IT COMES DOWN TO THIS. MONEY.

Poor planning is the difference between poor quality of life and these inherant problems.

The local councils are to blame. They approve (along with relevant bodies if required) the developments that are transit orientated, they approve the building plans for the facade of new homes to have Garages as the main aesthetic feature and they move a population into a growth region with little infrastructure, forcing us to be car orientated, even having to jump into cars just to buy a loaf of bread.

There are many differing theories on the spacial development of cities. I wont bore you but if you plan a transit based society reliant on cars (as is the case in all Aussie capitals the developers are putting money in councillors pockets to fund their campaigns so they approve what makes money, not what makes sense), yet you discourage those same people you put out there now from driving to the main employment (not to mention the rest) hub of the city? Stupid.

In other words, live out there with your cars, or live in town without them, you cant have it both ways now.

And society is not approaching segregation hey?

Blame our problems on our councils. They make or break this issue, and it is an issue that will not go away, only get worse.

Petrol is the lifeblood of the modern world, now we will go and fight wars for the problems we have created. There is an answer to this, there is a way in which people can have their cars yet be public transport orientated. But we have to start from scratch.

So every time you are in a traffic jam, curse your trusty local government.

"Cease all immigration and force the nincompoops in Canberra to formulate a Population Policy."

Ahh Leigh, you surpass yourself. An article about traffic congestion becomes a chance to slip in a bit of racism with absolutely no link to the topic.

Is there any topic imaginable where you couldn't be casually racist? "Hmm yes, I do think the Australian cricket team has a real chance to win the next World Cup - but only if we stop immigration right this minute!"

Patrick, your article is very rational.

May I add another suggestion. A key reason why many people don't use public transport, or cycle, or walk, is a perceived lowering of status. Pensioners and others less well off have to resort to buses, don't they?

Its time to paint the public transport user as a global and local hero. A saviour of the planet. A pollution fighter. A smart, responsible citizen.

With a backdrop of the climate mayhem that private cars are causing it is not hard to change the ubiquitous negative image that public transport conveys. A hard hitting advertising campaign can do this. After all, look at how smoking habits have changed with a little bit of coaxing..

The idea just needs promotion and can be done without demeaning those who, for one logistic reason or another, still need to use private transport.

Just grist for the mill.

Count0, what are you on about?

At the mere mention of immigration and/or population policy, you bring out the racist slur. According to you, no one can in any way discuss anything to do with immigration or population without being racist. How utterly deplorable.

“Is there any topic imaginable where you couldn't be casually racist?”

Count0, is there any topic imaginable that you couldn’t find a racist connotation in??

This is the most absurd posting I have seen yet on OLO.

May I also remind you that the first rule for posters is to keep responses on topic, which you have completely failed to do here.

.
I have been an avid cyclist for 36 years, since primary school. I ride to work a lot, a return distance of about 30kms. I mix it up with driving. It serves a very good second purpose – aerobic exercise. Cycling is excellent value.

It is one aspect of congestion-alleviation that we should really be promoting. It doesn’t suit everyone of course but if only a small portion of drivers rode to work, only half the time, it would really make a difference. Riding in heavy traffic is a bit of a concern, but with a concerted publicity campaign for both riders and drivers, about the road rules and courtesy, along with a shift in right-of-way rules in the favour of cyclists, it could become a lot more attractive. Anyone who lives within 20km of their workplace, and who is of reasonably fitness or capable of becoming reasonably fit, should be into it

Good to see you're getting published, mate.

Nice article, though I would prefer a tram loop to a bus one.

DK

Mr. Wall,

In your first 5 paragraphs you describe the high economic costs and other negative aspects of traffic congestion in no uncertain terms: 'And these figures cannot begin to predict the widespread and everlasting effects of cars on the environment and our health, which are beyond economic consideration.', 'Something has to be done.', 'Essentially we need to, in one way or another, reduce our dependence on cars..'.

The next 7 paragraphs you outline some of your ideas for solutions. However nowhere in your article, about tackling traffic congestion and pollution, have you even mentioned the establishment of dedicated cycle lanes. I am teaching English in Germany at the moment, and where I live I would estimate 40 to 50 percent of the population uses bicycles to go to and from their place of work or study. That's a huge amount, and in a climate that sometimes drops below -10°C in winter, with very icy conditions. Cycling is so popular that people of all ages are doing this; I've sometimes also seen mothers or fathers pulling a 'chariot' for their toddler behind their bike! (And that's legal). There are no regulations that you have to wear a helmet, because the risk of being hit by car is massively reduced, simply by having cycle lanes.

An extensive cycle network is spread across the entire country, which normally takes about 12 hours to drive a car from one end to the other. This is Germany, the industrial powerhouse of Europe, and the home of Mercedes, BMW, Audi and Porsche, very popular brands at the schools like those that you and I went to Patrick..

Our climate in Australia is far more condusive to outdoor activities than in Europe, and Australians are famous around the world as being amongst the most sports-loving people. Yet we don't even have the most basic cycle path network for commuters to use in our largest city.

How much more expensive could it be than whole new public transport systems? What would be your estimate of the short and long term economic and environmental costs of doing this?