All posts in the topic Traffic congestion (Short link)
Summary
- There are 39 posts — by 14 authors — in this topic.
- Latest post made by Tim Kerr at 2007 Aug 03 01:51 UTC
(I changed the email subject line in my reply to better reflect what this topic is about) Ralph Skjellerup wrote: > Good evening > > I am waiting for some good issues? One that stands out is the planning of > our roadways. The planners have ignored situations such as the Westfield If City planners are starting to give more consideration to cyclists, kudos to them ! Ralph, you ask about solutions to the problem of congestion - I don't think making life easier for motorists is one of them. Traffic congestion is the natural result of everyone acting in their own interests. If we try to pander to motorists, as a parent pandering to a willful child ends up creating a rod for their own backs, we will just make the situation worse. An example: suppose it takes you 15 minutes to make a particular journey through the city. One day the City makes some adjustments to the roads so that the journey only takes you 13 minutes. Hooray !, you say. The next day you say, isn't this great ? The day after, you say, man, the congestion in this city is getting really bad, someone should do something about it - it takes me 13 MINUTES to do this journey - that's FAR too long. Instead of pandering to motorists, how about some natural consequences ? If it takes too long to make that journey, how about: - not living so far away from where you work (if it's a commute) ? - maybe taking the bus so you can do something useful or relaxing on the way ? - maybe ride a bike so you can get some exercise and fresh air and NOT contribute to the congestion, and spend less money and time parking ? - maybe take a walk ? Christchurch has a natural disadvantage being flat and open - people can, and do, want to live anywhere in the city area, unlike, e.g., Wellington, where people are constrained to living in narrow corridors defined by the geography of the city. As a result, public transport in Wellington is far more effective because a public transport infrastructure shuttling people along a narrow corridor (they actually have commuter trains, for example) is far more cost-effective than one working over a very spread out area like Christchurch. My feeling is that the City should be actively *dis*-couraging people from living in places where it is more difficult to serve them with public transport by changing zoning patterns to make it more attractive to live near public transport corridors. In other words, we need a spoke-and-hub zoning pattern in the city rather than the bullseye pattern we have now. If anyone's interested, I've got an interview with Richard register of Eco City Builders (http://www.ecocitybuilders.org/) by David Room from Global Public Media at: http://www.reurbanise.co.nz/resources/interviews/richardregister where he talks about alternatives to designing a city for better use of energy and resources. It's an 18 MB mp3, so not small, but very interesting to listen to. Over a billion dollars is spent on roading every year in Canterbury and congestion is just getting worse. Isn't that just reinforcing the maxim that "if you build more roads, you get more cars" ? Cheers, Andrew.
re traffic congestion... 4 mornings a week between 8.00a.m and 8.20a.m. I get a bus into town. As I wait for the bus to come along Cranford st I notice that 95% of the cars have one person. Where are they all going? The 5% that do have passengers are mostly parents with children. I have also noticed the bus service is faster in school holidays. As for people biking - I see about 4/5 on bikes depending on the weather. I do realise that buses can't go everywhere but I do think more could be done like the bus lanes in Auckland. If you have a certain number of people as passengers and as a private car owner you can use the bus lanes and some people actually stop and pick up people at the bus stops so they can use the bus lanes. Maybe some roads need to be cyclelane free and have bus lanes. Or be buslanes in peak times and cycle lanes non peak times. Something has to be done about the traffic- try Riccarton Rd on a Saturday afternoon- even worse in wet weather. If something isnt done we will end up with a tax like inner London. Christine Andrew Groom <andrew@reurbanise.co.nz> wrote: (I changed the email subject line in my reply to better reflect what this topic is about) Ralph Skjellerup wrote: > Good evening > > I am waiting for some good issues? One that stands out is the planning of > our roadways. The planners have ignored situations such as the Westfield If City planners are starting to give more consideration to cyclists, kudos to them ! Ralph, you ask about solutions to the problem of congestion - I don't think making life easier for motorists is one of them. Traffic congestion is the natural result of everyone acting in their own interests. If we try to pander to motorists, as a parent pandering to a willful child ends up creating a rod for their own backs, we will just make the situation worse. An example: suppose it takes you 15 minutes to make a particular journey through the city. One day the City makes some adjustments to the roads so that the journey only takes you 13 minutes. Hooray !, you say. The next day you say, isn't this great ? The day after, you say, man, the congestion in this city is getting really bad, someone should do something about it - it takes me 13 MINUTES to do this journey - that's FAR too long. Instead of pandering to motorists, how about some natural consequences ? If it takes too long to make that journey, how about: - not living so far away from where you work (if it's a commute) ? - maybe taking the bus so you can do something useful or relaxing on the way ? - maybe ride a bike so you can get some exercise and fresh air and NOT contribute to the congestion, and spend less money and time parking ? - maybe take a walk ? Christchurch has a natural disadvantage being flat and open - people can, and do, want to live anywhere in the city area, unlike, e.g., Wellington, where people are constrained to living in narrow corridors defined by the geography of the city. As a result, public transport in Wellington is far more effective because a public transport infrastructure shuttling people along a narrow corridor (they actually have commuter trains, for example) is far more cost-effective than one working over a very spread out area like Christchurch. My feeling is that the City should be actively *dis*-couraging people from living in places where it is more difficult to serve them with public transport by changing zoning patterns to make it more attractive to live near public transport corridors. In other words, we need a spoke-and-hub zoning pattern in the city rather than the bullseye pattern we have now. If anyone's interested, I've got an interview with Richard register of Eco City Builders (http://www.ecocitybuilders.org/) by David Room from Global Public Media at: http://www.reurbanise.co.nz/resources/interviews/richardregister where he talks about alternatives to designing a city for better use of energy and resources. It's an 18 MB mp3, so not small, but very interesting to listen to. Over a billion dollars is spent on roading every year in Canterbury and congestion is just getting worse. Isn't that just reinforcing the maxim that "if you build more roads, you get more cars" ? Cheers, Andrew. Andrew Groom Bryndwr, Christchurch More info: Info about Andrew: http://forums.e-democracy.org/contacts/andrewgroom This topic's messages may be viewed at: http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/3HoZgUzTBcx4rPetwzMZSi
Hi Christine, christene edwards wrote: > re traffic congestion... 4 mornings a week between 8.00a.m and 8.20a.m. I get a bus into > town. As I wait for the bus to come along Cranford st I notice that 95% of the cars have one person. Where are they all going? The 5% that do have passengers are mostly parents with children. I have also noticed the bus service is faster in school holidays. As for people biking - I see about 4/5 on bikes depending on the weather. > I do realise that buses can't go everywhere but I do think more could be done like the bus lanes in Auckland. If you have a certain number of people as passengers and as a private car owner you can use the bus lanes and some people actually stop and pick up people at the bus stops so they can use the bus lanes. Maybe some roads need to be cyclelane free and have bus lanes. Or be buslanes in peak times and cycle lanes non peak times. > Something has to be done about the traffic- try Riccarton Rd on a Saturday afternoon- even worse in wet weather. If something isnt done we will end up with a tax like inner London. Thanks for that. While bus lanes sound like a good idea, they have the following disadvantages: 1. They still have to be built, which costs money 2. Where is the land going to come from ? So, I suspect retrofitting bus lanes in existing urban areas would be nightmarishly expensive. You mention the congestion tax in inner London (more details at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/uk/03/congestion_charge/exemptions_guide/html/what.stm). Personally, I think this would be a great idea for Christchurch, along with tolls for certain stretches of road at certain times of day. We have the technology for being able to charge people a fee for being on, say, Main North Rd between 5:00 and 6:00 pm and many other options besides - why aren't we using these options to reduce congestion ? The answer is in the assumption we make in this society - that it is our inalienable right to drive our cars whenever and wherever we feel like. So, when we say, "something must be done about traffic congestion", what we're really saying is, "something must be done about traffic congestion *that doesn't negatively impact on me in any way, shape or form*". It's only when we get past this mental block that we will be able to sort out our traffic congestion problems. Thinking larger scale for a moment, perhaps the best solution of all, and by far the easiest (technically) to implement, would be a gradual but significant hike in petrol tax, with the proceeds going directly to public transport. I imagine this would be seen as being unfair to those in rural areas, but you can't please all of the people all of the time ... Cheers, Andrew.
Ralph Skjellerup wrote: "There also appears to have been too much concentration on cycle lanes, perhaps the planners only ride bikes?" Well, I find that the planners have it really all wrong, too, going about it with a completely inappropriate mindset. I personally would love to bike, however find it too dangerous and unpleasant. Here is a good website that gives an idea how planning could be in Christchurch to make biking a useful mode of transport in the city: http://utilitycyclism.blogspot.com/
Christoph Hensch wrote: > Ralph Skjellerup wrote: > "There also appears to have been too much concentration on cycle lanes, perhaps the planners only ride bikes?" > > Well, I find that the planners have it really all wrong, too, going about it with a completely inappropriate mindset. I personally would love to bike, however find it too dangerous and unpleasant. > > Here is a good website that gives an idea how planning could be in Christchurch to make biking a useful mode of transport in the city: > http://utilitycyclism.blogspot.com/ Hey, thanks Cristoph - a very interesting read. The bit about cyclists being officially regarded as "fast-moving pedestrians" in Kyoto is particularly interesting. Personally, I regularly cycle on footpaths for short distances where the alternative is to cross and recross a dangerous stretch of road. I'm always very careful when doing this to either drop my speed or keep a sharp eye out for slower moving pedestrians or cars backing out of driveways. The number of close calls I've had on the footpath have been far fewer (and far less dangerous) than those with cars on the road. Cheers, Andrew.
As my urban planner professor said at Ottawa University: The more roads you
build, the more traffic you'll get. If you think that by building a better,
bigger road from a 2 laner to a 4 laner will help congestion, you're wrong.
The only thing that a larger road brings, is more traffic.
Good quality affordable public transportation is the solution-- and that
includes seats for everyone. The most annoying thing is to take a bus that
takes 30 minutes and to stand all the way and pay to stand!!
Cycling is great. I cycle to work when the sun is shining and frost is not
on the ground. I dare say that I don't trust car drivers with frosted
windshields.
