Forum Topic

LTNs cut daily driving by 1.3km

New research shows that LTNs reduce resident driving by 6% in a year.More good news. LTNs work and they are really popular. https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/245315/low-traffic-neighbourhoods-london-daily-driving/

Paul Campbell ● 228d62 Comments

Love to see a bit of doubling down but what's hateful to a snowflake isn't the same as libellous now is it.

Mark Talbot ● 227d

Screenshots of hateful Twitter timelines are not easily deleted though ....

Paul Campbell ● 227d

And posts on this forum can't just be deleted that easily unlike the all too regular occurrences on X.

Mark Talbot ● 227d

Topic: Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:LTNs cut daily driving by 1.3km Posted by: Paul CampbellDate/Time: 11/07/24 21:15:00

Richard Greenhough ● 227d

Someone has just pointed out to me that Campbell has made a libellous claim about me.  Waiting for them to specify where it is as I don't read his unpleasant mendacious posts.  If anyone can give me insight, that will be good and then I can get the lawyers onto it - thanks.

Claire Moran ● 227d

I hear what you are saying but, because he is a narcissist, it doesn’t sink in. He is just like Donald Trump. A trough pig feeding off peoples attention. If he doesn’t get attention he sinks into depression.

Steve Taylor ● 227d

Because he continues to bite and ridicule himself Steve.

Mark Talbot ● 227d

Why are people still responding to the village idiot. Just because he has no friends doesn’t mean you have to indulge him!

Steve Taylor ● 227d

🎣🎣🎣

Mark Talbot ● 227d

Just saying it how it is

Paul Campbell ● 227d

Boy oh boy,i seriously wonder at times Its a simple reply from me,dont you ever give up.

Julian Pavey ● 227d

Well yes really. I regularly meet local people in pubs and nobody has ever mentioned you or any of these other obsessive personality types from the forum. Councillors yes. I guess the people I socialise with don’t consider people here to be of any import while the embunkered minority car lobby has got a little bit too obsessed and enamoured with campaigners for safer streets.

Paul Campbell ● 227d

"One person on here is sometimes mentioned around the table in the pub and they dont even get involved on here." "Julian told me he talks about me in the pub today on this forum" Ive told you nothing,and i dont talk about you in the pub either. I said one person is sometimes mentioned in the pub,and they dont get involved on here. That is other people mentioning people or someone on here,not myself. But they bring it up as they know i post on here. Just for the record. Mind you,is one at all surprised that non perticipating forum people read posts on here and mention and maybe laugh a bit from time to time about what goes down on here in the pub.

Julian Pavey ● 227d

Mark, I respond to you on this platform because you are an excellent pantomime villain of the car lobby. And as Julian Pavey has pointed out lots of local people read this forum including the people who make the decisions on LTNs and cycle lanes. You are incapable of controlling your compulsion to respond to my posts. Your boastful claims of careless and carefree driving and your general waft of a liberal splashing of Brut are very helpful and I strongly encourage you to keep up your good form.

Paul Campbell ● 227d

Thanks as well Michael for replying to my question to Paul.

Andrew Jones ● 227d

Thanks for that Paul - At least I can now appreciate why some people (residing in LTNs) might choose to make fewer short car journeys as a result of the reduction in cars driving within their LTN.

Andrew Jones ● 227d

Blocks on X yet always responds (not answers) my posts, often within minutes and the calls me fixated, not quite comedy gold but very funny all the same. Spent enough time with my car burning around the Midlands yesterday thanks and the Mrs is away so I'll keep fishing and you keep biting Paul, great sport.

Mark Talbot ● 227d

Yes, but no one speaks of you or about you as a matter of course save that they do so  for the reasons posted.

N V Brooks ● 227d

Julian told me he talks about me in the pub today on this forum. It is your friend Simon who has rightly highlighted the fact that we all harm others when we choose to drive. I agree with him. There are no consequence-free choices in life not least when starting a car. It is something everybody should be as conscious of as Simon so we can make more responsible choices.

Paul Campbell ● 227d

The poor little narcissist think that people discuss his toot away from the forum as a matter of course. This only happens when he is discussed as an object of ridicule or pity.Got to love his bodice-wrenching hypocricy of feelingguilty when he make the decision to drive. Give up your car and save yourself the angst.

N V Brooks ● 227d

Ladt comment goes for Julian Pavey and any other loser who is wasting time talking abut me when they should be having fun together in a pub.

