Excited shrieks indicate that it is going-home time at James Wolfe Primary School in London’s Royal Borough of Greenwich.
In the street outside, one car after another is screeching to a halt and performing a frantic three-point turn at the school entrance.
Not one of these U-turning drivers is picking up a child, however. They have all just seen a brand new – and rather confusing – sign a few yards up the road warning them of a fine if they progress any further.
Similar crunch points have popped up in other parts of this historic borough in recent days as Greenwich implements London’s latest ‘Low-Traffic Neighbourhood’ (LTN). The aim is to prevent impatient drivers and motorcyclists from using ‘rat runs’ down residential roads and, thus, improve air quality.
The scheme’s detractors, of whom there are very many, argue that it is a textbook example of the law of unintended consequences.
Certainly, just three weeks in, the new Greenwich LTN is looking like a collector’s item. Not only is it almost incomprehensible but it is doing a brilliant job of creating High-Traffic Neighbourhoods on all the adjacent main roads which were already notoriously clogged. And I find it nigh on impossible to find anyone with a word in its favour.
Nor is this a party political issue. The scheme has been installed by an all-powerful Labour council in a staunchly Labour area with the support of London’s Labour mayor.
And yet the residents whom I meet (almost all of them Labour voters) think it is a terrible idea.
Redirected traffic has caused huge amounts of congestion in Blackheath, to the south of Greenwich
Michael Jones of Drings butchers, whose shop falls within the Greenwich LTN, says he has already noticed a slowing in business
‘Look at this mess,’ says digital publisher Joe Jeffrey, rolling his eyes as a van from Pimlico Plumbers slams on the brakes on Royal Hill to avoid crossing an invisible line which carries a £130 price tag.
And who can blame the plumber as he starts U-turning and going back down the hill? In order to go just a few yards further up this road, he must take a one-mile, 20-minute detour and come in from another road (assuming that he has downloaded the council’s map in order to find the designated entry point).
When a car behind him does the same, there is much hooting and shouting as another driver develops early-onset road rage.
Angry Man revs his engine and is in such a state that he fails to notice the camera trap as he whizzes through at speed. He is still cross, though not half as cross as he will be a few days from now when he gets a penalty notice through the post, telling him he can either pay £65 right away or wait and pay the full £130 later.
‘They can’t even get the signage right,’ sighs Mr Jeffrey.
The signs are, indeed, confusing. They don’t explain why they are here, nor is there prior warning at the start of this long road that punishment lies ahead.
Motorists are suddenly confronted by the standard symbol for a traffic camera – plus that of a car and motorcycle in a red circle. The sign then explains when the LTN applies (7-10am and 3-7pm on weekdays) and adds that unspecified ‘authorised vehicles’ (taxis and buses, it turns out) are exempt.
Previously, the signs also showed a blue badge symbol, allowing registered disabled drivers to pass through. Except the council then changed its mind and excluded all except blue badge-holders registered in Greenwich. So a piece of blank paper has now been pasted over the blue badge symbol. (Local disabled drivers must apply for a special exemption.)
Next door to Drings butchers is a another local business, greengrocer The Creaky Shed
Various locals have complained about the zone, from residents whose commutes have been disrupted to business owners who have noticed a customer drop
Confusing? It’s a shambles. And even those who have managed to do all the paperwork still have problems.
Jennifer Donovan has secured a blue badge exemption for her visually impaired ten-year-old daughter who has to be driven to and from school each day.
Because of the impact of the LTN on all the surrounding main roads, however, a journey that used to take 14 minutes each way and now takes at least 45, with the result that her daughter is frequently late.
‘My councillor just says that we all need to cycle but it is just not an option for us,’ says Jennifer, adding that she is frequently amused by the sight of workmen stopping their vans, sticking gaffer tape over their number plates and then driving on.
Local Labour activist Sally Hughes points out that a bike is not an option for many people. ‘I am a cyclist myself and we hear a lot of cyclist rhetoric but the fact is a lot of this part of Greenwich is too steep,’ she says, pointing to roads like Vanbrugh Hill. This has the same gradient (18 per cent in places) as some of the toughest mountain stretches of the Tour de France.
What really rankles is that, in other parts of London and elsewhere, local residents are exempt from LTNs on the basis that they are not looking for a ‘rat-run’. They just live in the blasted place.
Here in Greenwich, as in other pockets of eco-zealotry like Oxford, however, that simply will not do. All driving shall be made as disagreeable as possible for all people.
On one level, of course, this is just a parish pump issue for people in London SE10. However, it is also a parable of our times, a vintage case of the town hall knowing what is truly best for the stupid, ungrateful public. And that could have interesting implications for future council, mayoral and even national elections.
A motorist performs a U-turn to avoid entering the Greenwich LTN and having to pay a fine
And another car heads back the way they came to avoid the LTN charge
Think back to the last time the Tory party had anything to cheer about (this may take you a while). It was a wholly unexpected by-election win in Uxbridge back in July 2023.
The reason? It was not that the locals had suddenly warmed to Rishi Sunak. It was because they hated the extension of London’s Ultra-Low Emission Zone by the car-hating Labour Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan.
Under him, Transport for London will spend £80million this year on ‘healthy street’ initiatives, including LTNs. ‘Walking and cycling infrastructure, including Low Traffic Neighbourhoods, plays an important role in making our streets safer,’ says a spokesman.
