Forum topic: New chance to comment on Fox Lane LTN

For those who oppose the inequalities of this LTN there is an opportunity to gather and march on Saturday 20 November 2021 at Broomfield Park at 10.00 am. I will try to upload the poster about the march here or please visit OneCommunity website at https://stopfoxlaneltn.org/

Will there be food on the march? If not it would be an excellent opportunity to support the often neglected but extensive range of eateries between the post office and Yasir Halim, eg Bengal Bertie’s.

A quick reminder that if you care about the environment you should join the march advertised above, to remove the LTNs.

TfL say 35% of car trips are 2km or less. I think we all agree that a certain number of these are necessary or unavoidable. TfL say if you take out the necessary ones (people who genuinely cannot walk or cycle 2km, and remember these people don’t necessarily have to own a car, they may be dependent on friends or family to drive them to appointments, or even just out of the house to the park or for a coffee) TfL say that 22% could be done by normally healthy people. They never take into account weather or terrain but let’s ignore that for now. If we agree that for every 100 car trips 22 could be removed let’s see what happens when we remove 20 of them. That’s 90% of them.

TfL figures show that a 2km car trip in an Outer London borough is about 4 minutes driving, and we’ll also assume all these trips are the full 2km. So for every 100 car trips you have removed (20 x 4) or 80 minutes of car time from the roads, and all the pollution and Greenhouse Gases associated with that. But you had 100 car trips to start with, so you are left with 80. If you delay these 80 cars for JUST ONE MINUTE you have put back the 80 minutes of pollution you removed. Any delay beyond this results in INCREASED NET POLLUTION. This is with 90% removal of the short trips available for active travel. Most pro LTN academics would be cock-a-hoop with a 30% removal which means you only have to delay the remaining traffic for more than 20 seconds before you go into net pollution.

This basic logic says that if you persuade, educate or shame people into not driving short trips you will improve the environment and have the benefit of healthier people. If you close large areas of roads to through traffic you will only increase pollution and greenhouse gases because you cannot take enough car time off the road to compensate for the extra congestion you are causing.

LTNs are NOT environmentally friendly. Show you care about the environment by joining the march.

Yet more evidence that LTNs don't increase pollution. If you want fewer cars on the road, a safer, quieter environment and more people walking and cycling think twice before joining the high traffic neighbourhood supporters. http://betterstreets.co.uk/monitoring-air-quality-around-the-bowes-low-traffic-neighbourhoods-part-2/#more-3408

Hi Adrian.
Thanks for the link to your pollution monitoring article. As the article points out there huge imbalances caused by seasonal variations, which tend to be predictable but there are also huge variations caused by other climatic conditions such as air pressure and winds but most importantly, the direction from which our air blocks are coming from. Weather patterns that draw air from the west, ie from the Atlantic tend to deliver relatively clean air whereas weather patterns drawing air from the east tend to arrive already well polluted from industrial and traffic activity from Europe. This can easily mask any local effects due to increased traffic activity for example. One example of this is that prior to lockdown, PM2.5 levels in the months Jan and Feb were well below the previous 3 year average, when lockdown came in March 2020, traffic levels dropped by 70% so you would expect a huge fall off in pollution yet the PM2.5 levels went UP close to the previous 3 year average and only falling back in May.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/air-quality-statistics/concentrations-of-particulate-matter-pm10-and-pm25#average-hours-spent-in-moderate-or-higher-pm-pollution. Figure 14

So how can we see if there is any effect from a local change such as the introduction of an LTN when big climactic changes may override these ? Well the best way is to look at other close proximity sites which would be subject to the same variables in climate direction, temperature, wind etc. and you also don’t have to consider other variables such as the constant reduction in NOx and particulates occurring due to engine improvements.

In the 14 month periods either side of the Bowes LTN going in, your author on the BSfE site shows there was a decrease between the pre LTN and post LTN averages of 10% in NO2 emissions. So how does that compare to the two other closest Enfield sites, Bush Hill Park and Derby Road ? Over the same 28 month period Bush Hill Parks averages were (pre 18.51 and post 16.04) so a drop of 13.3% and Derby road (pre 30.64 and post 26.34) a drop of 14%. Since all the other conditions between the three sites would be expected to affect them similarly, why did the Bowes park area perform 33% worse than BHP and 40% worse than Derby Road ? The only real variable was the proximity of the LTN.

All this said, the North Circular road site is probably not as affected by the LTN compared to the other perimeter roads and beyond. Any pollution monitoring or modelling that has been done will have scant value since there is no reliable base data to compare it to, either in actual pollution measurements or base traffic counts. It’ll be like trying to do a 1000 piece jigsaw when all you’ve got is the four corners and a bit of blue sky. Nobody will be able to see the true picture.

I have tried to have a debate on BSfE with either you or the architects of these LTNs, (Oliver B, Sarah R, Ian B etc.) about all these statistics but my submissions have not got past the administrators, of which you are one. Why wont you have a reasoned statistical debate that your members can all respond to ? I do thank Basil for this site since at least some reasoning can be done here without simply being shut down.
But going back to my post above #6213, you still haven’t commented on or questioned the figures or logic.

How do you expect to reduce pollution and greenhouse gases with LTNs ? You simply cannot remove enough short journey traffic to active travel to compensate for the extra pollution and GHG you create through longer journeys and congestion. I am in favour of promoting active travel and removing these journeys by education, persuasion and making it safer for walking and cycling, but not where this increases pollution and GHG, as LTNs do, as I consider myself environmentally friendly and why I will be on the march this Saturday. I urge anyone else who considers the fate of the planet is in danger to join us.

Finally, since you have long been involved in the LTNs and the modal shift away from short car journeys, can you tell me what proportion of total traffic do the 2km or less trips make up ?

I’m delighted that our deadly air quality levels and several associated pollutants now have such awareness and concern. That, when only seven or so years back, after several sessions with leading researchers in town understanding the then silent problem, posts here and letters to the local press to raise awareness were met with a spectrum from disbelief to disdain. Our world has certainly moved far in a short period of time. However I doubt if marching for the right to drive anywhere to save the planet will cut it with any thoughtful observer, even were it not the week after COP26 with the highlighting of carbon associated catastrophes and need for fundamental lifestyle change.