Saturday, 23 February 2008
B&D Cycle Training
The benchmarking day was a good opportunity to hear about what Cycle Training manager Craig Elliott is doing. A true partnership worker, Craig has made strides in involving the police in cycle training. The police receive the the special police-specific cycle training, but they also receive standard adult cycle training and train as trainers of others. They have to engage with the community anyway (quite rightly) and this means they go into schools, but what better thing to do whilst they're there than train kids to ride bikes properly? It "ticks all the boxes" as Craig likes to put it. And it saves £.
B&D Cycle Benchmarking - tour of borough
I went to one of the two days of the benchmarking exercise at B&D council. Nick Davies (Cycling Officer) was in the chair and cycling officers or similar from neighbouring LBs were there, along with facilitators from CTC.
Nick had planned a ride to look at several aspects of cycle routes in B&D. We didn't see them all, owing to pressure of time:
1. A13 underpass (to Charlton Crescent, TVE). Demonstrates the severance shown by the A13 and efforts to make this crossing more attractive (A13 Artscape project).
2. Thames View School Access. We didn't visit this path. Nick says more work is needed.
3. Maplestead Road. This road joins Goresbrook Road to Lodge Avenue, but was pedestrianised in a cycle-unfriendly way. Fixing this had some momentum from the CRIM/CRISP in 2003 and Nick has now drawn a design to allow cyclists through and improve the route parallel to the A13 in the doing.
4. Goresbrook Road shared unsegregated path. The stretch from Gale Street to Dagenham Ave was completed in April 07 and this is currently being extended to Goresbrook Park. B&D council has chosen an off-road solution on the grounds that the Ambulance Service's objections to extending the 20mph zone could not be overcome. Off-road routes are also popular with local schools.
5. Chequers (Heathway / Ripple Road / New Road / Chequers Lane junction). Detrunked when the new A13 was opened east of Goresbrook interchange ("Madonna's Bra" location) this junction has lost its dreadful subway and accessibility will be improved by adding Toucan crossings. Currently at the drawing stage. (Action point from CRIM/CRISP)
6. Old Dagenham Park. New path across park (N-S) in place; funded by Cycling on Greenways.
7. Ballards Road. Funding has been secured through the LIP for the Local Cycle Network to gain a toucan crossing from Old Dagenham Park to The Leys across the road, which itself should get a Cycling on Greenways type route.
8. Salisbury Avenue / Upney Lane. Funding was withdrawn from this project as it is not on the LCN+. It now won't get the Toucan crossing suggested by the CRIM/CRISP back in 2003; some jiggery pokery will take place to connect the cycle track with the Toucan, whereon cyclists are intended to cross as pedestrians. (The plug that was here originally predates my time as a cycle campaigner, dating from the 1980s I think. My main issue with that was the left turn being too sharp. The whole thing has turned into an overblown infrastructure project which has had to be toned down for want of the usual £. Back when the plug was first put in they could have just whacked in a couple of bollards and job done.)
9. London Road. In a classic piece of unjoined up thinking (to be kind) or official vandalism, the cycle lanes here were deleted in favour of car parking. Nice one. Nick put in a lane inside the car parking bays in August 07. Well done to Nick but a waste of time and £ overall. We didn't visit the location.
Nick had planned a ride to look at several aspects of cycle routes in B&D. We didn't see them all, owing to pressure of time:
1. A13 underpass (to Charlton Crescent, TVE). Demonstrates the severance shown by the A13 and efforts to make this crossing more attractive (A13 Artscape project).
2. Thames View School Access. We didn't visit this path. Nick says more work is needed.
3. Maplestead Road. This road joins Goresbrook Road to Lodge Avenue, but was pedestrianised in a cycle-unfriendly way. Fixing this had some momentum from the CRIM/CRISP in 2003 and Nick has now drawn a design to allow cyclists through and improve the route parallel to the A13 in the doing.
4. Goresbrook Road shared unsegregated path. The stretch from Gale Street to Dagenham Ave was completed in April 07 and this is currently being extended to Goresbrook Park. B&D council has chosen an off-road solution on the grounds that the Ambulance Service's objections to extending the 20mph zone could not be overcome. Off-road routes are also popular with local schools.
5. Chequers (Heathway / Ripple Road / New Road / Chequers Lane junction). Detrunked when the new A13 was opened east of Goresbrook interchange ("Madonna's Bra" location) this junction has lost its dreadful subway and accessibility will be improved by adding Toucan crossings. Currently at the drawing stage. (Action point from CRIM/CRISP)
6. Old Dagenham Park. New path across park (N-S) in place; funded by Cycling on Greenways.
7. Ballards Road. Funding has been secured through the LIP for the Local Cycle Network to gain a toucan crossing from Old Dagenham Park to The Leys across the road, which itself should get a Cycling on Greenways type route.