Paul Campbell ● 227d

Mark, blocking haters and losers is a very sensible thing to do on social media because it is full of them and they suck the oxygen out of life and any discussion. I know I hurt you by blocking you from my fun, interesting and engaging Active Travel feed on X but there are three reasons I block people on that platform:1. They are racists, Islampahobes, hompophobes, or winning House in all three and more in Bigot Bingo every day like Claire Moran or Maggie Dodge2. They are obviously fake troll accounts from Russian troll farms3. They are developing an unhealthy fixation on me which I can see becoming problematic for them I have told you before that it is reason number 3 why I blocked you and that is why I have asked you if you tell your wife or your car how much of your time you spend thinking about me. It is in your own interest as I think an intervention would be helpful for you.

Paul Campbell ● 227d

"Only in the social media echo chambers of people ....." quoted from an earlier post has to be by far the funniest statement by a country mile of anything written today by anyone. Being from the prolific Paul "Blocker" Campbell who's worldy views are gathered from a narrow tunnel vision echo chamber created on X by blocking anyone who disagrees with him is comedy gold. The utter irony of the statement is there to behold, literally can't stop laughing. More please more.

Mark Talbot ● 227d

The people being obtuse are those who try to suggest that every choice to use a motor vehicle for a journey in London is made out of necessity. You were right to point out that every time we choose to drive we choose to be a worse person.

Paul Campbell ● 227d

I never read skidmark Campbell’s posts because I have noted in the past that he  spouts unadulterated drivel. I am surprised that anyone bothers to respond to him anymore.  I haven’t read a single post on this thread but am amazed at the number of responses. Why do you bother to feed his ego? He is just a narcissistic old man.

Steve Taylor ● 227d

You are being very obtuse. Most people don’t drive a lot. They drive when necessary and for any number of reasons.What is obvious is that there are a lot of people in London. Many of them drive, often for economic reasons, and that’s why there’s traffic. A lot of it is commercial or private hire vehicles (which are privately owned cars of course) keeping the capital’s economy moving. The tiny proportion of cycling that contributes to business is insignificant.You do come across as rather desperate and rather stupid.

Simon Hayes ● 227d

Of course I am. We all do every time we choose to drive. We are choosing to impose the negative consequences of our choice of mode of travel on everyone around us and on society in general. I’m glad the penny is very very slowly dropping for the people who choose to do that a lot when they could choose something else and be a better person more often.

Paul Campbell ● 227d

Of course idiot Campbell takes his own car out when it suits him. I do hope he’s not endangering the lives of other londoners and negatively impacting their health as he does so.

Simon Hayes ● 227d

>Andrew Dinsmore who was dropping leaflets through my door threatening the safety and health of my family.Is this more bonkers nonsense or did you report him to the police?

Russell Pearson ● 227d

Russ the reason nobody knows what you are talking about is because you are incapable of writing a coherent sentence. If I am generous it is probably because you are so afraid of revealing just how niche and wacko your belief system is. Remember I saw your Twitter timeline before you deleted it after we had a little chat online about why parked cars get hit by passing cars more often on rat runs than in LTNs. As Bannon as any I’ve seen. I’d say that inadequate Incels asserting intellectual or any other kind of superiority over Tom Pike is an unbeatable example of Dunning Kruger.

Paul Campbell ● 227d

Anyway serious answer to Claire’s question. This is an important moment. We have just seen an entire hierarchy of pro-driver politicians ditched by the electorate after setting out their stall on anti-safer streets and anti-clean air policies. At the national level the Tories and Mark Draper, “not the Minister for trains” and “on the side of drivers” with his Plan for Drivers sitting at home watching daytime television in his underpants. Greg Hands and Felicity Buchan fiercely anti-LTN and anti-cycle lane kicked out of their Kensington MP positions and replaced with pro Active Travel Labour MPs Ben Coleman and Joe Powell respectively. Andy Slaughter batting away Andrew Dinsmore who was dropping leaflets through my door threatening the safety and health of my family. Tony Devenish, West Central London Assembly Member and huge opponent of anything that might slightly inconvenience a driver, booted out and replaced with James Small-Edwards (son of Heather Small and Shaun Edwards interestingly) and proponent of Active Travel. Ronnie Mushiso going to succeed Tory Nick Rogers as South West AM in a pro-driver and anti-ULEZ campaign lost and moping around in his flat in Heston. And for London anti-ULEZ anti-LTN anti-cycling apotheosis of the Onesie Susan Hall beaten by Sadiq Khan. So worth reminding everybody and especially our newly elected pro-safer streets politicians that LTNs are both popular and successful and get that foot firmly planted on the throats of the noisy minority of entrenched opponents. The anti-LTN movement is dead and I’ll enjoy my fun poking its few remaining proponents while I can thanks 👍

Paul Campbell ● 227d

The sexism accusation is chimera. Exactly the same points were made to his pal Pike about science and the social. The fact he’s not even aware of what this means is yet more evidence of ‘unconscious incompetence’.

