South Of Sheffield Traffic Madness

[Andy C 86]

On 27/12/2019 at 11:12, Planner1 said:

This is what has already been happening for as many years as I can remember. Much of the money available for highway schemes is already targeted at improving bus services and encouraging walking and cycling.

 

Trouble is, only the tram actually produces mode shift away from car use. 

 

The evidence that I've seen points to the fact that any mode shift towards another "sustainable" mode of travel (walk, cycle, bus) , just abstracts journeys away from the other "sustainable modes of travel.

 

In my view the only way we will see major reductions in car use is if it is made much more expensive or more difficult (eg there's nowhere to park it if you use do it) to use the car.

There are of course limits on what can be done - be that financially, politically and physically.

 

My gripe these days is with politicians publically criticising bus operators for poor reliability when surely they know full well the issue is traffic congestion which is something the politicians themselves need to grapple with.

 

Public sector run the buses? Will the traffic congestion magically vanish or operating costs magically fall? I don't think so. Instead the tax payer will have to put more money in to prop up the losses many local buses are currently making.

[bassett one 450]

not bad today in s8 ,went to st james retail park,but busy as normal there,but the only way buses will work is by making them free like luxemburg 

[Planner1 437]

1 hour ago, bassett one said:

 the only way buses will work is by making them free like luxemburg 

see post #84

[Planner1 437]

3 hours ago, Andy C said:

Public sector run the buses? Will the traffic congestion magically vanish or operating costs magically fall? I don't think so. Instead the tax payer will have to put more money in to prop up the losses many local buses are currently making.

I suspect the logic that most people apply to that question is that they believe that the bus companies do make a profit, so if they were under public ownership, the profit could be used to provide more bus services on currently uneconomic routes or fares could be lowered.

[Weredoomed 10]

On 31/12/2019 at 13:57, Planner1 said:

According to census data, travel to work mode share in Sheffield is 2 to 3 % for cycling (depends on trip length) and 10% for walking.

That is not, by any stretch of the imagination, "a lot".

[Planner1 437]

3 hours ago, Weredoomed said:

That is not, by any stretch of the imagination, "a lot".

When you are dealing with huge numbers of commuting trips, even a fairly small percentage is a lot of people

[carosio 186]

3 hours ago, Planner1 said:

I suspect the logic that most people apply to that question is that they believe that the bus companies do make a profit, so if they were under public ownership, the profit could be used to provide more bus services on currently uneconomic routes or fares could be lowered.

Depends how big a profit they (public ownership) would want and how much of it would go to investment in the service; the bigger the profit, the better the service?

[Tony 10]

20 hours ago, Planner1 said:

I suspect the logic that most people apply to that question is that they believe that the bus companies do make a profit, so if they were under public ownership, the profit could be used to provide more bus services on currently uneconomic routes or fares could be lowered.

That's more wishful thinking than logic I'm afraid.  Most people  barely trust the council / SCR Mayor's Office to switch the street lights on, never mind to run an entire bus / train / tram company better than the private sector. The idea that public sector can magically transform public transport merely by eliminating profit from the equation is for the birds and promulgated by people with unfounded confidence in either their own ability or political ideology.

 

For comparison purposes, while I forget the actual number ISTR that TFL in Greater London made a loss of close to a billion pounds in the last reporting period. Let us not forget that the "loss" is actually money straight out of everyone's pocket.

 

There is no bus "profit" to reinvest, just bigger bills for everyone which are at the whim of politicians that eventually lead to a worse service subject to cuts when other political priorities take precedent. 

Edited January 4, 2020 by Tony

[Justin Smith 10]

On ‎24‎/‎12‎/‎2019 at 08:59, Planner1 said:

I think you are being very disingenuous here.

 

”We never spend any money on the alternatives”? “The alternatives are non-existent”?
 

What about the Supertram. Cost £230m.  Other cities like Leeds would love to have a tram system like ours.
 

We have also spent very substantial amounts on bus corridors and bus priority to improve the quality, speed and punctuality of bus services.

 

There’s also been a lot spent on cycling and walking and you can see the type of infrastructure the Council are now aiming for on Charter Row. Segregated cycle superhighway.

 

The cities like Leeds and Nottingham which have got cycle superhighways, bid for and won the funding for them through a specific government fund. Sheffield bid for money, but didn’t get anything on that occasion.

 

New facilities for sustainable travel need funding and the Council have bid to the government for over £80m from the Local Sustainable Transport Fund, see:https://sheffieldnewsroom.co.uk/news/council-set-to-bid-for-85-million-sustainable-transport-pot/

 

There are alternatives, but the painful truth is that many car drivers would not use public transport even if it were free. The only way most will get out of their cars is if they are made to (eg access restrictions ) or are priced off the road ( congestion charge, very high parking charges etc).

If it really was free traffic congestion would disappear, particularly if the increased use of busses and trains led to more frequent services on more routes. The fact is that public transport is soddin` expensive, particularly if more than one person is travelling.

NOTE : I'm not saying traffic would disappear, but the decline in car usage would be enough to make traffic jams largely a think of the past. One slight problem you would have, if car usage dropped so car journeys were quicker than they are now, that would act to increase car use, but, on balance, I'm sure the there would be fewer cars on the road, particularly at peak times.

Edited January 4, 2020 by Justin Smith

[Planner1 437]

16 minutes ago, Justin Smith said:

If it really was free traffic congestion would disappear, particularly if the increased use of busses and trains led to more frequent services on more routes. The fact is that public transport is soddin` expensive, particularly if more than one person is travelling.

NOTE : I'm not saying traffic would disappear, but the decline in car usage would be enough to make traffic jams largely a think of the past. One slight problem you would have, if car usage dropped so car journeys were quicker than they are now, that would act to increase car use, but, on balance, I'm sure the there would be fewer cars on the road, particularly at peak times.

The studies I saw said the majority of car drivers said they wouldn't use public transport if it were free. Whether that would be the reality is a matter for conjecture. You'd need to reduce the number of cars on the road by maybe a quarter to a third if you wanted to achieve the same traffic conditions we see during the school summer holidays.

 

Also, evidence suggests that any increases in bus use tend to come from those who already travel by "sustainable" modes, like walking, cycling, light rail, not from car drivers. The only public transport which takes mode share away from car use is the tram.

 

Another issue would be where to find the money from. Most of the money given by government to local authorities for highways / transport projects is "capital" money and can only be used for building things / providing assets. It can't be used for "revenue" purposes, which is what would be needed for subsidising operational costs of bus fleets. So, you can't just use the money which would otherwise be spent on transport capital projects, because it's not eligible spend.

 

Public transport expensive? So is motoring. Motoring organisations put the cost of running a car at circa £3.5k a year. You could buy around three annual public transport passes for South Yorkshire for that: https://www.travelsouthyorkshire.com/SYConnectplusAnnual/ So, a small family could use public transport for a similar cost to running a car.

[dave_the_m 61]

My morning commute takes 15 minutes door to door by car, or about 45 mins by buses, or 55 mins by foot. If buses were free, I'd probably still choose to drive.

[e5c4p3 10]

On 31/12/2019 at 20:30, Planner1 said:

I’ve seen research which suggests most car drivers would not use public transport even if it were free.

Perhaps that’s because a bus or train that cannot be relied upon to turn up is not a viable option for some irrespective of the whether it’s free or not.