SUSTRANS BID FOR LOTTERY FUNDING

NlEDERMEYER

http://www.sustransconnect2.org.uk:80/

Don't know if this has bee brouht up before, but seems a good idea to me.....

spen666

its a good idea if you want to marginalise road cycling.

This thread was debated on here earlier this week- not sure of the link

dannygcp

spen666 wrote:

its a good idea if you want to marginalise road cycling.

Rubbish. Most Sustrans routes actually use existing roads, and only have off-road sections to bypass busy main roads.

spen666

dannygcp wrote:

spen666 wrote:

its a good idea if you want to marginalise road cycling.

Rubbish. Most Sustrans routes actually use existing roads, and only have off-road sections to bypass busy main roads.

so all the quotes from sustrans calling for segregated facilities don't exist


Oh and where are these on road facilities providedby sustrans?

If you are referring to the on road cycle lanes usually provided by councils, then these would not be at the edge of the road would they? Thuws of course reinforcing the erroneous beief in motorists minds that the only place cyclists on the road should be is in the gutter.

Now, I and many right thinking people would think that is marinalising road cyclists.

biframe

2/3's of the National Cycle Network is on roads...

It is (imo) really important to have, and to educate drivers to understand that cyclists have the right to ride on the road and to improve conditions. However to make more people cycle (and this could be different to making more people "cyclists") the important factor is making the bike journey quicker than the car journey (often it already is in cities, but people don't realise, they don't factor in parking the car etc), and this can include purpose built facilites to do so. I think a lot of dodgy facilties are a product of trying to solve dodgy highway design that didn't think of cyclists and pedestrians in the first place. It's a bodge, but no one has the balls to really re-design all the road systems, and in the end cars, bikes, and pedestrians are losing out.

In terms of the lottery, it is a vote:
www.thepeoples50million.org.uk/home

spen666

building segregated cycle facilities is treating the symptom not the cause


The symptom is people feel unsafe on the road cycling. - Treat the symptom by removing them from the road


The cause is largely the driving standard of motorists (not sole cause though) - treat the cause by adressing the standard of driving.

The last point is harder than treating the symptom, so its not done. The cause of the problem will gradually get worse as we ignore it in favour of treating the symptoms

dannygcp

spen666 wrote:

building segregated cycle facilities is treating the symptom not the cause...The cause is largely the driving standard of motorists (not sole cause though) - treat the cause by adressing the standard of driving.

The last point is harder than treating the symptom, so its not done. The cause of the problem will gradually get worse as we ignore it in favour of treating the symptoms

I don't think it is just the standard of driving that is the problem. It is also the volume and speed of traffic, and the fact that our roads are primarily engineered for cars rather than bikes (or buses). In the ideal world I would like to see a complete reversal in priorities but that isn't going to happen any time soon given the strength of the car lobby.

In any case, in my experience Sustrans take a pragmatic view about building segregated routes. They provide segregated routes to bypass or take you across busy main roads, but then generally route you back onto quieter roads.

I am sure that most of the people on this forum feel confident enough to cycle on main roads, but there are plenty of cyclists out in the real world who do not. The popularity of many Sustrans routes demonstrates that this policy is successful.

another jacko

Why don't we just shoot ourselves in both feet then.

There is nothing intrinsically 'better' about cycling on mixed use roads than cycling on well designed cycle paths. Do whichever one suits you and suits your journey. Personally, even if car drivers were wonderful I would prefer riding without constant traffic noise whenever possible.

If you want to promote better road design, better driving etc. you will have more success if there are more people who cycle. But, the fact is that, at the moment, rightly or wrongly, mixed used roads are pretty risky places and many people are put off cycling by a fear of serious injury.

Most of the 79 Sustrans projects are to connect up bits of routes and quiet roads to make more pleasant and sensible road journeys for cyclists without having to choose between a death trap road or a massive detour. This should help contribute to raising participation in cycling and increase our political voice and also create more pleasant places to ride all over the country so we all win - those who do want to use Sustrans routes and those who don't.

