Outline plans for ‘cycling Greenways’ through the area around Temple Meads and the new Arena were published last month at http://www.bristoltemplequarter.com/greenways (and here Temple Greenways Proposal Plan – Consultation). They are companion proposals to the Temple Gate plans previewed last year. There is an online survey for responses which gives limited options but do take a minute to make some of the points below. You may want to include a link to this page if you support our points.

While both sets of plans show some innovation and welcome improvements, for example on the Q10 Promenade Quietway and a riverside path on pontoons, they also show a failure to tackle the fundamental issues and barriers, such as linking the F6 Bath Road Freeway into the centre, or the 6,000 space cycling hub that is needed at this key transport interchange.

We think that recent plans for cycling are so awful because they continue to throw in piecemeal routes after all major decisions have been made, and then most of them are for shared use with pedestrians.

There is only one section of separated Space for Cycling in these plans, and that’s the existing short Cattle Market Road section. Everything else is shared use with pedestrians which is only suitable when volumes and speeds are low (BCyC Policy – Shared Space Streets and Shared Use Pavements).

These routes will be some of the most heavily used in the city as we move towards the 20% level of cycling that the Bristol Cycle Strategy is aiming for. We can expect walking to comfortably exceed 40% of trips making clearly separated networks for walking and cycling essential.

As a result our overall position on the plans is to Object, with qualificationsBristolCyclingCampaignresponsetoconsultationTempleGreenways

Space for Cycling

Does this measure advance the six themes of 1) Protected space on main roads; 2) Remove through motor traffic; 3) Safe routes to school; 4) Cycle friendly town centres; 5) Cycle routes in green spaces; 6) 20mph speed limits?

Amber – overall neutral

Road Danger Reduction

Does this measure seek a genuine reduction in danger for all road users by identifying and controlling the principal sources of threat?

Amber – overall neutral

Triple A Quality (All Ages and Abilities)

Will this measure be attractive to all ages and abilities using all kinds of cycles?

Amber – overall neutral

Strategic Cycling Network

How does this measure contribute to the development of Bristol Council’s planned integrated and coherent strategic cycle network?

Red – overall disbenefit

Cycle-proofing

How far does this measure provide for Triple A Space for Cycling in the future?

Amber – overall neutral

 

Bristol Cycling Campaign also has the following specific comments on this consultation:

  1. We understand that these are shorter term proposals and so miss out many issues that have yet to be decided, for example bridge under railway. This makes it difficult to comment on more strategic issues but shows how attempting to introduce provision for cycling after plans are established inevitably delivers a poorly integrated and thought through result. We understand that the Council have just secured the Royal Mail site and development of that will enhance provision and access to the back of the station and the bridge over the Avon to the new Arena. We are not aware of any integrated strategy for each mode of transport having access to destinations and to transport links.
  2. There must be a real focus on quality in this key area as set out in Making Space for Cycling. There is a distressing underlying expectation that cyclists are on pavements. There is plenty of room for proper cycling provision. The area around Plot 3 in particular appears to requires several sharp bends.
  3. We are concerned that the capacity of the cycle network will not be adequate when the Bristol Cycle Strategy is aiming for a 20% mode share across Bristol, but this will be much greater in this area. In 10 years times we must not be looking back for a failure of vision. There will be much more employment, and more people walking and cycling, Bristol Cycle Strategy sets target of 20% cycling while walking is already close to 40%, so 60% or more of trips will be walking and cycling. Shared use and minimum width provision will not be adequate. Properly separated provision of adequate width and quality for mass walking and cycling must provided.
  4. We are very concerned at the failure to address the main weak link, namely the A4 Temple Gate from Bath Rd Bridge to Temple Circus, across the frontage of TM Station Approach. Provision here is appears to remain a hopelessly inadequate shared pavement, on both footways of Temple Gate where there will be very high useage with many pedestrians, plus bus-stop queues.
  5. The Harbour Walkway (new pontoon walkway / cycleway) proposals will be a good addition to routes in the area. It will be a useful alternative to the main road road past Temple Meads for those coming from the east, or having to cross the Glass Wharf bridges, then to cross back. We are concerned that it will not be wide enough for pedestrians and cyclists to use without causing conflicts. The pontoon will be 4m wide. The current path under Temple Way is far too narrow, and quite dark even in the daytime. It would be good to make sure its as wide as possible while not restricting the waterway. It must not be considered an alternative to suitable provision at Temple Gate.
  6. Looking at the proposals and images for Cattle Market Road, the two-way segregated lane is good, but needs integrating with onward routes around/across the Bath Road bridge. A width of 3.5m will not be adequate and does not include a buffer from motor traffic (which should be at least 0.5m), however provision at either end is for pavement cycling. This is not a continuous cycling network.
  7. Could the crossing from north to south across Cattle Market Rd be made to prioritise cyclists and pedestrians over cars, e.g. with a trigger for approaching cyclists or a zebra crossing? A little further up, how will this connect with the proposed Feeder Road cycle path and the quality of that junction (with Albert St?) – can cyclists get priority across this junction as well? Traffic levels should be low, but it would be good to create a space from the outset which is clearly for walking and cycling and not really cars. The quality of the path from this point further along the river will also be important.
  8. Further consideration must be given for separate provision on The Friary for a continuous Quietway route joining the Railway Path and Wesley Way to the the Brunel Mile and centre.
  9. Access to the pontoon from The Friary involves 3 sharp 90 degree turns. This is indirect and not suitable for all ages and abilities. A direct and smooth route should be provided through Plot 3.