CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Cycling News

More money (£3.9m) for cycling in ScotlandCyclists get £3.9m funding boostContin

(22 posts)
  • Started 12 years ago by kaputnik
  • Latest reply from crowriver

  1. kaputnik
    Moderator

    Cyclists get £3.9m funding boostContinue reading the main story

    BBC News article.

    The Scottish government is to invest an extra £3.9m in cycling infrastructure over the next two years.

    "In the Highlands and Argyll & Bute, we are committing £3m to fast track the National Cycle Network route 78 between Oban and Inverness.

    "The Great Glen cycle path will be an iconic route which will boost the local economy through the additional tourism in an area which already attracts over 20,000 spectators to the World Mountain Bike Championship each year in Fort William."

    As part of the commitment to route 78, a cycle route will also be created between Oban and Appin, to link a remote community off the main Oban to Fort William section of the larger route.

    A further £500,000 will go towards improving access to stations on the successful Airdrie to Bathgate railway.

    And £400,000 will be spent on increasing cycle parking at schools, which Mr Brown said would help encourage more children to cycle.

    Part of the £205m infrastructure spending announced recently, meaning cycling now up to 1.9% of that pot of money!

    Posted 12 years ago #
  2. chdot
    Admin

    All good (as far as it goes...)

    First bit is cycling as tourism.

    The second should have been in place before the line was open!

    Secure cycle parking is desirable at schools - but it's not enough in isolation.

    Posted 12 years ago #
  3. Calum
    Member

    Is there any word on the details of the suspiciously large figure of £53million for cycling that was announced the other day?

    http://news.stv.tv/scotland/208075-scots-urged-to-get-on-their-bikes-as-new-action-plan-announced/

    Posted 12 years ago #
  4. Kim
    Member

    Providing improved tourist routes is all very well, but are they going to make changes to the ScotRail franchise about the carriage of bikes on trains to allow the tourist to get to and from the cycle route in the first place? We really need a joined up sustainable transport policy.

    Posted 12 years ago #
  5. crowriver
    Member

    @Kim, what a lovely naieve thought. I think we are all supposed to drive to Oban with bikes on the roof/back of cars...

    Posted 12 years ago #
  6. Morningsider
    Member

    The same announcement within two weeks - good work by the Transport Scotland press office. The devil is, of course, in the detail. £25m of the "additional" £205m is from unspent contingency funding from the Forth Crossing project. All of a sudden - the "extra" £3.9m doesn't seem so generous.

    Also, the 1.9% figure is misleading - the £205m is actually part of a larger allocation covering financial years 2012/13 until 2014/15 - the £205m is for the first two of these three years, with the remainder to be allocated later. What proportion of the total is eventually spent on cycling will not be known until the allocations for 2014/15 are made. In any event it means nothing - total expenditure on cycling remains woefully low - the fact that an additional £3.9m represents a substantial increase shows how low total expenditure is.

    Also, the "extra" money is just being hosed away - does anyone really think that "the Great Glen Cycleway" or a route between Oban and Appin are the best use of extra scarce cycle funds?

    Posted 12 years ago #
  7. kaputnik
    Moderator

    I've not done the "Great Glen" cycleway myself yet. My old flatmate did and said it was rubbish as it took the least advantageous route for cycling, constantly climbing and falling on what should really be a pretty flat route.

    The paths around Oban were only recently opened when I used them (infact, they weren't actually complete, which was a particularly sore point when I almost ran into very-hard-to-spot barriers left across them and at other bits where I had to carry a very heavily laden bike across incomplete road crossings abounding with wet cement). However, they were of a very good quality and opened up areas of the country to the spending cycle tourist who might otherwise have taken another route.

    What I think the issue is here that it's all great stuff to invest heavily in infrastructure for cycle tourism / leisure cycling, but it doesn't help when it can be so hard to get yourself to the new cycle paths without using a car. I think it's great they're spending this money, but I think it's a shame on the Government that it isn't significantly matched (and bettered) by the investment in urban infrastructure, where cycling really can make a huge difference to quality of life in towns and cities. It's not urban snobbery - it's just the fact of our demographics in Scotland and where (from a safety point of view) the money is most needed.

    In conclusion, there's no reason not to invest this sort of money, but there's every reason to invest real, significant amounts more in the (largely) urban environment where cycling has potential to take over a large amount of the transport / utility journeys otherwise made by cars.

    Posted 12 years ago #
  8. crowriver
    Member

    Apparently there used to be a cycle route, dunno how the new one proposed differs.

