“It is a regular thing in Cheshire and Manchester for Cadent Gas to not leave enough time for cyclists at a set of roadworks,” says road.cc reader Bob, who as a result was forced to ride in the coned off section for safety, as highlighted in the above video he sent in for our Near Miss of the Day feature.
“They cone off a long section of road, presumably for the safety of their workers, but they don’t give cyclists enough time to get through,” he explained.
Contacting the company didn’t do much good, either, with Bob saying: “Last time I complained they just put up ‘Cyclist Dismount’ signs.
“Here is a video of their latest effort near Tatton Park in Cheshire, which seems unchanged since I passed it a week ago, except more cones have been demolished,” he continued.
“I seem to be only halfway through when cars start coming the other way.
“I went into the coned off section for safety.
“Note that they are not working at the site,” he added.
> Near Miss of the Day turns 100 – Why do we do the feature and what have we learnt from it?
Over the years road.cc has reported on literally hundreds of close passes and near misses involving badly driven vehicles from every corner of the country – so many, in fact, that we’ve decided to turn the phenomenon into a regular feature on the site. One day hopefully we will run out of close passes and near misses to report on, but until that happy day arrives, Near Miss of the Day will keep rolling on.
If you’ve caught on camera a close encounter of the uncomfortable kind with another road user that you’d like to share with the wider cycling community please send it to us at info@road.cc or send us a message via the road.cc Facebook page.
If the video is on YouTube, please send us a link, if not we can add any footage you supply to our YouTube channel as an unlisted video (so it won’t show up on searches).
Please also let us know whether you contacted the police and if so what their reaction was, as well as the reaction of the vehicle operator if it was a bus, lorry or van with company markings etc.
> What to do if you capture a near miss or close pass (or worse) on camera while cycling
-1024x680.jpg "“Clear anti-cyclist bias”: Lawsuit filed against Toronto police after cop doored cyclist… before ticketing rider over incident")
76 thoughts on “Near Miss of the Day 660: Cyclist forced to ride in coned off section of roadworks for safety”
You might want to remove the
You might want to remove the email addresses from the bottom of this article!
Not really up to our usual
Not really up to our usual NMOTD par (not a NMOTD at all, IMO), but pretty cr@ppy organisation by the gas company. Isn’t there official guidance on that sort of thing, timings on lights, etc?
brooksby wrote:
Can’t find anything absolutely definitive, but most sites say 300m is the maximum. This seems pretty authoritative https://app.hauc-uk.org.uk/traffic-control-by-portable-traffic-signals
Including:
“When using two-way portable signals to control traffic, you must consider the following:
the needs of cyclists and other vulnerable road users;”
Which is fine, but obviously dependent on the timing of the lights; 300m at 20kph takes more than a minute, but these lights seem to change after less than thirty seconds. Timings are covered by An Introduction to the Use of Portable Vehicular Signals https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/509198/introduction-use-portable-vehicular-signals.pdf
The table in that document gives 30s as the time for a 300m length;
Distance (metres) 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
All-Red time (seconds) 5 10 15 20 25 30
That is clearly not long enough for a cyclist to transit the works, and even the maximum of 50s may not be enough for many cyclists to get through before the lights change.
I’m sure the government, which is really, really serious about the safety of vulnerable road users, will address this problem immediately; or they might just put it off for eight years and then repeat that they take it seriously.
It might be worth measuring the length and checking the timing, and taking it up with the Highway Authority, requesting them to take action to ensure the safety of cyclists, asking for the length to be reduced and the timing extended to the maximum.
The Safety at Street Works
The Safety at Street Works guide has force of law (note the red box on p5). p35 is particularly useful regarding signal timings in relation to cyclists; p63 is also significant. The guide does not authorise “cyclists dismount” signs other than where the carriageway is closed and the footway remains open.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/321056/safety-at-streetworks.pdf
More to the point, however bad the timings are, the oncoming traffic should not take a green light as an indication of priority. The green light only means proceed if it is safe to do so. They should have waited. Although the video isn’t that clear, it looks to me as though the cyclist was in view to the traffic (I can see the car that was in front of the cyclist all the way to the point it exits the roadworks). It clearly wasn’t appropriate to proceed.
GMBasix wrote:
You mean – you expected those Very Important Motorists to wait until the cyclist had cleared the lane, and possibly miss their ‘go’ on the traffic lights?
Are you quite mad, sirrah??
(Seriously – have you ever watched how people behave if they’ve had to wait for an emergency vehicle to pass? They seem to think it gives them a Get Out of Jail Free Card for running the red light…).
brooksby wrote:
In fairness, I think discretion should be applied when somebody crosses the line on red to allow blue lights through. I assume that it is endeavouring to save lives, so if I can safely move out of the way, a white line isn’t foremost in my consideration.
GMBasix wrote:
That’s not what I was talking about, and I totally understand that.
I meant where people have been delayed on the approach to traffic lights because they’ve been waiting for/letting an emergency vehicle past. If the lights have then changed, a lot of people seem to think that they can just go through the lights… I don’t know, maybe they think that’s their reward?
Not just lights – a lot of
Not just lights – a lot of people also seem to think that some kind of special ‘last one back on the road’s a loser’ rules apply, whereby accelerating hard entitles you to barrel through a gap where someone who was in front of you before you all pulled over is trying to re-enter the road.
brooksby wrote:
Righting the karmic balance? Though they usually make up for it by nearly killing me most evenings so all balances out in the end.
How on earth were the times
How on earth were the times set?!?
A class 3 invalid carriage is a road vehicle, but limited to 8mph. As a road vehicle it should be able to pass through roadworks safely…
That basically means tripling the numbers given above!
Cycle faster !
Cycle faster !
I did have a word earlier in the year with the contractors who put were working in resurfacing on a hill. Fortunately at the point I was explaining more time was needed for cyclists, a cyclist appeared illustrating the problem! They just directed me to Essex CC for help for future works.
I believe it is something the
I believe it is something the council handle for some reason rather than the individual contractor, maybe they own responsiblity for the traffic planning as they work out the diversion routes, so the time the traffic waits is something they have to decide to minimise queues/congestion etc
I dont know, but last time I complained i was redirected to the council who said would get it sorted out, but the roadworks disappeared before I got chance to check if they did
Although it shouldn’t matter
Although it shouldn’t matter as the roads should cater for all, but I’d be interested in the speed of the cyclist as it seemed slow. I usually get my highest heart rate during those sort of sections as I race to beat the oncoming traffic for that very reason.
matt_cycles wrote:
Surely “if you sprint at them you’ll find they’re more frightened of you than vice-versa”?
It’s not always possible and
It’s not always possible and why should you have to anyway ?
I remember so many times where I’ve been absolutely cooked after a long ride coming across one of these types of roadworks, or startig on a hill, even being 2-3 vehicles back starting, or finding its green as you approach and just knowing this is going to happen. It’s bad enough trying to keep vehicles following you behind you let alone having to deal with the rest heading towards you, who I believe strictly speaking are supposed to wait till the road is clear before proceeding on green anyway.
That bit of road is a
That bit of road is a notorious drag.
Locally known as “Le Col du Tatton”
There’s an awful stretch of
There’s an awful stretch of road up and down Queensland Avenue in Coventry which forms my daily commute. Signal, about 200m of narrow road with cars on either side, bollard, another 200m of similar road, then signal with advanced stop line. One way’s downhill so I can usually pick up speed enough that following drivers won’t attempt a super sketchy overtake between signal and bollard. The other way is a frantic uphill drag, desperately trying to sprint from signal to bollard to signal so that no-one can try and sneak into the gap.
Drivers are really just SO impatient.
I’ve had a similar thing
I’ve had a similar thing happen to me before, not quite the same as in my case there were temporary traffic lights with a longer set of roadworks, going up a hill.
The problem is that – with cyclists running red lights being so ubiquitous – drivers coming in the other direction just assume you’ve ridden through the red light rather than that the traffic lights aren’t phased correctly.