The lottery funding for this project is only available in a competition - Sustrans will only get the money if more people vote for it than for the other projects. The other projects are creating or developing tourist attractions (like the environmental disaster that is the Eden Project) which will put even more traffic on the roads if they win. There is also a risk that a lack of support for the Sustrans project will be taken by politicians as a lack of grass roots interest in cycling, leaving us even more marginalised. So even if you are ambivalent about Sustrans, all cyclists should still get behind their project and vote.

spen666

another jacko wrote:

... So even if you are ambivalent about Sustrans, all cyclists should still get behind their project and vote.

I have to disagree 100% with this.

I am opposed to what sustrans are doing in the name of cycling and will most certainly not be voting for something that I believe will make things worse for me and those of us who cycle on the road as opposed to usingthe sort of IMHO) ill designed and maintained cycle farcilities provided by sustrans.

Additionally, I do have a view that one of the other projects is a better recipient of the monies and IF I vote, I will be voting for that one

Jon G

another jacko wrote:

There is also a risk that a lack of support for the Sustrans project will be taken by politicians as a lack of grass roots interest in cycling.

So we need to ensure politicians realise that Sustrans is not the voice of UK cyclists and that we do not all want to creep about on what are really footpaths (nor do we all ride in the dangerous ways depicted in the last Sustrans begging leaflet I saw).

Jon

guisto

I don't know if anyone else has mentioned this but last week a new website was launched:
http://www.thepeoples50million.org.uk/p ... ct-summary

On the 26 Nov the voting opens. Each of the 4 bids requires the public to vote on the most worthwhile project.

For me that has to be the sustrans connect2 project. I know some cyclists are against this as they feel it marginalizes cyclists, but this is also about giving youngsters and others the opportunity to cycle in relative safety and thus get them into the sport, to maybe even just lose an few pounds and reduce their carbon footprint a little.

Come on if we all stick together we can make a difference

Jon G

guisto wrote:

I know some cyclists are against this as they feel it marginalizes cyclists, but this is also about giving youngsters and others the opportunity to cycle in relative safety

A lot of the Sustrans creations I have seen are not safe. Try their route from Saltburn to Brotton in N. Yorks: a narrow loose gravel path on a steep incline.

and thus get them into the sport

I don't cycle for sport, I cycle to get around.

Jon

chrisjsmith

National route 4 is a deathtrap. Covered in dog shite and people staggering around with iPods on. Surface is bad as some of it (esp at this time of year) is covered in leaf mulch.

Are they pushing more of this on us?

After doing Richmond to Kingston a couple of times, I'd rather do the roads.

spen666

guisto wrote:

... and thus get them into the sport, ...

If the sport is pootling along footpaths with a bit of white paint on them, stopping at every driveway, gateway etc then you may be right.

sustrans is nothing to do with cycling as a sport. it may or may not have an impact on cycling as a leisure activity but cycling as a sport is not part of sustrans IMHO

dannygcp

Of course not all Sustrans routes are perfect. They are, after all, a charity with limited funds - which is why they are putting in a lottery bid.

But many Sustrans routes are excellent and have got people out cycling who would otherwise never be using their bikes.

In York, where I live, there are several good and well used routes which take you safely out of the City Centre, across the busy ring road, and into the countryside where you can then join quiter local roads. Any routes like the C2C, which is now the most popular long distance route in the UK, are attracting cyclists who would never have previously contemplated a long distance cycle ride.

As I said in a previous post, most of the people on this forum are happy cycling on main roads, but there are many more cyclists out there who are looking for dedicated routes that avoid the main roads and welcome the work Sustrans is doing.

spen666

dannygcp wrote:

Of course not all Sustrans routes are perfect. They are, after all, a charity with limited funds - which is why they are putting in a lottery bid.

But many Sustrans routes are excellent and have got people out cycling who would otherwise never be using their bikes.

In York, where I live, there are several good and well used routes which take you safely out of the City Centre, across the busy ring road, and into the countryside where you can then join quiter local roads. Any routes like the C2C, which is now the most popular long distance route in the UK, are attracting cyclists who would never have previously contemplated a long distance cycle ride.

As I said in a previous post, most of the people on this forum are happy cycling on main roads, but there are many more cyclists out there who are looking for dedicated routes that avoid the main roads and welcome the work Sustrans is doing.

so some people welcome sustrans and some don't.

Thats fine.

That however is no reason for the calls made by some that ALL cyclists must vote for sustrans.

dannygcp

spen666 wrote:

so some people welcome sustrans and some don't.

