Guest 703- Registered: 30 Jul 2010
- Posts: 2,096
Christine, there's nothing hidden, if you click on the link I posted above you can see all the plans including which trees are due to be removed, and make you objections online if you wish. I think the number of objectors required before going to planning committee was increased to 6 last year.
Guest 672- Registered: 3 Jun 2008
- Posts: 2,119
I think at the end of the day, what forumites ( and the public ) think and what they think should be done does not concern what the authorities in charge are doing.
It's a simple case of mind over matter, they don't mind and you don't matter.
grass grows by the inches but dies by the feet.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Come to think of it, Christine, there was a kind of public notice with a request for comments and opinions on the cycle path in 2010 in DDC's Gateway office.
At the time I thought it was a good idea, and do not recall changing my mind since then.
The alternative would be: cars, cars, cars, cars....roads full of cars....
There really ought to be some lanes for riding bikes on, but I do hope these will be clearly distinguishable from the footpath, to avoid collisions.
Incidentally there is a bike lane along the promenade too.
Guest 776- Registered: 1 Oct 2012
- Posts: 95
Ross thanks for reading my posts and your support on the willow trees. Support at last!!!!
If you read the KCC Paper and clause 1.1 (in the link in my previous post) that is the sum of the policy that I have been able to find.
The problem is the route is being designed for cyclists and the pedestrians (many of whom will be children running free) on Phase II of the route are being ignored. Along with the mature trees and the flooding issues.
Thank you.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
The river dour cycle route has been done in phases, each one having its own consultation and cycle route. It has been funded by Sustrans and KCC.
I believe it is now on the final phase.
I have asked for clarification on the criteria for an application to come before the planning committee; I know a ward councillor can ask for it - I know I've called one in.
Roger
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,895
I am sitting on the fence with this one I am afraid. The flooding issue to me is irrelevant a little extra tarmac will not make that much difference to what happens now but it will be a shame if the trees go I hope more will be planted to replace them.
I just wonder how many cyclists will actually use the cycle path, too many of the idiots who charge along the pavement past Charlton Centre will not change their route unless the police act to stop them.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Guest 730- Registered: 5 Nov 2011
- Posts: 221
I see this is featured on the front page of todays Dover Express. Someone saying it will be unsafe because it won't be wide enough and dosen't meet required regulations.
I agree it's a shame to cut down trees. Sadly if Cherry Tree Avenue is anything to go by, any replacements will only last a few months before they are vandalised.
Guest 776- Registered: 1 Oct 2012
- Posts: 95
These are walkways, an integral part of human quality of life. People, and many of them, sit and watch the bowls in the Summer months. A bike path is not need along here. They belong to our road systems, and KCC and Kent Highways, who require not planning permission, and do not live anywhere near to Dover, should have more respect.
You wonder why, the paths and vistas, along this River Dour are so neglected, and people lose heart, Then low and behold
£500.000.00 appears, to fell the trees, cut the River in half on a flood plain and tarmac a dead end cycle path.
On planning, Pencester PARK, currently has a Bye Law banning cycling. That, and the fact that it is a Public Park. means the construction of a new cycle way, (even widening of the footpath to accomodate it), needs planning approval.
Currently the design is for the paviours to be lifted and replaced with a 3m wide tarmac path.
To get around planning DDC & KCC are trying, (behind everyones back), to rededicate it as a Highways path, so that they can try and avoid planning
These paths come to a grinding halt everywhere anyway, if they stuck to the road system, which is in place, none of this stupidity would be necessary. Mark the Tarmac Path, which means all the expensive red bricks paving, will be removed, alongside the River in Pencester PARK. Again, this is a green space, a park, people sit alongside this river whenever they can. Cyclists should be nowhere near this, at all.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
There are and will be, some conflicting cycle routes, routes where cyclists should not cycle, but will be allowed to because it is all part of the River Dour Cycle route, a plan to open the route along the Dour.
I am concerned that cyclists will be allowed to cycle up and down Cannon Street/Biggin Street and all around the Market Square and as usual, not cycle in a safe and considerate way.
I also had confirmation about when an application can be brought before the committee: 3 or more 3rd party views (including the PC/TC views) contrary to the intended officer recommendation.
Roger
Guest 776- Registered: 1 Oct 2012
- Posts: 95
Mr Roger Walken. #29
with respect:
This planning application is only for the new bridge. What about all the other sections of the route that need planning permission - in Pencester, along the river by the college and bowling green etc. When will planning be submitted for them? Work in parks, on private land (college), in the river (flood plain), felling of trees (my favourite topic) etc are all subject to planning.
The KCC man in the Dover Express article today said they already have all the necessary approvals to proceed.
