Non - BCP cycle routes proposals

hba1 said:
Whilst I fully accept the benefits of cycling for exercise/recreation nobody has passed any comment about the fiscal reality of splashing the cash to the tune of £120M in the BCP area and rising. Another Bumbling Boris whiz idea on the back of his fag packet high on headlines low on detail.

The country, because of Covid, has a severe economic problem that will take possibly decades to resolve and party manifesto or not will cost us all in the form of taxation. I am of the opinion that public spending should come with caution on the packet. There are things the country needs to have and those that are nice to have but affordability must be the key.

The tribute to public sector waste on Castle Lane has been mentioned or spot the cyclist. A minority of the population and the spending in my view is totally disproportionate for the minority that will use the cycle lanes etc surrounded by concrete, difficult to clean I suggest, or not.

A 5 minute Covid wonder when people had nothing to do, nowhere to go in nice weather created a mini cycling hick-up of activity. The Unity shambles locally jumped on the bandwagon of Government money and nobody has challenged it because Mike Greene of the present administration is yet another bike zealot. The road space is limited despite the best intentions of the schemes. Has there been a reality check that depends on which side you sit on.

The Lycra mafia will still take to the roads, 2 or 3 abreast, on a Sunday roads not lanes. The school run, shopping (excluding Internet based deliveries) and commuting will be unchanged especially when the weather changes.

Each to their own but to me as a tax/Council tax payer it is the Emperor's New Clothes or Fools Gold syndrome and not good value for the majority.

That is my view I know others will not agree but the bottom line the money, our money, can only be spent once.
Click to expand...

Tax on emissions should increase to pay for greener travel. We don't get to opt out of your pollution so the least you should do is pay for the damage you do. If you had to bear the full cost of your decisions you'd probably hold a different view. The health of our people is more than just a 'nice-to-have'.
 
hba1 said:
Whilst I fully accept the benefits of cycling for exercise/recreation nobody has passed any comment about the fiscal reality of splashing the cash to the tune of £120M in the BCP area and rising. Another Bumbling Boris whiz idea on the back of his fag packet high on headlines low on detail.

The country, because of Covid, has a severe economic problem that will take possibly decades to resolve and party manifesto or not will cost us all in the form of taxation. I am of the opinion that public spending should come with caution on the packet. There are things the country needs to have and those that are nice to have but affordability must be the key.

The tribute to public sector waste on Castle Lane has been mentioned or spot the cyclist. A minority of the population and the spending in my view is totally disproportionate for the minority that will use the cycle lanes etc surrounded by concrete, difficult to clean I suggest, or not.

A 5 minute Covid wonder when people had nothing to do, nowhere to go in nice weather created a mini cycling hick-up of activity. The Unity shambles locally jumped on the bandwagon of Government money and nobody has challenged it because Mike Greene of the present administration is yet another bike zealot. The road space is limited despite the best intentions of the schemes. Has there been a reality check that depends on which side you sit on.

The Lycra mafia will still take to the roads, 2 or 3 abreast, on a Sunday roads not lanes. The school run, shopping (excluding Internet based deliveries) and commuting will be unchanged especially when the weather changes.

Each to their own but to me as a tax/Council tax payer it is the Emperor's New Clothes or Fools Gold syndrome and not good value for the majority.

That is my view I know others will not agree but the bottom line the money, our money, can only be spent once.
Click to expand...
The phrase "Lycra Mafia" suggests you have an agenda.
 
RobTrent said:
The phrase "Lycra Mafia" suggests you have an agenda.
Click to expand...

... I was just about to type... You lost me at 'Lycra mafia'...

The "5 minute Covid wonder" as you phrase it (@hba1) may have introduced cycling, running and other forms of previously unexplored activity to thousands of bored people, and yes, there will no doubt be countless people who hang up their bikes and running shoes now things are starting to open up again, however, there is also going to be a portion of those bored people that will want to continue and grow their new found passion for travelling around in something other than a car...

