Why don’t cyclists use cycle lanes? Because it’s a car park; Government shuts down latest mandatory helmet question; Toughest job in pro cycling commentary; Police horse rider catches phone-using driver; Strike day, bike day + more on the live blog
SUMMARY
Toughest job in pro cycling commentary? The first six hours of San Remo
If you’ve just sat down at your desk this morning (kudos for dipping into the live blog for some early procrastination) take a look at the clock, count forward six hours and imagine what you’d do if until then you had to talk, pretty much non-stop about cycling. Ready? 3. 2. 1….
The last time I watched the race at home, I had it on the projector, faded it out to black and white, turned off the commentary and put the soundtrack to Koyaanisqatsi own instead. Then I fell asleep.
— Ned Boulting 🏳️⚧️ (@nedboulting) March 15, 2023
Those pesky horse riders catching phone-using drivers again
It is Cheltenham week after all…
Officers from @ASPoliceHorses have been supporting #OpTelecom, our operation to clamp down on the risk posed by drivers who use their phone at the wheel. This driver was sighted & stopped on East Reach, #Taunton. Drivers face 6 points & £200 fine if caught using a phone.#FATAL5 pic.twitter.com/sW3YXWcaMU
— ASPolice Roads Policing (RPU) (@ASPRoadSafety) March 14, 2023
Get your best gags in the comments…
WARNING: anything involving ‘why such the long face’ WILL result in disciplinary action…
Strike day, bike day
London Bridge on Tube strike day. Nice day for a walk or bike ride… never seen the City so busy on a strike day pic.twitter.com/lI0voKw397
— Ross Lydall (@RossLydall) March 15, 2023
London’s network of Cycleways is really busy today. 🚲🚲🚲🚲🚲
Please cycle safely and be considerate of others – it’s not the Tour de France! pic.twitter.com/niCliHzk4B
— Will Norman (@willnorman) March 15, 2023
Government shuts down latest mandatory helmet question
Yesterday, Labour’s MP for Liverpool Walton, Dan Carden, had a written question for the Department for Transport…
For what reasons the government will not make it a legal requirement for cyclists to wear helmets?
In reply, the Minister of State for the Department for Transport said the government “recommends that all cyclists wear helmets, as set out in the Highway Code” and “particularly encourages children to wear helmets”.
“Helmet wearing is strongly advised in the Bikeability programme and school children are taught the correct way to fit them. A 2018 safety review considered mandating helmet wearing for all cyclists but concluded that this would deter many people from cycling and therefore any safety benefits would undermine wider health and environmental benefits,” the reply came.
Major London LTN "here to stay" after successful trial increases walking and cycling levels
Stoke Newington’s low-traffic neighbourhood will be made permanent following a successful trial, Hackney council has announced. Introduced in September 2021, the LTN has increased walking levels on Stoke Newington Church Street by 16 per cent, with cycling levels up 38 per cent too.
On top of the promising stats, six-in-ten respondents to a council survey said they wanted to make the scheme permanent.
The analysis also looked at the levels of traffic over 24 hours across five roads in the area and found levels dropped by 80, 48, eight and four per cent in four of the locations, while one was up eight per cent.
“Hackney is an importer of traffic, with 40 per cent of vehicle journeys neither starting or ending in the borough, and we know that road transport is a significant contributor to climate change. That’s why we have a vision for a low traffic Hackney, where transformed streets help to create a greener, healthier Hackney for all of our residents,” Cllr Mete Coban said.
"I think I raced with two today": Lotte Kopecky takes emotional victory just days after death of her brother
Hero of the day/week/month goes to Lotte Kopecky, the SD Worx star who just won Belgian semi-classic Nokere Koerse solo, the win made all the more impressive by the fact her family suffered the passing of her brother on Saturday, aged 29.
Lotte Kopecky: “I think I raced with two today.”
