Year-on-year congestion levels in London soar outside city centre as schools go back

I suspect a lot of it is that people get the kids into a great school whilst renting expensive places.  Then move out of the catchment area to cheaper places but drive the kids to school.

Or in our case live in the catchment of the local sink school - but manage to get into an excellent school nearly 2 miles away.  That would be cyclable distance, but isn't cycle friendly due to being on the south circular.  

I think we saw during lockdown that many of those people don't want to spend hours sitting in a car, and would love to to get out and about on foot or by bike. But they don't know the quietways, cut-throughs, etc., because they're obscure and fragmented, so they default to to the car and suffer the congestion.

mdavidford wrote:

I think we saw during lockdown that many of those people don't want to spend hours sitting in a car, and would love to to get out and about on foot or by bike. But they don't know the quietways, cut-throughs, etc., because they're obscure and fragmented, so they default to to the car and suffer the congestion.

But they'd learn all that in no time if they weren't wasting time sat in traffic

I'm not convinced about 'in no time' - I think those of us who have gained that knowledge underestimate the investment we've made to get to that place.

In any case, that isn't how human psychology works, and wishing it was otherwise doesn't really get us anywhere.

What we could do is make it easier to find and use those routes and remove the mental hurdle.

mdavidford wrote:

 I think those of us who have gained that knowledge underestimate the investment we've made to get to that place.

You only have to put a vague post on a local cycling FB group and you'll get a hundred keen and eager cyclists proposing routing options with all the advantages and disadvantages etc. We all want to help ease the big change!  

Christopher TR1 wrote:

Why do people do it?! I just don't understand it. Is it because they've spent so much money on a car that they are happy to sit in it, even in stationary traffic?

That's very large factor.  Once you've spent all that capital in buying and insuring it and effectively written them off, the cost of each journey is marginal.  There have been many proposals to switch the costs to per journey by increasing the cost of fuel (fuel duty escalator) but the government wanted the votes of drivers, so they froze the duty instead; we see the result.

For some there is definitely a sunk cost element. But aren't many cars leased now? Meaning that the cost isn't marginal, people are sinking hundreds of pounds a month on leasing the thing, then start again with a new one in 2-3 years. 

The cost of the lease is basically sunk once you sign it and you only pay per mile once you have got to a level of usage few cars in London will achieve (10,000 a year)

It's not sunk. It is a committed future cost which may not be realised. It also may give rise to other costs during the life of the lease.

I've really no idea why people are prepared to sit in a jam in their car. Is it because they're lazy or scared? I've lived in London for several decades and have cycled around the city for much of that time. I've also owned numerous motorbikes. I simply cannot understand why anyone would want to drive a car across London on a regular basis. And I do own a car now, having bought (the first  one when I became a parent.

I've commuted on two wheels across London for years (with and without an engine) and have no idea why people value their time so little that they'll willingly sit in a traffic queue. When I raise this point with people they'll say they don't want to get sweaty or are nervous of being on two wheels or that they have stuff to carry. But every time I come to a set of traffic lights on two wheels, I simply pass by most of the drivers sitting in their cars by themselves. And DfT data shows 40% of journeys made by car in the UK are for distances of two miles or less.

You answered your own question.  You've become a parent and ferry the kids around in a car.  Me too.  I've tried cycling with them but it really is rubbish most of the time.  i did look at a cargo bike as an option but wouldn't have worked due to the the route to school being the south circular (pollution), or through parks with anti-motorbike gates that i can't even get the tagalong through.  Also I'd have to park in in the street becasue i couldn't carry it down my front steps or get through the door.

Most of them arent willing to accept what they are doing is part of the problem,they'll blame cyclists for taking space,or not enough new roads being built, or if only more car parks were free so they could park there etc etc. For some I genuinely think they are so wedded to their cars and effortlessly driving everywhere the thought of making any physical effort probably scares them more than mixing with traffic does

Cargobike wrote:

Must be a London thing as traffic levels here in the Midlands are still significantly lower than they were 6 months ago. 

You reckon?  My  ommute by bike from Sutton Coldfield to Walsall has been every bit as busy (and as hostile, and as impatient, as far as the motorists are concerned) as it was last year.  Things have pretty much gone back t normal now the schools are back.

I haven't noticed it myself as much but then I'm not commuting still as the office didn't open due to the uptick in cases in Birmingham.  

I was in that der London the weekend for the MiL's Birthday. I normally do M11 / A12 / Blackwall Tunnel and the traffic on Saturday night and Sunday Evening return seems to indicate all the cars are back on the road down there. 

