“If you don’t like cyclists going through red lights, support cycling infrastructure”: Cyclists jumping lights spark debate; Van der Poel’s terrifying uphill sprint; Doughnut shop can’t open due to World Champs; Creepiest bike + more on the live blog
SUMMARY
"I want to ride my... bicycle": Creepiest bicycle ever?
I can tell you one thing, you won’t be seeing this on Bike at bedtime on road.cc anytime soon…
I know self-love is the best love, but sometimes I love my bike more. This is the weirdest way to combine those two affections.
Creepy, unnerving, scary, and just, wrong. No, I do not want this in my nightmares tonight, tomorrow, or ever.
"Fancy a Tantrum?": Glasgow doughnut shop unable to open due to road closures for World Championships despite being "promised access"
A Glaswegian doughnut shop, called ‘Tantrum Doughnuts’, has said that it is “unable to open” due to road closures courtesy of the UCI World Championships taking place right now, despite being “promised business access” by the Glasgow City Council.
“Unfortunately we won’t be able to open our Gordon Street shop today. We were promised business access to drop off the doughnuts in the early hours this morning, but after 3 hours of trying to get in we couldn’t even get remotely close to the shop!” wrote the doughnut shop account on Facebook.
“We’re trying to figure out what to over the next week as we are devastated – this was going to be a busy and exciting week for the City Centre,” it continued, informing that the west end and south side shops will stay open for business as usual.
The post has drawn sympathy from its regulars customers on social media, and even enraged a few of the locals against the council even more, which ironically has become public enemy number one in the Scottish city.
“I hope the council will be held accountable for this, but somehow they’ll blame contractors or someone else for their lack of forward planning. It reminds me of cop 26 when we were all promised access to walking routes and deliveries, etc, but come the day… Access denied. It’s mind over matter. They don’t mind and we don’t matter. Good luck with access during these events,” read one comment.
Another person wrote: “Glasgow City Council screwing over businesses again…really sorry to read this… I hope something can be sorted so you can provide excellent doughnuts for regulars and tourists alike.”
This is the first time all disciplines of cycling championships are being hosted in one city at the same time, making Glasgow the first host of the major historic event. However, in the months prior, a bitter brawl has brewed between the council and the residents over traffic restrictions and car park closures.
While in some cases residents were able to secure compromises with the council, as evident in the case of the para-cycling championships in Dumfries where the council tweaked the timings of the event to enable those who live in Summerville Crescent to access the street through the supermarket’s carpark, the general consensus, to use a broadest of broad generalisation, hasn’t been well.
Just earlier this week, locals slammed the council for road restrictions to be put in place for the Gran Fondo event taking place later today, with some residents plotting a “100-mile diversion” they would need to take just to cross town during the event.
While the loss of business would surely come as a setback for Tantrum Doughnuts, who find themselves in a peculiar jam and have all the right to throw… a tantrum (you know it was coming), there’s always the chance that locals, regulars, and tourists pop into one of their two other outlets to have a bite (or more) of what seems to be genuinely good doughnuts from the reviews.
And some good news for potential customers is that they are offering 25 per cent off of purchases of six or more doughnuts, just today. I can report that if Bex Francis’ comment under the Facebook post is to be trusted, they do “fancy a tantrum” and will be “buying them all” with the discount on offer. I could tell you I’d fancy one right about now.
"Visual metaphor"
An oldie but a goldie. “Oh shoot, when we built the cycle lane, Lake Michigan had a low water level!”
Shortest triathlon in history!!! https://t.co/iNGDwDZm2h
— Pierre 🌅 (@Aponhcet) August 3, 2023
Black Country, New Road... safety improvements?
No it’s not the experimental rock sextet from Cambridgeshire (also one of my favourite modern bands right now), but major safety improvements have been announced along the busy A4123 commuter route linking Wolverhampton city centre to Hagley Road, Birmingham, courtesy of a £30 million partnership of Black Country local authorities.
Plans for the 17 km highway include a proposed segregated cycleway and upgraded footpaths, which will improve safety, provide greater priority at junctions, and encourage more people to swap cars for bikes, particularly on shorter journeys.
Adam Tranter, West Midlands’ cycling & walking commissioner, said: “This is a hugely ambitious project which will provide significant connectivity for active travel in the Black Country.
“When delivered, this cycleway will be one of the longest continuous urban cycling routes in the country giving people new, sustainable, and cost-effective transport options. Connecting with other projects scheduled for delivery, eventually people will be able to cycle, protected from traffic, from Wolverhampton to Birmingham.”
Yesterday, we reported that at a meeting requested by Tranter who has been heavily involved in improving road safety for cycling and pedestrians in recent months, a new package of tougher measures to tackle dangerous driving in the West Midlands was introduced.
At the meeting — chaired by West Midlands mayor Andy Street and attended by the Chief Constable of West Midlands Police, the councillor responsible for transport at Birmingham City Council, Police and Crime Commissioner Simon Foster, as well as Transport for West Midlands’ executive director — tougher measures for dangerous drivers were agreed upon, with the cited aim to “target the most dangerous drivers” with “relentless enforcement of the rules of the road”.
UCI President David Lappartient to ride Gran Fondo World Championships
UCI’s President David Lappartient has revealed that he will be riding the Gran Fondo World Championship race along with hundreds of other cyclists, to take place later today.
Along with hundreds of fellow passionate cyclists, I’ll be participating in the Gran Fondo today as part of the 2023 UCI Cycling World Championships.
