Low Traffic Neighbourhoods (LTNs) are schemes designed to significantly reduce vehicular traffic on residential streets. Temporary or permanent barriers are implemented to prevent vehicles from using the streets as shortcuts (a practice known colloquially as ‘rat running’), however, access to the street is maintained for local residents, emergency services, walking, and cycling.
The UK Government invested £2 billion in making it safer for people to walk, cycle, or wheel for essential trips and exercise during the Covid-19 pandemic. This involved pop-up bike lanes with protected space for cycling, wider pavements, safer junctions, and cycle and bus-only corridors across England – many measures of which have remained in place since the effects of the pandemic have receded.
Although they have become more widespread in the last three years, LTNs are not a new feature in our towns and cities. One of the first in the UK was De Beauvoir Square in Hackney, created in the early 1970s to make residential streets safer for children. Continuing this theme, Hackney Council approved plans in January 2023 to make three quarters of its borough low traffic. It’s no real surprise that Hackney and LTNs go hand-in-hand, having been hailed as the ‘cycling capital of London’ after 2011 Census data revealed more residents used bikes than cars to get to work. But is it a chicken and egg situation? That’s a discussion for another time!
LTNs can be contentious matter, particularly concerning the residents living on the affected streets. Some of the more wide-spread arguments against LTNs are that they:
- Disproportionality benefit privileged people by pushing traffic (and in turn, increase air pollution) onto already busy roads which typically have lower house prices, and likewise cycling tends to be skewed towards certain demographics;
- Disadvantage disabled people who are more likely to be heavily reliant on cars or taxis and struggle to move through narrow spaces;
- Slow down emergency services responding to incidents; and
- Are bad for local businesses by inhibiting customers’ ability to arrive by car.
A possible workaround for issues with physical barriers (such as blocking taxis and emergency services) is enforcement through use of automatic number plate (ANPR) cameras – a practice commonly used to enforce bus lane restrictions. This has been implemented in a number of London Boroughs including Ealing, where the council switched a number of sites from physical barriers to camera enforcement after criticism of their failure initially to consult with emergency services. In January 2021, it was reported that the council had issued close to 6,000 Penalty Charge Notices since they started camera enforcement of LTN restrictions in December 2020. Ealing Council states that income from penalty charge notices (PCNs) is ring-fenced and used to pay for the borough road safety and traffic management measures and concessionary travel schemes. On the other hand, in 2021, Ealing also chose to remove 7 LTNs due to public backlash. No study was made of those LTNs and it is not clear what impact they were generating – positive or negative – prior to their removal.
There is clearly much debate over the value of LTNS, with much of the discussion centred around what happens to the traffic when one is installed. Does it simply move onto other roads? Until recently, analysis has typically covered individual schemes which can be substantially affected by other local factors, such as roadworks, building or utility works.
Two years ago (almost one year into the pandemic), a study by Redfield & Wilton Strategies of 1,500 Londoners reported that 46% of respondents believed that LTNs redirect cars to other roads, whilst 29% believed that they reduce the overall number of cars on London’s road (and 25% said they don’t know). Perhaps unsurprisingly, 63% of those who said they live in an LTN ‘agreed’ or ‘strongly agreed’ that is has improved their lives. This begs the questions: do LTNs really result in increased traffic on other roads, or is this a misconception?
A study published in January 2023 by ‘Possible’ (link opens google doc), a UK based climate charity working toward a zero-carbon society, provides analysis of local authority data on changes in motor traffic inside and on boundary roads of 46 LTNs introduced between May 2020 and May 2021 in 11 London boroughs. This research paper presents the first systematic review of motor traffic volume changes associated with LTNs in London.
The results suggest that LTNs have substantially reduced motor traffic on internal streets without having much impact on motor traffic on boundary roads, and other evidence suggests such reductions may then increase walking and cycling. However, many of the boundary roads may still be polluted, unsafe, and/or difficult to cross or cycle on and require improvements. The research paper concludes:
“Realising the potential benefits of LTNs may also depend on improving [boundary] roads, which often represent severance for continuing pedestrian journeys or parts of cycle routes which are off-putting to most potential riders.”
The key takeaways in my opinion are:
- We should support the aim of what LTNs are trying to achieve – a reduction in traffic and congestion and making streets safter and more pleasant for residents and others passing through;
- Research tells us that LTNs do not necessarily increase traffic on boundary roads, but there needs to be more opportunities for feedback on their ‘success’ from local residents and vulnerable groups;
- There needs to be careful consideration for the location and design of LTNs to ensure that pathways are wide enough for pushchairs, wheelchairs and non-standard cycles and kept clear of street clutter, that dropped kerbs aren’t blocked and they don’t create excessively long routes;
- Enforcement of LTNs through ANPR cameras can alleviate some of the issues surrounding the use of physical barriers, but signage needs to be carefully considered and revenue from PCNs should be reinvested into traffic management measures and measures to improve walking and cycling on boundary roads; and
- Design-led measures focusing on the experiences of people using the space and to improve accessibility by active travel modes and disabled users above vehicles should always be considered at the outset for new developments, rather than trying to retrofit.
Delivery of LTNS, and perhaps more importantly, how they are percieved by the general public remains a complex balancing act, and there are many questions still be be answered. However, it does appear that the more LTNs are implemented, the more opinion creeps towards acceptance.
