Council slam water park triathlon

Competitors who took part in the Cotswold 226 triathlon (9609080)

Competitors who took part in the Cotswold 226 triathlon (9609080)

First published in News
Last updated
by

COUNCILLORS from South Cerney Parish Council are demanding that they have more involvement in the organising of a triathlon following fears over safety, noise and traffic.

In the Cotswold 226 on August 10 competitors completed a cycle and swim in the Cotswold Water Park and then finished with a 26.2 looped run into South Cerney.

Race organiser Graeme Hardie said that he would like the triathlon to finish in South Cerney next year.

At the parish council meeting on August 13, councillors discussed the event and were not welcome to Mr Hardie's idea unless the event is better organised.

Councillors said they were disappointed that the event was organised with permission of the district council and county council and not the parish council.

Philip Nicholas said that not enough safety measures were put in place to protect runners.

He said: “There was runners running across the Spine Road in a zombie like state. It is extremely perturbing to see them running across the road as I only spotted on steward looking out for traffic.”

Mike Stuart, chairman of the council explained the council received complaints about traffic congestion and noise disturbance related to the race.

He said: “I have received three emails from Jo Aldridge at the United Church saying that a service there at six o'clock was virtually disrupted by noise from the tannoy system. She said if we knew this was going to happen we would have postponed or cancelled the service and that if we knew in future that would be good.”

James Harris explained he was concerned that Mr Hardie asked youngsters to steward the race but did not provide them with high visibility vests.

He added: “People travel from all over the country and we owe it to them as much as us to ensure it is a safe event. We are not killjoys, we just care about the safety of competitors.”

Peter Jay said he would not be happy if such a such a badly organised event happened in the village next year.

Comments (1)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:13pm Tue 26 Aug 14

graeme4130 says...

As the organiser of this event, I feel that we've been unfairly represented in this article.

Since the race, we have debriefed with the Police, who we employed on the day to provide the road crossings and safety on the course, and they are very happy with the way the event was executed.

As follows is an open letter to Mr Peter Nicholas, of South Cerney Parish Council, who we'd been communicating with in the run up to the event - This email was sent last night ;
--------------------
--------------------
--------------------
----------

Hi Peter
Following on from your last communication, I'm keen to come and debrief with yourselves and hear your ideas and issues about the event

I've had the newspaper article (http://www.wiltsglo
sstandard.co.uk/news
/cotswolds/11428755.
Council_slam_water_p
ark_triathlon/) brought to my attention, and feel that the Gloucester standard has perhaps produced a rather unfair report of the event, but having worked with newspapers in the past, I'm only too aware of how they sometimes choose to deliver 'news'
Firstly, I think the article contains some inaccuracies. Mainly concerning safety, where the two crossings of the spine road that were made by the runners, where both manned with marshals wearing high visibility clothing, and also both crossings had police cars with the lights on to provide traffic visibility, and also police officers at both junction stopping traffic. Also, all marshals for the event (we had 184 marshals in total for both bike and run, which is 3 or 4 times higher than comparable events of the same distance and significantly exceeds any outlines issued by both police and triathlon and running governing bodies) where issued with high vis and reflective clothing. We did have 'youngsters stewarding' on the course, but they were not in any way responsible positions, and we only have children along as parts of families to try and promote family activities and giving supporting families a chance to be part of a fun event.
I also feel, that although, we of course, were responsible for traffic build at times, a large part of this issue must be levelled at the emergency road works that were placed on station road in the days leading up the event which had traffic lights stopping cars from making progress and clearing space on the road leading from the Eliot Arms.
I feel that the paper has tried to put a negative slant on to the story, and even the picture they have used appears to have been chosen due to the nature of the runner - for info, the runner in question, has used these events in fancy dress to raise several thousand pounds for FABLE, the epilepsy charity, as his young son suffers from the illness and we support him in any way we can to aid his promotion of his fundraising.

This race was always intended to be something that South Cerney welcome in and brings tourism pennies to the local traders, not something that anyone feels is in the way or is a nuisance.
We're absolutely committed to making this race the best for everyone, including yourselves as residents of the host town, so I'd very much welcome a chance to come down and discuss with you all how we can look to run it next year in a manner that keeps everyone happy and works for all.

As I've discussed in my meetings previously with Katharine and Mike, we're not a large profit making organisation, but a small group trying to make fun and friendly races that welcome in competitors, and that local communities embrace. Cotswold226 is not any bodies job, so no one has an eye on cutting corners to maximise expenditure, and if there's things that were lacking in this years event, then we'll most certainly address them for next year and provide whatever needs to be provided.

We're truly sorry for the disturbance at the parish church, and we've apologies directly to the people concerned. We had, in the days running up the event, knocked on every door on the direct run course, and explained what the race was and that it was going to be running on the 10th of August as well as leaving an info pack and some supporter information. I'm not sure how, but the church may have been missed

Please let me know when we can discuss and I'll make sure I can be free

Regards

Graeme
As the organiser of this event, I feel that we've been unfairly represented in this article. Since the race, we have debriefed with the Police, who we employed on the day to provide the road crossings and safety on the course, and they are very happy with the way the event was executed. As follows is an open letter to Mr Peter Nicholas, of South Cerney Parish Council, who we'd been communicating with in the run up to the event - This email was sent last night ; -------------------- -------------------- -------------------- ---------- Hi Peter Following on from your last communication, I'm keen to come and debrief with yourselves and hear your ideas and issues about the event I've had the newspaper article (http://www.wiltsglo sstandard.co.uk/news /cotswolds/11428755. Council_slam_water_p ark_triathlon/) brought to my attention, and feel that the Gloucester standard has perhaps produced a rather unfair report of the event, but having worked with newspapers in the past, I'm only too aware of how they sometimes choose to deliver 'news' Firstly, I think the article contains some inaccuracies. Mainly concerning safety, where the two crossings of the spine road that were made by the runners, where both manned with marshals wearing high visibility clothing, and also both crossings had police cars with the lights on to provide traffic visibility, and also police officers at both junction stopping traffic. Also, all marshals for the event (we had 184 marshals in total for both bike and run, which is 3 or 4 times higher than comparable events of the same distance and significantly exceeds any outlines issued by both police and triathlon and running governing bodies) where issued with high vis and reflective clothing. We did have 'youngsters stewarding' on the course, but they were not in any way responsible positions, and we only have children along as parts of families to try and promote family activities and giving supporting families a chance to be part of a fun event. I also feel, that although, we of course, were responsible for traffic build at times, a large part of this issue must be levelled at the emergency road works that were placed on station road in the days leading up the event which had traffic lights stopping cars from making progress and clearing space on the road leading from the Eliot Arms. I feel that the paper has tried to put a negative slant on to the story, and even the picture they have used appears to have been chosen due to the nature of the runner - for info, the runner in question, has used these events in fancy dress to raise several thousand pounds for FABLE, the epilepsy charity, as his young son suffers from the illness and we support him in any way we can to aid his promotion of his fundraising. This race was always intended to be something that South Cerney welcome in and brings tourism pennies to the local traders, not something that anyone feels is in the way or is a nuisance. We're absolutely committed to making this race the best for everyone, including yourselves as residents of the host town, so I'd very much welcome a chance to come down and discuss with you all how we can look to run it next year in a manner that keeps everyone happy and works for all. As I've discussed in my meetings previously with Katharine and Mike, we're not a large profit making organisation, but a small group trying to make fun and friendly races that welcome in competitors, and that local communities embrace. Cotswold226 is not any bodies job, so no one has an eye on cutting corners to maximise expenditure, and if there's things that were lacking in this years event, then we'll most certainly address them for next year and provide whatever needs to be provided. We're truly sorry for the disturbance at the parish church, and we've apologies directly to the people concerned. We had, in the days running up the event, knocked on every door on the direct run course, and explained what the race was and that it was going to be running on the 10th of August as well as leaving an info pack and some supporter information. I'm not sure how, but the church may have been missed Please let me know when we can discuss and I'll make sure I can be free Regards Graeme graeme4130
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree