Despite the distances to be covered and the density of public transport (metro, tramway, RER, bus), it is in Paris that we walk the most, according to a study carried out on behalf of the National Federation of Transport Users (Fnaut). The capital is indeed characterized by a very low use of the car, with only 13% of the modes of transport, and a very important use of walking (52%). This could therefore also develop in other cities, medium and small in particular, where shorter distances are generally traveled. Because, far from being competitors, walking and public transport would then be complementary. To promote walking, which is free, does not pollute and is beneficial for health, it would naturally be advisable to ensure the safety of users, in particular on pedestrian crossings; the best is to generalize the circulation to 30 km / h (except on the axes of transit) in order to appease the city, as in the agglomeration of Grenoble. A regulation of which pedestrians and cyclists are the first beneficiaries, specifies the Fnaut. It is also necessary to free the sidewalks from what encumbers them and widen them, but also to create a network of routes reserved for pedestrians, properly lit, serving schools, public services, shops, squares and green spaces.
In terms of public transport, the tram and metro, which are faster and able to transport large numbers of travelers, are only justified in large agglomerations with significant flows (Paris, Lyon, Grenoble, Rennes, Strasbourg). On the other hand, in small and medium-sized towns where they would be oversized, only the bus is suitable. For Fnaut, the space freed up on the surface by the metro must be devoted not only to pedestrians and cyclists but to urban life in general. In the study, the central cities (main city of the agglomeration) where public transport is the most used all have a metro or tram network. Moreover, when an ordinary bus line is replaced by a tram, traffic increases by 130%, while a high-level service bus (BRT) increases it on average only by 30 to 40%. According to Fnaut, the absence of a tram explains the low modal share of public transport in some cities: 5% in Toulon and Saint-Nazaire, 4% in Pau, for example.
Another observation: to promote the use of public transport, it would be necessary as a priority to improve the hourly amplitude of the network and its coverage of the territory, which can be done at an acceptable cost, if the example of Vorarlberg is to be believed. (Austria), where 20 bus lines serve a rural area with a density comparable to that of the Jura. This network has more frequentation than that of medium-sized French towns, with 150 trips per year and per inhabitant, although the inhabitants are well-off and very motorized. However, the habits of suburbanites are similar to those of peri-urban: in central cities, the car represents 49% of modes of travel – against 70% in the suburbs and 75% in peri-urban areas where many precarious workers live.
In the most “virtuous” cities studied (Paris, Lyon, Grenoble, Rennes, Strasbourg, etc.), residents are mostly used to walking more; they use public transport to a lesser extent, but are not very fond of cycling. According to the study, cities are more virtuous because the use of the car is more difficult and they have adopted more ambitious mobility policies for a longer time. While in cities, the more space there is dedicated to walking and driving, the more people move on foot and by car and the more space allocated to buses and trams, the more they travel by transport. collective. On the other hand, there would be a weak correlation between the space allocated to the bicycle and its modal share, some municipalities also granting a lot of space to the car and their cycling facilities are often more intended for leisure. In addition, the inhabitants often make long journeys, which are difficult to do by bicycle.
Marie Gasnier
–