Best of luck to all of the competitors! #GlasgowScotland2023 | @CyclingWorlds pic.twitter.com/RdbpdQIg8D
— David Lappartient (@DLappartient) August 4, 2023
Rishi Sunak is “on the side” of drivers – What happened to Britain’s “golden age for cycling”? Plus THAT cargo bike parking row on the road.cc Podcast
We discuss what the Prime Minister’s pro-car agenda could mean for active travel in the UK, while a Bristol family ask why their cargo bike is deemed by the council to be less important than a car parking space…
"How are they going to cope with all the rainbows?": UCI criticised for awarding hosting rights to UAE and Saudi Arabia
UCI, pro cycling’s governing body met for its 192nd Congress yesterday at Glasgow, currently hosting the first-ever multi-disciplinary Cycling World Championships in history.
It also marked the first time that a meeting was joined by a record 151 UCI member National Federations, as the body also officially welcomed American Samoa to take the total number of National Federations to 203.
But everyone knew what was going to be the biggest story from the event: the unveiling of the host nations for the upcoming World Championships. And the unveiling has a lot of people unhappy. Why, you ask?
A few weeks ago I was interviewed by @nygaardbn @weekendavisen about cycling, sport and politics. He asked how I viewed the future regarding autocratic regimes interest in cycling and how UCI would respond. Today @UCI_cycling gave some answers by awarding hosting rights to 🇸🇦🇦🇪 pic.twitter.com/zHa9DRKDmC
— Stanis Elsborg (@StanisElsborg) August 3, 2023
To list it out, five out of the 14 events over the next five years will take place in Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates (UAE), including the 2028 UCI Road World Championships in Abu Dhabi, the 2028 UCI Gravel World Championships in Alula, and the 2029 UCI Track World Championships in Abu Dhabi again.
UCI’s President David Lappartient wrote: “Spanning from 2024 to 2030, cycling is coming to a country near you and we’re incredibly excited to bring the sport to new audiences.”
Philippa York, Scottish cycling legend and Tour de France mountains jersey winner, was critical of the decision right off the bat: “How are UAE and the Saudis going to cope with all the rainbows as being lgbtq is criminalised in those countries??”
“Not just lgbtq , people of colour too . Another happy welcome for those pesky Eritreans in the making,” she continued, after the Visagate debacle in which three Eritrean riders were reportedly refused a Visa by the UK Home Office for the Glasgow World Champsionships.
She highlighted the issues with racism, social prejudices, and women’s rights as well.
Women’s rights also https://t.co/CGB6dGEWog
— Philippa York (@pippa_york) August 3, 2023
Another person commented: “So UCI are happy to turn a blind eye to the abysmal human rights record of middle East countries because they want lots of dirty money in their bank account Not a good look at all.”
Qatar already had the World Championships in 2016, and it’s not like cycling lacks the presence of petrochemical autocracies in the first place, so does the decision really come as a shock to anyone?
What’s next? Team NEOM-Visma??
Pippa, brace yourself for a lot of monochrome filters! 😳🤷♂️🙈
— david brodie 🥃 (@davidjbrodie) August 3, 2023
Just MvdP things... Van der Poel makes 14% gradient look flat with a terrifying uphill sprint (and this is just ‘course familiarisation’)
*Admin cries into sandwich* @mathieuvdpoel making Montrose Street look like the flat…🥴pic.twitter.com/Yrx4RyYwAt
— 2023 UCI Cycling World Championships (@CyclingWorlds) August 4, 2023
Pardon my language but flipping heck… That too on a practice session as riders familiarise themselves with the roads.
Some responses from locals:
“Mental. It takes the average Glaswegian 3 weeks to get up that hill.”
“Jeez, our little Honda Jazz struggles up this hill!”
“I can’t even walk up that street.”
Gran Fondo is a-way!
GRAN FONDO IS GO!! 🟢@PerthandKinross – you were looking straight 🔥 this morning! #GlasgowScotland2023 | #PowerOfTheBike pic.twitter.com/cuG3kcysl3
— 2023 UCI Cycling World Championships (@CyclingWorlds) August 4, 2023
Let me know if anyone spots Lappartient…
"If it works, it ain't stupid": Taking a Specialized home on a hire bike, NYC edition
Problems only cyclists will understand. You save up to buy your dream bike, which happens to be a Specialized (hey, I’m not judging you), you order it online but to save a few bucks on your expensive bike, you end up doing a ‘click-and-collect’ delivery. But after getting to the store, you realise you’d have to get it home, somehow.
Somehow, being, using a hire bike. To carry your brand new home. On your back.
Cardiff police seize 17 illegal e-bikes in crackdown on riding in pedestrianised areas
The bikes, capable of reaching 40mph, are classed as motorbikes and therefore require a licence and insurance.
> Cardiff police seize 17 illegal e-bikes in crackdown on riding in pedestrianised areas
"On yer bike!": Pensions Secretary asks over 50s to consider working as takeaway delivery riders, says he "identifies" with Deliveroo riders
I do not jest, this is real!
Mel Stride, Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, has asked over 50s to consider getting jobs as takeaway delivery riders, as the Conservative Government looks to get more older people who aren’t working back into a career.
He also suggested businesses to opening up flexible jobs normally aimed at younger people to those closer to the retirement age, asking firms to try and attract older workers back into jobs and ensure they feel at home.
Speaking on a visit to the food delivery firm Deliveroo’s headquarters in London, he told The Times: “What we’re seeing here is the ability to log on and off anytime you like, no requirement to have to do a certain number of hours over a certain period of time, which is driving huge opportunities.
