Riders on the storm:

How (and why) to cut traffic and boost sustainable alternatives without losing your head

​

We’ll start at 10:02am

#Riders23

Code of conduct

#Riders23

1. We all belong here.

​

• We are all responsible for creating a harassment-free experience: critique ideas, not people.

​

• We will not tolerate harassment of participants or speakers in any form. Anybody violating these rules will be asked to leave or removed at the discretion of the conference organisers.

​

• For concerns, email hirra@wearepossible.org

Car Free Cities worked across Birmingham, Bristol, Leeds and London to:

​

1. Put forward the positive case for urban traffic reduction

​

2. Work with local communities - particularly those who are most harmed by the effects of mass car dominance - to co-design and deliver changes to their own streets

​

3. Encourage and inspire local decision makers to raise ambitions and accelerate change in our cities

Car free cities are free of the dangers, pollution & emissions caused by mass private car dominance.

Riders on the storm | #Riders23

They’re not cities with no cars at all. Many people, including some disabled people, cannot get around without a car, and reducing the number of cars in cities will make their lives easier too.

Riders on the storm | #Riders23

“The Government has made no progress on our recommendations on clarifying the role for car demand reduction…”

[emphasis added]

The Climate Change Committee

Progress in reducing UK emissions: 2023 Report to Parliament (June 2023)

Programme

Riders on the storm | #Riders23

10:00 - 11:30: Car wars - delivering local change against a backdrop of misinformation.

11:30 - 11:55: Coffee break

11:55 - 13:00: Reclaim our streets - how to introduce more equitable and sustainable uses of our kerbside. Please note, only the first part of this session will be available for online attendees.

​

13:00 - 14:00: Lunch

14:00 - 15:30: Cities of the future - how can we ensure that the shift away from car dependency increases equity and accessibility for all our communities?

15:30 - 16:00: Refreshments & networking

Car Wars:

delivering change against a backdrop of misinformation.

Riders on the storm | #Riders23

Riders on the storm:

Key insights on the political and temporal dynamics of delivering traffic reduction and road space reallocation

​

July 18th 2023

• Noisy backlash against traffic reduction is inevitable and universal regardless of the approach taken
• Once traffic reduction measures have bedded in, nobody ever wants to go back
• A majority and a plurality of people support traffic reduction but are unlikely to say so up front

THREE KEY THINGS TO REMEMBER

At every crossway on the road that leads to the future, each progressive spirit is opposed by a thousand men appointed to guard the past.

​

• Count Maurice Maeterlinck

London’s congestion charge was wildly controversial prior to its introduction. The Tory opposition handed out leaflets likening the zone boundary to "the Berlin Wall on your doorstep". Newspapers, some business groups & unions all vocally hated it. Westminster Council took the mayor to court to try to block it.

Polling found that despite 90% of Londoners believing there was too much traffic in central London, and worrying about the health and environmental effects of pollution, only 38% agreed that a congestion charge was the right solution. 43% opposed it.

​

If a referendum had been held on the C-Charge it would have lost, and London would have been cursed with perpetual gridlock.

Source: The Acceptability of Road Pricing, RAC Foundation 2011

But 8 months after the Congestion Charge had been introduced, public support had flipped to well over 50%, while opposition fell

Source: https://wearepossible.github.io/carfreestories/

This is a pattern we see over and over again all around the world

Public support for traffic reduction measures follows the Goodwin Curve

Standard consultation respondents are skewed towards those with a certain position: protecting the status quo.

​

People are invested in the way things work today, in a way nobody but a handful of dreamers are invested in a hypothetical future in which things work better.

​

“people who aren’t currently cycling, which we know is a large part of the population, they aren’t going to be out there giving support to something to benefit cycling because they don’t see themselves as a cyclist so don’t see this as relevant to them”

• Susan Claris, ARUP

The status quo always benefits from the incumbency effect, where people are in general invested in the way things are today, so loss aversion is powerful enough to really activate people to defend against a perceived threat

​

The problems with the status quo are known and familiar, whereas the hypothetical problems with the hypothetical future are both unfamiliar and infinite

The principle of traffic reduction is very popular and seen as a priority.

