Efficient traffic flow and economic vitality go hand in hand
The petrol engine was a German invention, the work of Gottried Daimler and Carl Benz. It first drove a vehicle in 1885. In England, the early movements of the motor car were hindered by a law which required any 'horseless carriage' on the roads to travel at a maximum of four miles an hour and to be preceded by a man bearing a red flag... a law which was not finally repealed until 1896 when the rules permitted travel at up to fourteen miles per hour. In Montreal, it seems that there are still people who would like motor vehicles to be preceded by the iconic man or woman bearing a red flag and who do not want traffic to flow quickly or efficiently at all.In the early years of the industrial revolution huge networks of canals were built which increased the wealth of all of the European countries concerned. Then, in the 1830's, 40's and 50's the railways came and mostly put the canals out of business. Once again the wealth of all the countries concerned increased enormously since trade was able to grow and prosper to a degree never imagined before. Then, at the end of the 1800's the motor vehicle came into being and, over the next few decades, very quickly replaced the train as the number one way of moving goods and people around and, like each of the previous leaps forward, greatly increased human wealth and comfort in the countries most affected. Today the relative health and vitality of any of the world's national economies is largely measured, for better or worse, by the quantity and type of traffic on the roads - that is to say by the number of vehicles involved in making deliveries of all the various goods and services that mostly get to our doors by road. Fast forward to Montreal in the year 2007 and there is actually an active lobby which wants to reduce the amount of traffic on the roads without realizing that this is in fact a movement to shrink our already small and underproductive local economy.
The Quebec/Montreal economy is already in such serious trouble that we lack even the minimum resources necessary to maintain public infrastructure - roads, bridges and the like. In fact, outside of rush hours, there is very little daytime traffic in the City of Montreal. The belief in 'too much traffic' has largely been created by commuters who have come to believe that just because they create rush hour traffic tie-ups in their private, single occupancy, cars that there is too much traffic in the city. In fact, outside of rush hour, there is very little traffic in the City of Montreal.
This past week, I chose to reconfirm a few recurring statistics. At lunch on Thursday at Rotisserie Italienne on Ste-Catherine and Towers, between one and two in the afternoon, there was hardly any traffic at all. No buses, one delivery vehicle and a smattering of private cars, mostly all with only one occupant. On Friday, at the Presse cafe facing Place des Arts, also on Ste-Catherine Street, the story was the same with hardly any traffic on the street. At three in the afternoon, on the same Friday, there were only eight cars on the block of Ste-Catherine Street, between Peel Street and Metcalfe.
Even during the rush hour, it is often possible to be on Sherbrooke Street between 8:30 and 9:00 in the morning with no traffic for two blocks in either direction. This is because Sherbrooke West is not a route for out of town commuters and is easily able to handle the local commuter traffic. However, outside the morning and afternoon rush hours there is very little traffic in the city and motorists only think that there is because the City of Montreal traffic department has managed to make such a mess of controlling traffic at intersections with the result that unnecessary back-ups and delays, usually involving only six-to-eight cars, are created.
We even have 'idiot arrows', the white 'go straight ahead' arrows that are used to forbid right and left turns on green at traffic lights. Four way stops for pedestrians crossing are another recent initiative that serves to hold up twice as much traffic as necessary, even when there are no pedestrians, and which make traffic light synchronisation difficult to impossible. Some years ago, in England, the London council instituted a 'congestion zone' and most Montreal observers mistakenly thought that the objective was to reduce traffic in the city centre. It was not.
Successful cities with high energy economies do whatever they can to speed up traffic in the city centre and discouraging frivolous trips is just a way to clear the roads to get the important work-related traffic around faster. The actual objective is to have just enough vehicles on the road so that they can get around swifly without unnecessary slowdowns and without putting pointless brakes on the economy. In the Montreal region we even have municipalities that install speed bumps to try to discourage motor vehicles using streets that were designed, built and implemented with the sole and express purpose of encouraging and facilitating the passage of motor vehicles. Putting in roads and then trying to discourage motorists from using them represents muncipal schizophrenia at its most creative.
For the Montreal economy to move forward and prosper we must, as a necessary precondition, abandon our collective mentality of forever trying to slow things down. We do not want dangerous, speeding vehicles but we do want our economy, upon which we all depend, to be serviced by vehicles that can get around quickly and efficiently and with a minimum waste of time and resources.
Imagine the economic disaster if the 'speed bump people' were to get their way and to impose their additional unwarranted slowdowns throughout the entire city. I invite you to take a few minutes now and then to stand on sidewalks in downtown Montreal, during the daytime, and to judge whether we actually have lots of traffic or whether it is really only five to ten vehicles per block. If you conclude that there is really not very much traffic at all in Montreal, outside of the rush hours, I invite you to get in touch with your municipal leaders and to ask for measures that will encourage, rather than discourage, smooth and efficient traffic flow in the direct personal interests of each and every one of us.
Something to consider, and let me know what you think.jeremy.searle@sympatico.ca
This author of this Article has choosen to make this article available with free reprint rights. Click here to copy this article.
Disclaimer: All information on this site is provided for informational purposes only! By no means is any
information presented herein intended to substitute for the advice provided to you by any health care or other professional
or organization.
