Plans for a pair of low traffic neighbourhoods from Greenwich Council have been delayed, with some residents claiming the scheme would ‘quadruple’ the duration of their current commutes.
Greenwich Council has paused plans to add traffic restrictions to roads surrounding Greenwich Park during rush hour after the scheme was criticised for its consultation method and effect on surrounding areas.
The scheme would consist of number plate recognition cameras being used to block through traffic in roads in East and West Greenwich between 7-10am and 3-7pm on weekdays. Vehicles such as blue badge holders, taxis, emergency vehicles and bin trucks would be excluded from the scheme.
The scheme, once approved, would run for a trial period of 18 months to allow for feedback from residents. The current proposal has been developed following several phases of engagement since October 2022.
The topic was discussed at an overview and scrutiny call-in meeting on July 31 after the decision was called in by Conservative Councillor Matt Hartley. The councillor claimed that he felt the proposal had already been predetermined by the authority regardless of the outcome of its public consultation.
The opposition leader claimed he was not opposed to the concept of low traffic neighbourhoods (LTNs), but noted that up to 79 per cent of responses to the consultation expressed negative or very negative feelings towards the scheme. He claimed the consultation process used was ‘flawed and biased’ and that residents had felt ignored by the authority.
Cllr Hartley said at the meeting: “People have to have confidence that the decision has been reached after a consultation in which their views were not just taken in a perfunctory manner but were listened to and considered. I’m afraid this consultation fell very far short of the mark in that regard.”
Amendments since the initial proposal included hard road closures being replaced by number plate recognition cameras and limiting the scheme to rush hour periods on weekdays. Labour Councillor Averil Lekau, cabinet member for climate action, sustainability and transport, claimed these changes had been made in response to consultation comments, despite reducing the overall benefits of the proposals and increasing the cost to the authority to £220,000.
Cllr Lekau denied claims from Cllr Hartley that the scheme was ‘predetermined’. She added that the authority went beyond its statutory requirements when consulting with the local community, which included residents, businesses and community groups.
Cllr Lekau said: “I think we need to note that the role of the consultation was never a referendum. The consultation was designed to help us understand people’s views on design proposals and to inform a decision on options for delivering the council’s established objectives for a safer, greener transport network for the local community.”
Council officers claimed at the meeting that the consultation had received over 8,000 responses, which represented a much greater response rate than seen for similar schemes in the borough. However, it was noted that a significant number of respondents to the consultation were from outside of the affected areas, with 21 per cent of respondents being from East Greenwich and 26 per cent from West Greenwich.
The decision was also called in by ward councillors in and surrounding the proposed areas. Council documents stated a number of the councillors’ suggestions had been adopted by council officers, such as retaining traffic filters on Gloucester Circus and Park Vista. Both Cllr Hartley and the ward councillors also raised the issue of neighbouring streets in Charlton and Blackheath being affected.
Members of the West Charlton Residents’ Association said they did not outright disapprove of the scheme but feared it would shift traffic into their streets. Local resident Sarah Gared claimed to have lived on either side of Greenwich Park over the past 35 years and said her journeys would quadruple in time and distance if the proposal was approved.
Jenny Donovan said she was a full-time carer to her disabled child and the only school in the borough suited to her needs was just over three miles from her home. She claimed that the previous LTN in the borough had increased her daily commute to the school from 14 minutes up to an hour and a half.
Ms Donovan said: “I am not alone. At the school my daughter attends, many children arrive by specialist transport from in and outside of the borough. The majority of their parents were never made aware of the proposals, nevermind consulted. [There is an] utterly unforgivable exclusionary element to these schemes.”
Nine members of the public spoke in support of the plans at the meeting, while 15 individuals made representations against the scheme. Colin Humphries, a resident of Maze Hill, praised the proposals and said that of the past five times he and his son had cycled on his road, cars had passed dangerously close on three occasions.
Mr Humphries said at the meeting: “Sat navs [have turned] our streets into motorways… I want to be able to take my son to football without putting his life in danger. I’m here trying to save my children’s lives by reducing traffic on our residential roads.”
The sub-committee asked Cllr Lekau to reconsider implementing the trial scheme in accordance with the suggestions made by the ward councillors and residents at the meeting. They also asked for arrangements to be in place to monitor the impact of the trial on neighbouring areas.
The cabinet member was asked to confirm she was satisfied an adequate consultation on the scheme had taken place. Furthermore, she was advised to ensure an acceptable consultation would also take place if the trial scheme was rolled out.
–
The topic was discussed at a Greenwich Council meeting on July 31. Photo by Joe Coughlan
