You are reading a single comment by @Airhead and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
-
This has certainly been born out in H&F. There are some correlations between poverty and houses on big main roads, the reason given is large families need homes that would be outside their budget in a side street. I think most of us realise that living above shops or next to 4 lanes of traffic is likely to be less pleasant than a side street.
Airhead
I can't remember the source (probably something by Rachel Aldred), but the Safe Cycling in London map is an interesting thing to browse (twitter account here). You can filter to look at just existing or just new LTNs. In my area at least there's an almost perfectly negative correlation between historic LTNs and the posh areas. The LTNs are mostly historic council estates. This doesn't mean that the posh streets aren't fairly naturally quiet, but they're still pretty awful public spaces (at least for cycling and playing) because the width of them has been reduced to being almost unusable by two lanes of parked SUVs.
I don't have any evidence for the demographics of residents on main roads; however, I'm pretty certain that if you have two otherwise identical houses, one on a busy road and one on a quiet road, then people will be prepared to pay more for the house on the quieter road. Some people use that to infer that trying to make anyone's road quieter is conveying an unearned privilege on them; I take it to mean that people really, really value living somewhere with less motor traffic and therefore reducing motor traffic overall will improve everyone's quality of life.