- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Cotham Hill LTN in Bristol (picture Adwitiya Pal)LTNs and 15-minute cities accused of being led by cycling lobbies, official review called a “whitewash”
Over 14,000 people have signed a petition calling for an “independent” review of LTNs, which will now be led by Active Travel Academy’s Professor Rachel Aldred, leading to claims that it will declare them successful in a ‘whitewash report’, while another petition has asked for a national referendum for implementing 15-minute cities amidst reports of Oxford Council ‘covering up’ risky data.
Prof Aldred of University of Westminster, who has more than 15 years of experience researching active travel, has been appointed by the Department of Transport (DfT) to “undertake an independent evaluation of active travel schemes funded in 2020/21, including low-traffic neighbourhoods”.
However, people have complained to the petitions committee that Prof Aldred has a track record of supporting the creation of cycling infrastructure and LTNs and so the review will not be independent, The Telegraph reports.
The newspaper, which was recently condemned for using divisive rhetoric such as ‘death traps’ without any evidence, said that it has seen letters that highlight how Prof Aldred was a director and elected trustee of the London Cycling Campaign (LCC) for six years, and that she had proclaimed her “work has helped shift perceptions among policymakers”.
Prof Aldred has been previously involved in authoring several peer-reviewed and published researches, as well as reports and studies for organisations and the government that claim that that LTNs help “overall traffic evaporation” both inside and outside the LTNs.
A spokesman for the Department for Transport, which has allocated £171,916 for the review, said: “All independent research is commissioned through a competitive process, in line with strict Government guidance. Once research has been conducted, policy decisions will ultimately be for ministers to take.”
The Telegraph reported that one of the letters sent to the petitions committee and Mark Harper, the Transport Secretary, accuses Prof Aldred of “clearly setting out to present LTNs as a success, even though the evidence on the ground suggests otherwise,” adding that “this will be seen as a whitewash and [be] widely repudiated.”
Another letter claimed that pretending Prof Aldred’s unit was conducting an independent review of the Government LTN policy was “one of the worst cases of being allowed to mark one’s own homework.”
The hilarious petition doing the rounds asking for an independent review of LTNs is backfiring spectacularly! Not only has the Government appointed independent University of Westminster to do the review but areas with longstanding or the most LTNs are remarkably resistant. pic.twitter.com/xmNEixgFK9
— DerekDidIt (@DerekDidIt) March 8, 2023
Similar concerns of pro-cycling policies being led by cycling lobbies were raised this year in January, when The Telegraph reported that cycling charity Sustrans was paid £200,000 for consulting on two controversial LTNs in Haringey, north London.
During the consultation, Sustrans allegedly did not speak to businesses on the High Street. Cllr Mike Hakata, the deputy leader of Haringey Council, said: “We are launching a business survey soon, and I’d strongly encourage the Myddleton Road traders to take the opportunity to have their say again.”
However, residents soon spoke about the benefits of the LTN. One mother wrote on a local news website: “Walking with the kids, we can hear birdsong and leaves rustling in the trees. The air smells fresh, and it’s so calm and peaceful. It’s like being in the countryside, except we’re in London. In the park I meet a woman who tells me she’s delighted not to have lorries thundering past her home, and she'll finally get another cat - her last two were killed by drivers outside her house.
“But it’s seeing my five-year-old daughter be able to ride her bike on the road that really brings it home,” she added. “‘I’ve been waiting for this for so long,’ she tells me. She happily rides to the park on the road, singing away.”
I appreciate new LTN’s can cause all sorts of upheaval at the beginning, but as someone who does a cycling commute through Haringey, it’s been so nice to discover an alternative route to lots of Green Lanes.
Lovely quiet streets that feel safe, with lots to see. I rode … 1/3 pic.twitter.com/x8krIPgSom
— Carla Francome (@carlafrancome) November 17, 2022
Accusations of pro-cycling policymakers don’t end here though. The Telegraph recently reported that “left-wing” council officials in Oxford “covered-up” data that could potentially put the 15-minute city plan in jeopardy.
The council provided a summary report during the official survey, which said modelling estimates show the scheme “will reduce traffic flows by around around 20 per cent within the city inside the ring road, and around 35 per cent in the city centre” but “increase total traffic flows by around three per cent on the ring road”.
However, The Telegraph claims that it has obtained the full results now which shows that traffic will increase in eight of 19 locations modelled, and its speed will stay the same or decrease in all but one of these areas – some of which are already controversial low-traffic neighbourhoods (LTNs).
A petition, which already has 13,000 signatures, has been launched by a Lewisham resident (who regularly tweets “LTNs don’t work”) calling for a “legally binding national referendum on whether any local authority should be able to implement a 15-minute city policy”.
The petition reads: “People need to be given the choice about whether or not they want these policies to be implemented in their areas. We believe it's far too important for the people not to be allowed to vote on these policies before they are implemented!”
