CONSTITUENCY MATTERS
AMONGST multiple coronavirus-related queries, the issue of Low Traffic Neighbourhoods has been uppermost in my inbox lately.
These schemes introduced with central government funds to encourage cycling and walking have proved hugely controversial.
The idea was to stop unnecessarily short car journeys in the face of the climate emergency by blocking off side streets with bollards and oversized flowerpots called “planters”, compelling use of main roads instead.
But with the schemes abruptly rushed through as a coronavirus emergency measure, the dramatic changes have felt for many, rather than introduced, inflicted on them.
I’m a lifelong and near daily cyclist. It began as my means of getting from home in Hanger Hill to school in west Ealing.
At uni in the 90s in Cambridge it was nigh-on compulsory.
In our house now there are more bikes than people; used for school trips of the next generation and by me at weekends often doing Ealing-Acton-Chisiwick-West Ealing-Pitshanger sometimes multiple times for engagements.
The benefits are obvious – healthy yet sedentary and relaxing, free of charge and takes you door to door. I do not need converting to that cause.
In terms of the difference the LTNs have made to me, I could cycle on side roads before and still can, but motor access is now prevented for drivers and restricted for emergency services who will be issued keys to unlock the bollards.
Main road dwellers complain rather than traffic evaporating, as was the intention, it seems to have been forced on them, worsening pollution.
There have been some unintended consequences to a certainly well-intentioned scheme.
Meanwhile, proponents say that the six months needs to run their course and the appropriate behavioural changes to take place so that is the most likely next step.
Alas, with opinions so entrenched on both sides it almost feels there is no possibility for rational debate on this subject.
On one side people are unwilling to be inconvenienced into driving a millimetre more than previously.
On the other the catastrophising brigade warn that unless they have their say the planet is going to hell in a handcart and that car journeys are set to rise exponentially – although as part of the new normal we are likely to see more homeworking with big city firms like Shroeders and PricewaterhouseCoopers saying staff need not return to the office ever.
I’m a great believer in evidenceled policy so for me this “implement now, consult later” way round of doing things seems incorrect sequencing.
However, we are where we are and these are designed as a radical shake-up with success previously in Copenhagen and Walthamstow, so whenever it is the six month trial ends for each scheme I propose that a referendum is held.
Would people like to keep the schemes (with adjustments if needs be) or discard them so we can return to the way things were?
Only that way can we see if it really is just a “vocal minority” opposed that regularly corral me in the street these days and fill the inbox.
Now that’s what I call the will of the people.