| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Low Traffic Neighbourhoods | |
| Posted by: | Tom Maher | |
| Date/Time: | 16/09/20 21:02:00 |
| Hi Ossian, For the record I live in Shakespeare Rd (eastern end) and being a cul-de-sac by virtue of the railway have been fortunate enough to not be affected by rat-running to the extent residents of other streets may have. With two children at St. Vincent's I used to sometimes use the car for the school run but the Goldsmiths and Acacia barriers have closed this option and we now cycle - which isn't the worst outcome. I am consequently neither pro or anti-LTN at the moment. It's interesting that you are quoting (as are Ealing) the 15% reduction in overall traffic recorded in the Walthamstow Village "mini-Holland" scheme and provide the Living Streets case study as reference. I have nothing against Living Streets per-se but would counsel caution using their representations as fully transparent - consider the following: "At first some residents weren’t too keen on introducing low-traffic neighbourhoods and were worried that it would be difficult to access homes and businesses. They also thought that it would lead to an increase in traffic on the main roads and might force traffic outside of schools. However, they soon saw the improvement in the area, and counts on main roads in Waltham Forest have shown that traffic is now more spread out across the day and maximum peak hour flows are lower on the main roads." Factually this is accurate (re: the distribution on max peak hr flows) but fails to highlight that in the 2 year post-implementation observation period, traffic on boundary roads bordering the LTN actually went UP by just over 28% in one instance. The table on p84 of the Walthamstow Village Review provides further detail - https://www.enjoywalthamforest.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/2017-08-23-WV-report-FINAL.pdf I cannot describe this statement as deliberately misleading or even disingenuous but it's clear in the case of our LTN that the statements "15% traffic reduction in Poet's Corner" and "28% increase in traffic on Horn Lane/Churchfield Rd./Uxbridge Rd." are at the same time not mutually exclusive and will provoke diametrically opposed reactions depending on where you live. Were you aware that Living Streets have a consultancy services team that will support boroughs such as Ealing in implementing LTN schemes? Again, I don't consider this untoward or improper but is indicative that they have "skin in the game" that may be completely contradictory to the wishes of local residents. |