Campaigners protest outside council offices against proposed park cycle lane and loss of car parking; Police announce successful recovery of a bike; New pro cycling reform group gathers momentum + more on the live blog
SUMMARY
Bath bike lane protests
The proposed £2.35 million bike lane through Bath’s Royal Victoria Park has turned into one of the longest-running sagas we’ve covered this year.
When we first wrote about the story in the summer, it was as much due to the unique situation of the local Green Party opposing the protected, active travel infrastructure, arguing that the contraflowing cycle lane, protected by kerbs from traffic, was “socially unsafe”.
But as a minority party on Bath and North East Somerset Council, they couldn’t prevent the Lib Dem-led authority giving the project the green light.
Only a fortnight later however, the work was stalled when it emerged the council had forgotten to respond to a formal objection. That objection has now escalated into a judicial review. Ryan wrote the latest, most detailed summary of the whole thing a couple of weeks ago…
What started as criticism from fellow cycling and active travel campaigners has swelled into a broader anti-bike lane, anti-council campaign. And last night that campaign became a protest that led the BBC Points West news.
Around 200 people gathered outside the council offices, many brandishing placards calling for the removal of the Lib Dem councillors behind the proposal, criticising the proposed loss of car parking spaces, and discussing protecting children.
Campaigners against the bike lane have also been circulating a petition calling on the council “to pause implementation of the cycle lane scheme and reconsider its design, cost and impact on access to this much-loved public park.
“We ask the council to:
- Pause the cycle lane works and associated parking removal while the decision is reviewed publicly.
- Demonstrate the need for the proposed route, publishing evidence of current and expected cycling demand, the shortcomings of existing routes and the alternatives considered.
- Publish a detailed breakdown of the £2.35 million scheme budget, distinguishing the cycle lane from pavement, crossing, lighting and accessibility improvements, and explaining funding restrictions and future maintenance costs.
- Explain the practical impact of parking changes, including the exact number and location of spaces lost and retained, peak-period demand and walking distances from alternative parking to the play area and Botanical Gardens.
- Publish the safety and accessibility assessments, addressing the contraflow layout, pedestrian crossings, children near the play area and personal safety after dark.
- Explain how consultation objections influenced the approved design, and hold an accessible public meeting where residents, cyclists, families, disabled visitors and other park users can question the proposals before further implementation.”
Well, I suppose if you don’t ask you don’t get, although it’s hard to see quite how all of those aims can be reconciled with the council’s belief that “removing the cycle lane element would be a missed opportunity to give new cyclists a safe place to learn, gain confidence and ride into the city”.
The council also has the support of the city’s incumbent Bicycle mayor and the chair of the Bath Cycling Club. No wonder it looks like this will be resolved in court…
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
@mitsky I was reluctant to make any assumptions because there doesn't seem to be a huge amount of information in the public domain (I haven't really looked but are they together etc). I would also assume it's not his first time but would his partner admit to this? Would she say she was coerced? There are many unknowns but I would guess she won't face any consequences. I just hope she is a better parent than he was (or at least now he's out of the picture she can up her game).
@DS2025 I'm wondering if the authorities will look into the family situation more. My guess is that this won't be the first time he has driven his kids after drinking and if his partner knew about this (and possibly other negligent parenting) could she face consequences for not taking action to protect her kids?
They are good lights, the reversible lens allowing it to fit either way up and the ability to customise high and low settings without having to scroll through them every time great features. However calling it simple to use is a joke, it only has one button and remembering the correct sequence of presses if you accidentally change something (easily done if it's mounted upside down) without the instructions can be a nightmare.
@Rendel Harris indeed. I always think the same when people are gushing over their partner on social media about the amazing meal they are having with their partner. So amazing that you just had to post about it immediately in the middle of the dinner because you were just having such a brilliant time. Its performative.
@ceppm Wouldn't confidentiality/privacy issues put the mockers on that, unless every cyclist identified gave explicit permission? If I was cycling down a deserted country road and was suddenly mugged for my bike and it transpired that the thief had used Waze/Google to find out I was coming wouldn't the tech companies be at risk of being found liable for enabling them?
If Waze was so worried about cyclists' safety, they could have asked daddy Google for that warning a long time ago. I'm sure there are very clever people in Google that can figure out when a person is on a bike using speed, route and position. Then just pass that data point to Waze. Suddenly hundreds of thousands more cyclists are visible on the app, without having to spend pretty £££.
@andystow To just brush.
Bone conducting headphones connected to an AI chatbot repeating the text 'harden the phuckup and ride faster" will do it every time
@a1white that actually chilled me to read - the notion that a metal box could have more value than a person’s life. Motonormativity at its finest. What a rotten society.
@Rendel Harris but but wasn't it a case of "only hurty words" again? Seems that that is the new "just bants". Which falls somewhere between saying you've a *very* robust belief in the right to say anything, no matter what offence caused * ... and being a (not very) crypto racist / holding other irrational hates. * Most who promote this approach appear unable to sustain it when on the receiving end of criticism - or even questions. It's almost as if people do it just for *certain* kinds of attention, and are seeking an easy win not a fight. There must be a word for that...