“Free public transport is a bad idea, which penalizes first the cycling and walking “

Forum. Free public transport is not a goal in itself. It is a means which must be at the service of a transport policy together in a coherent way all modes of travel. The key question is thus to ask what are the modes preferred by policy moves and why.

In an objective of sustainable urban development based on the three pillars (economic, social and environmental modes to use are those that provide sufficient mobility, while being more environmentally friendly, consume fewer non-renewable resources, the less costly for the households and for the community, the more favourable to the urban scene and the best for the health.

For the best response to this problem, it is preferable to first walking and cycling staff, and the public bicycles, public transport and the uses shared of the car, and finally the car in solo and two-wheelers.

Walking and cycling can provide to them only two-thirds of urban trips, according to several studies on the potential use of these modes may be carried out in major centres (London, Lille, Copenhagen, Innsbruck…). And it would certainly be also the case in Dunkirk (North). Public transport can then take over for longer trips, and the car for access to the peripheral areas difficult to reach otherwise.

This new hierarchy of travel modes is now advocated or debated in many cities of the world and opposes the “all-automobile”, as in ” all public transport “. If it is adopted, it is necessary to avoid any measure of affordability, which would affect the walking and cycling staff, both these modes are virtuous to all points of view.

Network saturated in the center

However, free public transport, which penalizes first the bike,…

Like this post? Please share to your friends:
Leave a Reply