Winnah!

[BentMikey]

Nice one on the insults, LOLOL!!!

 

[Morrisette]

...I think this is a positive step. Plus, it seemed to be the only project which had a truly nationwide reach....
QUOTE]

Totally agree. The other three were all fairly 'local' in scope and this is nationwide.

Good result!

 

[domd1979]

In terms of "localness" I don't think there is much to choose between them, since the Sustrans project is a series of quite localised schemes, with quite localised benefits (depending on your view).

In terms of the number of people who benefit, the Black Country Urban park would probably have benefited the same number of people.

Totally agree. The other three were all fairly 'local' in scope and this is nationwide.

 

[mrben]

In terms of "localness" I don't think there is much to choose between them, since the Sustrans project is a series of quite localised schemes, with quite localised benefits (depending on your view).

I was thinking of geographical "localness".

The Black Country project says that "more than 800,000 people will live within walking distance of a much needed attractive, safe environment.", whereas Connect2 says that "around 6 million people live within a mile of a Connect2 project".

Looking at their map, I reckon almost everyone in the UK will be living within 100 miles of a Connect2 project, apart from Scottish highlands.

 

[domd1979]

And there lies Sustrans dubious claims to the use of its routes. It says that people will use them for utility as well as leisure cycling, then quotes how many people live withing a mile or half-mile of their routes. Someone living a mile away from a route isn't going to cycle a mile to it, to cycle a mile, to cycle a mile back away from the route to their destination when they could just take the straightest route from A to B!!!

Connect2 says that "around 6 million people live within a mile of a Connect2 project".

 

[mrben]

And there lies Sustrans dubious claims to the use of its routes. It says that people will use them for utility as well as leisure cycling, then quotes how many people live withing a mile or half-mile of their routes. Someone living a mile away from a route isn't going to cycle a mile to it, to cycle a mile, to cycle a mile back away from the route to their destination when they could just take the straightest route from A to B!!!

No; but then again, people who live within walking distance of the Black Country Urban Park aren't necessarily going to use it either

My nearest Connect2 project is actually a possibility for my current commute, and would probably make it a bit shorter (shock horror!) (Admittedly, my back garden borders on a Sustrans cycle path, which I don't use....)

 

[John the Monkey]

I'm actually using part of the NCN (#74) for my current commute, as it goes. It continues through Crewe into Nantwich, I think, although my first leisure cycle from Crewe will probably be over to Alsager.

It's on road for the most part (other than some handy bits around large roundabouts). It ends a bit abruptly coming up to the train station though (imho) - luckily it's usually quiet enough to get back on to the road.

 

[gambatte]

Am I right in thinking that due to them going into partnerships with local authorities etc to get the grants, local byelaws being made are part of the deal? Byelaws stating that all other users apart from walkers will have to have 3rd party insurance?

 

[Brock]

Nice one on the insults, LOLOL!!!

I didn't necessarily mean you in particular mikey! xxx

 

[HJ]

And there lies Sustrans dubious claims to the use of its routes. It says that people will use them for utility as well as leisure cycling, then quotes how many people live withing a mile or half-mile of their routes. Someone living a mile away from a route isn't going to cycle a mile to it, to cycle a mile, to cycle a mile back away from the route to their destination when they could just take the straightest route from A to B!!!

If it gives people more options and gets them out cycling it has to be a good thing. No one is going to make you use them. Personally I use which ever route is most convenient, on or off the road.

 

[HJ]

It is also good to see some positive cycling stories in the press as well. Who know maybe the suggestion that "These projects will also have a positive effect on how we reduce the use of our cars." will come true as well

 

[domtyler]

Well now they have won the money I would like to see them put it to good use. I will watch with interest and hope to god that they don't just waste the lot on CRISP studies or other such pile of cak. I would love to have a direct route from where I live into Central London that is car free, well surfaced, safe to use and (most of all) convenient. I can't see how they would do it though.

 

[goo_mason]

If it gives people more options and gets them out cycling it has to be a good thing. No one is going to make you use them. Personally I use which ever route is most convenient, on or off the road.

Snap. Hence why I use the off-road route with the odd on-road excursions to get me to and from work. Beats the awful trip up Leith Walk, avoids the pot-holed nightmare that is Princes Street and instead I get to see swans, squirrels, lots of foxes, herons etc etc as well as avoiding breathing in the traffic fumes.

Sure, I get the odd local ned wildlife and ungritted, icy paths but it's more relaxing than the car-filled streets - plus it conveniently goes in the right direction towards the Gyle.