Building Strong Communities

"I happen to be a Transport Planner so this is my area of expertise"
Do you drive for a living ? I haven't seen much expertise in vehicle transport for years apart from revenue creation.

I am a self-employed engineer who needs to drive to multiple jobs in London carrying heavy equipment and tools.
Last Thursday I had three Covid safe jobs in Islington. Every location was affected by LTNs .
As a result I estimated that I spent at least an extra 30 minutes in my vehicle. Essex Rd, Holloway Rd and Highbury Corner jammed, this is not normally the case mid morning. I cannot see how net total pollution is reduced . Further the buses are further delayed too making public transport slower.

Instead of constantly bashing drivers of vehicles why isn't more being done to improve traffic flow. Here are some very simple ideas for you.
1. Intelligent traffic lights. Especially in rush hour when significant traffic volumes are travelling in one direction.
2. More control of roadworks and utility works with better traffic management. We all know of roads that are constantly affected and is there enough pressure on contractors to complete the work in a reasonable time?
3. Stop refuse collection on main roads in rush hour. These can cause major congestion and pollution. Simple and effective.
4. Increase the efficiency of bus services. How often do you see two buses on the same route in convoy?
5. Remove more illegal cars who drive without Tax, MOTs and insurance
6. More monitoring of taxis and Uber (& others) there are too many.

I disagree with almost everything Paul263 has written, apart from "[it's] a different story if you have to cycle up the Old Kent Road". I used to live in Peckham, not far from the OKR and agree.

I have a solution - reduce the speed limit on OKR, AND create a segregated cycle path on the OKR. Sorted! :)

No way! Were residents ever consulted on whether they want their streets to be used by increasing numbers of drivers using their once quiet streets as shortcuts? No they weren't! A recently published study says that 'The introduction of a low traffic neighbourhood was associated with a 10% decrease in total street crime.' https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/ftm8d

LTNs need careful design, then they do reduce air and noise pollution and hugely improve resident's health and lives. The original theory was that if you close a busy street, traffic will redeploy and reduce, some drivers will choose to use different transport. This is still believed by many traffic planners. In fact other research has shown that this is not a rule of traffic design & management, or an automatic outcome of hundreds or thousands of driver-choices. It very much depends on the local road layout, destinations served by the street, and other factors. So before an LTN decision is made, a different analysis of the impacts of the road closure is needed to the one currently being used? Where I live, much of the polluting (noise & air) local traffic is commercial vehicles and taxis. Taxis would find other routes (though they are getting fed up with constantly having to do this), but very many of the servicing and delivery vehicles have local destinations and limited ways of reaching them. If our residential streets become an LTN (fat chance!!), then other residential streets in this parish or ward will get more traffic. One partial solution is to make all vehicles lpt or electric, with greater speed than currently planned for - the other is to take the central London consumer society temples out of the centre, downsize them to the areas where people live.

Better to redesign for safer cycling than to give up on the concept altogether. It is right that many cycle lanes have brought more traffic congestion. And it is not as if many cyclists use them - at least not in my area where they are daily observed choosing the pedestrian part of the pavement over the two available cycle lanes (one new on the road, and the one on the pavement).

There is much need of safe walking routes for pedestrians, as currently there are too many roads without full pedestrian-phase traffic lights for crossing them, too many electric scooters, bikes, skateboards etc on the pavements at high speed, and little respect for pedestrians. Near us there is a so-called Safe Route for walking to a local park, but it is in fact the outcome of careless thinking. It is not a safe route because to reach the park it is necessary to cross at a junction where there are no traffic lights and vehicles come zooming round at speed. It is a Virtue Signalling Safe Route, not a real one. Pedestrians deserve better.

You might as well change the title of this idea to "Open Roads for Vehicles to pollute, congest & kill our neighbourhoods". They reduce and discourage traffic, which improves air quality. They have NO IMPACT on emergency services. "Getaway route for criminals"? What does that mean? Who are "time-poor"? They increase safety for vulnerable road users like the elderly by reducing traffic and associated road danger. Given the widespread and diverse residents groups that are supporting and lobbying for LTNs, your last is absolute "Daily Mail" nonsense where it is demonstrable that improvements in active travel increases health and wellbeing and increases economic activity in local areas boosting local businesses whilst freeing up our roads and public transport for those who actually need it. So in short, the above comment is complete garbage from start to finish and not backed up by any evidence.