Train Overcrowding

[swt_passenger]

I presume that includes standing capacity as the other official description is '30 or more standing per 100 seats'. And 'if a standing passenger has less than 0.45 sq m of space'.

That 0.45 sq m per standing passenger has a major caveat as well, it only applies to conventionally laid out seating accomodation. Two specific trains have a lower area per standee, SWT inner suburban 455s and SE 376s both have different figures, in SWT's case it's 0.25 sq m, the SE 376 is 0.35 sq m.

It has to be assumed that other recent designs such as the LO 378s have a much increased specific standing capacity as well.

 

[WatcherZero]

Thats always been one of my questions tbtc, is their a defined standard for carriage length when talking about trains in abstract i.e. not class specific?

Pacers 15m
Sprinters/450/Electrostar/Javelin 20m (Most common length?)
Pennines/Voyager/Turbostar/380/Mk3/Mk4 23m
Pendolino/Meridian/Super Voyager 24m

Proposed Super Express was 21m Diesel and 26m electric carriages (Longest?)

 

[swt_passenger]

Proposed Super Express was 21m Diesel and 26m electric carriages (Longest?)

It's only the diesel power car that is 21m (because it has no accomodation), but all the passenger carriages and electric driving cars are 26m, whatever the train type.

In the last SWT franchise spec SLC2, the absolute capacities of the different stock was given as follows:

Class/TotalSeats/Standing/Calculated %
455 / 236 / 380 / 161%
450/ 253 / 258 / 102% (High Capacity version)
450 / 270 / 196 / 73%
444 / 334 / 186 / 56%
159 / 194 / 90 / 46%

Every one of those capacities is far higher than the so called PIXC measures of noone standing in a long distance train, and 30% in a suburban commuter train, so I assume they are the absolutely wedged condition...

 

[jon0844]

Remember that until recently, the situation was reversed. Scrapping the Mk1 derivatives on the SW/SE/SN side of things was the first big investment taken in the south. When RR got 156s, 158s, 323s between the PTEs etc, the South didn't get as much. Now the situation is reversed, and it will reverse again before long.

Absolutely, I remember when we got brand new 317s on my line as a kid - and now we've still got them!

 

[TGV]

In my experience commuting on trains from all over the country - Scotland, midlands to South East overcrowding can happen anywhere that a short formation is provided compared to the usual service. But those occasions aside the worst by a long way is the South East round London (no surprises).

Worst offenders - Waterloo-Woking stoppers, and on the same line, the Clapham Jct-Woking-Farnborough-Basingstoke semi-fasts are rammed at peak hours too. Moorgate services are comically full at rush hour, Anything round Richmond can be pretty bad too. Cambridge trains from KX are often uncomfortably full. Victoria and Waterloo stations in general are overcrowded!

Away from London, Glasgow-Ayr services can be very busy around 5pm (esp on Fridays), Cross country on sundays (just about anywhere!), and the Bath-Bristol services are under-equipped for the number of people on them.

BUT - none of the above compares to the british holy grail of overcrowding - the Tube. I work in the city and the most notorious lines that I avoid (if possible!) at rush hours are Vicky line between Victoria and Kings Cross, Northern Line round London Bridge and Bank, Waterloo and City line (if you can even get on to it!), Central Line through Zone 1, Circle line (Paddington to KX and around Monument) and the Jubilee line between Waterloo and Canary Wharf.

The worst overcrowding I have ever seen wasn't Japan or NYC, it was the Victoria Line, on a Friday at about 6pm just before Christmas in 2005. I remember it vividly - They'd closed the gates at Oxford Circus to prevent a crush developing down the stairs, but the escalators were still piling people down to the tunnels and platforms that were full to bursting. They had to hit the emergency stop on the escalator to stop people ploughing into the backs of the crowd waiting for the platform. To make it worse, everyone seemed to have either suitcases trying to get home for Christmas or bags of christmas shopping. After waiting for about 15 minutes I got on a train to Kings Cross where it took AGES to get up to the mainline platform because of queues at the ticket barriers - TRYING TO GET OUT!!! God help them if there had been a fire down there, while I'm sure the exits and procedures are adequate, it's the mass panic mentality that would worry me.

So there - that's my 2 cents worth.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That could work, the platforms at Winchester could be extended in both directions with some minor work (not too sure about the bridge in the Eastleigh direction though).

Hmm. Don't think that would be a good idea. Winchester is a "change to nowhere" station. Basingstoke would be a much more sensible bet. Platforms 1-4 could be extended to the south/west over the road bridge (which is actually a tunnel underneath), then you'd have a large station involved in the process - one where people change between London/Southampton/Bournemouth/Portsmouth/Salisbury/Reading/"The North" etc...

Winchester serves itself well, but nothing else.

 

[tbtc]

In my experience commuting on trains from all over the country - Scotland, midlands to South East overcrowding can happen anywhere that a short formation is provided compared to the usual service. But those occasions aside the worst by a long way is the South East round London (no surprises).

BUT - none of the above compares to the british holy grail of overcrowding - the Tube

The only caveat I'd add is that if you can't get on a Tube (or train in Greater London) there isn't long to wait for the next one, unlike some frequencies in "the provinces"

Hmm. Don't think that would be a good idea. Winchester is a "change to nowhere" station. Basingstoke would be a much more sensible bet. Platforms 1-4 could be extended to the south/west over the road bridge (which is actually a tunnel underneath), then you'd have a large station involved in the process - one where people change between London/Southampton/Bournemouth/Portsmouth/Salisbury/Reading/"The North" etc...

Winchester serves itself well, but nothing else.

In fairness, it doesn't really need to be a "big" station, just somewhere well outside London where you can split/ join trains, to ensure sixteen (ish) coaches can fit through Clapham (etc) in one path; not necessarily somewhere that *needs* a sixteen coach train

 

[londonbridge]

If it counts,I found the Wimbledon branch of tramlink during the morning rush hour was always a nightmare when you included the schoolkids piling on. Several times I saw fights break out with people trying to forcibly shove others further into the car so they could board. And if there was an FCC on platform 9 when you reached Wimbledon getting off the platform and out of the station was horrendous.

 

[222666]

Londons problems could be alleviated by radical thinking in terms of changing shift patterns & other metro systems like trams (like, re-introduce them in central London). The ground is shot full of tunnels, perhaps there can be some adoptation of the Royal Mail tunnels but that'd probably be a nightmare , even if only for the peaks. I know it's busy most of the time in London now but not all office jobs require banking hours surely?

My concern with the rest of UK is that the DfT think it perfectly reasonable for TOCs to run inadequate capacity when people are paying for an expected level of service (a seat, in reasonable comfort, with toilet & refreshments dependent on length of journey etc) but there are no minimum limits it seems. It would be helpful if they could define what is the minimum amount of seats or coaches at peak time between city X and city Y but there seems to be not much evidence of this, except maybe in PTE (conurbation) areas. I'd like larger PTE regions (that adjoin each other) covering the whole UK so that even rural areas get better representation relating to the main cities contained in each region.

 

[GodAtum]

If it counts,I found the Wimbledon branch of tramlink during the morning rush hour was always a nightmare when you included the schoolkids piling on. Several times I saw fights break out with people trying to forcibly shove others further into the car so they could board. And if there was an FCC on platform 9 when you reached Wimbledon getting off the platform and out of the station was horrendous.

The buses and trams around Croydon are quite bad especially with the schoolkids :mad:

If I was working in London I would try to stay a later into the evening to avoid the rush hour.

 

[jopsuk]

The ground is shot full of tunnels, perhaps there can be some adoptation of the Royal Mail tunnels but that'd probably be a nightmare ,

What, you mean the post office railway? It has 7ft diameter tunnels at the station mouths.