But did you know that diesel is the worst polluter there is. At least
woodburners smell nice. (in reference to our supposed worst polluters, say
ECAN...)
Being behind a diesel vehicle, I would 'recycle' the air in my car. On a
bike, it's hard to hold your breath and peddle. So I take the side roads. I
truly believe that cycle lanes are not adequate. We need cycle ONLY paths
like those on the Avon. But this is impossible, so I won't hold my breath...
The only other solution is to redesign our city so that it is cycle
friendly. But the City Council likes the idea of cars in pedestrian malls
(is Cashel Mall), so we need to elect new city councilors who REALLY think
outside the square. With people getting fat and wanting to ride their cars
to the Dairy... well... we need new city folks too (chuckle)
Another solution which is coming close to realization is to up the price of
petrol and get people on their bikes and into buses! Hitting people in their
pocket would help, but then our city buses would up their price too because
of petrol prices...
The other solution is to give pedestrians and cyclist the right a way. Yes
change the law . A change in mind shift. People come first, as opposed to
cars!! Cycling is dangerous because car drivers don't respect them. In
Canada, pedestrians have the right away. Vancouverites are special drivers.
You only need to 'look' like you 'want' to cross the road, and cars stop for
you! Now that doesn't happen in any other Canadian cities, and that's been
15 years ago. Not sure if it's changed, but that's the attitude one is
looking for in a city. Friendly cities DONT drive over people :)
My lunch break is up. Gotta go.
Interesting article in the Herald today: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/topic/story.cfm?c_id=309&objectid=10450836 It does sound like the traffic is pretty effectively "managing itself" over the bridge in Auckland, and a lot of money is being saved in the bargain. I find it fascinating that we bleat about a new Council building costing $100M but we don't bat an eyelid at the possibility of spending 10 times that amount on probably unnecessary new roading projects, when a bit of simple demand management will fix the problem ... Cheers, Andrew.
Hi Paul, paul scott wrote: > All roads leading North from the City are now congested, but there was a reasonable flow along Hills road to Marshlands. When I read this, I'm just more and more convinced that some form of toll on the motorway north of the city at peak times would make a huge dent in this congestion problem, and generate some revenue that could be fed directly back into a better public transport system along that route. How hard would it be to set up a system that: 1. Automatically photographs license plates of cars entering or leaving the motorway during peak times. 2. Uses character recognition software to automatically detect license plates of passing cars (it does exist - check out: 3. Build some sort of billing system that either: a) charges people per trip or b) have some sort of flat monthly fee This is not sci-fi - it's being done now in various places round the world: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_number_plate_recognition#Electronic_toll_collection Richard, perhaps you could comment on whether this sort of system has been looked into by the CCC for managing congestion, and if not, why not ? I accept that there are concerns about accuracy and privacy, but I'm sure these could be overcome with a little creative thinking. Cheers, Andrew.
Hi
Tolls in Christchurch? Is this really necessary? It would cost more to
administer than it would to 'save our sanity'?
Car pooling, bus lanes, better bus schedules, etc... all of these
options need to be looked at instead of punitive ways. Why not give
away free bus passes, have a competition, make the bus a fun way of
getting to work-- put musicians/comedians on the bus, have prize
giveaways, publicise the winners, give restaurant vouchers, have a
'mystery bus', loads of possibilities. Why do what other cities do
when you can do it better?
Use your imagination !
Honey works better than...
Hi Natalie. Totally agree about tolls. There are better ways. Bus lanes are a start. Our bus service on the whole and compared to other countries is very good. I have taken tourist friends on the buses and they have been astounded to see a bus driver get off and help a wheelchair bound person onto the bus, let alone a bus that 'kneels' for the elderly. They were also astounded to see bus drivers chatting to regular school kid passengers. I think there needs to be more thought given to routes.Often when I would like to go by bus somewhere it means taking 2 buses and a trip into town and out again- so I end up with the car. More frequent bus times along main aterial routes at peak times would be better and not buses that stop in the middle of the road. I have never seen this anywhere unless there has been a specific bus route as part of the road markings. I think a thumbs up hot line for good bus drivers and a thumbs down hot line for poor bus drivers.. and these should be clearly and prominently displayed on the bus. I have often wondered why the buses here are so big. Many cities have smaller buses for off peak times.These are more economical and take less space on the roads = so why have the big buses running almost empty? Metro card is great but could further discounts be offered if you load up with $20 or $30 rather than the $10 that is often put on? This would encourage more people to go by bus. $20 = 2 free trips/ $30= 3 free trips A competition sounds great... Christine Doglinks NZ <natalie@doglinks.co.nz> wrote: Hi Tolls in Christchurch? Is this really necessary? It would cost more to administer than it would to 'save our sanity'? Car pooling, bus lanes, better bus schedules, etc... all of these options need to be looked at instead of punitive ways. Why not give away free bus passes, have a competition, make the bus a fun way of getting to work-- put musicians/comedians on the bus, have prize giveaways, publicise the winners, give restaurant vouchers, have a 'mystery bus', loads of possibilities. Why do what other cities do when you can do it better? Use your imagination ! Honey works better than... /Natalie Natalie Perzylo Wainoni, Christchurch, NZ Info about Natalie from Doglinks.co.nz Perzylo: http://forums.e-democracy.org/contacts/natalieperzylo This topic's messages may be viewed at: http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/4pAbvT00cPQTITn4MuEtuC
Just think if you were forced not to be able to drive a car like me because of
my sight impairment, for example, you would be forced to use the public
transport system anyway.
