Bristol cyclists are being urged to attend a public meeting on Wednesday (8 October) to influence the spending of funds intended to develop cycling in the city before the end of 2010. Back in June, Bristol was named as Britain’s first ‘cycling city’ and was awarded £11.4m in the government’s programme to encourage cycling. With Bristol City Council and South Gloucestershire Council matching that figure, the total amount in the kitty for the Cycling City Plan is £22.8m. But Josh Hart of On the Level: Car Free Blog claims there has been inadequate consultation with the public on how the money will be spent and believes there are major flaws in the existing plans. These include the omission of a bicycle expressway across the M32 motorway, 20mph speed limits, and adequate on-road cycle lanes. “This is an incredible opportunity to develop a high quality cycle expressway network in Bristol,” says Josh. “Yet we could end up seeing the money spent on more of the same: inadequate cycle lanes – often in the dangerous ‘door zone’ – that end just when you need them the most, ill-thought-out facilities that don’t join up and abandon cyclists at junctions, and underwriting the payrolls of existing city council staff and large charities.” He is urging cyclists to attend a meeting to be held on Wednesday by the Cycling City stakeholder group – which includes representatives from Rolls Royce, University of West of England, Bristol Cycling Campaign and Cyclists’ Touring Club (CTC) – although the councils are keen to get more non-cyclists involved. The meeting takes place from 6:30-8pm on Wednesday at Fairfield High School in Horfield.
Cycling City riders urged to speak up
Help us to bring you the best cycling content
If you’ve enjoyed this article, then please consider subscribing to road.cc from as little as £2.49. Our mission is to bring you all the news that’s relevant to you as a cyclist, independent reviews, impartial buying advice and more. Your subscription will help us to do more.
No Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
I see quite a few MAAP items out in the Surrey Hills. The new shop has a cafe and they're from Melbourne so the coffee should be good: I'm looking forward to visiting.
@chrisonabike Mercedes was acceptable, but the second one (old Toyota people carrier/ex-taxi) was a prosecutable offence.
I wasn't saying that nor talking about people who say that. I said it was silly to claim that wearing a helmet indicates acceptance of dangerous driving and poor infrastructure. I choose to wear a helmet; I also regularly report dangerous driving to the police and correspond with councils and road authorities about ways infrastructure could be improved for cyclists. I rather doubt I'm the only helmet wearer who does so.
@JamieT (a pedant writes) she's a London Assembly member, not an MP.
@Rendel Harris ".....but the claim that wearing one is somehow to be accepting dangerous driving and poor infrastructure is silly." Not that silly. Demanding that cyclists wear a helmet is seen by many people as 'the answer' to cycling safety, so there's no need to put in infrastructure. The difference between infrastructure and helmets is that infrastructure works. Helmets are a distraction from what really works, and the more time we spend talking about them, the less time we spend on things that do work. Helmets should be consigned to the dustbin of history as a failed experiment, and we should cease even mentioning them.
@Mr Blackbird Hats off to George Hall My hat's not coming off- despite this touch of cycleway-washing, Hall still bears the Mark of Cain, until he repudiates his party altogether
Perhaps an article showing a) what is available in the uk as cargo bikes and) comments from real life scenarios from those already using bikes or cargo bikes as one gentleman has done in the comments. Perhaps road.cc could follow up with this. Even the London Assembly member said not every business should use cargo bikes but suggested a more nuanced approach suitable for certain trades or companies....