8. Salisbury Avenue / Upney Lane. Funding was withdrawn from this project as it is not on the LCN+. It now won't get the Toucan crossing suggested by the CRIM/CRISP back in 2003; some jiggery pokery will take place to connect the cycle track with the Toucan, whereon cyclists are intended to cross as pedestrians. (The plug that was here originally predates my time as a cycle campaigner, dating from the 1980s I think. My main issue with that was the left turn being too sharp. The whole thing has turned into an overblown infrastructure project which has had to be toned down for want of the usual £. Back when the plug was first put in they could have just whacked in a couple of bollards and job done.)
9. London Road. In a classic piece of unjoined up thinking (to be kind) or official vandalism, the cycle lanes here were deleted in favour of car parking. Nice one. Nick put in a lane inside the car parking bays in August 07. Well done to Nick but a waste of time and £ overall. We didn't visit the location.
Cycle to work scheme - possible pitfall
This is from the Q&A page of Cycle (CTC magazine) Feb/Mar 2008 issue. Despite the fact that plenty of employers operate the cycle to work scheme, there is a risk that some will override this fact with what they see as problems; problems explained (and solved) here:
"After two years of deliberation my employer has chosen not to implement the Cycle to Work scheme (which was described in the Feb-Mar 07 issue of Cycle), mainly on two grounds.
First, since the employer is technically the owner of the cycle for the first year, the company has a duty of care to keep it maintained and would be liable for any accident caused by poor maintenance.
Second, if the employer cannot prove that the employee is continuing to use the bike mainly for 'qualifying journeys' (i.e. commuting) then HM Revenue and Customs can reclaim saved tax from both parties, and impose penalties. My employer claims there have been instances of companies falling foul of both these risks.
What is your view on these two points, and are you aware of any cases such as those claimed?"
Reply (edited):
"I cannot see that any employee would have any realistic chance of pursuing a claim against an employer in such circumstances [as the first grounds your employer gave]. Whilst technically the employer is the owner of the bike, the reality is that the employee has custody and position [sic - possession] of the bicycle and will be responsible for any maintenance issues. I do not see this as a valid objection.
With regards to the second objection, Mr Harrison's employers should be aware that many organisations are now providing assistance to their employees through the Cycle to Work schemes. I am unaware of any HM Revenue & Customs investigations into any alleged abuse of the schemes. The Government is committed to increasing the number of journeys made by bicycle in the UK. In practical terms there would be enormous difficulties proving that the employee had not been using the bike for qualifying journeys.
Unfortunately, the Cycle to Work scheme cannot be imposed upon employers. However, in my experience the majority of businesses are willing to participate in Cycle to Work schemes. This is an easy way to provide an additional fringe benefit to their workforce.
Paul Kitson"
"After two years of deliberation my employer has chosen not to implement the Cycle to Work scheme (which was described in the Feb-Mar 07 issue of Cycle), mainly on two grounds.
First, since the employer is technically the owner of the cycle for the first year, the company has a duty of care to keep it maintained and would be liable for any accident caused by poor maintenance.
Second, if the employer cannot prove that the employee is continuing to use the bike mainly for 'qualifying journeys' (i.e. commuting) then HM Revenue and Customs can reclaim saved tax from both parties, and impose penalties. My employer claims there have been instances of companies falling foul of both these risks.
What is your view on these two points, and are you aware of any cases such as those claimed?"
Reply (edited):
"I cannot see that any employee would have any realistic chance of pursuing a claim against an employer in such circumstances [as the first grounds your employer gave]. Whilst technically the employer is the owner of the bike, the reality is that the employee has custody and position [sic - possession] of the bicycle and will be responsible for any maintenance issues. I do not see this as a valid objection.
With regards to the second objection, Mr Harrison's employers should be aware that many organisations are now providing assistance to their employees through the Cycle to Work schemes. I am unaware of any HM Revenue & Customs investigations into any alleged abuse of the schemes. The Government is committed to increasing the number of journeys made by bicycle in the UK. In practical terms there would be enormous difficulties proving that the employee had not been using the bike for qualifying journeys.
Unfortunately, the Cycle to Work scheme cannot be imposed upon employers. However, in my experience the majority of businesses are willing to participate in Cycle to Work schemes. This is an easy way to provide an additional fringe benefit to their workforce.
Paul Kitson"
Cycling & Health - What's the evidence?
Also from CycleDigest
http://www.cyclingengland.co.uk/documents/FinalHealthreport-19.9.07.pdf
(3.62MB)
Report reviewing all the available evidence on the health benefits of
cycling, pulling it together in one place.
http://www.cyclinge
(3.62MB)
Report reviewing all the available evidence on the health benefits of
cycling, pulling it together in one place.
Planning policies don't match
From CTC's CycleDigest (ww.ctc.org.uk)
"In mid-December the Department for Communities and Local Government at last published the supplement to Planning Policy Statement 1 (PPS1), Planning and Climate Change, and a consultation on PPS4 - Planning for Sustainable Economic Development. The latter offers policy advice in direct contradiction to the values expressed in the former.
