Deputation 1
Victoria Ward presented the deputation to Cabinet. The key
points of the deputation are summarised as follows:
- LTNs
were not in the Labour manifesto and nobody voted for them. It was
claimed that before LTNs were introduced, 56% of residents did not
want them and that, since then, the administration had failed to
bring the public along with them on this journey.
- LTNs
were based on DfT data that was withdrawn, due to a catalogue of
errors. The Cabinet Member had advised residents that it was all
about the data. However, the deputation party contended that every
piece of data that had been used in support of LTNs had been
discredited. Cabinet was asked to read the data and to understand
it before pushing ahead.
- It was
put forward that at a meeting in February, the Leader and Cabinet
Member dismissed those opposing LTNs as alt-right and climate
change deniers. This was a wholly unfair characterisation and
showed contempt for residents.
- The
interim report sought to simply support the policy, rather than
interrogate it
- The
main justifications for LTNs were summarised as; a comprehensive
consultation, to reduce pollution, to help people live active and
more healthier lives and to reduce collisions. It was suggested
that all of these had failed and that rather: There had been a
negligible impact on pollution; cycling had reduced since LTNs were
created; there was no data available around collisions but that
traffic had increased on roads.
- The
other key justification given for introducing LTNs was around to
reduce rat running. It was suggested that the success of this goal
was undermined by poor data for the following reasons:
- The
baseline was taken after the introduction of the Enfield Bowes LTN,
so traffic on boundary roads had already increased
- The
technology used did not count cars travelling under 10km, none of
the sitting traffic is counted and the detail behind this has not
been released
- The
way cars were counted for the baseline inflated the number of cars
registered inside the LTNs prior to the change, which was admitted
in the report but dismissed.
- Even
if the car count was down, it was suggested that the Council did
not track how far those cars are travelling. Ms Ward advised that
she travelled 4.4km further every time she left the house, so the
car count was meaningless
- It was
commented that the increase in traffic on boundary roads had
directly led to a reduction in the number of buses and increased
journey times.
- Government funding for the schemes had been dropped, they were
widely acknowledged as being badly implemented and
counterproductive. It was commented that the Transport Secretary
told councils on Sunday to withdraw unpopular schemes.
- The
Council had received 2.5k formal objections to the scheme and
public opposition to the scheme was reflected in reduced a vote
share at recent bye-elections.
- The
deputation party requested that Cabinet look at the data in detail,
not just the summary, and that they did not just nod the report
through. The deputation party also requested a meeting with the
Director of Environment and Resident Experience, as it was not felt
that the experience of residents was reflected in the
report.
The
following arose in discussion of the deputation:
- The
Leader clarified that the decision to proceed with LTNs was taken
by Cabinet, prior to the 2022 election and that the election took
place against a background of LTN having been agreed.
- The
Leader clarified that the meeting referred to was a Labour party
meeting and that the topic of conversation at this meeting was not
LTNs.
- The
Cabinet sought clarification over the fact that residents have fed
back that LTNs had improved road safety and whether the deputation
party were concerned about the risks to road safety of re-directing
traffic through residential roads. It was suggested that in
general, areas with LTNs had halved the number of road injuries. In
response, the deputation party advised that all roads in Haringey
were residential and that LTNs had simply moved the problems from
one location to another. The deputation party agreed that they
would be in favour or more speed restrictions in built up areas but
advocated that road safety also had to be balanced with other
considerations such as women feeling unsafe at night in roads with
LTNs.
- The
Cabinet raised the issue of air pollution, and the inequality that
existed with air pollution disproportionately effecting the most
deprived areas, in which 60% of residents did not own a car. The
deputation party were asked whether they agreed that strong action
needed to be taken on air pollution. In response, they advised that
they did not agree that LTNs reduced pollution and that there was
no evidence to support this. The deputation party also set out that
the use of percentages in this context was problematic due to the
fact that the east of the borough was significantly more populated
than the west. The Deputation party set out that because the
Council had done very little engagement, it felt like it was
telling people what was good for them rather than asking
them.
Cllr
Hakata, Deputy Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Climate
Action, Environment and Transport provided a response to the points
raised by the deputation party. A summary of this response is set
out below:
- The
Cabinet Member advised that the network of LTNs was agreed as part
of the Walking & Cycling Action Plan, which had engendered a
strong sense of people for and against even at that early
stage.
- In
response to suggestions that there was no problem, the Cabinet
Member asserted that there definitely was a problem in terms of
road deaths, social isolation of young people and pollution. It was
suggested that even most drivers in the borough would agree that
there was a serious problem around congestion in the
borough.
- It was
commented that if the water people drank was as dirty as the air
they breathed, people would not drink it. Public Health England
have advised that poor air quality was the number one public health
crisis in the country.
- Inrix have
advised that that London is the most congested city in the world
and that on average drivers sat for 156 hours in traffic in a year
and that this was up from 148 hours in 2021.
- The
Cabinet Member also highlighted obesity issues in the borough as
well as the impact of congestion on health and mental health. The
Cabinet Member set out that he categorically did not agree with the
idea that people were not sitting in traffic before LTNs.
Congestion was a long-standing issue.
- In
relation to the data, the Cabinet Member advised that they had only
been using certain data up until now and that the amount of data
available was going to increase. Up until now, the only data source
had been ATCs (rubber tubes) and these had recorded every vehicle
travelling over them at every speed. VivaCity cameras would also be used going forward
which were 24hr AI multi-modal cameras recording traffic at
junctions. Bus data from TfL was also available for use and this,
crucially, was not collected by Haringey but by TfL.