“From an employer’s point of view in a tight labour market, it’s absolutely essential if you want to access all the available talent that you provide as flexible an offer as you can.”
Stride added that he “found himself identifying” with 51-year-old Abdul Javaid, a Deliveroo rider and a grandfather based in Kingston upon Thames in southwest London, who had lost 10kg since taking up the job.
Suffice to say, people aren’t happy.
Cheeky Bas***d – Worked 43 years non stop and was not given the salary and ridiculous “ uncapped expensive “ this idiot and the “ Westminster Club “ get. Thanks god this lot will be ousted at the next election.
Unfortunately the best of a bad bunch will take over. 🤦♂️🤦♂️ https://t.co/t9Gq20zYIH
— Robert Dixon (@gbdixor) August 4, 2023
“we’ve failed you as a government, why don’t -you- work harder?”
— DCharlie (@DCharlieUK1) August 3, 2023
As always, the nature of the comments hasn’t stopped the gifted comedians from having a laugh.
Maaaaaaate
— MadameCholet (@PurpleDon1973) August 2, 2023
The Tories’ latest idea: over-50s to become delivery bike riders….#strideout #sunakout #toriesout #toriesunfittogovern #toriesbrokebritain pic.twitter.com/gsa1fjCdBO
— Mike D – London, Europe (@MikeDLondon) August 3, 2023
And thanks to AI, we have this fever-dream picture too.
Aspirational Britain… I can tell you as someone who is nearing 50, the last thing I want to do is drag my knackered arse around on a bike delivering pizzas all day. @MelJStride proving he is just another insulting, privileged prick in the cesspit of Tories. #ToriesOut #SunakOut https://t.co/FXasP1lgpU pic.twitter.com/XC1p935Hzq
— Excluded and Forgotten (@AndExcluded) August 3, 2023
"If you don’t like cyclists going through red lights, support proper cycling infrastructure": Calls for better cycling infrastructure after cyclists jumping lights goes viral
Time to bring back this old adage from the road.cc way of news: “Getting on a bike does not make you a saint”, so it shouldn’t come as too much of a surprise or a shock that cyclists sometimes jump traffic lights, as evident by this viral video on Twitter from yesterday.
Fellow #cyclists, please respect pedestrian crossing esp. when someone is pushing a buggy. pic.twitter.com/dvwM6Odsoi
— SanjayLalwani 🌍🚴 (@i_SanjayLalwani) August 3, 2023
Just as a refresher of the Highway Code: Pedestrians, cyclists, horse riders, motorcyclists, cars, vans, and HGVs, in that order.
At the next signal I caught up with all the three riders!
— SanjayLalwani 🌍🚴 (@i_SanjayLalwani) August 3, 2023
for every 1 cyclist there are 100+ drivers breaking the HWC.
— SanjayLalwani 🌍🚴 (@i_SanjayLalwani) August 3, 2023
But of course, as we know, Amsterdam — one of the best cities for cycling in the world, has in the past experimented with doing away with traffic signals altogether, and with some success.
Until 2016, one of the Dutch capital’s busiest intersections at Sarphatistraat-Alexanderplein was controlled by traffic lights, with cyclists, the predominant users in Amsterdam as in a lot of Dutch cities.
The test was part of a larger mobility strategy across the city to make more room for cyclists and pedestrians, meaning limiting access and space for private vehicles. The new setup forced people to engage with their surroundings: Instead of relying on traffic lights, they now relied on their own abilities and the cues of others.
Over the period of a year, it was seen that cyclists had become more aware of their surroundings and of other road users. In less than two weeks, the evolution was already observed on Alexanderplein.
Delay times were reduced and safety remained unaffected, showing that regulation can lead to responsible and alert road users. It was so successful that the pilot was extended and a few months later the lights were completely removed, and even led to the junction’s redesign.
And not just completely doing away with traffic signals, I’m sure the presence of a segregated cycle lane cannot be stressed enough for increasing the safety of both cyclists and pedestrians, as pointed out by road safety expert Adam Bronkhorst.
Traffic signals are for the management motor traffic. The best cycling in NL avoid having them anywhere near cyclists!
— The Ranty Highwayman (@RantyHighwayman) August 4, 2023
But the question is if Netherlands did it in 2016, in a country where the cycling revolution kicked off in the 1970s, how far behind is the UK where we’ll get to see Dutch levels of not only riding, but also safety for all road users?
4 August 2023, 08:44
4 August 2023, 08:44
4 August 2023, 08:44
Help us to bring you the best cycling content
If you’ve enjoyed this article, then please consider subscribing to road.cc from as little as £1.99. Our mission is to bring you all the news that’s relevant to you as a cyclist, independent reviews, impartial buying advice and more. Your subscription will help us to do more.
85 Comments
Read more...
-1024x680.jpg "“Clear anti-cyclist bias”: Lawsuit filed against Toronto police after cop doored cyclist… before ticketing rider over incident")
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
(reply to Backladder as ability to reply to more than the fourth reply seems to have been removed) I really hope that's tongue in cheek, because if it isn't it's just ludicrous. I have never noticed the slightest discrepancy between wind noise when riding with a helmet and when riding without so it must be minimal at best. I've read quite a lot of debate about helmets, here and elsewhere, and you're the first person I've ever seen suggesting that people wearing helmets might crash because of wind noise.
You’re making a big assumption there that “anonymous person posting on the internet” is in the UK.
Its nice that they have these little things called kilometres for all the show offs to ride large numbers of, but in the UK road signs use miles and speed limits are in miles per hour so come back when you are using big boy units!
