Forum Topic

Good news on Ealing LTN removal

7 of 9 to be removed. The ones being kept are wanted by those inside them but not the people just outside, not surprisingly.  Let’s see if Peter Mason does the decent thing.

Maggie Dodge ● 1896d46 Comments

I'm no-one's fan of LTN's, but to be fair here, the Deans/Montague LTN isn't actually a bad idea - they're roads that I don't think are suitable for much through traffic and don't convey so much traffic, that its displacement will cause major issues.The 7 being removed on the other hand don't fit the same description.

Mark Warburton ● 1896d

Sounds about right. Shame it took so much time to come to this conclusion.

Maggie Dodge ● 1896d

No LTNs are being removed. The council is going to consider the issue in September. They have said they are keeping two of them on the basis that the people living in the zone were in favour despite the fact that people living on the border where traffic is being displaced where overwhelmingly against them.The problem for Ealing is that Andrew Gilligan has already turned off the funding tap over the scrapping of one LTN which was made inoperable due to the closure of a neighbouring road for roadworks. He isn't going to be interested in the argument that the other schemes should be scrapped because they are unpopular.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 1896d

The process that Ealing used based upon a survey monkey web page may also be contrary to government requirements as it was open to being gamed and may not be demonstrably objective, so they may be open to legal challenge.Some good news is that Ealing has confirmed that the cycle route between East Acton and Chiswick will be made permanent.

Michael Robinson ● 1895d

Perhaps they could employ the same lawyers as Trump to contest the result.On the East Acton and Chiswick route the article states that it runs from East Acton to South Parade suggesting Fisher's Lane remains up for grabs.

Mark Evans ● 1895d

Ealing Council’s survey flawed? Course it is. Peter Mason had a hand in it. You couldn’t make this stuff up.

Maggie Dodge ● 1895d

It was hardly an informed survey: the traffic data that shows whether an LTN is actually delivering lower traffic wasn’t released till afterwards. As it was, of the eight LTNs that had traffic counts, five showed significant falls in overall traffic, both within the LTN and overall including the boundary roads. LTNs that are delivering reduced pollution and emissions should be maintained as a matter of health policy as well as an effective response to the climate emergency. Ealing is letting down all of its residents if instead of relying on the evidence, it bases its policies on uninformed and ill-controlled surveys.

Tom Pike ● 1895d

Yet another reminder that traffic comparisons at the moment are always going to be distorted by the impact of the pandemic.Frustrating as it may be for you, the overwhelming opinion of people who live in and around these LTNs, that they weren't improving their lives, is probably a good indication that they weren't improving people's lives.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 1895d

Not when they just shove traffic onto surrounding roads, as you well know they do, Tom, as in the case of Burlington Lane - just one example of thousands.

Claire Moran ● 1895d

That's the thing though, they're not an effective response to the climate emergency. Nor were they introduced under that guise - the current tranche were put in under the extremely dubious guise of fighting Covid.The UK accounts for 1.1% of global CO2 emissions (not the worst greenhouse gas, but that's a different debate), of which transport makes up approximately 25%, or 0.275%.According to the latest figures that I can find, London accounts for approximately 10% (32.4t out of 326.1t) of that total. Now divide that by 33 (for simplicities sake) and you get to approximately 0.0008% per London Borough, now think about how much the emission reduction is per borough. There aren't reliable figures available, so let's be generous and say they reduce CO2 emisssions by 10% and you get to 0.00008%That's 8 hundred-thousands of a percent.Hardly effective is it?

Mark Warburton ● 1895d

On that basis nobody should do anything!It’s a well-known logical fallacy to argue because no individual action can by itself solve a problem, there is no reason for any individual to take any action.

Tom Pike ● 1895d

Clutching at straws guys. You’ve had a good run because you’ve got cyclist buddies in positions of power, Not because you’re telling the truth, or that there is any benefit in these schemes for the majority.  I hope the LTNs are removed, but If not I’ll sleep at night knowing I’m not responsible for hindering the Emergency Services. The cycle lobby will sleep at night because they don’t care about anyone but themselves.

Maggie Dodge ● 1895d

The overall reduction in traffic for those LTNs is beyond the drop seen in other areas. Do you think the overwhelming majority of residents want more traffic? That’s what removing those five LTNs will achieve, but that information was not made available when the survey took place.

Tom Pike ● 1895d

Actual measured response times for the fire service dropped where LTN’s were introduced. That would be consistent with an overall reduction in  traffic.