Absolutely stunning mental strength there after losing your brother a couple of days before
— José Been (@JoseBeenTV) March 15, 2023
Utterly speechless at that performance from Lotte Kopecky. She understandably doesn’t celebrate across the line as she wins Nokere Koerse. I can’t imagine how she must be feeling, yet her strength and dominance is just breathtaking. Pure dignity and class ❤️ #NokereKoerse
— Katy M (@writebikerepeat) March 15, 2023
“I made the choice to race today,” she said at the finish. “I really wanted to race today no matter what. These were not easy days, it’s just no use to let your head hang and today I just wanted to race, I’m happy that it worked out and I think today I raced with two.”
Lotte Kopecky vince la Nokere ma non esulta.
Non alza le braccia al cielo.
Le sue compagne la abbracciano dopo il traguardo.Lotte Kopecky ha perso il fratello 3 giorni fa. Questa vittoria non può che essere per lui 🙏❤#EurosportCICLISMO #NokereKoerse pic.twitter.com/7sfwqniPTQ
— Eurosport IT (@Eurosport_IT) March 15, 2023
Herd of goats brought in to weed Trouée d'Arenberg ahead of Paris-Roubaix
If they aren’t Thibaut Pinot’s goats then someone’s missed a trick here…
♻️ Pour préparer le parcours de #ParisRoubaix, le désherbage de la Trouée d’Arenberg se fait par éco-pâturage.
🐐 Dans le cadre de l’opération “Les Biquettes de l’Espoir”, ce sont une 40aine de chèvres et moutons qui s’attèlent à désherber 2 300 mètres de pavés ! pic.twitter.com/Z7RPKTCzfo
— Paris-Roubaix (@parisroubaix) March 15, 2023
A busy 24 hours in the cycling world — what might you have missed?
The big news this lunchtime? No, not the Budget… Pidcock’s out of Milan-San Remo…
> Tom Pidcock to miss Milan-San Remo after concussion diagnosis
Also on the news front, active travel campaigners have lost their High Court legal challenge over the decision to rip out the High Street Kensington cycle lane back in December 2020. Full story here…
On the tech front, Mat had a big scoop yesterday…
> Campagnolo is definitely going wireless and ditching thumb levers… and these pictures prove it
While editor Jack got his fine-tooth comb out for a look at the All Party Cycling and Walking Group’s meeting one year on from the major Highway Code changes. Let’s just say the adjective “disappointing” was fairly prominent…
And to top off a hectic day of action on all fronts… some more grim news from the bike industry…
Some balance from The Spectator: "Stop demonising cyclists"
Last week we, quite reasonably I’d suggest, highlighted a column in The Spectator from Mary Dejevsky which was branded “ill-informed” as she attacked the decision to sentence Auriol Grey, the woman found to have caused the death of an elderly cyclist in Cambridgeshire during a pavement cycling dispute, to three years in prison.
Well, for balance, here’s today’s offering…
“Yes, we should punish those cyclists guilty of egregiously antisocial or downright hooliganish behaviour. But we must also drop this culture-war-style animosity against cyclists. More than that, we should as a society in general become more bike positive. Let’s call it the spoke agenda.
This is the country that invented the modern bike, and it remains a wonderful achievement of our civilisation. And if you don’t believe me, get back on the bike and find out for yourself how much fun it can be.”
Does a heavier cyclist descend hills quicker? We strapped weights to ourselves to find out
Redcar and Cleveland to host British National Road Championships
Here’s where the jerseys will be decided this year…
As per British Cycling, the championships will begin one day earlier than usual with the time trials on Wednesday 21 June, due to local restrictions and venue availability, and further details of the route will be released in due course.
The circuit races will then take place on Friday in Redcar town centre before the road races on the Sunday, starting and finishing in Saltburn.
Local rider Charlie Tanfield said it’ll be a “special” event. “I cannot wait to go to Redcar in June. Having raced at the Tour of Britain last year, the crowds were amazing and I’m really hoping to claim another national podium this year.”
Full details of the routes and profiles will be announced in due course…
Have a great evening...
The live blog will be back in the morning, in the meantime I’m going back through the horse-related puns in the comments for not the first time this afternoon… you’ve outdone yourselves…
Why don't cyclists use cycle lanes? Because it's a car park...
