The engagement of this project has ended
almost 2 years ago
Any other comments?
Violates the Vale commitment to Nature Emergency by proposing this option with no biodiversity assessment
What do you think about this proposed route?
Add your like! More reaction types are coming soon.
No space for 4metre width down from the Vineyard to Sully without taking a strip off the roadway. Hazardous for pedestrians including kids and dogs, with fast cyclists coming from behind. It's contrary to Active travel guidance to have a non-segregated cycle/walk path. It flouts policy on biodiversity to describe the rich biodiverse stretch along the railway as "vegetation". Likewise to ignore the destruction of roadside hedges. The Habitats & Species Regulations 2017 require you to look for and assess less damaging alternatives.
Why do you feel this way?
• Bad for the environment
• Damages/destroy biodiversity
Isolated, not overlooked by anyone, particularly unsafe for females and evenings
• Great for the community
• Would like to cycle/walk/wheel here
• Good for vulnerable users
Whilst I support the reopening of the former rail line for active travel, one concern that I would have is that this route provides sufficient space to accommodate cyclists, pedestrians and other vulnerable users safely. A number of existing shared routes in the area do not provide sufficient segregation.
Route A is by far the best option for all the reasons already listed. But I fear, that short termism will again prevail and we will end up with route B which will in the long run defeat the purpose of getting more people on their bikes and walking. Plenty of these railway lines have been opened up in England. If they can, we can! Route A will be an investment, routes B and C will be a waste of money. You have a once in a generation opportunity, do it right for a change.