I was delighted to see this story told, but a crucial part of it is missing (London’s lost mega-motorway: the eight-lane ring road that would have destroyed much of the city, 13 December). In the mid-1960s a small group of us, mainly transport economists, got together to fight the then policy of solving congestion in cities by building roads, because it was actually counterproductive. The more people take to their cars, the more public transport deteriorates, setting off a further switch to cars – a vicious circle already in evidence.
One member of the group, Michael Thompson, carried out a cost-benefit analysis of the three ring road plan. It showed that the inner Motorway Box would be disastrous while the middle one, now the M25, was worth building. This was published later as Motorways in London.
The problem was how to get politicians to take notice. We started by convincing Camden, Islington and two other large civic societies that they should oppose the scheme not by the usual nimby arguments, but by showing that the policy was bad for everyone. With their support, we approached all civic societies in London, and most joined together as the London Amenity and Transport Association to adopt this united approach. They in turn put pressure on local councils already desperately worried about the destruction of housing required for the plan.
This bottom-up groundswell of opinion and its effect on the councils was crucial to the formation of the London Motorway Action Group led by Peter Jay, the winning-over of the London Labour party, and their victory in the GLC elections. I think it is a good example of what local action can do.
Terri Banks
London
• Have an opinion on anything you’ve read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication.
.jpg?w=600)
