Bristol – or at least a very small slice of it – now resembles Copenhagen, thanks to the installation of new support rails for cyclists, a first for the city, which will enable people on bikes to rest their hands and feet without getting out of the pedals while waiting at traffic lights on two steep city centre hills.
And which, unsurprisingly, have already been branded a “complete waste of taxes” by angry motorists.
The leaning rails, or foot and hand rests, have been installed near the top of both Colston Street and Upper Maudlin Street, where a new segregated cycle lane was recently opened (despite a few early, parked car-related hiccups), as one of the finishing touches to a long-running active travel scheme.
That scheme has led to Colston Street becoming one-way for motorists, while a protected bike path has been installed for cyclists heading up the hill towards the hospitals. Park Road and Upper Maudlin Street are also home to new cycle lanes, and better crossing points for pedestrians have been implemented.
Cycling-specific traffic lights have also been installed at the top of Colston Street for those using the cycle lane, with this week seeing the unveiling of the new metal railing they can now rest upon while waiting.
The railings, popular in Copenhagen and in other cities across Europe, feature two horizontal metal bars, one at arm height and the other conveniently positioned to act as a footrest, and allow cyclists to remain in the saddle while waiting for the traffic lights to change.
While any fixie rider who has perfected the art of the track stand may shrug their shoulders – hopefully without tipping over – these railings provide a welcome resting point for cyclists who would otherwise have to hold onto a friendly lamp-post, assuming there was one within reach, or plant one or both feet on the ground, leading to a difficult restart when the lights turn green on steep gradients such as those found on Colston Street and Upper Maudlin Street.
> Danish design helps Copenhagen’s cyclists rest their arms and feet. But would they work here?
However, despite their obvious benefits, it seems the new railings haven’t gone down too well with some of Bristol’s residents on social media, many of whom prefaced their complaints with the well-worn ‘I’m a cyclist, but’ trope.
“I’m a cyclist. This is a ridiculous use of taxes,” wrote Louis Jones on Instagram, while Paul Evans described the railings as “more money pissed up the wall”.
“I’m a cyclist and I had to check the date to see if it’s an April 1st,” added Pedro.
“I am cyclist and a car driver,” noted Richard on Facebook. “I think this is unnecessary money badly being spent. Council tax going up by five per cent, this is totally wrong.”
“Another pathetic waste of our taxpayers’ money,” concurred Noddy. “Two feet on the ground and a hand on the handlebars, it’s easy really.”
“Can’t get my recycling picked up, but thank God I can keep my feet on my pedals waiting for a light now,” wrote Jake.
“What problem does this solve?” asked Leon, while Suzie wrote: “Solving a problem that doesn’t exist with a solution nobody needs, wants or asked for. Absolutely genius.”
“What a waste of money, I’ve never seen a cyclist stopped at red lights!” Gingle (rather unoriginally) noted, while Elizabeth asked: “Surely it’s easy to put your foot down?”
Even those who cycle on Colston Street aren’t convinced that the new railings will have a substantial impact on their Bristol commute.
“Not sure why we need these and unfortunately it’s just adding to the hate being poured onto cyclists at the moment,” said Fiona.
“Waste of council tax, and this is coming from a cyclist,” added Mark. “It might be at least somewhat justifiable or useful if that was a busy road/junction which saw a lot of cyclists, but I ride up this road and across this junction at peak times, and I’m usually the only bike there.
“It is just going to stir up further anti-cyclist sentiment from some of the city’s less tolerant drivers.”
However, Sarah replied: “It won’t be out of council tax money though, they get funds for increasing active transport.
“I’m dubious about it too, but only in the sense that there is a lot of European cycling infrastructure that would be more useful to us than this, but at least they are trying. Sort of…”
“Commonplace in Copenhagen so the Danish seem to think that they are worthwhile,” noted Nigel. “Undecided, myself. Will have to try one when I see one, but I’m sure that there are more pressing priorities to spend the very limited active travel funding on.”
And Jutta concluded: “Without better infrastructure, the handrail is just a gimmick.”
Nevertheless, despite some grumbling about Bristol’s active travel priorities, many cyclists have welcomed the Danish invention to the city.
“It looks like a helpful aid as there’s a gradient – but you don’t have to use it. I assume the idea came from cyclists and was listened to,” wrote Ken.
“I’ve used it in the last few days, it’s great! And the lights change almost as soon as I rest on it,” pointed out Craig, while Mike said the bike rest “beats trying to do a track stand at the lights”.
Meanwhile, the Bristol Cycling charity praised the new infrastructure, claiming it is indicative of the city’s “cycling ambition” finally moving to “Copenhagen scale”.
“This is brilliant, it’s the future!” one cyclist told Bristol24/7 as he used the railing on Colston Street this week.
“Now we just need the council to council to collect our bins on time!”
And, finally, Mari said: “What I really appreciate is that they have finally resurfaced this road including the cycle lane.
“Before they had missed the cycle lane and it was a minefield of potholes. Now we even get to lean on something at the top! Do we finally exist?!”
> Bollards installed on new cycle lane outside hospital after drivers immediately block it
The social media debate swirling around the new railings isn’t the only minor furore that has engulfed Bristol’s new cycling infrastructure over the past month.
At the end of March, we reported that Bristol City Council was forced to act quickly to place bollards on the Upper Maudlin Street cycle lane, after the newly installed cycling infrastructure was immediately blocked by drivers’ parked vehicles.
Local cyclists had complained that the new painted cycle lane was soon completely unusable due to the number of parked vehicles in it outside Bristol Royal Infirmary, prompting the local authority’s swift response.
