Quote:
Originally Posted by flecc
Well, if everybody in Manchester including those running the scheme is as negative as the other contributors in this thread, it will fail of course.
It seems to be the old story of the glass half empty/half full....
When cycling to my nearest shopping centre the main route is congested with fast traffic and the narrow cycle lane at the edge of the road has road island pinch points. But I don't have to use that, there's another cycle route running parallel on very quiet suburban roads which drops me just short of the supermarket, avoiding all traffic lights, that route found with the free cycle route maps, another benefit paid for by the congestion charge.
.
|
It is not to do with half full glasses - there doesn't need to be a congestion charge to get more people on their bikes (if that is what we want to do). The roads just need to be designed with us in mind and at the moment that is not happening and all the congestion charging in the world is not going to change that. Less traffic travelling faster on the roads or many more buses work against us as I have found in London. As I say I am sorry to be negative but that is the way I see it.
By the way I have tried to use the cycle routes but they are hopelessly difficult to follow and add an extra 10 minutes each way onto the journey. Some of them require you to go the wrong way up a one way street so you can imagine what I think of them and those that planned them!
Quote:
Originally Posted by flecc
Like Hal, I see buses on my feeder route almost empty most of the time. That's because three of them serve a loop route which one could just about serve. The reason for that is the benefit, not having to wait a long time for the next bus, and that's the difference with me, a willingness to acknowledge the benefit as much as the downside..
|
But you would expect more frequent buses to be smaller and fuller, rather than larger and emptier. I could start a whole new thread about why the bus system works so badly...