We felt let down by Joseph Harker’s piece (contrary to LTNs not making you a “culture war” supporter. See what went down in Lambeth on May 14th). As a group of residents from Lambeth, we’re pushing for safer, healthier streets for everyone in our community.
Harker’s perspective misses the daily benefits of low-traffic neighborhoods, and he overlooks the growing evidence that they genuinely improve people’s lives.
Instead of merely shifting traffic between side streets and main roads, as he suggests, low-traffic areas can lead to a positive overall impact in the region.
Local councils that have implemented LTNs are conducting thorough research on their effects, especially on boundary roads. A comprehensive review of LTN assessments shows that changes in traffic on these roads are minimal. Moreover, it’s possible that as behavioral patterns shift, these benefits could become even more pronounced. There’s also evidence indicating that collisions and injuries decline considerably in areas with reduced traffic volumes and on surrounding roads.
The idea that roads are “cut off” is simply false. All roads within an LTN remain accessible to cars, and rat-running is effectively prevented.
There’s no proof that low-traffic neighborhoods lead to increased pollution. In fact, various studies point to a decrease in car usage and even ownership among residents in LTNs, including data from Lambeth.
Harker’s article fails to mention other low-traffic areas in Lambeth, like Railton Road, Brixton Hill, and Oval, which enhance neighborhood safety and health without relying solely on LTNs, along with other successful examples found throughout London and Europe.
Thanks to Joseph Harker for shining a light on how the Lambeth Council seems to have ignored the desire for a greener identity alongside other significant achievements.
Residents of the Kennington Park Estate, positioned in the oval section of Lambeth, feel trapped due to the imposition of a low-traffic neighborhood. Many of us struggle to get delivery or taxi access for a mere two hours a day. In the past, our quiet streets bore the brunt of large trucks from supermarkets and construction sites. Now, roads with minimal traffic appear cluttered with overgrown planters and litter, attracting fast-driving vehicles that endanger pedestrians and children.
My desire is for clean air and healthy neighborhoods. Unfortunately, the ongoing expansion of LTNs by the council seems to counteract this goal and is becoming increasingly unpopular.
As for Harker’s commentary, the issue isn’t just about redefining the Brexit debate. Not all opponents of low-traffic areas are just fuel enthusiasts in the culture war, but, undeniably, those enthusiasts are often vocal against LTNs.
The High Court’s ruling against the Lambeth Council was celebrated by right-wing media and extreme online factions as a setback for LTNs. This creates additional hurdles for local authorities aiming to promote cleaner, greener, and more pedestrian-friendly streets, and yes, it certainly encourages children to ride their bikes.
Clearly, efforts to enhance residents’ quality of life by reducing vehicular traffic in cities should be approached with care. However, court decisions that limit the council’s capacity to implement necessary changes for lowering pollution, reducing accidents, and fostering more peaceful streets are not beneficial for anyone.
In today’s polarized, social media-driven world, it’s refreshing to read Joseph Harker’s fair and empathetic articles about the struggles faced over the last five years in low-traffic areas.
Many of us who opposed LTNs aren’t against driving or cyclists; our concerns arise from the social and environmental injustices that shift traffic onto already congested boundary roads.
We can’t accept discrimination against disabled individuals and elderly neighbors who rely on cars, forcing them to travel much farther. We’re also apprehensive about the negative impacts on local shops and businesses due to road closures. Yet every time we suggest a fairer alternative to car usage, we’re met with dismissals, as if only our councillors have the insight on what’s best for us.
As part of a coalition of 15 community groups that came together in January to advocate for local consent before councils can impose LTNs, we appreciate having columnists like Harker who genuinely listen to residents’ concerns. Thank you.
