Update: 11:00 Tuesday 30 October.
We had clarification last night from the Commons Advisory Panel (CAP), that the intention was not to stop cycling on the path running between Long Leys Road and West Parade. The ban on cycling on West Common will relate to people riding on “grassed areas and damaging it”. It was suggested to CAP that as a minimum the proposed universal signage needs amending to state that cycling is permitted on the path. We will be collating the feedback on other matters before inputting the Long Leys community view into CAP. Thanks to everyone for expressing their views.
The Commons Advisory Panel, the body responsible for the West Common, has proposed some changes to signage, rules and horse feeding locations. LLRA invite feedback from the community on these changes, which include:
- Dog walkers to keep dogs on a lead or under close control during bird nesting season (March to August).
- No cycling on West Common (including the path between Long Leys Road and West Parade).
- The creation of two new horse feeding stations
- on Long Leys Road next to the small layby opposite Whitton Park.
- close to the A57/Grandstand area of the common.
- The closure of the existing horse feeding station on Roseberry Avenue.
LLRA have already pointed out to the Commons Advisory Panel, on which we have our own representative, that no cycling signs by the Long Leys Road and West Parade entrances would be in conflict with Lincolnshire County Council’s “Access Lincoln” website which shows the Long Leys/West Parade path as an off road cycle route (for further information on this see: accesslincoln.co.uk/cycling/maps/ and the map below).
Details of the proposed signage and locations are shown below. If any members of the Long Leys community wish to comment on these proposals please email us at LLRA@long-leys.org.
See background about the Commons Advisory Panel(CAP).
Further details on the Commons Advisory Panel meeting at which these matters were discussed can be found at https://democratic.lincoln.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=141&MId=3720&Ver=4
Proposed New Signage To Be Displayed
Locations For New Signage
Proposed New Horse Feeding Station Location – Long Leys Road
Proposed New Horse Feeding Station Location – A57 Saxilby Road
Access Lincoln Website Map
I would like to echo the concerns already raised regarding banning cycling. This would be counterproductive and needlessly restrictive to those trying to seeking to minimise car use.
Perhaps the council should instead consider introducing a cycling lane on part of the path?
I use the path most days and nights on my bike, both commuting and during work. Only issues I have had are horses stood in the middle of the path and me scarring people who are immersed in a phone conversation or listening to music with headphones on when I have rung my bell.
I agree with set feeding areas for the horses if the owners adhere to it. I challenged someone right next to the gate on Mitchell Drive last week and the woman was very dismissive of my comment.
Have no problem with keeping dogs under control during ground nesting period. Can they advise which birds we have and why such a long period. May – July is more appropriate. How are they going to stop the horses causing disturbance, especially when they stampede from one side of the common to the other? Horses are also ridden on the common and no doubt disturb the birds too.
It is common land though, so any byelaws should be for the benefit of all the people, not just those who use it to graze their horses.
What has brought about these proposals as all of them appear biased in favour of the horse owners?
Who is going to enforce them?
Hi
I think the ban on cycling across the pathway is a ridiculous idea, and it’s frankly ludicrous that it is being considered.
I would also disagree with dogs being kept on the lead, it would discourage the use of the common for many dog owners in the area, something that should be encouraged.
Regards
Paul
Personally I think the proposals are ridiculous!
Are there any real valid reasons for the proposals?
I thought cycling was suppose to be encouraged and not discouraged and as for dogs being kept on leads i’ve never seen any bothering the birds!
I’d protest against the no cycling rule – the path across the common is a major route for school in the mornings, and is part of our ‘no roads ‘ route to the Sus Trans Route past the Pyewype… I’d have though the horses fouling the footpath, football pitches and all around the common generally was much more of a nuisance.
I really don’t understand what the problem these people have against cyclists. What actually is the problem? Is my 4 years old cycling to St. faiths and back really a problem to anyone?
Also, isn’t that the wrong ‘no-cycle’ sign? I believe the link below shows the correct one. That’s certainly the one thats used at the passage near the university bridge.
https://www.cyclescheme.co.uk/community/featured/reading-the-signs
Personally of the issues facing the council and our community we should be focused on addressing the increasing amount of homeless people suffering in the cold on winter nights. As a community our thoughts should be on putting in place better mechanisms to help them, and not on bringing further regulation to something that doesn’t frankly need it. As someone who walks our dog on the common twice a day every day, I feel we should ensure we raise our concerns swiftly before another piece of bureaucracy slips into our daily lives. I fail to understand the extra care being taken to ensure horse owners can feed their horses and allow them to roam free. But a dog being allowed to socialise in a safe space away from parks, or the built up areas surrounding Lincoln seems somewhat biased in favor of the horses, who regularly stampede across the fields, which is especially concerning on foggy dark mornings.
I would like the consultation to be fully advertised to ensure maximum attendance by the local community, the conversations I have had with people on the common from all walks of life simply wouldn’t happen if you forced dog walkers further away from town. Equally what considerations are being made for the welfare of the dogs, they are entitled to exercise and socialise as much as another pet (horse) so why constrain these animals. I would then be forced to drive (increasing carbon emissions) to another space to walk my dog which is wholly unnecessary when a perfectly good, safe space is available. I have plenty more benefits to speak of and would happily contribute if required and any public consultation. I await your response.