I don't know of any research into that question but from my own experience a helmet interferes with my awareness of traffic around me, the noise from the wind in the helmet is louder than the sound of modern quiet cars and other cyclists so perhaps your urban commuters are crashing because they can't hear other traffic around them?
My father undertook post mortems and attended coronors inquests until his retirement and early death. He saw the riders who died in accidents. He built up decades of observed experience. He made us wear a helmet.
I'm glad I had my trousers on. If I hadn't I might have been arrested.
Who was responsible for organising the prizes on Bullseye? Tonight's star prize was a luxury fitted kitchen. How are you supposed to split that between two contestants? Absolutely ridiculous.
Oh sir! sir! Johnnys riding his bike without a helmet, he’s going to die when he falls off!, Yes what a silly boy he is ! Anyway jump in the car we’re going to be late for school and I hope no one gets in my way especially bleeding cyclists!! I wonder if AI will see what fools we are..
It's more about the nomex suit, car helmet and five point harnesses (with HANS), but "reply" ain't what it used to be...
'Gotten' ? The word is 'become', as in, I have become sick of seeing 'gotten'.
85 thoughts on ““If you don’t like cyclists going through red lights, support cycling infrastructure”: Cyclists jumping lights spark debate; Van der Poel’s terrifying uphill sprint; Doughnut shop can’t open due to World Champs; Creepiest bike + more on the live blog”
There’s definitely a case for
There’s definitely a case for experimenting with changing signage/lights at junctions. However, this light (which I know well as I ride through it twice a day (when on green, obviously), it’s on the Brixton Road) is a pelican for crossing a very busy four-lane (two traffic and two bus) road that is used by eight bus routes and very heavy motor and cycle traffic. If it wasn’t there there would be no way for pedestrians to cross and the nearest junctions are several hundred yards in either direction. Cyclist behaviour there, particularly around 7-8AM, is frankly appalling with peletons of young men (sorry but it is 95% young men) barrelling through the red without thinking of stopping regardless of who is on the crossing.
I agree. But I find it weird
I agree. But I find it weird that cyclist are the only folks subject to this collective responsibility. Does a driver cutting through red lights make all other drivers look bad?
Rendel Harris wrote:
Yeah but.. London, which to my non local eye appears to be both the pinnacle and the nadir of British cycle commuting.
peted76 wrote:
From my observations when perambulating around the country to see friends I’d say that in cities (mainly Newcastle, Leeds, Bristol, Cardiff, Brighton) pretty much the same percentage of cyclists run reds as do so in London; it’s more noticeable in London because we have far higher numbers of cyclists, ten of a hundred running a red looks a lot worse than one of ten.
It’s clearly very salient in
It’s clearly very salient in London however I suspect that’s just due to concentration as you say.
However in the UK it’s not quite just “some people on bikes” – there is a selection effect, because we don’t have “mass cycling”. If we had that I’d bet the levels of selfishness would trend towards the numbers we currently see in driving * – assuming there is some policing like there is in NL **.
Counter-example though – apparently in parts of Amsterdam a sizeable fraction of cyclists don’t respect red lights. But there doesn’t appear to be a slaughter of pedestrians; in fact NL rates as one of the safest places to walk.
So like other anti-social behaviour we need to measure what the actual outcomes / effects are to determine the priority for addressing this. Anyone have numbers / any evidence of “suppression of walking” – like happens where there are lots of motor vehicles?
* EDIT for clarity – which might make some rule-breaking increase! To fix that again address issues which cause people to break rules (e.g. make it more convenient) and then ensure the few remaining rules are policed.
** In the UK it seems this is “almost none” for cyclists – as opposed to “very little” for motorists who also e.g. run red lights despite being in easily identifiable cars with numberplates…
There should be better
There should be better infrastructure, and I think there is a reasonable argument for allowing cyclists to turn left through red lights when there’s not also a pedestrian crossing.
But the people riding as they do in the clip (and I see tens of them most days in my area, close to Brixton) aren’t doing that because it wouldn’t be safe for them to stop, and they’re not engaging with their environment and forming a reasonable judgement on what’s safe for them and more vulnerable road users.
They’re doing it because they don’t feel the rules should apply to them, they’re too selfish to care about others around them, and there is no penalty for their behaviour (other than me calling them wankers and occasionally standing in their way).
There’s no need for registration or tabards or any of that: just a random scattering of plod lurking round the corner handing out fines. They did it at a junction between Borough and Elephant (right by the police station), and the number of people sailing through the crossroad on red seemed to fall sharply.
And of course red-light jumping motorists should be penalised more harshly. In my bit of London though, RLJ in cars seems rare and is almost-always sneaking through just after the light has changed. It’s normal at some junctions for over 50% of cyclists to completely ignore the lights though, and it’s not ok.
Brauchsel wrote:
I’m sorry but that’s just not true, unless you have the data to back that up, that is an anecdote.
For example on yesterdays ride I can say that 100% of cyclists I saw stopped at a specific red light. I can only say that because when I was at said traffic light there was only one other cyclist at that specific time. It would then be completely wrong to say 100% of cyclist stop at that specific traffic light as I was only there for said short period. If a traffic survey over a full day was done we can actually get far more accurate data.
The saying “the plural of
The saying “the plural of anecdote is not data” has sadly been picked up by dim people as a kind of “gotcha” to excuse their own prejudices. It wasn’t an anecdote, it was an assertion: the limited data I have observed supports it, and you can believe me or not
I’m not going to sit around all week to do a study. But I can think of three or four junctions near me where, if the lights are red, more than half of the cyclists approaching will go through anyway. I’ve observed that at all times of day or night, so I don’t think it’s an unreasonable assertion.
