IT was set to be one of the most ambitious pieces of cycle infrastructure in Scotland, allowing cyclists to ride all the way from Milngavie and Bearsden to Glasgow on a route protected from traffic.
Today the Bears Way project in East Dunbartonshire lies in tatters after SNP, LibDem and independent councillors clubbed together to oppose the Labour-Conservative coalition and stop the cycleway in its tracks in a tight 12-11 vote last week.
The result means the scheme is now at a standstill with only Phase One, from Burnbrae roundabout to Hillfoot, complete. A "strip of cycleway in the middle of nowhere, connecting to nothing", as one frustrated council source described it.
With local authority elections looming in 2017, the situation is unlikely to change until a new administration is voted in - although a petition, signed by 2,600 locals, has called for the existing stretch of cycleway on the A81 to be ripped out and the road restored. That may well be the final outcome: a victory for the drivers, homeowners, and traders who bitterly opposed the loss of roadspace and parking, but a bitter blow for cyclists and environmentalists who had supported the European-style vision of safe cycling infrastructure.
Ironically, the vote came just days after Scottish transport statistics showed a small dip in the number of people cycling - to 1.2 per cent - sparking warnings that the SNP's long-time goal to have 10 per cent of all journeys made by bike by 2020 was now impossible.
The Nationalists' cycling ambitions seem to have been repeatedly thwarted by their local authority counterparts who, in fairness, must balance the interests and wishes of their constituents against party priorities.
In the case of Bears Way, the debate became so heated that public meetings featured everything from death threats on post-it notes to 999 calls to the police. To say opinion was split is an understatement.
SNP councillor Keith Small blamed "anger and frustration" over Phase One of the cycleway for actually creating conflict between motorists and cyclists.
In a similar vein, Edinburgh councillors - with the exception of the Greens - voted in August to put the controversial Roseburn tranche of the capital's segregated cycleway on ice after the debate became "too polarised". Mirroring East Dunbartonshire, battle lines were drawn between residents angry that a loss of roadspace for cars would exacerbate congestion, while those in favour argued that unless infrastructure is overhauled to make cycle routes safe and direct Scotland will never hit its cycling targets.
Today, an SNP motion going before South Ayrshire council is calling for a bi-directional cycle lane in Ayr to be removed and the carriageway restored to its original condition, again seemingly at odds with national objectives.
On the one hand, campaigners have a point when they urge the Scottish Government to spend at least 10 per cent of the transport budget on walking and cycling, compared to two per cent now.
But spending is only part of the battle. A tougher dilemma is local democracy.
How do councillors balance loyalty to their constituents with party policy? And is a "popular" decision necessarily the right decision given the growing threat from obesity and sedentary lifestyles?
For now, Scotland's cycling policy looks to be on a road to nowhere.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel