Forum Topic

URGENT CALL TO ACTION...If you do ONE thing today, make it THIS. Every email counts and clearly demonstrates we are not a noisy minority.Ealing Council’s new leader, Peter Mason, has stated he will be looking carefully at the feedback received regarding the success of the Ealing LTNs. You may have already emailed to give your views on the LTNs, but we urge you to write again before the Ealing Council AGM (on Tuesday 18.5.21)and ask you not to assume your previous communications have been noted. PLEASE EMAIL NOW, including the following details:Subject line - Opposition to the LTNs and Request for Immediate RemovalNameFull Address and Postcode (important or they will not read).LTN I reside in/am negatively impacted by (I lived on the boundary road x)In the body of the message, include either a detailed account or a few punchy points about why you are opposed.Send to:peter.mason@ealing.gov.uktrafficnotices@ealing.gov.ukCc relevent ward councillorsACTON CENTRAL WARDRooneys@Ealing.gov.ukdaniel.crawford@ealing.gov.ukabdullah.gulaid@ealing.gov.ukEAST ACTON WARDkatherine.crawford@ealing.gov.ukDonnellyS@ealing.gov.ukhitesh.tailor@ealing.gov.ukSOUTH ACTON WARDjosh.blacker@ealing.gov.uk (now portfolio holder)yvonne.johnson@ealing.gov.ukmik.sabiers@ealing.gov.ukCC all to:rupa.huq.mp@parliament.ukonkar.sahota@london.gov.ukPLEASE REMEMBER TO BCC oneealing@gmail.com so we can keep count thanks!****PLEASE DO NOT DELAY, those who are pro the LTNs are already doing this.  ****

Sara Nathan ● 1071d

The issue that central government and local authorities have is that motorist pay through the nose to upkeep the road infrustructure. Without that revenue paid to central government the roads will just get worse!. I'm a cyclist and a driver, I cycle to work most days and have no issue to cycle on the roads. LTN's have made road worse forcing traffic to sit in traffic jams pumping out more toxic fumes. Journey times are increasing, roads are busy all day Horn Lane and Uxbridge Road are just one example. Now Churchfield Road has more conjestion since the introduction of LTN's. Ealing Council are forcing drivers to find alternative routes to avoid ever increasing traffic jams. No other borough has taken this draconian measure in West London. Ealing Council has caused chaos across large parts of the borough without much thought of the impact on its residents. No one speaks about the economic impact this will have on the local economy as we start to exit lockdown, general public will avoid Ealing to do their shopping or visiting friends. Businesses need swift access to deliver goods to our shops, our shops need customers, our town centres need people to visit without visitors there will be nothing empty shop are not inviting and the more empty shops; the less attractive Ealing and Acton becomes. LTN have not improved the lives of residents or visitors in Ealing. Whether it be Cars, lorries and buses stuck in traffic affect us all kicking the "can" down the street helps no-one....

Nicolas Ozegovic ● 1236d

The council are holding a cabinet scrutiny meeting to discuss LTNs on the 3rd December.Please email and register your objections to the Council today.  Email addresses are:TrafficNotices@ealing.gov.ukBellJ@ealing.gov.ukmik.sabiers@ealing.gov.ukjasbir.anand@ealing.gov.ukcc your Councillors and MP if you want.Please log onto Commonplace and add your objections there. It is better to use the site on a PC, but the phone version works well too. Visit https://ealingltn.commonplace.is/Click the button at the top right hand corner of the page which appears like three small white lines, a drop down menu will appear. Click 'Log in' and from there select 'Create Profile'. It is also possible to use the platform without creating a profile.If you would like to have a look at other peoples comments click the three white lines in the top right hand corner of the page, this will open a drop down menu, click 'All Comments'You can view all comments as a list or map. You can then browse the map and zoom in on streets.While viewing other people's comments you can click 'Agree' if you feel the same. You will have to verify this by email, Commonplace will send you a confirmation email every time you hit agree.To make your own comment, select the top right hand button (three white lines), click 'Map' and then at the bottom of the map you will see a yellow box click 'Have your Say'. You are allowed to make as many comments as you like and as often as you like. You can comment on any street and on all the LTNs in the borough. The consultation rules allow you to comment on more than one LTN, there is a drop down menu of all of the LTNs and also an option 'All of Ealing’s LTNs'.The map will then appear with a blue pin icon. Drag this icon to the part of the map you want to make your comment for.Then enter the information in the boxes provided, the first question is 'Where have you placed your pin'. The next box asks you 'What LTN are you commenting on' when you click this a drop down menu appears.If you would like to make a comment that is against the LTN the best button to click is 'General Objection'. If you do not agree with the scheme where it asks 'How does this make you feel' click the red angry emoji face.It then asks you 'Why you feel this way' please click the boxes which apply to your feelings the most. Try to keep it focussed on the LTNs, you can also add your own ideas by clicking the ‘Other’ button and entering your own text.The next question is 'How can we make it better' if you disagree with the scheme then click 'Remove the traffic filter'. You can also add your own suggestions for making it better by clicking the ‘Other button’. If you want these schemes to end then the clearest message you send is by entering 'Remove all LTNs’ in this box.You will then be asked if you have any comments to make.Once you have made your comments click 'Save comment' and you are done!Thank you!!

Sara Nathan ● 1244d

It depends on what you believe is rat-running and what is simply through traffic.Horn Lane was already running pretty close to capacity, made much worse by the Morrison's roundabout. The council have essentially blocked off two routes from Horn Lane to through traffic, Emanuel Road and Acacia Road. Say they were each used by 3 cars a minute at peak times (either through traffic or looking to get onto what is now the opposite side of the LTN), that is still six extra cars per minute going onto a road that is already running to capacity. When you think how few cars get out per minute at the Morrison's roundabout for instance, it will soon get backed up.It has been terrible today. As I walked up the road at 4pm, the queue north started at Springfield Gardens, solid traffic of nearly a mile. It has been awful for the last three days, but just wait until they get some roadworks (Thames Water dig up Horn Lane at least twice a year), tempers will really rise then.It comes back to the main problem with the idea. This is a project designed to stop short road journeys, but the main difficulty with Horn Lane is that it is a shortcut between the A40 and M4. The other options for those drivers (who are doing long trips) is the North Circular, which means confronting Hanger Lane Gyratory, or the M25, if you live outside London, although that would add about ten miles to your journey.If Crossrail ever opens, it will get worse, as Acton Main Line is the first station outside central London, so there will be more drop-offs, more cabs, more Ubers. Acton needs a proper traffic plan, not an LTN.

Ron Lewis ● 1308d

Hi Ron,I note there appears to be long history here.  I think we can agree that we all want the same thing, smarter, quitter, safer and more environmentally friendly road.  I look at the information available to form an opinion that the forecast is positive on balance.  That is my view based on the information and data available.  Less traffic through poets corner and less peak traffic on the boundary roads, such as Horn Lane.  I have asked for information speaking against this scheme, but I only get stories around personal stories and impositions.  These are relevant and real, but I am not swayed by anecdotal ‘evidence’, in particular where not all aspects have been considered.  I think it is important to read up in an issue and try and see if from the other point of view.  Far too few do that on this forum.I don’t know much about LTN, but I did take the time to try and understand what is trying to be achieved with the LTN at poets corner.  It seems to me to be on the whole positive.  Therefore, I could not just sit back and read comments on this forum that are ill-informed and considered only in isolation and not based on best available information.The number of new items added are confusing me and make me wonder if you are looking for a discussion or just vent frustration with LBE/EC.The Walthamstow study is the study that LBE refers to and it seems reasonable to me to use this test as a basis.  A London central suburb/residential area (however it is defined), surrounded by a-roads and with problem with rat-running.  If you disagree that this is an appropriate comparison you need to justify and substantiate why.  The shape of the area is one aspect, for sure, you can never replicate a situation r scenario exactly.  Hence the acton LTN is on a trial basis.  The Walthamstow study paints a very positive picture in terms of impact, of a LTN, to a residential area, including for the boundary roads (such as horn lane).1. I am glad you understand the difference between a residential road and an a-road.  The Walthamstow study demonstrated some increase to the boundary roads (horn lane), but less at peak, which should mean less congestion experience.  Less cars passing through the area (horn lane included) during rush hours should be positive to us living near/on horn lane.2. Of course pollution reduction should be as much as possible, but the a-road is an artery and is designed differently with houses set back further etc.  I knew that when we moved here and I suspect you knew that when you moved to the area.  I believe pollution and traffic management is also approached differently for a roads.  You will always have traffic on an a-road, but you’ll also get busses and ‘safe’ crossing points.  If you want to understand the design codes better they are all on-line.  Again, the study in Walthamstow forecast an incremental increase to traffic volumes on the boundary roads, but this traffic is forecast to be much more spread out throughout the day (and evening).  I do not know if that is better or worse from a pollution perspective - my guess is better (no static idle traffic).  Ulez should be the biggest game changer for that though.3. I cannot answer this as I have not seen the traffic stats.  If you have them I’d be very interested to have a look.  The current scheme seems to meet its objectives, but here are more ways to plan a LTNs, of course, so I suggest you put your ideas to the council, our input has been specifically asked for in the leaflet (presuming you got one).4. Walthamstow achieved much greater than 15% reduction in the LTN, they achieved 50% in the LTN.15%, as far as I can tell, takes into consideration the boundary roads and the behavioural aspects, such as people, like I, now drive much less (it’s a pain not to be able to cut through - LTN helped me quit!) and phv etc no longer cutting through between the vale and horn lane.  I am going out on a limb here though, again simple traffic data would be needed to validate this.Specific points faced in Acton may be something to look at, I don’t know what they are, but pilot studies are, in my limited experience, a very meaningful tool to forecast.  I’d suggest you share these points to the council in your feedback message.Ron, seriously, if you don’t believe data and statistics, how can you determine anything?  Everything from traffic data to your health tests and checks.  It’s not going to be exactly the same in Acton as in Walthamstow, of course not, but if you think a couple of anecdotal stories on a forum provides a more accurate forecast, I am not sure we need to continue this discussion.  Residents views are very important but facts are facts.5. I don’t know anything about this Ron.  Seems to relate to some previous experience with lbe that you probably need to process.  6. Yes we cycle up and down acacia.  In particular now with the Uber bikes.  I don’t know where people cycle or what the protections for cyclists are.  Is this a point regarding the ltn?6 (again).  I am not sure what your point is.  But your notion around a gated community seems more resentful than factual (refer to item 5 above).  Your comment about trapping traffic is also not based on anything that I have reviewed.  It seems like this point is venting some form of frustration that traffic is shifted from poets corner to horn lane, as noted earlier this is not necessarily what the case study forecasts.  But data would need to be collected to verify.  Your notion is that EC is actively pushing congestion into our town centre, I honestly don’t know what this point means and it’s relevance.  Again, you seem very angry at EC..7.  If you base this point on the Walthamstow study, ie the point that more traffic is added to horn lane, this is perhaps correct.  The study however showed that the peaks have been reduced so the risk of gridlock is reduced.Using acacia road in the case of gridlock, maybe your guess is correct, it’ll need to be studied. maybe simulated (modelled) to test if a benefit, of no LTN, is to be able to reroute traffic in the case of an accident.  A factor perhaps, but I cannot see that this is a litmus test if the scheme is positive as an overall.  Unless you have done a test case or run a simulation you cannot possibly conclude on this.8. I am not aware that the roundabout or left turn (towards Ealing coming from Acton Town I presume), what the objectives were or what the data told them.  The same with the other examples you mention under item 8.Your point about traffic being so bad that it is turning away traffic is possibly a relevant one, but not one, I believe, used in planning a scheme like this.  It may be a side effect.  It may be very relevant, but if the forecast is that 1 in 6 cars will no longer be in the area, including on horn lane and churchfield, Holistically the area is forecast to have less traffic, surely that is a good thing?The final point around working from home and traffic may also be relevant, but it may also be that a lot more people drive during covid, than using public transport, and that some of the congestion you, and I, are experiencing is due to increased car joureys and not the LTN.  But without facts neither of us can know.Have a great day,Ossian

Ossian Olsén ● 1311d

Rosco,I should really not re engage you, I found your comment about my surname ignorant and flippant. But I had  missed this post and it is an odd one.  You claim to ask a question when you don’t (last sentences).  I believe data, yes.  I am an engineer and I am actually relatively good with data.  What we are talking about here is relatively basic and, no, you cannot manipulate simple traffic data to fit a purpose.  Walthamstow counted the cars, the measured the speeds and counted accidents.  If your argument is that Walthamstow and Ealing colluded to provide fake evidence that a LTN reduces traffic to an area - that can be the case, sure, but how would you know and how would you prove it?  If you cannot act up claims on this forum with any stats, how do you know that the two Burroughs are lying?Just because the ignorant and uniformed posts on this forum are normally not challenged does not give an authority to being ignorant and ignoring facts.  You can probably tell that I feel strongly about facts and this scheme is positive from a traffic to the area perspective, but if you don’t believe data and facts (or believe that they are fake data and facts) you have a bigger issue than can be discussed and resolved here.  Finally another one of your comments that appears to suggest I am not as experienced and knowledgeable about all matters love.  I am not sure if six years resident here and 8 years in chiswick is a long term or newly arrived - but more importantly, what does that matter?  It doesn’t change facts.

Ossian Olsén ● 1311d

Hi Tom,Great to receive a balanced and considered message and I completely agree with the notion that you should look at studies to try and forecast, imperfect, but the best we have.  I always presume that people are doing their best.  So in this case, I see no reason to disbelieve when Walthamstow was used as a comparison and the 15% reduction is being used as a benchmark (albeit I get slightly different numbers)…however I like your investigative mind wrt the consultancy and its self interest.  I was not aware of this!Having said that, if we can accept that the data from Walthamstow is accurate, it shows a massive reduction of traffic through the neighbourhood.  The reduction of morning peak traffic was also promising.  I disagree with you however wrt to the 28% increase, if you look at the data that is not accurate.  The 28% is the increase on the least trafficked boundary road; the overall increase to the boundary roads, over the two years, is 10.8%.  This figure appear to omit the background noise of UK city car journey(around 5% per annum). Reviewing the data on page 70 of the study, the traffic in the neighbourhood was halved (50% down) between 2014 and 2016.  That also appear to fail to take into account the background traffic growth, so would be even higher!Based on this I don’t think applying a 28% growth to the traffic at churchfield./horn lane is appropriate.  10% possibly, but that is number journeys per day, not peak, which decreased in Walthamstow so the experience by people should be vastly improved.  Add to this all other benefits, such as reduction in accidents etc. I am even more convinced that this is a great initiative for Poet’s corner and Acton.  Sounds like you could agree.All the best,Ossian

Ossian Olsén ● 1312d

1. I am not saying Goldsmith and Horn Lane are interchangeable, I never said that. Horn Lane will always have vastly more traffic than Goldsmith Road. But should the level of traffic on Horn Lane be built to unreasonable levels just so the residents of Poets Corner can have car-free roads? 2. Does the fact that Horn Lane has the title A4000 mean that the people who live there have no protection to traffic and pollution?3. Why block Acacia and St Dunstan's but not block Lynton Road, which is much more of a cut-through than Acacia, or Noel Road? Over that side of Horn Lane, the lack of blocked roads means the cars are spread out. On the "Poets Corner side" by blocking routes previously, a problem was created on Acacia Road.4. I don't believe for one second that overall traffic will be reduced by 15 per cent. How much do you know about LTNs in Walthamstow? I am talking about specific points faced in Acton and you are using as "proof" an area across the other side of London that none of us knows well, merely because it is a convenient talking point given by the council. My brief look at a map of the Walthamstow scheme showed that it seemed to be a rectangular area, so there was little distance saved by going through it. As the area covered by this LTN is basically triangular and cars are now forced the long way around, along two edges of the triangle rather than one, it adds to congestion.5. Yes it would be great if more people cycled, but the council are tackling a small local problem by adding to a bigger problem and washing their hands of it. 6. Would anyone ever cycle up Acacia Road? It is one of the steepest roads in Acton. Lots more people cycle down Horn Lane than through the LTN. Yet there is no protection from traffic there. And there is no real way of cycling through the LTN to bypass the route of going down Horn Lane, unless you are going from Acton Main Line east. But that would not have been a dangerous route in the first place.6. One thing that will change is that buses and lorries (vehicles which were already blocked from your gated community) will take longer to get through the Horn Lane-Churchfield Road/High Street route, thus pumping out more pollution. For years, councils across the country have tried to keep traffic out of their town centres, Ealing Council is actively pushing congestion into our town centre, even trapping people trying to avoid it.7. Yes, there will always be traffic in Horn Lane. This has added to it. Also now, whenever there is any problem (accident, roadworks, broken down bus) there is no escape route for traffic stuck in it, so there will be gridlock. If Crossrail ever opens, and when overall traffic levels return to normal, this will get even worse.8. That the council would implement this without even attempting to address the problems on the surrounding roads is a disgrace. But this is the latest in a string of short-sighted interventions by Ealing Council's urban planners that have made traffic worse in Horn Lane. There was the roundabout outside Morrison's and the decision to ban the left turn outside the Red Lion and Pineapple. Going back further there was the decision to let TFL sell off the Bus Garage/Tram Depot for housing and use the bottom half of Horn Lane as a bus station. Turning Grafton Road one-way merely forced more traffic onto Acacia.They haven't even had the brains to turn the junctions of Horn Lane/Churchfield Road and Horn Lane/Steyne Road into box junctions to stop them being constantly blocked. This has been done with a big two-finger salute to the residents of Horn Lane and Churchfield Road. The council's only hope seems to be that traffic becomes so bad that some of the through traffic will go another way. But if that happens that doesn't really help us.My fear is that they] council use lower current levels of traffic, caused by many people working from home, to claim some sort of proof that this has worked to reduce traffic, by comparing it to pre-pandemic traffic. I wouldn't put that past them.