Russell Pearson ● 227d

Seems to bother you. From my viewpoint, a flawed data methodology is overarching. Those citing it and then trying to cover their mistake with claims of sexism simply expose the paucity of argument in their position. Doesn't matter a jot if she is Rachel or Richard or whatever, wrong is wrong.

N V Brooks ● 227d

It’s yourself I’m taking to be the fool. Her writings on Benjamin were quite astute, hence saying she should know better.

Russell Pearson ● 227d

I’m fairly certain that if she was a man with a doctorate and a distinguished academic and science career Russ would be a little more circumspect in his criticism. A clever award-winning woman seems to be a real trigger for Incels.

Paul Campbell ● 227d

Why does it bother you what I post? You don’t read my posts remember? 😂

Paul Campbell ● 227d

Great summary Justin, thank you.

Mark Talbot ● 227d

This report is old news, I am sure it has been discussed before in this forum.The report shows correlation between LTN and reduction in driving but makes no effort to establish causation (admittedly that would be difficult and involve interviewing a lot of people).  The "near LTN" group is defined as <200m from a LTN boundary, although this is a common definition I have yet to see why it is used.  There is nothing special about 200m as opposed to 300m or more, what counts as near LTN will vary from LTN depending on the road layouts and likely direction of traffic.Then there is the issue that over half of the sample of cars within LTNs were excluded for various reasons.  This could massively skew the data or not - we have no idea.  Without any findings on causation backed by actual evidence from the relevant car owners the report is interesting but not particularly important

Justin Stephenson ● 228d

Every time Colonel Bellend uncritically calls her a scientist I’m reminded of the Dunning-Kruger effect. At least she’s read her Frankfurt School, and knows the pitfalls of Jonny Instrumental Reason.

Russell Pearson ● 228d

😅

Janice Evans ● 228d

Even a toddler would see through the crap that he posts. I have twin grandchildren aged three who would give him a run for his money.

N V Brooks ● 228d

They have an unhealthy desire to control others, think they mighthave more success if they open a crèche.

Janice Evans ● 228d

I suppose you could add narcissistic, to ageist, disabled-shaming, evasive and misogynist. What a catch he must have been for someone. That said, it would the first time that he is playing with a full deck (of prejudices).

N V Brooks ● 228d

Does Campbell still think he can brainwash us with his utter c**p?  Why does he do it?  He knows it's nonsense.  We know it's nonsense.  And still the obsessed one persists, driven by God knows what.  Seeing his name in print?

Claire Moran ● 228d

I don't need the tiny minority of entrenched opponents of LTNs to swallow anything. I don't care what you think about respected scientists and nor do they. Nobody actually expects you to be able to process information that counters your prejudices. The people absorbing studies like this are the people who will be rolling out the LTNs across the country in the coming years. Starting with the Hounslow Cabinet on Tuesday. They now know that LTNs have local support and are very successful.Nobody needs the permission of car supremacists to make our streets safer and quieter and our air cleaner.

Paul Campbell ● 228d

Oh, get over yourself dear.How dare such a misogynist, ageist odious little man criticise anyone?  Shall I count the delay to your "but you're an Ealing racist" in nanoseconds?If you admit that you are simply too challenged to read the sources discrediting Aldred and Goodman (Goodman has never even been peer reviewed) than sobeit. Just don't expect anyone else to swallow the crap that you post.

N V Brooks ● 228d

You can be as rude and abusive as you like but you will still be just as wrong. The very fact that Rachel Aldred's work has been published and profiled this week and that she continues to be commissioned and paid for further studies demonstrates definitively that the attempts of car supremacist misogynistic nobodies on the internet to smear her reputation over the last four years have failed. And very well done to her for ignoring the haters and the losers and getting on with her excellent work proving their unevidenced opinions to be wrong.

Paul Campbell ● 228d

Yes it has, and if you are too bloody thick to look up the sources then that's not my problem you muppet.

