A takeaway owner has claimed a new bike lane will ‘decimate’ his burger bar business.
David Amos, 66, owner of Mr D’s takeaway in Bath claimed the new scheme was ‘unnecessary’ and ‘ill-conceived’.
He also alleged that the cycle lane would prevent motorists from pulling over and allowing ambulances to drive past.
Somerset Live report that the planned cycle track along the Upper Bristol Road will be enclosed with bollards, as part of Bath and North East Somerset Council’s active travel scheme.
Mr Amos said: “From my perspective, I have built this business over 39 years and this is the biggest challenge I’ve ever had.
“There will be bollards with white metal posts coming out of them, so our customers can’t even pull in.
“We also have at least four deliveries a week and people would have to block the road to deliver stuff.”
The businessman claimed it would be difficult for people to pull over to let ambulances through, and for disabled and elderly residents to unload their groceries without blocking the road.
Under the Active Travel Scheme, a new bike lane will be created down both sides of the road, between the junctions with Midland Road and Charlotte Street
Active Travel Scheme proposals also apply to routes between Combe Down and the University of Bath, and on Beckford Road and North Road, between the city centre and the university.
The consultation period for the scheme, which opened on March 4, closed on (Friday, March 19), but Mr Amos said he had not been aware of the proposals until a neighbour told him earlier this week.
He said: “We have just come through a pandemic and I have tried my best to adapt by doing deliveries and stuff.
“The consultation is closing on Friday and I think they have been very vague and not consulted business owners. This is going to be a nightmare for me.
“Half my customer base will go away and it will decimate my business.
“We have had a lot to deal with over the years, four recessions, a pandemic, hassle with licencing, BSE – you name it. They want to throw everything at us. Recessions come to an end, but this won’t.”
In response Councillor Joanna Wright, joint cabinet member for Transport Services, said: “We are holding our online consultation on the three active travel schemes until March 21 and we welcome Mr Amos to submit his views at www.bathnes.gov.uk/activetravelschemes if he hasn’t already.
“We will listen to everyone’s concerns before making a decision on the proposed road improvement scheme, which aims to promote active travel, making it safer and more convenient for people to take short journeys by bike or on foot.”
72 thoughts on “Bitter Bath burger bar boss bashes bike lane”
Good tongue twister.
Good tongue twister.
hirsute wrote:
And aliteration
jova54 wrote:
And aliteration
— hirsutePedant police; alliteration.
Alternative aliterations are
Alternative aliterations are always available, aiding appreciation and approval
I’ve racked my brains for an
I’ve racked my brains for an alternative to path beginning with B, but have so far failed. Byway doesn’t quite do it.
PRSboy wrote:
Broadway?
Boulevard?
On street view, that road is
On street view, that road is really wide. Why would emergency vehicles have issues getting by?
and how do the parked cars
and how do the parked cars not create the same problem already?
Because that 44 cm of extra
Because that 44 cm of extra road space is enough for the ambulance to get by.
If the guy had an ounce of
If the guy had an ounce of sense, he’d arrange a small table & a few chairs outside, & advertise to cyclists. He could (if his food isn’t terrible) make an absolute bomb, given cyclists’appetites.
Also the cycle lane will
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.
sean1 wrote:
What??? Change my business model?? It’s been serving me well for almost 40 years!!!!
And anyway, I can’t think about that due to reduced brain function brought on by pollution…..
This. Why does he assume his
This. Why does he assume his customers don’t cycle? Or that cyclists don’t like a great burger? I’ve certainly pulled over on my ride to have a coffee and burger stop, and if it’s any good I’ll go again next time. Just think how many cyclists can park up in the space occupied by a single 4×4 customer. And cyclists (pandemic notwithstanding) tend to show up in decent sized groups, unlike car bound customers. This “businessman” has no business sense.
You may have hit the nail on
You may have hit the nail on the head there – does he serve coffee? If not, he’s definitely missing a trick (see also Captian Badger’s comment about changing one’s business model).
So they’re replacing the zig
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?
bendertherobot wrote:
…. 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
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 ????
Walk ????
For a burger?
For a burger?
unless his customers have
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:
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:
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?— Smiffi
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:
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:
You missed out legal compliance with reducing pollution levels.
hawkinspeter wrote:
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
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:
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.
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:
Take care, using your local-knowledge could brand you as anti-cycling.
Smiffi wrote:
Take care, using your local-knowledge could brand you as anti-cycling.— Smurfette63
Y’mean like sean1 posted in reply to one of yours earlier….
