Bristol Live readers are unhappy to hear that Bristol City Council has seen the cost of two pedestrianisation projects soar by £500,000 – a 40 per cent jump due to an initial underestimation. The council leaders have given the green light for the increased expenditure for Overton Road near Gloucester Road and Princess Victoria Street in Clifton and they are hoping that the West of England Combined Authority (Weca) will make up the shortfall after quotations for the works outstripped original calculations.

A decision back in July saw council officers up the budget from the initial combined amount of £754,000 for the pedestrian improvements by £124,000 based on early-stage estimates. Post-tender the additional costs have risen to half a million pounds, prompting ongoing discussions between City Hall and Weca about securing extra funds to cover the price hike.

Choosing to increase the budget rather than scaling back or scrapping the schemes, a senior council officer signed off on the increase earlier this month. An advisory on the official council website states that the amounts have escalated since July “because tenders have returned and are considerably more than we had estimated”.

Commenter Ezergood hopes that: “As the council gains experience in pedestrian-centric projects, instead of automatically pandering to motorists, it will be able to budget more accurately for future projects.”

Jubblyone4 points out: “If the Council keeps on bashing the motorist they will soon find the pedestrian areas are very quiet. Case in point – I recently visited Clifton village for a meal. Parking was a nightmare, the pedestrianisation of streets quite often reduces the number of car parking spaces available – therefore the Council are adding to the problem. Public transport wasn’t an option as we live outside Bristol and there is no regular bus service, plus it would take several hours more for a journey I can make in less than an hour in my own car. I won’t be rushing back to Clifton any time soon. Bash the motorist all you like but for the majority it is their only realistic option.”

Susiep replies: “The words of the Mayor of Pontevedra spring to mind – ‘It’s not my duty as Mayor to make sure you have a parking spot. For me it’s the same as if you bought a cow, or a refrigerator, and then asked me where you’re going to put them.'”

“If you visit a retail park, in or out of town, they have invested in providing parking spaces to attract customers, it’s a cost to their business not the Council; I’m unsure why it should be different in other retail areas.”

Thecookedsock thinks: “More unelected officials making decisions in the committee style system.” Predictabletechs replies: “The public have received what the public asked for. They now have to own it.”

Spankthemonkey believes: “PVS and Cotham Hill ruined by this experiment.”

Othermeinnit asks: “How on earth can a few planters cost a million pounds?! The council, and government generally, need people who have some idea what things cost and how to get them done for that price.”

Lili Pof says: “These zones won’t be an immediate success and there will be issues with today’s generation of motorists harking back to the good old days when there were half the amount of cars on the road. But gradually, the next generation will realise that there are other options rather than always jumping in the car for every journey.”

Guy Buckland agrees: “Motornormativity is entrenched. We simply can’t go on piling more and more cars into the same number of roads. Whilst this scheme may not be perfect, the answers to urban transport can not be unfettered traffic.”

Rob Hill writes: “They will ban/block cars, but then still leave it open to cyclists who will drive straight into all the pedestrians who now think it’s safe to walk in the roads because there are no cars. I’m all for blocking off to traffic. But it must be ALL traffic and that has to include bikes, powered scooters etc”

How do you feel about the scheme? Is it worth the extra expenditure? Have your say in our comments section.