Google Maps Publish restricted access routes - Sustrans?

[mickle]

Yes my friend I am on an Adventure only just got it a month or so ago so getting the miles in. Thank you for the information about the accessories I will look into it. Cheers.

Seat riser kit and Helping Handles.

 

[Mini58]

Seat riser kit and Helping Handles.

Many thanks kind regards. Alan.

 

[NorthernDave]

I've posted previously about NCN66 near me - in the space of about 8 miles you've got shared space, painted cycles lanes on road, roads with no specific cycle provision, hard packed well drained off road, rutted and rocky bridleway and deep mud with standing water.
Nothing at all on the Sustrans website (or Google) to tell you what is where either.

Also I emailed Sustrans about a problem on the route (regional office and cc'd national HQ) about a month ago, and have yet to receive a holding response, let alone an answer.

So I can't say I'm hugely impressed with them.

 

[Mini58]

Hello my friends: I started this thread because I raised an issue with Sustrans. My issue was/is: that as a person with a disability I ride a trike and as such I find it impossible to navigate the NCN. Sustrans call themselves an “inclusive organisation” promoting access to all. I was pointing out that this was not the case. I am riding from LEJOG starting in May. It was my intention to only use NCN routes as highlighted in the Sustrans Book. I found out that this may indeed prove to be impossible and I asked Sustrans for details of their route restrictions which they said they could not provide me with.

I am raising money whilst doing the journey for Scope a charity which helps people with disabilities you can find my JustGiving page if you search for Alan Connington ( please give generously for a good cause). I have asked Scope for their comments with regards to route restrictions on the NCN for people with disabilities. ( I await their reply)

The issue may very well fit into both categories that is why I originally put my thread in both sections the disabilities section and the recumbent trike section- I fit into both sections also I guess.

So please can you put my thread back in the disabilities section as well as leave a copy in the Recumbent section. I will be placing the response I get from Scope in the disabilities section which really will only apply to people with disabilities. Each thread can then have a life of its own and take what ever direction it choose

Kind regards Alan Connington

Mod note: done

 

[climo]

AsI understand it any barriers are put up by the local council and Sustrans has no say in the matter apart from giving advice which the council can ignore. I expect most councils groan at the proposal of a Sustrans route crossing their patch, more hassle, more expense, etc.

 

[Mini58]

AsI understand it any barriers are put up by the local council and Sustrans has no say in the matter apart from giving advice which the council can ignore. I expect most councils groan at the proposal of a Sustrans route crossing their patch, more hassle, more expense, etc.

Hi Climo
Below is the reply I received from Sustrans: and you are right to a degree with regards to the influence Sustrans has. I will be taking the issue up with my local MP when I return from LEJOG (hopefully before Christmas): I have taken some details out of the email names and such like.


In regards to access controls on paths please read our policy position on our website: https://www.sustrans.org.uk/our-position/access-controls-paths


The National Cycle Network is mainly owned by local authorities and other landowners like Network Rail, the Highways Agency, National Trust, Forestry Commission and Canal and River Trust. For many local authorities the fear of people on motorbikes illegally using paths, or children and people on bikes coming straight out on to roads, is greater than their desire to make paths accessible for all. Where there are known issues, local authorities managing the risks should first consider alternatives to physical access controls, rather than defaulting to installing barriers that in turn compromise access. As far as our responsibilities go (where we are the landowner) we aim to take all reasonable steps to ensure our paths are accessible to all. The use of restrictive barriers will be avoided wherever possible and should never be introduced where they would discriminate against people with disabilities, or prevent rightful access or passage.

 

[mjr]

That's a duck from Sustrans. They are the routing authority and could reroute or delete or simply renumber/relabel routes (maybe with an R on the end to indicate restricted access) to provide a minimum level of service on certain route types and to try to embarrass councils and public landowners into stopping discriminating. Why won't they? Too close to government?

