South Yorkshire Police were called to escort a cyclist off the M1 in Sheffield on Saturday. According to Highways England, he had been ‘en route to London’.
The Star reports that speed restrictions of 30mph were put in place while action was taken and the cyclist was removed from the motorway.
Thanks to @syptweet for assistance dealing with a cyclist who was on the #M1 southbound at J34 #Meadowhall en route to London. Removed from the motorway by South Yorks Police. 30mph restrictions now lifted, safe travels!
— Highways England (@HighwaysYORKS) March 31, 2018
Cycling is banned on Britain’s motorways but riders do regularly stray onto them.
On Christmas Day, drunk cyclists in Santa hats were escorted off the M5 and we’ve also previously reported on a man who was charged after taking the same motorway while riding back to London from an ex-partner’s home in Bovey Tracey.
On that occasion Balin Hobbs told the court that it was against his beliefs to travel by car. He also said he had only admitted using a pedal cycle on the motorway and a second charge of resisting arrest to avoid repeating his three-day ride to attend the trial.
He was given a 12-month conditional discharge and ordered to pay a £20 victim surcharge.
-1024x680.jpg "“Clear anti-cyclist bias”: Lawsuit filed against Toronto police after cop doored cyclist… before ticketing rider over incident")
30 thoughts on “Police stop cyclist ‘riding to London’ on M1 in Sheffield”
I imagine that the M1 is the
I imagine that the M1 is the shortest and most direct route from Sheffield to London, although it is illegal.
Our road network has evolved into one where the users who are *not* sitting in comfy chairs with heating and being helped by an internal combustion engine have to take the longer and less direct route. Would be fairer if cyclists got the shorter straighter route and the cars had to take the wiggly lines…
brooksby wrote:
But I prefer the wiggly lines when on my bike
CygnusX1 wrote:
So do I, if I’m just out for a ride. But if I specifically want to get from Point A to Point B (without passing through Points C thru F), I’d rather have a straight/direct route available 🙂
brooksby wrote:
Quite often the wiggling is not just sideways, but up and down. These roads may be not just more interesting and beautiful, but also have less motor traffic. This is great, but if you actually want to get somewhere, as Brooksby says, it can be a pain.
brooksby wrote:
Prime reason why the Stevenage cycleways are not used that much. They meander, go up and down at also steep inclines to get out of the underpasses, meanwhile the roads are nice and direct, wide and/or dual laned.
Usual priority for motors that hasn’t changed in 60 years.
The hard shoulder is a good
The hard shoulder is a good deal wider than the average cycle lane.
As someone who lives in a
As someone who lives in a foreign country, I think some signs could be confusing.
Some cycle lanes terminate at motorway junctions and are written in english without images to illustrate that cycles are not allowed.
If you miss that sign it’s easy to enter the motorway (I nearly did that myself in the uk), nevermind for someone who’s drunk or can’t read english that well.
Also a lot of accidents can be attributed to streets not having a street name at the corner, and people do u-turns without looking or have limited visibility.
Also why can’t motorways have a cyclelane anyways, get rid of that illegal “fast lane”, all we need is a lane for people going 70 and one for people going under 70, and implement minimum speed cameras (not for the bikes abviously)
Road CC says … “Cycling is
Road CC says … “Cycling is banned on Britain’s motorways but riders do regularly stray onto them.”
How often is that then, sorry, how regularly do people on bikes stray onto motorways, say compared to how often motorists kill cyclists or how often motorists stray onto bike lanes or footways, just so we can compare like?
Shame they don’t react the
Shame they don’t react the same way to a breach of HC rule 140.
Was it not a case that
Was it not a case that Carlton Reid found that many arteials in the UK had parallel cycleways that had been forgotten about? Does anyone know (I have done a quick Google search but cannot find anything) if the project has started to happen yet?
Pushing50 wrote:
Something like that… Not sure where it’s up to though
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2017/may/09/how-80-forgotten-1930s-cycleways-could-transform-uk-cycling
davel wrote:
Something like that… Not sure where it’s up to though https://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2017/may/09/how-80-forgotten-1930s-cycleways-could-transform-uk-cycling%5B/quote%5D
Yes, that is the best that I could find. I hope it is still planned and under consideration for development.
Pushing50 wrote:
Yes, that is the best that I could find. I hope it is still planned and under consideration for development.
[/quote]
The kickstarter is linked from the graun article; updated last year, mentions his book. Haven’t seen anything more recent than that. Really interesting project.
davel wrote:
The kickstarter is linked from the graun article; updated last year, mentions his book. Haven’t seen anything more recent than that. Really interesting project.[/quote]
If you supported the Kickstarter project you get an update email about every 6 weeks with random bits of information. Some if it highlights where cycle paths are while others can make you where old cycle tracks are in areas you know. There are also updates about publicity, sponsorship, etc
Bluebug wrote:
Cheers: I thought I had! Will check and chip in if not.