Once I’d explained the problem to the van driver coming in the opposite direction, and that I wasn’t an errant law-breaker, he was much happier and carried on with a wave and a smile.
Garage at Large wrote:
things that never happened on the roads number 136
If your count is from Boos
If your count is from Boos lying mouth, add another 1000. Pretty sure he is emulating his heroes in Johnson and the Orange Manatee in trying to lie as much as possible. Which are weird heroes compared to how he normally addresses people of that shape but there we go.
AlsoSomniloquism wrote:
Stick to the accounting Nige,
Stick to the accounting Nige, believable creative writing is not your thing.
As long as he doesn’t have to
As long as he doesn’t have to reference a specific page from a report. That bit seems beyond him each time.
Garage at Large wrote:
It’s not as ubiquitous as people seem to think it is…
The funny thing is he says it
The funny thing is he says it’s ubiquitous, which means happens everywhere, but in previous posts he’s claimed it doesn’t happen in whatever “leafy lovely” corner of Essex he infests, where all the cyclists are courteous.
Just reminded me, I must
Just reminded me, I must upload the video of the people carrier zooming through the red light on a pedestrian crossing.
AlsoSomniloquism wrote:
Going home last night I saw two cars go through a red light (left turn only on the lights, so they were cutting it rather fine before the oncoming traffic – er – came on at them).
Good point.
Good point.
So what is good about the
So what is good about the point? That a van driver sees a cyclist on the road in a section and still decides to go even though they should wait until it is clear? That both the cyclist and the van driver stop in the middle of a coned off section to discuss how long lights are allowed for sections.
Or just that Boo has posted something so you automatically have to agree with it even when it is mostly a lie?
Sock puppet reply I’d say.
Sock puppet reply I’d say.
I wonder whether Flintshire
I wonder whether Flintshire Boy and Our Nige might even be one and the same person, away from the keyboard…
brooksby wrote:
Maybe you could make up a common name for people of a different opinion to you – like “Kevin” or “Boo” or something?
Garage at Large wrote:
Not unreasonable if there’s only one opinion and a hype man. In that case a band name would be appropriate.
To be fair I did see a couple of posts from Flintshire which did appear to express an opinion (on driver retesting) the other day – could have been parody though. I’d got so use to the “yeah!”, “ain’t that right!” and “lame lefties!” from him.
Garage at Large wrote:
“Kevin”? You are seriously equating people on this forum calling you out for being a gobshite with racism?
Rendel Harris wrote:
Did he choose that name at random or to align himself with racists in cricket? https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/59304381
Definitely the latter, though
Definitely the latter, though not to align himself with racists (though we all know full well he would be right at home with their “banter”) but, unbelievably, to claim that being told he’s a gobshite by virtually everone on this forum is somehow equivalent to racial oppression. Staggering.
Garage at Large wrote:
Aren’t they Minions (as in Despicable Me)?
That’s Bob not Boo
That’s Bob not Boo
We need to talk about Kevin?
Up?
harry enfield ?
You’re right; my mistake.
You’re right; my mistake. Boo was the little girl in Monsters Inc.
(OT – but the opening few minutes or so of Despicable Me is something I can watch over and over, when Gru is being Evil. Freeze ray in the Starbucks queue – comedy gold…).
brooksby wrote:
Surely the most famous Boo is Boo Radley from “To Kill a Mocking Bird”. Still one of my favourite books.
eburtthebike wrote:
Nah – it’s the one from Yogi Bear.
So good they named him twice.
The one in Yogi Bear is so good they named him twice.
That reminds me – I actually
That reminds me – I actually saw a matter boo-boo the other day.
Go on then, I’ll oblige: what
Go on then, I’ll oblige: what’s a matter boo-boo?
And is it related to
And is it related to a matteryoohey?
eburtthebike wrote:
I’ve never read it. It’s one of those books I probably ‘ought’ to read someday…
Racist Boo, is because it is
Racist Boo, is because it is the same gobshite poster from last year, Boomoogoo or whatever the long name is whose posts and account all disappeared whilst making a racist joke or two. That person also had a fetish to ban any more then 6 cyclists, ban TT bikes, a fantasy that President Spanky was best and seemed to claim that cyclists were at fault for most things. Also some lesser agreements like similar views on Cycling Mikey.
