Jump to content

Active Travel


Stu Peters
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Stu Peters said:

BBC story

We should be more like Holland, allegedly. I wonder of the new Director of Public Health realises that we're a bit colder, windier, wetter and more hilly?

Worrying that you're in infrastructure and so against active travel that you'd post publicly against it, without seeming to understand what it's about. That's like the director of public health publicising the positives of smoking.

Being a "bit" colder doesn't mean that people don't put on a jacket and do it already, and the point of active travel isn't about commuting in from the Point of Ayre over the mountain every day. It's about persuading someone who could easily cycle the mile to work to do it. They get fitter, the roads are less crowded, there's more parking spaces. What's not to like ?

 

  • Like 4
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

More people would cycle and walk if it was easier and safer to do so.  The pavements are shocking, the lack of dropped kerbs is appalling.  Watched a motorised wheelchair struggling down Windsor road the other day as no dropped kerbs to cross the side streets.  The roads feel dangerous even if you are a confident cyclist. 
 

strret lighting is patchy. 
 

maybe the member for highways could look at making things better for all users of highways.  And question what the repair budget and timescale is for pavements too. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The Bastard said:

Worrying that you're in infrastructure and so against active travel that you'd post publicly against it

Worrying for you perhaps. Not for the rest of us. It's a refreshing change that someone may not fall for the AcT1Ve tR@VeL  BS. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We  have hundreds of thousands of pounds-worth of new cycleways installed already, bereft of bicycles. Cooil Rd, Pulrose and its Bridge, Peel Rd, Gansey, Lezayre Rd to name a few.

Where are all these commuting cyclists that they were put in place for the benefit of?

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Non-Believer said:

We  have hundreds of thousands of pounds-worth of new cycleways installed already, bereft of bicycles. Cooil Rd, Pulrose and its Bridge, Peel Rd, Gansey, Lezayre Rd to name a few.

Where are all these commuting cyclists that they were put in place for the benefit of?

On the pavements mostly!!

  • Like 1
  • Haha 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really don’t understand any rational person objecting to active travel.  It’s a win:win if implemented correctly.  More people walking, cycling, scootering = Less traffic, which makes traveling quicker, safer and easier for ALL road users (we’ve all experienced this when the schools are off).  What’s not to like?

No one is being forced (or even asked) to stop driving if that’s their preference for any particular journey. Active travel is about offering an alternative travel option for those who want it.  For sure, on particularly wet and windy days, participant numbers will be low, but that’s not a reason to take the stance that it’s not worth doing.  

Netherlands didn’t magically turn into a location where cycling infrastructure is on par with motoring infrastructure in urban areas.  They simply made an informed choice to make it that way.  At one point, they were where we are now.  No doubt there were a fair number of Dutch naysayers then as well….

  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Non-Believer said:

We  have hundreds of thousands of pounds-worth of new cycleways installed already, bereft of bicycles. Cooil Rd, Pulrose and its Bridge, Peel Rd, Gansey, Lezayre Rd to name a few.

Where are all these commuting cyclists that they were put in place for the benefit of?

I’ve yet to see anyone using all this infrastructure in any reasonable numbers. The only main use you see is of the TT access road but they all park in the QB carpark to use it. Hardly anyone commutes. I think I’ve seen one bike on Pulrose Bridge in 6 months. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has the director of public health ever visited?

Active travel and the cycle to work scheme seem to be championed by cyclists in government who want cheap bikes.  

Mr Peters, how is active travel funded by the DOI?

Historically we used to have many more cyclists on the roads without government forcing the issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the point that Stu is trying to make is that encouraging (or criticising for not doing it) people to commute by bike to work is barking up the wrong tree for the reasons he's put forward.

What we should be doing is providing better/more environmentally friendly public transport for work commuting and encouraging active leisure for fitness and health.

We could have put the money used towards installing an electric tramway system to bring people in from Farmhill etc?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, cissolt said:

Has the director of public health ever visited?

Active travel and the cycle to work scheme seem to be championed by cyclists in government who want cheap bikes.  

Mr Peters, how is active travel funded by the DOI?

Historically we used to have many more cyclists on the roads without government forcing the issue.

I quoe this as example of what I simply don't understand (not picking an arguement with any individual poster). 

Why wouldn't you want to encourage active travel.  How does it harm you in any way?  You would benefit, even if you weren't inclined/willing/able to take up the option for your own journeys.

As to your points:   Historically, we had fewer (and smaller) motor vehicles on the road, so cycling was safer and more practical.  I really can't see any government enforcement.  Surely every £ spent on active travel reduces spend on healthcare (probably by a multiple).   People have this weird fascination about linking DOI spending to their own cost in respect of vehicle excise and fuel duty (rather than accepting it's all paid for out of general taxation).  Applying that same logic, smokers would have preferencial access to our healthcare facilities.

Edited by Stabit
fat fingers/dodgy spelling
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Non-Believer said:

We  have hundreds of thousands of pounds-worth of new cycleways installed already, bereft of bicycles. Cooil Rd, Pulrose and its Bridge, Peel Rd, Gansey, Lezayre Rd to name a few.

Where are all these commuting cyclists that they were put in place for the benefit of?

I'm not sure they were built with commuting cyclists in mind or were consulted. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Stu Peters said:

BBC story

We should be more like Holland, allegedly. I wonder of the new Director of Public Health realises that we're a bit colder, windier, wetter and more hilly?

So what is your alternative?
 

I personally think we focus more on encouraging people to use public transport? Perhaps we could even look at consulting the public and create a bus timetable that would actually work for most of the working population, because at the moment unless you live in/around Douglas/Onchan, your options are quite limited and they certainly don’t cater for those who have to work weekends.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...