"Nathaniel Porter" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
"Nick Finnigan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
How would you define 'much less congested', and what
benefits would that have for town centre shoppers (say)?
Basically the only traffic in towns would be from people living in that town going to somewhere
out of town (but not commuting). People wouldn't drive into town centres - they'd walk, cycle or
take the bus/tram instead (it'd be cheaper, and more obviously so than at present) regardless of
where they
That is still traffic into the town centre.
Quoted message said:came from. Long distance traffic wouldn't go through towns, they'd go around them on bypasses. As
a guesstimate, I'd say you could half traffic in towns if you provided adequate cycle hire
facilities, cycle routes, mass transport and parking, and if the charges were set correctly.
Using bikes instead of a car increases traffic.
Quoted message said:The benefits for town centre shoppers depend alot on the layout of the town. Where the shopping
area is mostly pedestrianised and/or low traffic (i.e. Coventry), the positive effects would be
limited to simply getting to the shopping area quicker.
So a 3 mile walk+bus journey into Coventry off peak would
take roughly how long door-to-door, compared with a car?
Quoted message said:In towns where significant shopping streets form major routes (like Bedford), the reduction of
traffic would mean people could go about their shopping without having to dodge traffic.
So the half of traffic which remains is slower moving?
Quoted message said:It would also make town centres more attractive, and would this would help to halt the slide to
"Ghost town Britain".
If off-peak journeys into a by-passed town centre are congested, doesn't that mean they are
attractive?