​

The details of making it happen in practice are much more challenging!

Source: Public Opinion Survey on Traffic and Road Use, Department for Transport, November 2020

Majority support for LTNs is still present even in the specific, when the question is precisely around closing residential streets to through traffic

Source: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/national-travel-attitudes-study-ntas-2019-wave-1, Department for Transport, November 2020

Public polling consistently finds a robust majority of the public *support* closing residential streets to through traffic, with strong opposition limited to a narrow group.

​

This is true nationally…

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2020/oct/22/despite-a-loud-opposing-minority-low-traffic-neighbourhoods-are-increasingly-popular

…and in London specifically

Source: https://redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/plurality-of-londoners-support-expanding-londons-ultra-low-emissions-zone-ulez/

Source: YouGov Polling for Transport for London, 9th-11th November 2021

The problem is the group who really *care* about this stuff is the antis who want to block change, who far outnumber the oddball activists convinced that the world could be a better place. This group then dominate the public discourse: witness NextDoor etc.

​

In a recent TfL survey, just 13% of Londoners said they drove at least five days a week, while 64% drove once a week at most, if at all. This confirms that a relatively small proportion of Londoners are doing most of the driving.

​

Contrary to reports, London is not really experiencing a battle between a minority of cyclists and a majority of drivers. Instead the political and social struggle for our streets contest is between a large majority who drive rather little, if at all, and a small minority who drive a lot.

Dirty tricks are also de rigueur for opponents of traffic reduction

“Perhaps one reason negative voices find it so easy to sway things their way is that people have a tendency to misjudge public levels of support. The survey showed that, while most people think Britain would be a better place if more people cycled, they also guessed that other people were less supportive, and more hostile, to the idea than they were.”

• Ian Walker, Environmental Psychologist at the University of Bath

Support for LTNs is broad but shallow & soft, while opposition to them is narrow but hard, deep & pointy. This means it is easy to frighten local politicians away from seeing change through.

​

The majority of people who want the change don't want it enough to do or say much about it.

​

Expect opposition!

In LTN trailblazing Waltham Forest, thousands marched down the high st with a coffin, and councillors involved received death threats

​

41% of local people opposed the LTNs at the time they were implemented

Source: https://www.guardian-series.co.uk/news/13720251.grand-opening-mini-holland-scheme-dominated-angry-protestors/

Two years later, just 1.7% of residents wanted the changes reversed

Source: https://www.uk100.org/blog/2020/10/waltham-forests-mini-holland-why-ltns-are-so-important-clean-air

Modal filters as used to create Low Traffic Neighbourhoods are not new, and councillors introducing LTNs say nobody ever writes to them asking to have existing filters removed

​

This gives an important clue about the ephemeral nature of LTN controversy

Possible surveyed nearly 300 households on streets with historic modal filters

​

They are overwhelmingly popular!

People’s views about traffic filters are not fixed: they trend towards greater support following lived experience with the change

Where the status quo is a filtered street, residents focus on the problems that would be caused if that were to change

​

Change meets resistance - no matter the starting point

Time makes more converts than reason.

​

• Thomas Paine

Object lesson from Hammersmith & Fulham!

Summer 2019: local residents’ consultation using Common Place identifies rat running and too much motor traffic as priority issues in Brackenbury

Village

November 2020: local residents’ association workshops present initial proposals

Summer 2019: local residents’ consultation using Common Place identifies rat running and too much motor traffic as priority issues in Brackenbury

Village

Sept-Nov 2021:

series of working group meetings to develop plans. Lots of focus on public realm improvements, no hard traffic measures (only cameras)

December 2021: officers report on the South Fulham TCPR finds local public attitudes have completely flipped since it was first introduced, with over 85% of residents now wanting the measures to remain in place!