 

[Greenback]

What, you mean the post office railway? It has 7ft diameter tunnels at the station mouths.

Ideas for using the Post Office Railway crop up from time to time. They are pretty much unfeasible, due to the size of the tunnels as you point out. It was not designed to carry people, it was built to transport bags of mail!

Someone earlier mentioned the service frequencies on the tube. I've often seen a crammed train arrive and waited for the next one in 3 minutes or so, only to find it's pretty empty! Obviously you can't really do this where there's only one train an hour, and this often the case on services like Bristol - Southampton and Norwich - Liverpool.

In my area, trains in the peak from Swansea to Llanelli are 1600, 1605, 1705, 1750, 1809 and 1821. The first two are normally fairly crowded, but the 1705 is often extremely overcrowded. Still, people have no option but to try and squeeze on, making the journey extremely uncomfortable, even if it's only for 19 minutes or so. If the train is 2 car 158's. then it's sometimes impossible to get everyone on, and I once had to wait until the 1750, which I also found to be very busy. At that time, I really wished I lived in London!

 

[Lampshade]

Thats always been one of my questions tbtc, is their a defined standard for carriage length when talking about trains in abstract i.e. not class specific?

Pacers 15m
Sprinters/450/Electrostar/Javelin 20m (Most common length?)
Pennines/Voyager/Turbostar/380/Mk3/Mk4 23m
Pendolino/Meridian/Super Voyager 24m

Proposed Super Express was 21m Diesel and 26m electric carriages (Longest?)

Only 150s are 20m, 153/155/156/158 are all 23m

 

[sprinterguy]

Thats always been one of my questions tbtc, is their a defined standard for carriage length when talking about trains in abstract i.e. not class specific?

Pacers 15m
Sprinters/450/Electrostar/Javelin 20m (Most common length?)
Pennines/Voyager/Turbostar/380/Mk3/Mk4 23m
Pendolino/Meridian/Super Voyager 24m

Proposed Super Express was 21m Diesel and 26m electric carriages (Longest?)

The 26 metre carriages of the IEP would be the longest carriages on the UK network if the project went ahead: Prior to this, 23 metre carriages have always been considered the maximum permissible length to allow flexible use on most UK routes, this has now been rethought as regards IEP as it would be operating solely on major Intercity routes where clearances on curves, etc, are less of an issue than on some secondary routes.

The chosen carriage length of a train type is based on the duties that the train will carry out: The longer 23 metre carriages are favoured for long distance operation as it maximises the number of passengers that can be carried on routes where station dwell times are longer and station stops further apart, so the increased entrance and egress times from the train caused by having more passengers per carriage are not an issue.

Shorter 20 metre carriages tend to be used for commuter and suburban services, generally in combination with wider one third and two third bodyside position doors instead of doors located at body ends, as this maximises the flow of passengers on and off the train at more frequent station stops as distances to the nearest door are reduced from any point of the carriage: This leads to the shorter station dwell times desired by frequent start-stop commuter services.

Pacers are exceptionally short 15 metre carriages due to limitations on the maximum length of the four wheel chassis and it's ability to negotiate tight corners (as we all know they are bad enough as it is even with their short length), which also means the number of entrance doors per two or three car unit can be reduced to maximise the saloon space available. A Pacer is basically a combination of compromises to reduce cost!

Carriage lengths have been increasing over the decades as construction methods have improved and evolved to give stronger vehicles with greater crashworthiness: Mark 1s had a standard length of 19.66m (64' 6"), and I've been lead to believe the later air-con mark 2s were about 4 feet longer than this: Then the mark 3s were the first 23 metre carriages, as improved construction methods allowed this without compromising structural integrity, and they were intended for use on the less restrictive Intercity routes.

