[Closed] (Tory) Councillor and the bike lane. Slow hand clap...

The exact same scenario as happened here a while back. Massively wide road as well, I mean ****ing huge, but the fat, beetroot faced lazy petrol sookers went apeshit aboot it. Arseholes.

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/local-news/ayrs-holmston-road-cycle-lane-8991434

Its no coincidence that Tory is a 4 letter word.

@nobeerinthefridge holy crap, how much room do they need? Nae money to spend on existing stuff but enough to rip that apart. Sounds about right.

That makes no common sense as the wands are protecting an existing cycle path surely?  I understand (though don't agree with) those who complain when a lane is removed by putting in wants like the recent one in Worthing but here the wands can only help surely......

Same folks were moaning like **** about the one that's in Harling drive in Troon, to link up to Loans SK.

Another monstrous road, every massive house has enough drive space for a premiership fitba team, but they've all started parking on the road to piss everyone off.

Hope the fuds get keyed, I really do.

Its no coincidence that Tory is a 4 letter word.

Or as a placard once read, "Tories, putting the n back into cuts."

but here the wands can only help surely……

Well they restrict parking which is always going to go down badly. Even outside a school where there's no parking.

Unfortunately councillors of all tie colours are absolutely beholden to the folks who vote for them for their jobs, so if 68% are ignorant and stupid, expect the councilors to be in favour of ignorant and stupid things.

They've recently added these bollards (WTF are orca wands???) to existing cycle ways on the entrance to Bridge of Allan, coming from the Keir roundabout). Just a shame they only go for approx 100mtrs before ending before the train station, i.e. so that folk can still stop in the cycle lane to collect folk from the station I guess.

If you question him about it on twitter he will block you rather than respond. Well done Councillor Andy Morgan, I hope you are proud.

About par for the course for one of these arseholes. They really dislike being called out for dishonesty and/or misrepresenting fact.

Solid white line means mandatory cycle lane, no?

So cars can't legally use it, so any cars entering the cycle lane would have been doing so illegally?

So removing the bollards only actually helps drivers who drive illegally, or have I missed something?

That is what I was thinking, the line looks solid to me?

Its no coincidence that Tory is a 4 letter word.

Now it makes sense!

Solid white line means mandatory cycle lane, no?

I'm sensing the opportunity here to make a local council really unpopular with drivers and parking enforcement......

Just a thought, it’s it worth putting it to folk like this councillor that if the cycle lane or it’s segregating posts are removed without a proper risk assessment documenting the climate, direct safety and indirect health risks introduced by reducing cyclist protection and moving people away from active travel, then that same councillor might be personally liable to legal action, including any injured folk suing him.

Just might.

I know I’m at risk if I make stupid infrastructure decisions.

@Nobeerinthefridge the Holmston Road scheme was badly thought out. It didn't tie in with any other cycling infrastructure, didn't resurface the area of the cycleway (which was in a shit state) and the coloured surfacing at the bus stops was hideous.
Should have just widened both footways and made them shared paths.

Round our way there seems to be a desire to open public consultation on everything. Of course consultation are dominated by people who don't like stuff. How many primary school kids fill out questionnaires they see on Facebook to say they love how much safer their ride to school is? Nope, not many, instead you just get the furious drivers.

Near me we had an unlit, windy county road with no pavement turned into a one way recently. This allowed the second lane to be sectioned off for pedestrians and cyclists. It meant kids from a large housing area could then ride to school on 99% traffic free cycle lane. It meant staff could walk to the local hospital, one of the largest employers in the area. In just a few months it was used for thousands of foot and bike journeys. It also meant that drivers had to drive 1 mile (4 mins) to go the long way around the one way system to get home. They were furious. They blitzed the consultation and the whole lot was ripped out. In fairness, they are using the data gathered to put in a funding bid to build a sperate path / cycle lane but they could have just left it as it was for free.

Once again, the roads are seen as being the exclusive domain of cars.

This is how it is done properly! You should see the shitstorm it has caused though.

https://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/19525778.confusion-cycle-lane-wider-half-adjacent-road/

I do feel a sense of smugness gliding along the lovely new path past all the queueing cars at the roadworks where they are extending it on the other side of the road.

dangeourbrain has it, local politics is mostly just about pleasing the majority to stay in power

the Holmston Road scheme was badly thought out. It didn’t tie in with any other cycling infrastructure

Not true, it tied in with the new shared path that they built all the way to Coylton, granted, you then have to push your bike across a dual carriageway at busy o'clock.... Useless bastards. It also linked numerous housing estates almost directly to the train station. To be honest, the cycle network through Ayr is pish anyway, so anything new is a start.