April 2023:

Public drop-in events are held to show residents the final proposals

April 2023:

Local motor lobby (led by notorious climate change denier David Tarsh) launch ‘don’t kill Brackenbury’ disinformation campaign on NextDoor claiming disabled drivers not exempt etc

April-May 2023:

​

Anti-lobby target local businesses with warnings of catastrophic impacts

​

Antis hijack community drop-in events, shouting at consultants and defacing exhibition materials

​

Ward councillors do not show up to any events to explain or defend proposals

​

STOP Brackenbury Clean Air Neighbourhood petition garners over 1000 signatures within weeks of launching

June 2023:

​

Leader of LBHF Stephen Cowan - and Brackenbury ward councillor - announces ‘pause’ to borough wide Clean Air Neighbourhoods programme and Brackenbury proposals are killed off for good

• It is in fact impossible to deliver any urban traffic reduction scheme in a way that won’t be met with CAPSLOCK FURY from motor lobby
• Bending over backwards to devise a scheme that had absolutely no impact on local voting motorists triggered identical levels of backlash to every other LTN ever introduced
• The whole of the first four years of the Better Brackenbury programme was spent on the downward slope of the Goodwin Curve
• If bollard modal filters had been installed using an ETO in late 2019 in response to residents’ feedback and traffic monitoring data, the initial backlash would have been indistinguishable - but by now, in 2023, a new status quo with less traffic would have settled in and nobody would want to go back

Brackenbury shows that appeasement does not work!

BE COURAGEOUS HERE!

When it’s a notion

When it is vague

It is praised.

​

When it looms large

When plans are in motion

Objections are raised.

​

• Bertolt Brecht

• The difference between traffic reduction schemes that succeed and become permanent, and those that are removed mid-trial, is exclusively explained by the courage and resolve of the politicians responsible
• Schemes will have more visible enemies than friends when details are first proposed - this is fine, just don’t be surprised!
• The end-state with less traffic is universally preferred - the change itself is the hard part

SUMMARY

• Like removing a plaster or grasping a nettle, the only ‘good’ way to deliver a traffic reduction scheme is quickly
• …and ideally, avoiding the bottom of the Goodwin Curve during a re-election campaign!

SUMMARY

Thank you

July 18th 2023

Leo Murray, Director of innovation, leo@wearepossible.org

The impact of councillors’ LTN positions on voting behaviour in Greater London

Jamie Furlong, Research Fellow, Active Travel Academy, University of Westminster J.Furlong@westminster.ac.uk

Athena Brook, PhD candidate, Active Travel Academy, University of Westminster

Charlie Hicks, Councillor, Oxfordshire County Council

Rachel Aldred, Professor and Director of Active Travel Academy, University of Westminster

​

​

About Low Traffic Neighbourhoods

​

LTNs and controversy

Vandalism of LTN signage in Ealing, London (source: Richard Bouchier)

Anti-LTN protesters in Islington, London (source: Anna Lamche)

Vandalism of LTN signage in Lambeth, London (source: London Cycling Campaign)

https://redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/plurality-of-londoners-support-expanding-londons-ultra-low-emissions-zone-ulez/

Research questions

​

To what extent did incumbent councillors’ LTN tweeting, and their positive or negative stances on local LTNs affect their:

​

1. likelihood of retaining their seat between the 2018 and 2022 local elections in London?  
2. relative number of votes between the 2018 and 2022 local elections in London?

​

(*Relative votes = the percentage difference between number of votes received and the mean number of vote per candidate in the same ward)

​

​

Study included incumbent councillors in London boroughs where…

1. At least one LTN had been implemented since March 2020 and not subsequently removed prior to the 2022 elections, and/or

2. At least one LTN was planned to be implemented following the 2022 local elections.

Voting Outcomes by party

• 93% of Labour incumbents in the study kept their seat in the 2022 elections, compared to only 75% of Liberal Democrats, 73% of Conservatives and 67% of Greens. (Overall, 89% kept their seat).
• The mean average change in relative vote share was -13. Liberal Democrats saw a mean change of -23, Conservatives of -16, Greens of -13 and Labour of -11.
• One factor in this fall in relative support for all parties was a rise in smaller parties and independents compared to 2018.

