Nick - your reasons for not progressing this plan were
a) abuse is possible and
b) it's fair to consult Lou as Cycling Officer first.
Now you've consulted him, do share with us how you were dissuaded from the whole project to simply depict what we see ?
|
Posted by: "ndcanham" ndcanham@... Thu Oct 2, 2008 5:37 pm Max If 'not being robustly applied' is doublespeak for 'flagrantly flouted', then it's equally true to say that 'flagrantly flouted' is an undiplomatic way of saying 'not being robustly applied'. There really is no benefit in deliberately trying to get up Lou's nose. I may occasionally get up Lou's nose, but that's not intentional. Neither will I be taking 'Cardiff Crap Cycle lanes' forward for the reasons I gave, at least not while I'm editing the website. Cheers. Nick --- In cyclecardiff@..., Max Wallis <wallismk@...> wrote: > > Cardiff's sub-standard cyclelanes were condemned by the Planning Inspector > at the St Davids 2 Inquiry, particularly the 1.2 metres width for on-road > lanes. the Council claimed to follow the London standard of 1.5 metres. > And the London standards were formally adoped by the Council in their new > Cycling strategy. > > But to what effect? The St Davids 2 contractors still put in a narrow > cyclelane past Queen St station (including drain hazards and other bumps). > And even where there is abundant space in the multi-lane highway from the > Leckwith junction, the narrow 1.2 metres width has been put in. > > So Nick, is "not being robustly applied" doublespeak for "flagrantly > flouted"? > And now Lou has had chance to respond, will you go back to the 'crap cycle > lanes' proposal? > > Max Wallis > > Posted by: "Nicholas Canham" ndcanham@... > Sat Sep 27, 2008 11:03 am > ..... I thought it would be wrong to start mocking the various poor > facilities without giving Lou Lusardi a chance to respond first. > ..... ideally what counts as a poor cycle facility should be determined > against the DfT infrastructure guidelines, London Cycle Design Standards, > and wider advice on cycling practice such as the National Standards for > Cycle Training. > > .... I've had several discussions with Lou about certain facilities, and > what is clear is that London Cycle Design Standards are not being robustly > applied. > Back to top Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post Messages in this topic (4) Recent Activity 1 New Members Visit Your Group Yahoo! 360 Share what matters Share your photos, blog. Control who sees what. Yahoo! Toolbar
Yahoo! Groups
Need to Reply?
|
Messages | Files | Photos | Links | Polls | Members | Calendar
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Individual | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
Offline 
Send Email