Tom Pike ● 1895d

I didn't say nobody should do anything.I was addressing your wholly inaccurate comment that LTN's are an effective tool in the fight against the Climate Emergency, they are not.It is accurate to state though, that whatever the UK does & at whatever fantastical cost it will come to, will make barely a ripple in the pond of action required.That's not to say that we shouldn't take action, but that it might be nice if politicians and activists actually told the truth about the proposed actions and the overall impact that they'll have, rather than the current specious nonsense that is being pumped out.

Mark Warburton ● 1895d

Which is of course nothing at all to do with them coinciding with lockdowns and more people working remotely?

Mark Warburton ● 1895d

Did you really make the point that an area that you can't drive through has seen a higher percentage traffic reduction than those that you can, like it was some sort of revelation?That's hardly man bites dog news now is it?

Mark Warburton ● 1895d

I've reviewed all the data reports given for the Ealing LTNs and Tom Pike is correct to say that the traffic data shows significant reductions for most of them both within the LTN and on the boundary roads. This has clearly come as some surprise to the respondents to the consultation who have cited extra congestion as one of the main reasons for their overwhelming opposition.However, the basis of the data for traffic reduction is unclear. The source is quoted as 'Floow' but no dates are given for when the comparisons are made and just one road is used as a control which is within the affected areas. The presentation of this material is sloppy and appears to be unsound.If you scroll down further data from iBus is provided by TfL what this does show is that in most cases there have been rises in bus travel times on bus routes adjacent to the LTNs in the most recent quarter (March to June 2021) when compared to the same quarter pre-pandemic in 2019. In many cases these are quite significant.  It is hard to square the data from 'Floow' with this rigorously prepared and authoritatively sourced information which suggest very strongly there has been a significant increase in congestion in roads in the area.The issue for Ealing from here is that if they show the 'Floow' data to the government Mr Gilligan will quite rightly ask why on earth they are not persisting with these schemes as the problem is quite clearly that the people who live in the LTNs are deluded idiots incapable of recognising the benefits that have been provided to them by failing to observe that traffic has disappeared from local roads that they walk down every day. On the other hand if they show him the iBus data he may feel it is not a good plan to make public transport less viable if your aim is to discourage car use.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 1895d

That's extremely interesting - good spot.Given the choice between the two datasets, knowing how religiously TfL track bus journey times, I think I'd place my reliance on that TfL journey time data.Also, I don't think it would matter if you presented data to Andrew Gilligan that bus journey times had increased by an hour each trip, he'd still be advocating more LTN's and preaching for everyone to cycle instead of using public transport, he's a blinkered loon when it comes to cycling. Unfortunately there are too many like him starting at Boris and working down through layers of TfL management.

Mark Warburton ● 1895d

It seems the one advantage of Mason's ineptitude is that it is helping people to fully understand that it is the government that is incentivising Councils to implement active travel schemes and punishing those who do not. Future funding restrictions are not limited to active travel. They can be extended to transport and perhaps beyond. That might not bother wealthy RBKC with its parking revenue but it will certainly bother Ealing. Of course the government can also consider putting a Council like RBKC into special measures or a department of that Council such as Transport. They can install their own Head of Transport who reports directly to government to ensure that their statutory guidance to LAs is properly adhered to. Drastic perhaps but nothing too arduous or confrontational for the hero who implemented Brexit. It leaves local Conservative Councillors in Ealing and Hounslow looking daft when they try to pressure Labour Councils into defying the government's instructions and suffering the resulting dire and humiliating consequences. It is the only point on which the Southfield Lib Dems have more credibility than the local Conservatives.

Paul Campbell ● 1895d

It should hardly come as a surprise, if the council says they'll consult residents, who then say they don't want their LTN any more, that the council would agree to suspend it. Democracy in action!  Modal shifts and parts per million don't come into it. Moral is not to ask the public what it wants if you're not going to like the answer. I thought we'd have learned that lesson after Brexit. The perennial dilemma for all politicians is whether to follow the public will or to try and lead it, particularly when it comes to blocking up streets to make the world a better place.

