HPP meeting 22nd Oct - WHAT HAPPENED?

Inland paddling
Post Reply
Old Coach
Posts: 92
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2006 9:23 pm
Location: Marlow

HPP meeting 22nd Oct - WHAT HAPPENED?

Post by Old Coach » Sat Nov 15, 2008 5:08 pm

As raised by Terry Best on TVF there doesn't appear to have been any report of the last public meeting.

HP is now apparently closed for the works and all of Pete Cornes links seem to have expired so did the User Group get what was wanted?

Do tell

Tim

Dave Manby
Posts: 2014
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 10:36 am
Location: Llangollen
Been thanked: 10 times
Contact:

Post by Dave Manby » Sun Nov 16, 2008 12:32 pm

I'll re-post my previous post then.


I went to the open meeting at the Rugby club last week - strange meeting everyone seemed in agreement which don't usually happen.

It would appear that the aim is too keep the Muncher as is and alter stuff around it. The Magic roundabout will go because a wall will be built between the two islands Jaws will move and parts of the course will be widened, some of the deep pools will be filled in to make it shallower and mounting points will be placed in several locations so Omnifloats can be put in to modify the course. The bottom stopper might even get a slot in it.

All sounds good and this has all been computer modelled BUT remeber this is water and hydraulics in engineering is really guesswork with numbers it is NOT mathematics so the model may show a hole but it will not be able to tell if it is a retentive or flushy hole. So when the work is done we may get a somewhat different monster to what was predicted. To my mind this is not a problem the original course was built on drawings based on a 1968 model that had been long lost/destroyed. Remember that scale modeling hydraulics was very difficult in those days (and still is) mainly because of time. This time effect is further complicated by surface tension which has a unit of time in it so running water down a model will not be the same as running water down the real thing only a different size.

Having said that the original course was designed for 4m long slalom boats and NO ONE had thought of 2m long plastic boats let alone tricky-woos and the like. In the end the old course turned out OK and we the paddlers just got to find out what could and could not be done what we got which is where we are not with the alterations.

I just reckon the guys who have spent a lot of time and effort argueing over and altering the original proposed alterations deserve a round of thanks for a good job done.
_________________
Dave Manby

User avatar
Pete C.
Posts: 1074
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 7:16 pm
Location: Chester

Post by Pete C. » Mon Nov 17, 2008 10:07 am

I've just had a look at the thread on Thames Valley Freestylers. I'll try to answer your concerns...

Basically, I sent out the final plans to nearly 600 people before the meeting, and didn't get a single piece of negative feedback about them. Not one. There was no objection at the meeting, and the user group that was put forward by the attendees at the first meeting was unanimous that - according to what we'd been told - it looks like an improvement.

I agree with you that the public relay of information hasn't been great, but I've already put in weeks and weeks of work over this, and now I've got to concentrate on client work. I didn't put out a final email about the plans being approved because I'd thought the BCU press release would sort it out, and it costs me about £25 for each mass mailing I've sent out. And - crucially - it's not my job. Hell - that's why I can't always get back to you within an hour of posting on UKRGB on a Saturday night.

There's a huge fight for someone to change the BCU's internally-focussed culture to something that looks outward towards its members, and to back that up with the right communications. But it's not my fight - unless they're willing to pay consultancy rates.

Anyway, I think Dave's summed the state of the project up well. The crux is:

Changes going ahead
New plans better for all users than old plans
New plans better than 17 cumec course at the moment
No major objections from any quarter

Any other questions, then I'll do my best to answer them. Post them here, though, rather than on Thames Valley Freestylers.

P.

User avatar
Adrian Cooper
Posts: 9733
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2002 2:26 pm
Location: Buckinghamshire
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 13 times

Post by Adrian Cooper » Mon Nov 17, 2008 10:48 am

Pete C. wrote:I sent out to nearly 600 people before the meeting, and didn't get a single piece of negative feedback about them.
I'd just like to register my thanks to Pete for all of his hard work on this subject. The revised plans seemed to deal with most of the issues raised so I felt no need to comment further. I don't think this would have been the case without all of Pete's efforts.

Cheers Pete, you're a star.

Old Coach
Posts: 92
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2006 9:23 pm
Location: Marlow

Post by Old Coach » Mon Nov 17, 2008 11:36 am

I also think a huge vote of thanks is due to Pete for his input.

