LTNs halve number of road traffic casualties, new study shows

Awavey wrote:

the thing that bugs me about this research data, is why are the KSIs so high in the first place.

These are mostly residential roads right ? so how is it that so many people are being killed or seriously injured as pedestrians on them when they arent protected by  an LTN ?

assuming the LTN is the thing thats offering the protection and its not just a random anomaly in the data due to changing habits of travel due to covid. and Id argue the non LTN areas dont provide the counter data on that part because they themselves may be seeing a change in pattern we cant measure purely statistically via KSIs.

KSI'a are high in non LTN areas because they are racetracks for people to use from outside the LTN. A pedestrian (especially children or elderly) who walk out from between a park car across what used to be a quiet street is then hit by a speeding motorist who couldn't give a toss about the people who live there. Some of my local streets in the suburbs are essentially one car width wide thanks to cars parked on both sides of the street. The absolute minimum most cars are driven at is 30mph, often it's far, far higher. 
 

And so we have high KSI's and local people stopped from crossing the road they live on

they are basically saying in a 3month period in these LTN areas, pre LTN implementation, 81 people were hurt, now digging into it they do say those numbers count all injury severities so its not just KSIs, though they claim if you just do KSIs you get similar results in reductions through the LTN, though why they cant show that I dont know.

but anyway thats beside the point it still says 81 people were hurt, and over 7000 across London, but it feels so odd that no-one was doing anything about that to begin with.

dont the local communities lobby their councillors/mps/police to do something about it? it just seems an appallingly high level thats simply been accepted as part of life in these areas and I dont understand why.

I guess it is because we have become normalised to deaths and serious injuries due to traffic and over the years we continue to prioritise motor traffic and even blamed the victim as shown by the language that media reports use. Evidence shows that in urban areas when travelling by car you do not really save time, the proportion of people supporting commerce and shops is small but change is difficut and you can be in your own bubble and do not expend effort like walking or cycling. We know it is a false position as humans are designed to move so we now have an obesity and mental health challenege but the mirage or travelling with no effort pervades. This and those in positions of power be them politicians or highways designers are bought into the deception and cannot face reality. Charities such as Brake and Road peace have made many gains but are working against the system instead of with, which shows how powerful the distortion given the promise of speed and effortless travel is.

Totally agree. We had a temporary unofficial LTN when the road works at the bottom of the road caused it to be closed for several days. The peace and quite without people racing up the hill outside the house (blind hill with cars parked on it but why would that slow them) was very noticable. I wasn't even fussed that I had to take a longer route home either. (I don't cycle on pavements if I can help it).

The obvious answer is to make all residential roads LTNs, where possible, thus preventing the racers and the rat runners from accessing them.  This would have another massive advantage in reducing road capacity and cutting the number of cars, a long term objective, nay, necessity, if we are to prevent the planet burning.  Of course you'd also have to have segregated cycle and public transport lanes on the main roads, further cutting capacity.

This would reverse the policies of expansion of the road network to meet demand, the so-called "predict and provide" strategy which has so disastrously led us here, but there really isn't any alternative.  The problem is political, with the car lobby wielding enormous power, supported by many people whose jobs depend on building more and more cars.  The car industry are trying to push the idea that electric cars will solve all the problems of profligate car use, but they will exacerbate at least two; congestion and danger.  If people think their car is clean and green, they'll drive more, and the reduced noise will result in more deaths; we've all had people step into our path because they couldn't hear a car.

Awavey wrote:

the thing that bugs me about this research data, is why are the KSIs so high in the first place.

Because motor vehicles are dangerous, but we don't talk about it. Person injured by car doesn't make the news, even it it is a child and they were on the pavement. Barely makes the news when  when a car crashes into someones house.

shh nothing to see here, cars are not a problem at all.

Person injured by bike deserves national news coverage, either because it is so rare, or because there is an agenda.