Excellent news. Good to see evidence coming through that they’re effective.
>Overall, the team found that total past-year mileage of people living inside the new LTNs decreased by 6.4% compared to those living in other regions in Lambeth during this time
That’s a bit odd wording. Could be that people who don’t live in LTN have to drive more to avoid them and that makes the difference? If so that would be false economy.
The roads that are now covered by LTN were often used as shortcuts, so now that people don’t have permits, they need to drive around and people with permits may not need to avoid certain roads now and so their mileage will decrease.
I don’t think that sounds in favour of LTN the way they think it is.
It’s hard to see this as a good news story tbh.
I mean if they’re struggling to lower driving levels in a city with literally the best public transport in the country then what chance has anyone outside the London bubble got?
I wish there was more push for reducing traffic in smaller towns. Not only London all the time.
We drive in miles but they do the runners trick of putting it into Kms to seem longer I see your tricks runners!
[deleted]
If the tabloids are telling people to hate them then they must be a good thing
Fantastic: more please. The impact of car pollution on London residents is frightening.
The conclusion from the survey is as I can read it – while KM/day driven by people in the LTN lowered by 0.7 – the KM/day driven by people outside the LTN increased by 0.6 km
So the net effect is the LNT obstructions have close to zero effect and effectively just move the traffic slightly. People in the LTN drove slightly less – but the LTN’s forced people around the LTN to drive more. One step forward – one step back…
​
>The pre/post change in mean past-year driving was -0.7km/day among residents living inside the LTNs (from 20.3km/day to 19.6km/day), and +0.6km/day among residents in the control area (20.4km/day to 21.0km/day: see Table 2)
I think a bit of researcher bias is the cause of the “conclusion” published.
Anyone who lives in London and drives a car (that doesn’t *need* a car, and I mean *need* not just for dropping the kids off and doing their weekly shop), is a selfish piece of shit.
Traffic is cut but angry Facebook messages in local groups are up
Keep in mind that it’s not just about reducing car mileage. They’re at least as much or more about making streets generally nicer and safer for residents and anyone passing through them on bike or on foot, which will lead to more people feeling okay with cycling in the areas.
Air pollution is the least reason why Im an LTN supporter. It’s mainly everything else that comes with them. Cars along residential streets have increased massively since GPS apps directing people down them so it’s not even a matter of “well you shouldn’t have bought a house there”
They implemented this in my area of Leyton and the area is so much nicer because of it
Ban cars and people drive less on those roads.
News at 11.
Also grass green, Pope Catholic and bear latrine woodland location shocker.
I lived in London. Slowly I moved further and further away. My parents and brother now can’t park outside their own house, have been fined for using their own dropped-kerb, etc. etc. have to pay to park themselves, and can’t have guests without paying more money on a street that’s largely empty but used to be able to have a hundred cars parked without any obstruction or crowding.
My previous place, I had one allocated private parking space because I *insisted* on it as the main criteria for somewhere to rent. Parking was a major nightmare because all the surrounding roads don’t want cars (again, despite there being actual space for hundreds of cars just a few years previously).
I moved near Oxford recently, and my choice was influenced mostly to get a place with my own dropped kerb, enough space for two cars, and no parking restrictions on nearby roads.
I drove into Oxford, once. They quite clearly don’t want me driving anywhere near Oxford. I respect that. So I don’t. I drive even further away and use other places that actually welcome my car (which I *require* to get anywhere near a supermarket, DIY store, even a pound shop, where I live… my nearest town is 3km away – about 4 shops – and there’s ONE bus on a Friday that goes to one town and then DOESN’T COME BACK).
Ironically, the park-and-ride near me is literally dozens of cars parked on the grass on a main road, because people drive to there, then get on the bus to get to university/work. All you did was transplant the problem out of town.
Sure, it’s great if you live in Oxford, work in Oxford, have everything you need in Oxford. But everyone else is driving in the opposite direction to get the fuck away from you, including people who are literally trying to spend money, and still needs their car.
A first date asked me to meet them in Oxford recently. I refused. It’s just not worth the hassle.
Ban cars if you want. I’ll stay away. But then don’t cry about your high streets dying because the catchment area is severely reduced and how there are no local jobs and you can’t commute and/or can’t afford houses near your job.
It seems a really dumb idea to make a town that only the residents can get to, work in, shop in or visit reasonably.
Or you could just fix the fucking roads and parking situations.
I don’t think I’ve ever had a job that was anything less than a 30-minute bike ride away from where I live, and that’s over 25+ years ago, and recent job commutes are 30-40 minute drives with no viable bike route. It’s the only way I can afford to earn a living, a house I can afford, and still have something of my own left over to actually enjoy.
I wouldn’t mind if they fixed public transport, either. I hate public transport, but mostly because it’s shit. Fix it and this kind of idea is far more viable.
But banning cars will make people with cars go elsewhere. This isn’t rocket science. What it won’t do is solve the problem for which they have a car in the first place.
LTNs push traffic away from posh NIMBY residential areas that have the time and money to implement them towards poorer neighbourhoods that tend to be on main roads.
All for a negligible decrease in pollution as the pollution saved by pointless journeys is countered by other people having to drive around LTNs.
ULEZ fucks over poor people that can’t afford a new electric/ hybrid car. London itself has good public transport but for people who can’t afford the rent; getting trains into the city is ridiculously expensive.
The only way to decrease car use without fucking over working class people is to make public transport cheaper.
At what cost to people’s liberty? If we’re all using low emission cars, why shouldn’t we move around as we please? It’s all starting to feel Orwellian.
16 comments
Excellent news. Good to see evidence coming through that they’re effective.
>Overall, the team found that total past-year mileage of people living inside the new LTNs decreased by 6.4% compared to those living in other regions in Lambeth during this time
That’s a bit odd wording. Could be that people who don’t live in LTN have to drive more to avoid them and that makes the difference? If so that would be false economy.
The roads that are now covered by LTN were often used as shortcuts, so now that people don’t have permits, they need to drive around and people with permits may not need to avoid certain roads now and so their mileage will decrease.
I don’t think that sounds in favour of LTN the way they think it is.
It’s hard to see this as a good news story tbh.
I mean if they’re struggling to lower driving levels in a city with literally the best public transport in the country then what chance has anyone outside the London bubble got?
I wish there was more push for reducing traffic in smaller towns. Not only London all the time.
We drive in miles but they do the runners trick of putting it into Kms to seem longer I see your tricks runners!
[deleted]
If the tabloids are telling people to hate them then they must be a good thing
Fantastic: more please. The impact of car pollution on London residents is frightening.
The conclusion from the survey is as I can read it – while KM/day driven by people in the LTN lowered by 0.7 – the KM/day driven by people outside the LTN increased by 0.6 km
So the net effect is the LNT obstructions have close to zero effect and effectively just move the traffic slightly. People in the LTN drove slightly less – but the LTN’s forced people around the LTN to drive more. One step forward – one step back…
​
>The pre/post change in mean past-year driving was -0.7km/day among residents living inside the LTNs (from 20.3km/day to 19.6km/day), and +0.6km/day among residents in the control area (20.4km/day to 21.0km/day: see Table 2)
[https://findingspress.org/article/75470-the-impact-of-2020-low-traffic-neighbourhoods-on-levels-of-car-van-driving-among-residents-findings-from-lambeth-london-uk](https://findingspress.org/article/75470-the-impact-of-2020-low-traffic-neighbourhoods-on-levels-of-car-van-driving-among-residents-findings-from-lambeth-london-uk)
I think a bit of researcher bias is the cause of the “conclusion” published.
Anyone who lives in London and drives a car (that doesn’t *need* a car, and I mean *need* not just for dropping the kids off and doing their weekly shop), is a selfish piece of shit.
Traffic is cut but angry Facebook messages in local groups are up
Keep in mind that it’s not just about reducing car mileage. They’re at least as much or more about making streets generally nicer and safer for residents and anyone passing through them on bike or on foot, which will lead to more people feeling okay with cycling in the areas.
Air pollution is the least reason why Im an LTN supporter. It’s mainly everything else that comes with them. Cars along residential streets have increased massively since GPS apps directing people down them so it’s not even a matter of “well you shouldn’t have bought a house there”
They implemented this in my area of Leyton and the area is so much nicer because of it
Ban cars and people drive less on those roads.
News at 11.
Also grass green, Pope Catholic and bear latrine woodland location shocker.
I lived in London. Slowly I moved further and further away. My parents and brother now can’t park outside their own house, have been fined for using their own dropped-kerb, etc. etc. have to pay to park themselves, and can’t have guests without paying more money on a street that’s largely empty but used to be able to have a hundred cars parked without any obstruction or crowding.
My previous place, I had one allocated private parking space because I *insisted* on it as the main criteria for somewhere to rent. Parking was a major nightmare because all the surrounding roads don’t want cars (again, despite there being actual space for hundreds of cars just a few years previously).
I moved near Oxford recently, and my choice was influenced mostly to get a place with my own dropped kerb, enough space for two cars, and no parking restrictions on nearby roads.
I drove into Oxford, once. They quite clearly don’t want me driving anywhere near Oxford. I respect that. So I don’t. I drive even further away and use other places that actually welcome my car (which I *require* to get anywhere near a supermarket, DIY store, even a pound shop, where I live… my nearest town is 3km away – about 4 shops – and there’s ONE bus on a Friday that goes to one town and then DOESN’T COME BACK).
Ironically, the park-and-ride near me is literally dozens of cars parked on the grass on a main road, because people drive to there, then get on the bus to get to university/work. All you did was transplant the problem out of town.
Sure, it’s great if you live in Oxford, work in Oxford, have everything you need in Oxford. But everyone else is driving in the opposite direction to get the fuck away from you, including people who are literally trying to spend money, and still needs their car.
A first date asked me to meet them in Oxford recently. I refused. It’s just not worth the hassle.
Ban cars if you want. I’ll stay away. But then don’t cry about your high streets dying because the catchment area is severely reduced and how there are no local jobs and you can’t commute and/or can’t afford houses near your job.
It seems a really dumb idea to make a town that only the residents can get to, work in, shop in or visit reasonably.
Or you could just fix the fucking roads and parking situations.
I don’t think I’ve ever had a job that was anything less than a 30-minute bike ride away from where I live, and that’s over 25+ years ago, and recent job commutes are 30-40 minute drives with no viable bike route. It’s the only way I can afford to earn a living, a house I can afford, and still have something of my own left over to actually enjoy.
I wouldn’t mind if they fixed public transport, either. I hate public transport, but mostly because it’s shit. Fix it and this kind of idea is far more viable.
But banning cars will make people with cars go elsewhere. This isn’t rocket science. What it won’t do is solve the problem for which they have a car in the first place.
LTNs push traffic away from posh NIMBY residential areas that have the time and money to implement them towards poorer neighbourhoods that tend to be on main roads.
All for a negligible decrease in pollution as the pollution saved by pointless journeys is countered by other people having to drive around LTNs.
ULEZ fucks over poor people that can’t afford a new electric/ hybrid car. London itself has good public transport but for people who can’t afford the rent; getting trains into the city is ridiculously expensive.
The only way to decrease car use without fucking over working class people is to make public transport cheaper.
At what cost to people’s liberty? If we’re all using low emission cars, why shouldn’t we move around as we please? It’s all starting to feel Orwellian.