    "Please note that the Great Glen Cycle Route was dismantled in 2006 and no longer exists.

    Currently, cyclists use the original Great Glen Way itself with great success. However, the surface is not really suitable for road tyres. We have cyclists regularly completing the route on mountain bike or robust hybrid. It is fairly direct, and south of Fort Augustus there are few hills. Most cyclists take between 2 and 3 days to travel the entire distance from Fort William to Inverness. The route itself is clearly waymarked and commercial maps are suitable for cyclists as well as walkers.

    We advise that you ensure you have the appropriate level of fitness and also carry appropriate and adequate equipment for your trip, as the weather is very changeable. We also strongly recommend you take a mobile communication device, although signal cannot be guaranteed at all points on the route.

    A major cycling group is currently investigating options for road biking within the Glen. If you are on road bikes, the A82 is the only alternative for the section of the Glen you are planning on travelling at present. However we would be very cautious about recommending this as a cycling route as it is a major trunk road connecting Fort William and Inverness. Traffic regularly includes heavy timber lorries and other freight, caravans and other tourist traffic and, especially along Loch Ness-side, the road is very windy in places, making passing bicycles difficult for motorists."

    http://www.greatglenway.com/route_users.htm

    Posted 12 years ago #
  9. crowriver
    Member

    From 2008:

    "Comment: so what's it like to use?
    The official website highlights the many mountain bike trails along the route but, unlike the walking and boating routes, it seems to give mixed messages about the wisdom of cycling the whole length of the Glen, especially without a mountain bike.

    To quote the website itself, "Unlike The Caledonian Canal and the GGW Long Distance Route (primarily a walking route), the Great Glen Mountain Bike Trails do not provide a continuous route through the Glen. Instead, they are a collection of cycling facilities, at a variety of Great Glen locations, with opportunities for everyone - from beginners and families to world-class competition level. The precursor to these trails was the Great Glen Cycle Route which provided a long distance touring route through the Glen. However, this route had become a low grade experience for touring bikes and was withdrawn in 2006. Although it is possible for mountain bike riders to pedal between the various trails, they are not promoted as a continuous route and are not suitable for road bikes."

    The website fails to stress that much of the western end of the route – between Fort William and Fort Augustus in fact, is easy cycling along a very decent off-road surface along National Cycle Network route 78, much of it using the Caledonian Canal Towpath. And off-road cycle routes the length of the Glen are still promoted both on a map (Great Glen Way Walk and Cycle Route – available from Sustrans) and on Waterscape, the British Waterways website. The latter two routes are more for mountain bikers, especially at the eastern end of the Glen – the touring route actually had all signage removed. "

    http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/great-glen-biking-initiative-launched-15194/

    Posted 12 years ago #
  10. chdot
    Admin

    "
    I think it's great they're spending this money, but I think it's a shame on the Government that it isn't significantly matched (and bettered) by the investment in urban infrastructure, where cycling really can make a huge difference to quality of life in towns and cities.

    "
    This is partly a consequence of SG mostly ending "ring fencing" of money it gives to LAs, which makes it easy to say 'it's up to councils to decide how much to spend on cycling'.

    Most councils don't see cycling as much of a priority. Edinburgh of course is an exception but as we all know some of what it does leaves a lot to be desired and there is still far too much 'pro-car status-quoism'.

    However significant amounts of infrastructure have been created with 'match funded' money from Sustrans - which of course is money that has been given to them by SG.

    In addition money for cycle parking in schools has been spent by councils who have bid to Sustrans for money that has been given to it by the SG.

    This might seem inefficient but generally works well - and at least Sustrans understands cycling, infrastructure and getting more people cycling than most councils or Government departments.

    Sustrans has always had a complex relationship with Governments (not just in Scotland) as it is both a campaigning organisation and an infrastructure provider/funder.

    There have been longstanding dangers of criticising too much and getting less money! There have been plenty of times when Sustrans has had no idea of how much money it would be given in the next financial year, which has caused planning (and staff/employment) problems.

    In Scotland there is also Cycling Scotland which is directly funded by SG and responsible for the Cycling Action Plan Scotland - which is due to be updated this year.

    There is plenty of scope for the SG to 'promote cycling' and fund better infrastructure - especially in urban areas - but it still doesn't understand cycling as transport or the extent to which it is responsible for, and able to facilitate, action at local (particularly urban) level.

