Despite plans being approved for a new multi-storey cycle hub near Bristol’s Temple Meads station, cyclists have been told that they could be temporarily prevented from storing their bikes at the facility, for up to two or three years, due to safety concerns about the narrow shared pavement leading to the station.
A a new, safer alternative to the current shared pedestrian and cycle path, located next to the busy Bath Road and branded “absolutely horrendous” by local politicians, has long been earmarked and could involve the creation of an active travel-only bridge.
However, the delays in securing this infrastructure – the proposed bridge, if approved, is unlikely to be completed for at least four years – have prompted councillors to call for one of the lanes on Bath Road currently allocated for motorists to be temporarily removed, allowing cyclists to access the bike hub.
Meanwhile, plans to charge cyclists for using the cycle parking hub have also come in for criticism, with one local Labour councillor asking: “Are we going to be known as the country that charges for cycle parking?”

Approved unanimously on Wednesday by Bristol City Council, the Southern Gateway “multi-modal transport hub” will be built at the bottom of Bath Road and feature a seven-storey car park with 379 spaces along with a three-storey cycle hub, which will have space for 538 bikes and enable cyclists to securely park their bikes while using the nearby Temple Meads train station.
The project marks the first of several planning applications from the Temple Quarter company, a new collaborative organisation consisting of the council, the West of England Combined Authority, Network Rail, and Homes England, and focused on regenerating the area.
“This is the first critical piece of the jigsaw, delivering on proposals long set out,” Nick Finney, planning manager at Bristol Temple Quarter, said this week, BristolLive reports.
“We have worked closely in partnership with Network Rail on this scheme and this is one of a number of upcoming station improvement projects that will deliver a step-change in accessing facilities at the station.”
However, members of the council’s transport department have raised concerns that the Southern Gateway, and the prospect of more cyclists parking their bikes before using the train, could lead to greater numbers of people cycling and walking along the narrow ‘shared path’ on Bath Road.
Council staff have claimed that the additional trips generated by the proposed cycle hub could lead a greater risk of someone “being seriously injured or killed”.
While a new protected cycle lane will be built outside the Southern Gateway as part of the project, the narrow shared path, located next to a busy four-lane road, will remain north and south, until funding can be secured to improve the area’s walking and cycling infrastructure.

Last August, we reported that the narrow stretch of pavement, shared by pedestrians and cyclists, could be improved after Active Travel England money was relocated following an underspend on other cycling and walking projects in the city.
And in September 2025, it was announced that transport planners are currently exploring the potential to create a new walking and cycling bridge over the River Avon, providing an alternative to the current route.
A £712,000 grant from the Department for Transport is currently be used to draw up an outline business case for the bridge, with Labour councillor Tim Rippington welcoming the news, while arguing the current path “up and down the Bath Road is absolutely horrendous for cyclists and pedestrians”.
However, while the most optimistic forecasts predict that the bridge could be built and opened within four years, work on the Southern Gateway will start in June 2026 and will take two years.
According to the council, one option is to close a lane on the Bath Road temporarily, though a local authority report on the matter considered this move to be “contentious”.
If that isn’t possible, the council says they would explore “mothballing” the cycle hub until the bridge is built – a possibility that was heavily criticised by councillors at this week’s meeting.
“That would be incredibly frustrating for cyclists to have this fantastic new facility, and they can’t use it. That wouldn’t go down well in terms of PR,” Liberal Democrat Andrew Varney said.
“At the moment along the pavement there is a very meagre cycle lane. I would agree that the better option is the temporary closure of one lane,” added the Green Party’s Abi Finch.
“I generally don’t cycle to the station if I’m away from Bristol for more than one night, because I don’t feel safe to leave my bike overnight. So I really welcome having a secure cycle facility. It’s quite exciting.”
Meanwhile, the prospect of cyclists having to pay to use the hub – when they eventually can – was also criticised.
“Do you really have to charge for cycle parking?” Labour’s Katja Hornchen asked. “I’ve been trying to look in Europe where they have cycle parking, and they don’t charge for it anywhere except in Britain. Are we going to be known as the country that charges for cycle parking?”
The council says the cycle parking fees, which are yet to be determined, will result in “increased security” for users, as they would only be open to people who had paid to enter.
This, the local authority claims, would act as a deterrent for thieves, especially in the wake of the British Transport Police’s controversial recent admission that it will not investigate bike thefts in cases where the bike was left at a station for over two hours.





















