“Captain Nemo - good on you - but I hardly call a 4.5 mile bike journey a major trumpet blowing event. Have to say though Im glad I dont have to sit next to you! As a woman who deals with clients face to face a squirt of deodorant is not going to really cut it. My journey is 15 miles each way including over Lansdown, try cycling over there! Also a number of people have kids to drop off at school before going to work. Before you start saying they should be walking or cycling, if we didnt have this ridiculous school place system so many parents wouldnt have to drive their kids to a school miles away because they cant get into the one on their doorstep. If you have the time, the cycle paths and it genuinely is a practical choice fair enough. But for a huge number of us it is not and we are punished by this council for it without giving us a decent alternative”

“I love cats & dont like Pythons -

I don't live centrally - I'm in Staple Hill and cycle a round trip of about 9 miles per day to Bedminster. I have pointed out to drivers that the sweaty BO issue can be simply resolved by using this stuff called deodorant, but they seem to have missed the point. Odd really, as they must get a bit whiffy sitting in hot cars in summer. Anyway, I've found that a 4.5 mile cycle ride into work each day doesn't seem to make me sweaty at all. And if it does, a quick rub under the old armpits with a fresh wet wipe sorts it out. I keep a change of clothes in my desk drawer and it only takes me 5 mins to change in the gents loo each morning. I arrive at my desk refreshed and ready to work, unlike some of my workmates who moan about the traffic.

Go on bristol, try cycling. It's perfectly possible to cross the city by bike and don't worry about things like sweat - it can be esily sorted.

And to those drivers who think I have no right to preach - what right do any of you have to take up so much space and pollute the air?. Why should you seem to have priority all the time?. Stop blaming it on China and India 'cos they're far away. You all contrubute to pollution - Old Market is one of the most dangerously polluted areas in the city. What right do you have to park on pavements, in cycle lanes, double yellow lines or, when you've finished with your wreck, dump it outside other peoples houses? (I have lived in three different houses across this city, all of them with a car dumped outside).

Owning a car does not give anyone superior rights. If you choose to live miles outside Bristol and commute every day, then you contribute to congestion and really shouldn't moan about it. Congestion is the downside of having a car driving lifestyle.

I will continue to preach cycling to all who listen. I've had a driving licence for 28 years and have seen this country slowly bog down under the number of cars. I have made a conscious decision not to buy a car and thus not contribute to the congestion strangling this city. I cycle, walk, use the bus and occasional train. I have few problems getting about. I'm fitter and I certainly do not suffer from road-rage induced stress. Surely, this is what others want?. Of course, for some it's not ideal. But for those brave enough to ditch the car and switch to alternatives, it's not that bad - welcome to the future!.

I would encourage people not to be afraid of cycling, walking or taking trains/buses. Of course there's room for improvement, but everyone needs to do their bit to make it happen.”

“The answer to cyclists using lifts is simple:

Employ a traditional PE teacher (welsh accent, loud whistle, preferably called Jones or Griffiths, shorts and vest) to force cyclists into doing hill reps on Park Street (or other nearby hills) until they're fit enough not to bother other lift users again.

Simple.”

“Thanks for the response Jon.

Shame about the content.

""It has been found that approximately 60% of the users of the old lifts in the car park were not people who were parking there. Instead they were pedestrians and cyclists who were using the lifts as a short cut between Trenchard St and Park Row. This practice had resulted in fee-paying customers either being delayed or, in some cases, being excluded from the lifts because of the space taken up by the bikes and other users. There were also incidents of customers having their clothes marked by oil and dirt from bikes. Usage of the lifts by non-customers has added significantly to running costs (maintenance and energy), as well as reducing the life of the lifts."

Are we expected to take this seriously though?

Three lifts never overused.

All those sweaty cyclists rubbing oil over people in a confined space.

Sounds like rot to me...”

“we can only hope they look at the comments and do something about the traffic lights in bristol.would be fantastic if they did, take some down”

“Why is it that pedestrians have to push the button and wait for the lights to change, then get perhaps 10 seconds to cross before the cars start again? Why isn't it the other way round, i.e the pedestrians get the green man all the time, and it only changes to red when the car comes along? All the drivers on here seem to be saying that they are far too busy and important to wait for 10 seconds for a pedestrian crossing (all right, 20 seconds if you include the amber phases) and that pedestrians should be forced to make a five minute detour instead.”

“Random Ranter, Bristol at 13:38 also asks what answers I got and comments on Hicks Gate roundabout and Hartcliffe roundabout.

Grahame P, Central Bristol at 17:40 suggests that ,"it's time for some radical thinking here as well" like Netherlands and adopted in Germany. There are experiments in "shared space" in Bristol, such as behind the student flats opposite Cabot Circus. These too operate on the principle that when "you don't exactly know who has right of way, you tend to seek eye contact with other road users, automatically reduce your speed and take greater care."