However, a 2022 survey found that majority of people in different parts of Oxfordshire wanted “remarkably similar” amenities within their neighbourhood, such as GPs, cafes, pubs, banks, gyms, parks and so on, serving as a foundation for the 15-minute city policy that aims to provide these within walking distance to the residents.
> Tory MP attacks 15-minute city concept with known conspiracy theory
However, despite the council repeatedly clearing that there would be no physical barriers, nor would residents be confined to their local areas or need permission to travel across the city, several groups like Not Our Future and the Together Declaration have come forward to protest these developments.
The Oxfordshire Council, in response, has said that an internal review this month found the information provided was “sufficient and appropriate” and complied with the Gunning Principles of how local councils should engage residents.
Adwitiya joined road.cc in 2023 as a news writer after graduating with a masters in journalism from Cardiff University. His dissertation focused on active travel, which soon threw him into the deep end of covering everything related to the two-wheeled tool, and now cycling is as big a part of his life as guitars and football. He has previously covered local and national politics for Voice Wales, and also likes to writes about science, tech and the environment, if he can find the time. Living right next to the Taff trail in the Welsh capital, you can find him trying to tackle the brutal climbs in the valleys.
Latest Comments
- wtjs 4 hours 57 min ago
it seems that most places just rely on sufficient policing to reduce the issue...
- Matt Page 5 hours 41 min ago
Many manufacturers, including Scribe, can give you methods to reduce the noise level. On Scribe, and other ratchet designs it's usually just adding...
- wtjs 6 hours 19 min ago
It wouldn't work at all where wtjs lives...
- Sriracha 6 hours 36 min ago
Pretty sure AI could skim through hours of footage in a few seconds to identify suspicious events. Of course someone in authority has to care in...
- chrisonabike 6 hours 44 min ago
Bonsai samurai? Or is it just a case of "they seem to get smaller every year"?
- IanGlasgow 7 hours 46 min ago
Sorry to see Endura struggling. They're based in Linvignston, not Edinburgh, which puts them very close to where I grew up....
- mdavidford 9 hours 27 min ago
I dunno - seems like it's coming round on a regular basis...
- Rich_cb 11 hours 9 min ago
The mistake is to focus on the US....
- chrisonabike 11 hours 21 min ago
I mean it seems silly to complain in detail when we're firmly in the territory in the UK of "you will have to live with this the rest of your life ...
- eburtthebike 13 hours 52 min ago
I thought students were supposed to be intelligent?
Add new comment
86 comments
So what we need is someone who's an acknowledged expert in their subject, having devoted their career to spending many decades researching it, but who hasn't yet managed to form an opinion about it one way or the other. Well they should be two a penny.
And if you do find one, they immediately become biased once they have completed the impartial study and come to an educated conclusion that isn't the one that an anti road safety in residential areas believer wants ie LTNs are always bad.
Almost every modern estate follows the principles of how an LTN works by incorporating cul-de-sacs and non-straight roads to keep speeds appropriate to a residential area
"We want an independent review. And we want its result to be <this>."
"The independent reviewers keep finding out that I am wrong. It can't possibly be because I am wrong, it must be that the independent reviewers aren't independent."
This is, unfortunately, how consipracy theories survive. People who refuse to change their opinions in the face of contradictory evidence come up with wild explanations for that evidence's existence.
Those big, bad, evil cycling lobbies are at it again, are they? We need an investigation into how many MPs have £10,000-per-day second jobs with Sustrans or the CTC. Perhaps Piers Corbyn, Billy Piper's ex, and that mad one who used to do programmes about coastlines could set up a sting operation. But then that'd take them away from their current grifts.
I have to admit I did not parse this correctly on my first reading.
My fault for using the Oxford comma. I'd apologize to Billy Piper, but I think there's very little in it between the two as to whom would be more embarrassing to have as a former spouse.
You could have written that without the comma and it would still be grammatically correct.
It's amazing the lengths some people will go to in an attempt to stop something like nicer streets for people because they just have to drive absolutely everywhere, whenever they want (and anyone else has to live with the consequences).
I'd suggest that an appropriate response to the burning of LTN planters etc is to install more permanent structures with bollards and high kerbs. Plus CCTV and rewards offered for evidence that identifies the vandals.
Or perhaps a kind of quid pro quo - people living in an LTN whose infrastructure is damaged are then allowed to smash the windows and slash the tyres of every vehicle blocking a footway.
Chris Evans? Didn't know he was a right wing twat.
Guy's gotta have a hobby for when he's not running around in spandex saving the world.
Minor thing - but Dr Aldred was 'upgraded' a few years ago to Prof. Aldred. The article flits between the two. Maybe she has more authority as a Prof? In which case, I look forwards to her opponents calling her Miss Aldred.
Maybe get someone from Shell for balance? Although, they must now be seen as biased with one of them on the board of Active Travel England.
And reports produced by the AA, Association of British Drivers, Road Haulage Association and the like aren't biased in the other direction??
I'm not sure its entirely fair lumping the AA in with the other loons. Arent they pretty reasonable for a motor-centric organisation. Or am I thinking of the RAC?