- The
Cabinet Member identified that the bus cameras had shown that,
apart from a very small number of locations, there had been a
significant improvement in traffic and that journey times had down
back down to pre-LTN levels, and in some cases to better than
pre-LTN levels.
- The
Cabinet Member asserted that the Council had done a huge amount of
consultation in relation to LTNs, possibly more than any other set
of schemes, and that it would continue to engage with residents
going forward.
Deputation 2
Tara Hawkins presented the
second deputation on how the LTN schemes have negatively
and detrimentally affected businesses and
customers.
Tara Hawkins contended that the
Council were not acting in accordance with their pledge to support
businesses and were causing the destruction of business as a direct
result of the implementation of LTNs introduced last
year.
The deputation further
contended that the scheme was an ill-thought-out arrangement, and
no businesses were involved in its consultation.
The deputation asked that
Cabinet reflect upon how businesses take years and decades to build
up, and that business owners invest significant amounts of time,
energy and money in developing and expanding their
business.
She explained that in order to
achieve growth businesses, seek to attract markets located further
afield and the introduction of the LTNs had significantly disrupted
this business model resulting in a reduction in revenue. Customers
and suppliers had to navigate circuitous/complex routes to get to
shops adding to their journey times, together with managing the
increase in traffic, parking restrictions, and fines. This had
resulted in customers not coming to the area.
The deputation highlighted that
survey results conducted by a Dental practice in the Bounds Green
LTN between April – May of this year and which had produced
the following data:
- More than
50% of the clients visit by car.
- Nearly 40%
travel from more than 4 miles away
60% travel from outside of the borough
- 86% said
LTNs would not make them change their mode of
transport.
There were further LTN impact
statements referred to from business owners in the
borough.
- A Driving
Instructor - who was no longer able to accept many new pupils due
to traffic.
- A
Café Owner in Myddleton Road
with a 50% reduction in business, after having expanded who was
unable to pay bills and had to get a charity involved to deal with
the legal side of this.
- A Tottenham
Business Owner who had seen a 40% reduction in business after
working hard for 15 years we spent building customer based which
has vanished because of the LTN Scheme.
- The
deputation felt that none of the reasons for implementing the
introduction of the LTNs stood up to scrutiny. These were
implemented soon after covid
restrictions ended which was then followed by the cost-of-living
crisis, and businesses had not been given any chance of
recovery.
The deputation felt that the
experimental scheme had seriously impacted people’s
livelihoods for the worst. In conclusion, the deputation felt that
there was nothing to support the continued presence of LTNs in the
borough, apart from the funding that the Council was collecting in
fines. The deputation called on the
Cabinet to remove all LTN’s as they are causing huge economic
damage.
In response to question from
Cllr Brabazon, Tara Hawkins explained
that she had to move her business from Myddleton Rd to Crouch End because as soon as the
LTN were introduced her business sales had reduced by 50% and in
particular she had lost customers from
Haringey.
The Cabinet Member for Climate
Action, Environment, and Transport and Deputy Leader of the Council
responded, focussing on the data collected and the experience of
business in the LTN areas in Haringey and wider, in London, where
semi pedestrianisation and pedestrianisation schemes had been brought in. The
following was outlined:
- Data
analysed on business transactions and footfall across the town
centres in the borough, both in and outside LTN areas, showed all
were experiencing an economic downturn due to cost-of-living crisis
and energy prices. They all followed the same trajectory with dips
and recoveries, but essentially all were following the same
pattern.
- Reference
to a business area in Waltham Forest and Hackney Church Street
which had implemented their LTN schemes much earlier than Haringey
with similar objections but which were now a thriving high streets.
The traders in these areas had previously had similar concerns to
those expressed in the deputation.
- Contested
the understanding that trade to businesses emanates from car
journeys. There were studies and surveys that conveyed that traders
overestimate the number of people coming to their businesses by car
and underestimate the number that are coming by foot. Most
residents were searching for local provision such as dentists that
they could reach on foot.
- It was
important for residents to access their local provision such as
dentist and not be competing with customers outside of the local
area for access.
In conclusion the data on
footfall and card transactions did not indicate a greater impact on
business activities in LTN areas compared to the other businesses
in non LTN areas.
Deputation 3
Cathy Stastny presented the third deputation. The main points of the deputation are summarised
as follows:
·
The dedicated group to discuss the exemptions
procedures were not made clear to members of the Joint Partnership
Board, nor were the procedures collectively agreed to.
·
Whilst the new process would exempt all Blue Badge
holders, it was stated that not all disabled people held Blue
Badges and even those who did, were at the centre of a network of
people supporting them, who would not benefit from any exemptions
to the scheme. It was felt that
exemptions should apply to all people working with and caring for
people with disabilities.
·
The LTNs caused more traffic and slower journey
times, and it was contested that this caused people to breathe more
polluted air than before.
·
LTNs has been scrapped across the capital, the
Government had stopped funding all projects which involved the
creation of car free zones, which meant that Council would now have
to spend money on this scheme.
·
The residents did not want LTNs and urged the
Cabinet to end this scheme and work with residents to find
equitable public transport led solutions.
The Cabinet Member for Climate
Action, Environment, and Transport and Deputy Leader of the Council
responded to the deputation:
·
It was important to keep in mind the purpose of the
LTNs – air pollution was one of the worst impacts of motor
traffic and the most vulnerable people in the borough needed to be
protected.
·
The schemes had already shown improvements in the
borough and would continue to work to discourage people from taking
unnecessary car journeys and clear the roads for people who
depended on car travel.
The Leader thanked all parties
for attending.