It isn’t for us to judge whether we’re too close, can get round safely, whatever. We, and other road users, are poor judges of speed and distance and others’ behaviour, and so there are rules in place to mitigate that. So it’s for us to stop at the fucking red lights and wait our turn.
Brauchsel wrote:
Assertion/Anecdote, it still results in you having no “scientific” data. My assertion based on 30 years of anecdotal evidence is that 90% of cyclist stop at red lights. Now you can believe that or not but I’m not going spend my time to look for actual studies to prove my point when I can just Chuck out lazy assertions.
And I will stop at fucking red lights where I deem it right and proper (99% of the time). The other 1% I have yet to kill or maim anyone by going through one.
“And I will stop at fucking
“And I will stop at fucking red lights where I deem it right and proper (99% of the time). The other 1% I have yet to kill or maim anyone by going through one.”
Should all the other people, who aren’t fortunate enough to have your superhuman powers of observation and foresight, get to pick and choose which traffic laws they obey? 1% feels like a high level of occasions in which it would be hazardous for you to stop.
I can readily believe the overall studies at 13% or whatever (although imagine if one in eight cars didn’t bother stopping). Many/most junctions it’s obviously unsafe to cross on red because there’s a stream of traffic, and often drivers prevent us from getting to the front by filling the ASL box (which should also be enforced). The junctions I am talking about (and I didn’t claim otherwise) are not like that. They’re mostly pedestrian crossings, or where a major road meets a minor and most riders *do* go straight through because they perceive it to be safe *for them*. They’re usually right, but that’s not the point: the people who are following the (rational and well-known) rules should be able to expect to cross safely on their turn.
Brauchsel wrote:
Being able to observe one’s surroundings at 15-20mph is not a super power. In 30 years of riding I have had zero pedestrian incidents precisely because I’m careful and observant.
You say the junctions you’re talking about “are not like that” but are happy to chuck out another assertion about my riding through 1% of traffic lights without any idea of the time of day, Road layout and design or location. Impressive.
“Being able to observe one’s
“Being able to observe one’s surroundings at 15-20mph is not a super power. In 30 years of riding I have had zero pedestrian incidents precisely because I’m careful and observant.”
Not so careful or observant when it comes to reading. I am sure you’re an excellent rider (as most people say they are) and I won’t be so petty as to ask for data beyond your own claims.
But, many people are not excellent riders or drivers even though they think they are. You trust your judgement: they trust theirs, but theirs is shit. If you can jump red lights when you feel like it, so can they.
This causes problems. A solution might be to have some kind of signal, to let excellent and shit riders alike know that the way ahead of them is going to be clear. If everyone obeys those signals, nobody’s going to ride into anybody else. They might have to slow down or stop for a few seconds, which might be a bit frustrating, but it doesn’t seem an unreasonable price to pay in order to have a system which is reasonably fair and predictable for everyone.
I could be wrong but… tell
I could be wrong but… tell me you’re a lawyer without telling me you’re a lawyer
Brauchsel wrote:
I can read perfectly well. You suggested not everyone had my “superpowers”. I asserted that I do not have superpowers just am careful and observant. Of course not everyone is careful and observant.
What sort of data could I possibly provide anyway to prove such a claim apart from my own personal anecdotes of my riding over the past 30 years? It’s a pointless point.
And again you have no clue what red lights I am chosing to “jump” i.e to come to a slow roll, check there are no cars about before carrying on my merry way. Pedestrians are not at a couple of the traffic lights as they are not pedestrian crossings or I am crossing with the pedestrians who also often cross on the red light (naughty pedestrians, yes it’s not illegal but well, we should all observe the red lights, right?)
The best solution is as far as possible, separated infrastructure for cycling, walking and motor vehicles as per the Dutch. Everything else is just half arsed.
Brauchsel wrote:
This is the problem. Very few people intend to kill or maim anyone by jumping a red light. The cyclist who hit one of my family on a pedestrian crossing probably didn’t intend to hit her, or to break her ankle and collarbone. But, as with investments, past performance is no guarantee of future performance.
I think your excusing drivers
I think your excusing drivers “sneaking” through a red misses the huge acceleration, noise and speeding that accompanies it.
And this is not forgetting the size and weight of the vehicle.
Though many of them are trying to camouflage them with the tarmac grey colourings…
RDaneel wrote:
Indeed. I’ve read two studies on this, one based in London and one in Northern Ireland that put the rate at under 13% (I think the NI one was around 10-11%, the London one was around 12.5% – but this is from memory)
I noticed on Twitter an
I noticed on Twitter an increasing number of drivists suggesting that, in response to RJLing videos, if the cars didn’t hit anything, where was the problem?
The problem isn’t cyclists
The problem isn’t cyclists going through red lights, it is not respecting pedestrians. In France one is allowed go through on red at many lights (there is a sign allowing this) but one has to give way to pedestrians and other road users.
neilmck wrote:
I agree – I personally think running red lights is one of the big advantages of riding in urban areas, as it means you can get from a – b much quicker than cars.
However, it does mean that you will come across cars & peds – and the key to running a red light is being acutely aware of your surroundings.
neilmck wrote:
There’s definitely a case for allowing left turn on red etc, but I really don’t think it’s applicable to a non-junction pelican like this one. Why would the people who currently think it’s OK to ride straight through the red when there are pedestrians on the crossing be more, not less, respectful of the pedestrians if there was a light saying they could go? Can’t see that happening. Where pedestrians are crossing the only sensible control is a mandatory red for all road users, in my opinion. It would be lovely if one could say cyclists could be trusted to be sensible, and the vast majority of us can, but (as the video shows) a significant minority can’t.
