Michael, once again I find myself having to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you are posting in error not to deliberate mislead.My point was never that Heathrow traffic was the primary determinate of the amount of journeys through Grove Park. What would have been self-evident to anyone who has read my posts was that I was trying to explain to you that making categoric claims that the restrictions are the sole cause of any change in traffic patterns at the moment is unsound. Despite your attempt to obfuscate the figures, the decline in traffic in the area coincided with a reduction in usage of Heathrow. It is clearly one of many factors influencing the number of journeys taken in the area.As for how an LTN is defined and what its aims are I looked at both the Living Streets site and Ealing Council's (couldn't find anything particularly relevant on Hounslow's) and they both explicitly give the primary aim as reducing through traffic. In this regard, the proposals for South Chiswick, impractical as they may be, are exactly in line with the stated aims of LTNs.Ealing to not mention the notion of making journeys for residents more difficult as an objective of LTNs. Living Streets do raise the possibility that requiring local drivers to take more circuitous routes to get home could encourage some people to walk or cycle instead. The problem with this notion, and probably the reason that they don't give it much prominence, is that the modal shift would need to be sufficient to offset the extra driving that is generated through an area by residents needing to take longer routes in the area. It will obviously depend scheme by scheme, but even where there is a net benefit it will probably be so marginal as to make the restriction unjustifiable.
Francis Rowe ● 1891d