A panel of three councillors have called for plans for a rush-hour low-traffic neighbourhood in parts of Greenwich and Blackheath to be reconsidered.
The council plans to close streets east and west of Greenwich Park to through traffic to stop drivers using residential streets to avoid queues on the A2 as part of an 18-month trial.
But the proposals have divided opinion, with critics fearing that roads on the boundary will be overloaded with traffic and that drivers will switch to neighbouring areas such as Charlton instead. They also say that high levels of opposition in a consultation mean the measures should not go ahead.
Supporters say the measures are needed to cut antisocial behaviour from drivers using their streets as cut-throughs and to reduce car use more broadly.
The plans were first consulted on in August last year, with original options including a 24/7 closure of Point Hill, Hyde Vale and Crooms Hill to the west of Greenwich Park; and Maze Hill, Vanbrugh Hill, Halstow Road and Westcombe Hill to the east.
Opposition to the various options was as high as 79 per cent. The final plans were watered down to closures between 7-10am and 3-7pm on weekdays to be enforced by cameras, with a wider range of exemptions, including for taxis, carers and those carrying people with special educational needs.
At a “call-in” meeting on Wednesday, the three councillors – Lauren Dingsdale and Ivis Williams from Labour, and Pat Greenwell from the Conservatives, referred the revised plans back to Averil Lekau, the council’s deputy leader.
They wanted Lekau to make sure she was satisfied with the adequacy of the consultation, including plans to assess the public’s views while the 18-month trial was taking place.
The three councillors also wanted Lekau to consider amendments suggested by council officers, to reflect on comments made about specific streets raised by residents who attended Wednesday’s meeting, and to reflect on their comments made about boundary roads and surrounding areas. These included Blackheath Hill and Trafalgar Road.
The scheme is still likely to go ahead, but Matt Hartley, the Conservative opposition leader who was one of the councillors to challenge the scheme, said afterwards that he hoped the council would ditch it altogether.
During the meeting, Hartley said he was not against low-traffic neighbourhoods, as he had been arguing for traffic measures in his own ward in Mottingham, but questioned whether the consultation had been predetermined.
He said: “I think it is clear there is nothing like majority consent yet the council is pressing ahead anyway, there is huge concern about these proposals and the amended scheme hasn’t been subjected to consultation.”
Hartley also criticised a “mythbusting” leaflet that had been distributed in the affected area after the consultation. He said the amended plan should be withdrawn and a new consultation launched.
Lekau, though, said that it was clear that the council supported measures to reach net zero and it was “inevitable that it would be apparent that the council was supportive of this type of measure”.
She added: “However, the consultations were genuine and extensive listening exercises. People’s responses directly influenced the preferred option.
“These are significant changes to the proposals. They reduce the scheme’s benefit and increase the cost and risk to the council, but allows us to deliver a scheme that delivers the council’s policy.”
She said that monitoring of the scheme would cover data on traffic levels, air quality, queue lengths and bus journey times.
Another low traffic neighbourhood, covering west Greenwich only, had been put in place in August 2020. The scheme was blamed for congestion in east Greenwich streets such as Maze Hill and scrapped before the 2022 council elections.
One supporter, Colin Humphries, of the Maze Hill Action Group, said: “I’m here for my two-year-old son and two-week-old daughter. Road traffic accidents are the leading cause of death among children and young people.
“The last five times I have cycled along Maze Hill with my son on my bike, I have been dangerously close-passed three of those times. I want to be able to take my son to football without putting his life in danger.
“The journey to help people to make better journeys is difficult. But we should stand together against the extreme right wing who would rather our children die and our planet burn rather than have a minute longer drive to the shops.”
An opponent, Lisa Gorsky, of Charlton, said: “I am really pro the net zero target, and I don’t think anyone is against public health, but that applies to the public en masse rather than the selected few who will be impacted positively by what’s being recommended.
“We don’t feel the solution being proposed is inclusive or stands to benefit everyone in the community – and frankly, that’s your job.”
“I empathise with everyone who’s spoken about children’s safety and respiratory issues but we also bear a burden with the same issues. People already use us as a cut-through to the retail parks. You have a full community to think about.”
Another Charlton resident, Peter Conway, said his residents’ group had counted 2,000 vehicles already using Eastcombe Avenue each day, with pinchpoints there and on Victoria Way making the situation worse.
The council’s senior traffic engineer, Rich Udemezue, said: “We’re not forgetting about Charlton – it is going to be covered and reviewed as well.
“From our monitoring so far there’s more travelling east to west in the morning peak, so it’s something we are aware of, but we have to start somewhere. Wherever we start, we will be looking at the surrounding areas.
“So for now we are looking at west and east Greenwich, but also keeping an eye on Charlton as well.”
Three Labour councillors – Maisie Richards Cottell (East Greenwich), Leo Fletcher (Blackheath Westcombe) and Lakshan Saldin – had also called in the decision.
However, this was largely to raise issues with elements of the scheme, such as a decision not to completely block Maidenstone Hill and Winforton Street in west Greenwich to through traffic, as well as the effect in Charlton.
They welcomed a change to the scheme in Maze Hill, moving the closure point from the south of the road to near the railway station.
Hartley said after the meeting: “The council leadership now have a decision to make. They can ignore the committee’s views – just like they ignored residents who took part in the consultation – or they can show some humility and admit that they just got this one wrong. I really hope they choose the latter.
“If they don’t, public trust in Greenwich Council and our local democratic process is going to sink even lower.
“It’s time to go back to the drawing board and find a solution that can command genuine public support.
“At the very least, the council leadership should test public support for their amended proposal in a new, unbiased consultation that includes everybody affected – in neighbouring areas like Charlton as well as areas inside the scheme.”
The meeting had been due to take place in the spring, but was delayed twice because of restrictions around elections. One of those was a by-election caused by the death of one of the councillors who had called the scheme in, Conservative John Hills.
Normally at call-in meetings, councillors discuss the issue in public, but for this one, they deliberated in private for 25 minutes before returning to the committee rooms to deliver their verdict, with no hint of their own personal opinions about the scheme or the way the consultation had been carried out.
This unusual arrangement was made on legal advice, Greenwich Council has confirmed.
Updated at 11.10pm on Friday to include the section on legal advice.
You must be logged in to post a comment.