FLASHBACK:
Letter to David Woods from Michael Borrill dated
4 July 2005
Dear Mr Woods
We have received your letter of the 21st June outlining
the various stages of the consultation process and hope
that when the Study has been completed a satisfactory
outcome will be achieved to overcome the problems of congestion
and flow of traffic through Boston and the surrounding
area.
We do, of course, realise that you have to take all things
into consideration when completing this Study and as you
so rightly say, the limited
crossing points over the Rivers and drains is one of the
key issues. Traffic going from one side
of Boston to the other has to be funnelled mainly across
the Haven Bridge. Movements
of vehicles in this category should not be discounted
as in the past.
Whilst we recognise the issues outlined in this brief
are only a synopsis of the full brief, we look forward
to reading the full brief in due course.
Having said this, we are
now totally dismayed to find from your letter, and from
various sites in the Town, that the Census and Data Collection
has already commenced. This is after we were assured that
we would be involved in any discussion prior to implementation
of the Study.
A letter was sent to Elaine turner on the 13th June requesting
a meeting to discuss our involvement with Lincolnshire
County Council and we have only today had the courtesy
of a reply. Needless to say we are disappointed that no
meeting is to be held with us other than that of the Stakeholder
Reference Group.
The following points come to mind with your Study:
1. The cards being distributed to motorists are explicit
in requiring a postcode. This (postcode) system was used
in previous census and gives a false picture. Why is it
being used again when as aforementioned, the problem with
Boston is the River crossings, which form a “divide”
in the Town.
2 The map 1.5, shows a
3km radius of Boston but this does not
include the “rat runs” of Hubberts Bridge/
Punchbowl Lane etc. to the South and Gipsey Bridge, Langrick
and Brothertoft from the North.
3. We are concerned about
the use of an existing data model. Boston is a unique
situation and using practice from other areas will not
give a true picture in relation to Boston.
4. Is the data collected to include tail backs, number
of vehicles, congestion (how long vehicles stopped for)
and time of day.
5. Your Background issues (1.4) should also include:
-
vibration and noise, journey times, stress and disruption
of appointments.
6. We are now living in a 24/7 society and wonder why
the study is mainly confined to weekdays in the Spring
and summer months.
Those are just a few of the points which we would have
discussed but it appears
that Lincolnshire County Council has still not learnt
the meaning of “consultation” which was highlighted
in the recent Corporate Governance Inspection Report:
“It has a weak corporate
approach to consultation and communication
with the public and also a
reluctance to work in genuine partnership with other organisations
across the area”.
If this Transport Study
is found to be flawed in how it is applied to Boston then
I am sure questions will be asked as to why this was allowed
to happen and by whom. Taxpayers money is involved here,
a large amount, and let us hope that this is not wasted
by invalid data being applied.
Yours sincerely
Michael Borrill
04 July 2005
|
