Councillor Marc Francis on Liveable Streets

Liveable Streets Bow Proposal July 2020

This article was kindly sent in by Councillor Marc Francis (Bow East)

The “Liveable Streets” proposals to restrict access to some roads in Bow through is proving as polarising as the EU referendum.  And like Brexit it divides friends, neighbours and even families!  We have another petition against them at the Full Council meeting coming up on Wednesday and so I think it is important to let Bow residents know where I stand on it as one of your local councillors.  

Like most people, I want to reduce the amount of pollution in our air – for our own sake, for the sake of future generations and for the sake of the whole planet.  Reducing the number of car journeys is one of the most effective ways to do that.  Tower Hamlets’ location means it is inevitable many vehicles needing to access central London will drive through.  However, for nearly half a century now tens of thousands of drivers each day have used our residential neighbourhoods as a short-cut instead of using Transport for London’s main thoroughfares – the A12 and A13.  North Bow is one of those neighbourhoods that suffers the brunt of this, with commuters coming off at the Old Ford junction and rat-running either along Tredegar Road, St Stephen’s Road and Roman Road, or Parnell Road and Old Ford Road every morning.   And they head back that way in the evening too.  

So I fully support decisive action to stop this rat-running.  That’s why, as Labour Party candidates at the last local elections, we stood on this manifesto promise:

“Tower Hamlets has many main arterial roads going through it, serving the strategic Transport for London road network.  Through-traffic should by and large stick to these main roads but many of our residential neighbourhoods have seen huge increases in rat-running traffic, making them more dangerous, noisy and polluted.  We will create low traffic neighbourhoods, keeping through-traffic to main roads, in any residential area where residents want them, with an ambition to have started on at least half by 2022.”

Somehow or other though, this laudable and unifying proposal has morphed into something much more extreme and divisive.  As well as stopping that rat-running commuter traffic, our Mayor and Cabinet have agreed to the implementation of a timed “bus gate” at the junction of Roman Road and St Stephen’s Road and the closure of the “skew bridge” section of Old Ford Road.  Anyone driving through the gate in the morning or late-afternoon and early-evening will be fined, including our own residents too.  

Bizarrely this will force my own constituents who need to go west to start by driving east before joining traffic jams on Bow Road or Victoria Park Road – adding 20-30 minutes to each journey and increasing pollution.  And the skew bridge closure will force more traffic on to Roman Road when the bus gate isn’t in operation.  Most Roman Road business seem to be opposed too.  There’s nothing in that manifesto statement above about introducing bus gates to block our own residents’ movements.  In fact, given how live an issue this was in the run-up to the 2018 local elections, you could go further and say we were implying we wouldn’t go that far.  

I’ve been listening over several months now to residents’ descriptions of the car journeys they make now that they wouldn’t be able to do if the bus gate comes into effect.  Journeys to work.  Journeys to drop kids at school on the other side of the Borough.  Journeys to take elderly relatives to healthcare appointments.  Almost all of them seem to have much more difficult public transport alternatives.  I really don’t think it is right for the council to impose convoluted detours around east London to make these journeys unless we have an electoral mandate to do so.  

Supporters of these restrictions and the physical barriers on Coborn Road and Old Ford Road claim there is public support for it.  And the consultation last summer certainly resulted in a significant majority of respondents supporting the proposals.  But a significant minority did not.  And this was never billed as a referendum.  If it was, it should have been conducted independently.  Worryingly, we also saw significant under-representation from some parts of our diverse local community in the responses.  A “Town Hall-style meeting” the Mayor promised us last November to remedy this democratic deficit proved to be nothing of the sort when it finally took place last week.

Despite this the Mayor seems intent on pressing ahead.  We have seen similar situations with restrictions elsewhere in the Borough.  This has provoked real anger amongst many residents.  And the uncomfortable truth is that our community seems to be split on socio-demographic lines.  From the dozens of emails, phone calls and conversations I’ve had so far, those in favour are generally middle-class.  And those opposed are generally working-class and long-standing residents.  This polarisation should worry all of us who call Tower Hamlets our home.  

Given this I think it is time for the Mayor and Cabinet to compromise and allow a resident exemption from the bus gate restriction.  That’s what has been done successfully in Hammersmith & Fulham.  They don’t need to block Old Ford Road either.  Other measures can reduce speeds and improve safety there.  I know this won’t be enough for some people, but it will still ensure thousands of rat-running commuter cars and vans are stopped from driving through North Bow each day.  And that will significantly reduce air pollution locally.  If it doesn’t, let’s see the evidence and look at more radical solutions.  But let’s take this a step at a time and carry the whole community along with us. 