 

[climo]

That's a duck from Sustrans. They are the routing authority and could reroute or delete or simply renumber/relabel routes (maybe with an R on the end to indicate restricted access) to provide a minimum level of service on certain route types and to try to embarrass councils and public landowners into stopping discriminating. Why won't they? Too close to government?

What would rerouting do? To where - a busy road? I very much doubt councils want barriers, too expensive for one. The only possible reason for a council, etc to erect a barrier is to prevent 4x4 or trailbikes trashing the path and creating a nuisance & more expense.
As for embarrassing landowners, that's precisely what they shouldn't be doing. Paths can be permissive bridleways, any hassle & permission is withdrawn. Sustrans can only operate with the goodwill of councils & landowners.
I very much doubt that Sustrans is close to this government.
What's your solution to vehicles using bike/ walking paths?

 

[jefmcg]

What would rerouting do? To where - a busy road?

Well, that would depend. I have only relied on one NCN route (I'm not disabled) and I will be cautious before doing it again. It was after dark in November, and I was confronted by deep muddy ruts, leading to a gate with a field beyond. My lights could just make out a few dozen pupils reflecting back at me. I stuck to the road I was already on and it was a perfectly acceptable route. A while later I was on the same route travelling in the opposite direction in summer, and by the time I realised I was at the other side of the same field, I decided to go forwards as it would be a lot of back tracking, and I had to carry my bike most of the way. It was a slog, and I regretted not retracing my steps.

This isn't remotely suitable for any sort of distance cycling, and disaster for disabled or trike users. But if you look at their map it's happily described as a "Traffic-free route on the National Cycle Network"

 

[climo]

Then I think that you're not giving Sustrans routes a fair go. Sure, some are rubbish but very often they follow delightful country lanes or (near me) straight through the Longleat estate, a splendid route which afaik didn't exist before Sustrans negotiated access. The newish tunnels near Bath wouldn't have happened without Sustrans. I cannot see many councils creating bike routes by themselves, can you?
You can't compare it with France, etc but then many EU countries have a long tradition of cycling whereas here it's only just become popular.

 

[swansonj]

Then I think that you're not giving Sustrans routes a fair go. Sure, some are rubbish but very often they follow delightful country lanes or (near me) straight through the Longleat estate, a splendid route which afaik didn't exist before Sustrans negotiated access. The newish tunnels near Bath wouldn't have happened without Sustrans. I cannot see many councils creating bike routes by themselves, can you?
You can't compare it with France, etc but then many EU countries have a long tradition of cycling whereas here it's only just become popular.

If they follow delightful country lanes, in what sense are they distinguished by being Sustrans routes, as opposed to, you know, roads, available like all other roads for the use of cyclists?

(The other examples you give, negotiating access to private land, and pinch point infrastructure, I can recognise the value of)

 

[NorthernDave]

Then I think that you're not giving Sustrans routes a fair go. Sure, some are rubbish but very often they follow delightful country lanes or (near me) straight through the Longleat estate, a splendid route which afaik didn't exist before Sustrans negotiated access. The newish tunnels near Bath wouldn't have happened without Sustrans. I cannot see many councils creating bike routes by themselves, can you?
You can't compare it with France, etc but then many EU countries have a long tradition of cycling whereas here it's only just become popular.

