Cycling UK wants to hear from clubs affected by council’s absurd Velolife cycle cafe ban

I'm seriously considering arranging to meet someone there, on bicycles, informing the council of my intention, and having the press there to record my subsequent arrest and incarceration for the heinous crime of having organised a cyclists meet.

I'll be starting a crowdfunding page for my defence and subsequent fine; any amount over cost to be donated to a charitable brewery of my choice.

Looks like the Streisand effect is working!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-49317340

I was at Velolife last Friday. The cafe was in full swing, and everyone sounded happy. As a regular there, I have been interested, even anxious about the survival of my favourite stop-off. So I counted the people present who had clearly NOT arrived on bikes, and got to 13 with more outside, perhaps a third of the clientele. For the cafe is used by dog walkers, fitness walkers, and motorists who just stop by. It is always that kind of balance on my experience (I largely visit on a weekday). So I have emailed that prize ass of a planning enforcement officer suggesting that he should try and do his job more thoroughly, and write to every inhabitant of the borough, warning them all from organising to 'meet' in any way at this particular cafe. For all the walkers chat with one another, dogs can bark, and car doors slam.

Years ago, I dined at 'The Snooty Fox'. It was quiet, but the food was good. I was mildly surprised that the owner told us about how he had come to be there: a tale of having co-owned one of the large pub restaurants on the A4, and having been robbed of half a million pounds by his business partner. This somewhat strange anecdote - for it is an odd thing to tell two of your diners - makes me think that the complainant has a long history of grievance-harbouring.

I'm fairly happy to think that Velolife is by now the best publicised cafe in the south of England, and so the complaint, so crassly supported by the council, will have rebounded on the claimant, as users of the cafe, on bikes or not, go on doing what they are entitled to do.

Double post due to timeout issues...

Double post

Seems like I’m causing a few waves. Latest reply...

Dear Sir, 
Thanks for your email.

I have been away most of last week on urgent family business of a highly personal nature. Hence why I needed to get updated on this issue and understand the facts.  I have spoken with Simon today, cutting short my family business, in order to get fully appraised and updated on this situation.  Thus, no management speak but rather I was simply trying to understand how on earth this issue has come about as it does seem rather perplexing and bizarre.  I always pride myself on knowing the full facts, but also acknowledging emails and correspondence quickly, and I will be seeking a full understanding of this situation as I am very concerned.

For the record, I am a big fan and supporter of cycling, and have actually said this many times on the public record over the last few years.  I, like Simon, want this resolved per Simon's social media remarks, and I have asked for the Managing Director to present me with the full facts upon his return to the office, as has Simon as Leader.  I will also be speaking with my Cabinet colleague for Planning, David Coppinger, given this matter falls in his portfolio to express my deep concerns and worries.
Best wishes, 

Stuart

Cllr Stuart Carroll
Boyn Hill Ward, Maidenhead 
Lead Member Adult Social Care, Children Services and Health 
 

Give this councillor his due, I received a reply!

“Dear Sir, 

Thanks for your email. This is an important issue and I know the Leader, Cllr Simon Dudley, is seeking and working hard to find a solution per his social media comments earlier today. I am coordinating with Simon and will work with him on this matter given my Lead Member portfolio.  

Thank you. 

Stuart 

Cllr Stuart Carroll
Boyn Hill Ward, Maidenhead 
Lead Member Adult Social Care, Children Services and Health”

So my reply to all councillors was;

Dear Cllr Carroll

Thank you for taking the time to reply which I wasn’t expecting. I’m glad to see that the management speak course has been attended and passed with flying colours. I suspect that email will be the sum of action taken; you’ve replied, stated ‘just how important an issue’ it is and committed to taking it up with the portfolio holder. 

Remember, my wife serves on a county council and even she was aghast that a letter such as that was sent out to local cycling clubs, so the platitudes are worthless. Accept how wrong it was, on record, correct it and get that officer to make a public apology for trying to bully and threaten decent citizens whilst coming down on the side of a disgruntled, envious resident who simply hates the fact someone has made a successful business in the premises where his failed. You should see through this vexatious complaint and treat it for what it is; baseless. Just exactly how much noise do you think a bunch of middle aged cyclists (which I bet is the majority) actually make DURING DAYLIGHT HOURS compared to lawnmowers and power tools and cars and trucks. Unbelievable.

I would expect the Lead Member for Health to be strongly defending the rights of cyclists and indeed encouraging such activity as it has been shown again and again in government surveys to be, alongside walking, the easiest form of exercise for non-sporting members of the public to partake in. Motorised vehicles are killing us and the obesity epidemic is costing all tax payers increasingly unsustainable sums and drowning the NHS. 

You should be ashamed of yourself if you are not vehemently defending this cafe owner and encouraging more cycling. Did the Portfolio Holder ever consider that simply asking everyone who congregates at the cafe to simply ‘keep it down’, if indeed there is actually a problem? I suspect that balance hasn’t come into it at any stage - no matter what ‘enforcement’ you take the complainant won’t be happy until the business is shut down and he smugly laughs at having completely hoodwinked your council.