    This why contacting MSPs and Ministers is important. But it's not enough to say 'we want more money spent on cycling because we like it and think other people will too' - though that's obviously worked quite well for the 'motoring lobby'!!

    Governments increasing what "evidence" - though they are quite capable of ignoring it if it doesn't suit their politics/prejudices.

    One problem for 'cycling' has always been that 'benefits' have been too good/wide - general health, obesity, wellbeing, fewer traffic jams, less air pollution, tourism, sport (especially elite) etc. etc. So it's harder to quantify/pigeonhole/fund without saying 'cycling is so wonderful we'll just chuck lots of money at it and know it will all be spent wisely'...

    Posted 12 years ago #
  11. minus six
    Member

    My guide to cycling the Great Glen from Edinburgh, three or four nights:

    Get cheapest return train ticket, Edinburgh ~ Inverness.

    Get early train. Get off at Newtonmore northbound.

    Cycle west to Laggan junction. Take minor road to Garva Bridge. Continue through to Melgarve Bothy.

    Bear SSW, stravaiging over rough path to Luib Chonnal Bothy. Relax.

    Magnificent morning cycle down Glen Roy to Spean Bridge.

    Join Great Glen Way at Gairlochy. Camp at Loch Lochy is possible, on west side of loch directly opposite Letterfinlay / Corriegour Lodge.

    Continue north on regular Great Glen path route, train home from Inverness.

    Posted 12 years ago #
  12. cb
    Member

  13. Tulyar
    Member

    Crowriver wrong on A82 and wrong on 2-3 DAYS to complete route. Remember I used to live & work from Inverness and cover rail routes which required using parts of Great Glen to get to them. I also did some of the early Sustrans work updating the mid 1980's surveys. As noted later round the Loch (Ness) = 6 hours and you'll easily do Inverness to Gairlochy in a day - so the extra bit to Fort William could be a pretty full day's riding - especially as you can do most of this on the canal (level with fine downhill on Neptune's Staircase to Banavie).

    Letter in The Herald on Friday outlines a lot but essentially a key section lacking in a rideable route for touring is Loch Oich, where the disused railway and 1726 road run along the South Shore and the A82 on the North one - the road and railway being abandoned for at least 80 years, and in great disrepair. From Invergarry a cul de sac single track road connects at one end of the forestry road that connects back to another cul de sac at Achnacarry and goes via Gairlochy and the option to use the canal towpath right through to Banavie, already rideable with a good touring bike.

    Around the Loch (Ness) was reckoned to be a 6 hour trip , and we used the 1726 or 1732 'military' roads for the South 'shore'. The 1726 road actually gets no sight of Loch Ness, as it runs very straight at high level from Errogie to Whitebridge and Loch Tarff, before dropping at 1 in 4 down Glen Doe - but it is very nice to ride, aside from the stiff hill at Glen Doe and switchback along the lochside to Foyers on 1732 road (which can be side-stepped through Glen Lia)

    I think the press release misspelled Corron for Corran ferry but I reckon that the link needs to be sorted from Ballachulish (Onich) rather than just the Northern section, and note that the old military road takes a route further inland and may offer an option to reach Loch Leven and options to follow the shoreline via Kinlochleven and Glencoe village rather than the direct crossing on the Ballachulish Bridge.

    The Northern section of the original 'cycle route' is a bit of a joke for a leisurely touring option as the gorge which is the fault-line rises over 600 feet above the loch and the converted forestry roads and a few minor roads to places like Abriachan offer fantastic views but massively steep descents to cross Glen Urquhart and Glen Morriston, with correspondingly fierce climbs on the opposite side - all on standard forestry roads - created from locally excavated materials (ie 'nominally' drybound macadam)

    Don't pin everything on the rail service carrying bikes, more capacity is available on coach services* to Inverness, Fort William, Oban and Lochgilphead (or even from Cloanaig for those who really want to do the route from South to North). Scotrail also already has a set-up for bike hire at Oban, Fort Bill, and Inverness, allowing for 1-way trips, although at present this is mainly MTB rather than touring bikes.

    *Packed properly up to 10 bikes can fit in the underfloor hold of a 50-seat coach compared to 4 -6 roll-on bikes on a 140 seat train, although dismantled and packed bikes can also add to the number of bikes carried by train. As a coach is 2.55m wide it should be possible to fit a tandem across the width of the luggage hold on a modern monocoque vehicle - I'm chasing that one up, but given the size and space issue it may be a special booking detail with the coach operator.

