Steve Loughran wrote:

> Consultation has started on the chocolate path BRT

That's what WEP calls consultation, then? ;)

I've filled in the the two comment boxes, but left the rankings blank;
my text responses were:

==================

There is insufficient information in the consultation information to
make any realistic comment on the proposal but, based on what can be
inferred from the document, it appears that the existing chocolate path
and adjacent single-track railway line are to be entirely destroyed,
with pedestrian and cycle routing moved to a new path on the North side
of Cumberland Road.

If this is the case, I cannot see how this can be in any way regarded as
an improvement in amenity: popular and tourist-friendly railway trips to
the Create Centre will be lost and pedestrians and cyclists will be
moved from a sheltered route right by the New Cut to being trapped in a
concrete corridor between traffic and the buildings along Cumberland Road.

Aside from this, I am unhappy with the (unconsulted) decision to use
bus-based vehicles; the least friendly choice both for the environment
and for other road users by a considerable margin.

==================

Providing a set of pre-defined answers to be ranked, that are presumably
derived directly from your already finalised plans does not count as
"consultation".

As an example, if feature "J" (attractive as it is in the abstract) were
ranked highly, this could very easily be used to indicate public support
for the proposed changes to Princes Bridge (which are of negative
benefit to drivers, cyclists or pedestrians).

I reject the premise of this "consultation" and so have only provided
answers to the free text comment fields.

==================

--

Pete Jordan
http://perlmonger.livejournal.com/