​

Identifying councillors’ Twitter accounts

Identifying tweets related to LTNs

• Use of Twitter’s now removed API service for research
• All councillors’ tweets downloaded between 1 January 2020 to 5 May 2022 (local election date)
• Tweets identified using key words: ‘LTN’, ‘liveable neighbourhood’, ‘healthy neighbourhood’ etc.
• Only standalone tweets included (not replies or retweets)

​

�

Councillors and tweets about LTNs

​

31.5% of Conservative incumbents with Twitter accounts tweeted about LTNs (similar % for Lib Dems & Greens), but only 18.5% of Labour incumbents did.

Sentiment analysis and scoring

• We used a Naïve Bayes classifier to predict sentiment towards LTNs.
• The model learns from a manually coded dataset
• Each tweet is classified as positive, negative or neutral (and the probabilities of each) based on text, emotional tone, additional context features (e.g., borough, party)
• Aggregate positive, negative and neutral sentiment probabilities of each councillor into composite scores
• -1 (most negative) to 0 (neutral) and +1 (most positive)

Predicting the effects of LTN sentiment on seat results and vote changes

​

​

​

​

To predict the probability of holding a seat: logistic regression models with a binomial outcome variable (1 = Yes, 0 = No).

​

To predict the change in relative number of votes received between the 2018 and 2022 local elections, linear regression models with the change value as a continuous outcome variable.

​

In both models, we control for key political and demographic characteristics

Councillors and LTN sentiment

​

​

​

Voting outcomes and the effects of tweeting about LTNs at all

​

​

​

Modelled estimates of the relationship between tweeting at all and change in relative number of votes

When we look at relative votes, we see there is a positive relationship for tweeting about LTNs at all, compared to not tweeting. Relationships are not statistically significant when separated by party.

Voting outcomes and LTN sentiments – party trends were non-significant, but we did find an interaction effect (difference in the trends)

​

​

​

The relationship between councillors’ LTN sentiment scores and the change in relative vote scores between the 2018 and 2022 local elections

Voting outcomes and the effects of tweeting about LTNs

​

​

​

Odds ratios of holding seat by whether councillors had tweeted at all

The trend is non-significant – wide confidence intervals

79% of councillors who tweeted negatively kept their seats, compared to 75% of neutral and 96% of positive Tweeters. However, this difference was again not statistically significant.

Concluding thoughts

​

​

​

• Most incumbent councillors in areas with LTNs did not tweet about LTNs at all.
• However, evidence suggests there was no negative electoral effects of tweeting at all. If anything, it is positive.
• Divergence by political party: For incumbent Labour councillors, compared to their Conservative counterparts, the more positive the tweets about LTNs, the more positive the relative changes in their support.
• However, no evidence that tweeting about LTNs or tweeting positively or negatively affected seat retention.
• Findings should be treated with caution…

�

The impact of councillors’ LTN positions on voting behaviour in Greater London

Jamie Furlong, Research Fellow, Active Travel Academy, University of Westminster J.Furlong@westminster.ac.uk

Athena Brook, PhD candidate, Active Travel Academy, University of Westminster

Charlie Hicks, Councillor, Oxfordshire County Council

Rachel Aldred, Professor and Director of Active Travel Academy, University of Westminster

​

​

Powered by behavioural science, our work improves and saves lives.

​

As a full-service communications consultancy, we fuse science and creativity to create communications with impact. We don’t just observe

audiences, we understand and empower them so they make good choices.

​

We are outcomes and measurement obsessed and our methodologies take the guesswork out of whether we effected change. Our

multi-award-winning campaigns and global recognition received proves just that - but more than that, we know we are making a

difference when we measure the value of our work - leading to lives improved and lives saved.

​

Our model is full and flex service. And with our scientific thinking, academic rigour, and creative flair, we are leading a sea change in comms.

our tool kit.

lynn.global

three key takeaways:

​

Online ≠ Offline - Just because something is gaining traction on social media doesn’t mean our audience has been exposed to it, or that it resonates with them.

​

​

​

​

​

​

Fact checking Santa Claus - Is the information we’re worried about causing real-world harm? Because if not, then it’s probably best to ignore it.

​

​

Deeper truths > Facts - The most recent meta analyses of fact checking shows it has very limited impact. Humans are storytellers. Don’t bring facts to a culture war.

​

1.

2.

3.

lynn.global

(Credit: The New Yorker)

lynn.global

(Credit: The New Yorker)

lynn.global

demystifying misinformation.

Misinformation

​

​

Misleading or false information shared without the intent to mislead or cause harm.

​

Disinformation

​

​

Misleading or false information shared with the intent to mislead or cause harm.

​

Malinformation

​

​

Accurate information shared with the intent to mislead or cause harm.

​

Conspiracy theories

​

​

A worldview claiming there are a shadowy group of elites pulling the strings behind the scenes.

​

lynn.global

maintaining information integrity.

Anywhere someone (intentionally or unintentionally) peddles a misleading narrative ��– often implicit and constructed using a cherry picked mix of elements of fact combined with fabrications that is adversarial in nature against an at-risk group or institution, and most importantly, creates risk of harm – they are engaging in mis/disinformation

“

”

lynn.global

exploring misinformation: some questions to start with

​

• Harm: How do we define harm? Why is that important?

​

• Vulnerability: What makes our audiences vulnerable to conspiracy theories? Should we care?

​

• Control: What factors negatively impacting information integrity are beyond our control? Is there anything we can do to influence them in the future?

​

lynn.global

in summary

There should be three key pillars to your approach to information integrity:

​

1. Scanning: What beliefs are circulating online and offline about your organisation and its work?

​

• Identifying threats: What beliefs constitute a threat to your organisation and its work?

​

• Building your strategy: What’s going to make your audiences more resilient to misinformed beliefs? The Wall of Beliefs framework (see left) provides one example of how to approach this.

​

These three stages should supplemented by ongoing monitoring, threat detection and escalation processes.

​

three key takeaways:

​

Online ≠ Offline - Just because something is gaining traction on social media doesn’t mean our audience has been exposed to it, or that it resonates with them.

​

​

​

​

​

​

Fact checking Santa Claus - Is the information we’re worried about causing real-world harm? Because if not, then it’s probably best to ignore it.

​

​

Deeper truths > Facts - The most recent meta analyses of fact checking shows it has very limited impact. Humans are storytellers. Don’t bring facts to a culture war.

​

1.

2.

3.

lynn.global

Want to keep the conversation going?

​

Add me on LinkedIn: Stefan Rollnick

lynn.global

lynn.global

How hard can it be to change the transport system?

Installing Low Traffic Neighbourhoods in Oxford

What are we trying to do?

​

from...

to...

What do you need to get started?

​

The overall results are positive

​

But be prepared for this

​

Polled public opinion vs

Perceived public opinion

​

Polled public opinion

​

Perceived public opinion

​

“Discrimination”

​

“Not listening”

​

“Abuse of power”

​

“Not working”

​

“Dividing the community”

​

“It’s delaying ambulances”

​

“Air pollution”

​

“No evidence”

​

“People are cut off”

​

“Longer journeys”

​

Fairness perceptions

​

Outcome fairness

​

Procedural fairness

Chan, 2011

Outcome fairness

​

Expectations

Social comparisons

Contrasts

Chan, 2011

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Voice

Explanations

Respectful Treatment

Procedural fairness

OECD, 2016

So if we want more of this

​

We need to consider

​

Information to citizens on plans, processes of decisions, reasons for decisions

Thorough and transparent data collection and evaluation

Hosted on a well designed user-friendly website

​

Public participatory process for co-production of the plans

Professional representative polling to assess public opinion giving equal weight to each voice

​

Proactively engage and build relationships with groups who are currently most car-dependent and likely to be hostile

Finding solutions and economic support to help people adapt

Explanations

Voice

Respectful Treatment

�The Enjoy Waltham Forest Programme��Cllr Clyde Loakes

Deputy Leader, London Borough of Waltham Forest and Cabinet Member for Climate and Air Quality

LB Waltham Forest�

What have we delivered in Waltham Forest so far?

