Greenwich Low Traffic Neighbourhood approved
A Low Traffic Neighborhood Scheme for Greenwich has been approved after proposals were called in last month.
The project follows a temporary LTN installed in parts of the town back in 2020. This project will run during peak times between 7am-10am and 3pm-7pm covering Maze Hill, Vanbrugh Hill Crooms Hill and Westcombe Hill either side of Greenwich Park.
Unlike the initial set up during 2020, cameras will enforce the area rather than physical obstacles enabling emergency services to pass. In addition, taxis, carers and those with special needs will be exempt.
After a scrutiny meeting, a decision has now been posted on Greenwich Council’s website.
Concerns over displaced traffic will see monitoring cover traffic levels in the wider area including Charlton to the east.
Public attention
A council report gives a good overview of the scheme’s recent history, with 8,000 comments received during consultation, with a majority opposed. The report outlines the preferred path forward:
“Option 2: The decision maker notes the comments of the Overview & Scrutiny Call-In Sub-Committee provided at the meeting held on 31st July 2024, the responses to them set out in this report and re-considers the decision, incorporating the recommendations set out in this report, as referred to in 1.2 and 1.3 above. This would include:
• Consultation will be extended to the Blackheath and Charlton areas. These would include drop-in sessions and information packs.
• Monitoring will be extended to the Blackheath and Charlton areas. This would include (but not limited to) ATCs, air quality monitoring, and iBus data.
• To retain the modal filter in Gloucester Circus detailed in the West & East Greenwich call-in report,
• Cade Road to remain open to two-way traffic as detailed in the West & East Greenwich call-in report,
• To retain the modal filter in Park Vista as detailed in the West & East Greenwich call-in report; and
• The proposed ANPR modal filter in Maze Hill (junction with Vanbrugh Park) is to be relocated further north on Maze Hill as detailed in the West & East Greenwich call-in report.”
No start date is revealed for the project. An 18-month period upon commencement will study impacts before a decision is made on whether it should be made permanent.
Running a site alone takes time and a fair bit of money. Adverts are far from enough to cover it and my living costs as a private renter.
You can support me including via Paypal here Another option is via Patreon by clicking here You can also buy me a beer/coffee at Ko-fi here There's also a Facebook page for the site here Many thanks
If it’s a camera type set up why can’t they allow locals to register to use it as an exemption. If you are near the river side in west greenwich this will be a real pain.
With church street closing to southbound traffic for 3 months anyone on the riverside is going to have a big problem with getting out of greenwich….
Did they issue responses to the consultation?
Greenwich sits astride one of the main routes into London. Travellers have been going through it to get to town for 2000 years. A few zealous anti-car councillors won’t stop traffic but they will muck up the journeys for many locals who want to drive, er locally. Still at least the resulting traffic displacement will affect riff-raff rather than the upper and upper middle class residents of Royal Hill and the like.
It’ll be interesting to see the affect on Charlton Church Lane where the road is narrow enough to cause problems for buses as it is, let alone the pinch point on Victoria Way Murky has highlighted.
Greenwich has plenty of public transport options and even some passable cycling infrastructure in places. Really no one should be using a car for local journeys unless there’s absolutely no other options. Any measure like LTNs that help achieve that are worth implementing. Improving health, air quality, walkability should all be priorities. And cutting unnecessary car journeys (eg large suvs doing school drop offs inside a city) is a big part of that.
And there’s the rub. You are anti-car. Despite RBG spending millions cyclists here are still like hen’s teeth. How many cyclists do you see going up Royal Hill? Have you noticed Greenwich is a tad hilly? Have you noticed all the cars owned within the impoverished LTNs? If LTN residents ditched their cars then maybe you would have a point. But they won’t, they just want others to. Also, the cycle lanes coupled with the old LTN buggered up Trafalgar Road and Woolwich Road no end and made my morning bus journey into the centre of Greenwich for coffee and a potter too long to bother with. So I bought a car and now head elsewhere. The laws of unintended consequences.
I’ve got a car, I’m anti short inner city journeys with a car when public transport options exist and that’s the majority of intra-borough journeys. I cycle regularly through Greenwich and Charlton, it’s bloody dangerous at times even in the bits where they’ve made an effort.
What’s frustrating is the council tries but doesn’t make it actually good for anyone. Eg Charlton road, a wide bicycle lane, except where randomly there’s parking spaces that with no warning force you back into the main traffic. Successfully making an unsafe bike lane, pissing off drivers, slowing busses and not encouraging cycling.
There are plenty of other examples where the council or TfL don’t need to do much to make it a lot better. (See the proposals for the main road through Woolwich where they are compromising in a way that won’t satisfy anyone.
LTNs are a no brainer from a public health, nice neighbourhood, walkable city, air pollution point of view. Sadly rbg could do them and other transport so much better. Also, it’s okay and not unreasonable for ltn residents to have cars and drive, but encouraging those journeys to be on foot/bus/scooter/bike is a reasonable public health goal.
LTNs
You’ve got your cake and you’re eating it. Far more people live on main roads than in your leafy suburban roads yet these are people you want subjected to more traffic. These people are also far more likely to be crammed into multiple occupation homes, will be less well off, more likely to be BAME, more likely to be on social housing and more likely to be affected by traffic than you folk. Your health arguments are hypocritical.
Nothing wrong with being “anti-car” considering how bad they make London. The worst period was the 1980s when congestion levels were appalling and people were moving away as a result.
Cars are fine for rural journeys but should be discouraged in city’s like London with so many better travel alternatives.
I agree Chris. It will cause added problems for Victoria Way and Charlton Church Lane and not fogetwhich are narrow roads and already busy with traffic.
Charlton Lane is even narrower but also seeing an increase in traffic through out the day.
Meant to say not forgetting other nearby roads like Marlborough Lane and Hornfair Road which will see an increase in traffic as people cut through these roads to get to Victoria Way or Charlton Church Lane.
The school street scheme on Indus Road in Charlton was meant to be monitored by cameras but these were never installed. They have also lost the local crossing patrols on Canberra Road and Charlton Parl Lane due to Greenwich Council cuts.
If they are replaced by pelican crossings in the future who knows. Road safety is not a high priority for Greenwich Council and never has been.
Great news, LTNs seem to make places so much more desirable to live in. Also great news for people’s house prices.
Cuz that’s what greenwich really lacks. High house prices.
W You are not wrong. The cost of buying or renting a house or flat in the Royal Borough of Greenwich is ridiculous and remains out of reach for many people to afford on their salaries.
Yet again, wealthy, influential people have turned their public streets into semi-private property, denying access to other taxpayers. Increasing their property values, while simultaneously destroying the quality of life or those around the border of their private village. If you live in, and promote an LTN, you are an immoral elitist.
It’s interesting to see the demographics of where the LTNs push the traffic. On to the poor people of course! Still, it’s their fault they live on main roads….
This isn’t factually true, but car owners are in no way a marginalised group. To create a city where cars are essential would be immoral and elitist. So many people can’t afford to run a car! I’m really happy to be immoral if that means the kids in my neighbourhood can play outside safely and the decrease in pollution means we can all (ALL) breathe easier.
Yes it is factually true!
In Greenwich’s case traffic is being diverted from Royal Hill, Crooms Hill and the like and sent to Blackheath Hill (60 percent social housing) and Trafalgar Road, as well as places like Victoria Way in Charlton. Go and check the cost of housing — and percentage of social housing — in each street. EG – In Royal Hill houses are 1-3 million quid, Victoria Way 600-700,000 and Trafalgar Road, 300-400,000. Still your kids are ok (they won’t play in the road and you know it) and the riff-raff won’t be breathing easier.
Nothing changes with these LTN schemes, push the traffic onto already congested main roads while the poorest in society are affected.
What is needed is more speed cameras to be brutally honest. The amount of speeding cars and cars being driven dangerously is on the increase across the Borough.
I have witnessed so many incidents of late you are frightened to drive at times
I do not know if the drivers do not have driving licences let alone insurance. Or they are driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol.
I agree with Anon local residents who can provide evidence they live on the streets where cameras are installed could apply for an exemption.
This is the first thing that should be done: Westcombe Hill would be a prime candidate instead of a bus gate. As for the small shops at the bottom of the hill, has the Council considered how places like the convenience store or the barbers will survive once passing trade is effectively cut off? Or the small cars that people run to make Evri or Amazon drops for some extra money. Even the exemptions are subject to application – a blue badge holder is exempt, but only if they apply for exemption. I imagine many fines will be issued while they implement that system.
As for Lekau’s reaction, watch it online. Even Rees-Mogg showed more decorum.
All Blue Badge holders are exempt from LTNs and individuals can also apply for personal exemptions.
The less traffic on our streets the better. Neighbourhoods should be designed for people to live in, not just drive through.
LTNs have proven beneficial to local businesses in other boroughs so should help local businesses in Greenwich too. LTNs are bad for the large supermarkets and corporations however, hence why they put so much effort into fighting LTNs.
The roads all over greenwich are ridiculous…why do cyclists need an 8ft up and down cycle lane. The congestion was bad enough before but I witnessed countless times where emergency vehicles can’t get passed the crammed roads because cars can’t pull in to let them pass. The increase usage of LTN’s is just a money making scheme to try and make London the greenest city in the eyes of Europe. I’m in construction and need to use my van every day to carry tools etc….I may only need to drive a couple of miles away from my home…but you try carrying a transformer, drills, benchsaw etc on a bus!
@Dave: I have seen tradesmen on public transport with substantial kit, but I take your point about the constricted roads and the danger they pose to the emergency services. There should be other ways to manage traffic that does not include blanket low traffic ordinances that funnel vehicles onto a select few roads thereby causing bottlenecks and gridlock.
I agree anonymous201486. LtN”s and floating bus stops do slow down emergency vehicles and create mote traffic congestion. However, I am all for road safety and support 20 MPH speed limits. Bur there must be a better way to manage traffic 24 hours a day and not just during peak hours.
Great news. I’m seeing a lot of misinformation in the comment section, so just a couple of points. Can’t link to sources to avoid being categorised as spam but a quick google will confirm.
1. There’s no evidence that LTNs slow down emergency services (even the Fire Service tried to find evidence and couldn’t). In fact, the less drivers there are, the less delays.
2. Blue Badge drivers are exempt, as are people who apply for an individual exemption due to their health.
3. The University of Westminister found there was minimal negative impact on local areas.
4. LTNs have been around since the 70s, they aren’t a new concept.
Kirsty, I urge you to go and ask the folk at East Greenwich Fire Station whether LTNs slow them down. They are the ones who know. Forget weird, biased surveys by pro-LTNers like the University of Westminster, RBG themselves admitted the last LTN was a disaster which is why even those hard nut anti-motorists abandoned it!