19 thoughts on ““More money p***ed up the wall”: Drivers fume at Bristol’s new ‘leaning support rail’ for cyclists to rest at top of steep city streets”
What about the disabled,
What about the disabled, elderly and ambulances I say!
I’m a cyclist but… This
I’m a cyclist but… This does look like a poor use of scarce money. Like the Facebook gammons, I really would rather they had fixed some potholes instead.
Dnnnnnn wrote:
I kind of agree with that too, though the cost is probably not even a blip compared to their other costs. What would be interesting is comparing the cost of one of those with the cost of fixing (temporarily) a pothole.
And if the money spent was
And if the money spent was specifically earmarked for active travel I would rather an extra metre of segregated cycle lane somewhere else.
It might have stretched to
It might have stretched to that metre, and I suspect it was only available for active travel capital projects – but the general public just see potholes, proposals to cut black bin collections to monthly, council tax increases and wonder how on earth this sort of thing can be prioritised.
TBF currently almost anything
TBF currently almost anything that isn’t the things you mention will get a WTF from most. Exponentially more so if it also impinges on their driving “rights”.
Folks like Chris Boardman have shown ways to work round some of these blockers (mostly “for children” – though even that doesn’t always move people!)
Rantyhighwayman says
Rantyhighwayman says
“I installed the first one of these in England Glasgow was first in the UK). The cost is obviously peanuts compared to all of the stuff installed to control and manage people driving. A little gimmicky? Perhaps, but it’s nice to be able to either put a foot on it or hold on.”
Needs a plaque: “If you don’t
Needs a plaque: “If you don’t see the point: raise your saddle.”
I know this is road.cc, but
I know this is road.cc, but other bike types exist. I couldn’t comfortably touch the floor while on the saddle of my road bike, but could on my folder and cargo bike.
Agreed. Usable by many, but
Agreed. A minor convenience to some (but not much use if I was on the recumbent).
A lmost certainly not a very good return on the money.
But again … England seems only to be able to get intermittent “souvenir-level” cycling funding…
Scotland did have a commitment to a sensible … we never reached it. And that went out with the Greens and will likely disappear in the arms budget / cost of cleaning up after Trump. And perhaps will never be again if the US stays convinced it wasn’t winning hard enough.
I am disappointed, on
I am disappointed, on returning from 4 days cycling up to Carlisle and back, to see the lack of acclaim for councils trying, small step by small step, to do the right thing for cyclists. Well done Bristol- keep going despite the whingeing from car-brains who are only too pleased to accept the billions of tax cuts, in the form of a lamentable failure to keep jacking up the price of petrol. Bring back the Fuel Price Escalator! Squeeze the b******s!!
This highlights how generally
This highlights how generally awful public bodies are at engaging with the public with regard to everything they do. I work for one by the way – which is similarly awful. So much could be achieved by engaging properly to not only develop what people need/want but then get advocates in the community for good work. You might say that is the job of councillors but while they are still basically volunteers, that will not happen (unless you are lucky and have a good one). So in the meantime, endless uninformed debates in crap press and social media will prevail! 🤷🏻♂️
Hmm… I’m sure “more could
Hmm… I’m sure “more could be done” but there are two parties here. It seems hard to reach people with “council information”. Particularly with “boring” infra stuff they probably don’t care about. (Or perhaps – don’t want to hear? )
Then – despite letters being sent out, posters going up, presumably social media postings – a few days before (or sometimes after) changes occurring a small but significant and very noisy group always appears shouting “first we’ve heard of this” and “no consultation”!
There’s likely a vicious circle here leading to less engagement and communication. People don’t trust the local authority (“they never listen” – and some of the complaints are valid, with occasional outright crooked dealings by those in power). They may also filter out “noise” coming from them. And perhaps in return the LAs aren’t strongly motivated to do more than the legal minimums, given that when they did it properly they still got “you never told me”.
And possibly because whatever the change they’ll get abuse from someone? Extending to possibly death threats when it comes to street design and rule changes.
I tried the footrest on the
I tried the footrest on the way home, it’s a great idea, you can keep on the saddle making it easier to get away from the traffic lights, and being in the more upright position makes you more visible to others.
The truth is, if we can
The truth is, if we can improve public health (physical and mental) then councils can save millions on the real money pit – adult social care. The cost of active travel infrastructure is trivial by comparison.
The other truth is (to misquote) if some people can’t imagine this working it is not evidence that it won’t work it’s only evidence of their lack of imagination.
My wife & I visited Bristol
My wife & I visited Bristol for the 1st time a couple of weeks ago, I was amazed at the congestion caused by the number of single occupancy cars that drove past the Park and Ride we used. Locals need to get a new mind set before it becomes a toxic area due to the emissions from the number of stationary cars.
Seems like a poor use of
Seems like a poor use of money, and promotes the “cycling needs special costly infrastructure just coz there’s a hill” brigade, rather than getting it where it needs to be – just a normal way of getting around, no drama required.
It looks as if this article
It looks as if this article has been written by a dyed in the wool petrolhead. Why does he give so much coverage to the views of motorists?. The press never seem to seek the views of cylists when road works likely to benefit motorists come into use.
Rory26 wrote:
By my reckoning there are eight comments from cyclists who don’t think it’s necessary, five comments from cyclists who think it’s good, four comments from cyclists who are undecided and six comments from people who are not identified as cyclists or motorists. Even if you assume that all unidentified persons are non-cycling motorists that still doesn’t seem like an excessive amount of coverage of their views.