Our Lib Dem administration is taking a different approach to the challenges on Bristol transport. We are open to ideas, not afraid to experiment, and are prepared to make some difficult decisions to get things moving.

Our approach is not just about consultation, but about understanding the problems, and sharing the problems back with residents at an early stage, seeking feedback, comments, involvement and engagement at an early stage.

Consultation, which for many has become a dirty word, is the final step in the process, to invite structured comments about a preferred option or approach to solving the problem.

I am keen that we only consult on things that may influence a decision. If we have already decided what we are doing, then no point in a sham consultation.

Thanks again for all the comments - much appreciated.

Jon”

“Andy, BS1 at 13:38 asks about my lack of reply to his question on 3rd September about why the "NCP car park on Park Row now prevented people - primarily the elderly and disabled from using their lifts"

I said I would find out, which I did, but I didn't have any means of letting Andy BS1 know the answer, as I don't have his contact details, and it is very unlikely he would spot a comment posted two weeks later, but for the record, here is the officer response. Apologies for posting this lengthy, but informative response under the wrong heading...

"Trenchard Street Multi-Storey Car Park is serviced by three lifts. The original lift cars were constructed with the car park and are approximately 40 years old. We commenced a major refurbishment programme of the lifts in April 2009. Two of the lifts have now been fully refurbished and the third one should be completed by the end of November 2009. The cost of the refurbishment project is £340,000.

"The refurbishment of the lifts has been undertaken for the following reasons:

"There were health & safety concerns regarding the reliability of the lifts. The age, general wear and tear and vandalism of the lifts had resulted in a significant number of lift failures resulting in poor customer service, and unfortunately, an increasing number of more serious incidents of customers being trapped within the lifts causing distress and inconvenience.

"The increasing difficulty in maintaining the lifts and sourcing spares because of the age of the installation.

"The lifts failed to comply with the DDA 1995.

"It has been found that approximately 60% of the users of the old lifts in the car park were not people who were parking there. Instead they were pedestrians and cyclists who were using the lifts as a short cut between Trenchard St and Park Row. This practice had resulted in fee-paying customers either being delayed or, in some cases, being excluded from the lifts because of the space taken up by the bikes and other users. There were also incidents of customers having their clothes marked by oil and dirt from bikes. Usage of the lifts by non-customers has added significantly to running costs (maintenance and energy), as well as reducing the life of the lifts.

"In view of the above, it was decided that when the lifts were replaced the car park tickets would operate them, as this would improve the environment and service to our customers by reducing waiting times. Limiting their use to fee-paying car park users will also reduce future wear and tear to the lifts, and hopefully also reduce the amount of vandalism occurring. We should also benefit from reduced energy and maintenance costs.

"If we were to allow non-customers to use the lifts again this would counter the above benefits of the refurbishment project for the management of this car park.

"Arguably if we were to introduce a charge for using the lifts the associated additional maintenance and energy costs could be recovered but customer wait time would increase making it a less attractive car park for users. It would also be difficult and expensive to introduce a charging regime for non-car users. If a scheme of charging none car-park users were to be introduced we would once again encounter problems of lift overcrowding and the potential for customers to damage their clothing. On balance therefore it is believed that the current limitation on lift usage is appropriate.
Please let me know if you require any further information"

The interesting thing about this response is that it does show a demand for the lift in Trenchard Street by cyclists, pedestrians, parents with buggies and disabled people who don't have a car parked there. This was part of the suggestion from Chris Hutt for a bicycle lift up the outside of the car park.

Jon”

“Back at 9.30pm and over 70 comments! I will try and answer the ones directed at me...

(Q1) Lee, Hartcliffe at 09:52 asks "why have traffic lights been installed at Hengrove roundabout?"

(A1) I am afraid I don't know the specifics, but will ask. Traffic lights are generally installed to help pedestrians cross roads safely, help cars join roundabouts and other roads more safely, prevent congestion, etc. For example, the traffic lights at M32 J3 roundabout were installed to help vehicles use the roundabout safely (there were many accidents there), and to prevent the city centre snarling up when Cabot Circus opened.

(Q2) Paul, Bristol at 10:57 asks "what's happened since you first asked the question" about switching off traffic lights some or all?

(A2) Officers explained, as some readers have explained, that there are of course highway code issues, safety issues, traffic flow issues, congestion issues, age of traffic lights issues, and so on.

On newer traffic lights we can change the settings to be more sensitive to cars or pedestrians approaching.

We have already changed many lights, especially outside rush hours, to be more responsive. If the road is quiet, why don't the lights change to green as you approach?

More answers in a few minutes.

Jon”

“The council would do better to spend some of the money on some road repairs rather than spend so much money on traffic lights.”