Ron Lewis ● 1312d

Hi Sara, I think everyone on here understand that this will negatively impact you and your mother.  It must be really bad, because you opened the dialogue on here.  I am sorry about that, I really am.I only got involved because we have to base our decisions on data and no one on here actually shared any.  We cannot draw conclusions on a scheme based on the impact on one person, I think you understand that.  And I hope you can work around this somehow, but I get it.  I used to drive a lot more than I do now, but I am lucky, I am able to walk much more now.  But the LTN has given me that nudge.  I appreciate this is My experience which is also anecdotal. Listen, the only reason I am on here is to fly the flag for data and facts. For example you driving further may mean that others don’t take the car, if that is the case I hope you would accept that on a balance, we are better off as a collective.  The data in this case indicates a number of benefits to the area (ref the Walthamstow study), accidents, pollution/traffic reduction toMention a few.  Your own experience is never going to validate that, but the studies that I hope are planned into this LTN will hopefully show that we are better off.  I hope that makes sense.As a society we seem to focus only on emotional arguments.  Some one this forum even suggested I was a bot or something, due to my surname.  What an odd view to have.  We would all be better off we did not assume that others are evil or against us and tried to understand the benefits and the dis benefits and then make decisions based on the balance.  If everyone took the position ‘me first’ I am afraid our society is going to be worse off and we head towards a survival of a fittest order.On the note of healthcare, just because you mentioned your mom’s flu jab.  I did hear on LBC that emergency services had not been adequately consulted and after seeing an ambulance having to reverse down acacia I really hope this is rectified and resolved as a part of the roll out; and that no one was impacted negatively as a result!

Ossian Olsén ● 1312d

Hi Ossian,For the record I live in Shakespeare Rd (eastern end) and being a cul-de-sac by virtue of the railway have been fortunate enough to not be affected by rat-running to the extent residents of other streets may have. With two children at St. Vincent's I used to sometimes use the car for the school run but the Goldsmiths and Acacia barriers have closed this option and we now cycle - which isn't the worst outcome. I am consequently neither pro or anti-LTN at the moment. It's interesting that you are quoting (as are Ealing) the 15% reduction in overall traffic recorded in the Walthamstow Village "mini-Holland" scheme and provide the Living Streets case study as reference. I have nothing against Living Streets per-se but would counsel caution using their representations as fully transparent - consider the following:"At first some residents weren’t too keen on introducing low-traffic neighbourhoods and were worried that it would be difficult to access homes and businesses.They also thought that it would lead to an increase in traffic on the main roads and might force traffic outside of schools.However, they soon saw the improvement in the area, and counts on main roads in Waltham Forest have shown that traffic is now more spread out across the day and maximum peak hour flows are lower on the main roads."Factually this is accurate (re: the distribution on max peak hr flows) but fails to highlight that in the 2 year post-implementation observation period, traffic on boundary roads bordering the LTN actually went UP by just over 28% in one instance. The table on p84 of the Walthamstow Village Review provides further detail - https://www.enjoywalthamforest.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/2017-08-23-WV-report-FINAL.pdfI cannot describe this statement as deliberately misleading or even disingenuous but it's clear in the case of our LTN that the statements "15% traffic reduction in Poet's Corner" and "28% increase in traffic on Horn Lane/Churchfield Rd./Uxbridge Rd." are at the same time not mutually exclusive and will provoke diametrically opposed reactions depending on where you live.Were you aware that Living Streets have a consultancy services team that will support boroughs such as Ealing in implementing LTN schemes? Again, I don't consider this untoward or improper but is indicative that they have "skin in the game" that may be completely contradictory to the wishes of local residents.

