Congestion

[presta]

Someone's just posted a tweet of a congested road saying that if half the people were to walk or cycle there wouldn't be a traffic jam. Sounds reasonable on the face of it, but then the penny dropped....

We've known for decades that when you build more roads the traffic just grows until the congestion returns, so why won't the remaining drivers just drive more when the other half go? When congestion is the only thing limiting demand for motor transport, congestion is what you get, and halving the traffic is just the opposite side of the coin from doubling the number of roads.

I still think that what's needed is policies to reduce the total number of vehicle miles by forcing people out of their cars, and then leave them to decide for themselves what their alternative is.

 

[figbat]

You’re assuming that the overall mentality will stay the same and selfishness, laziness and/or needfulness will remain the same and will drive behaviour. I assume the point of getting people out of cars and onto feet or bikes is to fundamentally change that behaviour.

 

[Profpointy]

One reason people drive more is that we move around for work a lot more than we did, and also, having taken, by choice or necessity, a job 20, 30,40 miles away there's the question of it really not being worth the cost and upheaval of moving house if you need to move again 4 or 5 years on. Whilst I cycle commuted for 15 years, I did an absurd 80 mile round trip for a good number of years (10 maybe) before that. My last 5 years were working away from home entirely, so I did a weekly long commute, maybe 50% car until I realised trains were far less tiring and dull despite taking longer.

Another factor is couples may end up working in different towns, so one or other is likely to commute.

Back in the day people would live near, or at least in the same town as their work, and likely stay a long time, so bus, walking, cycling was a more realistic choice for many.

 

[DCLane]

I'm afraid this requires an entire culture shift and there's little self-motivation to change. The person sat in traffic thinking "why don't people walk or cycle" is most likely to have a range of excuses as to why THEY couldn't, even if it's not a long car journey distance-wise.

How do I know? Because for years I was that person.

 

[Dommo]

We've known for decades that when you build more roads the traffic just grows until the congestion returns, so why won't the remaining drivers just drive more when the other half go?

Indeed, which is why the natural response should be to reduce the space by half available to road traffic and convert that space into cycle paths and wider footpaths, thus maintaining the same level of congestion for those who choose to indulge in the driving in inner-city areas.

 

[presta]

You’re assuming that the overall mentality will stay the same and selfishness, laziness and/or needfulness will remain the same and will drive behaviour. I assume the point of getting people out of cars and onto feet or bikes is to fundamentally change that behaviour.

It's not changing the behaviour of the ones that stay in the cars though, it's rewarding it.

One reason people drive more is that we move around for work a lot more

A statistic I saw is that everyone commutes 30 mins each way on average regardless of their mode of transport, so if you give them faster transport they just spend the same 30 minutes going further. Sounds reasonable to me, cars just became a ticket to travel for a better job or a better house.

for years I was that person

I spent my childhood counting off the days until I could have a car, so when I passed my test I gleefully jumped in the car and joined the fray. Traffic jams bothered me not at all, I was just happy as a pig in sh!t sat queueing in my car. I used to spend my evenings driving nowhere in particular just for the fun of it.

 

[presta]

I think this illustrates the point well, for all the cycling the Dutch do, they don't actually drive significantly less:

 

[Jotheboat]

I think this illustrates the point well, for all the cycling the Dutch do, they don't actually drive significantly less:

View attachment 719662

Those annual mileages pp (kms) look mighty low. Is it the average of all people or just car drivers?
Anyhow, in miles it works our very roughly at about 11 miles / day (that's based on 365 days for commuting days, perhaps 15 miles / day?).
Interesting little piece anyway.

For me it's about choice. The fact is I don't cycle much on the roads because there's little pleasure in it, except 6.00 AM on Sunday morning.
If I lived in The Netherlands (for example) where the infrastructure is immeasurable better, would I cycle more? Yes. Though I may as well trade in the MTB!

We are a car-driven society (Aphorism?).
Our domestic fuel bills have, what, doubled. Imagine the outcry if motoring costs suddenly doubled.
For domestic fuel we've had Net Zero thrust upon us and there has basically been little public pushback. We've rolled over and 'accepted' it. Would some kind of seismic shift in motoring levies work under some spurious idiom. Fat Zero perhaps? Or T2 Zero (diabetic ref).

 

[Ming the Merciless]

One reason people drive more is that we move around for work

Whilst it would be nice to think that’s the reason, car use is still fsr too high for trips that could be walked or cycled.

For trips less than one mile, 16% are made my car, for trips less than 5 miles, 67% by car, and less than 10 miles, an astonishing 83% by car.

