Frequently Asked Questions

What is the Living Streets Campaign?

It's a new campaign highlighting the importance of streets and public spaces for community life. In many places, streets have become dirty, dangerous, full of litter and graffiti and dominated by speeding traffic. As a result, walking is in decline; children can't play outside or walk to school; neighbours no longer talk to each other; older people don't go out after dark and people are reluctant to spend time outside due to fear of crime.

We're publishing a Manifesto for Living Streets that sets out an action plan for national Government, councils and local communities to create Living Streets. We're inviting people to sign up to the Manifesto and answer a few questions about their own street to see what's good about it and what could be improved.

What's wrong with our streets?

Streets should be places where people feel safe and comfortable and choose to spend time. They might be walking to the bus stop or sitting on a bench reading the paper or watching the world go by. But we've allowed many streets to become completely dominated by cars and lorries. We've let vandalism, litter and graffiti spoil the environment. Low priority has been given to fixing pavements and street sweeping. Many streets are grey and boring. We need to develop a new idea of streets as living spaces - places for children's play, conversation and community life.

Improving street lighting, repairing cracked and uneven pavements. It's all fairly familiar stuff. What's new?

What's new is understanding how important these issues are to ordinary people and how few places have got them right. Some local authorities are starting to take issues like traffic calming, street sweeping and lighting seriously. Birmingham, for example, has transformed its city centre into a people-friendly environment. Hull has more 20 mph zones than any other city and has seen its traffic casualties fall dramatically. The London Borough of Camden has a new Boulevard project, designed to improve the environment on key shopping streets. But these are still the exceptions, when they should be the rule.

Don't you feel you're swimming against the tide? The car is king, the corner shops have gone. You're really just trying to turn the clock back.

Not so. All it needs is for all users of streets to be taken into account when plans are being drawn up and approved. It's very do-able. There are several instances, in UK cities like Birmingham and other countries like Denmark, of living streets. We also have huge and growing support - from London's Mayor for example. People are getting fed up with our streets becoming unfriendly and unusable.

Does this just mean pedestrianising all town centres?

In some places that may be the best option. But there are lots of things we can do to improve streets without pedestrianising them. We can reduce the amount and speed of traffic through traffic calming. We can widen pavements on busy shopping streets. We can put in more pedestrian crossings. Street lighting can be improved. More priority can be given to street sweeping and tackling vandalism and crime. We can plant trees and put in public art.This campaign is about all the things that make streets unattractive and unsafe, not just traffic, although traffic is often the biggest problem.

Isn't this just another chance to bash drivers?

No. It's about striking a new balance between streets as traffic routes and streets as living spaces. You're not going to traffic calm the motorways and have children's play areas there. But on many residential streets, you would expect priority to be given to the interests of people who live there rather than people driving through the neighbourhood. And on many local high streets, there will be far more people on foot than there are sitting in vehicles. Yet all the priority is given to the smaller group of people in cars and lorries. The way the streets are designed and managed needs to reflect the jobs we want them to do and the number of people using them in different ways.

Isn't giving priority to pedestrians just going to make traffic congestion worse?

This is often used as an objection to any change that will make life easier and safer for those on foot, even when they're in the majority on a street.In fact, research suggests reducing traffic capacity does not necessarily lead to congestion. In some cases, it can even make traffic "evaporate" as drivers change their travel patterns or switch to another mode. This traffic "degeneration" is the opposite of the traffic generation that takes place when road capacity is increased.

What about these new Home Zones? Are these part of the answer?

Yes. Home zones are residential areas where priority is given to local residents and activities like children's play. They've been very successful in countries like Holland and Germany and can significantly improve the quality of life for local communities. There are nine pilot Home Zones being tried in the UK at the moment. But Home Zones are normally restricted to residential areas. We also want to see changes in town centres and local shopping streets.

Surely it's madness to encourage children to play in the street?

It certainly is at the moment. This is largely due to the danger posed by speeding cars. Parents are also worried about so-called "stranger danger". But children in other European countries have much greater independence and are able to use the streets for play. This is partly because they've done much more to tame traffic. It's also because the more people there are around on the street, the safer people feel.