Over 55 km of segregated cycle track

22 School Streets

46 public realm improvements

Planted more than 800 trees

85 modal filters

570 EV charging sockets

36 pocket parks

714 Bikehangars

11 Station Cycle Hubs

Encouraging community ownership

Working with community organisations and neighbourhood groups

• Cycle training

​

• All Ability Cycle Club

​

• Dr Bike and cycle maintenance courses

​

• Community cycle loan scheme – 10 cargo bikes and 34 standard bikes

​

• Peddle My Wheels – Try Before You Bike

​

• Waltham Forest Wanders

​

• ZED Waltham Forest

​

​

Enabling behaviour change

Residents and Businesses

475,000 km travelled

350,000 deliveries

Reducing reliance on private cars

Car clubs

• 103 Car Club bays

​

• 3 operators offering both EV and van options

​

• Working in partnership with EV charging point operators to electrify fleet

​

• Target of at least 1 Car Club bay in every CPZ by December 2023

​

Overcoming challenges

• Challenge: Resistance to change
• Solution: Adapting and enhancing engagement approach
• Challenge: Differing cultural and travel behaviours across the borough
• Solution: Introducing initiatives such as Community Walking and Cycling Fund and supporting local groups
• Challenge: Funding availability to meet demand, e.g. cycle training
• Solution: Diversification of funding sources

Air quality and health benefits of schemes

King’s College London research

University of Westminster/Active Travel Academy

​

​

What do we have planned next?

• Introduction of a further 500 Bikehangars by December 2025 with £1.6m investment

​

• Expand EV charging across the borough through the installation of a further 500+ sockets by March 2024

​

• Introduction of new Controlled Parking Zones

​

• Consultation on a new Low Traffic Neighbourhood

​

• Aiming to deliver a further 20-25km of protected cycle lanes in the next 4 years

​

• Increasing the coverage of 20mph zones

​

• Combining Public Realm and Climate Resilience

​

Car Wars:

delivering change against a backdrop of misinformation.

Riders on the storm | #Riders23

Feedback survey

Riders on the storm | #Riders23

If you are leaving us now, please take 5 minutes to fill in our feedback survey:

https://wearepossible.org/riders23-survey

​

​

​

Riders on the storm:

How (and why) to cut traffic and boost sustainable alternatives without losing your head

​

Coffee break until 11:55am

#Riders23

Reclaim our streets:

How to introduce more equitable and sustainable

uses of our kerbside.

​

We’ll start at 11:57am

Riders on the storm | #Riders23

Reclaim the Streets

An overview of Possible’s work on space equity, parklets and parking

Popularising parklets as a way of reclaiming space for people

Our Write to Councillor Tool has been used by hundreds of people to ask their local councillors for a parklet permit process

Data visualisation on parking stats

Pop-Up Parklets for Car Free Day 2021 & 2022

Parking Action tool launched May 2023

Impact

Four London Boroughs have now adopted parklet permit processes in place and more are developing policies in this area

New Parklets Campaign for 2023-2024

• We want to work with community groups, schools, places of worship, venues, to create five longer term parklets in London with experimental traffic orders
• Working across London boroughs
• Working with Hackney Council and a Hackney stakeholder to implement a physical parklet in September 2023
• Talk to us about working with us on parklets!
• Carolyn@wearepossible.org

Reclaim our streets:

how to introduce more equitable and sustainable uses of our kerbside.

​

Riders on the storm | #Riders23

Feedback survey

Riders on the storm | #Riders23

If you are leaving us now, please take 5 minutes to fill in our feedback survey:

https://wearepossible.org/riders23-survey

​

​

​

Riders on the storm:

How (and why) to cut traffic and boost sustainable alternatives without losing your head

​

Lunch until 2pm

#Riders23

Cities of the future:

Ensuring the shift away from cars increases equity

and accessibility for all our communities.

