[dfgdghdf]

> My sister in particular is incensed about the road blocks put up all over London that have resulted in several local deaths as emergency vehicles can't get through to attend to heart attacks etc.

Source?

I'm guessing you are talking about LTNs (Low Traffic Neighbourhoods). For those outside the UK, these are schemes where through motor traffic is prevented from using residential roads. The idea has been around for decades, but they have seen a recent government push due to people switching away from public transport due to COVID. They are usually implemented by strategically placing modal filters (bollards, gates, enforcement cameras, etc). Emergency services are given keys to the gates and bollards. Walkers and cyclists can travel through unimpeded.

In a public Q&A, London Ambulance Service said they had no evidence of delays due to new LTNs. In fact, they are generally supportive of the schemes. By law, councils must consult with emergency services before implementation.

They have also been the subject of disinformation campaigns by right wing newspapers and taxi driver unions.

[olivermarks]

The source is my sister's practical and local experience. the Private Eye podcast covered LTN's recently in some detail also

https://soundcloud.com/privateeyenews/page-94-the-private-ey...

15 minutes in

[dfgdghdf]

I listened to your source, but I'm afraid it wasn't very convincing.

The evidence they presented was an ambulance driver who had to go around a modal filter via side-streets to get to a patient who later died. We do not know if the patient died because of the LTN. I am aware of a case where Ealing council failed to delivery keys to an ambulance service - perhaps this was that? That error has now been rectified.

Needless to say, this is a tragedy. However, patients also die because emergency services get stuck in gridlock traffic. What needs to be show is that LTNs in general increase response times; but we were not presented with any data to support this. On the other side, there are examples of ambulances moving rapidly through LTNs, since they do not have to share the space with any other traffic. Remember, London's congestion is so bad that we have an air ambulance service. What we really need is data, and the limited amount we have so far is generally positive towards LTNs. One example we can look to is The Randstad, which is a huge urban area containing many connected LTNs, built from the 70s onwards. It doesn't seem to have problems with emergency service response times.

There's also the risk of missing the forest for the trees here. How many premature deaths occur from diseases of inactivity, toxic levels of air pollution and road accidents? Childhood obesity is around 20% in the UK and even higher in inner London boroughs. If you look at old photos of London, a striking difference to now is children playing safely on residential streets. Ambulance response times are not the only metric we need to keep an eye on.

The hosts like to make sweeping generalizations and talk about the "law of unintended consequences", but I wonder if they understand the law of induced demand?

[olivermarks]

There's plenty of Private Eye coverage as I previously stated if you're interested in their perspective in 'rotten boroughs' although it sounds as though you are a convinced enthusiast of LTN. Not sure if you bothered to listen to the part of the podcast about the claim (also a component of resident lawsuits https://twitter.com/ShimanoSteve/status/1358509807297298432 etc) that wealthy 'leafy' boroughs are having traffic routed away from them at the expense of poorer areas getting more traffic, resulting in greater pollution.

My original point is that my sister can no longer cycle and is dismayed to find it a lot harder to get around by car, while her son (a v strong cyclist) has to pay £15 congestion charge every time he uses his car as he lives on a band. He is convinced London has 'a war on cars'.

[olivermarks]

https://www.hackneygazette.co.uk/news/anti-ltn-campaigners-t...