Research / evidence of benefits (to motorists) of Low Traffic Neighbourhoods

[Redlight]

My Local council has introduced a handful of Low Traffic Neighbourhoods in the area (none near where I live) by restricting access to some roads to pedestrians, cycles and those who live there. The consultation was a bit rubbish, using COVID as a rationale for doing it quickly, and not all the changes have been well-implemented.  However, from what I've seen, the streets that have been reprioritised - along with many of those nearby - are much more pleasant as a result.

Now, one of my neighbours - who insists that this is a terrible thing as it is bound to take her longer to drive her two teenage kids the 1.4 miles to school - is circulating a petition demanding that all the LTNs be scrapped.  I have politely declined to sign but, given that I am bound to be taken to task by some of my other car-fixated neighbours, can anyone point me to any authoritative research that shows how, over time, everybody benefits from such schemes?

(I'll be googling the likes of Walthamstow mini-Holland, but I'm most interested in smaller scale measures.)

Thanks.

[FifeingEejit]

The primary advantage to motorists is that it gives them a chance however small to think that 1.4miles might just be a walkable distance...
If that breif moment of clarity snowballs they soon discover that they save on car maintenance and fueling

[Redlight]

The primary advantage to motorists is that it gives them a chance however small to think that 1.4miles might just be a walkable distance...
If that breif moment of clarity snowballs they soon discover that they save on car maintenance and fueling

She drives an Audi Wankpanzer to her gym class (1.2 miles). I don't think clarity of thought is one of her strengths.

[Adam]

Have a look at the research done by Rachel Aldred after 1 year of the mini-Hollands.

Overall, the findings here suggest that programme interventions, while controversial, are having a measurable and early impact on active travel behaviour and perceptions of the local cycling environment.

No evidence either way of change in car use associated with interventions.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856417314866

[Speshact]

I did two Twitter threads that you might find helpful:
https://twitter.com/KenningtonPOB/status/1279353746749894656?s=20
https://twitter.com/KenningtonPOB/status/1287047718590980097?s=20

[nikki]

"Experience reveals that predictions of traffic problems caused by low-traffic neighbourhoods almost always fail to materialise, and that significant reductions in overall traffic levels across an area can happen as a result of people making a wide range of behavioural responses to the new traffic configurations."
https://londonlivingstreets.com/2019/07/11/evaporating-traffic-impact-of-low-traffic-neighbourhoods-on-main-roads/

Also an actually terrible thing:
"over three quarters of deaths due to injury in the age bracket of 10-18 year olds are related to traffic incidents."
https://www.rcpch.ac.uk/resources/why-children-die-research-recommendations

This Living Streets document also has a page on common arguments:
https://www.livingstreets.org.uk/media/3844/lcc021-low-traffic-neighbourhoods-detail-v9.pdf

There are a few stats on life expectancy increase and benefits to local economy at the end of this post:
https://www.sustrans.org.uk/for-professionals/infrastructure/an-introductory-guide-to-low-traffic-neighbourhood-design/an-introductory-guide-to-low-traffic-neighbourhood-design-contents/design-guide/all/1-making-the-case-for-a-low-traffic-neighbourhood

[Wanlock Dod]

Imagine how things might be if the kids could manage less than 10 minutes cycling to the school themselves...

[nobby]

Is there anything in 20's Plenty?
http://www.20splenty.org

[toontra]

In Islington there have been massive public demonstrations and marches blocking the roads by people AGAINST the introduction of LTN's.  The organisers deny rumours that they are a lobby group got up by local taxi drivers and their families    At the forefront was the rent-a-"celeb" Linda Robson 

One thing I noticed from the pics in the local rags - virtually all those involved looked as if they could loose a few pounds.

https://www.islingtongazette.co.uk/news/islington-people-friendly-streets-upper-street-protest-1-6770674

[The French Tandem]

She drives an Audi Wankpanzer to her gym class (1.2 miles). I don't think clarity of thought is one of her strengths.

