I write to you to raise a follow-up request to FOI ref FOI76745, relating to the chicane barriers along the shared pathway through Heynes Green, Cox Green, Maidenhead in two locations along NCN4 (national cycle network route 4), at the following positions: 51.5057437, -0.7547434 51.5055678, -0.7517702
The present FOI reiterates the points made in the previous request relating to the impediment caused by these barriers for those using adaptive cycles,as well as for wheelchair and pushchair users, in particular as regards the insufficient spacing due to the current barriers, and their lack of adherence to provisions in Equality Act 2010, Section 20 (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/201...). RBWM replied in January 2022 to the previous FOI, I reference the reply text in italics below:
“It has been decided that this location is worthy of further review. Our team of engineers are working on whether a more appropriate solution would be available for this location that follows the LTN1/20 guidance and enables use of this path by a greater number of pedestrians and cyclists (including those with disabilities). This work has commenced and should a better design be achievable will be subject to local consultation and assessment under current guidelines. “
I now ask for an update as to this work since the previous response was over a year ago.
1- Has an Equality Impact Assessment (EIA) now been completed at these two locations, and can you please provide a copy of this
2- Has any other work been conducted (separate from an EIA) in assessing these locations and can you provide a detailed description of such work and copy of related reports
3- Please confirm that the work considers a/ provision for the passage of cyclists along this signposted cycle route, and b/ allowances and accommodations for disabled cyclists
4- If this work has not been completed can the reasons for the delay be set out, and what KPIs does RBWM adhere to in such case i.e. given the commitment in the previous FOI to conduct this work how much time should this take
5- What are expected timelines for follow-on activity to take action to improve accessibility at these locations in line with S.20
Additionally I have some related questions regarding vegetation clearance along NCN4:
6- Please advise what obligations relate to neighboring landowners at both above locations as regards vegetation clearance protruding onto the NCN4 shared path since the barrier design forces users into adjacent hedges whilst navigating round the chicanes
7- Above question 6 also applies to the NCN4 segment just further along to where it reaches Highfield Lane and where there is a large leylandii hedge extending over the path, restricting the width even without a chicane; what precisely is the obligation to cut back vegetation from the edge of the paved NCN4 path, both a/ in width and b/ in height; (I note RBWM HSIM https://www.rbwm.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2022-07/highways_hamp_append... Appendix D specifies height clearance should be no less than 2.4 meters )
8- How does RBWM enforce these obligations and when was this part of NCN4 last inspected