We are having a big discussion on the 'Accounts' thread about why Max didn't build infrastructure and capitalise on the '5 minute PL wonder' that we've recently experienced...? Struck while the iron was hot and built our fan base whilst they've all been introduced to the new AFCB era of PL football... taken advantage while the brand was at it's highest... Well, why is this different to capitalising on the one positive to come out of Covid, in that folk are starting to get healthier and get on two wheels as opposed to 4...

The answer for improved movement in the conurbation is not to build new and more roads... It's to improve public transport and build alternative methods for folk to get around freely, easily and most important, safely... How many people don't even entertain a sunny ride to work because of poor roads and not really feeling the love for dealing with traffic?

And with reference to your 'Lyra Mafia' quip, these people are not even really the people these routes are aimed at... These routes are aimed at those that want to move around on their bikes with their families, or commute to and from work without having to dodge trucks, buses and impatient cars... Surely it's a win win situation? Bikes off the roads and roads just for bikes...?

As you'll have guessed, I am 100% behind these routes and I'd welcome them to continuing growing over time...
 
Last edited:
No agenda Rob only fiscal. However I read the phrase Lycra Mafia in the endless debates on cycling etc in the Echo and the daily press.
 
The culture of cycling in this country is one of exercise and fitness not carrying out daily tasks. I have to drive round the conurbation all day everyday for my work. I carry a lot of stuff so cycling not posible. The majority of the traffic, and it is getting grim again, are trades, freight, delivery plus pensioners on a trip out. The biggest contributor though is the afternoon school run. Thousands of yummy mummys in huge 4x4,s etc. Invest in fleets of electric buses for schools and kids picked up and dropped off. No one should be driving to school to pick up their kids.
Cycling, and investing in it is fine, but like trying to put out the fire of London with a bucket of water.
 
hba1 said:
No agenda Rob only fiscal. However I read the phrase Lycra Mafia in the endless debates on cycling etc in the Echo and the daily press.
Click to expand...

Yep don't mess with us :guns:


hqdefault.jpg
 
red_house said:
Yep don't mess with us :guns:


hqdefault.jpg
Click to expand...
Reminds me of a time when I was fortunate enough to be in Adelaide some years ago whilst Tour Down Under was going on. Took a look around the 'village' (brand/team goods for sale, mechanics sorting the bikes etc) and I went ot a stall to by a Tour T Shirt
Bloke in front having selected his choice of shirt was advised it only available in XXXL or small, which would he prefer?
He looked similar proportion to your pic above, pointed to his own cycling club lycra shirt he was wearing and just smiled. It read...
'Sydney Fat **************************** Cycling Club'
 
SteveJonesLegend said:
... I was just about to type... You lost me at 'Lycra mafia'...
Click to expand...

it was "2 or 3 abreast" that got me.
Lets-Play-cyclist-hating-comments-bingo.png

Accepting that it's a massively divisive topic with achingly predictable arguments and counter arguments for both sides, we have to accept that the growth in car usage is unsustainable. I really can't see that as an arguable fact (FACT).

Even when we are all driving clean power Teslas around, it doesn't mean we can keep putting more and more cars on the road.

this: https://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/n...ace-gridlock-uk---can-reveal-congested-roads/

and this: https://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/19039733.bournemouth-remains-one-congested-towns-uk/

and even this: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-dorset-53176717

The level of vehicle traffic is unsustainable.

These cycle routes won't make a massive difference but a council willing to spend money developing this sort of thing rather than building more roads and car parks is a council heading in the right direction.

The ideal for the short term future is better shared space. Decrease car usage naturally by making other options available and feasible. Build it and they will come. Check out the CYCLOPS junction in Manchester. Read about proper LTN (not the scaremongering guff) results. Follow Kensington Cycle Lane on Twitter! Cyclists don't want to eliminate car driving since most cyclists also own a car. What lefty, liberal, environmentalists like me want is to not have to take a big SUV on every journey.

I'd love to make the entire centre of Bournemouth south of the wessex way a LTN. I think that would help regenerate the shithole that it currently is, improve the area, increase footfall and benefit the local economy.
 

Attachments

  • Lets-Play-cyclist-hating-comments-bingo.png
    Lets-Play-cyclist-hating-comments-bingo.png
    40.4 KB · Views: 0
When all the people that don't have to drive everywhere finally realise they ARE traffic, I'll miss those Echo comments.

"It's taken me an hour to drive somewhere I could have walked to in 15 minutes" is my favourite :)
 
NornIron said:
it was "2 or 3 abreast" that got me.
Even when we are all driving clean power Teslas around, it doesn't mean we can keep putting more and more cars on the road.

this: https://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/n...ace-gridlock-uk---can-reveal-congested-roads/

and this: https://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/19039733.bournemouth-remains-one-congested-towns-uk/

and even this: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-dorset-53176717

The level of vehicle traffic is unsustainable.

These cycle routes won't make a massive difference but a council willing to spend money developing this sort of thing rather than building more roads and car parks is a council heading in the right direction.

The ideal for the short term future is better shared space. Decrease car usage naturally by making other options available and feasible. Build it and they will come. Check out the CYCLOPS junction in Manchester. Read about proper LTN (not the scaremongering guff) results. Follow Kensington Cycle Lane on Twitter! Cyclists don't want to eliminate car driving since most cyclists also own a car. What lefty, liberal, environmentalists like me want is to not have to take a big SUV on every journey.

I'd love to make the entire centre of Bournemouth south of the wessex way a LTN. I think that would help regenerate the shithole that it currently is, improve the area, increase footfall and benefit the local economy.
Click to expand...

Car usage has been largely static for the last 30 years following an explosion in the late 80's early 90's[1] but the population has increased around 40% [2][3]

Studies have shown that cycle lanes increase congestion as well as being pretty expensive per cyclist[4]

You don't need to drive an SUV, taking a journey by electric vehicle normally has a lower carbon footprint than cycling[5]

[1]https://assets.publishing.service.g...a/file/906276/national-travel-survey-2019.pdf
[2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countries_of_the_United_Kingdom_by_population
[3]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_England#Population
[4]https://www.visordown.com/news/indu...cycle-lanes-increase-congestion-and-pollution
[5]https://www.greencarreports.com/new...-bicycles-which-has-a-higher-carbon-footprint
 
Kudos said:
Car usage has been largely static for the last 30 years following an explosion in the late 80's early 90's[1] but the population has increased around 40% [2][3]

Studies have shown that cycle lanes increase congestion as well as being pretty expensive per cyclist[4]

You don't need to drive an SUV, taking a journey by electric vehicle normally has a lower carbon footprint than cycling[5]

[1]https://assets.publishing.service.g...a/file/906276/national-travel-survey-2019.pdf
[2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countries_of_the_United_Kingdom_by_population
[3]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_England#Population
[4]https://www.visordown.com/news/indu...cycle-lanes-increase-congestion-and-pollution
[5]https://www.greencarreports.com/new...-bicycles-which-has-a-higher-carbon-footprint
Click to expand...

and herein lies the problem. For every stat and reference you quote I can quote another reputable one claiming exactly the opposite.

Cars declining? Not according to this. https://assets.publishing.service.g...d-traffic-estimates-in-great-britain-2019.pdf
or this: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/all-vehicles-veh01

electric cars better than cycling? not according to this: https://theconversation.com/cycling...tric-cars-for-reaching-net-zero-cities-157163

and so on.

The real truth is probably somewhere between your truth and mine. That's why I advocated shared usage rather than one above the other.
 
NornIron said:
and herein lies the problem. For every stat and reference you quote I can quote another reputable one claiming exactly the opposite.

Cars declining? Not according to this. https://assets.publishing.service.g...d-traffic-estimates-in-great-britain-2019.pdf
or this: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/all-vehicles-veh01

electric cars better than cycling? not according to this: https://theconversation.com/cycling...tric-cars-for-reaching-net-zero-cities-157163

and so on.

The real truth is probably somewhere between your truth and mine. That's why I advocated shared usage rather than one above the other.
Click to expand...

Cars not declining, car usage, i.e. the amount a person uses a car has been mostly static since the early 90's. Your first document largely supports this by showing an increase of 35% in motor traffic over 25 years pretty much in line with population growth. People aren't using their cars more, there are more people using their cars.

A trip in an electric vehicle is (in most cases) a lower carbon footprint than a bicycle ride, it doesn't compare construction and disposal of both vehicles.

I can see in the study that it assumes zero emissions for cycling, which is fair enough for its model but a combination of that and no separate category for electric vehicles makes it a weak study to make the comparison from.

I think you're right that there is a place for multiple modes of transport however with a population growing at 5% annually and infrastructure not really developing at all* shutting down roads (LTN) and partitioning existing infrastructure feels counterproductive to me from both an economic and environmental standpoint.

* I can't think of a single road built since the 80's that hasn't been part of an industrial or housing estate
 
Kudos said:
Cars not declining, car usage, i.e. the amount a person uses a car has been mostly static since the early 90's. Your first document largely supports this by showing an increase of 35% in motor traffic over 25 years pretty much in line with population growth. People aren't using their cars more, there are more people using their cars.

A trip in an electric vehicle is (in most cases) a lower carbon footprint than a bicycle ride, it doesn't compare construction and disposal of both vehicles.

I can see in the study that it assumes zero emissions for cycling, which is fair enough for its model but a combination of that and no separate category for electric vehicles makes it a weak study to make the comparison from.

I think you're right that there is a place for multiple modes of transport however with a population growing at 5% annually and infrastructure not really developing at all* shutting down roads (LTN) and partitioning existing infrastructure feels counterproductive to me from both an economic and environmental standpoint.

* I can't think of a single road built since the 80's that hasn't been part of an industrial or housing estate
Click to expand...

I think that's good debate and thanks for being constructive about it.

It helps clarify the objective because people observe some things relatively, and some things absolutely. For example, compared to when I were a lad, there are more cars on the road and it makes me more grumpy. That's a relative comparison. What I don't see relatively is car usage because I don't observe each trip as associated with a person. I just count cars.

So you can quickly use both your argument and mine to say that if we want fewer cars on the road, we need people to use their cars much less so that it doesn't just decline, but declines when faced with continued population growth.
To do that means giving people viable alternatives and so far, no-one as done that. Hence my support for the direction the council is taking, even if the actual plans aren't themselves a solution. Interestingly, I see Yellow Buses now comment on planning applications for town centre residential developments. They argue that rather than creating parking spaces for new residents, the house/flat should come with a subsidised public transport permit which they could offer. Again, not a perfect solution but a decent enough idea I think to edge us closer to lower traffic.

Or to tap into what @wellsworld was getting at, it could be that falling sperm counts and fertility rates because of plastic pollution will make all of this a moot point in 50 years anyway. The world has a funny way of working like that!
 
LewSwimmin said:
M3 around Winchester and Eastleigh, Newbury by-pass, A35 Tolpuddle and Puddletown by-pass for starters?
Click to expand...

Had to Google it but you're correct on all counts. All the examples are around the early 90's from what I can see. I bet you're great on Pointless ;)
 
Kudos said:
A trip in an electric vehicle is (in most cases) a lower carbon footprint than a bicycle ride, it doesn't compare construction and disposal of both vehicles.
Click to expand...

Its quite convenient it doesn't mention construction bearing in mind the link you used have a vested interest in selling cars, its also extremely tenuous . Not forgetting the health benefits of cycling its probably the most ridiculous comparison I've read in years..thanks for posting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

;