    So summing up I think I can see why it is a £3m project, but would suggest that a good quality surface built with locally won material is a better value prospect that the high carbon footprint of laying tarmac (but very few contractors are competent to build a good drybound road, and the maintenance regime needs strict control of the use of motor vehicles on the surface, and diligent control of overhanging vegetation). the package of building as to be supported by an equal package of public transport linking-up, and bike hire/servicing, and we need to actually measure the current position to be both certain of the results from the investment, and clear on where the detail of connections and facilities need to be provided as the project is delivered.

    Would love to be involved - where do I apply?

    Posted 12 years ago #
  14. crowriver
    Member

    Letter here:

    http://www.heraldscotland.com/comment/letters/buses-ought-to-be-included-in-joined-up-thinking-about-cycling.19825928

    As a coach is 2.55m wide it should be possible to fit a tandem across the width of the luggage hold on a modern monocoque vehicle - I'm chasing that one up, but given the size and space issue it may be a special booking detail with the coach operator.

    That would be interesting, if only my son was not prone to car and coach sickness. Do East Coast still do an Inverness service? Could be another option...

    Posted 12 years ago #
  15. kaputnik
    Moderator

    Do East Coast still do an Inverness service?

    Once train a day I think in each direction, but it's Class 43 / Mk. 4 combination, which has limited bike space, 4 hanging up by the wheels and that's it (plus 2 permanently locked shut guards compartments in the locomotives!)

    Posted 12 years ago #
  16. Arellcat
    Moderator

    According to the National Rail journey planner, there are on average 7 direct trains a day from Edinburgh to Inverness, including the 1633 that originates from Kings Cross (Kaputnik's Class 43/HST, whose throaty exhaust I recognise when I'm in the office of an afternoon).

    From Inverness to Edinburgh there are 6 direct trains through the day, starting with the 0755 to Kings Cross. All others are First Scotrail. There are further options of course, such as changing at Perth.

    I'm another who would rather catch a train than a bus/coach on account of trying to avoid motion sickness, but fully support the bike+coach option for getting people up and down the country.

    Posted 12 years ago #
  17. crowriver
    Member

    Pity about the rolling stock to Inversneggy. It's the tandem I'm thinking about.....however No.1 son would not survive the coach journey(s) methinks :-( He's fine on trains.

    Might be a market for tandem hire on the Oban to Inverness trail once it's renovated.....or maybe buy a folding tandem (yes, they exist, but not cheap). Or simpler still, just take wheels, mudguards off, wrap it and carry as oversized 'luggage'.

    Posted 12 years ago #
  18. Tulyar
    Member

    With wheels off (and mudguards) a tandem can get down to around 1.8-1.9m which is the length of a typical bike with wheels on. (Or with front wheel removed and set at an angle resting on the forks). Working on the principle that if it fits the bike space it is a bike that should be one way to deal with the tandem issue.

    However worth noting that there is an INQUIRY – EFFECTIVENESS OF LEGISLATION RELATING TO TRANSPORT FOR DISABLED PEOPLE with Westminster Transport Committee, so commentary of getting tandems & trikes on board trains and coaches might be worth banging in http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/transport-committee/news/disabled-people---tor/

    Posted 12 years ago #
  19. SRD
    Moderator

    My tandem fits the bike space, but I have still been threatened with no travel. Not actually refused yet, but enough to make me very wary.

    Posted 12 years ago #
  20. kaputnik
    Moderator

    If it fits in the bike space without causing an obstruction, I don't see what business of Scotrail's it is what shape your bike is. Perhaps they should ban downhill MTBs because of the outrageous width of their handlebars?

    Posted 12 years ago #
  21. Morningsider
    Member

    My understanding is that tandems are banned by ScotRail because they add to the time it takes to get everyone on/off a train (caused by tandem cyclists negotiating the cramped interiors/narrow doors of most rolling stock)- rather than because they are too big to fit in the available space.

    I know this seems daft - but the madness that is the privatised rail system can see First fined if a train spends too long at a station, even by as little as an extra minute or two. This means there is an active disincentive for the operator to carry tandems.

    Posted 12 years ago #
  22. crowriver
    Member

    I'm going to try out the Ute on a few Scotrail trains this year. Not quite as long as a tandem, but a fair bit longer than a standard bike. It should fit in the Bathgate line trains, and the North Berwick ones.....indeed a full sized tandem would fit in those trains no bother as well.

    Posted 12 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin