It's a thread asking people to lay out proposals for how to arrange use
of the new space. Specifically that! How are we supposed to do that
without mentioning or discussing those ideas?
I don't normally rage, but I'm getting kinda tired of any ideas
discussion being automatically and immediately met with cries of
"bikeshedding" because it adds an extra couple of emails for
disinterested parties to scroll past.
And while I'm aware of the irony, people don't get to cite Godwins law
when actually talking about World War 2, so you don't get to cry
"bikeshedding" when people are actually talking about parking arrangements.
I concede that parking layout is the most flexible of all our planning
options in that it requires little or no construction or demolition. But
it was raised, it's what people are apt to discuss particularly in the
light of how poor our current parking situation is. People want this to
be better from the start.
In short, I agree with Nigel saying bikes should go in that corner, and
I suggested some additional reasons it seemed a good idea. I mentioned
this in reply to motorbike parking since the same criteria apply.
The curtains were mentioned as an alternative to partition walling
mentioned in an earlier thread, and brought up as they would surround
the direct access to that bike area. This seemed an easier, more
flexible option that might not require planning consent & still keep
heat in. Not domestic curtains and not faffing over decoration.
The correct reply is to point out what you think is wrong with the idea,
or provide better ideas. No one is arguing the colour of anything of
clawing onto other minute details. There's no bikeshedding here. :P