Tbh, it was the reaction of the ****wits locally that annoyed me more than anything else, and then the subsequent pandering from the council, when all they had to do was fix it. I agree with your suggestion of widening, and they should also have double red lined it, as there's always cars parked in the half arsed cycle lane.

and they should also have double red lined it, as there’s always cars parked in the half arsed cycle lane.

You've faith in paint. Round here I don't think double rows of spike strips would solve the parking in cycle lanes.

or too much traffic parked in the bike lane to bike to school...

I know you shouldn’t judge a book by its cover, but he looks like exactly the face you’d expect to be behind all of those actions. The only image that could possibly be more apt would be if he’d stuck some googly eyes to his actual arsehole and taken a photo of that.

@nobeerinthefridge Harling Drive is an odd one in that it doesn't really make sense. There is an existing path from Marr under the flyover, along the back of the cemetery and round the other side of the golf course which provides a (mostly) quieter route to the train station. The other routes into town from there are Wallacefield Road/St Meddens Street or Brown Ave/Gillies St/Portland St.

Fiver says that councillor sends his kids to that school (is that the private one?) and the 'responders' are the other ******** who aren't able to sh1tpark when dropping the kids off

Actually IGM may have a point - you could use FOI request to see the risk assessment for the consideration of the cyclists who are put in harms way by removal. Then you have a nice follow-up story for one of the pro-cycling journo's at the MEN (I'm in Bury so can't play the resident card to do the FoI ) when you can see it doesn't

He's not even looking at the lens when taking the photograph. Vote grubbing turd.

@squirrelking I hope they didn't decide to stick with the Marr underpass for the simple reason there's a proper nasty wee pinchpoint going under there, just enough room for one bike, and a wee sharp hill straight after it heading north, so folk are either getting up to speed to get up the hill, or coming down it at speed.

I know of one ex colleague who had a head on collision, and that's not taking in school kids wandering about on their phones.

The new route is a great as it's a big **** off signal of intent, there should be a network of routes into the station, and decent storage too once there. Not only does this help show folks there is another option, it shows drivers they're not the only show in town.

I thought it had been mellowed out and widened, I certainly only remember a brave bars width (involving a quick flick) on my circa 500mm Diamondback all those years ago. Think I've only been through once or twice since it was paved so was probably more shocked it had been widened as much.

Fair do's though, the back roads to the beach are ripe for another path as well.

Sadly, these sorts of schemes seem to really rile up the boomer Gammon types.

I really don't know why exactly other than reactionaries being reactionaries, and that generation is really invested in the 'sovereignty' of the motorist for some reason.

We have some in Edinburgh. I'm hoping that the A702 one remains. Although I'm not sure about the Orca wands, are these ever a long term solution?

Also the Council has really not done a good job with consultation or any coherent joined up planning and annoyed a lot of people. It fudged the emergency measures together with some existing plans and created a right mess.

Also the Council has really not done a good job with consultation or any coherent joined up planning and annoyed a lot of people. It fudged the emergency measures together with some existing plans and created a right mess.

Councils are not used to moving this fast - so when Covid happened and the funding for a load of pop-up active travel measures were suddenly announced, they had to bid for this cash then spend it quick. Most of the measures were put in using Experimental Traffic Orders where the consultation happens alongside the (temporary) measures and they can be tweaked, removed etc as required.

The reason councils are not used to moving fast is that by and large, most councilors want an easy life and it's possible to hide a whole host of "appearing to do a lot" behind consultations. Come up with a grand scheme - consult, tweak, re-consult, re-tweak (this process can go through many iterations), produce finalised "grand design", put it to Government, nothing happens, blame Government for lack of funding and go back to the drawing board. Council actually has to do very little.

Faced with them doing something and a vocal minority complaining (and it is almost always a very small minority shouting very loudly) and they panic and start thinking about local elections.

Consultation is the enemy in most of this - sometimes people simply need to be told that there is an urgent and critical need to drive less so measures are being put in place to aid that, it's not up for debate.

I’m in Bury so can’t play the resident card to do the FoI

Anyone can submit an FOI request. You don't need to be a local resident.

I'm a local so can do an FOI, would need advice on the wording tho, sommat proper legalese sounding.

ALso dunno if it's been mentioned but the 68% aren't happy is disingenuous BS, as you'd expect, that figure includes those who said its a good start but it needs improving. The consultation even said keep it going and monitor it

https://twitter.com/OreganoUK/status/1440048009631318017

Grrrr! I'm struggling to embed the tweet, just click the damn link!

I’m a local so can do an FOI, would need advice on the wording tho, sommat proper legalese sounding.

So long as it is in writing and mentions the phrase "Freedom of Information", you can write what you want. Email will suffice, you just can't make a request by phone.
The key with FOI is to be precise in what you're asking for.

Asking for "all emails from the last 5 years" will result in a refusal as it can be deemed too time consuming/expensive to go through those records, redact individual's names and contact info, collate it all and send it to you.
Asking for the minutes of the decision-making meeting though is much more likely to yield the info you're after.