The Pendos, Voyagers and Meridians are variations on the 23 metre length, just with a few extra inches added in. 20m and 23m long carriage designs are the norm in the UK, with no variations inbetween, because generally depot facilities have been set up for previous carriage designs with similar dimensions, plus it keeps everything fairly standard for platform stopping positions and so on.

 

[swt_passenger]

Hmm. Don't think that would be a good idea. Winchester is a "change to nowhere" station. Basingstoke would be a much more sensible bet. Platforms 1-4 could be extended to the south/west over the road bridge (which is actually a tunnel underneath), then you'd have a large station involved in the process - one where people change between London/Southampton/Bournemouth/Portsmouth/Salisbury/Reading/"The North" etc...

Winchester serves itself well, but nothing else.

I only suggested Winchester because it only has two platforms to extend, and on the busiest longest distance trains it is already the first stop, and there is no major S&C to relocate, like at Southampton Central. There are plenty of other trains for Basingstoke pax, Portsmouth pax go the other way, and I'd suggest very few people leave Waterloo to go north via Basingstoke in the evening peak. In the up direction likewise, existing trains are non-stop from Winchester.

 

[thefab444]

Winchester is a very important commuter station; not just for the city it is in, but the surrounding area as well. When he was working in London, my Dad used to drive up to Winchester and then get the train from there, and many others like him did the same.

 

[jon0844]

Someone earlier mentioned the service frequencies on the tube. I've often seen a crammed train arrive and waited for the next one in 3 minutes or so, only to find it's pretty empty! Obviously you can't really do this where there's only one train an hour!

While it wouldn't work at some stations where every train in the peaks will be full, I always look at how many trains are behind - by the times on the screens. If there's been a long gap in service for whatever reason, chances are that one or two trains will be near crush loaded. It seems that a full train has people panic and get desperate to squeeze on, whereas I'll wait for when there are trains that are around 1 minute apart (they catch up, given the delays caused by all those people trying to squeeze on to the ones in front).

In most cases, you'll certainly find them near empty - or certainly empty enough to board comfortably.

Given how many people are probably regular commuters, I am surprised more people don't realise this. Yes, I will definitely be up to 5-10 minutes later to the destination than I would be squeezing on, but I don't arrive all hot and flustered.

 

[Greenback]

While it wouldn't work at some stations where every train in the peaks will be full, I always look at how many trains are behind - by the times on the screens. If there's been a long gap in service for whatever reason, chances are that one or two trains will be near crush loaded. It seems that a full train has people panic and get desperate to squeeze on, whereas I'll wait for when there are trains that are around 1 minute apart (they catch up, given the delays caused by all those people trying to squeeze on to the ones in front).

In most cases, you'll certainly find them near empty - or certainly empty enough to board comfortably.

Given how many people are probably regular commuters, I am surprised more people don't realise this. Yes, I will definitely be up to 5-10 minutes later to the destination than I would be squeezing on, but I don't arrive all hot and flustered.

What I love is people rushing down the stairs to catch the tube in the platform, even though it's jam packed! You are right, it's worth reading the screens to work out what's going on, I'd rather be 5 mins later and have a comfortable journey.

Incidnetally, I once had to go for a meeting in Holborn on the day of an Underground strike a few years back. People were coming up from all corners of the UK, but I was the first there 10 minutes before the meeting was due to start! The last person to arrive had come up from Plymouth, and got to the meeting 45 minutes late. As she had got into Paddington (like me) she was amazed how I'd got there so early. My secret? I hadn't bothered with cabs, just nipped out to Westbourne Place and hopped on a pretty empty number 7 bus! By praed Street it was rammed, but on the West of Padd there was quite a bit of room! Then, just a shortish stroll from Russell Square and I was there just a little later than the Tube would have got me there if it had been running!

Now I always take the number 7 to get to that part of town!

 

[mickey]

If there's been a long gap in service for whatever reason, chances are that one or two trains will be near crush loaded. It seems that a full train has people panic and get desperate to squeeze on, whereas I'll wait for when there are trains that are around 1 minute apart (they catch up, given the delays caused by all those people trying to squeeze on to the ones in front).
[...]
Given how many people are probably regular commuters, I am surprised more people don't realise this.

Because many people have had nasty experiences of being caught up in lots of disruption and don't want to miss out on the chance of being on the last train before it all erupted. That and they're generally impatient.

If I'm not in a particular hurry I too am usually happy to wait, especially if the sign says the next train should be along pretty soon. Usually it's much emptier, it's true. Although the modern practice of 'regulating the service', essentially sitting for ages in a station somewhere to re-establish proper spacing, is a nightmare if I'm cutting it fine for a train out of a terminus (I've missed several at Euston that way!), in which case I'd much rather be crammed in but moving.

 

[urbandingdong]

Wow.. I'm truly enlightened ... again. This is what I have realised:
1. We are ( mainly the media ) all screaming about overcrowding and not the fundemental reasons for it.
2. The solutions all appear to be expensive ( stock & platforms )
3. The solutions are only realisable in the medium to long term ( lead ins )

I like the simple assessment of 'Passenger self regulation'... it focusus the picture quite clearly...

i) We all want / have to work with a commute in mind.
ii) More people will do this as time goes on.
iii) Nobody want to pay more for this 'chore' in our age of Austerity.

The Solution?...
Localism - Work / Shop / Play near to where we live.
a) We get that commuting time back ( possibly ) to do 'Stuff'
b) We pay less ( possibly nothing if we walk or bike )
c) We can do something about it NOW ( if we are lucky enough )
d) We can steer commerical goals to a localism life by our actions.
e) We will expend less energy.
f) We can spend more time in our community.

How can we all do this?...
- First of all... Stop and think about what our everyday life entails.
- Ask to work from home. ( or partly )
- Look for a job nearby.
- Try starting a local office.

How can we better realise this?...
- Good local Commerce Planning
- Good local Transport Planning
- Good Urban Design.

What makes this difficult to realise?...
- The Suburbs...

Google or Youtube: 'The end of suburbia'. Its an eye opener that may change the way you think...

"Whats the biggest threat to our planet?...... The Suburbs"

 

[yorksrob]

The Solution?...
Localism - Work / Shop / Play near to where we live.
a) We get that commuting time back ( possibly ) to do 'Stuff'
b) We pay less ( possibly nothing if we walk or bike )
c) We can do something about it NOW ( if we are lucky enough )
d) We can steer commerical goals to a localism life by our actions.
e) We will expend less energy.
f) We can spend more time in our community.

How can we all do this?...
- First of all... Stop and think about what our everyday life entails.
- Ask to work from home. ( or partly )
- Look for a job nearby.
- Try starting a local office.

How can we better realise this?...
- Good local Commerce Planning
- Good local Transport Planning
- Good Urban Design.

What makes this difficult to realise?...
- The Suburbs...

Google or Youtube: 'The end of suburbia'. Its an eye opener that may change the way you think...

"Whats the biggest threat to our planet?...... The Suburbs"

Well, possibly - to an extent. My employers are trying to push this on everyone, however there seem to be limitations to the working from home approach.

For example, it means that you may have to heat your home for longer, making it possibly less environmentally friendly and considerably more expensive for the employee.
The employee may have to buy more equipment/telephone/broadband lines etc.
They may not have an appropriate workspace i.e. small house with young family around - no room for a study.
Most jobs in my experience benefit from having people around to bounce ideas off etc.
Mental health - I'd go quietly mad stuck on my own all day without work colleagues around.

Such a solution may be viable in some cases for one or two days a week but for most people, I doubt it would be a panacea.

Personally I think if more companies adopted flexi-time it would help a lot of people to vary their commute. This is the case where I work in Leeds and pretty much all of the motorists vary their start and leave times to avoid the horrendous traffic.

I myself usually beat the evening rush by visiting the gym afterwork so that I can relax with a cup of tea in relative comfort on the way home.

 

[urbandingdong]

I totally agree will all your comments. Did you notice, however, that all your constraints are based on the environment that we are familiar with? A shift from centralism is a solution, but I would agree that it's not a panacea.
The only issue that really lingers is the 'face to face' bouncing ideas. Technology has a fair way to go before we can tackle that.
Would you agree, however, that it's habitual patterns, that we reinforce and commerce helps to shape, that needs that paradigm shift?
I must confess, i romanticise about the days of yore when life was simpler. It was much more about people being people, than us feeding the machine.

 

[moonrakerz]

From today's "Telegraph":

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/matt/

 

[jon0844]

Like it!

 

[yorksrob]

I totally agree will all your comments. Did you notice, however, that all your constraints are based on the environment that we are familiar with? A shift from centralism is a solution, but I would agree that it's not a panacea.
The only issue that really lingers is the 'face to face' bouncing ideas. Technology has a fair way to go before we can tackle that.
Would you agree, however, that it's habitual patterns, that we reinforce and commerce helps to shape, that needs that paradigm shift?
I must confess, i romanticise about the days of yore when life was simpler. It was much more about people being people, than us feeding the machine.

Yes, this is true - and certainly some of my objections are based on my own personal preferences and conditioning.

But I also wonder whether there is something more fundamental in human nature that benefits from having a clear seperation between home and work life. Perhaps this is just for people with certain types personalities. Or maybe it's different for different types of work. For example, a novelist might feel more in control of his work and therefore more comfortable in having it as part of his home life than someone on a wage.

I also know people who like work as somewhere to escape from home life!

 

[jrhilton]

Where in Britain are the worst places for rush hour?

My vote would be between Earlsfield and Waterloo around 8.10 and 8.30 in the mornings.

I would guess most people at Earlsfield and Clapham Junction would have to wait maybe for two or three trains. Even though trains are every three or so minutes, and never seem to get any further into the train than the door vestibule area.

But ten minutes earlier at 8am it is not bad. All down to everyone wanting to travel between those times to get into work for nine. I'm not sure what else SWT can really do. Suspect sixteen car trains (putting aside all practical considerations!) would be needed between to make a real difference and get most people into seats, but that would be overkill at all other times of the day! Maybe the 10 car suburban program is a good compromise, all things considered.

 

[EWS 58038]

The things you can do with decent infrastructure....
Here you have 1100+ seats on just 1 train.
Trains up to 18 coaches is being investigated.

 

[313103]

I think it is time to move away from single deck trains and invest in double deck trains. These solve many issues the main one being overcrowding at peak times. These are used in quite a few countries around Europe, so why not invest in this type of train. It would solve the problem of also having to extend stations and you could run the service with the same rolling stock and not having to need to extend trains to 12, 16, or even 20 coaches long. A current overcrowded 8 car train would then be full but at least 90% of the current passengers would have a seat.

The problem is that everyone will moan the cost, the cost, the cost............. All in the short term because that is how british business is based short termism, if we changed the mindset and said Yes it will be costly at the outset, but in the long run it would save us a small fortune, i think a lot of what is wrong in business in this country is that we only think of initial costs and what we can get out of it before it is allowed to make itself work. Long term planning and investment is what is required.

It certainly is food for thought.

Thank You EWS58038 for raising the subject.

 

[Greenback]

I totally agree will all your comments. Did you notice, however, that all your constraints are based on the environment that we are familiar with? A shift from centralism is a solution, but I would agree that it's not a panacea.
The only issue that really lingers is the 'face to face' bouncing ideas. Technology has a fair way to go before we can tackle that.
Would you agree, however, that it's habitual patterns, that we reinforce and commerce helps to shape, that needs that paradigm shift?
I must confess, i romanticise about the days of yore when life was simpler. It was much more about people being people, than us feeding the machine.

I agree with you. I think that long distance ciommuting is not a good thing. I always used to liek living within walking distance of my work place. That's not always possible, but I like to keep any commuting I do short, as it is a waste of time I could be using for other things.

The problem is that everyone will moan the cost, the cost, the cost............. All in the short term because that is how british business is based short termism, if we changed the mindset and said Yes it will be costly at the outset, but in the long run it would save us a small fortune, i think a lot of what is wrong in business in this country is that we only think of initial costs and what we can get out of it before it is allowed to make itself work. Long term planning and investment is what is required.

It certainly is food for thought.

Thank You EWS58038 for raising the subject.

Yes, short termism seems to be the overrriding interest in the UK today. I don't know how to change that, though!

 

[jopsuk]

Wow.. I'm truly enlightened ... again. This is what I have realised:
....

There are a heck of a lot of jobs that do require physical presence- research laboratories, manufacturing, medical, care etc. Teaching can be somewhat remotely done for some subjects, but not all, and is generally better with physical presence.

So, we can't all home-work. Further, our internet infrastructure is not high enough capacity and ribust enough to cope with the huge demand than running all those VPN connections would put on it from the security requirments of those jobs that could be done from home.

(I work in a lab, but I do cycle to work. Cycle provision, even in the Cambridge area, is frequently lousy and too-often downright dangerous).

the main barriers though are cultural. Especially in this country, owning a house with a garden is an aspirational thing. Owning a car is seen as a status thing.

 

[cuccir]

With crowded trains all day on some routes (and at peak times on many routes), throwing any resources at speculative Open Access operations. When you have two car units on the Liverpool - Nottingham (Norwich), or three car units on the Cardiff - Portsmouth, or four car units on the Cross Country routes, does anyone think that we should use five car 180s on routes like Bradford - Pontefract - London? I appreciate that in the competitive railway we have Grand Central have simply played the system, but should they be allowed to use these valuable 180s on emptier routes?

Surely this then leads to the pertinent question: where are trains unacceptably empty and how can stock be freed up from these to be used elsewhere.

One starting point I'd have thought would be to make more use of splitting, as empty carriages can often be found at the end of medium-long distance services.

I totally agree will all your comments. Did you notice, however, that all your constraints are based on the environment that we are familiar with? A shift from centralism is a solution, but I would agree that it's not a panacea.
The only issue that really lingers is the 'face to face' bouncing ideas. Technology has a fair way to go before we can tackle that.
Would you agree, however, that it's habitual patterns, that we reinforce and commerce helps to shape, that needs that paradigm shift?
I must confess, i romanticise about the days of yore when life was simpler. It was much more about people being people, than us feeding the machine.

Reading this as a social scientist, there are a few points to ruminate on:
* Statistical evidence shows a pretty nice correlation between the improvement of ICTs (information and communication technologies) and increased mobility (that is, tendency to travel). Communication with more places entails more interaction with them. This might be because of more business travellers, more tourists, or more commodities moving between them. In our everyday lives, too, we move more: as was pointed out above too, it is much more inefficient to have everyone in their own home than in large factories/offices: products thus need to be brought to people, rather than people going to the products. Whilst people might take advantage of the ability to work at home, and thus reduce commuting travel, this is supplemented by increased leisure travel or travel to engage with institutions (you can't have a dentist's check up at home). Often, the major earner in a household (usually male) will have the freedom to move to home working, but this might increase travel for other members eg spouses/children. The need to travel is more than simply a case of face-to-face interaction, though that does come into it.

* High density, high-rise living has been shown to be significantly worse for mental and physical health than suburban living, though suburbia obviously has its issues.Even the environmental impact of the two is similar.

Essentially, then, if we are planning to continue to move towards a society with more and better 'virtual' communication, then current evidence suggests that we need to plan for more and better transport links.