Times sportswriter Simon Barnes denounces Derby cycle track

As a Derby cyclist who actually attended the planning meeting when this application was passed maybe I could answer a few points.
The site itself was created when all the contaminated topsoil from Pride Park was dumped and covered with a membrane and fenced off to keep the public away. This allowed nature to regenerate the area and attracted wildlife (mainly birds) and the area was later upgraded to a Local Nature Reserve.
The funding from BC specified that the track should be next door to the velodrome so that the changing rooms and car parking can be used for both.
The track itself will be screened from the rest of the reserve by an earth bank to keep disturbance to a minimum and the whole area will be fenced off to protect both the LNR and the track.
The planning committee approved it by 6 votes to 5 ; all 5 Labour councillors voted for it while the 4 Tories opposed so it came down to the 2 Lib Dems who were split on the issue (or if you are cynical you could say they were allowed to make their own minds up )

I'm curious about this point:

“British Cycling agreed to part-fund the cycle-track - but, the council understood, only if it was next to the sports-centre/velodrome,”

Is it true, and if so, what reasons for this do BC give? Because it seems to me a bit odd to imply that (sports?) cyclists would be far too lazy to use the track if it were any more than a two minute leisurely stroll away from the sports centre.

I find his suggestion that this is anti "green" which cycling supposedly is.
What cobblers. Green? Yeah right. Just look at all those new bikes and fancy kit and all those bikes being driven to trail centres.
It does seem a touch in sensitive this but naturally we only have half the story to base our uninformed comments on1

I have ridden through that area quite a few times and didn't even realise there was a nature reserve there! More a dump really!

Another non-story really, next?

If you investigate this further you'll see that the track is being built on what looks like a brownfield site, of which the nature reserve is part of - see photo here https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=670191436336972&set=pcb.67019156...

Looks like there are plenty of other sites very close - why not build on one of those?

It wouldn't affect me hugely living where I do now, but I'd quite like to go racing in Derby! It just seems that the location they've chosen has already been developed.

To be honest though, the cycle path next to the river gets flooded very easily imagine any infrastructure that isn't a nature reserve may struggle anyway.

He may well have a point, but lashing out at cycling is veering towards Daily Mail territory.

Seems to have a valid point. Surely the point of nature reserves is that they're safe from development, whether that development be a block of flats or a cycle track.

Wonder how long it will be before "they destroy nature reserves" gets thrown in to the mix along with 'knocking down grannies on the pavement' and 'jumping red lights' and 'wearing stupid looking plastic hats and silly yellow outfits'/'not wearing essential safety equipment' (or even both complaints at once) for the next generic collective-blame anti-cycling newspaper column?

He should care. They turned part of my local reserve into a golf course.

Destruction ????????