12 thoughts on “Plans for new station bike hub approved… that cyclists might not be able to use for years due to dangerously “meagre” cycle path – but councillors call for car lane to be closed to allow access”
Re-charging, if it’s a small
Re-charging, if it’s a small fee, and the whole thing is secure, then fine. And season tickets should be offered. I don’t have any objection to paying a fee if it’s a secure space. If it’s just a bike shed with a posh roof, forget it.
A reasonable fee, for truly
A reasonable fee, for truly secure storage of bikes would be OK with me but I’m puzzled about the access issue – is every single car park safe to access by foot (and would anybody even question it, never mind delay a project for several years, because of it)
Then there’s the matter of why this issue wasn’t raised from day 1, and addressed immediately, as it couldn’t possibly take as long as building a 3 storey structure…
Slightly tangential, but it’s
Slightly tangential, but it’s worth pointing out that most insurance companies consider a bike “abandoned” if it’s left in a public place for more than a few hours – often 24, but I’ve seen some policies as low as 12 hours, and never more than 36 hours. And even a “secure” parking facility would be considered a public place under most insurance companies’ definitions. This certainly puts me off cycling to the station if I’m going away for more than a day. In contrast, as far as I can tell, my car insurance has no restriction whatsoever regarding how long I can leave it parked in one place and it will still be covered against theft (provided you don’t contradict your declarations about where the car is “usually” kept).
Obviously that’s not something local council has any influence over, but I wonder if a paid-for parking site could include insurance against theft from the site within the fee. If it really is secure, the premium per user per day should be pretty small.
I’m thinking that having a
I’m thinking that having a charge for parking will just lead to lots of people locking their bikes up somewhere near the station instead. If they think that just by charging a fee, it will increase security, then they are sorely mistaken. I bet there will be lots of “bikes left at owner risk” signs everywhere and combined with police not investigating thefts if the bike has been left for more than two hours and it’s just going to be a rip-off.
UK is of course a long way
UK is of course a long way from this, but … I believe that in NL it is often seen as being a net social and economic positive to a) build good quality cycle parking and b) make it free (there is usually some charging system to keep use appropriate eg. dissuade long term parking in a city centre “shopping” parking).
https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2021/10/20/why-did-utrecht-open-yet-another-giant-underground-bicycle-parking-garage/
I hope certain people on the
I hope certain people on the council haven’t watched Martyn Ashton’s Road Bike Party 1 and assume that’s an acceptable option for a cycle lane over that bridge.
I was expecting a lycra
I was expecting a lycra-intense version of the Green Party there … still, gets my vote!
The daft thing is, they are
The daft thing is, they are planning a separate multi storey cycle parking facility, when they could just make bike parking the ground floor of the main parking facility, save a load of money on another building and make it more accessible for all users. Multi storey cycle parking means really shallow ramps which occupy a lot of space you cannot use for parking.
adamcatt wrote:
Naah. Just put some stairs in, like they did at Richmond Station’s Cycle Hub.
That cycle lane on the shared
That cycle lane on the shared pavement is signed as south only.
The shared bus / motorcycle / taxi bicycle lane on the other side of the A4 road is for notherly travel.
Benthic wrote:
However, two way traffic on that shared pavement is common as otherwise you have to cross multiple lanes of traffic multiple times in order to get to Temple Meads from the south.
I sometimes go to Temple Meads from Cattle Market Rd (usually when the cheesegrater bridge is closed) and it’s striking how a very wide cycle lane along Cattle Market Rd (though typically blocked at one end by the building work) joins up to nothing along the pavement with the bus stop that goes to the entry road for Temple Meads. That whole area needs an overhaul and preferably not by motornormatives.
hawkinspeter wrote:
That’s no excuse.
Agreed.