Controversial traffic ban could be lifted today - as reports show increasing opposition
Ahead of the meeting, 70 Exeter researchers and educators have written an open letter warning that traffic problems are only getting worse
Exeter's controversial 'Low Traffic Neighbourhood' trial could be scrapped today.
It's after 82 per cent of people in the area said they oppose the trial restrictions on some vehicles - which aim to allow for safer walking and cycling - and a councillor was recently elected in Exeter who campaigned on the single issue of removing the LTN.
Drivers say it's increasing journey times and causing congestion elsewhere, while supporters claim it's led to increased active travel and people feeling more safe.
Ahead of today's vote, 70 Exeter-based researchers and academics have urged the committee to rely on what they call 'sound evidence” and not public pressure.
The agenda and pre-prepared reports for today's meeting can be found here
The letter adds that: “It seems clear that without active intervention, Exeter’s traffic problems and associated emissions will only continue to increase.”
Here is the letter in full:
Dear Councillors,
Please base your decisions on the Active Streets Trial on sound evidence.
We are a group of Exeter-based researchers and educators in a range of fields. We look at data, interpret it, and put them in a wider context; some of us use data to inform policy. We are also citizens and people who know from experience that evidence-based decision making can be hard and must not lose sight of those affected.
We are writing to urge you to ensure that decision-making around the Heavitree and Whipton Active Street Trial (AST) is soundly based on good-quality evidence, including reliable evidence on public views on the trial, and that the decision-making considers all citizens, current and future. We also urge that decisions remain consistent with existing policies that aim to protect citizens.
Both Devon County Council (DCC) and Exeter City Council (ECC) have declared a Climate Emergency in recognition of the threat posed by climate change to the citizens of Devon and Exeter. DCC have committed to facilitating the reduction of Devon’s carbon emissions to net-zero by 2050 at the latest and are taking a leading role in the Devon Carbon Plan. The Devon Carbon Plan has a clear ambition to increase active travel, stating:
“If we just substituted existing vehicles with electric and hydrogen alternatives and maintained our current behaviours, we would miss a once-in-a-generational opportunity to achieve the health and wellbeing benefits and transformational changes to our town and city centres that an increased use of active and public transport could bring. By making it easier and more attractive for everybody to use sustainable transport we will be more active, which will help address the obesity crisis, and air quality will be improved, helping reduce rates of respiratory and cardiovascular disease.”
Any decisions on the AST must therefore be taken with this established policy context in mind.
As noted in previous reports by DCC officials to HATOC, Low Traffic Neighbourhoods (LTNs) such as those being trialled in Heavitree and Whipton have been shown to be beneficial for reducing travel volumes. Further co-benefits include reductions in localised noise and air pollution and access to streets for children to play. And indeed, the data in the latest report to HATOC, and other data from the trial not highlighted in the report, already show beneficial effects in reducing traffic numbers and increasing cycling.
However, to properly assess the effect of the AST, it needs detailed consideration of its evolving impacts over time, not just averages which can give a false impression. Moreover, it needs time to fully take effect, especially since the initial implementation has been repeatedly sabotaged. It is crucial that the AST be continued for the full 18 months possible in order to allow proper evidence on its success in facilitating shifts in transport choices. In particular, it is critical that the results of the trial are not compromised by the traffic-reduction measures having been illegally removed or ignored, as has been the case for much of the trial period so far. The trial results can only be considered reliable when the traffic-reduction measures are properly in place and obeyed.
One possible impact of the AST is traffic on boundary roads. It is vital that all factors are taken into account when seeking to explain changes in traffic numbers, rather than automatically concluding that the AST is the only influence. Any changes during the trial period need to be looked at in the context of longer-term trends driven by other factors, particularly the ongoing increase in population within and near Exeter and the associated increase in commuter traffic into the city.
The recent consultation has resulted in a very large number of submissions, and as expected, included views on the benefits of the LTN as well as helping to identify concerns over unwanted side effects of the current implementation. We urge you to look at the data critically, and in particular, check whether feedback from individuals is supported by evidence. If they are, then ways to address them without losing sight of the original aims of the trial should be pursued. The consultation responses should feed into decision making in line with existing policy and evidence discussed above.
As it is local people who are affected, decision making needs to take into account views of the public, which include all forms of response, including support and opposition. This is not trivial to capture. There is much evidence from other LTNs and similar issues faced in local decision-making that consultation tends to only capture a small number of the most vocal opinions without truly reflecting the range of local opinions. Crucially, we note that the latest report to HATOC acknowledges its weaknesses in estimating the number of individuals who have responded and does not consider whether responses were from people affected by the scheme. Without a robust methodology behind it, it cannot be considered reliable as an indicator of public opinion. Hence we strongly suggest implementing rapid and rigorous collection of comprehensive information to inform any decision through tried and tested techniques to better understand and, importantly, quantify the impact on local people.
We suggest a deliberative process with a rigorous and independent collation of information, for example through a Citizen’s Jury