Does this mean the planning process is a sham and back door deals have been done to stop the democratic process?
If not when can we expect to see the applications ?
Respectfully, many people are asleep over this, and most of the disasters that have occurred in Dover, and there have been soooooo many over the years, are because the end-game is hidden.
Thank you.
Guest 703- Registered: 30 Jul 2010
- Posts: 2,096
http://planning.dover.gov.uk/online-applications/files/28B155B7D16D95E570F12CB0277BDCCF/pdf/12_00823-CIV-13460-SA-90-0101_A0222260620000.PDF-214776.pdf
The above is from the planning application link on the first page, it shows the full plan including lighting, changes to the riverbank, tree removal etc as well as the bridge. The title of the planning application mentioning just the bridge is a little misleading maybe.
Jan Higgins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,895
Re the bowling green area surely all they are planning to do is slightly widen the path that is already there so why would they need planning for that, in fact if the steps prior to the bridge are going that will be a benefit to the disabled and those with prams, I hardly ever go that way because of those steps.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Guest 776- Registered: 1 Oct 2012
- Posts: 95
Ray,
The application is specific to the bridge replacement only all the other works are simply part of the plan that shows the bridge location. That is why I'm asking Roger when we will see all the other applications.
Any comments on all the other works on the plan in your link will be ignored. So they can cut down the trees without consultation.
Try doing that in your own garden if you had a mature willow and see how quickly the DDC would be to take you to Court
Jan,
Yes the ramp is most welcome. However, imagine a cycle roaring past you at 30 miles per hour, and these state of art cycles can do this easily. Skateboarders, will have a field day. However, the path is is widened by about 2 metres into the river. Its a flood plain here so making the river narrower by 2metres is barmy. Remember Reg stopped the Hospital being built here because of the flooding problems. I don't think the people already suffering from flooding will be happy.
Thus we have a path, NARROW AT THE EXPENSE OF A NECESSARY RIVER/and beautiful mature Willows and other trees/ with mobility scooters/push chairs/ loose children and cycles..woopee for the personal injury claims for the Council.
Guest 703- Registered: 30 Jul 2010
- Posts: 2,096
Removal of the trees is covered in the Design and Access Statement of the application with reference to there being no objections by the Environment Agency with 'confirmation under separate cover' but which is not available for public scrutiny in the planning application as far as I can see.
Jan Higgins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,895
Christine the vast majority of cyclists who use cycle paths are very considerate of pedestrians, unlike those who use ordinary pavements. I have yet to have a problem with those who use the cycle path by Morrisons in fact they are more considerate than many of the pushchair brigade.
Not knowing how they will construct the path by the bowling green I can not judge the flood risk but I am sure they "have a cunning plan" of some sort, I certainly hope so.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Guest 776- Registered: 1 Oct 2012
- Posts: 95
Try walking the Underpass in Bench Street, where is states "Cyclists Dismount."
Do they heck
Very few cyclists use the designated Cycle Path, coated in Green,alongside the Sea Front.
No, indeed, they happily roar along the Sea Front.
Cyclist do not like pushing their Bikes.
They belong to the Roads. That is what the Roads were built for, and heaven knows there is enough space on them for the Cyclists.
Jan Higgins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,895
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
whilst i agree about the mad cyclists and the serious problems they cause the seafront is a bit different as the cycle lanes disappear at certain points after the sea change improvements.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
My understanding of the rest of this River Dour Cycle Greenway, has been discussed (and decided) at the Joint Transportation Advisory Board meetings, held at DDC Council Chamber between KCC Highways dept. and DDC Councillors.
There has been much discussion taken place on this, no secrets at all. I don't know who makes the decision about where these things are to be decided, but as it is the responsibility of KCC and happening in Dover, it is the Dover JTB where the issues are resolved.
Roger
Guest 776- Registered: 1 Oct 2012
- Posts: 95
"For some strange reason I am beginning to think Christine dislikes cyclists."
I would correct you, immediately, on this JanH. Please, do not read into something that is not there.
There is a place for everything, and, to a certain extent, everything has its place.
We, or, it would appear, I am a lone voice on this forum. Asking for a sensible attitude towards a quiet walkway, along a lovely River, in the centre of our Town. With beautiful Weeping Willows, a Bowling Green, where, in the quiet Summer months, a gentle sport for people is carried out. We lost, Brook House, in this area of the Town, to a very little used Car Park, since the demise of The White Cliffs Experience. This had Tennis Courts and beautiful Gardens.
I say to you, it is criminal to have a dead-end cycle-path here, at grave expense to flooding etc. etc. The wild-life and beautiful trees etc.
You may giggle and take the peeeed.
I think something like this is worth a effort of looking at again, and understand that it need not happen.