Thats fine.

That however is no reason for the calls made by some that ALL cyclists must vote for sustrans.

No one in this thread has said that "ALL cyclists must vote for Sustrans". However I think those cyclists who do enjoy Sustrans routes should get behind them.

spen666

dannygcp wrote:

spen666 wrote:

so some people welcome sustrans and some don't.

Thats fine.

That however is no reason for the calls made by some that ALL cyclists must vote for sustrans.

No one in this thread has said that "ALL cyclists must vote for Sustrans". However I think those cyclists who do enjoy Sustrans routes should get behind them.

Really?

Think you should re read this thread then

another jacko
Joined: 05 Dec 2002
Posts: 815
Location:


Posted 02 Nov 2007 13:23
Why don't we just shoot ourselves in both feet then.

There is nothing intrinsically 'better' about cycling on mixed use roads than cycling on well designed cycle paths. Do whichever one suits you and suits your journey. Personally, even if car drivers were wonderful I would prefer riding without constant traffic noise whenever possible.

If you want to promote better road design, better driving etc. you will have more success if there are more people who cycle. But, the fact is that, at the moment, rightly or wrongly, mixed used roads are pretty risky places and many people are put off cycling by a fear of serious injury.

Most of the 79 Sustrans projects are to connect up bits of routes and quiet roads to make more pleasant and sensible road journeys for cyclists without having to choose between a death trap road or a massive detour. This should help contribute to raising participation in cycling and increase our political voice and also create more pleasant places to ride all over the country so we all win - those who do want to use Sustrans routes and those who don't.

The lottery funding for this project is only available in a competition - Sustrans will only get the money if more people vote for it than for the other projects. The other projects are creating or developing tourist attractions (like the environmental disaster that is the Eden Project) which will put even more traffic on the roads if they win. There is also a risk that a lack of support for the Sustrans project will be taken by politicians as a lack of grass roots interest in cycling, leaving us even more marginalised. So even if you are ambivalent about Sustrans, all cyclists should still get behind their project and vote.

colint

I agree with Spen that Sustrans has nothing to do with cyclcing as a sport, but I still think we should be supporting this project. I can understand people concerns about Sustrans possibly focusing on pushing cyclists off the main roads, but the fact is we need to do something to get more people onto bikes.

I cycle on the road quite happily, but there are plenty of inexperienced cyclists who would basically be terrified if they did. Having said that, when I used to commute from Liverpool to Bolton, I used cycle paths for 80% of the journey on the East Lancs Road, as otherwise I'd probably be dead. Somehow, we need to find a way of encouraging people to commute more, if 70% of the journey was on safer routes, they could be eased into the madness of our roads bit by bit.

I know it may seem that we are handing over the roads to the car, but lets face it, they already own it. We are a minority and things are not going to change until we convert more car users to cyclists to increase our voice.

Mike Healey

Why not look at it this way.

Let's close all Sustrans routes and tell the people who are currently using them that they should be on the roads. That will immediately improve the lot of all cyclists because the scales will immediately fall off the eyes of the Sustrans routes users and the numbers on the highways of this country will instantly increase and our safety will improve by leaps and bounds because of the huge nos. of cyclists on the roads.

That's why we shouldn't vote for Sustrans

colint

You really think if we TELL these cyclist that they have to use the main roads, that they all will ? I'd guess that a large proportion will stop, and we'll lose them forever. I understand the argument, but I think we need to fight on 2 fronts, safe off road routes AND safer roads. The 2 are not incompatible.

pneumatic

If you feel uncomfortable about voting for Sustrans, try voting for Bikeworks instead (see thread called "Cyclists will you help?")

Better still, why not vote for both?

pb_roadie

I will be voting for one of the other projects.

Connect2 will not improve things for all types of cyclists. The cycle paths loved by Sustrans provide ammunition for the growing number of motorists who are calling for cyclists to be banned from all roads. When that happens I will give up cycling.

