Sustrans/cycleways- what do you want?

[TheDoctor]

That's not even a farcility. I can't think of any reason why I'd ever ride there, unless I suddenly developed some kind of mud fetish.
If it's ideal for horses as is, why not just leave it that way?

 

[wafflycat]

That's not even a farcility. I can't think of any reason why I'd ever ride there, unless I suddenly developed some kind of mud fetish.
If it's ideal for horses as is, why not just leave it that way?

Quite. It's suitable for MTBs and that's it.

 

[summerdays]

I'd ride there for fun/leisure but not for a commute unless summer and definitely dry... As long as it went somewhere vaguely in the direction I wanted (I don't mind going a slightly longer route if it is nice and gets me away from urban streets for a bit) or was long enough to be a trip in itself say with kids. And it would be on a hybrid bike.

 

[TheDoctor]

Quite. It's suitable for MTBs ducks and that's it.

FTFY

 

[Norm]

This is an old mineral railway line with a drainage canal along part of its length. The surface is compressed stone but it is a bit softer in places where there is silt on top but I feel could be easily improved without tarmac.

It already looks a pretty good surface to me, much better than some of the stuff I ride at the moment.

Not happy with being "required to" dismount, though. That would just make it a no-go for me. There's an off-road run for me to my local town with gates at either end requiring a dismount, I just don't go that way. I'd rather cycle on the dual cabbageway for 1/2 mile than stop and fight through kissing gates which are about 2" too short for my bike and only slow down cyclists for a few feet either side of them anyway.

 

[sadjack]

That's not even a farcility. I can't think of any reason why I'd ever ride there, unless I suddenly developed some kind of mud fetish.
If it's ideal for horses as is, why not just leave it that way?

+1. If there is already a route for bikes linking the same areas, why spend the extra money here?

Seems daft in this day and age.

 

[Danny]

This is an old mineral railway line with a drainage canal along part of its length. The surface is compressed stone but it is a bit softer in places where there is silt on top but I feel could be easily improved without tarmac. I would appreciate your views. Its currently used by cyclists and walkers but more, I think by riders. The planning application initially states shared space/footpath but with only a small section for horse riders and the path is due to be tarmaced. It is wetter at one end which will need more attention but I think this is a nice natural surface which wouldnt cost much to improve.

From the pictures, this line looks similar to the route that runs from Scarborough to Whitby. It was certainly rideable when I did it in late autumn. However I did use it in the middle of a dry spell so I'm not sure what the surface would be like after prolonged wet weather.

Given that a lot of off road cycle routes run along railway lines or toe paths I'd try and find a few near you and ride on them to get a feel for what they are going to be like.

 

[equicyclist]

The thing is that the county council are increasing the routes available to walkers and cyclists and I dont object to this.....but if those routes have already got equestrian access I think its unfair to put up barriers to obstruct them. Im sure this would be the thought of cyclists as well if they were using a route that the council was going to "improive" for walkers. I wanted to know what a compromise in surface could be and I thank you all for your comments as they have been very useful.

If you could choose a perfect surface would it be tarmac or some other surface? By knowing what users want as Ideal we can look at creating compromise.

Interestingly I have just had a local cyclist say that the cycleroutes are not suitable for riders because at points he could be doing 20 miles an hour and it would be unsafe! At the planning application for the route I pictured the councillors were asking about safety for children amongst horses. I think perhaps they need to think again!
Its not all...its the odd few, and that goes for riders as well.

 

[equicyclist]

What do you think of the barriers that are supposed to stop motorbikes? Does anyone have trouble getting a bike through and have you witnessed any problems with prams etc?

 

[jonesy]

What do you think of the barriers that are supposed to stop motorbikes? Does anyone have trouble getting a bike through and have you witnessed any problems with prams etc?

They invariably make life more difficult for legitimate users, especially those with buggies, tag along child trailers etc and they make the paths inaccessible to wheelchair users,;while motorcyclists, often being of the scrambler type, often force their own route onto the path. The best deterrent against motorbikes is having plenty of legitimate users around, which is encouraged by having barrier-free access.

 

[mangaman]

Quite. It's suitable for MTBs and that's it.

Absulutely.

No-one has mentioned MTBers, but probably they're one of the commonest leisure bike.

I don't have a decent road bike. I use a cheap commuting bike with useful things like mudguards, lights, bell and a big rack for getting from A to B

I have a gratuitously expensive MTB with no lights / mudguards etc for leisure.

All cycling is done in shared spaces.

When riding to get somehere I'd rather share my space with cars as generally, in town, our speed differential is very small and I can generally predict what they'll do

When riding for fun I share bridleways with horses and walkers. I think this is more dangerous if I want to go quickly (which I often do) as the speed differential is so high. I therefore ride the roads to the quietest trails and avoid the much trumpetted mixed-use Sustrans paths which are the worst of all worlds.

I'm obviously careful of walkers and horses, but prefer a good old fashioned muddy bridleway. No need for tarmac or anything else.

My worry with Sustrans is the disproportionate amount of influence they have in policy making. They can provide a "quick fix" at often little cost to the council by providing a "shared use path" and have a phobia of roads.

 

[Norm]

Not happy with being "required to" dismount, though. That would just make it a no-go for me. There's an off-road run for me to my local town with gates at either end requiring a dismount, I just don't go that way. I'd rather cycle on the dual cabbageway for 1/2 mile than stop and fight through kissing gates which are about 2" too short for my bike and only slow down cyclists for a few feet either side of them anyway.

Picking up this one again, with the idea of barriers to stop motorised access, I went into town with my daughter on Sunday. We went in through the park, which requires the use of the 2 barriers I mention above. My daughter said that she disliked them so much that she'd rather come home on the road than use the parkland route, just because of those gates.

 

[Danny]

Picking up this one again, with the idea of barriers to stop motorised access, I went into town with my daughter on Sunday. We went in through the park, which requires the use of the 2 barriers I mention above. My daughter said that she disliked them so much that she'd rather come home on the road than use the parkland route, just because of those gates.

That's just poor design.

There are plenty of barrier designs that will prevent motor bikes or cars getting onto a cycle route, but still allow bikes to pass through easily. I go through one practically every day on my way to the station.

However I do agree with jonesy's point about it making life very difficult for buggies, trailers, trikes, and wheelchairs.

 

[Norm]

It is indeed. My MTB's bars won't go through the gap, although my road bikes will go through, the path is almost unrideable without suspension. Whilst my daughter's bike will fit, she's not confident enough to ride through.

Sad, really, that some thoughtless gimp who has probably not ridden since his balls dropped has decided to render the cycle path useless by putting blockages at either end.

*and breathe in.... and relax...*

 

[summerdays]

What do you think of the barriers that are supposed to stop motorbikes? Does anyone have trouble getting a bike through and have you witnessed any problems with prams etc?

I hate most barriers that are meant to stop motorbikes.... they usually make cyclists have to slow to zero or get off. There are ones that your pannier catches on, your handlebars don't fit through, aren't long enough to fit a bike in without lifting the front of the bike. And that is for a normal bike - if you haven't got a standard bike the problems I assume are greater.

Some of the barriers then create a bottleneck on the paths when groups of cyclists have to get past.

That's just poor design.

There are plenty of barrier designs that will prevent motor bikes or cars getting onto a cycle route, but still allow bikes to pass through easily. I go through one practically every day on my way to the station.

Could you post a picture of that one?