LTNs are back on the hit list in the Daily Mail today as features writer Louise Perry called for the "ill-conceived schemes" of the "Traffic Taliban" to be scrapped to "undo the anguish" they have caused...
Despite:
- A 2021 study showing road injuries were halved in low-traffic neighbourhoods when compared against areas without the schemes
- Transport for London analysis showing that LTNs in Hackney had not caused a rise in traffic on nearby main roads (and encouraged a quarter of residents to cycle more)
- Ambulance trusts saying the schemes, along with pop-up cycle lanes, did not slow their response times
Perry wrote that LTNs in south London were hitting businesses and residents, and cited Department for Transport figures which "reveal that LTNs have spectacularly backfired, actually increasing the total number of vehicles miles travelled".
> Highway Code changes: Daily Mail publishes "error-strewn" Richard Littlejohn column attacking cyclists
What the Department for Transport figures showed is that the total vehicle miles driven in ten inner London boroughs that introduced LTNs or equivalent schemes in 2020 rose by 11.4 per cent (an average of 41 million miles) in 2021 compared to 2020...
The two inner London boroughs that did not implement the schemes saw an average rebound of 29 million miles or 8.9 per cent. But are LTNs the sole reason for a traffic increase? The Department for Transport did not comment, The Times newspaper admitted "the figures do not prove a link between LTNs and more miles being driven".
> 10 of the most hysterical anti-cycling Daily Mail headlines
Anyway, Perry's "Traffic Taliban" column goes on to suggest families in London have to drive, and cycling with children, in a cargo bike for example, would be "nearly impossible" and you would be "lucky" to have a bus going where you want to go...(apparently)...
Commenting on similar schemes in Oxford, Perry writes:
Oxford politics has always been skewed by the presence of its two large universities.
During term time, almost a quarter of Oxford adult residents are full-time students — the overwhelming majority of whom are childless, able-bodied, and not looking after elderly or disabled relatives. Of course these young adults are going to be in favour of the council's war on cars, particularly when it's presented as a woke, eco-friendly endeavour.
They can virtue-signal without any cost to themselves. But across the country, these measures are causing so widespread misery, dividing neighbourhoods and only making traffic worse.
Now that we have proof that they do not achieve their environmental aims, councils across the country must think again. It's time to scrap these ill-conceived schemes — and undo the anguish they have caused to so many.