You could argue that cycling
You could argue that cycling on the hardshoulder of a motorway, is a fair bit safer than some busy dual carriageways.
Some cycle routes, designed
Some cycle routes, designed by highway engineers (sic) are less safe than riding down the hard shoulder of a motorway.
Very true. Here is a link to Bez’s blog.
He shows a picture of a busy 70 mph dual carriageway with a cycle lane where the motorway has the hard shoulder. The cycle lane is narrower, and the road has one less lane. Yet this is a designated cycle route!
The cycle route crosses slip roads: you may have seen this arrangement.
https://beyondthekerb.org.uk/idiots/
I wouldn’t want to be any
I wouldn’t want to be any where near the hard shoulder of a motorway. The noise is deafening and the fumes would be deadly.
If you want a national network of cycle routes alongside the railway lines would be a much better choice. Flatter and quieter (between occasional trains).
well as all direction signs
deleted
He could have taken the
He could have taken the adjacent A1 (or large sections of it) perfectly legally. But the best way to cycle from Sheffield to London, however, is probably via Lincoln towards Peterborough and Cambridge, then dropping down towards Ware – there are cycle paths along the canals all the way to Limehouse and Regents Park from there.
Chris Hayes wrote:
Fact, hard shoulder of motorway is safer than trying to use pseudo motorway with no hard shoulder … By plenty!
The old Ermine St. route is acceptable if not particularly direct
BehindTheBikesheds wrote:
Facts backed up by no evidence as you aren’t allowed to cycle on the hardshoulder.
What would probably happen if cyclists were allowed to used the hard shoulder is that there would be red paste made of cyclists all over the hard shoulder as lorry drivers use it as a nodding off lane or being blown to sides by the wind lane. Don’t forget the horror of navigating slip roads and multilane splits. Yes, clearly it would work well……
Yorkshire wallet wrote:
Take a look at the photos in Bez’s blog post I link to above. These show cycle lanes narrower than a hard shoulder, alongside two lane dual carriageways with seventy mph traffic, i.e. the same speed as a three lane motorway. The navigation of slip roads by these cycle routes is pretty horrific too.
And yet the dual carriageway cycle route is designed by highway engineers, so called. I would call these cycle routes more dangerous than using the hard shoulder, and yet there is no red paste, possibly because cyclists use them little more than the hard shoulder.
The point is the hypocrisy and doublethink of the authorities, who make so much fuss about the cyclist on the motorway, but actually guide cyclists onto the dual carriageway!
Yorkshire wallet wrote:
My thoughts entirely. Motorways have their place, they are essential infrastructure. Given the high volume and speed of traffic (something which few dual carriageways rival), cycling on a hard shoulder would be foolish.
Commercial aircraft and general aviation aircraft are separated similarly using airways (sky motorways) for the exact same reason.
Yorkshire wallet wrote:
I can prove that number of deaths on the hard shoulder of ALL UK motorways is much less than the deaths on the dualled trunk roads no problem at all.
HTH
[/quote]
[/quote]
Fact, hard shoulder of motorway is safer than trying to use pseudo motorway with no hard shoulder … By plenty!
[/quote]
My take on it is that if you’re hit from behind at 70mph+ on a bike you’ll have nowhere to stick your facts 🙂 Either one is sheer lunacy, legal or not.
Not entirely sure why some
Not entirely sure why some people seem to be supporting this bloke or suggesting that one lane of the motorway should be used as a bicycle lane.
The bloke was an idiot. The fact we need more cycle lanes is an entirely different topic (but yes, we definitely need cycle lanes which are actually useful and go between places, rather than just meander to nowhere).
Canyon48 wrote:
I don’t thik anyone is suggesting that
meanwhile highway engineers will mark cycle routes on roads whcih differ only in name from motorways (and less width than a hard shoulder) No police action is taken against those who encourage cyclists into almost exactly the same situation.
Also there is a campaign to prevent banning cycling on the A63, which is essentially the M62 extension, not even a cycle lane here, just cycling in lane 1. The campaign has a significant amunt of backing. Time trail courses on dual carriageways with national speed limits are great apparently as they allow very fast 10mile times to be set.
And then of course we have this
http://road.cc/content/news/228159-marcin-bialoblockis-25-mile-time-trial-record-disallowed
cycling on a two lane dual carriageway between lane 1 and 2 to FORCE dangerous close passes in order to shave some seconds. Much less public outcry.
In fact it amazes me how police always seem to have resources to rush to evict a single cyclist from the hard shoulder, but not to deal with the truely dangerous drivers on the road.
Good point Chris, shame it
Good point Chris, shame it happens on A roads, B roads, national speed challenge I mean limit country lanes, 30 zones etc.
Hmmm….I don’t suppose the
Hmmm….I don’t suppose the absence of cycling road deaths on M’ways has anything to do with the general absence of cyclists on M’ways? On that basis, I guess the moon is a perfectly safe place to cycle – no deaths there. Or the sea, perhaps 🙂