Richard D wrote:

Cargobike wrote:

Must be a London thing as traffic levels here in the Midlands are still significantly lower than they were 6 months ago. 

You reckon?  My  ommute by bike from Sutton Coldfield to Walsall has been every bit as busy (and as hostile, and as impatient, as far as the motorists are concerned) as it was last year.  Things have pretty much gone back t normal now the schools are back.

Not everywhere in the Midlands is Birmingham either.

Major cities are far more likely to suffer a greater return to congestion as commuters turn to the car rather than the train as they've moved further away from the city centre in search of a better quality of life at a half decent price.

My examples were Derby and Nottingham, two cities far smaller than Birmingham and London. It's noticeable that Nottingham is busier than Derby, it's a bigger city, but the need for the grand commute is far smaller than in Birmingham, or London too.

I thnk the reason it's hit harder in London is that the public transport infrastructure is normally used ahead of cars for the majority of people; however we're being told to avoid buses, tubes, trains etc for distancing reasons and to allow those who need to use them to do so.  So we have the weird situation of a huge visible rise in people on cycles, on electric scooters and walking in parallel with the creeping rise of motor traffic (despite so many people still working from home). The removal of public transport as an option is displacing workers in both directions.

At my work I have 5 people who had never cycled in London now cycling to work and a couple more walking the sort of distance where they'd always taken a bus before. This sounds like a gain but I also have a couple of colleagues who are now driving to work who previously would have got a combination of tubes/buses.  I know it's just one example but at my workplace the comparatively large increase in cyclists and walkers has not got anyone out of a car yet the increase in drivers is +2 cars on the road. 

I think another part of the problem is far too many people "just can't" cycle because of (something).

And the Govt had been spending months saying "Don't use public transport because you'll DIE!".

It isn't surprising that people just got back in their cars...

Bears really do shit in the woods!

brooksby wrote:

I think another part of the problem is far too many people "just can't" cycle because of (something).

But what? Surely if someone is capable of driving a car they are capable of riding a bike? (possible exception of some people with disabilities but even then there is probably an alternative to the car).

The disability thing is a crap excuse usually made by people without one. Disability is the subset of society that is most likely to use car alternatives and are most hindered by a societal reliance on cars. We shouldn't use the word disability as a cover for people who are just lazy, and afraid of sun/rain/heat/cold or whatever other pathetic excuse they come up with to justify driving two miles.

Philh68 wrote:

The disability thing is a crap excuse usually made by people without one. Disability is the subset of society that is most likely to use car alternatives and are most hindered by a societal reliance on cars. We shouldn't use the word disability as a cover for people who are just lazy, and afraid of sun/rain/heat/cold or whatever other pathetic excuse they come up with to justify driving two miles.

See also: "ambulances won't be able to get through".

Christopher TR1 wrote:

brooksby wrote:

I think another part of the problem is far too many people "just can't" cycle because of (something).

But what? Surely if someone is capable of driving a car they are capable of riding a bike? (possible exception of some people with disabilities but even then there is probably an alternative to the car).

I know that.  I was alluding to how people seem to constantly come up with excuses as to why they "just can't cycle":

I just can't cycle because I'll get all sweaty.

I just can't cycle because the roads are too busy.

I just can't cycle because of all the hills.

I would cycle but its raining.

I would cycle but its too sunny.

I would cycle but I have to do some shopping.

I would cycle but I don't own a helmet.

I would cycle but ... <fill in some other excuse here>.

brooksby wrote:

Christopher TR1 wrote:

brooksby wrote:

I think another part of the problem is far too many people "just can't" cycle because of (something).

But what? Surely if someone is capable of driving a car they are capable of riding a bike? (possible exception of some people with disabilities but even then there is probably an alternative to the car).

I know that.  I was alluding to how people seem to constantly come up with excuses as to why they "just can't cycle":

I just can't cycle because I'll get all sweaty.

I just can't cycle because the roads are too busy.

I just can't cycle because of all the hills.

I would cycle but its raining.

I would cycle but its too sunny.

I would cycle but I have to do some shopping.

I would cycle but I don't own a helmet.

I would cycle but ... <fill in some other excuse here>.

And when you provide them with the solution to whatever excuse they give for not cycling, they immediately find another.  It doesn't matter if all their perceived problems are addressed, they are literally addicted to their cars, which was a finding of an RAC report about ten years ago.