Maybe someone ought to point
Maybe someone ought to point out to Mr Amos that vehicles shouldn’t be parking outside his premises anyway
Between the Clean Air Zone,
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.
This is non-news. Nothing
This is non-news. Nothing has happened yet, just someone worrying about what might happen.
Quote:
Which they would be doing at the moment anyway – they’ll just be blocking a different part of the road.
mdavidford wrote:
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’.
If I’d spent 39 years
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.
eburtthebike wrote:
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:
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:
Get out of here with your completely correct use of the English language BS …
If you fear for your business
If you fear for your business because of a cycle path then perhaps the problem isn’t actually the cycle path?!
His delivery drivers park
His delivery drivers park right out front when he’s open.
Won’t that stop any of his
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:
Aye, on the zigzags….
I bet he’s also in
I bet he’s also in partnership with services like UberEats and Deliveroo. Business couldnt be better with so many orders due to lockdown and UberEats/Deliveroo staff coming and going but he still wants something to moan about.
RoubaixCube wrote:
And in the TV ad, the Uber guy rides a bike.
On a broader note, as I’ve
On a broader note, as I’ve seen similar complaints in Bristol where I live, and we cyclists could, just maybe, be a little more compassionate. I believe the introduction of more cycle lanes will make some current businesses worse off. Change rarely comes without costs.
In Bristol thousands lost their jobs in the tobacco industry in the 70s & 80s when the dangers of smoking became well known – not just the people working in the tobacco factories, but local shops, suppliers, bus companies etc. There was a similar impact in many coal producing communities. Many, probably rightly, believe that there’s a net benefit of such changes, but there were undoubtedly individuals who will have lost their livelihoods.
I’d be more compassionate if
I’d be more compassionate if people in Bristol weren’t suffering from the poor air quality. It’s hardly fair to put a minority of businesses and/or workers ahead of everyone else’s health and it’s also worth considering all the externalised costs to the NHS. Workers can choose to reskill and get employment elsewhere and businesses can adapt to changes, whereas I can hardly choose which air to breathe.
I agree; I simply think it
I agree; I simply think it better to acknowledge that such changes are not always a win-win, lets not be blind to the reality there will be some losers for the greater good. Lets try to empathise and ameliorate rather than coruscate.
Fair point. I think a lot of
Fair point. I think a lot of cyclists get defensive about all the lip service paid to increasing active travel and the substandard facilities that are then provided if at all. The problem is that there’s cyclists dying on the roads and everyone is suffering from the poor air quality and yet there’s extremely vocal opponents to any attempt to re-allocate space on the public roads.
Changing nothing rarely comes
Changing nothing rarely comes without a cost.
I completely agree. I think
I completely agree. I think a lot of change is needed and welcome, but lets not pretend that there won’t be some losers along the way; which may well be acceptable and reasonable compared to the losses of stasis.
Mary Willoughby wrote:
Whereas it is clear that when changes have to be made consideration has to be given to regeneration – you only have to see the evisceration of northern communities affecting millions as a result of the demolition of the coal and other heavy industries to see that – that is a failure of government, and should not be seen as a reason to put off the necessary.
I have a huge amount of compassion for people in difficult circumstances, however the bulk of my compassion is reserved for people like Ella Adoo-Kissi-Debrah and her family
Analysis has demonstrated that 10s of thousands of people in this country die annually due to the effects of air pollution and many, many more have their lives blighted with horrific chronic conditions such as COPD. A large proportion of this is attributable to vehicular pollution from petrol, diesel, brake dust and tyre particles.
This is a life reality for many people in that it is happening to them now, and there is little in the way of concrete governmental action to combat the issue. On the flip side (pardon the pun) Mr Burgers’ worries for his business in relation to the cycle lane are likely just that – unfounded worries, combined with refusal to adapt and survive.
I wasn’t in any way
I wasn’t in any way suggesting plans should change owing to the objections of Mr. Burger & Co., simply that we understand their perspective and not pretend there aren’t losers in the name of progress. I prefer the “Sorry mate, this needs to be done, but perhaps we can make a few suggestions and help to minimise the impact” approach more than simply shouting “Selfish Plonker”, even if the latter were to be true, – some that will lose are perfectly reasonable people who don’t bleat to the press.
Mary Willoughby wrote:
Glad to hear it, same here
simply that we understand their perspective and not pretend there aren’t losers in the name of progress.— Mary Willoughby
Still not clear that he needs to be a “loser”. Comprehensive cycle infrastructure is typically beneficial for local economies.
I prefer the “Sorry mate, this needs to be done, but perhaps we can make a few suggestions and help to minimise the impact” approach
— Mary Willoughby
Same here. As I said in my earlier post, the lack of this kind of approach (if it were needed, and I doubt that the installation of one cycle line would require this) would be due to failure of [local] govt. Typically the authorities that don’t treat such projects in this way are the heel-dragging lead swingers who are fundamentally and ideologically opposed to ensuring that people have a safe and fit for purpose option to adopt active travel.
I don’t remember shouting that. Or shouting anything for that matter….
Is Mr Burgers bleating then? I’d say so too. Being around for 40 years does not mean that he doesn’t need to react to change. As a number of people have pointed out, this (minor) change will hardly affect him on the points he has cited and is likely to increase passing trade. I think we can be forgiven for interpreting his rant in the way we have.
My original comment started
My original comment started “On a broader note, as I’ve seen similar complaints in Bristol where I live, and we cyclists could, just maybe, be a little more compassionate.” I was making a broader point about change and not specifically referring to Mr. Burger but reflecting about businesses who may actually find themselves disadvantaged by new cycle lanes.
I didn’t say you called Mr. Burger a “Selfish Plonker” I simply used the phrase as a comparator for my own approach to dealing with such scenarios. I’m completely baffled why what I’ve written leads you to believe I agree with Mr. Burger & Co’s views. Emapthy & compassion are characteristics of understanding not agreement or submission.
I’m still not quite sure why
I’m still not quite sure why Mr Burger and Mr Cello Repair Shop are unable to relocate their businesses to more car friendly areas of town. Surely there are plenty of empty retail premises with adequate car parking. Why should such business owners expect that their failure to adapt to changing circumstances, in this case customers no longer being allowed to park on / obstruct the pavements and public highway outside their shops, is any different to the commercial consequences should their businesses fail to adapt to the changing needs of their customers?
Well it’s more that moving
Well it’s more that moving would cause expense and disruption.
I doubt that the Violin shop would need to move as there’s an NCP within easy walking distance and I’m sure that musicians are prepared to put in the effort to visit shops that have the necessary expertise and craftmanship. They probably don’t rely on people just randomly deciding to learn the violin as they’re driving past.
Hold my Cello.
Hold my Cello.
Of course they can relocate,
Of course they can relocate, in much the same way that you could move house if, say, a new motorway, quarry or recycling centre was put next to your home. You would only be adapting to changing circumstances so apparently there’s no need for anyone to be sympathetic that you feel forced into moving home by change outside your control.
All I’m suggesting is that we consider, understand and acknowledge that some folk may be worse off when cycle lanes are installed. I’m surprised that this seems to be such a heretical proposition, it seems obvious to me. That doesn’t mean cycle lanes shouldn’t be implemented, doesn’t mean that all businesses will loose and it usually means the majority of people will gain.
Mary Willoughby wrote:
I suppose my compassion and empathy runs thin when folk say “This minor project that is unlikely to impact me and will be beneficial to many in terms of health, wellbeing and quality of life should not go ahead cos I don’t want it too”
I’m much more sympathetic to folk who might say “I can see this is necessary but I’m worried. Please help me adapt”
I’m keen to understand the
I’m keen to understand the detail behind the generalisation, “I believe the introduction of more cycle lanes will make some current businesses worse off.”
But let’s not make the leap of illogic that says passing trade is only what travels by car. If a street given over entirely to non-motorised traffic, so that cars drop to nil, that does not mean that a business which hitherto relied on people traveling by car will not thrive just as well when the same numbers – or more – travel by bike.
And yet that is what we hear time and again – bloody cycle lane, where will my customers beach their 4×4 now? Answer, they won’t need to, because your customers will be the people on bicycles.
Granted, car wash emporia, motor accessories shops and NCP will suffer. But if your business serves people and not cars, chances are how they get there is largely irrelevant.
And any business which has bemoaned the cost of providing car parking spaces (instead of just socialising the cost by misappropriating the common good) should delight in the much [i]lower [/i]cost of providing a[i] greater[/i] number of secure cycle parking places instead.
I’m thinking, for example,
I’m thinking, for example, about the chap who repairs & sells cellos from a shop that’s now got cycle lanes outside on both sides of the road – the shop has been there for as long as I can remember. I find it difficult to see how it’s going to help his business.
His shop is on a road where some of the highest pollution levels in the UK have been recorded. I used to have the displeasure of cycling along it twice a day, if the pollution wasn’t going to get you, one of the buses probably would and it’s the site of my one & only dooring.
I don’t believe for one moment that the shopkeepers’ issues should stop the cycle lane being implemented, nor should we overlook that some shopkeepers may benefit (in addition to the general public), but the cello shop owner has my sympathy because his shop has ended up being in the wrong place through no fault of his own. I don’t see what’s wrong in having a balanced view, being compassionate and giving some thought to the losers of change as well as the beneficiaries.
Mary Willoughby wrote:
After last night’s events, I think us Bristolians should recognise that the use of violins is not acceptable.
(I was only just the other day saying about the danger of the cycle lane outside of the BRI – hope your dooring wasn’t too bad)
Mary Willoughby wrote:
Quite, it’s just a well-known fact that the advent of the motor car allowed violins to increase in size. And of course thank goodness for the proliferation of SUVs, without which the double bass would never have been possible.
Mind you I’ve always been suspicious of the cello. I can’t help thinking it’s just a big fiddle……
Mary Willoughby wrote:
I think I know the shop and road that you’re talking about. Like the burger bar in the story, its already on a busy road with double yellow lines (one shop) or right on a junction between two busy roads with double yellow lines (if its the other one).
There were a handful of parking bays nearby, which have been repurposed into a cycle lane. But they were the sort of parking bays which are always occupied, anyway; the chances of just arriving there with your cello and finding a legal parking space would be vanishingly small.
On one of those shops, what the cycle lane may have done is stopped people parking on double yellows or on the footway right outside the shop, on the approach to a busy set of traffic lights.
If either of those shops felt that they were dependent on their customers visiting by car then they were NEVER in the right location…
(there is a nearby multi storey car park).
Sriracha wrote:
And of course, motor accessory shops are increasingly frequently found on out of town malls, as are carwash emporia.
As for NCP, if they repurpose some of that real estate to secure bike storage, well….
Adapt and survive…..
Does the D stand for Dopey?
Does the D stand for Dopey?
It’s interesting. Outside his
It’s interesting. Outside his shop there are zig-zags for a pelican crossing (No Waiting at Any Time) and double yellow lines with no signs or kerb markers (No Waiting at Any Time). A little further along the road there is parking, but only with a resident’s permit.
On the other side of the road, opposite his shop,there are double yellow lines with no signs or kerb markers (No Waiting at Any Time). A little further along the road there is a stretch of single yellow lines, which for that CPZ means no parking, 8am-6pm Mon-Sat.
So, it seems the proposed cycle lane would prevent people legally stopping not particularly close to his shop after 6pm and all of Sunday. I can see why he is so upset. Not.
Mr Amos also alleges that ‘the cycle lane would prevent motorists from pulling over and allowing ambulances to drive past.’ True, so it would become just like many 2-lane roads in the country. Maybe the ambulances could do what others do when they want to go faster than the vehicle in front – overtake. Or perhaps Mr Amos should campaign to have the parking bays removed from any location like Monmouth Place, just along the road from his shop, as the row of cars parked along it appears to prevent motorists from pulling over and allowing ambulances to drive past.
In addition, the two-lane road that runs past the private close where Mr Amos lives doesn’t appear to be sufficiently wide to enable motorists to ‘pull over and allow ambulances to drive past’. Maybe Mr Amos could campaign to have that widened to provide sufficient width.
Not that he’ll read this.
Perhaps daytime deliveries
Perhaps daytime deliveries should be banned in town centres anyway: they just cause congestion and could easily be done between the hours of 10pm and 6am. If this were implemented across the country our towns would be cleaner, better for shoppers, pedestrians, and cyclists.
Most evenings (and I mean, 5
Most evenings (and I mean, 5.30-6.00, heart of what used to be called ‘rush hour’) there’s an articulated HGV parked where I’ve indicated, delivering goods to a Tesco Express which is there.
https://goo.gl/maps/Ycjp5NwEn7nxTvUJ7
Not helpful for coming out of or for getting into the junction you can see a matter of metres further along…
Chris Hayes wrote:
Whilst this seems a solution there is the problem that deliveries need someone to accept them, even allowing for a sophisticated delivery time slot system it’s goimg to increase costs significantly.
Or, from another perspective,
Or, from another perspective, it will put the cost back on the activity that causes it, instead of it being externalised onto other passing road users.