Peter Evans ● 1895d

“However, the basis of the data for traffic reduction is unclear. The source is quoted as 'Floow' but no dates are given for when the comparisons are made and just one road is used as a control which is within the affected areas. The presentation of this material is sloppy and appears to be unsound.”The traffic data is stated as being collected between January and March 2021 and the matched week to the control data is given. The control, Argyle Road, is stated as having been selected because it was well away from all the LTNs. You can’t claim the analysis is “sloppy and unsound” when you have simply overlooked the information you claim is missing. “If you scroll down further data from iBus is provided by TfL what this does show is that in most cases there have been rises in bus travel times on bus routes adjacent to the LTNs in the most recent quarter (March to June 2021) when compared to the same quarter pre-pandemic in 2019.”I count 17 cases of decreased bus delays, 18 of increased delays and 3 of no change. The differences were all less than a minute. On that basis it’s difficult to claim there was any significant overall change in bus delays when it’s on average a fraction of a minute.The buses run along the boundary roads, not through the LTN’s that on the whole saw large decreases in traffic. There is therefore no contradiction between there being no significant change in bus delays and a large decrease in traffic counts within the LTNs.

Tom Pike ● 1895d

Tom, all this data is irrelevant now, as the people have spoken and, it seems, they might have been listened to. Data and democracy don't mix!

Peter Evans ● 1895d

So Mr Pike you’re ignoring the story of the young man who died when an ambulance wasted 15 minutes getting through an LTN? Doesn’t fit your data? It’s only one life ? We’ve always said wait until somebody dies but no, doesn’t bother you one bit because the data says…..

Maggie Dodge ● 1895d

What the advocates of all these schemes never, ever comprehend is that the majority of people simply don’t want them. They can bang on about pollution and cycling and all the rest of it to their heart’s content but they just don’t convince people.There was nothing stopping people cycling before and there will be nothing stopping them cycling once these schemes are removed. All the emotional BS is just that, BS.

Simon Hayes ● 1895d

The traffic data does look very suspect and, like Jeremy, I couldn't find any indication of what the base comparison was for the figures.If you take one of the LTNs in West Ealing the Floow data shows all roads within the LTN experiencing a decline in traffic with one down by 97% This is obviously one on which a barrier has been placed but necessarily other roads must have experienced increased traffic as residents circle round to get home but this appears not to be taking place.The road which saw a 97% fall in vehicles is Loveday Road which is about a quarter of a mile long and all residential. The report claims that this has seen traffic fall from 266 vehicles an hour to just 7. The number of delivery vehicles in my road which is much shorter exceeds 7 throughout the day in about 15 minutes so it is impossible to believe the number given in the report.The use of Argyle Road as a control is clearly flawed - it is the B452 and is adjacent to LTNs and an extension of Northfield Avenue which is a distributor road for more than one of the LTNs.As far as I can see Floow is a subsidiary of the Direct Line group. If this information has been collected by a private company commissioned by the council it is hard to discount that they have provided conclusions which were pre-determined.Although I haven't looked at the bus data in detail a scan of several of the main schemes did seem to indicate that there had been significant increases in bus travel times more often than not. However, even if you are prepared to endorse Tom's contention that the impact on bus travel times is broadly neutral this does suggest the schemes are failing in this regard. Bus passenger levels for the latest quarter would be at around 60% of those for the comparison quarter pre-pandemic. This should mean that the service runs more quickly and reliably so even if you can find an interpretation of the figures that indicates bus travel times are overall unchanged, they should have fallen so the LTNs appear to be generating more traffic.

Francis Rowe ● 1895d

Mason miscalculated. He saw an opportunity to seize power and was prepared to accept loss of the LTNs as collateral damage. So he promised referenda. Subsequently, and when Mason was a long way down the road on his promise, the government issued updated instructions to LAs stating explicitly that "consultations are not referenda". Of course this was a thinly veiled direct message to Ealing Council in particular. It has created substantial additional downside that Mason failed to calculate when he took the opportunity to oust Bell. There is nothing wrong with consulting. It is the referendum part that is a nonsense that has rightly been called out by the government. If people in a consultation have strongly held beliefs about pollution increasing, road safety worsening, congestion increasing that are disproved by objective facts then there is no obligation to listen to them. The obligation is to lead. It is the government not me who is saying that. The government has made that perfectly clear now and Mason is in a sticky mess of his own making. He can choose to appease the people who despise LTNs and lose funding and maybe even control of the Council departments OR he can anger the people who despise LTNs by rowing back on his promise of referenda and continue to receive funding. It's probably time for Mason to seek mentorship from Curran and Cowan.

