Please Defend National Cycle Route 1

[mjr]

So our borough council now seems to have completely lost the plot and is running a consultation for the King's Lynn riverfront with three options, all of which involve more cars, including adding them to a section of National Cycle Route 1 (part of EuroVelo 12 / North Sea Coast Route) which was originally tarmacked with Sustrans "Safe Routes to School" money.

If you'd ever like to cycle along the east coast of England on quiet roads and car-free tracks, please respond to this short one-page consultation and ask the council politely to go de-motorise itself gently.

More background, advice and a link to the consultation at http://www.klwnbug.co.uk/2016/11/21/please-defend-national-route-1-hardings-way/ - I'll reply to questions here as best I can. Thanks for any help.

 

[Glow worm]

I can see no need whatsoever for any motorised traffic to be allowed along south quay save for access. It would be immeasurably better with the removal of cars from there. And as for allowing all traffic to use Hardings Way, well, words fail me, it was bad enough when they allowed buses on it a few years back. Such a shame we no longer have dear old Roger Turf with us to fight this, he would very soon have had it knocked on the head!

I'll fill in the consultation later when I have a bit more time. I had a quick glance and it refers to 6 design principle but further down, it asks for comments on 3 options. I'm probably being thick but I wasn't sure what the 3 options were or how they relate to the 6 design principles.

 

[mjr]

Such a shame we no longer have dear old Roger Turf with us to fight this, he would very soon have had it knocked on the head!

I'll fill in the consultation later when I have a bit more time. I had a quick glance and it refers to 6 design principle but further down, it asks for comments on 3 options. I'm probably being thick but I wasn't sure what the 3 options were or how they relate to the 6 design principles.

The three options are in the "King's Lynn Riverfront Delivery Plan exhibition boards" link on the preceding page, which I see now is actually below the "Complete our online questionnaire" link. I'll go try to make that clearer on the KLWNBUG page.

And yes, it's an insult to Roger Turff because this would make a traffic jam a frequent view from his memorial seat, if I've remembered correctly exactly where it is.

 

[Glow worm]

The three options are in the "King's Lynn Riverfront Delivery Plan exhibition boards" link on the preceding page, which I see now is actually below the "Complete our online questionnaire" link. I'll go try to make that clearer on the KLWNBUG page.

And yes, it's an insult to Roger Turff because this would make a traffic jam a frequent view from his memorial seat, if I've remembered correctly exactly where it is.

Thanks- I probably read through it too quickly. Will have a proper look later.
You are correct about Roger's seat. (I had a small part in developing Harding's Pits as a public open space and had the pleasure of working with Roger at the time. A truly lovely fellow- much missed).
Anyway, I hope you get plenty people to oppose these plans.

 

[mjr]

Thanks. I've updated the KLWNBUG page and started pestering the media. Any more responses or assistance much appreciated.

The exhibition boards are a bit of a game of "spot the difference" between the three options: option 1 does least development (but still more cars on the cycle route), option 2 adds some more houses to the south-east of the Nar Loop (and so even more cars) and a car park outside the flood wall, option 2 and 3 add commercial activity in the middle bit and option 3 is the nuke-the-cycle-track "open to all traffic" option. I think they're all just twiddling around a car-centric plan, which seems a daft idea in an area of low car-dependency - IIRC, almost half of households in that area don't have a car.

 

[mjr]

Heh. Someone on another site accused me of staging this picture, which I used on the linked web page, because both riders are in ordinary clothes. As if! All I did was turn into the cycle route and pressed the camera button. What I was actually wanting in the photo was the slightly unusual bus+bike-but-no-motos/taxis sign. There just happened to be cyclists there too.

If I was staging it, I would have asked the nearest rider not to go so close to the kerb and taken another one. And probably have more riders. But hey, this is real life and a cycle route can be pretty busy without people forming large photogenic bunches on no-traffic-lights sections like this.

 

[alpine fenlander]

Signed. I don't cycle into KL very often, but coming from the south it always seems like a fairly good route. Would be a shame if they changed it!

 

[mjr]

I may be on BBC Norfolk about half five talking about this. Freeview channel 719 in East Anglia, East Yorkshire and Lincolnshire.

 

[mjr]

It's now online at http://bbc.in/2gz5G4M about 1h35 into it.

 

[mjr]

So thank you for any comments you left. 77% of responses opposed the car park and 71% opposed opening Harding's Way.

Job done, right?

Sadly not. Apparently, someone has decided not to count anyone who opposed all three current development options and thereby come out with the stunning result that 55% of people prefer option 3, which includes the car park and opening Harding's Way!

I wouldn't make this stuff up. It seems like "Yes Minister" or "The Thick Of It" at their maddest. The report containing the misleading 55% claim goes to a council panel meeting this evening.

More info at http://www.klwnbug.co.uk/2017/06/28...-you-say-55-support-something-that-77-oppose/ - later updates will get linked in the comments section automatically.

 

[mjr]

I'm now at the meeting. Updates going to https://mobile.twitter.com/mjray