Great things are happening in Greater Manchester and it really shows how far behind the West Of England Combined Authority is.
One criticism I would have is the use of the term “Cycle Super Highway” which is causing issues around public perception. “Cycle Track” is an internationally recognised type of cycle infrastructure https://nacto.org/publication/urban-bikeway-design-guide/cycle-tracks/ and I see no reason not to adopt a UK National CT designation similar to the Motorway or even A road designation. Anyone coming to a city or town would know that CT218 is a route with high quality segregated cycle infrastructure their kids could ride on.
It also solves the political compromises that a CSH (Cycle Super Highway) designation has that it does not define a minimum level of infrastructure and allows Local Authorities to get away with delivering sub-par infrastructure that no parent would let their kids cycle on.
I know Sustrans are reviewing the National Cycle Network at the moment and it might be good to consider reclassifying the NCN4 designation into NCN4 and CT4 identifying high quality segregated sections of the route.
Cycle Tracks cannot be politically compromised due to the very clear definition, not only by NACTO, but also by Public Highways England http://www.standardsforhighways.co.uk/ha/standards/ians/pdfs/ian195.pdf
It is key that we recognise that within the way we communicate these schemes with the public. A Cycle Track scheme is great for kids enabling them to cycle to school. A Cycle Super Highway evokes MAMILs racing along at high speed with far greater public opposition. CSH needs to die. It’s a REALLY bad term with no minimum design requirement unlike CT.