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.
- News

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 £1.99. 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
@mdavidford I can see how it confused you when I pointed to the reviewer at the bottom. but hey if you cant read an entire comment before getting all keyboard warrior blah, kind of like you usually do that not my fault. I should have guessed the first person to reply to a comment would be you, you cant help yourself.
@chrisonabike It never ceases to amaze me how drivers consider public land to be their private parking spaces.
Erm - it has - as per the item above: (Technically, a 'budget cap' and a 'team salary cap' aren't quite the same thing, but given how much of the costs are paying riders, it would have a similar effect.)
A lot of pro sports leagues have team salary caps. Curious that hasn't been mooted. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salary_cap
Well your original comment did rather suggest that was your understanding. The bit 'critiquing' the pros and cons was sandwiched in the middle of railing against the makers. And the amount of ill-thought-out tripe that gets posted under some of these reviews, it wouldn't surprise me at all if someone thought the manufacturer provided the pros and cons.
JB may not bé Mr Nice but in this case he's 100% right. I thought when Lappartient was elected he knew sod all about pro cycling and his real ambitions were related to running thé Olympics.
@mdavidford Well duh, is a manufacturer going to put negative comments on their own products? did you really just try to explain that?
Surely Fred Wright's going to win a race in his career that isn't the national champs. He's been close so many times now.
Awful human slags off Machiavellian politician -shock horror.
The pros and cons come from the reviewer, not the manufacturer. And they do explain in the review why they think the lack of MIPS could be viewed as either/both a positive or a negative. Less so with the shape, but it's easy to see how that could be considered a good or a bad thing, depending on whether it suits your head shape. If anything, it's a deficiency of the review template - that it doesn't have a section for something like 'other considerations' that aren't pros or cons.