The official narrative is that LTN schemes cut traffic and protect poor people from the filthy fumes of rich, selfish gas-guzzlers. Except many here in Greenwich say this is hogwash. Rather, they see this as a scheme extort money (a trial-run of a smaller LTN here in 2022 nabbed half a million pounds in fines in just six months) and also to satisfy the progressive posh by steering traffic away from quieter streets and grand Georgian terraces towards the grotty areas.
Joe Jeffrey points me to the latest Census data for the area around Royal Hill. The proportion of social housing in the smarter streets inside the LTN area is below 20 per cent and, in places, as low as 4 per cent. All that smelly traffic has now been pushed on to Blackheath Hill where social housing accounts for 58 per cent.
Or take the figures for car ownership. On the smart streets inside the LTN zone, up to 75 per cent of residents own a car. On poorer, fume-filled Blackheath Hill, vehicle ownership is 39 per cent. So who is protecting whom?
Mayor Khan’s attempt to paint himself as a sort of clean-air Robin Hood took another hit just before Christmas. The High Court ruled that a council was fully entitled to uproot several failed LTN schemes, even though the Mayor tried to block the removals.
Unfortunately for the spin doctors, these LTN-haters were not ghastly Tories driving Mercs and Jags. They were the residents of London’s poorest borough, Tower Hamlets.
The quiet road of Drings and The Creaky Shed, which falls within the zone
Except for authorised vehicles, cars and motorbikes cannot go into the zone between 7-10am and 3-7pm
It is yet another culture clash between Labour’s doctrinaire political class and those pesky worker bees who insist on driving around all day in their old bangers and vans.
It’s all very well telling everyone to walk and cycle but that’s of little help to the poor Ocado driver trying to deliver the kumquats and sourdough to all those public sector folk working from home in their pyjamas. It is certainly hard to see how policies like this will help Rachel Reeves attain her longed-for ‘growth’.
I talk to local traders in Greenwich, like Michael Jones of Drings, a traditional independent butcher. He says that no one sought his advice but he has already noticed a slowdown.
‘It only takes a small thing like this to change shopping habits and then that hits the business,’ he says.
Next door, greengrocer Christopher Peacock says that he now has to cram his delivery schedule into a shorter window outside the penalty hours: ‘It just creates more pollution, not less.’
There can be no doubt that Greenwich has its traffic issues.
The handsome and historic town centre sits on one of the main routes between the capital and the Channel ports. It is squeezed between the River Thames and one of London’s great green spaces, Greenwich Park, an ancient hunting ground, now best-known as the starting point of the London Marathon and the equestrian showpiece of the 2012 Olympics. King Charles II built his observatory here and defined the Greenwich Meridian, against which the whole world still sets its watch.
Accordingly, people accept that this place is an untouchable, insoluble bottleneck. As the website for UK transport boffins, roads.org.uk, puts it: ‘There is no good way to send traffic through Greenwich and no good way around. Learning to live with the unhappy status quo might be the best we’ll ever do.’
Except that the council now has another idea: the new orthodoxy that the best way to deal with traffic is not to deal with it. Instead, you just stop it altogether.
‘You would struggle to find a council that is more anti-driver than Greenwich. It’s a crusade,’ says Matt Hartley, leader of Greenwich council’s tiny opposition – three Tory councillors and a Lib Dem versus 51 Labour.
‘At every turn, Labour councillors are imposing their ideological dogma. Hiking parking charges, selling off car parks, introducing low traffic neighbourhoods despite massive public opposition.’
Five months ago, he organised a special council meeting to ‘call in’ the proposals for the new LTN scheme, citing official government guidance.
‘Local authorities,’ says the Department of Transport, ‘should not impose schemes in the face of strong local opposition that is clearly representative of the views of the community.’
Given that local consultations had revealed consistently negative responses to the LTN – ranging from 65 to 79 per cent – Mr Hartley asked what the figure needed to be before the council would listen.
Greenwich made a couple of minor tweaks to the implementation strategy and pressed ahead. The policy is being driven by Averil Lekau, the council’s deputy leader and cabinet member for ‘climate action, sustainability and transport’ – in that order. On her own social media profile, she describes herself as: ‘Politics by day. Game of Thrones by night. If it doesn’t feel risky or uncomfortable, I AM NOT RISKING ENOUGH.’
Might she be risking Labour votes, however? ‘We understand that some residents have concerns and suggestions about the scheme and we invite them to have their say via our online consultation,’ says a council spokesman, adding: ‘It’s vital that we take action to tackle air pollution, improve road safety, and reduce traffic and carbon emissions to protect the health and well-being of our communities.’
Erstwhile party members like Joe Jeffrey have already torn up their memberships. Those with longer memories may recall a minor political earthquake here more than 30 years ago. Back then, Greenwich council was blocking plans to redevelop The Valley – the crumbling home of local football club, Charlton Athletic.
For a while, the club was forced to share with local rivals Crystal Palace while people even started growing carrots on the old pitch. Loyal fans formed The Valley Party, stood at the 1992 local election, scooped 15 per cent of the vote, and thereby ejected several Labour councillors, including the chairman of the planning committee.
What happened next? The club suddenly got their planning permission, the carrots were uprooted and football returned to The Valley.
In the meantime, how best to get in or out of Greenwich now? The clue lies with the two most popular local landmarks: the National Maritime Museum and the Cutty Sark. In other words, go by boat.
