| Topic: | Re:Reply | |
| Posted by: | Ossian Olsén | |
| Date/Time: | 16/09/20 16:18:00 |
| Tania, do you really want to use public outcry as a measure if a scheme is, on balance, positive? Brexit, immigrants, etc. All outcries that have been factually incorrect. Was there a study to show that the LTN in wandsworth was so bad (on balance) and therfore they abolished? I looked online and did not find any information. Also, that is not what Grant Shapps wrote and you are either intentionally or unintentionally twisting his message, I believe you are referring to the Telegraph article that starts with 'I am a petrol head' and as far as I could read he was relating LTNs to where town centres are 'dying'. I am not a fanatic either way, having objected to the Turnham Green parking changes. But we have to start dealing in facts and not confuse matters further. Making neighborhood's less car friendly has been successfully implemented in Holland, Belgium, Sweden, Germany, Denmark (that I know of). There are fantastic experimentations and trials in Holland of mixed mode traffic (quite similar to Churchfield), I should be able to dust of a copy of my old civil engineering magazines with case studies if needed, or you could just google it. Your message is different, than the other anti-LTN messages on here, in that the LTN now stops your from using Churchfield. That is sad, if true. It is a shame that you cannot see a way to make both aspects work, for example park on the south side of the LTN barriers and walk the last bit home (I presume you live north of the barriers as you now use the horn lane sainsburys). Just to be clear, what shop on Churchfield would you use instead of the horn lane sainsbury's? The churchfield sainsbury's? Genuine question. I try to support the butchers and the veg market, these are the only two shops I see as alternatives to Sainsbury's, but I am probably missing something. WRT to safety; you put to this forum that more traffic is safer. I would put to you that you are massively oversimplifying a complex issue and are looking only on a small aspect. The socio economic aspects alone is too complicated for a couple of hundred words. For starters, why only consider this aspect? I get the issue you describe, but perceived safety due to traffic may be real (to you) and it may be real in terms of statistics, less assaults on quieter roads - I don't know, but it would need to introduce more risk to health than the risk to health from traffic for this argument to be valid, right? I know the change feels like a negative change, but try and adopt a more open mind, consider the alternative/opposing POV. Who knows, maybe you will join me in welcoming this change that on a balance, is positive to the neighborhood, albeit with some longer journeys for when you 'need' to drive to churchfield. |