I walk my girls to and from school every day and am constantly amazed at how
congested Marshland Road is getting.
However, I would dearly love to be able to have the choice of riding a bike
round the city. Pity there are not enough cyceways around Christchurch.
Perhaps we whould encourage carless days and offer incentives to those who
actually do take up the challenge!
Eeea -Bureaucracy .
.
Apparently I have been wrong.
I was thinking we could encourage Mayor Bob Parker to be road user friendly.
Well, it turns out that would be a waste of time, because Bob can’t make Policy
at all on Traffic.
A couple of the people at Council put me right.
Richard West plans, directs and oversees policy.
STOP CARS GET CARS OFF THE ROAD policy .
Mayor Bob only gets to say “infrastructure”
And I am not allowed to sack Traffic Planners at all,
2021 socialism forever dudes, elect who we like.
Its not good is it, sorry to let you all down.
Even though motorists like me are 80% of the ratepayers , and drivers we have
no say.
I have come to the conclusion that Mayor Bob Parker can and will not close down
the STOP CARS antagonism to motorists.
Hills Roads by Richard
First there is 1.5m of footpath.
After that there is 1.5 metres of garden for the dogs to go in
Then there is the bicycle track 1.5metres
Then there is a two metre slab concrete helipad concrete and yellow fence in
the middle of Hills road, which nobody has ever stood in.
By now we are six meters towards the center of the road., leaving 3 metres for
cars.
What about a Bus stop on the left hand side of the road, where it belongs,
not where Richard has it . In the middle of the road.
Hey dudes check out this site which Andrew Groom advertises,
He wants electronic surveillance of all motorists all the time , way to go
Andrew
Paul makes a good point that most people in Christchurch get around by
car. And that in itself is the main part of the congestion issue. But
buses are also useful to car drivers- if you average out the numbers of
passengers on each bus (overall trips about 20 per bus) and then the
average number of people in each car. One bus replaces 15+ cars on the
road so it frees up the road for less congested travelling.
Also, re the bus borders - yes they are in the middle of the road and
yes they are designed to hold up traffic but only for the 30secs that
the bus is stationery and the way that the traffic is congested in Hills
Rd that will just mean that the cars have less time waiting at the
lights or queuing in traffic. It will normally not make any difference
to the length of time that a car takes to drive down the street.
In the long term by keeping the buses in the traffic flow they will be
able to keep to a more reliable timetable and be more attractive to bus
users. Therefore patronage will increase and there will be fewer cars on
the road and traffic will speed up. It really is short term
inconvenience for long term gain and the alternatives of increasing
congestion are far worse. So give the bus boarders a chance you- the car
driver- will be a winner if they work.
Cheers Nicky Wagner
Chair Public Transport Portfolio Environment Canterbury
National MP
New Zealand National Party
Christchurch Office - 189 Montreal St
P.O.Box 538 Christchurch
Cell 021 387 521
Phone (03) 3658297
Check out my website at www.nickywagner.co.nz
or the National Party at www.national.org.nz
Disclaimer: The information in this email (including attachments) is
confidential and may be legally privileged. If an addressing or transmission
error has misdirected this email, please notify the author by replying to this
email and destroy the message. If you are not the intended recipient, any use,
disclosure, copying or distribution is prohibited and may be unlawful.
e- -Bureaucracy . OK I have almost changed my mind a bit. I went out to watch Hills road last night for a while and no buses stopped. The traffic flow was consistent and good, so good I couldn’t cross the road again, how about pedestrian crossing from the yellow fence helipad. hahah see what happens when you forget to take your car .. I have said elsewhere how bus drivers have been saying they are usually let out by motorists now. When Motorist comes up to a bus they slow down, but not stop, and the flow continues. But of course in the socialist republic we can not rely on people for anything, Car drivers are rednecks by definition we have to guide them firmly and punitively towards the STOP CARS TOLL LEVY GET CARS OFF THE ROAD My next subject will be the Unitary Council, ie Sacking the entire ghastly politicised Regional Council and having a non partisan leader, who can actually make policy. I’ll be back. Paul Scott http://paulscottfilms.blogspot.com/
Of all those people who are against any of the actual or suggested measures for reducing traffic congestion in the city, i.e., improvements to the public transport system, motorway tolls at peak times, support for cyclists, etc., I would ask: 1. What would *you* propose to do about it ? 2. How much would it cost ? 3. Who would pay for it ? Also, I have to say to those who say we can solve this problem just using carrots, i.e., no sticks, no offense but perhaps a bit of reading on Psychology 101 is in order - you'll get some very slight behaviour modification this way, but substantial behaviour change will only come when there's some negative consequences for our actions. Would you suggest that we could reduce crime by letting perpetrators go unpunished and putting everyone who doesn't reoffend within a certain timeframe in a draw to win a prize ? :-) Of course, measures like making people feel good about taking the bus will always be political winners because: a) they're cheap b) they delude everyone into thinking that they're making a real difference c) there are no negative consequences for anyone And, yes, bus patronage has grown significantly but has this resulted in an increase in the overall *percentage* of trips being taken by bus ? If you read the latest Regional Land Transport Strategy Annual Monitoring Report (which I have just found): http://www.ecan.govt.nz/NR/rdonlyres/59B3DBF9-9252-427B-A2CD-BEBB05128A47/0/RLTSAnnualMonitoringReport_2006.pdf you'll see a rather odd thing on page 12 - a lot of detailed stats are published on the number of bus trips, expenditure on cycle lanes, etc., to show that we are spending more on "alternative" modes of transport. The odd thing is that the most important statistic, the percentage of trips using alternative modes, was last reported in 2001 and not since. The only suggestion of a problem is that the percentage has *decreased* to 14% in 2001 from 15% in 1996. Have we stopped recording it ? If so, why ? Could it be that it's not politically expedient to report that, with all the money we're spending on buses and cycle lanes, we're just not getting the shift of people away from cars that we would have hoped for ? Don't get me wrong, I think all of these things are great, it's just that using the carrot without combining it with the stick is just a pointless waste of everyone's money. Cheers, Andrew.