It is not just that cycle paths are tediously slow and inconvenient to use but also that they are dangerous. The belief that cycling is safer on them is an illusion. Recent research in Denmark has shown that cyclists using cycle paths have a higher accident rate than those using roads. Cycle paths in Britain tend to run parallel to a road but at roundabouts or any junction with a road a cyclist has no rights of way and is expected to get off, wait for a gap in the traffic and push their bike across both lanes of the road completely against the flow of traffic. This is a dangerous thing to do at any time but at rush hour periods or on busy roads it is ludicrously dangerous and more than cancels out any extra safety the cyclist has while riding between junctions. Most paths only go up one side of the road. If a cyclist is riding on the other side then in order to use the path they would have cross the road to get on it and cross again when the path comes to an end. No-one will ever convince me that in this situation it is safer to cross and use the path than to continue riding on the other side of the road. There is a design gem of a cycle path near where I live. This path runs at one side of a road for a while and then for no good reason switches to the other side, at a point where cars are usually doing 60+mph. So far three people in three separate incidents have been killed using this path. The path was constructed by Northumberland County and approved by Sustrans. Northumberland are now building another path a couple of miles away that has the same stupid design.

Cycle paths are not the way forward for cycling and Sustrans does not speak for or represent all cyclists.

megilleland

Opportunity to get a share of £50 million handout. Only one project out of four will be chosen for Lottery funding by popular vote. So it's vital that as many people as possible spread the word and VOTE for Sustrans Connect2 in the competition.

ITV1 are screening the causes this week, commencing at 11.05pm each evening Monday to Friday. Sustrans Connect2 is featured on Tuesday 4th December 2007 at 11.05pm.

Its not only cyclepaths, which most people here seem to be against. Here in Hereford, successful voting could provide Lottery funding for a bridge for walkers and cyclists across the River Wye at Rotherwas in Hereford, under the Sustrans Connect2 project. Other parts of the country will also benefit with their schemes.

For more information on the Rotherwas bridge, please go to:
http://www.sustransconnect2.org.uk/sche ... .php?id=92

see photos here:

dannygcp

pb_roadie wrote:

I will be voting for one of the other projects.

Connect2 will not improve things for all types of cyclists. The cycle paths loved by Sustrans provide ammunition for the growing number of motorists who are calling for cyclists to be banned from all roads. When that happens I will give up cycling.

There is no evidence whatsoever that Sustrans is providing ammunition for cyclists to be banned from all roads. In fact there is no evidence that a growing number of motorists are even calling for this - despite the load noises made by a few Jeremy Clarkson like dinosaurs.

Sustrans is all about trying to get people who do not currently cycle, or who only cycle occasionally using their bikes. If they get more people cycling in this way, then there is every chance that a fair proportion of those people will go onto cycle on the road.

spen666

dannygcp wrote:

pb_roadie wrote:

I will be voting for one of the other projects.

Connect2 will not improve things for all types of cyclists. The cycle paths loved by Sustrans provide ammunition for the growing number of motorists who are calling for cyclists to be banned from all roads. When that happens I will give up cycling.

There is no evidence whatsoever that Sustrans is providing ammunition for cyclists to be banned from all roads. In fact there is no evidence that a growing number of motorists are even calling for this - ....

Really?

Then try getting off your Pc and cycling on the ROAD and you will almost daily if not more often get such comments whenever you are cycling on the road and there are some form of cycling farcility nearby- even if it is going a different direction to you.


Come and join me on my daily commute and on my weekend rides and have your eyes opened (and your ears) Then try repeating the above nonsense

natrix

Maybe its YOU they want off the road Spen, not cyclists in general.

dannygcp

I cycle on the road every day thank you very much, and have never once had anyone tell me I should be on a cycle route - though I do occasionally get the sort of general absue that every cyclist experiences.

spen666

barnesr wrote:

Maybe its YOU they want off the road Spen, not cyclists in general.

I'd never thought of that! :oops: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:
They'll never take me alive

Tourist Tony

I have just returned from Australia. There are a number of "cycling provisions" there, ranging from marked lanes beside the road (solid line) to shared-use off-road routes, all of which have multiple signs reminding cyclists that they are second-class farcility users behind pedestrians.
I am informed by a travel guide (not been able to confirm the truth) that if a cycle lane is provided on road, its use in Oz is obligatory. This makes turning right a nightmare on a busy road.
That is what I see as a result of Sustrans-style cycling provision.

Pennyfarthing

I have had a couple of cycling holidays in Holland and admit I loved it. Are Sustrans long-term aims to make a cycle network similar to that in the UK?