| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Seperate area for EUG nonsense? |
| Yes please |
|
72% |
[ 21 ] |
| Go on then! |
|
3% |
[ 1 ] |
| Good idea Tucker |
|
24% |
[ 7 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 29 |
|
| Author |
Message |
George Gilbert
Div 3 Pro
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
Posts: 4159
Location: Somewhere, over the rainbow
|
 Posted: Tue May 08, 2007 12:52 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Plurien wrote: |
| Why not ask of the ODA for yourself George? |
I'm just an individual, what good can I do with the response?
You however chair an organisation, the EUG, to which that kind of information would be invaluable...
| Plurien wrote: |
| Just how knowing the kernel of information you seek would affect the debate we're in now is really not clear. |
If you can't see how that would be helpful, then that speaks volumes about your ability to run the EUGs campaign.
On the off chance that you really can't see the benefit, let me explain. The "lost" land is still there, it hasn't disappeared from the planets surface and therefore must be being used for something else. There must have been a reason for the planners to allocate it to that other purpose over the original suggestion of allocating it to cycling.
In order to revert the plans back to allocating that land to cycling, you need to make the case that cycling needs that land more than whatever has been allocated it now. You cannot do that without knowing the reason why cyclings allocation has decreased.
Currently the EUG act like a petulant spoilt child stamping their feet screaming "I want, I want, I want", without any appreciation of there being a trade off involved. Saying that cycling is good is not sufficient, you've got to say that cycling is better than whatever it is that would otherwise benefit from the land. The situation is no different from a child throwing a tantrum for an expensive toy with no appreciation that the money required is needed for food / mortgage or whatever.
| Plurien wrote: |
The main influence holding back the users' case from being made is the very real support being lent by BC to the developer for its plans. The plans were adjusted for whatever reason, but the subsequent support received from the developer's chosen partner in cycling disciplines has done the real damage because it allowed to idea to go forwards into a real plan as published on 6 Feb.
So for that reason, it's more important for us to get the answer to the question already asked;-
Please can BC let us know when it first learned of the plans to scale back the velopark? |
Again, the fact that you think that this is the most pressing issue for you to spend your time on speaks volumes about your management of the situation.
Consider the possible responses BC could give; either it was before such-and-such a date, or after it. How would either response help you?
As you have said before with regard to reading your own mission statement daily to remind yourself of your objectives, how can their response aid you? You're barking up the wrong tree having a go at BC - I cannot possibly think of any benefit towards getting better facilities at Eastway that asking these questions is going to have.
If you can let us know what you would do with the answers and show how they would be useful, then perhaps you might get more of a response. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ingatestonian
Cat 1 Groupie
Joined: 16 Feb 2007
Posts: 133
|
| Posted: Tue May 08, 2007 12:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| George Gilbert wrote: |
On the off chance that you really can't see the benefit, let me explain. The "lost" land is still there, it hasn't disappeared from the planets surface and therefore must be being used for something else. There must have been a reason for the planners to allocate it to that other purpose over the original suggestion of allocating it to cycling.
In order to revert the plans back to allocating that land to cycling, you need to make the case that cycling needs that land more than whatever has been allocated it now. You cannot do that without knowing the reason why cyclings allocation has decreased. |
Ah... that's not what you asked George. You asked who and when, and why. What the land is to be used for is far more straightforward, and far more relevant.
The rest of the Eastway site that's not in the new Velopark is to be used for housing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KJ
T de F Winner
Joined: 18 May 2005
Posts: 26400
|
| Posted: Tue May 08, 2007 1:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| and are all the displaced Eastway users cyclists? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
martin smith
World Champ
Joined: 09 Jun 2003
Posts: 12187
Location: shoehorning kittens into jars
|
| Posted: Tue May 08, 2007 1:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
you've still got a far better range of facilities than the rest of the country, now stop moaning.
how about looking at what the rest of us have to work with and then wonder why the sympathy hasn't come pouring out? i would love a 7HA colsed circuit and a velodrome near my house but instead i have 40 miles in one direction for a decent outdoor track and 60 miles in the other direction for a closed circuit.
oh and the solution to it taking an hour to drive 10 miles in the capital? get on your bikes and ride there ffs! i used to ride the 40 miles from nottingham to darley moor, race and ride back! i was fit then...
_________________
Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way, when you criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ingatestonian
Cat 1 Groupie
Joined: 16 Feb 2007
Posts: 133
|
| Posted: Tue May 08, 2007 1:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| martin smith wrote: |
| oh and the solution to it taking an hour to drive 10 miles in the capital? get on your bikes and ride there ffs! i used to ride the 40 miles from nottingham to darley moor, race and ride back! i was fit then... |
I doubt there's traffic lights every 30 yards up your way. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
George Gilbert
Div 3 Pro
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
Posts: 4159
Location: Somewhere, over the rainbow
|
| Posted: Tue May 08, 2007 1:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ingatestonian wrote: |
| George Gilbert wrote: |
On the off chance that you really can't see the benefit, let me explain. The "lost" land is still there, it hasn't disappeared from the planets surface and therefore must be being used for something else. There must have been a reason for the planners to allocate it to that other purpose over the original suggestion of allocating it to cycling.
In order to revert the plans back to allocating that land to cycling, you need to make the case that cycling needs that land more than whatever has been allocated it now. You cannot do that without knowing the reason why cyclings allocation has decreased. |
Ah... that's not what you asked George. You asked who and when, and why. What the land is to be used for is far more straightforward, and far more relevant.
The rest of the Eastway site that's not in the new Velopark is to be used for housing. |
The "why" part obviously requires the "what" part to be answered and so I didn't bother including it as a separate question! Now we know the answer, the more specific question is "Why is some more housing considered more important than some more cycling". Answer that and you'll know what next to tackle.
So, the EUG needs to make the case to the ODA as to why cycling is a better use of the land than housing. Simple. So, what are the EUG doing to achieve this?
As I said, sniping at BC won't help one jot with that; the EUG are currently going after the wrong target (unless of course, the EUG has an aim that isn't part of their defining mission statement). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ingatestonian
Cat 1 Groupie
Joined: 16 Feb 2007
Posts: 133
|
| Posted: Tue May 08, 2007 1:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| George Gilbert wrote: |
| The "why" part obviously requires the "what" part to be answered and so I didn't bother including it as a separate question! |
The 'what' part has been mentioned many, many times - it's was reasonable to assume you'd picked up on it.
You asked 'why', and frankly, who cares why? It really doesn't matter what their reasoning was, or what they were thinking. There's little way to know the real truth in any event. We may as well all make up some conspiracy theories.
| George Gilbert wrote: |
| Anyway, so the EUG needs to make the case to the ODA as to why cycling is a better use of the land than housing. Simple. |
Nope, not at all. This isn't a business deal, and that's not how these things work. Firstly, cycling was there first on a large part of that site. Secondly, this is a political matter, not a simple weighing-up of the factors - and so far the EUG seem to be doing very well at that game - in many ways, it could be said that now the media and politicians have taken up their cause, it's largely moved beyond the EUG now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
George Gilbert
Div 3 Pro
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
Posts: 4159
Location: Somewhere, over the rainbow
|
| Posted: Tue May 08, 2007 1:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ingatestonian wrote: |
| George Gilbert wrote: |
| The "why" part obviously requires the "what" part to be answered and so I didn't bother including it as a separate question! |
The 'what' part has been mentioned many, many times - it's was reasonable to assume you'd picked up on it.
You asked 'why', and frankly, who cares why? It really doesn't matter what their reasoning was, or what they were thinking. |
Because knowing why will enable you to come back with a compelling case as to why not.
The approaches that should be taken to reverse the decision will vary depending on whether the change was made for profit, to placate angry home owners, environmental reasons, gaining votes, or whatever else. The fact that you don't know and don't care why the land has been taken from the plan is somewhat bizarre. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Plurien
E, Silver
Joined: 09 Dec 2003
Posts: 1966
|
| Posted: Tue May 08, 2007 1:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Righto George. What happens when the ODA comes under criticism for not representing the needs of users?
- Doesn't it just point at its 'engagement' with the NGB?
Which part of this particular alliance do you think EUG should criticise?
The developer, for taking the land?
The NGB for supporting it in doing this?
- or maybe the both of them....
Hence the reason why we're so keen on knowing exactly when BC found out about the velopark's reduction.
Brian - Please can you let us know exactly when BC learned the velopark was to be reduced in size? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ridley
E, Silver
Joined: 30 May 2006
Posts: 1342
|
| Posted: Tue May 08, 2007 1:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Plurien you are an irritating kn0b... that is all I have to contribute, thank you goodbye |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
George Gilbert
Div 3 Pro
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
Posts: 4159
Location: Somewhere, over the rainbow
|
| Posted: Tue May 08, 2007 1:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Plurien wrote: |
Righto George. What happens when the ODA comes under criticism for not representing the needs of users?
- Doesn't it just point at its 'engagement' with the NGB?
Which part of this particular alliance do you think EUG should criticise?
The developer, for taking the land?
The NGB for supporting it in doing this?
