The High Court on Tuesday ruled that Tower Hamlets mayor Lutfur Rahman was acting lawfully when he decided last year to remove three low traffic neighbourhoods (LTNs) from the streets of Bethnal Green.
But what could the ruling mean for similar low traffic schemes in other parts of London?
LTNs have become a ‘hot button’ topic in the capital over recent years, with Tory mayoral candidate Susan Hall promising in her unsuccessful City Hall campaign earlier this year to help communities get rid of “unwanted” LTNs and to axe 20mph zones “where safe to do so”.
Transport across the city is ultimately overseen by mayor Sadiq Khan, who is responsible for drawing up an official transport strategy for all 33 of London’s local authorities to follow. The latest edition of the strategy was published in 2018.
Within the first few pages of that 163-page document, the mayor argues that motorised traffic is “overwhelmingly responsible for the greatest environmental challenges we face as a city”, and he stresses that fatalities and injuries on London’s road network remain “unacceptably high”.
For these reasons, the strategy’s main target is for 80 per cent of all trips in London to be made on foot, by cycle or using public transport by 2041. To pursue that goal, Mr Khan promises to work with boroughs on “traffic-reduction strategies” in their area. Transport for London (TfL) provides funding to support those strategies, by agreeing a ‘local implementation plan’ (LIP) with each council.
The LTNs in Tower Hamlets were agreed as part of the borough’s LIP - and this is where the High Court’s ruling could potentially set a new precedent for councils looking to get rid of similar schemes elsewhere in London.
TfL had been arguing throughout the case that “boroughs cannot unilaterally decide to revise LIPs, nor can they unilaterally decide not to implement them”.
But the judge, Mr Justice Fordham, questioned whether the requirement on councils to implement the schemes was “open-ended”, or whether, once put in place, they can be taken down again.
To put it another way, the case hinged on how the word “implementation” should be understood. Does it mean ‘create an LTN and keep it there, unless the council is given permission by TfL to remove it’? Or does it mean ‘create the LTN, but feel free to remove it later, provided all of the necessary local processes are followed’?
TfL’s barrister claimed that councils had an ongoing requirement to keep any agreed schemes in place until a new agreement had been struck with TfL, or a new transport strategy had been drawn up by the Mayor of London.
Mr Justice Fordham concluded however that, in order for that to be the case, a clearer timetable “would need to be spelled out in the LIP”, adding, perhaps crucially: “I do not accept that it is open-ended.”
It is this line which could potentially be seized upon by councils looking to remove LTNs previously agreed with TfL.
Most London councils which have already implemented such schemes - particularly those in inner London - remain supportive of them. But a change of political leadership in any of them, as happened in Tower Hamlets in 2022, could change that equation.
A TfL spokeswoman told the Standard: “Walking and cycling infrastructure, including Low Traffic Neighbourhoods, plays an important role in making our streets safer and enabling more active travel across London.
“Decisions on schemes such as these are a matter for local councils, but we are carefully considering any implications for TfL-funded borough schemes.”
Jane Harris, a member of the Save our Safer Streets campaign - which had been legal challenging the Tower Hamlets LTNs’ removal - said: “It’s really worrying, because if this [set of LTNs] does get taken out, it will be the first time that a low traffic neighbourhood has been taken out against the wishes of residents, against the wishes of businesses, against the wishes of the police, local hospitals and GPs.”
She pointed out that it can take a while for communities to become used to LTNs. “The research shows that it takes about three years for people to get used to these kinds of schemes,” Ms Harris said. “This seems a really strange time to take it out, when we’re literally at that three year mark.”
She added: “I think it’s really important that people can get across London in an integrated way… I don’t think anybody wants to think that they need to have a different plan for their transport when they cross into a different borough of London - that doesn’t make any sense. I know it’s not a legal issue - but it is an issue for people in their everyday lives.”
Mayor Rahman issued a statement following the High Court’s ruling, stating that he had “a responsibility to fulfil the democratic mandate from voters in the May 2022 election to reopen these three roads”. He claimed that the schemes had contributed to “gridlock traffic” on main roads, increasing air pollution for some residents and in fact “undermining efforts to boost public transport use”.
