Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
• First evidence of residents’ perceptions of low traffic neighbourhoods (LTNs) in Oxford, UK. • Demonstrates moderate support for LTNs among residents living in the case neighbourhood. • Reveals attitudes to LTNs are divergent and nuanced and largely based on household circumstances. • Suggests how decision makers could foster more widespread acceptability of LTNs. The adoption of Low Traffic Neighbourhoods (LTNs) is a recent traffic management approach to removing motorised through-traffic from residential streets in the UK by strategically blocking roads using bollards and planters but allowing passage of walkers and cyclists and other micro-mobilities including electric scooters. Critics of LTNs argue that such schemes hinder mobility and force motor traffic onto LTN boundary roads resulting in increased congestion and traffic pollution. Supporters of LTNs highlight the wider benefits to the community such as improved road safety and environmental quality through less motor traffic and the potential to encourage more people to walk and cycle for short journeys; increased opportunity for social interaction among neighbours; and the ability of children to play out in the street. Focusing on the city of Oxford, UK, this paper provides an insight into residents’ perceptions of LTNs through a social survey of households in the most recent ‘East Oxford LTNs’. Our results show that the East Oxford LTNs are generally supported, and their impact regarded as largely positive. However, this support is nuanced and masks complexity of opinion. We suggest that, to facilitate more widespread acceptance, government should pay attention to sequencing of local authority LTN programmes within the context of wider interventions to support a transition to sustainable travel. Local authorities could also be supported in developing more effective communication strategies and in facilitating participatory planning programmes for communities wishing to get involved in street experiments and placemaking (particularly along boundary roads).
Jones et al. (Sat,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: