[quote="Grahame"]Be truthful, Mr T. BC initially recommended accepting Romney Marsh, and it was only the fuss kicked up by Eastway Supporters (to the point of Michael being refused entry to BC "public" meetings) and others that caused an about face and the push for Hog Hill.
Well done all the same.
Let's see if the planting plan allows for decent mountainbike and cyclocross racing? The battle has been won, but the war for a full Eastway replacement and decent cycling legacy goes on.
Hog Hill London Champs 6th Sept
19 posts
• Page 2 of 2 • 1, 2
Re: Hog Hill London Champs 6th Sept
by mrP(Boonen)VT » Tue Sep 09, 2008 1:20 pm
No Grahame - that is not right.....
The LDA called a consultation meeting to decide on a replacement at which point it was disclosed that they already had a fait-a-compli with BC HQ at Manchester (Dave Cockram) who had agreed that Rammey Marsh was an OK site for the Eastway replacement. There was almost a riot with dissenting voices, one of the loudest being Michael Humphreys of ESL. BC SE (John Hawkridge and myself) were also members of ESL and also vociferous in the rejection of Rammey Marsh. Hog Hill was a site identified by (??bugger can't remember) about 8 months before that fateful meeting, and I had even driven over to see the site and taken photographs of that and Rammey Marsh for direct comparisons.
The LDA tried to convince us that we could only have access to LVPRA land - which is a long thin strip North of Eastway, but with negotiation it was soon apparent that this was not the case, but there was still BC HQ support for RM.
Michael being refused entry to meetings was just a case of political gaming. If it hadn't been for him, I don't think there would have been enough drive to carry this of - even if his methods were a bit suspect at times!!
Eventually there was a turning point when Peter King visited the sites personally after lobbying from us, and once BC HQ support focussed on Hog Hill, then the powers that be conceded and we are where we are now.
As I was a member of ESL from the early days, supporting their work and representing BC, you cannot say BC were in favour of RM - BCHQ.
I agree that there is still much work to be done, but we have come a long way and let us not detract from the fact that it is a great venue that needs continue development. Many people are involved (Kelvin) to ensure it heads in the right direction, and only time will tell.
I have been to numerous meetings regarding the legacy circuit in the velopark once the Olympics have gone and turned around what was going to be a useless road circuit into something meaningful. It will be a pale imitation of Eastway as the hill has gone. It will be similar to Hillingdon, and will have 2 bridges to cross the river (I'm not too sure about that bit) and utilise the area to the SW. The site of the velodrome has been moved 6m south to accomodate the circuit in front, so be sure that lots of work is going on behind the scenes, and BC now have substantial clout in negotiations.
Guru P
-
mrP(Boonen)VT - lives on this board 24/7!!!
- Posts: 4430
- Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2002 9:10 pm
- Location: kitchen chair
Re: Hog Hill London Champs 6th Sept
by Grahame » Tue Sep 09, 2008 2:22 pm
I stand (partially) corrected. To me, BCHQ were the face of BC at the start of the negotiations, and were it not for the fuss kicked up locally (and I'll happily include BC-SE in that grouping), we'd have got next to nothing.
To me, the important thing is to not relax and think we've won. We are still only part way there. We need to make sure Hog Hill is as useful to the cycling community in all its forms (road, cross and mountainbike racing, road and offroad liesure cycling) as Eastway was, and that the Eastway replacement (post 2012) is also as useful. Then we can say that cycling as a sport has a decent legacy from the drug abusers sports fortnight.
By the way, is it still the case that Hog Hill only has funding until 2012?
To me, the important thing is to not relax and think we've won. We are still only part way there. We need to make sure Hog Hill is as useful to the cycling community in all its forms (road, cross and mountainbike racing, road and offroad liesure cycling) as Eastway was, and that the Eastway replacement (post 2012) is also as useful. Then we can say that cycling as a sport has a decent legacy from the drug abusers sports fortnight.
By the way, is it still the case that Hog Hill only has funding until 2012?
- Grahame
- lives on this board 24/7!!!
- Posts: 1636
- Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2003 12:27 pm
- Location: On the highway to hell (and I've not even told my mum when I'll be back)
Re: Hog Hill London Champs 6th Sept
by Sylv » Tue Sep 09, 2008 2:31 pm
[quote="mrP(Boonen)VT"]Sylv,
You will still be recovering from the 12. I haven't been able to get a HR much above 140 for the past 3 weeks, but is starting to come back now.
Riding easy is Ok, but you lose that top end speed - especially on the hill. A couple more weeks and you'll be flying again - just take it easy for now.
Guru P
You will still be recovering from the 12. I haven't been able to get a HR much above 140 for the past 3 weeks, but is starting to come back now.
Riding easy is Ok, but you lose that top end speed - especially on the hill. A couple more weeks and you'll be flying again - just take it easy for now.
Guru P
Good to hear that (you know what I mean).
There is an off-road test ride at Hog Hill this Saturday but I won't be able to make it.
-
Sylv - lives on this board 24/7!!!
- Posts: 5742
- Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 2:40 pm
- Location: londinium, lugdunum
Re: Hog Hill London Champs 6th Sept
by mrP(Boonen)VT » Wed Sep 10, 2008 12:59 pm
[quote="Grahame"]I stand (partially) corrected. To me, BCHQ were the face of BC at the start of the negotiations, and were it not for the fuss kicked up locally (and I'll happily include BC-SE in that grouping), we'd have got next to nothing.
To me, the important thing is to not relax and think we've won. We are still only part way there. We need to make sure Hog Hill is as useful to the cycling community in all its forms (road, cross and mountainbike racing, road and offroad liesure cycling) as Eastway was, and that the Eastway replacement (post 2012) is also as useful. Then we can say that cycling as a sport has a decent legacy from the drug abusers sports fortnight.
By the way, is it still the case that Hog Hill only has funding until 2012?
To me, the important thing is to not relax and think we've won. We are still only part way there. We need to make sure Hog Hill is as useful to the cycling community in all its forms (road, cross and mountainbike racing, road and offroad liesure cycling) as Eastway was, and that the Eastway replacement (post 2012) is also as useful. Then we can say that cycling as a sport has a decent legacy from the drug abusers sports fortnight.
By the way, is it still the case that Hog Hill only has funding until 2012?
On the face of it, yes, only the distinction being that BCHQ hadn't got a clue what THEIR MEMBERS wanted, unlike BC SE and ESL. Fortunately we have moved on since those dark days.
I totally agree that we are only part way there and need to keep focused. Peter King (BC supremo) and John Hawkridge (BC SE) have both had direct conversations with Kate Hoey and Boris Johnson on this very subject (I cannot disclose more at the moment) and the vexed case of Herne Hill.......watch this space.
The "reinstatement" of Eastway will be nothing like Eastway was - there are too many other demands on the land etc, but there will be a facility there and we are fighting to make the best we can of what is available. You wouldn't believe how far we've come since the first draft of (crap) plans were submitted - and a whole lot of work has gone into that.
The funding of Hog Hill until 2012 (actually it is funded until the facility at Eastway is reinstated, so probably 2013 and beyond.....) is being met by the ODA. After that, it is down to Redbridge to maintain it. If, as is likely, the centre is extremely popular, then I am sure you will agree that it is extremely unlikely that they will just turn their backs, lock the gates and walk away - from a facility that they have not had to capital fund in the first place - BUT - it could happen.
Guru P
-
mrP(Boonen)VT - lives on this board 24/7!!!
- Posts: 4430
- Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2002 9:10 pm
- Location: kitchen chair