-
A few responses:
- The intention and real documented experience of LTNs is that in the medium term (1-2 years) traffic on surrounding roads goes down, because of traffic evaporation and reduction in car use.
- The "poorer residents on main roads / rich residents in leafy side streets" doesn't stand up to much scrutiny. A lot of "nice" streets are full of flat shares, social housing, etc; A lot of council estates are de facto LTNs; a lot of posh flats have been built next to main roads.
- The idea of "widespread opinion" is often illusory or astroturfed, even if you get the impression otherwise from Twitter comments / newspaper vox pops.
- What's the alternative? LTNs have been shown to have a genuine effect of reducing traffic and improving air quality, and are quick and easy to set up. Nothing else has.
To get past this you really need to understand which part the clean air campaigners have misunderstood and carry out a suitable charm offensive to persuade them otherwise. And preferably get those people on board before you start implementing LTNs.
- The intention and real documented experience of LTNs is that in the medium term (1-2 years) traffic on surrounding roads goes down, because of traffic evaporation and reduction in car use.
grams-
I get the general idea about LTNs, however I'm relaying the perceived response to a specific scheme and this
preferably get those people on board before you start implementing LTNs
very much appears not to have happened.
Of course not all local people are on facebook groups or twitter or write to their councillors/MPs, but there is a surge of dissatisfaction and what I notice is that it's a range of people - not just those who complain about no longer being able to drive to Lewisham town centre in 5 minutes, but also those who say they no longer feel safe to walk or cycle on their own road with their children, and those who say air pollution has made living on their road miserable, and that at least my perception prior to this was that as an area it was fairly pro-walking and cycling, pro local amenities etc and whether it's the actual scheme which is a problem or whether it's terrible PR/communication, it seems to have backfired.
I don't think the clean air campaigners misunderstand the intention, they are responding to short-term increases in slow-moving vehicular traffic on residential main roads. Perhaps there is no less painful alternative, but those that live on the affected roads reporting worsening asthma etc have not been persuaded that this will, in the long term, get better.
@amey is doing a valiant job of being a vocal supporter. An adjacent neighbourhood to the first cell is trying to implement their own LTN as quickly as possible in response to increased vehicular traffic routing around the first - which is at least leading to discussion. Let's hope some of that traffic evaporation happens soon.
There is some concern about what happens if/when the school run starts again - this would be a great target for some good PR.
hoefla
@Backstop - are you in Lewisham or did I misremember that?
There seems to be huge local backlash against the new "low traffic neighbourhood" in Hither Green and imminent changes around the high street / Rushey Green. Despite the overall low car-ownership in the borough, this seems to have been a major setback in public support of any changes to reduce car use - the local air-pollution and safer streets campaign groups have joined 'populist' anti car-use restriction lobby in voicing opposition to the current schemes. There's a widespread opinion that the HG scheme is there to benefit the 'posh' neighbourhood while poorer residents (who are unlikely to own cars) living on the main roads suffer significantly worse vehicular traffic and air quality, buses are getting caught up and unusable etc.
Would be interested to know your thoughts.