It reminds me of a famous gym in Montreal that was on the second floor of a shopping mall on St Catherine Street. The gym was accessible via either a normal staircase or an escalator. It was very funny to watch people taking the escalator, knowing that they will pay a lot of money to spend the next hour on a stair climbing machine.

A

Edit: second floor in Leftpondia, but only first floor in the UK

[toontra]

I suspect many of those on the march in Islington are the ones who use their Wankpanzers to go to the corner shop for their fags 'n' tabloids.

[Redlight]

Thanks folks, this is all very helpful. 

The neighbours are piling in on me a bit now (we have a normally civilised community WhatsApp group) so all ammunition is helpful. One has been complaining that the 'road closures' are making it difficult for her to get to her hospital appointments. I've pointed out that the road to the hospital is not closed and was always nose-to-bumper before the LTNs were introduced. 

[Jaded]

In Islington there have been massive public demonstrations and marches blocking the roads by people AGAINST the introduction of LTN's.  The organisers deny rumours that they are a lobby group got up by local taxi drivers and their families    At the forefront was the rent-a-"celeb" Linda Robson 

One thing I noticed from the pics in the local rags - virtually all those involved looked as if they could loose a few pounds.

https://www.islingtongazette.co.uk/news/islington-people-friendly-streets-upper-street-protest-1-6770674

Fatties with Five Exclamation Marks !!!!! What more could you want...

[ian]

The problem you will find is that she's not actually bothered about the evidence, so it won't matter have compelling or detailed it is.  If you're driving a giant wankpanzer in 2020 (to make pointless journeys – yes, yes, I know these people are too important to waste 20 minutes walking anywhere), you definitively don't care about evidence.

Any erosion of a perceived entitlement will garner the same sort of response. Which, on the plus side, means it's working.

The only effective strategy in my experience is to turn it around, it turns out none of these people like wankpanzers speeding past their house or running over their kids. And bully through the changes, no one consulted me about cars driving by my house.

[grams]

The only effective strategy in my experience is to turn it around, it turns out none of these people like wankpanzers speeding past their house or running over their kids.

Any kids that get run over is an unfortunate, unavoidable accident alas. Their parked car being damaged, that's a tragedy.

One effect rat runs cause is where they meet the main road there'll be a constant stream of cars aggressively nosing out or pushing through to turn right at an inevitably uncontrolled junction. Main roads flow better once you close the rat runs.

I guess the fundamental thing to establish is whether she agrees that there are too many drivers from outside the neighbourhood using your streets, and whether she things that's right or wrong.

[MikeFromLFE]

I guess the fundamental thing to establish is whether she agrees that there are too many drivers from outside the neighbourhood using your streets, and whether she things that's right or wrong.

This could be a key 'trigger' - the locals aren't the problem - it's the pesky drivers from outside the area. Close the roads to keep the Others out!

[ian]

It's one of those pitfalls of being rational, educated, and empirical. You think you can persuade people using evidence, logic, the kinds of thing that ought to be persuasive but are only persuasive if you're rational, educated, and empirical.

So it turns out it doesn't work. Because they don't care. And honestly, even the best willed for us all is often a victim of our prejudices, and it takes a lot to recognise that even if you're willing and able to do so. Most people don't bother to try.

But anyway, they want to drive their car everywhere, and that's their life, and the proposals threaten that. So yeah, that gets their back up. Even a rationale rebuke will likely do little more than intensify their ire, because if they don't have a counter-point, they have anger to fall back on.

I remember years ago when we lived in Ealing a street slated as a 'home zone,' angry neighbours coming around with a petition. I politely and reasonably pointed out at it all sounded quite good and told them that no, we wouldn't be signing. She was furious and shortly afterwards we started to get strange angry letters through the letterbox about 'some people' in the area blah blah blah.

I sent a supportive letter to the London Borough of Ealing and we got a home zone and the world didn't end. Dunno, if it's still there, basically some planters, diagonal parking, and generation a batch of things to make the street far less desirable as a rat-run. The only contentious thing was that they'd lose a couple of parking spaces.