Unfortunately it seems to be a fact of life that while there is never a shortage of moaners about any given topic there are very few like Pete who will stand up and do something concrete.

Being involved in construction I know that a project such as this has been in preparation for a good long time to the point that it was ready to go ahead at the signing of the funding cheque.

The sad thing is that it would appear that someone decided that the public were not to be party to the preparation, why is anyones guess.

Petes publicity brought this to our attention and hopefully at the end of March we will see his and the user groups efforts justified.

Tim

User avatar
Lowri Davies
Posts: 1068
Joined: Tue May 14, 2002 1:35 pm
Location: North Wales
Contact:

Post by Lowri Davies » Mon Nov 17, 2008 11:59 am

A very big well done to Pete for putting in so much time and effort to create a much more positive outcome from something that will affect thousands of us paddlers.

I only have one question now: Can I get money back from my season ticket for the period in which HPP is closed?! If so, how?

User avatar
Pete C.
Posts: 1074
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 7:16 pm
Location: Chester

Post by Pete C. » Mon Nov 17, 2008 12:00 pm

Old Coach wrote:I know that a project such as this has been in preparation for a good long time to the point that it was ready to go ahead at the signing of the funding cheque.
At the first user group meeting (the one I missed because I was away) everyone agreed to a 'twin track' approach, putting the project out to a prospective tender on one hand, while working on a design to base the decision around on the other hand. I was rather sceptical when I first heard about this, but neither of these two processes pre-empted the outcome of the other.

In other words, the changes weren't a fait accompli at any point before the final public meeting. Had there been any serious objections (or any objections) then it would have had to proceed differently.

All in all, there's been a hell of a lot of compromise and cooperation by everyone all the way through. I think the turning point was when Mark Delaney from World Class slalom said, "Well if the Muncher and plughole are so important to you guys, why don't we just leave them as they are."

The feeling in Nottingham is that everyone's really stoked to see what comes of it in March. I can guarantee that the course will suck when they first put water down it, so don't jump to conclusions until it's had time to sort out the setup. After a three week initial course configuration period (including representatives from all the different user groups) I'm certain we'll see something better than what we've got right now...

Also, while my name's been the one that everyone's seen, Matt Chadder, James Reeves the Squirt Specialist (tm) and Richard Chrimes have put in just as much time and energy - it's been a proper team effort...

User avatar
RichA
Posts: 2837
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 12:51 am

Post by RichA » Mon Nov 17, 2008 7:04 pm

Lowri Davies wrote:I only have one question now: Can I get money back from my season ticket for the period in which HPP is closed?! If so, how?
At the last meeting I think they said that refunds wouldn't be given, but extra time would be added to the expirary date of your season ticket. For example if the work takes 3 months, your ticket will expire 3 months later than it was meant to.
For the record I think that's the wrong way of doing it and believe refunds should be given in lieu of an extension, if requested.

ChrisMac
Posts: 233
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 4:05 pm

Post by ChrisMac » Mon Nov 17, 2008 7:18 pm

RichA wrote:
Lowri Davies wrote:I only have one question now: Can I get money back from my season ticket for the period in which HPP is closed?! If so, how?
At the last meeting I think they said that refunds wouldn't be given, but extra time would be added to the expirary date of your season ticket. For example if the work takes 3 months, your ticket will expire 3 months later than it was meant to.
For the record I think that's the wrong way of doing it and believe refunds should be given in lieu of an extension, if requested.
I dont think that was realistically ever going to happen. I think the extension is fine

User avatar
Mark R
Posts: 24134
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2002 6:17 pm
Location: Dorset
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 15 times
Contact:

Post by Mark R » Mon Nov 17, 2008 7:27 pm

TWP - 'I have posted a similar request on UKRGB which has been up for an hour with no response so far.'

Ha ha ha - genius.

Good work Pete and chums, thanks for keeping track of this on behalf of all us. Do try to monitor UKRGB more closely in future, though ...
Mark Rainsley
FACEBOOK

Old Coach
Posts: 92
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2006 9:23 pm
Location: Marlow

Post by Old Coach » Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:02 pm

Mark R wrote:TWP - 'I have posted a similar request on UKRGB which has been up for an hour with no response so far.'

Ha ha ha - genius.


I posted that because I was amazed there had been no response and was starting to think that noone knew the answer. Perhaps it took a while because I posted on a Saturday when water levels were good.............

Tim

Post Reply

Return to “Whitewater and Touring”