Hi Nicky,
Nicky Wagner wrote:
> Paul makes a good point that most people in Christchurch get around by
> car. And that in itself is the main part of the congestion issue. But
> buses are also useful to car drivers- if you average out the numbers of
> passengers on each bus (overall trips about 20 per bus) and then the
> average number of people in each car. One bus replaces 15+ cars on the
> road so it frees up the road for less congested travelling.
Well, yes, it would theoretically reduce congestion if cars were driven
by robots. However, cars are driven by human beings, and human beings
will modify their behaviour according to the circumstances. So, if you
reduce congestion on a given stretch of road at a given time, more
people will use that route and the congestion will return. You will have
achieved an increase in the number of people through that route, and
maybe a slight decrease in the amount of transport energy used per
person, but not reduced congestion or the total amount of transport
energy used.
Cheers, Andrew.
PS. On closer inspection of that monitoring report I linked to in the
earlier message, it appears that the percentage of trips by alternative
modes is based on census data, hence the long gap between figures.
However, isn't this an important enough figure to be surveying annually
by other means ?
Re Buses. Law change required to make other traffic give way to Buses leaving a Bus stop. It was a major change when Left turning traffic was made to give way, and that change was introduced reasonably smoothly. In my opinion, it is absolutley absurd to turn Buses into Barriers, impeding the traffic flow. I can see a mind set developing in Car drivers where they wouldn't catch a Bus just to be bloody minded. John RAtkinson > To: <email obscured>> From: <email obscured>> Subject: Re: [Canterbury Issues] Traffic congestion> Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 10:09:05 +1200> > e- -Bureaucracy . > > > OK I have almost changed my mind a bit.> I went out to watch Hills road last night for a while and no buses stopped. > The traffic flow was consistent and good, so good I couldnt cross the road again, how about pedestrian crossing from the yellow fence helipad.> hahah see what happens when you forget to take your car ..> > I have said elsewhere how bus drivers have been saying they are usually let out by motorists now. > When Motorist comes up to a bus they slow down, but not stop, and the flow continues. > But of course in the socialist republic we can not rely on people for anything, > Car drivers are rednecks by definition we have to guide them firmly and punitively towards the > > STOP CARS TOLL LEVY GET CARS OFF THE ROAD > > My next subject will be the Unitary Council, > ie Sacking the entire ghastly politicised Regional Council > and having a non partisan leader, who can actually make policy.> > Ill be back.> Paul Scott> > http://paulscottfilms.blogspot.com/> > paul scott> > Info about paul scott: http://forums.e-democracy.org/contacts/scottpaul> > This topic's messages may be viewed at: http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/618jF9bJdTGrwrWoF1YzmZ>
New Zealand needs to sort out PUBLIC TRANSPORT!
I drive around the country reasonably regularly. I also drive around
Christchurch a bit.
I noticed congestion - but mainly between 0830 and 0900 in the mornings and
1430 to about 1700 hrs in the afternoons. The rest of the time I can park in
the city - though I have generally stopped using parallel parks in town
because I can get an hour for free in a parking building.
If you want my two-cents worth I find buses in Colombo St a bloody nuisance.
They are too wide to overtake, they take up too much road space when
turning, and they are actually congesting the road within the four avenues.
I have been caught between six or seven of the things in the central city.
In addition, their automatic transmissions are very noisy making normal
conversation impossible on the foot paths - and in some shops. Then walking
along parts of Lichfield St by the bus depot is an exercise in acrobatics -
the drivers aren't keen to give way to pedestrians if the street is clear
for them to move out.
Also, they are now impossible to pass when on a bicycle - they just take up
too much space.
I believe there are no traffic problems (apart from buses in Colombo St
within the CBD) and apart from commuters and school kid deliveries.
In the longer term I do not see an great increase in off-peak congestion
because the city is spreading outwards and the traffic is being dispersed to
the outer fringes and malls etc.
