Yet Another Cycling Forum

General Category => On The Road => Topic started by: Pancho on 11 August, 2014, 12:29:10 pm

Title: You know that thread about crap surfaces - look at this!
Post by: Pancho on 11 August, 2014, 12:29:10 pm: (http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/webimage/1.6229795.1407582105!/image/730933801.jpg_gen/derivatives/articleImgDeriv_628px/730933801.jpg)

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/cyclists-criticise-rough-and-hard-new-cycle-path-at-salterns-promenade-1-6229796

Pristine tarmacc-y smoothness for pedestrians and knee deep shingle for cyclists! In real life, it's worse than the picture.
Title: Re: You know that thread about crap surfaces - look at this!
Post by: Basil on 11 August, 2014, 12:38:19 pm: So Sustrans contributed £20000. Don't they check? Don't they care?
I'm afraid that Sustrans, already pretty low, are sinking rapidly in my estimation.
Title: Re: You know that thread about crap surfaces - look at this!
Post by: danhopgood on 11 August, 2014, 12:44:02 pm: Probably a gravel surface due to some environemental constraint that there is to be no increase in the impermeable surfacing area of the scheme.

Article says the grevel needs time to bed in - which may be true. I just hope the gravel gets enough maintenance - it'll certainly pothole.

Not a great cycle-friendly solution.
Title: Re: You know that thread about crap surfaces - look at this!
Post by: chrischapman1951 on 11 August, 2014, 02:11:50 pm: I know it says "No Cycling" but I know which side I would ride on were I in that vicinity :-)
Title: Re: You know that thread about crap surfaces - look at this!
Post by: Kim on 11 August, 2014, 02:58:50 pm: Quote from: Basil on 11 August, 2014, 12:38:19 pm
So Sustrans contributed £20000. Don't they check? Don't they care?
I'm afraid that Sustrans, already pretty low, are sinking rapidly in my estimation.

I'm becoming increasingly convinced by the "Sustrans aren't a cycling organisation" theory. While inadequate paths and stupid barriers are usually the fault of the landowners themselves, it seems that Sustrans will happily put their name to any old crap that furthers their goal of having more miles of off-road network to quote in their next funding bid.

The grass-roots stuff is volunteer lead and fares somewhat better, but that doesn't lead to usable infrastructure.

If Sustrans took cycling seriously, they'd do a better job of information provision (both mapping and signage) that detailed exactly what is and isn't accessible to different classes of users, even if there isn't money to improve the infrastructure itself.
Title: Re: You know that thread about crap surfaces - look at this!
Post by: Canardly on 11 August, 2014, 03:09:54 pm: If that path had a topping of 1/4" to nothing grit applied and then soaked it would lock down and provide a much more user friendly surface. Hoggin will never provide a suitable surface for most cyclists and the Council should know this and Sustrans should certainly know this.

'But cyclists are shunning the cycleway as it is made of a mixture of clay, gravel, and sand – called hoggin – preferring to cycle on the newly-laid promenade.'
Title: Re: You know that thread about crap surfaces - look at this!
Post by: David Martin on 11 August, 2014, 09:37:07 pm: Sustrans do know this. Where they disperse funds for new projects they have control (he who pays the piper etc) and mandate sealed smooth surfaces for cycle use. We have run up against this on our railway path project where we want to use a whindust path (perfectly suitable for bikes) but may have to find the extra for tarmac if Sustrans are funding it.

I'll be meeting their rep on site on Wednesday if I can get some time off.
Title: Re: You know that thread about crap surfaces - look at this!
Post by: T42 on 11 August, 2014, 09:41:32 pm: All they really need to do is swap over the signs: peds on the nice crunchy gravel and cyclists on the tarmac.
Title: Re: You know that thread about crap surfaces - look at this!
Post by: David Martin on 11 August, 2014, 09:54:50 pm: That doesn't look like it meets minimum standards for a cycle path. It should have 1.2 m width plus a further o.5m fromt he edge of the path to the upstand. The bollard doesn't comply as it is not marked in a suitably bright manner with retroreflectives.

A letter to the council asking when they are going to finish it would be a good idea.
Title: Re: You know that thread about crap surfaces - look at this!
Post by: levitator on 13 August, 2014, 09:12:28 am: Some years ago, there was a local proposal to create a cycle path linking us with a neighbouring town (not alongside a road) which would have been a useful link.But they were going to surface it like that, I was led to believe. I complained, writing that many cyclists including me would be unable to use it on my present (road) bike. No joy.

But the path never came into existence, due to I believe being blocked by local landowners. Blessing in disguise?

We continue to have to use the alternatives: a busy main road or a minor road which has become a rat run.

If that path had been built, could we have got the surface upgraded?

Incidentally, many Beeching-axed railway lines in our area have become cycle routes, but they too are mostly surfaced in loose gravel. Another opportunity missed.
Title: Re: You know that thread about crap surfaces - look at this!
Post by: Ham on 13 August, 2014, 09:33:35 am: What does happen on surfaces like that is as it beds in is that the loose gravel gets swept into the less used edges which, when encountered in a deep drift unexpectedly - say when riding side by side with family, leaving them in the "good" centre and chatting away merrily - does have the resultant effect of reducing the total amount of loose gravel. This is because you end up removing a quantity of the same, embedded in your body.

DNAHIKT
Title: Re: You know that thread about crap surfaces - look at this!
Post by: Mr Larrington on 13 August, 2014, 10:51:24 am: I bet it's fun trying to rdie a recumbent bike on that path... The closing overs of the New Forest On- and Off-Shore had something similar when I rode it in 2007. At a walking pace. Not clipped in. The Organisator said he'd add a road-based alternative route for the following year.
Title: Re: You know that thread about crap surfaces - look at this!
Post by: cygnet on 13 August, 2014, 08:34:45 pm: Aside from the crap path someone could mention to the chap in the photo that his helmet is at about 30 degrees from where it is recommended to be (if wearing one)
Title: Re: You know that thread about crap surfaces - look at this!
Post by: Bledlow on 14 August, 2014, 11:20:21 pm: Quote from: Ham on 13 August, 2014, 09:33:35 am
What does happen on surfaces like that is as it beds in is that the loose gravel gets swept into the less used edges which, when encountered in a deep drift unexpectedly - say when riding side by side with family, leaving them in the "good" centre and chatting away merrily - does have the resultant effect of reducing the total amount of loose gravel. This is because you end up removing a quantity of the same, embedded in your body.

DNAHIKT
Mrs B suffered that problem once. Still has the scar on her elbow.
Title: Re: You know that thread about crap surfaces - look at this!
Post by: wajcgac on 16 August, 2014, 02:49:55 pm: Quote from: levitator on 13 August, 2014, 09:12:28 am
Incidentally, many Beeching-axed railway lines in our area have become cycle routes, but they too are mostly surfaced in loose gravel. Another opportunity missed.

We had a cycle route developed nearby which used to be an old railway line. The surface was variable depending on which 1-2 mile section you were on. The worst bit, although having a compact surface felt as if you could feel where every sleeper had been removed. Particularly annoying at anything above walking pace.

Incredibly they resurfaced that particular section last year with the finest smoothest asphalt. :thumbsup:
Title: Re: You know that thread about crap surfaces - look at this!
Post by: Asterix, the former Gaul. on 17 August, 2014, 06:22:14 am: WRT tarmac, where trees are close to the track their roots lift the tarmac making ridges like mini speed humps. A very uncomfortable surface that I suspect would not happen with a looser topping.

As regards SUSTRANS, I agree that their aims are not consistent with the right of cyclists to use proper roads and so I stopped my subscription years ago.