Main Content
Features
The push is on to make streets 'people friendly'
December 2001
As a professional lobby group, the Pedestrians Association has achieved some remarkable success. Since its inception in Britain in 1929 it has persuaded the government to introduce the original driving test, the original 30mph speed limit on urban roads and the first pedestrian crossings. Of course many other countries have since followed suit.
Now it is campaigning again - this time to have authorities spend around $21 billion to make streets people-friendly and more socially cohesive. The association claims in the case of Britain the huge cost of such a project would be far outweighed by the social and economic benefits.
For example, in its new report, "Streets are for Living"; the association says for every dollar spent improving street lighting, $47 would be saved in tangible losses from crime.
The report says the $9 billion the association wants for traffic calming and the imposition of 20mph speed limits in residential areas would prevent an estimated 50,000 casualties a year.
The rest of its campaign shopping list includes up to $7.5 billion to provide safe walking and cycling routes to all schools in Britain, $4.2 billion on 6500 Dutch-styled "Home Zones" and $1.5 billion to introduce 30mph speed limits in England's 16,000 villages. Some of the association's argument for claiming streets back from traffic dominance is what it describes as a seminal piece of research conducted in San Francisco in the early 1970s.
The researchers found the more traffic there is on a street, the poorer the quality of relationships between residents. The research looked at three types of streets: Light Streets (2000 vehicles a day), Moderate Streets (8000 vehicles a day) and Heavy Streets (16,000 vehicles per day).
"Residents on Light Street had three times as many friends and twice as many acquaintances as those living on Heavy Street," said the association's report.
"Light Street was perceived to be friendly and families with children felt relatively free from traffic danger.
"Heavy Street had little or no pavement activity. People had adapted their environment and their behaviour to take account of the hostile environment. Residents kept to themselves and had withdrawn from the street environment.
"There was very little sense of community. Most families with children had left Heavy Street, with older people unwilling or unable to leave 'locked in'. Some were sleeping in back bedrooms because of traffic noise."
The report says in the 30 years since the San Francisco research was completed, traffic has grown relentlessly and more communities are suffering the negative effects of noise, severance and pollution.
"This could have serious implications for the physical and mental health of people living in these communities," it said. "Research suggests that low levels of social support are linked to increased mortality rates from all causes. People with fewer social contacts may be at more than twice the risk of those with more social contacts."