Councillor Marc Francis (Bow East)

101 Comments

  1. Hi Garry,

    If you drove to Cornwall from here, you’d mainly be taking motorways and A roads, with a few residential/unclassified roads at either end. And that’s how it should be – long distance traffic should use the roads specifically designed and built for the task. That’s what low traffic neighbourhoods are about too – keeping through-traffic on the through roads that have been designed for the task, rather than being displaced onto narrow, less safe residential roads as if they were escape valves. As car ownership and mileage rises, it’s fast becoming gridlock on residential roads too. Where do we go from there?

    You are also forgetting that low traffic neighbourhoods have been repeatedly shown to cut traffic *on the boundary roads too*, not just the interior roads that have the modal filters. So the lesson of your Cornwall metaphor, that many more low traffic neighbourhoods would lead to ‘standstill’ is unfortunately not based on the evidence. But it’s an amusing story so thanks for that.

  2. Nah mate – you should try these things called motorways and ring roads to get to Cornwall. They are big and wide and you don’t get charged congestion charge.

  3. Think far too many NIMBY’s you forget each journey starts somewhere and ends somewhere and if every area stopped anyone else driving through well no one would be able to go anywhere so take it this way you want to go on Holiday in Cornwall well you have to get through London X amount of boroughs on way Imagine if they all said that’s X amount please and you can’t go through here or here just one narrow road that is at a standstill from morning to night!.
    The Surrey/Hampshire/Wiltshire/Dorset/Devon and each county held there hands out not much left to scoff Ice Cream?

  4. Because not Fluffy area that types that have “Oh ive bought a place in East London Trying to be all Gangsterish!” Live in and then want to try to change areas to what they want rather than live with us plus they want to reside in Gated Communities in case the Nasty EastEnders Come by.
    To me if don’t like it Ship up and Ship out we live here also and have many things to do/get on with
    Rather than just bash keyboards slurping there Oat milk Lattes!

  5. Apologies all for my radio silence on this over the past few weeks and especially to Beverly for not responding before now to your own suggestion of longer hours on the bus gate in return for my suggested exemptions for residents and local businesses. I think it’s a good one. I’ve spent more than one afternoon in St Stephen’s Green recently and it’s clear to see the commuter traffic streaming eastbound from 2pm onwards. Directing that elsewhere would be a big plus and certainly help reduce pollution even further. If the Mayor can agree exemptions for a trial period, longer hours on the bus gate for the same period makes sense.

    I think all councillors were probably hoping we would have moved to a decision by now. There have been some really good discussions amongst Labour councillors, and I think it’s fair to say, quite a few want an exemption from the bus gate for residents. True also, that quite a few don’t. Hopefully, we will get a chance to determine our collective position before too long. I am still not convinced skew bridge needs to be completely closed to traffic though. Am very interested whether there are further traffic calming measures there that could improve safety for cyclists and pedestrians alongside a ban on non-resident vehicles?

  6. Peter
    1. If it was pedestrian worthy then footfall wouldn’t be negligible, as the temporary summer closure proved overwhelmingly. Why should pedestrians be forced into detours by traffic? Have you tried getting a wheelchair over it? Step back and think about what you’re saying;
    2. The park closes at dusk, which is as early as 4pm in winter;
    3. We don’t need to wait for deaths to improve infrastructure?!
    4. That simply isn’t true. Here’s a few hours after your response: https://twitter.com/SaveColumbiaRd/status/1353316702516359169
    5. To assume everyone who disagrees with you has a property portfolio to increase is unhinged.

  7. Before there were any cycle lanes around here I used to cycle across Skew Bridge twice a a day during the week to work in Farringdon. My favoured route was along the Hackney Road and straight across Old Street roundabout. I never had a problem. Obviously I kept a good lookout for what was going on around me, and gave way to big metal things – even if it was my right of way. At that time I also owned a car. We are not separate tribes.

  8. Beverly,

    The footfall over Skewbridge is negligible – pedestrians use traffic free Victoria Park and sleepy Chisenhale Road.

    There are no recorded deaths or a history of serious traffic incidents involving cyclists in this area. Cyclists can and do use park roads or turn from Grove Road into Bunsen Street (no car traffic).

    No one is pushing cyclists off parks and canal towpaths – they are just being asked to cycle safely and give priority to pedestrians.

    What is the real reason Beverly you are advocating for the Skewbridge closure?

  9. I’d add to Mark, L, that I too have been deterred from engaging in discussion as when giving my opinion I’ve been asked (in no particular order), if I’m male, a cyclist, working class, white, a resident, how long I’ve been in the east end… As if the answers make views more or less valid. Assumptions are made about me. That’s where the discrimination is coming.

    I’m not a driver or a cyclist. Maybe the ‘for’ discussions have been pushed by cyclists, but the ‘against’ discussions have been pushed by car owners / outside taxi drivers. What about those of us who are neither – just ‘residents’?

    Most of my day is not spent on travel. I spend most of my time in my home, breathing fumes, hearing revving and large lorries, sleep disturbed by asbo speeders at 3am (not commuter rat runner). And I have to ask – surely an attempt at something different has to be better than this?

  10. Dear John,

    I agree we do all need to live together as citizens regardless of colour, gender and class. However, I have tried to be respectful of differences in this but when people have contacted councillors asking them for no exemptions for blue badge holders and carers that is where the real anger comes from. This isn’t about cycling vs driving it is a much deeper issue. I cycle more than I drive and the power structures in this process has led to real resentment.

  11. Dear “L”,

    The majority of locals who responded to the consultation support the scheme and want to see Bow become a healthier and less-polluted place to live. Liveable Streets was part of the manifesto Biggs was elected upon (and in fact ALL of the mayoral candidates signed up to the local cycling group’s “manifesto”. See https://www.towerhamletswheelers.org.uk/campaigns/cycling-manifesto-2018

    When you say folk asked for discussions and they have not happened, I don’t know quite what you are referring to ? There have been numerous meetings both online and in person, over many months and in fact years. Plenty of cabinet and general council meeting time has been devoted to it and the Mayor has been quizzed by numerous residents who know how to get their anti-LS points across very well as I have witnessed multiple times.

    I don’t think using labels such as “self-appointed campaigners [that are] white middle class men” is useful. Labels just serve to divide the community. We all need to live together as citizens regardless of colour, gender or [perceived] socio-economic status.

    Regarding your numerous comments that this is about “control”, then if it was, then I too would find that unpalatable. Occasionally some cyclists are evangelical, but that is true of some car-drivers too who see driving almost as a basic human right. The majority of us locals lie between these two extremes and just want less pollution, less traffic, and for Bow to be a healthier place to live whoever you are.

  12. You evidently don’t know the word ‘selflessness’ means. So you believe that an elderly woman with severe arthritis should be in additional pain and travel 3 miles to her local GP because of your admittance of no exemptions for carers in peak hour traffic. Gosh you have shown your true colours and it is truly pathetic. Also your comments are doing is the epitome of Gaslighting and you might be have high virtue in the eyes of my ward councillors, but you certainly disgust me with those comments. This is about control for you and you don’t give a damn about the people you are hurting. I won’t respond to your pitiful comments that don’t care about the communities you are ruining and the division you are causing.

  13. I’m not “gaslighting” or attempting to control anyone.

    In society we all have to rub along together, accepting a very slight loss of our own freedom [in this case to drive exactly the route we might like], so that other people do not come to harm from our actions.

    That’s not “control.” That’s neighbourliness. It’s being considerate. It’s selflessness.

    Have a lovely day too.

  14. Matt again you are missing the point and making extreme comments, about something very reasonable. The truth is we can tackle pollution, make the streets safer and cycling attractive by resident exemptions which would radically lower the levels of rat running and congestion in the area. It is not a few minutes and that is one of the most frustrating thing about this. I agree we have to do something about pollution and make the roads safer but your unwillingness to see others in this is quite worrisome. I don’t think we will agree on this as you have been ardently opposed to carer exemptions. Also please stop gaslighting others and believe that it is your duty to control what others should and can do. I don’t think we will agree on this nor change ones mind. Have a lovely day.

  15. It really isn’t – I’m not sure where you’re getting that from. You know nothing about me.

    Forget about this strange class non-issue, and try to think of the children in the area, of whatever class. Let’s make the roads safer enough for them to walk and cycle to school, to the park and to their friends’, like their grandparents used to, so we can cut the damaging rate of childhood obesity that will put pressure on the NHS in the decades to come. Children are among the many thousands injured in our borough’s streets – let’s stand together and say that’s unacceptable. Children are having their lungs malformed by the levels of pollution in the borough – we can fix that.

    Let’s balance our personal eagerness to get places a couple of minutes quicker with our responsibility as a community to the next generation.

  16. Hi @matt
    I won’t lower my tone as I am pretty fed up of being told how I should behave by white middle class men. The polarisation comes from you, when you make ‘carer exemptions’ seem extreme and masquerade to other councillors to not make any compromises. I don’t think we will agree on this but this is about control for you and you don’t care about who are hurting from it.

  17. I haven’t made fun of you, L. I’m not sure where you’re getting that from.

    You didn’t use the word “process” in your comment.

    Your comment did, however, throw around a load of wild and unevidenced claims about “kill[ing] communities, displac[ing] families and harm[ing] local businesses, when all we’re talking about here is getting the minority of residents who drive to sometimes enter their streets via a different route.

    Lowering the temperature and reducing the stress and toxicity starts with cutting out the hyperbole.

  18. Hi @Matt,

    As someone who has been made fun of by you. I will keep this short and sweet, the other LTN’s that use resident exemptions are very safe for cycling infrastructure. If this was about reducing speeds of cars to all 20mph I would agree with you. I said in this “process” if you read again, which I think you know what I am speaking about.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *