We blame drivers for driving, when we should be blaming transport planners for not providing enough public transport.
That’s a vicious circle, people need cars because the transport offer is insufficient, taxpayers don’t want to give more money for transport because most people don’t use them as they already have cars.
A transport planner could argue that alright. He doesn’t have enough money or power or time to do his job properly, or he has other pressures on him. He doesn’t have enough training. There could be plenty of excuses, and even legitimate ones.
I do have higher expectations from transport/road planners to fix the transport/road mess, than from transport/road users.
Are you claiming the point is that there are people whose job is to plan the public transportation, who have enough money to have more of it working but who purposefully decide not to? Why would they do that?
I’ve never worked in one of those offices. I don’t know why things are so often badly done. I’d guess they are like everyone else. They do things a certain way out of habit, and don’t think enough about why they are doing things that way, or whether that approach is appropriate to each job.
But I don’t know. I’m like everyone else. I just see the results when they bollox their job up.
If poor transport planning is the reason, then it means that there are times where too much transport offer is set at places where it is not needed, and they would be better set somewhere else instead. I don’t tend to observe that (but of course, this is a single person’s experience!), which makes me think that they lack financial means to improve their service.
I notice these things a lot. Where roads and junctions are expensively over-engineered. They add granite road insets, or fancy paving, or traffic lights where they’re not needed, etc.
Humans have a tendency to over-engineer. They tend to spend their entire budgets, even when they are quite big budgets. They optimise too much for a single metric and forget other important factors.
There’s nowhere near where you live that’s been unneccesarily changed around several times in the last few decades, while other places that need imporvements have been neglected?
I notice these things a lot. Where roads and junctions are expensively over-engineered. They add granite road insets, or fancy paving, or traffic lights where they’re not needed, etc.
Ok but we’re talking about the public transportation. This is actuallly consistent with the idea that public transportation be underbudgeted in favour of more projects who are directed towards car drivers.
That’s a vicious circle, people need cars because the transport offer is insufficient, taxpayers don’t want to give more money for transport because most people don’t use them as they already have cars.
A transport planner could argue that alright. He doesn’t have enough money or power or time to do his job properly, or he has other pressures on him. He doesn’t have enough training. There could be plenty of excuses, and even legitimate ones.
I do have higher expectations from transport/road planners to fix the transport/road mess, than from transport/road users.
Are you claiming the point is that there are people whose job is to plan the public transportation, who have enough money to have more of it working but who purposefully decide not to? Why would they do that?
No of course not.
I’ve never worked in one of those offices. I don’t know why things are so often badly done. I’d guess they are like everyone else. They do things a certain way out of habit, and don’t think enough about why they are doing things that way, or whether that approach is appropriate to each job.
But I don’t know. I’m like everyone else. I just see the results when they bollox their job up.
If poor transport planning is the reason, then it means that there are times where too much transport offer is set at places where it is not needed, and they would be better set somewhere else instead. I don’t tend to observe that (but of course, this is a single person’s experience!), which makes me think that they lack financial means to improve their service.
Here’s an example I read recently. They were trying to make a change, with good intentions. They have the money to implement it.
But they did it in a way that was illegal. They didn’t have the competences or thoughtfulness or guidance or whatever to plan the project correctly.
It’s not always a shortage of money to fix the roads. It’s often just incompetence from the competent body of people.
I notice these things a lot. Where roads and junctions are expensively over-engineered. They add granite road insets, or fancy paving, or traffic lights where they’re not needed, etc.
Humans have a tendency to over-engineer. They tend to spend their entire budgets, even when they are quite big budgets. They optimise too much for a single metric and forget other important factors.
There’s nowhere near where you live that’s been unneccesarily changed around several times in the last few decades, while other places that need imporvements have been neglected?
Ok but we’re talking about the public transportation. This is actuallly consistent with the idea that public transportation be underbudgeted in favour of more projects who are directed towards car drivers.
Oh, you’re just talking about buses and trains, not urban transportation in general? In that case your argument makes a lot of sense.
In thinking more about the whole thing - prioritisation of different types of vehicle, road layouts and rail connectivity, and the interconnections.