Sincerely

Peter Smith

I suspect if plenty of cyclists engage them in a similar way it will really push it up the agenda and something WILL be done. That’s how the political game works.

I've visited Velolife twice this week and I'm really sad to say that this whole sorry debacle has taken the shine off it for me. It used to be a wonderful, relaxing destination with a great atmosphere, but now I feel on edge there, worried that I might be doing something wrong or upsetting someone.
The staff are still great and the coffee is still great but its not the same for me. And that sucks.
Really hope this all blows over soon and I can go for a bike ride, stop for a coffee and enjoy it again.

I’ve written to all the elected councillors. If you fancy doing the same, here are their email addresses;

cllr.baldwin [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllr.baskerville [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllr.bateson [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllr.bhangra [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllr.bond [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllr.bowden [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllr.brar [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllr.delcampo [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllr.cannon [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllr.carroll [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllr.clark [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllr.coppinger [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllr.c.dacosta [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllr.dacosta [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllr.Davey [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllr.davies [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllr.dudley [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllr.haseler [at] rbwm.gov.uk, Cllr.Hill [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllr.hilton [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllr.hunt [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllr.johnson [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllr.jones [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllr.knowles [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllr.larcombe [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllr.luxton [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllr.mcwilliams [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllr.muir [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllr.Price [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllrS.rayner [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllr.reynolds [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllr.sharpe [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllr.shelim [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllr.singh [at] rbwm.gov.uk, Cllr.Stimson [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllr.story [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllr.targowski [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllr.taylor [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllr.tisi [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllr.walters [at] rbwm.gov.uk, cllr.werner [at] rbwm.gov.uk

This is my rather long winded letter!

Dear sirs and madams
I refer to this letter sent to a several local cycling clubs by Arron Hitchen
Senior Planning Enforcement Officer; 

https://road.cc/sites/default/files/letter%20to%20cycle%20club%20Windsor...

What on earth are the council thinking trying to ban cyclists from meeting in a cafe? Just listen to yourselves - trying to ban a group of cyclists from gathering, meeting, riding from or to, or stopping at local cafe? Has your council gone mad?

Apart from the fact that individuals who have nothing to do with the ownership of land cannot be in breech of planning rules, how on earth do you think this could be enforced? How will you prove in a court of law that any of said cyclists had actually organised a ‘meet’ of some kind? Would you seriously consider spending tax payers money on pursuing such a claim? And what if one cyclist just happened to turn up at the cafe and someone he knew from his cycling club happened to be there? Would you pursue that folly in court too? What happens if they all dismount 50yds from the cafe and walk? They then become pedestrians. How would you deal with that?

Just what exactly is the council policy on bullying? I assume there is one? Because that letter is not just heavy handed, completely unenforceable in law but also quite inappropriate in its bullying, threatening tone. Are you councillors all happy having your names associated with it, or will at least one of you rein in this out of control nonsense? 

It just shows the ignorance of the writer because this letter is likely to have the exact opposite effect - this story has hit the national cycling press - it will encourage more cyclists to visit Velolife in support of this worthy little business which has turned around a failed pub and will no doubt be paying significant business rates and taxes into your local economy. As I understand it the nimbyism has come from the former pub owner who lives behind the premises with the shared access. You couldn’t make it up - a former pub landlord complaining about noise during the day on the site of his former pub!

And besides, did ANY of the elected councillors actually bother to visit the premises to ascertain the validity of the complaint that has lead to this heavy handed approach? And did they seriously think that an ill informed legal approach through planning law would be an appropriate way to respond? Are you happy with this statement “The Council are currently investigating the position with regard to criminal offences.” Seriously? Criminal offences, what like talking, laughing and joking on a Sunday morning before having a coffee and a slice of cake?

Your council is the laughing stock of the cycling community. Don’t think that is very many people? Just a fringe group who wear Lycra and can’t afford cars? 5.3 million people aged over 16 cycle at least once a week. Check for yourself https://www.cyclinguk.org/statistics

I can only assume that for equality you will be sending ‘enforcement notices’ to all residents who have kids who play out in the street making noise during the day as well, and all lawn mower owners, and car drivers who have the audacity to use their noisy cars on the road disturbing the peace, and every business that involves using power tools in public places because it would be completely unreasonable for them to be used DURING THE DAY.

Your council has hit the headlines and the back tracking and over explaining via ‘clarifications’ on twitter and the like is making a laughing stock of your elected representatives. Get a grip - you can’t send threatening letters like this to law abiding citizens and residents based on dubious legal grounds yet say that cyclists can still visit the cafe. Do what you are elected to do and take control of these planning officers who obviously have a hatred of cyclists and have pandered to a nimby resident.

Invest your efforts in tackling the real problems and troublemakers amongst your community. You should be encouraging cycling as it is the ‘golden nugget’ in terms of healthy living, sustainable transport and environmental saviour.

Yours sincerely

Peter Smith
British Cycling Coach and husband of former Mayor and now Cycling and Walking Champion of our council.
 

David, All of the bike parking is on the other side of the "smoking shelter" and there is plenty of it, signs up requesting no bikes beyond the pike parking, and to keep the noise down and respect the neighbours, then the drive to the private property, with signs saying no bikes, with the entrance to the cafe there, workshop entrance on the long road side of the "pub" I suppose.  Car parking on the road side, around bike park and "smoking shelter" (and bins).  The bike parking is sort of long metal poles, supported by metal A frames, You are meant to hang your saddle over the long poles, I locked up my bike to one of the A frames, as I am very paranoid.

There were lots of old issues of "Cycling" magazines, and plenty of cycling books if you fancy reading if you arrive on your own.  Friendly staff.

On a visit to my in laws, I drove past Velolife.  A car park full of motor vehicles, a big sign up on what I think might have been the former pub smoking shelter saying “no bikes”.

Thanks for attaching the letter to 700CC.

Are  “cyclists’ meets” actually a thing, in a legal sense? You have a hospitality business of any sort, you attract people to it, and around it.  As has probably been said, The cafe doesn’t itself organise meets, but it permits, or suffers some to happen.

Anyway, absolutely staggering.  Under the Act, only persons owning or controlling the land in question are guilty of an offence if a breach of the Enforcement Notice continues.

I presume the injunction is what the court proceedings in November are about? Great to see CUK have now weighed in to this. 

the Town & Country Planning Act 1990:

F1 179 Offence where enforcement notice not complied with.

(1)Where, at any time after the end of the period for compliance with an enforcement notice, any step required by the notice to be taken has not been taken or any activity required by the notice to cease is being carried on, the person who is then the owner of the land is in breach of the notice.

(2)Where the owner of the land is in breach of an enforcement notice he shall be guilty of an offence.

(3)In proceedings against any person for an offence under subsection (2), it shall be a defence for him to show that he did everything he could be expected to do to secure compliance with the notice.

(4)A person who has control of or an interest in the land to which an enforcement notice relates (other than the owner) must not carry on any activity which is required by the notice to cease or cause or permit such an activity to be carried on.

(5)A person who, at any time after the end of the period for compliance with the notice, contravenes subsection (4) shall be guilty of an offence.

I don't get this ban at all.  Is this correct they banned people from this cafe, because a few squeeky wheels complained (pun intended)?  They should have just banned cycling (sarcasm).  It's unenforceable.   In the states where I'm from I think we have the freedom of assembly. 

With my full support against the ban,

David 

Seattle

This whole sorry episode is unfuckingbelievable and I look forward to Cycling UK and Mr Boardman ripping you a new arsehole.

Councillors taking a position in opposition to cyclists

No contest

Poor, dimwitted council versus super intelligent, resourceful cyclists

Only one winner in the end

Is this real? I cant believe a council would waste any time or money on something like this when they should be looking after the welfare of their citizens (and the people that pay them tax).

Thank you for that well reasoned legal point  of view there Jezonabike.  It would be a shame if Arron Hitchen was seen to be overreaching his powers and position and were to lose his job.

And that various councillers were abusing their own positions.

Look, if you want to get at cyclists just run them over in your expensive, over powerful, and over weight motor vehicles.  Make sure you kill them and have no independent (Non cycling) witnesses.  Do not, whatever you do, drive away.  Maintain that you didn't see them, no matter what. Sun in your eyes, A-pillar, bushes (Mirrors?) whatever.  They might try and do you for Death by Dangerous, but stick to your guns, it will be dropped to Death by Careless and the fellow car driving jury might let you off that anyway.  Suspended sentence, a few hours unpaid work and a small fine are the most you can expect.  Even taking away your licence, no biggy, keep driving and save on the insurance.  No traffic police to catch you, and in the incredibly unlikely event that you are caught, they will just add a few months to your unenforceable ban.

But whatever you do, don't start this shitstorm, massively increasing the popularity of said cycle cafe, exposing your wanton abuse of power and having your best laid (though utterly incompetent) plans come to naught.

I must admit I am rather enjoying this evolving tale, and the cycle cafe, which I would never have known about, let alone visited, without this ever continuing story.

I'm a solicitor and worked at a local council.  This is an astonishing, bullying and quite improper letter from the Council:

Planning matters are for the owner or occupier - they are nothing to do with the general public or users of land at large.

If you read the letter carefully, the Council actually quote the relevant law, they note that "other than the owner" an enforcement notice only applies to people who have "control of or an interest in the land".

It must be clear to the Council that this cycling club is not the owner of the land nor do they have control over the land or any legal interest in it.  Therefore, as the Council full well know, this enforcement notice does not apply to the cycling club.

Against this legal background, it is absolutely wrong for the Council to be sending official letters, saying that they are "currently investigating the position with regard to criminal offences", referring to "ongoing investigations", "unlawful activity" and "taking any action against your club" if "evidence is gathered".  

The Council's threat that "you may be added to the Court application as a named defendant" is absurd: the Council could try to add whoever they like as a defendant, but unless that person owns, controls or has an interest in the site, then such 'defendant' would have no case to answer and the claim would be stuck out.

There is simply no legal basis for the Council to suggest that they could take any action against this cycling club.  It is an abuse of the Council's powers for them to be writing letters like this.

Can cyclists meet there if they arrive in their cars?