Commuting makes up a small proportion of all trips, representing only 16% of the reason people are driving.

Then you look at school trips and see that even amongst 11-16 year olds, 26% are being driven to school less than 5 miles away. An astonishing 40% of kids are driven to their school.

We are producing a nation of sedentary children who will think the primary means of getting around is the car and sod climate change and the environment amongst other things, their convenience trumps that.

 

[Drago]

War on the motorist!

 

[mjr]

I think this illustrates the point well, for all the cycling the Dutch do, they don't actually drive significantly less:

View attachment 719662

Can't you see a small problem with dividing the distance driven in the Netherlands by the population of the Netherlands? Like, distances driven in the Netherlands by people who aren't its population because, unlike the UK, it's between other countries and has open borders. Dutch driving abroad is said to be excluded but not forever driving in NL.

Then ask yourself, why calculate that unusual figure and not simply look at the modal shares, which would take account if one population makes more journeys than the other? Does it contradict the (unnamed) author's point? Fishy.

I suspect the numbers on driving alone may simply support the point made earlier: if you reduce the need to drive by providing cycleways and filters but don't reclaim some of the now-surplus road space from motorists, then other motoring will happen to refill it. Induced traffic.

 

[Profpointy]

Whilst it would be nice to think that’s the reason, car use is still fsr too high for trips that could be walked or cycled.

For trips less than one mile, 16% are made my car, for trips less than 5 miles, 67% by car, and less than 10 miles, an astonishing 83% by car.

View attachment 719665
Commuting makes up a small proportion of all trips, representing only 16% of the reason people are driving.

View attachment 719666
Then you look at school trips and see that even amongst 11-16 year olds, 26% are being driven to school less than 5 miles away. An astonishing 40% of kids are driven to their school.

View attachment 719667
We are producing a nation of sedentary children who will think the primary means of getting around is the car and sod climate change and the environment amongst other things, their convenience trumps that.

I find driving a silly little distance rather annoying. Some years ago we had two offices 5 or 10 minutes walk apart. Driving was no quicker by the time you'd waited at the lights and parked up. But to walk you had to take your life in your hands crossing a busy roundabout. I still walked just out of buggerment but I'd seen elderly people pretty much running for their lives. Eventually there were lights and crossings, albeit requiring an extra detour. This was the Aztec West roundabout on the A38 in Bristol

Anyhow, I really have never understood (able bodied ) people driving these small distances but do accept that a lot of people do. Perhaps relating to this is why I live very much in the town, so all everyday errands are easily walkable.

 

[Electric_Andy]

Lots of things have changed since the 50s for example. Kids would walk to school, but can't now due to more traffic, faster traffic, lack of safe walkways and crossings, and of course more idiotic people. Also schools aren't necessarily as local as they were, especially in cites where you might have 15 schools to choose from and the closest one might not be the most desireable one. More cars are parking on the roads in residential areas, causing blockages, which wasn't an issue in the 50's. How ever many extra buses you put on, doesn't make much difference as there's no room for layby-style bus stops, so buses have to stop in the road. There are only bus lanes on the larger trunk roads in my city, so for much of the journey there is no advantage in taking the bus.

We are dealing with an ever growing population, most of whom want cars, but don't often have a driveway to park them on. The actual roads remain as narrow as they were when they were first built; designed to carry 50x fewer cars than there are now. We can't widen roads, or build flyovers, or plough through green space to make more more roads of cycle ways, as it's too expensive and councils are all skint. We are being told to walk and cycle more, but unless you make this option realistic then it's not going to happen.

We moved house for a better quality of life, which we got, but at the expense of us now having to drive my son to school 3 days a week. So yes I'm adding to the conjestion as well, but there is no alternative when the walk would take 1hr 45mins, and it's too dangerous for my 11yr/old to cycle. I'm waiting for him to be old enough to ride on the back of a motorcycle or scooter, but it's far easier to just leave 5 mins earlier and take the car.

 

[All uphill]

I think this illustrates the point well, for all the cycling the Dutch do, they don't actually drive significantly less:

View attachment 719662

I can just about believe these figures having spent lots of time in NL. But not all miles are equal.

NL has a fantastic well maintained motorway network, allowing and encouraging long distance travel.

Nearly all towns have traffic free centres and in the suburbs cyclists have priority.

The UK has a creaking motorway network and positively encourages car drivers into medieval street plans for multiple short journeys.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Lots of things have changed since the 50s for example. Kids would walk to school, but can't now due to more traffic, faster traffic, lack of safe walkways and crossings,

Well kids walked to school in the 60,70,80s as well. Have the pavements and crossings been removed since the 80s? I think not!