CoMoUK’s Senior Policy and Advocacy Officer Matthew Ledbury takes a personal look at the delivery of Low Traffic Neighbourhood schemes, and what they tell us about changing individual travel behaviour.
The urban street I live in has seen a profound change in recent months. Despite being purely residential, it suffered from heavy traffic due to it being a convenient cut-through between two arterial roads. Many drivers would speed through, keen to take advantage of a brief bit of open tarmac. Step off the pavement without carefully looking in the distance either way and you might suddenly find yourself having to make a speedy retreat.
All that changed when the street became part of a Low Traffic Neighbourhood (LTN) trial area in May. Planters and bollards appeared, creating new ‘filters’ aimed at stopping through-traffic of cars and vans. The noise of accelerating engines was replaced with the grinding of gears from cars performing three-point turns as they sought other routes. The gentle ‘whoosh’ from increasing numbers of bicycles suddenly became audible, as did the chatter of people walking down the street. Newer features appeared, such as parents teaching young children to ride their bikes in the road, or housefitters using the road surface to cut carpets and assemble furniture. The street quickly became what residential streets should be: a public area open to a range of uses, and not just a thoroughfare for traffic and a parking area for private vehicles.
The overwhelming majority of drivers have adapted their travel patterns in response to the new filters. But of course, not everyone approves of the trial. Drivers who believe that the payment of VED and fuel tax entitles them to drive through everywhere object to the new restrictions. Some local businesses have pleaded that anything that impedes the ‘freedom’ of drivers threatens their viability. Residents who had built their life around their use of the private car suddenly find that they are having to replan familiar journeys that may take longer than previously.
A war of attrition has developed between those who support the trial and those who are still prepared to openly flaunt any restrictions. Bendable plastic bollards (as can be seen in the photo above) were installed to allow emergency service vehicles to drive over them when necessary, but have been rapidly abused by drivers who realised that they too can drive over them. Bollards can also be wrenched out of their fittings, either to be left lying by the side of the road until someone puts them back, or driven off and dumped sometimes several miles away. Petty vandalism, such as ripping out flowers in the planters put there just to brighten up the street, has also abounded.
The problem is compounded by a lack of enforcement measures: the police have been unwilling to take action, arguing it is the local council’s responsibility to deal with the fallout, while the council has pleaded lack of funds, staff and powers. Meanwhile, the failure to tackle repeated vandalism has meant those who think it is acceptable continue to act with a sense of impunity. It has been left to local residents who want to see the scheme work to become the unofficial enforcers, retrieving bollards when they go missing and on occasions acting as ‘human bollards’ to prevent drivers passing through filters.
All this serves as a reminder that however much change is needed, some people are very reluctant to adjust embedded travelling habits that they have spent their lives building up. If the UK is going to meet its net zero targets, then making changes to how we travel needs to accelerate rapidly. But planning is key: opposition needs to be anticipated, genuine concerns listened to, and communication clear to help support people during a process of adjustment. Perhaps most importantly, changes need to be seen as part of a coherent plan. The stick of restricting car usage needs to be clearly tied to alternative carrots such as bike, car, scooter share schemes, public transport and good walking and cycling routes, possibly helped by the use of ‘mobility credits’ to encourage take-up.
Without incentives, too much energy can be taken up just dealing with the impacts of those who refuse to vary their approach and insist on continuing to travel as they always have. Quite apart from the climate impact, this is a shame – because, as anyone who lives in a Low Traffic Neighbourhood knows, they are a success at making streets much nicer to live in. LTNs can help end the domination of our roads by motor vehicles and are part of our transport future. We need more of them – just not with plastic bollards.