​

We’ll start at 2:02pm

Riders on the storm | #Riders23

Cities of the future:

how can we ensure that the shift away from car dependency increases equity and accessibility for all our communities?

Riders on the storm | #Riders23

Cycling as Labour

Precarious work on precarious streets

​

Tiffany Lam

18 July 2023

• Why this matters
• Key findings
• Recommendations

143

Why this matters

Delivery cyclists: a large & growing proportion of overall cyclists

​

“Although [immigrant] food delivery cyclists account for large numbers of NYC’s cycling population [upwards of 45%], bike planners and advocates often do not include delivery cyclists in discussions about street design. ‘Invisible’ cyclists are not invisible because of their absence but because of systems designed to exclude them.”

(Lee et al., 2016)

​

145

Growth in & potential of cargo bike logistics

If scaled up, cargo bikes have huge potential to replace vans and reduce:

• Delivery times
• Traffic congestion
• Carbon emissions
• Air pollution
• Road injury risk

146

‘Perfect storm of risk factors’ affecting health & safety of all road users

Christie & Ward, 2018

147

Key findings

‘Time is money’

149

‘…really dangerous…’

150

‘It’s a man’s culture’

151

Recommendations

What do delivery cyclists want?

153

tiffany.lam@sustrans.org.uk

Sustrans is the charity making it easier for people to walk and cycle.

​

We connect people and places, create liveable neighbourhoods, transform the school run and deliver a happier, healthier commute.

​

Join us on our journey.

​

www.sustrans.org.uk

​

Registered Charity No. 326550 (England and Wales) SC039263 (Scotland)

VAT Registration No. 416740656.

Low Traffic Towns

​

Ben Coleman, Associate Director

​

18.07.23

Hello

​

Background

​

Traffic in Towns

​

Projects

​

Next

Background

​

The relationship between low traffic volumes and positive impact upon streetscapes and their social-ability is not new news

​

Background

​

Audit tools and policy also reinforce the preference for reducing volumes of vehicular traffic, and are still using similar traffic thresholds for auditing schemes

​

‘Encouraging through-traffic to use main roads can provide benefits for pedestrians and residents, particularly children and vulnerable adults, as well as enabling cycling’ (LTN 1/20)

Background

​

It’s also well established that the UK has high dependence on private car/vans at nearly all journey lengths >1 mile.

​

​

​

Background

​

Trends for trip purpose are also reasonably consistent since the 2002 – despite an overall reduction in the number of trips made

​

​

Background

​

Despite the availability of data, trends and research, projects involving traffic reduction are often incredibly emotive and contentious.

​

Our challenge therefore is to have more transparent and frank conversations around the role of vehicular traffic in towns, and how it impacts upon local needs, and the equity + accessibility of our streetscapes.

​

Traffic in Towns

​

Too often though, the focus is on the raw traffic volumes and purpose …

​

This influences the ambition and delivery of many of our projects including:

​

• LCWIPs
• Movement Strategies
• Masterplans
• Corridor Designs
• Neighbourhood Schemes
• New Developments

​

​

​

Wakefield

​

“It is a victory for common sense and a victory for the continuity of business in Wakefield city centre”

�

Dorset

​

Re-open High Street to A35 traffic

Why traffic?

​

Understanding traffic composition and the ‘why’ behind these trends enables a deeper insight into local behaviours and he potential for better street design

​

This increasingly is a key feature of our projects to help facilitate these conversations at the project outset.

​

​

​

Trip Length

Trip Purpose

Why?