N V Brooks ● 228d

There are people living in Kew who used to drive to Roko who now cycle instead because they were put off driving there by the restrictions, took to the bike, found they enjoyed it and it made them feel good and have carried on and use the bike for more of their local journeys too.LTNs do indeed generate modal shift.

Paul Campbell ● 228d

Not it hasn't. Only in the social media echo chambers of people who are unable to read academic papers and understand them. Which really equates to further endorsement for her. She continues to be commissioned to do this work because she is highly regarded and respected in the field of transport. There are some accusations of misogyny flying around this forum but I'd say with certainty that old men who do not have Rachel Aldred's qualifications or any relevant qualification in her field and who have demonstrated repeatedly that they are unable to understand her work criticising her and cancelling her are misogynists.

Paul Campbell ● 228d

A couple of reasons:1. Making some journeys more inconvenient to drive means people choose other modes.  Such as, someone who may have driven half a mile to the local shops.  Then because of a traffic filter, it becomes a longer journey.2. Reduction of traffic within an area means it is more pleasant to walk or cycle.  A street jammed with rat-running or speeding vehicles is not very conducive to walking or cycling.If you create an environment that prioritises driving above everything else, then just about everyone drives.  Large parts of the US are evidence of this.  If you create an environment that reduces the priority of driving and increases the priority of other modes, that's what you get too.

Michael Robinson ● 228d

Aldred's methodology, as you are well aware, has been discredited. Not measuring stationary traffic on LTN peripheral roads and then citing the data as proof of a reduction, is the most notable failure.  Those who continue to cite such data are disingenuous at best, or simply liars.

N V Brooks ● 228d

Take 5000 cars per day off roads in LTNs and they are suddenly much better and safer environments for walking and cycling. What was an intimidating and unpleasant walk or cycle to school, the swimming pool, the gym, the church, the rowing club, the hairdresser, the pub, the cafe, the Co-Op (other supermarket chains are available) becomes attractive.The report talks about behavioural change. Streets designed for cars create car-centric behaviour. Streets designed for people reverse that. This is well-studied and known.

Paul Campbell ● 228d

Hi Paul,Can you explain why it’s a logical outcome that people who live in LTNs drive less?I’m not anti LTNs but can’t imagine why this might be the case.PS I haven’t read the report, so if the logical reason is in there, please feel free to cut and paste.

Andrew Jones ● 228d

As specialy  the one's that get run in to.

James Dow ● 228d

She’s a professional scientist and specialist in her field and that is why she keeps being commissioned by various bodies to perform research. The anti-LTNers have all got very Trumpian lately on this forum. Dodgy this, fake that. Are they all really this incapable of processing evidence that challenges their beliefs? If you were able to take a big step back you’d realise that it is a logical outcome that people living in LTNs drive less and not a far out idea. You’d have to be very tied to your car and a bit of a solipsist to be unable to consider that.

Paul Campbell ● 228d

Rachel Aldred is a co-author of this report and really she is an advocate for a particular point of view rather than an academic.

Francis Rowe ● 228d

Overall the team found that the LTN bourgeois class regularly skiving from home don't use their car as much now whilst swinging the lead. There fixed that one for you.

Mark Talbot ● 228d

I suppose we should never assume that a retired racist from Ealing isn’t as smart as scientists at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, University of Westminster and Imperial College but: “As a control, the same comparison was made in non-LTN regions at least 200 metres away.Results indicate changing behaviourOverall, the team found that total past-year mileage of people living inside the new LTNs decreased by 6.4% compared to those living in other regions in Lambeth during this time (equivalent to a daily decrease of 1.3 km per vehicle). They emphasise that this difference was not just a continuation of a pre-existing trend as there was no difference in trend between areas inside the LTNs and control areas in the years leading up to their introduction.”Incredible how angry evidence that contradicts their deeply held prejudices makes the anti-LTN folk and racists.

Paul Campbell ● 228d

All too easy to call you a fool. I have read the report and the data collection dates are as I have quoted. Fool.

N V Brooks ● 228d

Much easier to call me a fool than to actually read the report and avoid inadvertently proving who is the fool in this (as in every) case.

Paul Campbell ● 228d

Otter twaddle. The data embraces the period of both the pandemic and the radically changed patterns of work and commuting. Doubtless the brain dead of Grove Park and their boy blunder sidekick will leap on that as proof that LTNs work when most people absolutely know that they do not in most cases. Pigeon chess indeed. Fool.

N V Brooks ● 228d