This will just displace congestion and pollution, not reduce it

  • Actually, a significant proportion of the motor traffic simply disappears.
  • Remaining motor traffic is smoother.

One-way streets just increase road speed

  • This has been found to be true where no roadspace has been reallocated.
  • In our one-way system, there is only one lane for vehicle.
  • This means they can only travel as fast as the slowest participant.
  • City buses travelling at the speed limit will fulfill this purpose.

This was tried in Stevenage/Frideswide Square and it failed

  • In Stevenage, motor traffic continues to be incentivised by fast, high-capacity roads.
  • Frideswide Square is isolated, and even in isolation does not conform to OLS proposals.
  • By contrast, the Marston Ferry Road segregated cycle path has been instrumental in shaping Cherwell School cycling rates.

Oxford is too hilly/chilly

  • Technology does provide a solution here: electric bikes.
  • Other cities with comparable or cooler climates (Oslo, Copenhagen, Groningen) have made a success of this vision.
  • There’s no such thing as bad weather—just the wrong clothes!

This is bad for people with mobility problems

  • Low-intimidation streets benefit people with mobility problems.
  • Segregated cycle paths can be used by people in wheelchairs and mobility scooters.
  • There are cycle adaptations for virtually every physical disability.

Bus routes would be disrupted

  • Good public transport is a key part of the vision.
  • We envisage shuttle buses inside Oxford connecting with transport hubs at the edge.
  • Strategic bus contraflows would allow cross-city connections where necessary.

Businesses/students won’t be able to receive their deliveries

  • Much more can be delivered by bicycle and smaller vehicles than at present.
  • Restrictions on motor traffic in the city centre can be lifted at specified times as they are at present on Cornmarket.
  • The vision includes two-way road access to business parks and industrial estates.

Emergency vehicles would be slowed down

  • There is no evidence that liveable streets cause longer emergency response times.
  • To the extent that they reduce congestion, they would be expected to reduce emergency response times.
  • Segregated cycle lanes, like pavements, can be occupied by cars in order to clear a path for emergency vehicles—or by emergency vehicles themselves.
  • The London Fire Brigade reports no sustained degradation in attendance time where comparable infrastructure changes have been introduced.
  • The OLS vision for Oxfordshire ensures good ambulance access to the John Radcliffe hospital.

This is bad for motorists

  • Traffic evaporation means people who need to drive have smoother-flowing, more predictable lanes.
  • The Netherlands has the highest driver satisfaction in the world and the most segregated cycle infrastructure of any country.

This is bad for businesses/shopkeepers/stores/traders

  • Higher pedestrianisation and cycle access is associated with higher trade
  • Traders’ groups that initially oppose such plans are often the first to sing their benefits after the fact.

Politicians won’t accept it — it would be suicidal

  • There is already evidence of the plan’s advantages for all road users, residents, and businesses.
  • There is already evidence of support among the electorate.
  • Studies suggest that expectation management, good monitoring of key indicators and speedy availability of facts, and good communication are key to ensuring that benefits are recognized.
  • In other cities, opposition has decreased substantially after the transition.