[bhoot]

This article https://www.lcc.org.uk/articles/lcc-and-urban-movement-launch-new-engagement-and-consultation-guide may have some helpful links. There is a downloadable guide which is quite lengthy and really covering the whole process rather than the specific stage your neighbourhood is at, but there might be some useful nuggets in there.

The neighbours are piling in on me a bit now (we have a normally civilised community WhatsApp group) so all ammunition is helpful.

I can feel your pain as I am sure our views on this sort of thing would be at odds with many of our neighbours

[Greenbank]

They've just[1] put in a School Street near my daughter's school (and another school) and it was amazing the push back from some of the local community who just weren't interested in the details and somehow thought that their basic human right of driving past their house at the speed limit during school drop-off/pick-up times was going to be restricted.

Imagine a rectangle of four streets with the school streets being two streets connecting opposite diagonals. If you wanted to get from one corner to the other you just used the other two streets. The other streets were no thinner or trickier to drive along. It should be a simple and obvious thing to do.

The roads were still open for residents and access (there's a health clinic and the 24h RSPCA animal hospital).

But some of the local residents:
* Phoned the Police (the Police came and found there was nothing wrong)
* Ranted about how they wouldn't be able to get their car in or out - they were told the road was still open for access
* Ranted about "what if someone is disabled" - they were told the road was still open for access
* Ranted about people needing to get to the animal hospital or the health clinic - they were told the road was still open for access

It caused much frothing on the local community forum from many posters (who don't have cars themselves) coming up with imaginary situations that it somehow creates a problem for that is solved purely by repeating the statement "but the road is still open for access".

Some parents at the schools were annoyed that they couldn't continue their existing practice of driving close to the school and parking illegally whilst dropping off or collecting their children - they were told that the scheme was trying to improve road safety and if it prevented parents from parking illegally/dangerously (double parking or parking at junctions and obscuring sight lines, etc) at school drop-off/pick-up times then it was doing part of its job. They didn't like this.

Anyway, the relevance to this is that this is a precursor to it being part of a larger area being labelled as a LTN. If this is the reaction from locals for a scheme that is so simply obviously good with no downsides I can't imagine how much shite there will be for a larger LTN going in.

Meanwhile, I've put myself down on the rota for a couple of mornings doing a shift on the barriers once the new term starts.

1. The council had been talking about it for 18 months so XR got involved. XR just turned up with some S.8 barriers and started talking to drivers trying to drive through the streets that were going to be designated as school streets, informed them of the changes that were coming and let them know the alternatives. They badgered the council about it and the council put up the signs a few days later. Almost all drivers complied and within 2 or 3 weeks of being there almost every driver had adjusted their route to avoid the streets at those times. Even some of the staff at the animal hospital would take the slightly longer route round if they came from the North/East to minimise how much they had to drive through the School Streets section.

[Greenbank]

My other point is I'm grateful for this thread as I'm also interested in any data that I can post to people who won't be interested in reading it to help quash the notion that an LTN is somehow terrible.

[Gattopardo]

The primary advantage to motorists is that it gives them a chance however small to think that 1.4miles might just be a walkable distance...
If that breif moment of clarity snowballs they soon discover that they save on car maintenance and fueling

She drives an Audi Wankpanzer to her gym class (1.2 miles). I don't think clarity of thought is one of her strengths.

There you have it.

It is nicer and people feel safer walking or cycling it means less cars on the road, and the drivers are more aware of cyclist and pedestrians so are more aware...in theory.

[Greenbank]

She drives an Audi Wankpanzer to her gym class (1.2 miles). I don't think clarity of thought is one of her strengths.

Most of it is time.

I give myself time to walk the 1 mile to somewhere and so I end up walking 1 mile to somewhere. If you are used to driving everywhere then you fill your day in such a way that you only give yourself 5 minutes to get to somewhere and so cycling/walking becomes out of the question, and into the convenient car you go.

