Minutes:
Viv Vallance, consultant Transport Planner for Slough Borough Council gave a brief overview of the public consultation for the Local Transport Plan 3 (LTP 3) and supplementary documents including the Walking and Cycling Strategies. It is intended for this LTP 3 to run for 15 years until 2026, with reviews every 5 years.
VV explained that comments could be made by forum members individually on the link to the Council’s Limehouse public consultation pages. He would forward this round to everyone via JW. JW advised that though the official closing date for comments was the 21st January, Rub Nawaz, Head of Transport Policy would accept comments up until 26th January at the latest. VV supplied members with hard copies of the draft Cycling and Walking Strategies (supplementary documents to the LTP3). He explained that any comments would be welcome including those about style and omissions.
Discussions ensued with TE stating that the current network for cycling in Slough is not very well linked up. He asked if the strategy aimed to try to integrate the existing network and improve links. VV replied that the cycling strategy may not go into a great amount of detail in solving gap problems on the network. He did refer however to cycle permeability being the links between developments as an aim in the strategy (see SA7 - Cycle Routes Infrastructure).
IH asked if there were targets attached to the two strategic documents in terms of increasing walking and cycling activity. He questioned the fairness that the Council appears not to be setting itself targets but expects developers, SEGRO, for instance, to achieve modal shift targets. VV countered that the Section 106 developer contribution agreements had a different context to the strategic policy documents being discussed. However, he acknowledged the value of the comments being made and encouraged members to pass these onto the Council.
Quantification of the problem was discussed with VV relaying that automatic counts from loops provided statistics on how many cyclists were using the network which informed the strategy. IH asked if this important data could be made public and TE suggested it could be hung on the walking and cycling web map currently on the Council website at; http://sloughwalkingandcycling.yourmap.net/document.aspx?display=maps
IH commented that though the Council says it’s keen, it still felt like cycling and pedestrian facilities/perspectives are an after-thought in the design process for planning applications and any road schemes. He felt that the designers ought to cycle routes themselves before designing, mentioning the problems with the Bradley Road/Stoke Poges Lane road safety scheme. In this scheme he thought the road narrowing created unnecessary difficulty for cyclists where none existed before.
KW mentioned the road widening as part of the access works for the Sikh Community Centre development site further up Stoke Poges Lane. He complained that the cycle lane had been closed for a long time. AD advised that the works had been delayed due to problems with the sewer connections. KW also complained that the new virgin media cable boxes being installed across the borough were obstructing the free passage of pedestrians on the pavements. AD advised that the utility companies did have a legal right to locate these boxes in the public highway.
VV pointed out that Cycling England had criticised the Slough LAF specifically for having too strong a focus on off-carriageway and recreational routes. Members felt this was unfair criticism with TE saying it showed a lack of respect for volunteers. JW commented that it would be most effective for the Slough LAF and a potential Slough cycling forum to be amalgamated.
Post Meeting Note: In May 2009 DEFRA issued further Guidance to Local Access Forums which had the effect of enabling forums to advise on functional or utility access issues, which might include using land (or a right of way) to get to work, school, shops or local amenities.
Resolved - Members would go through the LTP3 documents provided and either comment themselves using the Council website or forward comments via JW.