LCWIPS

Tyre Lady
Posts: 170
Joined: 31 Jan 2019, 10:53pm
Contact:

Re: LCWIPS

Post by Tyre Lady »

@Squeaker - thanks so much. It is a really good LCWIPs.

I have put an idea out via the resident's local FB group to test the waters with the general public. Need to be able to squash the haters who feel the car should be put first and that cyclist should pay tax. Farage has been putting out anti-cyclist articles which is creating fear that car drivers will lose control, cyclist are freeloaders etc.

Did your action group deal with this type of negativity?
Low carbon, zero waste running journey
User avatar
squeaker
Posts: 4113
Joined: 12 Jan 2007, 11:43pm
Location: Sussex

Re: LCWIPS

Post by squeaker »

Tyre Lady wrote:Did your action group deal with this type of negativity?
Not that I'm aware of (but I didn't attend all the meetings :oops: ). Previous experiences with a failed attempt at 20mph for Worthing did identify taxi drivers and Compass Bus Co. as significant obstacles, so that element may well come to the fore if any significant motor road changes get to the design stage.
Recent experiences with the Upper Shoreham Road emergency cycle lanes did not bode well for the democratic process should any road space (especially parking space) be given over to cycling :( (Saga here.)

On the positive side, the guys at Shoreham-By-Cycle (geddit?) did an ace PR job, even getting on the DfT's Active Travel promo :)
"42"
Tyre Lady
Posts: 170
Joined: 31 Jan 2019, 10:53pm
Contact:

Re: LCWIPS

Post by Tyre Lady »

@Squeaker - thank you so much. These are really useful documents.

Thank you for your help

R-) xx
Low carbon, zero waste running journey
MikeF
Posts: 4347
Joined: 11 Nov 2012, 9:24am
Location: On the borders of the four South East Counties

Re: LCWIPS

Post by MikeF »

gaz wrote:
Tyre Lady wrote:Why do you think it lacks ambition?

I tend to apply an "encourage" v "enable" test. There's an awful lot in ABC's LCWIP about encouraging active travel and very little about enabling it.

Perhaps I'm being overly cynical, my judgement is clouded by seeing the results of decades of past encouragement and those results have not been good.

The LCWIP does at least have some metrics suggesting a target of doubling the proportion of journeys made by cycle by 2029. If they achieve it that would still be only 4% of all journeys.
Yes, indeed. Many councils like to "encourage" cycling as a box ticking exercise. It absolves them of having to actually "enable" anything.
In general people don't need encouragement to cycle. They just want somewhere where they feel confident to be able travel by cycle.
"It takes a genius to spot the obvious" - my old physics master.
I don't peddle bikes.
MikeF
Posts: 4347
Joined: 11 Nov 2012, 9:24am
Location: On the borders of the four South East Counties

Re: LCWIPS

Post by MikeF »

squeaker wrote:As a member of the Adur & Worthing Cycling and Walking Action Group I 'assisted' in the production of the A&W LCWIP, despite not living in A&W (I used to commute through it quite a lot.) I thought Sustrans did a good job, and was impressed by the direct involvement of the council leader in the Action Group.
This contrasts significantly with the Horsham LCWIP (the district I live in) where I have been underwhelmed by WSP's efforts (but then I live 16 miles from Horsham town...). You may note that the identified routes in the Horsham plan do not join up :roll:
With WSCC's current opposition to any cycling schemes I don't think anything will happen.
Seems to be two different extremes of LCWIPs here, WSP''s is minimalist whilst in contrast, in my view, Sustrans' is verbose in the extreme, lacks positivity and needs to be restructured in presentation to have impact.
"It takes a genius to spot the obvious" - my old physics master.
I don't peddle bikes.
Tyre Lady
Posts: 170
Joined: 31 Jan 2019, 10:53pm
Contact:

Re: LCWIPS

Post by Tyre Lady »

MikeF wrote:
gaz wrote:
Tyre Lady wrote:Why do you think it lacks ambition?

I tend to apply an "encourage" v "enable" test. There's an awful lot in ABC's LCWIP about encouraging active travel and very little about enabling it.

Perhaps I'm being overly cynical, my judgement is clouded by seeing the results of decades of past encouragement and those results have not been good.

The LCWIP does at least have some metrics suggesting a target of doubling the proportion of journeys made by cycle by 2029. If they achieve it that would still be only 4% of all journeys.
Yes, indeed. Many councils like to "encourage" cycling as a box ticking exercise. It absolves them of having to actually "enable" anything.
In general people don't need encouragement to cycle. They just want somewhere where they feel confident to be able travel by cycle.


We will keep Runnymede on board with the "enabling"

@Squeaker - just had a meeting with them and showed them your links. All gave thumbs up and provided more direction where we are going. So thank you very much for those links
Low carbon, zero waste running journey
User avatar
gaz
Posts: 14657
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent

Re: LCWIPS

Post by gaz »

High on a cocktail of flossy teacakes and marmalade
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20332
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: LCWIPS

Post by mjr »

Our group's rather rushed response to our local one: http://www.klwnbug.co.uk/2021/04/08/res ... plan-2021/

What is the average cost per mile of cycleways now?
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
MikeF
Posts: 4347
Joined: 11 Nov 2012, 9:24am
Location: On the borders of the four South East Counties

Re: LCWIPS

Post by MikeF »

I've not seen that. I need to look more closely
"It takes a genius to spot the obvious" - my old physics master.
I don't peddle bikes.
Post Reply