Is Sustrans fit for purpose?

[confusedcyclist]

May be old news for some but this documentary goes into some of the history of our poor cycling infrastructure and there's interviews with Sustrans founders too.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMiNdAMIqjk

 

[confusedcyclist]

I doubt the government really cares about protests unless it gets in their way. I'd happily be up for protest where we all go down and block Horseferry Rd by the DfT for a few hours and see if that bends a few ears.

It's been tried before in the 70s and failed, see above. Only thing that can really change culture and the way we use our roads at this point is another oil shock. We are due another one in the not too distant future anyway. But it will be too late to spend lots of money on nice new infrastructure, on the postive side, there will be plenty of new space on the existing infrastructure, think quiet rodes and almost empty motorways to ride on the Sunday club run.

 

[psmiffy]

Nothing will change until there is a cyclists vote - plenty of other things that a Government has to find money to run - todays example is £2Bn for adult care - plus LAs are strapped for cash - Council Tax will rise in April to meet social demands

 

[Glow worm]

The picture below from Google Earth taken near me demonstrates the contempt road planners have for cyclists. You can (just about) see Newmarket is 15 miles away on Sustrans routes (and at this time of year you'll be spending a week clearing mud of your bike for the privilege when you eventually get there) whereas it's only 6 miles by car.
You can of course ride the 6 miles, but it is pretty unpleasant (I won't ride that road now after being clipped by a van).

So if I'm in a hurry to get to Newmarket, I have no choice but to drive. (This is in a flat area where it rarely rains much. The Dutch must just piss themselves laughing at us).

I'd rather just have an honest sign there that says 'Screw you cyclists' and be done with it.

 

[confusedcyclist]

Nothing will change until there is a cyclists vote - plenty of other things that a Government has to find money to run - todays example is £2Bn for adult care - plus LAs are strapped for cash - Council Tax will rise in April to meet social demands

Oh yes, and somehow they can find room in the budget to subsidise... public houses. Those important contributors to national infrastructure. Don't get me wrong, I like a good pint. But waiting for the government to sort out this mess is futile. Central government are the very gits who got us into this mess in the first place. I think the Sustrans had its heart in the right place, but got lost somewhere along the way with the mammoth £42 million grant, that's one hell of a project to manage. They were probably a bit ambitious with their timelines and lacked the expertise to pull it off.

We need a sustained spending commitment for cycling infrastructure, but that won't happen unless society beings to recognise there's an alternative to personal motor transportation, and not only an alternative, but a preferable alternative. As I said, I find it hard to find that day coming any time soon, it won't be until driving becomes too expensive, and by that time the economy will be on it's knees again and there will be little to spend on fancy schemes on the scale of Sustrans. We should continue hope for some common sense up top, but for now, we might be better off volunteering and opting for bottom up approaches, like the roots of Sustrans, rather than waiting for 'they' who will never arrive to sort it all out. Sadly, the low hanging fruit (disused rail lines) have been picked, so what's left is practically difficult for volunteers to tackle.

Don't like the rubble on your cycle path, take a broom and rubbish bag. Don't like the potholes? Fill em!

http://www.citylab.com/commute/2016/12/san-franciscos-anonymous-diy-bike-lane-builders-qa/510989/

 

[EasyPeez]

http://cycle.travel/map

This looks really good as a basic mapping tool.
Excuse my ludditeness but I can't seem to find a key to the different colour coded routes - is there one? And before I go through the sign-up process, can you save routes plotted on there as gpx files to export to Garmins etc? Can't see any facility for it to plot elevations etc?

 

[Ian H]

My impression of Sustrans is that its main purpose is to raise funds for Sustrans.

 

[mjr]

This looks really good as a basic mapping tool.
Excuse my ludditeness but I can't seem to find a key to the different colour coded routes - is there one?

Click the "Key" link next to the copyright message (top right on my computer - might not appear on mobiles).

And before I go through the sign-up process, can you save routes plotted on there as gpx files to export to Garmins etc?

GPX, TCX and KML with optional announcement distance. You should be able to test it by clicking "GPS" on routes I've saved like http://cycle.travel/map/journey/22666

Can't see any facility for it to plot elevations etc?

It plots 2D and 3D elevations. Click the mountain symbol. (If you do that on the test link then no, it's not broken and we really do ride 100 miles like that around here. )

 

[mjr]

The picture below from Google Earth taken near me demonstrates the contempt road planners have for cyclists. You can (just about) see Newmarket is 15 miles away on Sustrans routes (and at this time of year you'll be spending a week clearing mud of your bike for the privilege when you eventually get there) whereas it's only 6 miles by car.

That sign combination in Bottisham is rather notorious because both signs are wrong!

