The pics from the planning application and the tender document (closes on 30 Mar) show how bad the plans are suggested captions: This plan was first seen by users on 15 January in a meeting which was not part of the consultation – There has been no consultation with users

EUG publishes its Guide: Objecting to the Olympic Legacy plans and a Letter
of Reply from Chief Exec of the ODA
Eastway Users Group has completed its Guide for those who wish to object to
the Olympic Legacy plans.

Comments of objection can be made no later than 19th March so all riders wishing
to object must get a letter in.

EUG’s Guide covers how to make an objection on planning grounds.

Get objecting
You can apply for your copy by email to [email protected]
by sending your name and the statement
"I agree with the Mission Statement of Eastway Users’ Group"

Whatever riders may think of how the issues have been handled, if the plans
are unaccaptable in any way this should be made known to the planning authority
as an objection .

The planning conditions which secured the relocation were also intended to cover
the legacy return after the Games. The current plans show:
– NO offroad competition facility
– A road circuit configured to be as near to the A12 as is possible and as far
out of the park as is possible
– A park area for cycling which is roughly where the car parks for Eastway and
Eton Manor used to be

David Higgins, chief exec of the ODA has made a reply to the EUG – below – which
serves to confirm the worst detail of the plans intended.

This is not the 34ha Velopark which the London Olympic bid enclosed and which
was the last plan on which any user consultation took place. Little or no change
is contemplated on plans that were drawn up without consultation. An absence
of consultation continues so the plan cannot be informed by the community it
was supposed to be serving.

You can read the planning applications for yourself at http://planning.london2012.com/publicaccess/
(when the site is working, which isn’t all the time) The applications were made
in the w/c 4 Feb.

LETTER OF REPLY FROM DAVID HIGGINS, CHIEF EXECUTIVE, ODA 6 March 2007

"London VeloPark ˆ Legacy Issues
Thank you for your email of 22 February outlining the concerns of the Eastway
Users Group with regard to the VeloPark legacy proposals and the interim provision
for cycle sport.

This plan comes from the Tender. Bids to build this must be in by 30 Mar 2007 with the contract based on this plan.

Interim Provision
As you know the London Development Agency (LDA) has secured planning permission
for a new road cycle circuit and off-road provision at Hog Hill and this is
scheduled to open later in the year. It is clearly very good news for cycle
sport in London that, while Hog Hill was originally intended as an interim provision,
it has now been designed & will be built as a permanent facility with substantial
ancilliary facilities. I am also aware that the London Borough of Redbridge
is already looking at how it will be able to revenue fund the this facility
beyond the LDA funding in 2012.

It is disappointing that your road riding season has been disrupted while Hog
Hill is developed but I know that my colleagues at the LDA are doing as much
as reasonable possible to support cycle users in this period.

London VeloPark
The VeloPark remains at the heart of our plans for the legacy Olympic Park.
Over £50m is being invested in cycle sport facilities at this VeloPark
& I strongly believe that our plans will create a unique, world-class cycling
centre. In particular I would draw your attention to the following:

– The velodrome will form the centrepiece of the VeloPark & will be a cycling
focused facility in legacy with a programme of use being developed to allow
full access from beginner to elite;
– We are also currently looking at enhancing our legacy commitments made to
the International Olympic Committee (IOC) for the Velodrome by maintaining the
seating capacity at 6,000 (as opposed to the present reduction to 3,000). We
have recently commissioned a feasibility study that has shown a demand for track
cycling events that will sustain this capacity;
– The legacy BMX circuit will be designed & built as training facility for
all levels of ability but with the provision that temporary seating can be introduced
for high level competition;
– The 1 mile road circuit has been designed in consultation with British Cycling
& the design guidance produced by the Eastway Users Group;
– The mountain bike provision is aimed towards beginners as an introduction
to the sport.
Notiwthstanding the above, following the feedback we have received from the
consultation we have undertaken with the various user groups & British Cycling‚s
London Alliance, the ODA Project Sponsor for the VeloPark, Richard Arnold, is
currently reviewing the outline proposals in the following areas:
– Possible reconfiguration of the road cycle circuit extending into the Eton
Manor site & potential increase in off-road provision;
– Review of introduction of cycle speedway
– Explore with the masterplan team how occasional mountain bike competitions
might be staged in the wider Park in legacy.
Richard will be reporting on these issues to the BC London Alliance in April
& I will ensure you are updated.

Thank you for your continued interest in the project.

Yours sincerely,
David Higgins"

Commentary from the users‚ perspective on David Higgins‚ letter:

Hog Hill is being delivered by the developer in the Strategy 32 as the Relocation
for Eastway Cycle Circuit. It is not the Legacy and its provision is not material
to the Legacy Mode to which the LDA made covenant.

The revenue funding for Hog Hill beyond 2012 is confirmed by this letter from
the developer to be uncertain, so the firm provision it has to make to secure
the Legacy Strategy cannot be based on provision at Hog Hill.

The correspondent is unable to substantiate the definite actions being taken
to secure an interim facility for the 2007 road season. In fact there is not
likely to be any provision until June at the earliest, when an undertaking was
given for this to be available from February 2007.

The Velodrome‚s seating has no beneficial impact on the provision made
for riders, which undoubtedly will be under pressure of time for track use,
and pressure
of sustainability for its seating capacity that can be for purposes other than
cycle sport (note the phrase „cycling-focused‰)
The BMX provision will be of local and possibly regional interest for youth
riders ˆ It will not be a provision for national senior racing unless track
re-grading can take place before and after competition.

The road circuit has not been designed in accord with the EUG’s Book of New
Eastway, though the participation of British Cycling in its design is noted
as evidence of its participation in the site design

Mountainbike provision is confirmed as not being a facility for competition
such as was held very sucessfully at Eastway each week of the season. The most
effective way to introduce young riders to the sport is for them to be able
to do it on a course which conforms to the stated definition given by the UCI.

The involvement of British Cycling’s London Alliance has served to let the developer
know that it can make cursory amendments to its plans in order to meet the wishes
of the London Alliance which in no way is a representative body fit to represent
Eastway or capable to show that it has consulted with them.

British Cycling says it finds the plans ‘unacceptable’ but is not prepared to
make any objection to the plans. Users believe it cannot be relied upon to protect
their interests.

Insurance and risk assessment of any mountainbike event in open parkland with
public rights of way is at best difficult to achieve. To proceed with any role
confirming such a plan to provide a facility by this means, British Cycling
must indemnify any future organisation wishing to promote mountainbike competitive
events for the cost and resource to secure any form of competitive event if
this sport provision is to be regarded as a facility. Even if this proves possible
it is clear that the users’ clearly stated requirement for open space of equal
value which is designed to avoid conflict.