Forum topic: Fox Lane low-traffic neighbourhood

We should be clear, Fox Lane in not a B Road (nor a C Road), rather a heavily used residential street.
PG Celt’s preference for the sufficiency of 20mph plus speed bumps was indeed the outcome of three plus years of work by a large team of local residents plus the council over a decade since. GLA funding was secured, but ultimately not wide local support. So I think we have to say we’ve tried that one. Cutting edge at the time (except for Ealing), awareness of various traffic issues and preferred solutions has moved considerably since then.
I see the desire to tax any increases in property values as a consequence of lower traffic disturbance as simply highlighting what a nuisance, and indeed financial cost, traffic must therefore be. Externalities (the cost to society) were calculated at roughly £1600 per vehicle some years back by one university (a similar ballpark figure was published by the Cabinet Office). That before air quality and climate impacts would have been factored in at the level of awareness we now hold.
Good luck to Bowes residents. Many people have worked for an immense period of time in Fox Lane to address not dissimilar issues. We wait to see if our own latest trial provides sufficient answer. Certainly there is no magic bullet and there will be changes required to current behaviour. And as Chris Bland mentions, the intent to move away from cars and towards active travel – London wide in this case – is indeed policy, at all levels. The many LTN’s are about more than simply cutting out through traffic.

Strong message coming from National Government circles that schemes such as this will be halted. The picture of a fire engine on a way to an emergency, that got trapped by a road closing large plant pot this week has not helped the cause. The FBU are against such schemes as they increase their response times.

Fox Lane was closed off at one end this week, by Thames Water, causing access problems/delays for ambulances to various care/residential homes. Why should this become a permanent problem?

Fixing the pavements at the end of Pellipar Close, forcing the removal of some of the scaffolding on the Fox Pub so that wheelchairs can access the pavement and adding a pedestrian crossing on Green Lanes close to the Post Office would be far more sensible

I do believe that the strong message coming from National Government circles is indeed of a u-turn, but that currently applies to so much of their activity. There’s no reason to expect HMG’s approach to LTN’s to be unique in its shot at national leadership. In the world of traffic I understand a double u-turn is termed a donut. Let’s hopefully see what actually occurs across many UK and more local trials.

In response to #5489 and the photo of the crashed car. This was the result of criminal activity and could have happened anywhere. To use this as justification for the low traffic scheme is absurd. It's like saying there has been a serious increase in shoplifting at Sainsbury's so we are going to close Sainsbury's.

Rather than close a store in such circumstances the approach tends to be to install CCTV, employ security guards, electronically tag high value goods as well as employ other, less obvious, techniques, the cost of which is then spread across all law abiding shoppers. There may be an analogy there.

A low traffic neighbourhood is designed to stop speeding, dangerous rat runners carving through residential areas; the crashed car was a speeding rat runner. Why would anyone support a high-traffic neighbourhood?

To answer Adrian D's question on 5th September I think lots of people, not to say most, would support a high-traffic neighbourhood, although the vast majority of them would not think of it in that light. For them it is the most natural thing in the world to have a car(s) parked close to home and in constant use without a thought of dangerous air quality, an under exercised community and what lack of chatting with neighours means for social cohesion. How well do most people know their neighbours in your street? Personally I very rarely see families chatting with their neighbours as they did when I was young, though I should say I'm a long way into my 80s, and lots of, most, people didn't own a car so they met neighbours in the course of going to work or doing the shopping .

I confess that I'm a cyclist rather than a walker - I find it is very kind to the hips as I age - and cycling isn't quite as conducive to social exchange as walking - but it's not as isolating as shutting yourself in a car for those the short local trips which can be so conducive to neighbourliness.

I live in Fox Lane, the speed of the traffic and amount of cars going up and down is horrendous and we were upset when our young cat was run over and killed and the person didn't even stop. It is inconvenient to have to drive that bit extra, when you are used to a certain route, but I am so looking forward to a quieter Fox Lane. This road has been abused as a major road and short cut for a long time. The speeding cars do not take into account the many school children crossing to go to St Monica's too. The benefit to all the Lake Roads is that each one will be in its own oasis of calm, traffic just coming in and out for the people who live there. I am really glad that this scheme is being tried out