Even following the bizarre Sustrans mud bath route, it's 11.5 miles, not 15 (did someone not type a 1 at some point, then someone later think "it can't be 1.5 - they must mean 15" rather than actually check?) - and you can cut 1.3 off by using the direct B road (which is so-so and would benefit from a cycle track, for which there's enough space in the highway corridor). Meanwhile, it's actually 7.5 miles by car, not 6 - but yes, that route would benefit from a cycle track too, but because there aren't many places on it, I reckon Burwell-Exning should come first.

But that those signs are still wrong means the point still stands: it's a bit of a "screw you cyclists" from Cambridgeshire County Council there

 

[psmiffy]

We need a sustained spending commitment for cycling infrastructure,

There is not much point in preaching to the converted - the key thing is money/investment - and then using that money/investment however limited in a smart way - quite what a "smart way" is the tricky bit assuming you can get the money/investment - one thing I immediately notice being on a couple of cycle forums is that everybody's opinion of what is a smart way is different and as yet Ive not seen anyone come up with a cunning plan that would satisfy Uncle Tom Cobbly and All

Easy to point the finger at the howlers by LAs and Sustrans - they try their best with pretty limited funding (I think somewhere above £43 million was spoken about for Sustrans for the whole of England - that will be over a period of something like 5 to 10 years - I was cycling in Holland and they were talking about €208M for one year for a single city)

Cycling per se is a minority activity - until it becomes mainstream improvements will be little by little - sometimes steps forward and sometime steps backwards - working out what is the "Smart Way" for the UK will be tricky

 

[Glow worm]

That sign combination in Bottisham is rather notorious because both signs are wrong!

Even following the bizarre Sustrans mud bath route, it's 11.5 miles, not 15 (did someone not type a 1 at some point, then someone later think "it can't be 1.5 - they must mean 15" rather than actually check?) - and you can cut 1.3 off by using the direct B road (which is so-so and would benefit from a cycle track, for which there's enough space in the highway corridor). Meanwhile, it's actually 7.5 miles by car, not 6 - but yes, that route would benefit from a cycle track too, but because there aren't many places on it, I reckon Burwell-Exning should come first.

I'd not noticed/ measured that - reminds me of a lot of Norfolk lanes where no matter how much closer you get to your destination, the signs always seem to add a half mile or so to give the impression you're getting further away rather than nearer.

The Burwell to Exning road is horrible. Not sure how a cycle route could get over the railway bridge on that road - my suggestion of course would be to close the road to motorised traffic I'm sure that would go down well!

The parallel bridleway (to the north) is a good alternative but only really passable by bike in summer. And only really good for MTB/ hybrid.

 

[Pat "5mph"]

reminds me of a lot of Norfolk lanes where no matter how much closer you get to your destination, the signs always seem to add a half mile or so to give the impression you're getting further away rather than nearer.

On the NCN bit from Balloch to Luss there's a sign saying "Luss 6 miles".
After about 5 miles, the same sign. After another 5 miles ... "Luss 6 miles"

 

[Glow worm]

On the NCN bit from Balloch to Luss there's a sign saying "Luss 6 miles".
After about 5 miles, the same sign. After another 5 miles ... "Luss 6 miles"

Exactly - completely soul destroying! At least the Garmin never lies!

 

[mjr]

The Burwell to Exning road is horrible. Not sure how a cycle route could get over the railway bridge on that road - my suggestion of course would be to close the road to motorised traffic I'm sure that would go down well!

Could do what's happened on some other narrow bridges: single alternating-flow of one lane for motorists, controlled by traffic lights, while cycles free-flow in the other lane... but there's no railway under there since 1965ish, so any cycle track could probably go to the south.

There's tons of other options for a more direct route, too. All it needs is CCC to get their finger out, really.

 

[EasyPeez]

Click the "Key" link next to the copyright message (top right on my computer - might not appear on mobiles).


GPX, TCX and KML with optional announcement distance. You should be able to test it by clicking "GPS" on routes I've saved like http://cycle.travel/map/journey/22666


It plots 2D and 3D elevations. Click the mountain symbol. (If you do that on the test link then no, it's not broken and we really do ride 100 miles like that around here. )

Brilliant, thanks for the quick tutorial.

As a skinny-tyre type who nevertheless likes to go off-piste where possible I think this tool is a revelation. I've used Google maps and Sustrans website up to now but have often plotted rides where I've had to detour midway because the surface just wasn't traversable on a road bike and there was no way of knowing that from the vague-at-best Sustrans info.

I'm loving the riding in your part of the world by the way - I thought East Yorkshire was flat, but you can virtually pick out each sleeping policeman on the elevation graph of your 100 mile ride!