PPS1 follows the agenda set by Planning Policy Guidance 13 (PPG13), and establishes clearly that reducing the need to travel through land use planning must be fundamental to meeting our climate change goals. Of course, that message is bundled up with a collection of recommendations on renewable energy, adaptation to climate change etc., but picking out the section on transport and repeating it back to local authorities may help to hammer home the principle that better land use planning will reduce car dependency and benefit cycling.
Draft PPS4, on the other hand, unhelpfully suggests that out-of-town developments may be acceptable, and reverses some of the maximum car parking standards set in PPG13. Mixed messages!
PPS1: www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/ppsclimatechange
PPS4 consultation (closes 17/3/08):
www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/consultationeconomicdevelopment"
"In mid-December the Department for Communities and Local Government at last published the supplement to Planning Policy Statement 1 (PPS1), Planning and Climate Change, and a consultation on PPS4 - Planning for Sustainable Economic Development. The latter offers policy advice in direct contradiction to the values expressed in the former.
PPS1 follows the agenda set by Planning Policy Guidance 13 (PPG13), and establishes clearly that reducing the need to travel through land use planning must be fundamental to meeting our climate change goals. Of course, that message is bundled up with a collection of recommendations on renewable energy, adaptation to climate change etc., but picking out the section on transport and repeating it back to local authorities may help to hammer home the principle that better land use planning will reduce car dependency and benefit cycling.
Draft PPS4, on the other hand, unhelpfully suggests that out-of-town developments may be acceptable, and reverses some of the maximum car parking standards set in PPG13. Mixed messages!
PPS1: www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/ppsclimatechange
PPS4 consultation (closes 17/3/08):
www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/consultationeconomicdevelopment"
Thursday, 21 February 2008
Post Office Closures
From: LONDON ASSEMBLY John Biggs AM
Dear Resident,
Post Office Limited are currently consulting on proposals to close 15 post offices in City and East constituency, across Tower Hamlets, Newham and Barking & Dagenham. I recognise the vital role that Post Office plays in the social and economic life of local communities. I am very worried that at a time when we are seeking to regenerate poorer areas of London that local shopping parades will be hit by the loss of an important local service which attracts shoppers to use their local shops and facilities.
I am particularly concerned that the criteria for access to Post Offices has been downgraded in London - previously deprived communities in London had to be within a half mile of a post office. Now this has been reduced to 1 mile.
Thank you to everyone who took part in my survey on this issue last year. I would very much appreciate it if you could take five minutes to fill in my online survey at http://FreeOnlineSurveys.com/rendersurvey.asp?sid=2l6y6gd769uk2ug398579
There is a six week consultation period ending on 2 April 2008. I want to know your views on these proposals so I take them up with Post Office Ltd.
Regards,
John Biggs AM Assembly Member for City and East London
Dear Resident,
Post Office Limited are currently consulting on proposals to close 15 post offices in City and East constituency, across Tower Hamlets, Newham and Barking & Dagenham. I recognise the vital role that Post Office plays in the social and economic life of local communities. I am very worried that at a time when we are seeking to regenerate poorer areas of London that local shopping parades will be hit by the loss of an important local service which attracts shoppers to use their local shops and facilities.
I am particularly concerned that the criteria for access to Post Offices has been downgraded in London - previously deprived communities in London had to be within a half mile of a post office. Now this has been reduced to 1 mile.
Thank you to everyone who took part in my survey on this issue last year. I would very much appreciate it if you could take five minutes to fill in my online survey at http://FreeOnlineSurveys.com/rendersurvey.asp?sid=2l6y6gd769uk2ug398579
There is a six week consultation period ending on 2 April 2008. I want to know your views on these proposals so I take them up with Post Office Ltd.
Regards,
John Biggs AM Assembly Member for City and East London
Sunday, 10 February 2008
Marathon for Alzheimers
B&D LCC member Tony Richards is running this year's marathon in support of The Alzheimers society (http://www.alzheimers.org.uk/). If you can sponsor him, please get in touch:
barkwitt [at sign] yahoo.com
barkwitt [at sign] yahoo.com
Saturday, 9 February 2008
Raileasy
www.raileasy.co.uk/
Raileasy is a new train ticket website and rival to www.thetrainline.co.uk/ . It claims that it copes better with situation where two singles are cheaper than a return - sometimes the case in our potty ticketing regime - but disappointingly it makes no mention of Goldcards. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concessionary_fares_on_the_British_railway_network#Gold_Card_and_Gold_Card_Partner.27s_Card). I have pointed out this shortcoming to them, but in the meantime if you have a Goldcard double check the fares on The Trainline. There's a £2 booking fee on Raileasy.
Raileasy is a new train ticket website and rival to www.thetrainline.co.uk/ . It claims that it copes better with situation where two singles are cheaper than a return - sometimes the case in our potty ticketing regime - but disappointingly it makes no mention of Goldcards. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concessionary_fares_on_the_British_railway_network#Gold_Card_and_Gold_Card_Partner.27s_Card). I have pointed out this shortcoming to them, but in the meantime if you have a Goldcard double check the fares on The Trainline. There's a £2 booking fee on Raileasy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)