The big issue, for me anyway, is that you've got no idea what you're getting until you get there - I've posted this before, but NCN 66 near me is a prime example of a good idea poorly executed.
Leave Leeds heading (roughly) east and you're on either on road cycle lanes or shared space.
Then there is a bit of off road, before getting back onto tarmac - it's only a few hundred yards and is doable on a road bike but only just at this time of year.
More shared space, then it just ends in a dead end at a kerb. Up that and across a bit of footpath and there are some vague signs directing you on a quiet but badly potholed road for a bit.
You then cross the dual carriageway A6120 at a toucan crossing and hopefully spot the signs directing you on road up some residential streets.
It's then a bridleway onto an office park, across there and back onto the bridleway which is mainly hard packed and well drained, but has some very muddy patches, through some woods on a similar surface before eventually dropping down onto a tarmac road. It's then tarmac roads with no specific cycling provision for the next mile and a bit.
Then you're onto a rough, rutted and rocky bridleway up into some woods, where it gives way to mud. At this time of the year, that's several inches deep mud with lots of standing water.
Then, after another mile it drops down onto a tarmac road and stays on tarmac for the next few miles, initially on road and then with the option of on road or shared space path. Then it dumps you onto another rocky, rutted bridleway for a bit, before more tarmac, before ducking into another wood on another bridleway with it's own fair share of muddy lumpiness before you get to Wetherby
The point I'm making is turn out for that on a road bike, or a trike, and sections of it will be difficult and other parts will be simply unrideable.
Turn up on a mountain bike and while you're ideally equipped for the muddy or rocky bits, you've got an awful lot of slogging on smooth tarmac to deal with between the fun bits.
Whatever bike you turn up on, it's the wrong one for significant sections of it and Sustrans don't seem interested in making the necessary information available to anyone.

 

[climo]

Then NCN 66 is a poor route and one of many I'm sure but hey what's the alternative? Cash strapped councils providing cycleways? Hardly likely is it. The most you can hope for is a too narrow lane designated by a dotted white line often ending just where it would be useful.
Perhaps there should be a website for Sustrans routes conditions? Anyone?

 

[climo]

If they follow delightful country lanes, in what sense are they distinguished by being Sustrans routes, as opposed to, you know, roads, available like all other roads for the use of cyclists?

(The other examples you give, negotiating access to private land, and pinch point infrastructure, I can recognise the value of)

Fair point but a lot of recreational cyclists wouldn't know what an OS map is or how to use a road map even. They need their hand holding. Even I look at the local NCN routes on a map and think that's a good route and it saves me from working out a pleasant route through an area that I don't know. Use your brain thats all.
Don't condemn an entire system on the basis of a few bad experiences.

 

[mjr]

What would rerouting do? To where - a busy road?

To another cycleway or quiet road which disabled people can actually access, ideally. Maybe in some cases it would need more substantial rerouting but it's usually possible without busy roads.

I very much doubt councils want barriers, too expensive for one. The only possible reason for a council, etc to erect a barrier is to prevent 4x4 or trailbikes trashing the path and creating a nuisance & more expense.

Ha! I know far too many examples where the barriers are completely ineffective against trail bikes or only at one end of a route to agree with that. A more common reason for a council to erect a barrier is that there's some officer who doesn't give enough of a shoot about disabled people who insists cycleways obviously must have barriers for bonkers reasons like slowing cyclists down before junctions (because obviously, we'd ride out into traffic otherwise, like we do at all other road junctions(!) )

As for embarrassing landowners, that's precisely what they shouldn't be doing. Paths can be permissive bridleways, any hassle & permission is withdrawn. Sustrans can only operate with the goodwill of councils & landowners.

I reserve most of my contempt for the council and government agency routes. There's no excuse for barriers blocking disabled people from them.

And I blame councils for Sustrans having to resort to permissive paths. Councils should make bridleway creation and improvement orders and remove landowner foibles from the equation. You don't see motorists having to do bizarre things to access permissive ring roads or permissive bypasses: government just compulsory purchases the route or requires it to be built in part-exchange for planning permission. But cycling is still the poor relation.

I very much doubt that Sustrans is close to this government.

So all the grants...?

What's your solution to vehicles using bike/ walking paths?

Well-spaced bollards at carriageway interfaces to deter cars, police to stop other illegal motorised users, stonking fines and licence points when caught. As mentioned, the overwhelming majority of vehicles blocked by more restrictive barriers are cycles, while some motorcycles can still pass through because their handlebars are narrower.