crap cycle path

"Richard Bullock" wrote in
:

The local paper in Wilmslow, Cheshire reported on a cycle track which
was in planning - which would be a designated "local cycle route" on
the Sustrans scheme. The planning permission was overturned because it
was too dangerous - the reason? A set of 80 or so steps was to form an
integral part of the cycle route where the cycle track came up against
a 1:12 incline which rises a total of 23 metres.

Brilliant! Do these people know what a bike is? Is it a cycle track
specifically for trials riders?

Richard Bullock wrote:
A set of 80 or so steps was to form an integral part
of the cycle route where the cycle track came up against a 1:12 incline
which rises a total of 23 metres.

There was one such farcility near me when I first moved in. The steps
on one side of the incline have since been replaced by a ramp, but it's
still quite a climb and I certainly wouldn't want to meet someone coming
the other way. Needless to say, I use the road:
url:http://www.speedy5.freeserve.co.uk/danny/cycling/farce/wraxall1.jpg

or the 7th picture down at
url:http://www.speedy5.freeserve.co.uk/danny/cycling/farcilities.html

--
Danny Colyer (the UK company has been laughed out of my reply address)
url:http://www.speedy5.freeserve.co.uk/danny/
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine

Iain Jones wrote:
"Richard Bullock" wrote in
:

The local paper in Wilmslow, Cheshire reported on a cycle track which
was in planning - which would be a designated "local cycle route" on
the Sustrans scheme. The planning permission was overturned because it
was too dangerous - the reason? A set of 80 or so steps was to form an
integral part of the cycle route where the cycle track came up against
a 1:12 incline which rises a total of 23 metres.

Brilliant! Do these people know what a bike is? Is it a cycle track
specifically for trials riders?

Prabably had a surplus of Cyclist Dismount signs they were hoping to use up.

Tony

Tony Raven wrote:

Prabably had a surplus of Cyclist Dismount signs they were hoping to
use up.

Tee-hee!

I have been using a short stretch of Sustrans path to avoid Nastiness. I'm
going to have to stop usig it; it was marginal on the tourer but is bloody
unpleasant on the 'bent. Why? Because Sustrans, in their infinite wisdom,
have chosen to spread loose gravel over the tarmac surface. Somebody really
out to point out to them that the "trans" part means "transport", which
means that you can't assume balloon-tyred MTBs will be the only bikes.

--
Guy
===
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

Victory is ours! Down with Eric the Half A Brain!

in message , Geraint Jones
k.invalid') wrote:

Further
up the route, near Woodstock there's a contra-flow cycle lane that
drops off the pavement into and though the bus-stop lay-byes alongside
the A44.

When (not if) someone gets killed there, is it murder or manslaughter
the planners should be charged with?

--
(Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

Morning had broken, and there was nothing we could do but wait
patiently for the RAC to arrive.

I have been using a short stretch of Sustrans path to avoid Nastiness.
I'm
going to have to stop usig it; it was marginal on the tourer but is bloody
unpleasant on the 'bent. Why? Because Sustrans, in their infinite
wisdom,
have chosen to spread loose gravel over the tarmac surface. Somebody
really
out to point out to them that the "trans" part means "transport", which
means that you can't assume balloon-tyred MTBs will be the only bikes.

I took an old MTB along to do short sections of the Trans-Pennine Trail -
I've done the bit from Spike Island, Widnes to somewhere East of Stockport -
and the quality varies enormously. The section along the former railway
between Altrincham and Lymm is actually quite good (although has annoying
gates where it meets a couple of minor roads) - and certain bits in
Warrington are ok - the section past Fiddlers Ferry power station was almost
impassable on foot let alone on a bike - it was so overgrown. The bit from
the end of the end of the railway to the east of Stockport is generally
quite crap - the surfacing is very poor - I certainly wouldn't recommend
doing it on anything with smaller wheels than my MTB - and one particular
section East of Stockport - I wouldn't recommend doing it on a bike at all -
I nearly broke a wheel. I hope that bit has been properly surfaced now/ or
an alternative route found - rather than just saying that large loose rocks
are an adequate surface.

Tony Raven wrote:

Prabably had a surplus of Cyclist Dismount signs they were hoping to use up.

William. I think they gave a job lot to British Waterways too - on a
whim I rode home up the tow path (Regent's Canal, Hertford Union Canal,
river Lea) yesterday and there were a profusion of signs forbidding the
riding of bicycles under bridges.

--

Dave Larrington - http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/
================================================== =========
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
================================================== =========

"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote in message
...
I have been using a short stretch of Sustrans path to avoid Nastiness. I'm
going to have to stop usig it; it was marginal on the tourer but is bloody
unpleasant on the 'bent. Why? Because Sustrans, in their infinite wisdom,
have chosen to spread loose gravel over the tarmac surface. Somebody really
out to point out to them that the "trans" part means "transport", which
means that you can't assume balloon-tyred MTBs will be the only bikes.


But that would involve them having some knowledge of what they were doing.
Interested to see John Grimshaw in a letter to AtoB saying no-one in Sustrans
"has any knowledge that trikes cannot be used on bridleways". So no one is
Sustrans has heard of that fundamental piece of rights of way for cyclists
legislation, The Countryside Act 1968, which only allows bicycles and not
tricycles or unicycles on bridleways then.

Tony

On Tue, 11 May 2004 09:05:02 GMT, Simon Brooke
wrote:

When (not if) someone gets killed there, is it murder or manslaughter
the planners should be charged with?

Is idiocy a crime? If not, how about "spending one's allowance before
the end of the financial year"?

James

Dave Larrington wrote in
:

Tony Raven wrote:

Prabably had a surplus of Cyclist Dismount signs they were hoping to
use up.

William. I think they gave a job lot to British Waterways too - on a
whim I rode home up the tow path (Regent's Canal, Hertford Union
Canal, river Lea) yesterday and there were a profusion of signs
forbidding the riding of bicycles under bridges.


Plenty of those up here too. I'll never understand why they build a
cycleway and then put "Cyclists Dismount" signs every time it meets some
kind of obstruction.