Forum topic: Fox Lane low-traffic neighbourhood

If it was just 3 or 4 'persistent defenders' I might believe you - but luckily both cycle lanes and LTNS are vital elements of central, regional and local government policy for the incumbent parties (and a fair percentage of the opposition in each case). The 10 point sustainability plan launched last week allocated more funding to these measures and indicates that far from not lasting, both cycle lanes and LTNS will become an integral part of transport infrastructure - just as they have in Holland.

I wouldn't judge anything on the number of people who comment on this website. There is big support for cycle lanes and LTNs here and elsewhere in London. Better Streets for Enfield has 1200 supporters on Facebook.

The results of consultation on a big scheme in Bow were published this week - 70 per cent in favour. Even though Bow is home to many cabbies, who are some of the noisiest of the people trying to stand in the way of progress.

talk.towerhamlets.gov.uk/lsbow

Interesting to see that 5,000 (I believe the total is now close to 5,500) people having signed a petition against just one of the Enfield LTNs is described as a "tiny percentage" of Enfield's population, whilst the Better Streets For Enfield Facebook group membership of 1,200 is apparently being cited as impressive.

You're distorting what I said. I was replying to a Richard Carlowe's suggestion that there are only three or four people in support, which is absolute rubbish. And several polls carried out by professional pollsters have shown widespread support for LTNs and cycle lanes, and that is simply a fact.

In any case, at this point what we need to be discussing is factual arguments for and against, not speculating about the number of supporters and opponents. Most of those arguments have probably been made already. If the same points keep coming up I'll either be deleting them or locking this discussion. There's been some interesting stuff on both sides of the argument, but it risks boring other visitors to the website and putting them off reading information about other subjects.

The LTN system may well be working well in other areas in London but not in Palmers Green.
I ask anyone to actually take a look at the traffic problems this has caused in the roads surrounding the LTN. As a Southgate resident I have never seen such traffic queues in and around Southgate, it might actually be the last blow for some small businesses,
If you look at the whole area of Southgate and Palmers Green, yes the LTN is quieter for a few hundred but more congested, noisier and more polluted for thousands.
A quieter plan for all not for the few would be fair.

3500 households spared through traffic that has been displaced from A roads over the past ten years or so and has disrupted their lives. Research shows local small businesses close to an LTN thrive as more people choose to walk or cycle locally (rather than jump in their car and drive elsewhere). Traffic causes traffic problems not low traffic neighbourhoods - it's why we need more in Enfield.

What are the issues for business owners on Alderman's Hill ? Research shows shops and cafes benefit from local customers because its easier for the people living locally to walk and cycle (and slightly more difficult for them to get in a car and drive elsewhere).

Hopefully he will correct me if I am wrong, but I understood Richard Carlowe to be referring to support *on this forum*. He may well be wrong, as I think it might even be as high as six...

One thing I have noted through most of the back-and-forth on all this, as well as the PR surrounding the Fox Lane LTN, is that we are seeing LTNs being described as though they are only ONE thing, and as though they have the same (infallibly positive) effects in all areas. I think this is a mistake. I strongly believe that they need to be reviewed, discussed and understood on a case-by-case basis.