Certainly Edmund King, AA president, makes some very encouraging noises about increasing cycle provision and the need to cut out short journeys by car. They are generally anti-LTN though.
It's almost as though in the grand scheme of things there are large number of "road users" who drive and cycle, or even use public transport, depending on which is the most suitable. Who'd a thunk it!
Still waiting on the referendum about putting more & more vehicles on the roads every year (roads that the car industry doesn't seem to have to cough up towards) and using hitherto residential streets as part of the mainstream urban transport network. Guess that'll have been the cycling lobby at work again as per....
still waiting for the referendum on turning over public space on the roads into private storage space for vehicles.
I would ban all overnight parking on the roads, stopping on the road to visit is OK, but cars left on the highway at all times should stop. If every car has off road parking avaialble for overnight, it would spend most of the time there.
Also waiting for some action on the consultation on the annexing of pavements by drivers for the storage of their property. Since the consultation clearly came down strongly against tolerating pavement parking, but the government is too scared of the motor lobby to action it.
Totally agree. My two neighbours opposite have three cars each. First thing they both did when moving in was to convert their garages into utility/ storage rooms, so now we mostly have six cars parked on a very narrow road all the time. This is on a newly built estate.
Thats how it works in Japan - no overnight on street parking - you will get towed and heavily fined if you do. If you live in a city you have to prove you have a parking space before you are allowed to buy a car. This limits car ownership in the more densly populated areas where there is excellent public transport and allows for car ownership in the rural areas where public transport is not so prevalent.
That sounds like a good idea to me. I think it should be a thing on new estates to not allow on road parking overnight.
one of my ex neighbours had their house up for sale and the Estate Agent put large amount of off road parking available as part of the selling details. To which my reaction was shame they never flipping bothered to use any of it then.
I know - I think most people seem to think the road in front of their house belongs to them. I don't understand it.
"Dr Aldred of University of Westminster, who has more than 15 years of experience researching active travel...
....However, people have complained to the petitions committee that Prof Aldred has a track record of supporting the creation of cycling infrastructure and LTNs and so the review will not be independent."
Just because someone who actually studies urban transportation recommends the adoption of LTNs and active cycle infrastructure does not mean that they are biased, it means that might actually know what they are talking about.
Which is exactly what they are worried about.
Maybe the reason that Dr Aldred tends towards a certain outcome is that LTNs and 15-minute schemes are generally successful. There's plenty of examples of them being successful in other cities and over long time periods, so it's reasonable to think that they should be successful here if they're implemented correctly (that "if" is doing a lot of lifting).
If the Torygraph has evidence that Dr Aldred has been hiding data or willfully misinterpreting outcomes, then they should present that data rather than just trying to label her as being impartial and biased. It's a classic tactic of attacking the person rather than the data.
If she has previously been involved in campaigning for LTNs then it's not unreasonable to question her objectivity.
Compare and contrast to the scepticism that you expressed towards Shell having a board seat at Active Travel England.
The Oxford modelling story is also a bit more complex than road.cc are making out. An excerpt is attached.
The modelling showed a very large increase in traffic (>50%) on some roads but the councillors made an active decision not to release it until after the consultation closed.
Again, it's not unreasonable to question their motives for doing so.
I do agree to some extent, but I think the Torygraph is not acting in good faith with questioning her objectivity.
A lot of people working with active travel are not going to be strictly objective, but that doesn't mean that they are twisting results - mainly because they really don't need to as the results tend to be clear and certainly leaving things as they are is causing significant health problems for the population.
I'm not convinced that comparing her to a Shell Chairman (Chairperson?) is valid as Shell have a history of knowingly acting against the population's interests for many decades in the pursuit of profit. I don't think the same level of suspicion is justified for Dr Aldred as I doubt that she's making huge amounts of money for pushing an agenda and there doesn't seem to be any evidence that she has been skewing the statistics to support her position.
Meanwhile, there does seem to be evidence that the Torygraph is deliberately pushing an anti-cycling, anti-active-transport agenda that does go against the evidence (i.e. cycling and active transport are a net positive to society).
If the evidence is clear cut then an objective analysis would reveal that.
By appointing someone with a clear conflict of interest they are undermining the results before they are even published.
Bearing in mind that Sustrans was apparently paid £200,000 for consulting on 2 LTNs there is likely be significant remuneration for this study.
Why give the conspiracy theorists ammunition unnecessarily?
I don't believe that she has a clear conflict of interest. What payments does she receive for publishing an outcome one way or another? Does she hold shares in shoe companies or cycle companies? Does her employer depend on transforming streets for its profit?
Meanwhile, here's a simple search on FullFact.org for various untruths that the Torygraph has published:
https://fullfact.org/search/?q=telegraph#gsc.tab=0&gsc.q=telegraph&gsc.page=1
I'll also add that anyone that enjoys breathing clean air could be said to not be objective about LTNs. I don't think that absolute, strict objectivity is needed when there's people dying from poor air quality and extremely wealthy companies are pushing to have it continue.
Pages