Paul Campbell ● 1895d

Windmill Road is much more congested now, particularly since the Swyncombe Avenue closure (which may well have fallen outside the data collection period). The pollution data the council published was manipulated to show there was no ‘exceedance’ of permitted levels. The traffic flow data will have been similarly manipulated. This is a scenario replicated elsewhere in the borough.The council was challenged at the outset over the lack of baseline data and failed to provide any adequate response. Now it’s fudging and lying to try to prove something that isn’t true.The plain fact is this was an experiment that blew up spectacularly in the faces of those who proposed it. They thought the areas chosen were full of residents who would simply roll over and take it.Watch electoral wipeout for Labour in parts of Ealing next year.

Simon Hayes ● 1895d

If you compare the bus travel times for the boundary roads that also have traffic counts, on average the bus times have dropped by 3 seconds and the traffic counts by 41 vehicles an hour. Essentially the buses were not experiencing any delays and keeping to schedule - they don't go faster than schedule because there are fewer passengers! The traffic counts and the bus times are consistent.Nevertheless, you go on to suggest without any evidence that Direct Line, an independent third-party contractor, have fiddled the figures . Would you claim the same if the figures were collected by the council themselves?But on the more reasonable assumption that Direct line were doing their job, the counts show a total fall of more than 38,000 vehicles a day from the LTNs, both within and on the boundary roads. Considering the A4 through Chiswick carries around 100,000 vehicles a day, that's a sizeable reduction.Peter Evans is right, though. It appears the Council are going to base their decision on an uninformed survey rather than the evidence.

Tom Pike ● 1895d

While fiddling the figures might be a bit strong, Direct Line were clearly employed to present a particular narrative on behalf of Ealing Council. The opacity of when and how the data was collected and the inappropriate choice of control road gives them leeway to provide 'evidence' which supports a chosen view. Providing services like this to local authorities isn't going to be very profitable for Direct Line if they start telling the client things they don't want to hear.I'm sure if you carefully select the bus travel times for certain routes you can come up with an average that shows that overall there was no impact. Averages are irrelevant in this case - where there are significant increases in bus travel times on certain roads which coincide with the introduction of LTNs shouldn't those particular LTNs be scrapped?

Francis Rowe ● 1895d

So basically , you can trust the data ?

Maggie Dodge ● 1895d

Predictions of electoral impact for Labour are likely to be confounded. The pattern of voting in the Mayoral elections showed little impact of the traffic measures in Chiswick in local wards. Like many demographically similar wards Labour made significant gains and there is a real chance of Chiswick having Labour representation next May.Although transport issues generate a lot of heat on discussion boards and social media, for most people it isn't the primary determinant of the way they vote. In Chiswick those that do have strong views are generally knowledgeable enough to know that the transport schemes are a Conservative government policy implemented by a Labour council so the issue is neutral from a party political point of view.The wards with LTNs in Ealing are similar to the ones in Chiswick containing a large proportion of professional people who may have tended towards the Conservatives in the past but are having to deal day to day with the consequences of Brexit and the Prime Minister's F**k Business outlook. There is a trend for Labour to make gains in this demographic and it could be that we lose some effective and hardworking Conservative councillors as a result. The chances are Labour will increase their vote in many of the Ealing wards affected by LTNs even if they are forced to persist with them.

Francis Rowe ● 1895d

Direct Line provided traffic data. They will make money by providing accurate estimates, not skewing data, and your aspersions here are made without any evidence. Direct Line are basing those estimates on samples as not all cars will be providing them GPS information. Criticising one particular count is therefore pretty meaningless. There were no significant delays on any bus routes. The largest delay was on Pope's Lane westbound at 42 s which matches the variance given. There is no reason to scrap any of the LTNs on the basis of significantly increased bus times, and on average the difference is just 2.5s!Pollution and congestion were the two most prevalent concerns cited by residents, but they were not given the traffic data to inform their survey responses. Shouldn't LTN's that gave significant decreases in traffic, and therefore reduced pollution and congestion, be retained?

Tom Pike ● 1895d

Tom surely - this should be a decision taken only after residents have been consulted on all the options?

Cllr Sam Hearn ● 1895d

Sam, actually reducing pollution will require leadership, not uninformed consultations. If Ealing council want to salvage any credibility on their ability to deliver such reductions, they will be making their decisions based on the evidence.

Tom Pike ● 1894d

Evidence? That’ll be the same as data. Who supplies the evidence, that’s the question

Maggie Dodge ● 1894d

I have two comments.There is research going back decades which shows that traffic management systems, which include LTNs, work best when they are supported by the local community.  It does seem as though in Ealing most of the schemes were not well liked.  Sure the survey may have its flaws, but so does a lot of evidence provided by both sides of the argument.As for bus times, the effect of Covid has been that buses are running with far fewer passengers.  If the traffic volumes did not change between the "pre-LTNs" and "with LTNs" period, bus times would, solely because fewer passengers means less time stopped at intermediate stops to allow for people to get on or off, be less.  That needs to be factored into any discussion as to whether or not bus times are faster or slower because of LTNs.  Then there is the issue of the effect of Covid on traffic volumes - depending on when the data was gathered that will have a significant impact.  Sadly for those wanting all LTNs removed we will need at least a full year's worth of data on traffic volumes  (and probably a full year after covid lockdowns)to be able to reach any sort of worthwhile conclusion

Justin Stephenson ● 1894d

Well that feels like a giant step backwards. All the money being spent on allthese surveys, consultations whatever you want to call them. For every one that likes the results someone queries the findings. Why not keep it simple, they’re not working, their not wanted by the majority. Take themout.

Maggie Dodge ● 1894d

“There is research going back decades which shows that traffic management systems, which include LTNs, work best when they are supported by the local community.”Any references to the research?

Michael Robinson ● 1894d

Ealing has admitted that no baseline data on flow numbers was collected on the boundary roads around LTN21 the largest LTN by area in London. Local residents however took base line data immediately prior to the implementation of LTN21 and again on the sames days and times immediately following implementation.Id addition, the diffusion tubes measuring pollution levels at two key sites were removed prior to implementation. An additional site was requested by the parents of St.Mark's school in Hanwell as static traffic due to the increased volume of displaced traffic was of concern.  Ealing were not even able to maintain monitoring of this site citing Covid19 issues in changing and checking the diffusion tube, A difficulty that did not occur on any other site.The baseline traffic and pollution data published was therefore at best a guess, at worst a simple lie.The3 decision is based on the feedback from residents as the data, at least in LTN 21, was little more than a work of fiction.

N V Brooks ● 1894d

Apparently what the majority of residents want is not of interest to some.. Lets hope the bully boys don’t get their way. They don’t deserve to win.

Maggie Dodge ● 1894d

The notion that there were no significant delays on bus routes is a misinterpretation of the data by Tom Pike.Although the resulting delays might seem small they are averages collected over a 12 hour period. For most of the time traffic will flow as normal so any delays will have been concentrated at peak time. Therefore the experience for a large number of travellers on the affected routes will be significantly increased journey times.Although the rise in travel times is coincident with the full operation of LTNs and the ending of lockdown measures we can't be totally sure that the LTN is directly responsible but it is a smoking gun. The concern has to be that there will be modal shift from buses to cars in areas were the bus service has been harmed. A modal shift from buses to bikes yields zero benefit because the bus continues to run just with fewer people on it.

Francis Rowe ● 1891d

The only thing that’s going to get these LTN’s removed is Tfl bus journey time data. We are still a mile away from normal traffic levels, slowly it will increase as lockdown unwinds. It may not get back to the old normal ever but it doesn’t need to and no bad thing but once it gets any where near the lols levels busses will be useless on many routes and then they will have to remove the LTN’s

Craig David Mcdowell ● 1891d

There was no significant change in bus times with the introduction of LTNs. To claim that a 2.5s average delay was “coincident” with the introduction of LTNs is misleading. There would have been similar or larger shifts “coincident” with many other times, all insignificant as well.Your conjecture that an insignificant shift represents a faster service outside of peaks and a slower peak service is just as likely as the opposite occurring. Most likely in the absence of any further information is that there were insignificant changes in the delays to both. Given there is no actual evidence of a deterioration in the bus service, you are just selecting the less probable outcome that confirms your own prejudices.What the data shows is that on average there was no significant change to travel times on the bus routes along the boundaries of the LTNs, and there was a substantial reduction in traffic both overall and within the LTNs. Ealing should have made this information available to residents prior to consulting them.

Tom Pike ● 1890d

If only Ruth Cadbury had Rupa Huq's attitude regarding LTN's

Loraine Pemberton ● 1889d

Agree, Rupa is practical and reasonable.

Janice Evans ● 1889d