It’s very common in
It’s very common in Southampton where I live for there to be a sign on the pavement indicating a shared use cycle/footpath and a picture of a bike and a pedestrian showing green on the pedestrian phase of the lights. So, if I am to mount the pavement and cross the road on my bike this is perfectly safe and legal at these junctions, but if I ride through it without mounting the pavement first it’s dangerous and illegal? Or if I’m to ride through on the pedestrian phase when there are no pedestrians close by this is also dangerous?
The rules around cyclists and red lights have nothing to do with safety.
Using a signed shared use
Using a signed shared use area to cross the road in parallel with the pedestrians when you have a shared green signal is very different from riding perpendicular to the pedestrian flow at a time when they have a legitimate expectation you won’t be.
[Edited to add – it’s possible I have misunderstood what you’re describing]
As far as I understand your
As far as I understand your description you’re talking about on the one hand crossing the road with the pedestrians on a green on a Toucan crossing without dismounting your bike and on the other hand riding through a red light across the path of the pedestrians crossing the road, is that right? In which case yes, one is safe and legal and the other is dangerous and illegal. Apologies if I’ve misunderstood your description.
Jinx!
Jinx!
People are people. If there
People are people. If there’s no feedback for breaking rules the rules will be broken. Having enough police and courts to fix established rule-breaking can be really expensive apart from having unwanted side-effects.
Why not acknowledge human nature and work with it? Make it so there is less incentive to break the few rules which are really needed.
So let cyclists ride past red lights! And get rid of the pedestrian crossings! (Sorry, bit of provocation there…)
All things being equal I reckon giving someone an armoured exoskeleton capable of rapid acceleration and very high speeds might lead to worse behaviour than putting someone on a bike. Especially when there is minimal enforcement of rules – including use of distracting entertainment systems. And when this is also a way of demonstrating your status / prestige…
Don’t feed the troll
Don’t feed the troll
any of them!
any of them!
I note one of them has now descended to the risible attention seeking level of nonsense and overt trigger words that normally come shortly before their next ban
Editorial staff have been on
Editorial staff have been on holiday, don’t be surprised to see some action next week.
I can’t wait.
I can’t wait.
Indeed, I shall be completely
Indeed, I shall be completely ignoring their rather desperate attention seeking rubbish.
I’m 100% for introducing
I’m 100% for introducing things such as the Idaho stop or the French system of allowing cyclists through some red lights – but until this is actualliy indroduced, it’s still a bad look to hand-wave illegal RLJ-ing away as “fine”.
In this exact scrnario, If I
In this exact scrnario, If I’d been the cyclist videoing or the two who breezed through I would have stopped no question. But equally If I’d have been the 4th cyclist who passed behind the pedestrian I would have done the same, as by that time she passes the ped is further enough crossed to not cause any issues at all.
There is no excuse for riding
There is no excuse for riding through a red.
None.
Unless you’re a cunt.
Except in an emergency when
Except in an emergency when you are going to be rear ended (personal experience).
As I have a camera, I get off and jog around red lights.
As legally the offence is
As legally the offence is defined as crossing the white line, it has much to recommend it as a technique.
Or when the local council
Or when the local council hasnt installed sensitive enough plates in the road for the lights to change….. 1 in 3 or 4 are like that round here.
And the thing is you’re never quite sure….
Yeah, 05:30am, no cars around
Yeah, 05:30am, no cars around, and half the lights in the town are sensor-based and will never change for a cyclist. There’s only so much you can change your route to avoid them.
IMO you’re covered on this by HC rule 176. A traffic light’s purpose is to direct the flow of ALL traffic, not just cars. If it does not detect (and therefore will not change for) a cyclist, then it is, by definition, faulty.
Do you have the case law to
Do you have the case law to back up that position .. or is it a ‘as far as you are concerned, the lights are faulty in order to assuage your conscience?
I’d honestly take my chances
I’d honestly take my chances with the fine at court. A traffic light is supposed to control the flow of ALL traffic, if it cannot detect (and will not correctly operate for) and entire category of valid road user, it is not correctly performing its function. In this case, proceeding with extreme caution is literally what the HC tells you do do
Have you ever arrived at a broken set of temporary traffic lights in your car that will literally never change? You have to carefully got through eventually, how is this any different?
What would you do? Bring a sleeping bag so you can set up camp and wait 2-3 hours for a car to come and let you through?
That’s actually a good point.
That’s actually a good point. I’ll generally not go through a red light (I love passing the same riders multiple times on CS7, it’s good sport) BUT there are a couple of well known SMIDDY (sorry mate I didn’t detect you) lights around here. You either have to wait for a motor vehicle to come along & trigger them, or make alternative arrangements.
Ok I understand you may not
Ok I understand you may not like some nations but saying that all of them are cunts it is a bit stereotyping.
https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/oct/27/cyclists-run-red-lights-paris-london-san-francisco
Several times I’ve stopped at
Several times I’ve stopped at red lights when, on hearing the siren of an ambulance from the local hospital approaching from behind, I’ve cycled forward through the red lights so that the ambulance has enough space to get through between myself and the pedestrian refuge. I think a c**t would stay where they are and block the ambulance.
Even with a SUV 6 feet off
Even with a SUV 6 feet off your back wheel who you can’t here decelerateing?
S13SFC wrote:
Naaaa those are useful. Tonsils on the other hand….
ErnieC wrote:
And appendixes.