Tom Maher ● 1316d

Tania, do you really want to use public outcry as a measure if a scheme is, on balance, positive?  Brexit, immigrants, etc.  All outcries that have been factually incorrect.  Was there a study to show that the LTN in wandsworth was so bad (on balance) and therfore they abolished?  I looked online and did not find any information. Also, that is not what Grant Shapps wrote and you are either intentionally or unintentionally twisting his message,  I believe you are referring to the Telegraph article that starts with 'I am a petrol head' and as far as I could read he was relating LTNs to where town centres are 'dying'.  I am not a fanatic either way, having objected to the Turnham Green parking changes. But we have to start dealing in facts and not confuse matters further.  Making neighborhood's less car friendly has been successfully implemented in Holland, Belgium, Sweden, Germany, Denmark (that I know of).  There are fantastic experimentations and trials in Holland of mixed mode traffic (quite similar to Churchfield), I should be able to dust of a copy of my old civil engineering magazines with case studies if needed, or you could just google it. Your message is different, than the other anti-LTN messages on here, in that the LTN now stops your from using Churchfield.  That is sad, if true.  It is a shame that you cannot see a way to make both aspects work, for example park on the south side of the LTN barriers and walk the last bit home (I presume you live north of the barriers as you now use the horn lane sainsburys). Just to be clear, what shop on Churchfield would you use instead of the horn lane sainsbury's?  The churchfield sainsbury's?  Genuine question. I try to support the butchers and the veg market, these are the only two shops I see as alternatives to Sainsbury's, but I am probably missing something. WRT to safety; you put to this forum that more traffic is safer.  I would put to you that you are massively oversimplifying a complex issue and are looking only on a small aspect.  The socio economic aspects alone is too complicated for a couple of hundred words.  For starters, why only consider this aspect?  I get the issue you describe, but perceived safety due to traffic may be real (to you) and it may be real in terms of statistics, less assaults on quieter roads - I don't know, but it would need to introduce more risk to health than the risk to health from traffic for this argument to be valid, right?I know the change feels like a negative change, but try and adopt a more open mind, consider the alternative/opposing POV.  Who knows, maybe you will join me in welcoming this change that on a balance, is positive to the neighborhood, albeit with some longer journeys for when you 'need' to drive to churchfield.

Ossian Olsén ● 1317d

Hi Angela,This is not entirely accurate, you chose to ignore the ‘fact’ of a reduction in traffic to the area and only focussing on traffic on your road.  There are two aspects here, micro and macro.  On a macro level, the changes should reduce traffic to the area and to stop rat race (through traffic), apart from the dangerous illegal driving past the acacia barriers, I presume the data will show the external through traffic to have been eliminate - big win For us all, right? The Micro impact on you is entirely plausible and I am sorry for that.  The change did however not change the road outside your door From a cul-de-sac to a through road, ie the ability for anyone to drive outside your door, I believe. You appear to be annoyed that your road is now a main route.  But Just consider that previously this traffic was outside someone else’s door.  Is your argument that it should be Anywhere but outside your door?  Luckily for us, who disagree, have our local govt to make decisions on the macro aspects and Then balance Macro aspects with micro aspects.  I still have to read a factual argument, on this forum, to explain why this is a bad idea (On a macro level).  it is becoming more and more clear that The issues are : access to churchfield from north of goldsmith barriers and that existing routes are now getting the ‘domestic’ traffic - traffic that previously joined up with The through traffic, and passed outside someone else’s door.  Which is a wholly selfish point of view.

Ossian Olsén ● 1320d

I agree.  The imminant LTN at Acton Central will affect all traffic to and through Poets Corner and the results are not likely to be less pollution.Some people have thought about the consequences of an unresearched LTN in Poets Corner and have signed the petition.  http://chng.it/DH77JktC6P because this needs to be properly researched.Like others who have objected to similar schemes in other parts of Ealing, I agree that it would be lovely to have more pedestrians and cyclists and less traffic and less pollution, but that is far from certain. Yet without analysis of the use of these roads, and without engaging with residents for changes and amendments that might improve the schemes. the council are forging ahead. The danger is that traffic being forced up Horn Lane and Churchfield Road will make even more polluting queues than there are at present.  The tables in front of the cafes on Churchfield Road, the pedestrians and cyclists on the main roads will be plagued with more fumes AND when we need plumbers, deliveries, nurses, Ubers, refuse collections etc they will need to travel further in more traffic to reach us.All to stop a few people who cut through the area!As the move is meant to be all about pollution, and there has been no open consultation so far, it would be comforting to know that they are monitoring the pollution count now, so that they have a base line to measure against.  But that is not happening. Please sign the petition if you would like further analysis and consultation AND write to the council officers responsible COVIDtransport@ealing.gov.ukand the senior councillor responsible, Cllr Mik Sabiers NB CORRECT EMAIL ADDRESS SabiersM@ealing.gov.ukLet's at least show them that we would like proper research and consultation!

Serena Macbeth ● 1346d