- or maybe the both of them....
Hence the reason why we're so keen on knowing exactly when BC found out about the velopark's reduction. |
Nope - I still don't see how that would help you get the land back.
The only thing it would give you, as you've clearly stated, is that it would allow you to criticise someone... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KJ
T de F Winner
Joined: 18 May 2005
Posts: 26400
|
| Posted: Tue May 08, 2007 1:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Are all the people who used to use the Eastway site cyclists? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ingatestonian
Cat 1 Groupie
Joined: 16 Feb 2007
Posts: 133
|
| Posted: Tue May 08, 2007 1:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| George Gilbert wrote: |
| Because knowing why will enable you to come back with a compelling case as to why not. |
Don't have to - that's not how these things work. In fact, it's more up to the ODA to come up with a compelling case as to why they've done what they did.
I'm fairly sure if they could have, they would have used it when they were hauled in front of London Assembly over this. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ingatestonian
Cat 1 Groupie
Joined: 16 Feb 2007
Posts: 133
|
| Posted: Tue May 08, 2007 1:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| KJ wrote: |
| Are all the people who used to use the Eastway site cyclists? |
No. Triathletes, in-line skaters, and other assorted people used Eastway. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KJ
T de F Winner
Joined: 18 May 2005
Posts: 26400
|
| Posted: Tue May 08, 2007 1:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ingatestonian wrote: |
| KJ wrote: |
| Are all the people who used to use the Eastway site cyclists? |
No. Triathletes, in-line skaters, and other assorted people used Eastway. |
Are they represented by the EUG? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KJ
T de F Winner
Joined: 18 May 2005
Posts: 26400
|
| Posted: Tue May 08, 2007 1:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| or by their governing bodies? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ingatestonian
Cat 1 Groupie
Joined: 16 Feb 2007
Posts: 133
|
| Posted: Tue May 08, 2007 1:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| KJ wrote: |
| Ingatestonian wrote: |
| Triathletes, in-line skaters, and other assorted people used Eastway. |
Are they represented by the EUG? |
The EUG would have to answer that one. If not, they're certainly not represented by any of the other parties involved. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Plurien
E, Silver
Joined: 09 Dec 2003
Posts: 1966
|
| Posted: Tue May 08, 2007 1:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
EUG members include people who represent those sports. We know that schools, disabled groups, running, HPVs and inline-skaters were not consulted about Eastway's loss.
They were invited by EUG to the meeting at The Royals, for instance, along with the community groups and Pedal Power which has had to say that Hog Hill is too far away. Schools, similarly have reservations about getting kids up to Hog Hill but they think they will be able to. They were defintely not able to consider trips up to Rammey.
It's a wide remit to represent so many groups and so many users. EUG even tried to conduct a survey of the school groups, but they had all been told Eastway was closing and, basically, 'that's it', so we didn't really get very far. There's a lot of things people would like to know. And so few answers unless you get them for yourself.
We would like to know when BC first learned the velopark was to be so grossly devalued. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Des
Moderator
Joined: 19 Apr 2002
Posts: 16900
Location: Harrow
|
| Posted: Tue May 08, 2007 1:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| martin smith wrote: |
you've still got a far better range of facilities than the rest of the country, now stop moaning.
how about looking at what the rest of us have to work with and then wonder why the sympathy hasn't come pouring out? i would love a 7HA colsed circuit and a velodrome near my house but instead i have 40 miles in one direction for a decent outdoor track and 60 miles in the other direction for a closed circuit.
oh and the solution to it taking an hour to drive 10 miles in the capital? get on your bikes and ride there ffs! i used to ride the 40 miles from nottingham to darley moor, race and ride back! i was fit then... |
I and many others from all parts of London used to ride to Eastway Martin. The central location of Eastway made this possible.
_________________
www.kentonrc.co.uk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Plurien
E, Silver
Joined: 09 Dec 2003
Posts: 1966
|
| Posted: Tue May 08, 2007 1:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yes, the debate on LondonCycleSport will be starting soon - Will there be racing at Crystal Palace tonight? - looks like it might rain.
Last week there were 20 riders turned away and others who arrived too late to race. This extra demand and the nightmare journey to get there is brought about by the loss of Eastway.
Crystal Palace is not as far out as Dunton and obviously it's a lot nearer than Hillingdon. As for Betteshanger/Fowlmeade near Deal and Dover.....??
What you might not realise about Crystal Palace is there is no racing if it's wet. They usually let the youths go round if it's damp, but there's a marked reluctance amongst seniors to chance it. I've seen all the u16 field go down on the first bend just in damp conditions so it's suicide when wet. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