Public transport supporters seem to have a fixation on transport to the CBD.
Well... I don't like catching buses to the CBD because I have no way of
carrying the stuff I have picked up from there home!
As for the school traffic.... First step (if you accept regulation - and
most of you seem to love it) is to make school pick-up and drop off points
for cars and buses 1600 metres from the school gate. A short walk or jog
from the drop-off point to the school gate would reduce obesity and improve
social interaction skills - while reducing traffic congestion. (if you want
to know how this works then ask me...)
Second step, bill the commuters - charge the buggers for travelling to and
fro within the crucial congestion hours. As I have observed in previous
comments, there is little commuter congestion at 0600 hrs! Riddle the place
with special cameras (which you all seem to love) and send a monthly
account...
Third step, get rid of over-sized buses with noisy automatic transmissions
within the CBD.
Finally, ban cycle helmets so people like me can go back to riding our
bicycles without being threatened by resentful motorists.
Tim Kerr
Hi Tim,
Your comments above are not very positive. Imagine if you had a wheelchair,
the bus needs to be wide enough to accommodate you. Same with anyone who uses
a pram for their children.
I remember when I had my big OE in Britain some time ago, that the busses were
small which is great for those who don't have access problems. But our busses
are great here in Ch Ch. In fact we have the best bus service in NZ. I wonder
if any of you have ever bothered to get out of your cars and use public
transport. Judging by the comments on this topic - I doubt it. At least you
guys have a choice of whether you use a car. I don't and I am completely
dependent on others to get me from A to B. However, my kids and I don't suffer
from obesity unlike some people who constantly use their cars even to go to the
corner dairy.
Here's an interesting report on some research done on changing commuter behaviour in New Zealand: http://www.its.usyd.edu.au/publications/working_papers/wp2002/ITS-WP-02-13.pdf An interesting conclusion: "Our results show that implementing measures to promote the use of alternative modes, such as passenger transport and cycling, without complementary measures to deter car use is not going to have the desired effect on traffic growth and congestion". Cheers, Andrew.
Eee bureaucracy . Richard West and Traffic planners talk about the “Traffic induction cycle” By this means if you block traffic driving here, it will drive over there. That is called ‘traffic evaporation”. If you block off the road, or a road becomes so difficult to traverse by say putting concrete blocks right in the middle of it, the motorists look for another way. Since their objective is to get cars off the road, they study examples of total clearance of traffic. Will you observe reader, that they never talk about efficient traffic flow, not at all, just get cars off the road, and replace with bus lanes, bike lanes and gardens for the horses and dogs. lets googleGoogle “Traffic induction cycle” and get one only article, Case histories in reclaiming the street Volverhampton England 1990’s “ Private car through-traffic was gradually removed by closing the central core roads, effectively blocking the main north-south and east-west routes through the city, ….City centre access was restricted ” Yes that’s right Motorists, they closed the main roads Vauxhall Cross, London, England 1990’s “Transport planners have used the concept of traffic evaporation” ie. Again they Closed the roads to motorists The studies admit that drivers become upset when you block their roads, and so we are best not consulted at all. Because we are the problem and because we would object, Private drivers will have to become politically active..and we will. Marshlands road Lets evaporate the traffic hold ups on Marshlands road now. Marshlands has four lanes in a lot of places, but that roundabout at the single lane intersection beside BP station and the plant nursery need fixing now. It keeps the engines turning but going nowhere here, and the Planner says he will look at it in 2012, I think he said. This is punitive and mindless Double lane through the roundabout. Save every commuter minutes each way. Then get four lanes along the rest of this hotch potch main arterial drive. Paul Scott http://paulscottfilms.blogspot.com/ EVAPORATE car traffic TOLL LEVY CARS OFF THE ROAD CONSTANT ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE TRAFFIC PLANNER AUTHORITY SOCIAL KONTROL
Dear Tracy,
Wheelchair owners drive cars, take taxis, wheel their own chairs - and use
buses. I rarely use buses - but I seem to use them more than wheelchair
users - judging from my personal experience - for I have never seen a
wheelchair user on a bus. Now, it is mandatory for buses to have special
equipment for wheelchair users - which costs a few bob - but they are rarely
used. If you want to utilise energy efficiently it would be better for
provide free access to taxis for wheelchair users. Specially-equipped taxis
are constantly used for transporting people in wheelchairs. They have a bit
more space for luggage and a bit of room for other passengers (like the
wheelchair user's friends for example).
No, I agree, I don't use buses very often. I don't need to. I prefer a car
or a bicycle because they are quicker, cheaper or more comfortable.
The reason Christchurch has the "best" bus fleet is due in large part to the
massive subsidies required to run them. Subsidies hide inefficiencies and
should be avoided as much as possible.
As one taxi driver observed in earlier correspondence on the topic - they
don't get subsidies (although some of the users get subsidies) and they
provide an excellent service from point to point.
While you may enjoy sitting in a bus watching the world pass by, they do
make a lot of noise and are too wide and too noisy and too numerous along
Colombo St within the city centre.
And you have missed my main point. Most "traffic" problems only occur around
the key commuting times of day. Alter the usage at these times of day and
there would not be a traffic problem. And there are ways of doing this - one
being starting earlier in the day... or another billing motorists using the
roads at certain times of the day.
Both would be more energy efficient than building buses equipped for
wheelchairs under subsidies.
Cheers,
Tim Kerr.
Obesity transgresses all transport modes. I have seen obese people on buses.
I have even seen obese people on bicycles and walking. However, making the
children walk 1600 metres to and from the school gate a couple of times a
day would reduce the number of Mum's waiting outside the school gate and
would reduce commuter delays considerably. The reason, as I mentioned
previously, can be explained but not within this message.
Hi Tim,
You seem to contradict yourself in your post. Since you rarely use the busses
you would not know that wheelchair users do use the busses. I have seen qite a
few since I use the bus a lot.
As for the taxi idea - get real. Taxi drivers find it expensive to convert
their vehicles into ones suitable for people with wheelchairs. There are nont
many of these on the road and those wheelchair users whom I know find it
extremely frustrating to book them because there are so few of them on the
road.
Finally the Metrocard card gives you discounts on your rides. How much do you
pay in petrol - when using a metrocard in a day, it costs no more than $3 and
you can ride as many times as you like. Another bonus when using the bus is
that you don't have to worry about parking spaces/tickets, registration and WOF
fees and car repairs to name just a few benefits.
Quoting Tim Kerr <Tim.Kerr@xtra.co.nz>:
For many years I drove a car, and for several a motorbike as well. In Nov last year was forced to ditch car when it broke down so I got back on my pushbike. I have dropped and kept off several kilos, feel much fitter, and because I live close to several bus routes, plus am on the Orbiter route and 5 mins bike from Eastgate, biking has not been a problem. We have carpooled without much of a problem for Sat morning footie, etc. I think some of my friends feel sorry for me because they see a car as somewhat of a status symbol. I can understand people who don't live close to *easily accessible bus routes* resisting a change. But Chch buses have been superb for us, kudos to whoever put that system together. A London friend here recently for a few months was very impressed. My only regret is selling the motorbike to buy the last car [grin]. On 7/27/07, Andrew Groom <andrew@reurbanise.co.nz> wrote: > > Here's an interesting report on some research done on changing commuter > behaviour in New Zealand: > > > http://www.its.usyd.edu.au/publications/working_papers/wp2002/ITS-WP-02-13.pdf
Blenheim road deviation . Is there anyone here [ especially planner ] who can understand what Blenheim road was about? The traffic flow worked well from both ends of the Park before, but not now. I keep asking drivers if they know what it means and they do, it takes longer to get through the lights than the old good roundabout. Some people say the bridge area is sold to private interests for car parking. Apparently there were massive commercial gains and losses in this deviation Paul Scott http://paulscottfilms.blogspot.com/
I am a regular bus commuter as I work near Hagley Park thus parking is at a
premium.On warm days I cycle but that can be a hazard when going straight ahead
and vehicles want to turn left.I travel on the red and blue bus services and
the drivers are a real mixture of helpfulness and
friendly attitudes depending on peak times and quiet times.The maintenance or
lack of was brought up recently when the driver asked us to call out when our
stop was nigh as the call bell was faulty and when there is a gap at the bottom
of the rear doors you choose your seat wisely so as to avoid the draughts. The
timing of each run is more accurate so we signal the driver or he sails past as
one driver informed me that it is unsafe to stop the bus suddenly because of
it,s size .At the exchange trying to enter at peak hour is a problem because of
the vehicles travelling east on Lichfield in the left lane who want to turn
left into Manchester St.I think the bus should have priority.
I would like to make some comments on issues around transporting people in
wheelchairs.
Tracy is right when she says it is difficult for wheelchairs users to get a
taxi. High demand for services and a shortage of drivers are the main
reasons why. There is currently excess capacity in the Christchurch
wheelchair taxi fleet due to a shortage of suitable drivers. If anybody
would like to become a driver please contact me on 0276584211. First
Direct can have greater coverage of wheelchair taxis immediately if we get
more suitable drivers. We also have other positions available. No previous
experience necessary if you have the right attitude, good language skills,
and a good driver's license.
This highlights an issue that Christchurch will have to face if we want a
better passenger transport system. At present, there is a lot of
competition between the groups of taxi and bus operators for a short supply
of suitable drivers with P endorsements. It takes up to two months to
produce a trained driver who can legally transport people for payment. This
is too long for many potential recruits to the passenger service industry,
as they need to earn money straight away, so they often drift away from
passenger service before becoming qualified. I believe Red Bus can afford
to pay recruits for that period but many operators aren't so fortunate.
The passenger transport system is constrained by the number of qualified
drivers who are willing and able to do different types of work. I would
like to see a political effort to solve the driver shortage problem that
Christchurch's passenger service industry faces, and I would be happy to
talk to anyone who wants to work towards this. Passenger transport is
becoming increasingly important and we need extra drivers to solve issues
such as the poor taxi coverage that Tracy highlights. The situation of
scarce essential resources such as drivers, and bus and taxi operators
competing against each other for them, needs addressing if Christchurch is
to improve its transport system.
