Bitter Bath burger bar boss bashes bike lane

Won't that stop any of his customers from visiting?

And what about the, only important when it comes to cycle lanes, emergency vehicles?

And don't his parking customers intefere with the aforementioned emergency vehicles?

Alf0nse wrote:

His delivery drivers park right out front when he's open. 

Aye, on the zigzags....

eburtthebike wrote:

If I'd spent 39 years building this business and that was all I had to show for it, maybe I'd considering a not-very-well deserved retirement.

Agree.

"We have just come through a pandemic and I have tried my best to adapt by doing deliveries and stuff."

Then you can adapt to this too.

"The consultation is closing on Friday and I think they have been very vague and not consulted business owners."

You're being consulted now in this consultation, idiot.

"Half my customer base will go away and it will decimate my business."

Utter bollocks, a completely made-up 'fact'.

And the cycle lane may seem unnecessary for you but, surprise surprise, it's not all about one sad little junk food shop.

Simon E wrote:

"Half my customer base will go away and it will decimate my business."

Hmmm. If removing 50% of his customers causes a 10% loss of business, he's carrying a lot of non-profitable clients.  This will do him a favour in business efficiency.

GMBasix wrote:

Simon E wrote:

"Half my customer base will go away and it will decimate my business."

Hmmm. If removing 50% of his customers causes a 10% loss of business, he's carrying a lot of non-profitable clients.  This will do him a favour in business efficiency.

Get out of here with your completely correct use of the English language BS ...

mdavidford wrote:

Quote:

people would have to block the road to deliver stuff.

Which they would be doing at the moment anyway - they'll just be blocking a different part of the road.

And of course they don't have to. they choose to. There is nothing that says that they have to be less than 20m from their delivery point.

In any case, it's not his problem - it's his suppliers'. 

Between the Clean Air Zone, proposed cycle lanes (incl blocking a road to cars) and proposed Low Traffic Neighbourhoods the motoring lobby (& some traders) are howling like banshees in Bath, stoked up by the cr#p local news website.  I feel like saying to them, "so your solution is do nothing; more congestion, more pollution, more overweight people etc".  If your not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.

bendertherobot wrote:

So they're replacing the zig zag don't park and double yellow don't park outside his shop with something else that will prevent parking outside his shop?

.... but there are a whole bunch of parking spaces just to the right which are likely to go, and are probably where his customers park and as far as I'm aware, deliveries may be made on double yellows so long as there are no "no-loading" bars present (which I can't see) so a bollarded cycle lane will mean any delivery vehicles will then block the road.  There's also a much quieter road running parallel which would be far more pleasant to cycle on.  

I don't know of any accident statistics on this roadway, and there may be a very good reason for adding cycle infrastructure here for safety reasons, but consideration should always be given to the proposals impact on locals and to ensure it doesn't create other hazards, a 15 day consultation period just smacks of a tick-box exercise by the council to implement a quota without appropriate consideration. 

There is a 1000 space car park (Charlotte Street) 100 meters walk from the takeaway.  Delivery vans and customers can also park in Nile street just around the corner about 40m from the takeaway.

Walk ????

For a burger?

unless his customers have parking permits to park there, they cant, its permit holders only parking, and Im not sure the quieter road is quite the alternative route you think it is.

Im assuming this cycle lane will link up with the bits of infra already on that road

Smiffi wrote:

consideration should always be given to the proposals impact on locals and to ensure it doesn't create other hazards, a 15 day consultation period just smacks of a tick-box exercise by the council to implement a quota without appropriate consideration.

Have you asked any of the locals?

And do you have any evidence of an implementation quota in Bath? Or is this just more of your anti-cycling bollocks?

Simon E wrote:

Smiffi wrote:

consideration should always be given to the proposals impact on locals and to ensure it doesn't create other hazards, a 15 day consultation period just smacks of a tick-box exercise by the council to implement a quota without appropriate consideration.

Have you asked any of the locals?

And do you have any evidence of an implementation quota in Bath? Or is this just more of your anti-cycling bollocks?

No, and no, answers which I suspect are the same for the bulk of people posting here, and precisely why I gave a different perspective to the majority, to balance the argument.  There's a million things we don't know (who the permit spaces are for, perhaps they're for staff at a domestic violence safe house next door, or a nursery, or a disabled veterans centre, all of who MIGHT be severely compromised by the loss of the local spaces, we don't know, but proper consultation would identify these potential needs).  At no point did I say anything about hard facts, I merely postulated some possible alternative reasoning, which is what normal, sensible, respectful humans do, to promote discussion.  Then I get rude replies.

This is a cycling website, and consequently everyone here cycles or has an interest in cycling, and as such many have an agenda which they're only to willing to propagate.  Just because someone suggests that consideration, , communication, evaluation, and consultation takes place does not make them the enemy.  No single demographic should take complete priority at the expense of all others

Smiffi wrote:

....

but consideration should always be given to the proposals impact on locals and to ensure it doesn't create other hazards, ...

Proper cycle infrastructure invariably has a positive impact on local economies

As for other hazards, do you mean things like heart disease, diabetes, bowel cancer, poor circulation, stroke, thrombosis etc?

Or were you thinking more COPD, asthma, lung cancers, croup (in infants), increased incidence of pulmonary and bronchial infections, and abnormal lung development in children?

Captain Badger wrote:

Smiffi wrote:

....

but consideration should always be given to the proposals impact on locals and to ensure it doesn't create other hazards, ...

Proper cycle infrastructure invariably has a positive impact on local economies

As for other hazards, do you mean things like heart disease, diabetes, bowel cancer, poor circulation, stroke, thrombosis etc?

Or were you thinking more COPD, asthma, lung cancers, croup (in infants), increased incidence of pulmonary and bronchial infections, and abnormal lung development in children?

You missed out legal compliance with reducing pollution levels.

hawkinspeter wrote:

......

You missed out legal compliance with reducing pollution levels.

Damn, gets me every time that one.
Even so I think I can be forgiven, seeing as it seems to slip the mind of so many local and national politicians too...

Even the AA don't believe that you should stop on double yellow lines unless you are loading or unloading heavy goods. Believing that you can stop to pick up a takeaway is a willful misinterpretation of the highway code.
https://www.theaa.com/driving-advice/legal/parking-guide-yellow-lines

IanMK wrote:

Even the AA don't believe that you should stop on double yellow lines unless you are loading or unloading heavy goods. Believing that you can stop to pick up a takeaway is a willful misinterpretation of the highway code. https://www.theaa.com/driving-advice/legal/parking-guide-yellow-lines

I didn't suggest that it was his customers who were legitimately stopping on the double yellows.  Read what I said again, "there are a whole bunch of parking spaces just to the right which are likely to go, and are probably where his customers park and as far as I'm aware, deliveries may be made on double yellows so long as there are no "no-loading" bars present (which I can't see)", I suggested his customers parked in the parking bays (which has subsequently been scuppered as they're apparently permit-only bays) and his deliveries could be on the double yellows (as is permitted).

I know this area quite well. It's nothing to do with making cyclists 'safe' or anything 'greener', the powers that be don't like the small family business anymore it crushes their control!!!!!

Smurfette63 wrote:

I know this area quite well. It's nothing to do with making cyclists 'safe' or anything 'greener', the powers that be don't like the small family business anymore it crushes their control!!!!!

Take care, using your local-knowledge could brand you as anti-cycling.

Smiffi wrote:

Smurfette63 wrote:

I know this area quite well. It's nothing to do with making cyclists 'safe' or anything 'greener', the powers that be don't like the small family business anymore it crushes their control!!!!!

Take care, using your local-knowledge could brand you as anti-cycling.

Y'mean like sean1 posted in reply to one of yours earlier....

sean1 wrote:

There is a 1000 space car park (Charlotte Street) 100 meters walk from the takeaway.  Delivery vans and customers can also park in Nile street just around the corner about 40m from the takeaway.

Also the cycle lane will provide a very efficient cycle delivery option along the A4 corridor route.  Something he could take advantage of for local home orders.