Plans to remove a key cycle lane in Bristol – which the city council claimed would help alleviate the risk of flooding on the road – have been scrapped.
Whiteladies Road, a key approach to Bristol city centre from the north west with a much-used cycle lane, regularly floods when there is rain due to water running downhill from adjacent roads that have blocked drains. Water levels of up to 18 inches caused by the blocked drains have made conditions hazardous for cyclists and motorists, as well as pedestrians.
Earlier this year, we reported that Bristol City Council was consulting on whether to tackle the risk of flash floods by installing grass verges to soak up rainwater, as well as a drainage channel, through widening the footway on either side of the road.
> Key Bristol cycle lane to be scrapped – because council claims it causes flooding
This plan, however, was widely criticised by local cyclists and active travel campaigners, who pointed out that the scheme meant that there would no longer be space for the cycle lanes running in each direction.
Councillor Don Alexander, who holds the transport portfolio at the Labour-controlled council, said at the time that removing the cycle lanes was “a last resort… but the lack of space in this area means we need to consider it.”
Vassili Papastavrou, secretary of the Bristol Tree Forum who raised concerns over the potential scrapping of the cycle lane on Whiteladies Road in a lengthy thread on Twitter, told road.cc that he had “never heard of a cycle lane causing flooding before,” and suggested that “it might be a world first.”
However, following the widespread condemnation of the scheme from cycling campaigners and other councillors – including the Green Party’s Emma Edwards, who first raised the issues with drainage at the end of 2021 – the council has dropped their initials controversial plans to remove the cycle lanes.
Liberal Democrat councillor Andrew Varney, who said he was “glad” that the bike lanes were being retained, told the BBC: “Whiteladies Road is a key route into the city and needs decent cycling infrastructure if we are to encourage active travel and reduce car dependency.”
The Bristol Cycling Campaign also welcomed the news, writing on Twitter: “We were delighted to see the latest draft plan shown to us at a meeting today with [councillor Don Alexander] and Bristol City council officers, included retention of dedicated cycle lanes on both sides of the road.
“Cllr Alexander explained there was still a lengthy process and many stages to go through to deliver the final plan.
“Our thanks to Cllr Alexander and Bristol City Council for maintaining a constructive dialogue on the Whiteladies Road flood alleviation and footpath scheme, and also to our supporters for their responses to the process.”
> “How can removing cycle lanes ever be justified?” Council blasted for getting rid of bike lane… so motorists can “park on pavement more easily”
In August, we reported on the blog that Bristol City Council was once again under fire for removing a bike lane on the Cheltenham Road towards the junction with Ashley Road.
In an article for the news site Bristol 24/7, editor Martin Booth described the lane as “of poor quality and in desperate need of improvement. But it was still a cycle lane.”
Booth noted that the recent ‘improvements’ to the junction – which the council even admitted might prove “contentious” – have resulted in a wider pavement, which according to the writer has not improved pedestrian safety but simply allowed motorists to park their cars more easily.
According to Booth, the extended works on the Ashley Road “have mostly just moved the crossings by a few metres, widened a few short stretches of pavement and removed a cycle lane: all seemingly for the benefit of car drivers… By widening the footway, all it has done is make it easier for cars to park. And I have yet to see the double-yellow lines ever be enforced.”
Lamenting Bristol’s apparent fall from its status 14 years ago as Britain’s ‘first cycling city’, the news editor also questioned whether “removing cycle lanes can ever be justified” and argued that “safe cycling needs to be prioritised across our city”.
“Even a crap cycle lane is better than no cycle lane at all,” he concluded.
Add new comment
17 comments
The Martin Booth video ...
Was disappointed that no-one came out of the shops with a cooker on a sack-barrow, and Richard Ashcroft didn't appear from almost no-where
.
Can't be right.
.
This is a Lay Bah & Green Council. A Layyyyyy Bah & Green Council.
.
How can this article be correct?
.
Do you mean that you're surprised that they proposed removing the lane, or that they backed off from doing it? Or are you just trolling?
(I can't tell any more...)
I can't see how removing cycle lanes will drastically help with drainage issues. Yes, it might allow slightly larger surface drains, but it sounds like most issues are general maintenance (so making them bigger just means it will take slightly longer for them to get blocked).
I can see how removing cycle lanes on a long hill between 80+% of university hall places and the rest of the university + city centre is a great way to cause massive issues.
Fast cyclists going downhill, so can't have shared use footpaths and slow cyclists going up hill so can't share with vehicles unless you are going to ban overtaking AND ENFORCE IT RUTHLESSLY.
I wonder what would happen if they amended the uphill drainage ... maybe made the capture chambers bigger or even just jetted them every few months?
In my years in wastewater design, we have only managed to make drainage go downhill. If you have a secret to share we could save a fortune on pumping costs.
These "lets install a strip of grass a few inches wide" ideas seem to be a current fashionable (and imo unnecessary from cycle funding if that's where it comes from) gimmick, which will have no effect on the retention of water other than as a marketing fig-leaf for Council box-tickers, but will potentially earn lots for a provider of green gimmicks.
That's very different to significant areas of grass.
I recall similar in the recent inadequate scheme for the Tottenham Hale to Walthamstowe link road. Was that featured on road.cc?
A money-tipping-away tendency to watch?
On the scheme in the piece, it's good news but I see no reason for those cycle lanes not to be compulsory and protected by kerbs big enough to damage wandering cars - given that the lane width is a full 3m (I think) for bus passage.
But how do we get those 1.2m cycle lane widths up to the acceptable minimum? Is that advised to be 1.5m now for one way in the UK?
One for the next consultation in 2050?
Good. Sad it took this long. I raised my objections, along with, as I understand, many others. Glad the council listened. Wish they listened more.
I wonder whether the council will now have a go at unblocking the drains along there, and maybe educate the businesses about what happens when everyone tarmacs over their front gardens for car parking...
The drains were full of silt/dirt, to the level of the drain covers, when I looked when I first saw this subject on here. I couldn't help but laugh. To be fair I have no idea how that problem is solved though - presumably jetting it would merely relocate the problem. Can they suck it up?
Other thing that sometimes happens, not sure if its what's happened on Whiteladies Road, is where a road is resurfaced and tarmac/asphalt fills in the gaps of the drain grate but nobody thinks to clear it...
I've long been wondering how one could stop people who have no grasp whatsoever on reality from getting into positions of responsibility?
.
But. But. But.
.
Lay Bah & Green Council.
.
Shewly shumfink ronk with what you are saying re. Brizol CC?
.
Ah - you are labouring (sorry) under the delusion that because some people here aren't keen on the Conservative Party, where they're not in power the cyclists must have taken over. Luckily this can be cured by taking a short walk beside almost any road in the country. Or going for a bike ride. If you're still struggling and haven't bumped into any parked cars yet you could then simply attempt to cross the road a few times, or cycle through a junction. Obviously that's dangerous because of all the
speeding bicyclesmotor traffic though.In a (the) country where cycling is taken seriously, right- and leftwing parties support and enable cycling.
In all the other countries where cycling is not taken seriously, ...
Wierd.
What are they going to do with all the water from the cycle lane? Why do cyclists need so much water anyway? Why can't they just pedal on dry land instead of demanding water up to their bottom brackets?
Will local shops which have been inundated be able to sue the lycra louts responsible for this absurd decision, which will lead to flooding, homelessness, disease, death, destruction and the end of civilisation as we know it?
It's the tyres isn't it? As we all (on road.cc) know, because of their narrow profile cycle tires do more damage than those on a 747. So the cycle lane will soon have channels down it and probably sink into the water table.
Or it could be "we've already tarmaced everywhere else, we haven't sorted out the drains for years, the cheapest way to 'do something' (one-offs cheaper than regular maintenance) is to rip this up to allow for overflow muddy puddles beside the road. Oh and have some good news for those very loud voices."