Are there specific aims and are the outcomes of the trial being measured?
If the aim is to reduce carbon emissions, how is that being measured?
If the aim is to reduce pollution, how is that being measured?
If the aim is to reduce the volume of traffic, how is that being measured? And if so, is the volume of displaced traffic being measured?
In all the noise of the debate about the merits or otherwise of the LTNs, I've lost sight of the objectives.
If you go on the haringey council website you will see that each LTN has an evaluation plan. Whether or not you agree with it it is there...
I think Rachel Aldred from University of Westminster is also doing some research into the effects of them.
Regarding displaced traffic I don't believe that it is being directly measured as part of the evaulation. Evaluation plans will typically look at the 'boundary roads' - which are often those roads within 500m of the LTN. Traffic displacement however can happen potentially over a much wider area than that -as cars re-route through an area. It's one of those much disputed issues when it comes to LTNs..
Thank you Andy. I found some documents here. It's quite disappointing.
There are several existing threads about the LTNs, monitoring, displacement, etc. If you look at the latest active one (which was started by me a bit back), you’ll see that the topic of traffic displacement in a far wider area than just on immediate “boundary” roads is well discussed (see https://harringayonline.com/forum/topics/st-ann-s-ltn-feedback-and-... ). My understanding from the original council comms was that their ostensible aim was to stop drivers of “through traffic” taking short-cuts — aka “rat-running” — through side streets and force them onto busy main roads instead, but of course the road closures also mean that those living in, or just outside, an LTN also have to take a circuitous route if, for some reason, they need to drive instead of walking, cycling or getting on a bus.
All questions for the council really.
GoHC web site see HC objective for shutting hundreds of Borough lawful public highways to vehicles & creating TLNs biasedly that 60% resident dont own cars, so the 40% that do their Shut out of all TLNs including disable people car owners and need a car, HC grants all car owners inside TLNs exemptions drive in out as loads times and of course its own emplyee vehicles emergency and cars dropping people off inside TLNs, this HC policy caused horrendous borough wide traffice jams as all local through traffic been forced to use only borough public main highways no side roads or streets. Traffic jammed vehicles pumping into our airways excessive increases of gallons of toxic posionous exhaust fumes for hours all humans stuck in traffic jams or using shops kids walking to schools everone has been exposed to breathing in to their lungs the worst polluted air all around haringey daily so that 60% of none car owners get their own areas regarless of everother residents healths breathing in toxic air resulting from held up vehicles? HC objective stop 40% of car owners using them to favour 60% none car users, in my opinion thats discrimination risening out of HC policy on TLNs
An TLN's are very Large areas created by HC called 'Traffic-Low-Neighboroughhoods (TLN's) I read onHC web-site a few Councillors think because 60% of resident dont own cars and regardless of 40% own essentially used cars, HC introduced a Policy Streets-For-people and gone about shutting down vertually hundreds of Borough Legal used public side Road, streets hundreds closed to cars inextremely large areas right across haringey putting up hubdreds of red noticed signage banning all cars/vehicle access to enter the Traffic-Low-Neighboroughhoods unless you live within one of a TLNs own a car you can drive in when you like, HC close off hundreds of our existing public roads streets even stopping you get out the other side of most of its TLNs, if you say in car on St.Anns Road and want to get to West Green Rd now you cannot cut through side roads of streets you must drive miles out of your way either towards Turnpike Lane join west green road at juction there or drive up St Anns Road down seven sisters and turn into West Green road off High Cross main highway, that includes all seriouly disable blue badge holder owner drivers because there home address dont fall inside one of HC new TLNs, they are causing all vehicles to congregate on to all main public highways now with daily horrendous lengthy traffic jams all over haringey vehicle stopped numper to bumper all engines running pumping out gallons and gallons of pure toxic posionous exhauste gas filling the borough airways full of the worsted most polluted air with everyone in in or near these traffic jams are all breathing these new excess posions into their lungs every day now all because HC closed off hundreds of borough roads stopping proventing all daily local through traffic all bunched up together every day now, all for HC to favour the 60% residents that do not own a car/Vehicle regardless of residents suffer damage to their lungs too?
John, I am sure there are quite a few drivers who HAVE to make regular short journeys across the LTN and who are currently inconvenienced and not eligible for an exemption. If it is possible to identify and categorise them so that they may be exempted then that may be a sensible and workable outcome. But please don't assume the 40% of drivers in the LTN are against LTNs. I am one of those 40% and I love the LTN. I'm no spring chicken but I cycle to work in Central London and always have done. It's remarkably easy and generally quicker than other methods. Plus it's free and healthy. I use the bus and Tube when I'm not cycling. I occasionally drive but usually only when I have a heavy load (rare) or am going on a long journey (in which case a few minutes extra doesn't really matter). I choose my driving times carefully. If I can drive out of rush hour I will. And I will almost never choose to drive where it's quicker to use another means of transport. And that's probably how it should be. Ideally people will change their mindset voluntarily. It's not for me to tell others what to do but if drivers are capable of changing their habitual dependence on the car, then perhaps slower and longer journeys will be the catalyst for them to do so. And that's to the benefit of all of us.
First point I have not assumed tge 40% dont like the TLNs no They only own cars HC created TLNs not for them but 60% none car owners, unlike you those in the 40% are in my opinion being targeted discriminated againest wheather they or you like these TLNs, because they own cars, read HC web site HC states its because 60% dont own cars is why they giving 60% these TLNs plus giving us all worst airways in Haringey for years people who already go out but have damaged lungs dont get a choice, you are able to ride your bike fine others whom own cars dont want to ride bikes, your allowed to use all public legal roads borough wide why should other residents who want to use the same roads we all pay council tax to maintained not have exact equality rights, what makes your access right's to ride inside a lawful public borough road street inside aTLNs using a bike given prioity over the residents whom have eqaulity rights to use same with driving their cars, you are able bodied unlike me I cant ride a bike or walk any distant I need like hundreds of other resident blue badge holder we owner car vehicles that are essenti
Ial to use boroughwide out side too but we are all included in HC 40% car owners not been excempt why because we like lots of many other in the 40% car owners we our Borough address homes are do not either inside or boarder close to one of HC TLN's,, last point HC had a duty well before it closed down hundreds of side roads streets shutting people that they were fully aware in the 40% had protected Characteristic's and were resident used a car/vehicle every day essentail for there disability to go out about like you on your bike, HC duty was to protect blue badge holder under the 2010 Equalty Act by putting in place adaquate adjustment into the policy before activating it and shutting out all protected residents from these new TLNs. Sadly HC has neglected doing it first, the fact is HC first priority was to make sure people with protected disabilities got first and better priority so they got treated fair and equally first not Bike with all due respect not 60% none car/vehicle owners ir people whom do NOT have a protected disability and they can ride a bike to get into TLNs where as a disable person that cant ride a bike hardle walk must drive there car/vehicle to get and drive into TLNs to share equally with others can access the services inside and even soend time with people like you bike riders their friends to meet tbem at any TLNs to share them together, EQUALITY COMES FIRST FOR ALL NOT JUST 60% NONE CAR OWNERS, OR BIKE RIDERS EITHER. SO EQUALITY IS BEST FOR US ALL NOT THE FEW ABLE BODY RESIDENTS.
I make you exactly right Mr John Stevens, its is Low Traffic Neighbourhoids, I dont rant I made the error type in TLNs only due to my having a severe cognitive disorder Dyslexia, the facts remain the same HC has totally neglected its duty owed to people that have a protected disability when inventing a policy for 60% of none car owners, neglected its duty not to make reasonable adaquate fair ADJUSTMENTS for people with protected disabilities to harmonize and create for them an equal opertunity to use the car/vehicles to get to LTN's drive inside to share all offered in HC LTN's fully and equally together with people that do not have a protected disability i.e people dont have a disability all can walk, run, trott ride bike's, ride electric scooter's, use skate boards use roller skates to get to all LTN's, A person that physically disabled and that must use a car/vehicle too must be allowed to drive too and into all LTN's to share equally with able body persons!! Thats why the 2010 Equality act in place it place a direct duty on local authorities like HC to make adaquate adjustments to treat all people equally especially residents that have a protected disability defined under the Equalty Act 2010 all protected people are owed By HC a duty under the act they all fall into the 40% as owners of vehicle's must use them side by side with bikers Disable people vehicles are essentially used every day but HC policy is a protective disabled person daily address falls outside or not close to HC LTN's regardless of they get refuses dont excemption to drive there vehicles to and drive in and use any of HC LTNs, no point telling me HC won't do this it is doing it to loads of disable people and the fact is HC had a duty to completely avoid treating people with protective disability completly unequal soley on their residential address not being inside or borders these LTNs the fact that all able bodied resudents no matter where they live can walk ride run from boroughwide to HC LTNs and enjoy whats on offer but a person that cant walk cant run ride a bike only uses a vehicle their essential vehicle are all shut out denied entrace into HC LTNs (A) they use a vehicle (B) they dont live inside or near the boundary of HC LTNs worst form of discrimination towards a person that has a protected disability in my eyes. Mr Stevens my opologises for errors if found due to severe Dyslexia another protected disability under the equality Act.
@ John. That comment about punctuation is rude and thoughtless. You should apologise.
Thank you Mr John Stevens was EXTREMELY rude, however I have got used to his type of remarks towards my errors. I know what I am saying is fact because I must always research things to put myself in a position to give my opinion, Mr Stevens last comments told me he factually know nothing about accessing HC new LTNs using a car/ vehicle I do, I made an application to use my vehicle to drive into HC LTNs and because my residential address was not inside or on there borders HC refused my vehicle an Exemption permit to drive my disable vehicle in them, he right able body people can access them regardless where there residential address is because they are able bodied can get to them and in with out a car/vehicle I cannot, so Mr Steven is totally wrong and he clearly know nothing about equality of people either. So big thank you for telling him to opologise for saying what he said much appreciated John .
John Steven's comment has been deleted, as will be be if continues to break house rules.