UK and Europe · Public discussion

Where do I go next?

Started by marc · · Last activity · 7 posts · 335 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
UK and Europe
Published
5 December 2007
Last activity
6 December 2007
Original author
marc
Posts
7
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
335
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–7 of 7
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Latest letter from the LA

    "Dear Mr. ????,
    Thank you for your emails of 16th November and 4th December 2007
    regarding the cycle parking at Bridgend leisure centre, and the
    segregated cycle route along Angel Street.

    I would like to clarify my earlier response regarding the reference to
    the use of Sustrans guidelines during the development of the route, and
    to address your assertion of contradiction. As stated in my email of
    16th November to yourself, you will recall that the off-road option was
    selected in an effort to encourage young and inexperienced cyclists.
    Once this principle had been established the Sustrans guidance on design
    specifications for that particular type of facility was considered and
    applied as appropriate, subject to on-site considerations.

    Although I note your comments regarding monitoring of the cycle parking
    facility, as I have already explained in my earlier email there is no
    specific budget for the provision of cycle parking facilities and
    therefore a case will have to be made based on evidence gathered by the
    Council, rather than purely on anecdotal evidence presented by members
    of the public. Following discussions with the CCTV control centre
    manager, I am hopeful that we might be able to gather this monitoring
    data within a short period of time.

    I regret that you feel the information provided so far sounds "like
    corporate whitewash" and that you feel I have not provided any
    "information, data or references to any of the subjects under
    discussion". I can assure you that in every instance, I have attempted
    to provide an appropriate response to each of the issues you have
    raised. Where specific technical points have been made I have referred
    these to the relevant officers and have included their responses
    accordingly.

    With regard to any technical specifications recommended by Sustrans or
    set out in the document "Cycle Friendly Infrastructure: Guidelines for
    Planning and Design" produced by the IHT, these guidelines are applied
    as widely as possible. However, it should be noted that they represent
    "guidance" and not "definitive standards", and in some real-life
    situations it is not possible to implement the recommendations set out
    within these documents and therefore the most appropriate option is
    selected.

    Should you wish to attend a site meeting with myself and a
    representative of our engineering design team to discuss the above
    issues further, I would be grateful if you could provide a range of
    dates and times when you would be available.

    Regards,"

    What's my next step? Is it worth meeting with them?

  2. marc said:

    What's my next step? Is it worth meeting with them?

    Probably. At the very least both sides will understand each other's
    side better, and clear up some misconceptions each side too.

    PhilD

    --
    <><

  3. marc said:

    Latest letter from the LA

    ...........

    Quoted message said:

    Should you wish to attend a site meeting with myself and a
    representative of our engineering design team to discuss the above
    issues further, I would be grateful if you could provide a range of
    dates and times when you would be available.

    Regards,"

    What's my next step? Is it worth meeting with them?

    Absolutely. Local authority officers receive many hundreds of
    representations over all sorts of projects and issues and simply do not
    have anything like the time necessary to meet all interested parties
    face to face. This is an opportunity you are being offered not only to
    make your case directly to someone with the clout to respond to it but
    also to gain direct insight into the processes involved which could
    stand you in very good stead should you have issues to raise in the future.

    --
    Brian G
    www.wetwo.co.uk

  4. "marc" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Latest letter from the LA

    What's my next step? Is it worth meeting with them?

    After a letter like that, I'd be seriously considering not bothering to even
    acknowledge receipt! But, perhaps they are just completely ignorant of what
    cyclists want, and were merely justifying their complete lack of knowledge
    and use of Sustrans guidelines where they are completely inappropriate.

    Meet them, and make sure that they understand that Sustrans NCN guidelines
    apply to the NCN only, and that in all cases, CFI should take precedence if
    there is any conflict. Make sure they understand the hierarchy of
    solutions, and that shared use, and other off-carriageway solutions, are
    more dangerous than on-carriageway ones.

    And the best of luck! May I suggest the i-spy book of dinosaurs might be
    useful to identify the opposition at the meeting.

  5. In message <[email hidden]>

    burtthebike said:

    CFI should take precedence

    And CFI is, please? (I have googled)

    --
    Charles
    Brompton P6R-Plus; CarryFreedom -YL, in Motspur Park
    LCC; CTC.

  6. Quoted message said:

    In message <[email hidden]>

    burtthebike said:

    CFI should take precedence

    And CFI is, please? (I have googled)

    "Cycle Friendly Infrastructure: Guidelines for
    Planning and Design"

    as mentioned in the OP.

    --

    Tim

    fast and gripping, non pompous, glossy and credible.

  7. In message <[email hidden]>

    Tim Hall said:
    Quoted message said:

    And CFI is, please? (I have googled)

    Quoted message said:

    "Cycle Friendly Infrastructure: Guidelines for
    Planning and Design"

    Quoted message said:

    as mentioned in the OP.

    Thanks.

    --
    Charles
    Brompton P6R-Plus; CarryFreedom -YL, in Motspur Park
    LCC; CTC.

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.