When I first confronted Nige, he denied it. Then recently he seemed to cop to it by first stating he had “chatted” with the Racist Boo person and that it wasn’t banned, just a voluntary deletion?? Hmmm right.
Not sure about Kevin though.
And I don’t think Flintshire is Boo/Nige. Just that as most on here are one side of the Political spectrum, and the those two (plus a few more less trolling ones) are the other, FB deems he has to be on Boo’s side on everything. Unfortunately this means he will pop up like today with “good point” without answering anything else when asked, either because he is trolling or realises he didn’t agree with boo really but felt duty bound to support him no matter what. Seems strange being as Racist Boo is being full on troll now and FB seems to be agreeing that all cyclists (including himself maybe) jump red lights. I suppose we will know more about FB’s motives if he agrees on Boo on his latest trolling that (no evidence for) fat cyclist caused the close pass with the horsebox.
AlsoSomniloquism wrote:
Oh, right – I remember that anti-TT commenter. Booboomajoo, in my memory. Really hated TT bars, or something?
TBH there’ve been so many ‘trolls’ of varying kinds on here, who’ve been and gone over the years… Remember ‘L. Willo’?, or ‘Superpython’? Some of them made good points, long arguments, were in it for the argument rather than necessarily being Ubertrolls, but we’ve had lesser ones who are just @#%!””!
booboojmooj
booboojmooj
TT bikes were a danger to pedestrians
Then they went full on Victim Trolling here
https://road.cc/content/news/tt-rider-seriously-injured-a11-284881#block-node-comment-block-node-comments
but the mods removed posts after complaints
AlsoSomniloquism wrote:
Found it!
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/nov/16/campaigners-warn-over-kevin-nickname-reported-by-azeem-rafiq
I was about to say the exact
I was about to say the exact same.
Thanks for your support, and
Thanks for your support, and it’s disappointing to see so many fellow cyclists pouring scorn on my words.
To expand a little, when the van driver approached he glared at me, so I gestured for him to pull down his window a little. I explained that the lights phasing was too short, that I’d gone through on green, and that I’m a keen motorist myself. That’s what persuaded him that I was giving a truthful account of the situation and turned his mood positively.
Strange that. I once stopped
Strange that. I once stopped at a similar set of temporary lights on amber as one is meant to do. The van driver behind me unleashed a torrent of abuse at me for my audacity in doing so even though he would have had to run the red to get through as he drew up behind me as they turned red. No cheery wave or objective listening to my saying they were changing down. Just abuse, warnings that he would run me off the road and threats on my life. Got off the bike and waited a good 10minutes until he was well ahead.
Once had a van passenger try
Once had a van passenger try to grab my musette to unbalance me as we circled the (old) Elephant and Castle roundabout at high speed as punishment for the same “crime”, slowing to stop on an amber. We obviously need to work on expressing our courtesy to those behind us, with Nige his courteous attitude clearly shines from every orifice and calms the angriest drivers as they bathe in its golden glow.
Don’t forget the abject
Don’t forget the abject grovelling for deterring them on their journey and the deferential doffing of one’s headgear as they pass!
Rendel Harris wrote:
Nasty!
Rendel Harris wrote:
As in…
I think the best approach
I think the best approach with these long roadworks with lights is just to ignore the lights and ride through the coned off section. Safer and less delays for everyone.
Of course even the drivers behind you (who are benefitting) will complain about cyclists and red lights.
The current set near me has
The current set near me has too much going on in the coned off bit for that. Fortunately they pack it all up for the evening and w/e so no runs so far.
Driver could see the rider
Driver could see the rider occupying the lane. Had they read and understood their HWC they would know that the section “Light Signals Controlling Traffic” states that “GREEN means you may go on if the way is clear. “
Driver should have waited for the rider, just the same as they would have waited for a car
Captain Badger wrote:
I’ve had one of these where i was about 20m from the end of the coned section whent he oncoming lights turned green and the driver drove straight at me. I don’t know where he expected me to go, perhaps I should have walked backwards all the way to the start.
wycombewheeler wrote:
Stop, blocking them, then if/when they build up traffic behind preventing them reversing as they should, reverse slowly and carefully (naturally in cleats so 1mph at best without falling over…).
Clearly the lights will change and someone else will ignore the traffic in the roadworks and pull forwards preventing you reversing further.
At which point you dive past on pavement/through cones, leaving gridlock behind 😉
qwerty360 wrote:
This is where a fixie comes into its own. Often means that you don’t make it through the lights too. But you can happily spend the day there.
Captain Badger wrote:
If only drivers were made to take a test to prove that they’ve studied and understood the Highway Code…….
And tested again, at regular
And tested again, at regular intervals – perhaps every three years?
I would actually say 5, but
I would actually say 5, but yes, I’m in agreement that regular testing to keep the license is required and no more grandfathering of rights. For example, I’ve been driving for 30 odd years and never ever towed anything, yet in theory I could hook an 8 metre caravan up and just drive because towing lessons and tests came in later down the line.
I’ve been driving for 40
I’ve been driving for 40 years and the vehicles I can drive (but never will) as a result is just ridiculous. Makes me laugh if somebody suggests that I should take a test to ride a bike.
I’ve said it here before, a
I’ve said it here before, a simple on line portal that you have to log onto every few years, watch a video explaining any updates and /or things that they want to improve. Then a few simple questions to show you’ve been paying attention. Yes it’s massively open to cheats but it would be so simple to implement.
There’s a permanent ‘shuttle’
There’s a permanent ‘shuttle’ section of about 300y on a steep hill between Glutton Bridge and Longnor (B5053), which has been there since a partial road collapse in 2002. I wrote to Staffordshire Council about it some years ago, and got the response quoted below. Needless to say, still nothing has been done to provide a safe way for cyclists to get through the section.
‘The signals were installed in December 2002 after part of the road collapsed. The signals prime sources of detection are above ground radar units of which one each is positioned at the stop lines with a further three sensors positioned along the route. These units detect traffic approaching the signals and provide extensions for the green for traffic moving up and down the gradient. These sensors have a lower speed detection limit of 5kmp but also cycles do not present a very large �target� and can get missed. The other form of detection that can be used is loop sensors cut into the carriageway but the condition of the carriageway at this location is not suitable.
However, hopefully, all is not lost! There is a path to the side and it could be that this route may be able to be improved to provide cycle & pedestrian use which of course would not be subject to the traffic signal control. With that object in mind I have forwarded your report with our thoughts to our Transport Strategy Section for their views/consideration. ‘
Nearly 20 years to get a road
Nearly 20 years to get a road fixed?! Even for Broken Britain, that’s appalling!
Clearly the contractor wasn’t
Clearly the contractor wasn’t making enough donations to the right people…
Actually I can name a road
Actually I can name a road where exactly the same has happened.
That’s nothing – the Mam Tor
That’s nothing – the Mam Tor road (A625) was abandoned in 1977, when they gave up trying to fix it. It would be a great alternative to Winnats Pass for cyclists, being traffic-free, if only they woud at least mend it a little bit. It used to be rideable all the way up but has gradually deteriorated and now there’s a stream running across at the top so you end up with wet feet.
I used to live in Derbyshire,
I used to live in Derbyshire, and I haven’t been there for a few years, but last time I rode it was on my MTB and it was only just passble without walking even back then! I did see they used it (and also Winnats Pass) as a filming location for the recent Apple TV series Invasion.
Clearly I’ve missed the point
Clearly I’ve missed the point of the Benal comments made by the usual suspects ‘victims’ of the nasty motorist. But couldn’t really get the point of any of the comments and digs made at each other. Duck into the coned off bit, may well be safer; now you can argue that point, or cycle faster. Not really a near miss.
Who are the usual suspects
Who are the usual suspects and which specific posts do you refer to to support your claim of ‘victims’? And who is Benal?