Saw a classic example of one this morning, came up behind me in a 50 doing at least 80 crossed the solid lines to under take me and the few vehicles in front of me, cut back across the solid lines to cut in front of a bus. Then saw him cut through a narrow diagonal between cars to cut lanes again. Passed him not 2 minutes later doing 30 in a 70 brake checking a taxi.
That statement is NOT correct.
Buses for many offer a much shorter journey time than using the MTR in many instances. The main issue for buses is the lack of bus priority schemes. In the last 20 years Seoul have doubled the speed of buses in urban areas while in Hong Kong they are about 40% slower. Buses are only slow in Hong Kong because the Government wants them to be slow.
Perhaps your survey should of asked questions about how peoples journey could be made better rather than having 2 preferred solutions - Cordon Charge / Alternate day car pass.
I cant agree it is bad planning. The government encourages public transport but where can the minibus park at night? many just park on the street. Tourism is encouraged but little no space for tour bus parking/waiting so they park illegally blocking traffic (Chatham road is car park). They build sports facilities without any public transport, or parking, so cars are illegally parked blocking the road. They lease buildings for recreation type clubs, there is poor or no public transport and causing cars to block the street, etc. etc. better planning and setting aside parking spaces for buses etc. would open up the roads and reduce congestion.
They have.Original Post Deleted
The extension to HKU was partly paid for from tax dollars rather than MTR property development.
Yes there should be more MTR lines
Electric bikes for the masses!!!
Drivers play a large part as well. Theres a general attitude here of not letting anyone merge, past etc as well as sitting in fast lanes doing 20 under the limit just because. I watched with amusement near Mongkok one day where a large amount of traffic was following a route that pretty much did a U turn around a block before going right. Traffic at the end of that U coming from the right and going straight had stopped across the junction stopping the traffic coming round the U. At the same time the traffic joining that U route was stopping across the junction effectively blocking the traffic that would need to move in order to clear their own route. No one willing to let anyone past and would rather sit on the horn instead.
Some harsher enforcement is needed to change attitudes here.
I don't think congestion is a huge problem here give the size of the place.
I'm not saying congestion isn't a problem...but when I compare it to London or any of the major junctions on the M25...much more pressing issues in my opinion.
You still have the last mile problem, particularly in places like NT where the density is lower and having an MTR station every 100m is impractical. Which then means more transfers - bus to MTR to bus/office. Many people prefer the current situation of just picking up one bus near where they live and going direct to the office. The ability of a bus company to offer lots of routes - which pick up and drop off in slightly different places but have the same backbone, e.g., a freeway, allows this flexibility.Original Post Deleted
My main point is that anything which inconveniences people results in more cars. Just because MTR sounds like a better solution, does not mean it is for everyone. And overall cost - benefit analyses tend to ignore the behaviour component. People who benefit benefit but it does not change traffic (they were previously on a bus). People who don't buy cars. The benefit does not outweigh the cost because the benefits don't take cars off the road (its very rare for people who already have a car to not use it) but costs result in more cars.