Do we really want gangs of teenagers hanging around on street corners?

There clearly is an issue, particularly for older people and women, about feeling threatened by people hanging around. But that's partly because we've got out of the habit of seeing people out and about in the street. And it's partly because in many communities, the only people who feel comfortable spending time in the street are gangs who may be perfectly innocent, but may make other people feel uncomfortable. The more people we have on our streets, the more people will feel reassured.

Where's your evidence to show people actually want all this? Isn't it just a minority of high-minded people trying to get their way?

Recent MORI research shows that, when asked about how to improve local quality-of-life, people have street issues high on their agenda for immediate action - less rubbish and dog mess, tackling traffic problems, better street lighting. All these are at the centre of our campaign.

Aren't you trying to apply a version of community life that only works in hot countries like Spain and Italy?

Not at all. One of the most people-friendly cities in the world is Copenhagen in Denmark, not a country famous for its tropical climate. And there are a small but growing number of British cities - like York, Bristol and Manchester - that have understood that their future prosperity depends on creating high quality public spaces where people will want to spend time and money. The real challenge is to extend this principle beyond town and city centres to local high streets and residential areas.

What about poorer neighbourhoods, which often have the worst environments?

That's absolutely right. People in poorer communities are most dependent on walking and usually have the most dangerous and dirty streets. Not surprisingly, there's lots of evidence that people in inner cities and poor areas are most concerned about their local environment. If we want to tackle problems like social exclusion and urban regeneration, we have to tackle the problems of vandalism, traffic, street grime and rubbish that afflict poorer communities.

You picked inner London for your launch. This is really all about city streets isn't it? Nothing to do with rural communities.

The problems of dirty and dangerous streets and public spaces are more serious in urban areas and in poorer communities. But these issues affect all communities. Many villages are cut in half by speeding traffic. People in rural communities complain about a lack of street lighting. Rural lanes are used as dumps for cars and builders' waste. Communities everywhere have lost the use of their roads and streets as community spaces and that's what this campaign aims to address.

How much would all this cost? Who is going to have to foot the bill?

Living Streets would save money over time, because we would reduce traffic accidents and street crime and revive run-down areas. There are, inevitably, initial costs: creating safe routes to all schools in the country could cost around 3 billion for example, but the social benefits would be enormous. And funding does exist, so we're not looking for ?new money'. We already have the Ten Year Transport Plan, Neighbourhood Renewal Funding and the Single Regeneration Budget. It's really a question of spending existing funds in the right way.

Doesn't all this really boil down to safety and security? Wouldn't it better to spend all this money on more police? What sort of policing do you want to see on Living Streets?

Policing and personal security are key issues. There is strong evidence that the public want to see more uniformed officials on local streets. More beat bobbies is part of the answer. But new schemes such as Street Wardens would make a big difference too. The Government has recently announced more funding for Street Wardens, which is very welcome. We'd like to see these schemes rolled out in all communities that want them.

What steps should a) central government; b) local government take?

There are already some important initiatives taking place, like the New Deal for Communities, the Neighbourhood Renewal Fund and more money being spent on local transport investment. The Prime Minister made a speech on the importance of public spaces shortly before the election. We want central government to ensure more money is spent on improving the local street environment. This means more traffic calming and speed reduction, new crossings, better lighting, safe routes to school and improved pavements. We also want the Government to use its influence on local authorities to make sure they give a high priority to improving streets and public spaces.

Local councils need to adopt the best practice being developed in some areas. Hull has introduced more 20 mph zones than any other city and has seen traffic casualties fall dramatically.
Bristol has a Legible Cities project, aimed at making it easier for pedestrians to find their way round the city.Lambeth in London has a "one-stop shop" for all queries and complaints relating to the street environment.

What do you want ordinary people to do?

We want them to sign our declaration and answer a few questions about their own street. We'll put their name and results of the surveys on a database that we'll be presenting to Ministers.

Communities can also identify the priorities they would like for their local streets and put their case to the local council. We can help them with our community street audit system. Until people feel confident to ask for improvements, not much will change.

You might also be interested in the history of Living Streets.