Sully Active Travel logoSully Active Travel

Route option A contributions

Some people making comments

...

A person happy and a comment icon

...

almost 2 years ago

0

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?

Very unhappy

Add your like! More reaction types are coming soon.

almost 2 years ago

0

Any other comments?

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.

Add your like! More reaction types are coming soon.

almost 2 years ago

0

Why do you feel this way?

• Bad for the environment

• Damages/destroy biodiversity

Any other comments?

Isolated, not overlooked by anyone, particularly unsafe for females and evenings

Add your like! More reaction types are coming soon.

almost 2 years ago

0

Why do you feel this way?

• Great for the community

• Would like to cycle/walk/wheel here

• Good for vulnerable users

Any other comments?

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.

What do you think about this proposed route?

Happy

Add your like! More reaction types are coming soon.

almost 2 years ago

0

Why do you feel this way?

• Great for the community

• Would like to cycle/walk/wheel here

• Good for vulnerable users

Any other comments?

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.

What do you think about this proposed route?

Very happy

Add your like! More reaction types are coming soon.