Also, viewed in isolation a 1.2 mile each way journey to the gym in a car may seem like madness (it does to me), but it may be the only way that a particular person can do something.

What if, for example, they only had a 1 hour lunch break and wanted to do their 45 minute gym class that was 1.2 miles away? You can't walk 2.4 miles in 15 minutes so you need some other form of transport to do it within time. They might live, like I do, somewhere where there's no easy bike storage and 7.5 minutes isn't enough time to get the bike out, cycle 1.2 miles and lock it up and get to the class. Meanwhile the car is parked right outside, the local roads are generally clear and parking at the gym is easy. Guess what they'll do?

That's exactly the case for me. I live 1km from my local gym/pool. Parking is no problem. Traffic is never a problem. But I have never ever driven in the 1000+ times I've gone to the leisure centre because the thought doesn't even cross my mind, even though it is the fastest way for me to get there.

What if they drive to the gym and then pick up a click and collect shopping order in the car on the way home? Should they walk/cycle to the gym and walk/cycle back, then go out in the car and collect the shopping?

The only way you'll get many of these people out of their cars is making it less convenient for them to take that option or, more succinctly, make the alternatives way more convenient. LTNs at least attempt to address parts of both of these issues.

But, fundamentally, some people are just wedded to their cars and cannot think of using an alternative either through inconvenience or status/class.

[grams]

Most of it is time.

In a lot of built up areas driving isn't any faster than walking or cycling.

One thing I've noticed when I do the same trips by car as by bike or foot or public transport is how arduous and longwinded it can seem by car - constantly queuing at lights, fighting for space at merges, praying for a good parking space, mixed with the occasional 30/40/50 mph dash.

My assumption with I-drive-everywhere people is that they think doing the same journey by bike is the same shit, but a million times harder and slower because you don't have an engine. The it's-always-twenty-minutes traffic-doesn't-matter there's-always-a-parking-space aspect of doing it by bike just does not compute.

[quixoticgeek]

She drives an Audi Wankpanzer to her gym class (1.2 miles). I don't think clarity of thought is one of her strengths.

Most of it is time.

I give myself time to walk the 1 mile to somewhere and so I end up walking 1 mile to somewhere. If you are used to driving everywhere then you fill your day in such a way that you only give yourself 5 minutes to get to somewhere and so cycling/walking becomes out of the question, and into the convenient car you go.

Also, viewed in isolation a 1.2 mile each way journey to the gym in a car may seem like madness (it does to me), but it may be the only way that a particular person can do something.

The actual thing to bare in mind is trip chaining. It may be that she drives 2km from the office to the gym, but the may then drive 10km from the Gym to pick up the kids etc...

This is one of the big problems with the "x% of all journeys are under 5 miles!" stats that we roll out. Yes, yes they are, but for many, and especially for women (we trip chain more, due primarily to care responsibilities, see https://amzn.to/2Kpf2Qy for more info), that is because their morning consists of 5 separate journeys of <8km. As they go to drop the kids off, and then to the pharmacy, then to grandma, then to the shop, then to work etc...

We have to be careful about this.

J

[Greenbank]

Most of it is time.

In a lot of built up areas driving isn't any faster than walking or cycling.

Agreed, but that ignores that in many cases driving is faster than walking/cycling. That's the point.

As I've said, by far the quickest way for me to get to my local leisure centre would be to drive.

Walking: It's 1km so it's about 10 minutes.
Cycling: I have to walk to where I store my bike, open that up, unlock the bike, lock up the store. Ride there. Lock up the bike and go in. Probably 3 minutes riding and 5 minutes faff, so 8 minutes in total.
Driving: Walk outside, get in the car, drive 1km on empty local residential side roads, cross one major road, park up in the car park that always has spaces (and if not I'm still in the same parking CPZ so I can park on a nearby street). 5 minutes, 6 if I had to drive around to find a space somewhere else.

It's the same for me to go to my local supermarket. Similar distance. No parking problems as it is the same CPZ. No local congestion as these are residential roads.