Forum topic: Fox Lane quieter neighbourhood: More information published as consultation is extended to July

It’s a shame that you can’t accept that a majority of people are against these LTNs . It appears democracy only works if we are made to kow-tow to a very vocal minority! It must have taken quite a time for you to take a photo with no traffic around. Shame you weren’t there from 10-11am, the official time. It was uplifting! Passing busses, cars, vans etc. honking like crazy in support.

Please share some evidence for your assertions. All the research I've seen conducted in the last year shows more support than opposition for LTNs - and that it's those opposing who are in the 'small and noisy' group. redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/steady-support-for-for-low-traffic-neighbourhoods-in-london/ . Remember Enfield's population is over 330,000 - so 50 to 100 people at a demo doesn't even hint at a majority (but a tiny percentage). And finally, in this case, the camera doesn't lie - no evidence of the claimed gridlock on periphery roads whatsoever - remember this is a Saturday morning!

Seems the government is to announce further funding for additional LTN’s tomorrow (Friday 30/7) as part of a new walking and cycling strategy. Boris Johnson said to be “strongly in favour” of more of them.

I drove past a few minutes after 11, High Street was empty, Aldermans Hill quiet too. Was it markedly different just 10 minutes earlier? I doubt it.

Rain? False claim. I was running in the park so know exactly that the rain stopped at 9.20am. Therefore there were 40 mins of clear dry weather before this protest started. Given everyone there should have been "local", the weather cannot be said to have had any impact on turn-out. You could have waited from the rain to stop, driven from Hertfordshire, and still arrived in time...

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1007619/gear-change-one-year-on.pdf

Yes more evidence that the opposition to LTNs is small - see page 30.

Thanks Adrian, a report that is well worth a (full) read and I think should be mandatory for anyone at this stage promoting non-evidence based opinion. In terms of expressing the direction of travel this government report puts it on a stick and waves it in your face.
On LTN’s specifically it evidentially debunks so many themes raised over the last year or so: boundary road and other nearby road overspill; adverse issues with the emergency services; street crime problems; inclusivity / exclusivity; and apparently there being no such thing as traffic evaporation.
It suggests there is no alternative to the paths it outlines, but if there is, you need to specify exactly what that alternate is to meet the same goals. A fair shout and there’s 35 reports listed at the back which give a good start point for any research supporting such work.

This forum thread has now been closed. This contribution from Karl Brown has been copied to a new thread discussing recent government announcements about more active travel schemes , including LTNs.