I would like to correct something Tim Kerr has written that he attributed, I
think, to me. Taxi operators do get subsidies. Total Mobility gives a
subsidised fare for users but taxi companies get paid directly the subsidy
to distribute to their operators. There are also a few other subsidies for
wheelchair transport that go to operators because there are a lot of extra
costs involved.
This month has seen the introduction of a new TM payment of $10 GST incl. to
all operators in New Zealand for trips where the hoist is used, which
highlights a second issue concerning wheelchair transportation. Drivers can
not charge any loading fee under the new scheme. A number of the taxis in
Christchurch are configured to carry 3 and 4 wheelchairs, which can take
quite a while to load and unload (sometimes this takes longer than the
journey). So some wheelchair trips are becoming less profitable, especially
for the operators who have invested in 4xWC vehicles (some of the Ford
Transits you see around). With the introduction of the new $10 subsidy
(which is really $8.89 without GST), Christchurch operators lost previous
regional subsidies which included some payment for loading. Taxis that
take several wheelchairs do provide more fuel efficient transportation, as
Tim Kerr suggests, if compared to single trips made in many vehicles.
Another Ecan loading subsidy may be something to revisit if Christchurch
wants to encourage this kind of wheelchair transport which is also more cost
effective to users.
Many taxi operators in other regions have got out of transporting
wheelchairs and it would be a shame if this happened in Christchurch.
Although there is always room for improvement, Christchurch has much better
wheelchair taxi services than some other places in NZ. Wheelchair taxis are
expensive for taxi operators, customers and the taxpayer, and the vehicles
have to do a lot of other types of work other than TM wheelchair
transportation to be profitable. We have to be careful to build the
services and not see operators in Christchurch exit such a necessary part of
the industry.
Dial-a-ride is also meant to be trialled this year but I'm not sure how
that's going. It will be some kind of more flexible bus route for
wheelchair transportation that users can phone. However, I have doubts that
going bigger is the best way, due to the significant loading time, and my
assumption of dial-a-ride in ChCh is it will be less flexible with its
routes than fleets of taxis, and flexibility becomes important when you are
transporting dispersed groups of people at different times of the day and
night. If time is quite valuable to users I think dial-a-ride could have
problems if it tries to take too many chairs per trip. It has to guarantee
people will get to work, the doctor, church etc. on time. Dial-a-ride will
have to be quite heavily subsidised to work I would imagine, but that's not
to say it can't work because it does in some parts of the world. Time will
tell.
I don't agree with Tim that subsidies always hide inefficiencies (although
often they do). Sometimes subsidies are necessary because society highly
values some things with significant costs attached.
I hope this has given people some insight into some of the issues and
complexities involved.
Hello, Nick,
Thanks for clarifying the issues for us about the wheelchair taxis. I even
learnt a thing or two which I didn't know before. I also think it's a bit much
for the poor taxi drivers to have to pay $10 TM payment. These guys have to
make a living just like everyone else.
Sorry I can't take up your offer of being a taxi driver. As a member of the
Royal NZ Foundation of the Blind, I don't think I would qualify as a very good
or safe driver - he he!
Hi Tracey,
Sorry, I didn't make myself clear. The drivers don't pay the $10. They
receive it as a subsidy, but on some trips it is looking less profitable
when drivers take extra chairs due to longer loading/unloading times and no
mechanism in the subsidy to address this (the drivers get only $10 no matter
how many chairs they take in one trip). There was a regional subsidy Ecan
was paying that did help address loading/unloading time but they decided to
take it away this month when the national subsidy was implemented. The $10
subsidy looks like it will be better on the trips with one or two chairs and
not so much loading time, but it may yet discourage operators to invest in
the more expensive vehicles that take up to 4 chairs, which at the moment
can provide more options and cost-effective solutions for users, as well as
being more fuel efficient on large multiple wheelchair trips. So it could
yet be something of a two-edged sword in Christchurch.
I should add that nationally this is the first time in most regions
operators are getting any subsidy to address the extra costs involved in
transporting wheelchairs, so it should go some way to help building up
services around the country. The Christchurch experience proves that
government support makes a big difference.
Dear Tim
There are very good reasons why wheelchair users are not seen on buses
as often as they would like. The buses may seem wheelchair friendly but
often they are not.
People with disabilities are often unemployed and on benefits, therefore
have a limited income. Bus transport is fiscally the best option for
them however the design of the busse is still not good enough. Bus
drivers have set timetables to adhere to and waiting for a person in a
wheelchair or on fact a lady with a pram, affects his time table.
Another issue is that buses will pull up at a bus stop and inform the
wheelchair user that the bus ramp is not working. If this is in fact the
case, should the bus leave the depot if it is not in good working oredr.
Perhaps if Mr Holton-Jefferies or another representative from Ecan,
attends the DPH Transport Forum tonight at the baptist Church, Oxford
Terrace, they may be able to understand the frustration of those in
wheelchairs.
Cheers
BJ
BJ Clark QSM JP
Regional Facilities Manager & Access Advisor
CCS Disability Action
PO Box 8066
Riccarton
Christchurch
email - <email obscured>
Ph (03) 348 8974
cell 027 296 5505