Have a read of this:
https://www.gov.uk/make-a-freedom-of-information-request

ALso dunno if it’s been mentioned but the 68% aren’t happy is disingenuous BS, as you’d expect, that figure includes those who said its a good start but it needs improving.

See my 7th sentence in OP. ;0)

Cheers Dave. Top man.

Minutes of the meeting wouldn't have a lot. You just want any officer's report into the scheme from its inception to cancellation. Then you'd know exactly how much council taxpayer money Bolton is losing by withdrawing the scheme.

FOI sent

Regarding “wand” removal on chorley new road cycle lane, I’d like details of any risk assessments done documenting the climate, direct safety introduced by reducing cyclist protection and indirect long term health risks caused by moving people away from active travel

Slow hand clap…

Judging by his utterings it will probably appear at normal speed to him.

FOI is back, havent looked at the links yet but that reply sounds suspiciously like "we didnt do any"

Dear Requester

Request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000/Environmental Information Regulations 2004

Further to your recent request for information received on 23rd September 2021. The Council has assessed if your request should be handled under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 request and concluded that it should be dealt with under the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 (EIR), which is the legislation that applies to requests for information which relate to the environment, including the use of land and the built environment.

You requested:

Regarding “wand” removal on chorley new road cycle lane, I’d like details of any risk assessments done documenting the climate, direct safety introduced by reducing cyclist protection and indirect long term health risks caused by moving people away from active travel

Regulation 12(4)(a) of the EIR provides an exception to the release of Environmental Information where the public authority does not hold that information when an applicant’s request is received. In this case Bolton Council does not hold the information that you require. As such it would not be possible to provide the information requested without further analysis and creation of new information therefore the information cannot be provided under regulation 12(4)(a) as it is not held by the council.

In accordance with Regulation 9(1) of the Environmental Information Regulations, “A public authority shall provide advice and assistance, so far as it would be reasonable to expect the authority to do so.” I can inform you that there is a report on the Chorley New Road Scheme which was presented at the councils Executive Cabinet Member – Highways and Transport on 20th September 2021 which can be found using the following link;
http://www.democracy.bolton.gov.uk/cmis5/Meetings/tabid/73/ctl/ViewMeetingPublic/mid/410/Meeting/14570/Committee/3242/SelectedTab/Documents/Default.aspx

Under Regulation 11, you are entitled to make representations to us if it appears that we have failed to comply with a requirement of the Regulations in relation to your request. Representations must be made to us no later than 40 working days after the date you believe we failed to comply with such a requirement to freedomofinfo@bolton.gov.uk

We will then consider your representations and supporting evidence and decide if we have complied, notifying you of our decision as soon as possible, and no later than 40 working days after the date of receipt of your representations.

Under Regulation 18, you are then entitled to apply to the Information Commissioner for a decision as to whether, in any specified respect, your request has not been dealt with in accordance with parts 2 and 3 of the Regulations.

Should you wish to contact the Information Commissioner then you can write to them at the following address:

Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF
www.ico.org.uk
Tel: 0303 123 1113

Yours sincerely

The Information Governance Team
Town Hall, Bolton, BL1 1RU

Means they don't have a risk assessment. Your question was too broad, you need to be direct and succinct, successively drilling down to what you really want to know which is "was this cancelled on the whim of an official/member"

Go back with a request to see the equalities impact assessment.

@D0NK
Yep, that's a swerve - some poor bugger officer in the council was told by the higher ups to get rid of the cycle lane asap without any assessments. They're hiding behind EIR's here. I've been on the receiving end of this from councillors back in my council days.
I'd appeal through their process to release the information as these kinds of assessments would normally be published. If they swerve again ping it to the government information commissioner.

I'm more than happy to go back to them, but I've never done this type of thing before so need help with the wording of follow up request so that they can't just keep swerving it.

With regard to Equalities Impact Assessment, Im not in a protected group, I thought only disabled cyclists could tackle councils with EIA. Isn't that what has been used to open up cycle lanes that have had A-frames/slalom gates put in? Or am I mixing up my equalities stuff?

Further to my request for information on <insert date> I wish to clarify my request for information due to my dissatisfaction with your response on <insert date>
Please can you provide me the following
1. minutes or records, including emails, or written directives that detail the instructions given, and the reasoning for removal of the 'WAND' on Chorley New Road Cycle Lane.
2. A copy of the environmental impact assessment undertaken for the removal
3. A copy of the equalities impact assessment undertaken for the removal
4. Documents and assessments, including emails, pertaining to the health and safety implications for all users of Chorley New Road undertaken before and after the recent changes

That looks pretty good to me. They might try and say it's disproportionate cost to collate it all but the Info Commission would disagree I think.