Tonsils on the other hand….
Tonsils on the other hand….
I have to stand up for tonsils. They are very important, and you’re better off with them. You can manage without a leg, but that doesn’t mean you might as well have it amputated. Same applies to tonsils, and they rarely remove them these days.
I don’t go through red lights
I don’t go through red lights but I struggle to see any problem with that cyclist casually going through the red a safe distance and sensible speed behind the woman pushing a pram. Traffic lights are really only needed to control motor traffic after all.
The woman pushing the pram seems to be actively seeking confrontation though, which is a little mind-boggling, but I expect this comes from the usual anti-cyclist mentality. (You can’t claim a cyclist is putting you in danger when they are trying to give you space and you try to put the cyclist and yourself in danger. This is good evidence to show that pedestrians present more danger to cyclists than vice versa, she wouldn’t have done that if it was a car going past!)
She doesnt. She seemed
She doesnt. She seemed genuinely shocked by the close pass. My sympathies lie with her.
I’m not sure – that last RLJ
I’m not sure – that last RLJ passed awfully close behind her (admittedly, they would have been further away had she not stopped to remonstrate with them). BUT it does carry vibes of “I wouldn’t have hit her if she’d carried on rather than jumping backwards”.
In all circumstances, like it or not, RLJ is not good optics.
Traffic lights apply to all
Traffic lights apply to all road users. Someone crossing on a green man should expect the traffic (and we are traffic) to stop.
Her perception, as the more vulnerable user, of the cyclist’s speed and proximity will be different to his. Just as many drivers have yelled that they were nowhere near me, when from my point of view they were a swerve or an unanticipated stop from hitting me.
Honestly, if you think that a woman being pissed off with someone breaking the law while she crosses what is a stressful road to cross, with her child, is showing an “anti-cyclist mentality” then I’m not surprised people think we’re all arrogant selfish pricks.
Stop. At. The. Fucking. Red. Lights. You’re not special, you don’t have more of a right to go about your journey than anyone else, and the rules do apply to you.
Brauchsel wrote:
Mostly with you here – I’d oppose “right turn on red” for the same reasons. Either a particular traffic light is vitally important or we should get rid of it.
I’d just note we’ve set pedestrians and cyclists up for inconvenience and possible conflict again in the UK. First, roads tend to be wide (for the convenience of driviers) so the crossing times tend to be long. Especially so with multiple lanes – again normally partly for “capacity” of driving.
Making cyclists come to a full stop has a disproportionate impact on the ease of cycling (as compared to e.g. driving) – this is acknowledged in e.g. LTN1/20.
We rarely have separate cycle paths next to the main road. Having those – as opposed to cycle lanes on the roadway – would allow pedestrians to safely deal with any cyclists, then pause in a safe space while they then deal with the motor vehicles
Finally once people are used to it they find it safe for a cyclist to pass behind them or in front on the other side of the space. That doesn’t make it right to blow through reds in the UK of course. It does suggest other solutions e.g. crossing a cycle path doesn’t need special crossings or lights – as is shown here.
Surely in three hours,
Surely in three hours, Tantrum Doughnuts could have just parked up somewhere else nearby and carried their stuff through to the shop?
I wonder if they could’ve
I wonder if they could’ve dropped their goods off with a cargo bike.
Pallet truck?
Pallet truck?
Sack barrow?
True, you have to have one with you …
Though none of the cyclists
Though none of the cyclists presented any danger to the pedestrian, it is intimidation, and the pedestrian should be able to cross on a green light without feeling threatened or bullied to move quicker. As a cyclist I complain about drivers passing or driving too close, starting a turn across my path to bully me into waiting or moving quicker. However, if we need police to act then it has to be prioritised to deal with the most dangerous road users. Those who kill and maim 100’s every day of the week. It’s not cyclists, no matter how annoying we might be to pedestrians and drivers. So having gangs of police waiting to pounce on red light jumping cyclists is not an appropriate use of finite resources.
The video angle makes it look
The video angle makes it look like a very close pass for the ped, and that *would* have been intimidating.
Parents – especially on their own – with small kids should be given the widest berth possible if you can’t pass in front.
Small kids drop and throw things, and the parents first thought is item retrieval not road safety … for for the sake of a few measly seconds, slow down and give them room.
Oldfatgit wrote:
so intimidating that she stops, resulting in the pass being closer than it would otherwise have been.
Of course this serves to highlight how pedestrians act in unpredictable ways when encountering cyclists unepectedly. So give them a wide berth.
It’s her crossing.
It’s her crossing.
The light for road traffic is on red.
She.
Is.
Not.
At.
Fault.
Re: the Netherlands video
Re: the Netherlands video held up as an example of infrastructure – I note that many cyclists proceed through the pedestrian crossing while pedestrians are waiting, so the effect is not disimilar to the Brixton video (albeit pedestrians don’t seem worked up about it and just seem to wait for a lull in cyle traffic). Anyone *know* how they operate in NL?
I think chrisonatrike posted
I think chrisonatrike posted a bicycle dutch video about that not too long ago. Peds will generally wait for a cycle to pass if they’re close in order to not make them lose momentum, should the ped step out the cyclist will either slow or go round them dependant on their speed/distance. Both parties work with the midset the other is not trying to deliberalty collide with them.
So I think the official policy is ‘they can be trusted to sort themselves out’
Exactly this. It’s mutual
Exactly this. It’s mutual respect between pedestrians and cyclists.
Here you go!
Here you go!
Been a while since I was there so see posts from the locals!