Kent

LCWIP

​

84% = Through Traffic (~16k trips)

​

PM Peak

​

Mendips

LCWIP + High Street Study

​

60% High Street = Local Shortcut Traffic

​

AM Peak

​

​

Mendips

LCWIP + High Street Study

​

​

​

​

Mendips

LCWIP + High Street Study

​

71% = Carriageway

​

​

Mendips

LCWIP + High Street Study

​

Herefordshire

Movement Strategy

​

52% = Intra trips

(~100k daily trips <4miles)

​

(7% of all traffic = ‘Strategic’)

Hampshire

Mini-Holland Study

​

76% = In-Out/ Out-In Trips

​

AM Peak

Cotswolds

Traffic in Villages

​

81% = Strategic Trips

​

AM Peak

​

Surrey

Public Realm + Movement Study

​

43% Town Centre = through-traffic

​

(79% of which = ‘Strategic’)

​

AM Peak

​

Surrey

Public Realm + Movement Study

​

It’s not always completely about traffic though …

​

Sometimes it’s just design

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Seven Dials Roundabout, Brighton

​

​

​

Seven Dials Roundabout, Brighton

​

​

​

Next

​

Our aim is to make understanding traffic composition and its impact on street design a more normal and comfortable conversation in all projects.

​

The Cities of the Future and Re-imagining the Kerbside

Cllr Rezina Chowdhury

Lambeth Council,

Deputy Leader, Sustainable Lambeth and Clean Air

Kerbside Strategy - Rebalancing Road Priorities

Emergency COVID transport response

(LTNs, Healthy Routes, wider pavements)

2019

2020

2021

2022/23

2022

COVID trials made permanent

Net Zero by 2030

Healthy Routes and LTN rolling programme

2023/24

Climate emergency declared

Why kerbside now?

264km

138km

138km

51km

35km

What is the kerbside?

60% of households in Lambeth do not have access to a car

​

That’s over 81,000 households,

​

or 190,000 residents

​

Highlights from our year 1 deliver plan

• Borough wide micromobility network

​

• 200+ new BikeHangars

• Launch of parklet application process

• EV strategy launched

​

• Expand e-cargo bike hire to all high streets

​

​

• New design standard for street trees

​

• £6 million SUDS programme begins rollout

​

• Fees and charges linked to vehicle size and air quality

​

Centring disability in

sustainable mobility transitions

Dr Harrie Larrington-Spencer

Research Fellow, Active Travel Academy

h.larringtonspencer@westminster.ac.uk

@TricycleMayor

Riders on the storm:

How (and why) to cut traffic and boost sustainable alternatives without losing your head

​

Closing plenary

#Riders23

194

“You may remember that I'd been planning to get solar panels with the money I made/saved from selling the car. Well, it's finally happening!”

• Julia, Leeds

Michelle from London also sold her car:

Joe in Birmingham sold his car and swapped his wife’s car for an EV:

“it’s made us realise how life without a car could be achievable as a family.”

https://www.instagram.com/reel/CelE8RNPR90

Funmi from London says it has been life changing

Nathanael helping to spread the word about how traffic is holding up emergency vehicles

​

https://twitter.com/_wearepossible/status/1519692924887330816

​

One big pattern: its nearly always the same

​

Initial fears about potentially negative impacts from traffic reduction prove unfounded. Once in place and the benefits have been experienced, people don’t want to go back.

​

​

One big lesson: courage

​

The key to success is leaders who practice good communication, are courageous, tenacious and see things through

What’s next?

Riders on the storm | #Riders23

What’s next?

Riders on the storm | #Riders23

Hot Wheels: unsafe streets x unsafe work

Work with IWGB unionised food delivery riders to accelerate the switch to cleaner and safer ebikes, and to bring the voices of this road user group into public and policy discourse.

​

​

​

​

What’s next?

Riders on the storm | #Riders23

Clean cars for carers

Working with New Automotive to research the EV finance market today to find the barriers to carers accessing EV financing. Working with the Care Workers Charity to run surveys and focus groups with rural care workers, paying them to participate, and assessing their current attitudes towards and experience of EVs. We'll follow a rural care worker on a busy shift in their own car and film it. Support that carer through the process of trying to obtain finance to switch to an EV, recording all barriers encountered along the way. Identify and support a suitable ‘champion’ who could act as a media spokesperson. Lobby for change.

What’s next?

Riders on the storm | #Riders23

Feedback survey

Riders on the storm | #Riders23

If you are leaving us now, please take 5 minutes to fill in our feedback survey:

https://wearepossible.org/riders23-survey

​

​

​