Sustrans claims National Cycle Network has saved UK economy more than £7 billion

@spen - true. even the new segregated path in central Bristol is overrun with pedestrians ignoring the cycle symbols and the fact that it's made to look like a road not a footpath (eg. a dashed centre line)

The problem is that a lot of local authorities have no internal expertise for 'active travel' and or cycling due to cuts. So money is funneled into Sustrans.

I don't believe this to be an ideal arrangement.

Sustrans are simply yes-men for bad infrastructure. They have the belief that ANYTHING is better than nothing, which leads to small budgets spread too thinly and used for the easy option. That's why we have the NCN that we do - unsurfaced routes with steps and barriers that are indirect or inappropriate for most types of bike and rider.

Just look at their approval for the Bedford Turbo-roundabout.

gaza_d put his finger on exactly why segregated infrastructure isn't generally being installed anymore. Bot prds and people on bikes ignore the segregation.

As for Sustrans, they are becoming part of the problem rather than the solution. They have several members of staff who are positions to give a yeah or nay on funding who simply don't live in the real world. For instance they wanted raisewd cussins put across junctions on 40mph road with cyclists have priority across all junction. I wonder how many casualties they thought was an acceptable level on an arrangement like that?

gazza_d wil also find that he uses LA routes with Sustrans paying for the signs and a proportion towards groundworks, with no provision for any future maitenance, leaving the LA to pickup the bill, and a map with their logo all over it. After that- nothing to do with us guv!( the sections of paths owned by sustrans where I live are notable by their lack of basic maintenace. some years not even basic grass cutting, surfaces lifted by tree roots and generally poor quality surfaces). The money they use isn't even theirs, most of it comes fro central government fro some unfathomable reason Sustrans get their hands on it first and take out their admin fees before a penny is spent on infrastructure.

Get rid of Sustrans, give the money directly and ringfenced to LAs with rules governing consultation before implementation and we might statrt to get a network that goes to the same places that people want to.

We have a section of fairly new Sustrans designed segregated NCN route here on South Tyneside. It's been in about 4 or 5 years now.

I have had several local authority officers tell me over the last 2 or 3 years that shared is the preference rather than segregated, unless cyclist and pedestrian traffic are both quite high.

I use some stretches of segregated and people just walk in the cycling bit all the time. Which can be frustrating when it's a group with prams, or a bunch of teenagers spreading out over the path. The reasons seem to be because A) the cycling side is wider, and B) further away from the road traffic

Sustrans do some good work, but am I right in thinking that they always put in shared use cyclist/pedestrian paths? Really when possible it's better to have a bike path/lane, and a pedestrian path/lane, which is what the Dutch do - because the speed of travel is different for walkers v cyclists.

I'm in favour of sustainable travel, but not slow travel just for the sake of it.

Sustrans ……………… LoL!

To expand on the fist comment, I have deep reservations about Sustrans. As far as I can tell, their route go from somewhere you aren't to somewhere you don't want to go via routes that would destroy a decent set of wheels.

Just had a quick look at their (piss poor) website and nothing joins up - unless you have an MTB and a sense of adventure.

I recall a few years ago, I was in Cornwall and me and my son had road bikes. We knew what to expect from the terrain. Anyhow, coming (slowly) up a section of road marked with a 30% gradient, we came across a Dutch family. One parent on a tandem with one kid, the other parent with the other kid on a followme job. Both with fully loaded panniers and a trailer. They had seen the sign "National Cycle Network" and had foolishly assumed that this was the sensible way to go. They must've thought it was some cruel British joke. Which, in a way, I suppose Sustrans is.

course not hence why the Tories cut the wind subsidy, can not have cheap electric killing the carbon industry eh ?

who is that Gazza, name names ...

I would love to think you are wrong but if politicians were bothered about people being being healthy they would

1) ban smoking - I smoke
2) min alcohol until price at about £1 (would not affect pubs)
3) Big sugar warnings, limit sugar in children's food etc

This government will cut it all. They hate cycling as a party (some notable exceptions) and will fall in with the UKIP tenandancy where they can. Boris remember is an exception but he is only continuing what Ken started and knows is popular.

Quick show of hands- does ANYONE believe that the government will commit 5% to active travel? They can't afford it cos they're too busy giving tax breaks to make sure wealthy people can move their house to their children/grandchildren/housekeeper/cat without paying any tax

I use a mix of Sustrans and LA routes for my commutes and the sustrans stuff is generally good and well surfaced.

The problem is as ever that some of the routes that were nailed together many years ago & seemed a revelation then are seriously crap by today's expectations.

The problem is generally lack of money for dedicated cycling schemes, and political will to take on the driving lobby and to ensure that good quality joined up cycling provision is baked into other schemes such as junction works or town centre revamps.

Better still:

Dear Dave

Please f*** off.

PS, judging by how busy some of the Sustrans routes round here are they are doing a good job of getting people on bikes. Nothing's perfect of course but credit etc.

Dear Dave

Please spend money on cycling infrastructure

Please don't give it to those Sustrans clowns.