On “pedestrian crossings” – often there isn’t a formal one where interacting with cyclists. First the cyclists are on a cycle *path* separate from the main road and that doesn’t necessarily get a red at the same time as motor vehicles where there is a junction. Second it’s simple to cross a relatively narrow cycle path, then you can deal with the motor traffic while waiting in a safe place.
In the UK we get over-fussy with this because cyclists and especially cycle paths are currently a rare novelty.
Opinion piece in the Grauniad
Opinion piece in the Grauniad by Devi Sridhar:
The rows over ‘anti-motorist’ Ulez and LTNs lose sight of the truth: they save lives
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/aug/04/uk-must-follow-europe-lead-prioritising-walking-cycling-public-transport
Slightly odd article that
Slightly odd article that seems to be mainly about the exact terminology used in debates. Comes from a good place though.
The whole “build more cycle
The whole “build more cycle infrastructure to stop red light running” is a lazy Tu Quoque logical fallacy.
I have no issue with waiting my turn for the lights when I am out riding.
The one issue is the sensor triggered ones when it is quiet, where it is annoying to have to dismount and push the pedestrian button to force a change.
Bradshsi wrote:
Is it? What was the question? It sounds like this is acknowledging this happens and proposing a solution rather than distracting with criticism.
If you don’t like the phrasing how about “yes, some cyclists go through red lights. Should they? No. Would you like to change that?” If the answer is “yes” to the last then the next questions are “why do they?”, “under what circumstances do they?” (you’ve already given one example – sensor failure), “what are the actual effects of this behaviour?” and then “knowing that, how could we change this?”. One of the possible answers is “infra” (or indeed “get rid of the red lights for cyclists” – then they don’t need to jump them).
Always do a shoulder check –
Always do a shoulder check – lifesaver
(or spidey senses of driver here !)
https://youtu.be/DkNKaB5TLoI?t=226
After a few quiet Fridays, I
After a few quiet Fridays, I’m pleased to say this bmw driver didn’t let me down on this nsl.
we’re firmly in “cyclists are
we’re firmly in “cyclists are always doing x” territory here. Drivers have done quite well for themselves in getting this lie and the pavement riding lie set in people’s consciousness. All while drivers do x on an industrial scale, with deadly consequences, but no one minds / notices because cars.
Well you see it’s because
Well you see it’s because cars are a necessity of life because cars; whereas bikes are a frivolous luxury.
Not everyone has a car, bikes
Not everyone has a car, bikes are a form of transport not a luxury. Given the poor health of the nation cycling can only be a good thing
Most motorists don’t have a
Most motorists don’t have a problem with other motorists going through a light on amber or stopping in the advanced cycle box. These are exactly the same as running a red light.
So my question is why do they hold a higher standard for cyclists than they do for themselves?
Incidentally, I don’t usually go through red lights. Most of the time I enjoy a little rest, but I don’t see why the rules should apply to me when they don’t apply to motorists.
I don’t see why the rules
I don’t see why the rules should apply to me when they don’t apply to motorists
They certainly don’t in the Offending Motorist’s Paradise, Lancashire:
https://upride.cc/incident/lc11vep_kiavenga_redlightcross/
https://upride.cc/incident/px68nhc_toyotatrailer_redlightcross/
https://upride.cc/incident/yd18knj_vwgolf_redlightcross/
https://upride.cc/incident/f2yny_rangerover_redlightcross/
All of those occurred within 40 minutes, and Lancashire Constabulary declined to take action against any of them. There have been many more since, all ignored by the police
Re the Glasgow donut shop
Re the Glasgow donut shop being forced to close.
Given yesterday’s headlines that obesity is costing Scotland £5.3 B pa I would put this down as one of the benefits of bringing the champs to Glasgow.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/scotlands-obesity-crisis-predicted-cost-30625228?utm_source=mynewsassistant.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=embedded_search_item_mobile
And it wasn’t the only
And it wasn’t the only doughnut shop in Glasgow with issues!
My son works at the Krispy Kreme stall in Buchanan Galleries but he was texted this morning to tell him not to bother as they had no doughnuts either.
Tried to deliver at 4.30am but were turned away by security.
On the plus side, I stepped out of my work for ten minutes and watched the French, Belgian and Danish teams (amongst various other individual riders) ride past.
Around me the best donut
Around me the best donut shops would never be waiting for donuts to be delivered. They make their donuts on premises daily. The ingredients keep a long time.
andystow wrote:
To be fair to Tantrum (slow work day, I looked them up) they do bake all their own goods in their Glasgow kitchen then deliver them to their three outlets in the city, so pretty much as good.
Waring’s is my local bakers
Waring’s is my local bakers in Caversham, their double knot doughnut is a truly incredible thing. They don’t bake on the premises. Everything is still fresh, only thing missing is the smell of fresh bread baking in the very early morning.
I work on the 2nd floor of an
I work on the 2nd floor of an office on St Vincent Street … the final straight of the relay on Tuesday.
I’m hybrid working and my office day is Wednesday… ?
Grassers Paradise now
Grassers Paradise now
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m001pnjh/morning-live-series-5-04082023
I am disgusted Anthony, absolutey disgusted
(4:15 to 10:40)
Hanging’s too good for them.
Love to the family Colin,
Love to the family Colin, love to family
If you are familiar with Dave
If you are familiar with Dave Walker’s cartoons, I see he now has an online shop
https://davewalkershop.com/
If not, here’s a snippet
I will be buying a “largely
I will be buying a “largely fuelled by cake” T shirt.
Hirsute wrote:
I find his lack of squirrels disturbing