We often joke semi-facetiously that the reasons why we might not use a cycle lane are well into the thousands by now… poor condition, terrible routing, painful give way lines… the list goes on. But bike lane blockages, namely by those who’ve ‘just popped to the shops’ or are ‘just dropping something off’ would be right up there in the top ten reasons, we’d assume…
“There’s a car park 20 meters away”: Cyclists slam cycle lane parking putting riders in dangerhttps://t.co/ENa2l6sMQP #cycling pic.twitter.com/rbTbLLdqlg
— road.cc (@roadcc) March 14, 2023
Yep, this is yesterday’s story about the cycle lane in Bristol on… *checks notes* Park Row… that is, well, yep, you see the irony…
> “There’s a car park 20 metres away”: Cyclists slam cycle lane parking putting riders in danger
The story prompted a bit of discussion about the issue in the comments, the perfect start to a live blog in my book…
pete666 reckons we could have a job for Danny MacAskill, “to ride over the offending vehicles”, while eburtthebike was (jokingly) outraged at the fact the nearest multi-storey car park is a whole 20 metres away…
“You expect me to walk twenty metres?! Quite, quite mad.”
Even Google Maps’ Street View has captured the absurdity of the situation…
Owd Big ‘Ead: “If Bristol is anything like Derby, it would appear that double yellow lines and a continuous white line denoting a cycle lane count for nothing. Whether loading, or not, vehicles of all kinds are allowed to park wherever they like with absolutely no chance of enforcement measures against them.
“It makes me wonder what the actual point of putting cycle lanes in at all, is all about. Are councils really that hard-pressed that they will take any government funding available, whether needed or not, just so that they can go through the exercise of ticking a box or two and believing that they are doing their bit?
“There is one 20 metre contraflow section in Derby city centre that is constantly full of private hire taxis every Friday and Saturday night, where you are already dodging pissed up revellers then turn a corner to find the cycle lane full of cars and a bus coming headlong at you with nowhere to go.
“I’ve queried this lack of enforcement with the groups of police that wander the streets keeping the pissed up yobbos from scrapping and all you get is a shrug of the shoulders or ‘try walking if you don’t like it’!!”
Oldfatgit: “Makes me laugh that the same people moaning about cyclists pointing this stuff out, will be the same people that moan that cyclists never use the cycle lanes”
HoldingOn: “There are several cars parked on the solid line cycle lane on my route to/from work every day. It really bothers me when nothing is done about it. People I’ve spoken to about it usually respond with ‘I didn’t know you weren’t allowed to park in a cycle lane’.
“Ignorance is not an excuse to break the law, however I do think Bristol council could help remove any form of doubt, by putting a cover over the parking meter so drivers don’t see the parking sign on its side and think its okay to park there.”
Sriracha: “‘Park Row’ — maybe it’s nominative determinism?”
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.
58 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
I'll counter that by saying the Bryton 750se I have drives me nuts at times. Inconsistantly picks up on routes created on Komoot and the app re-syncs every few seconds when trying to set up the device and sends me back to the home screen. The most infuriating one is that I turned live track on. Once. It now won't turn off and repeatedly flags up the live track is starting, and then disconnecting every few seconds whilst riding. I haven't timed it but it wouldn't suprise me if 10-20% of the time the the screen is covered with an error message. That's been about 6 weeks now. Other than that it's great :/
RE: Police launch road safety operation... by clamping down on cyclists using footbridge Meanwhile in Glasgow, Police Scotland are riding their motorbikes over the pedestrian and cyclists only bridge. https://x.com/FietserGlasgow/status/2065106152917012523?s=20
@Paul J Van Schip certainly seems a bit of a dick, but he's a European and multiple World Champion on the track, pretty sure you don't get there without having some talent in your legs.
Poor Vincent cannot get over the simple fact that given the choice people prefer dedicated cycling spaces, rather than pretending to be cars like vehicular cyclists.
What is the point of the fancy air sensor if it can't account for changing weather conditions?? If all you care about is a delayed approximation of aerodynamic watts in steady conditions, you don't need any special sensors for that. Just your speed on a decently flat course is enough to approximate rolling resistance and drivetrain losses. And the rest must be aero. If you assume a less aero body position at the same watts, your speed will drop while rolling resistance also drops, which means approximated aero watts goes up. And that's enough to demonstrate what you've shown in your testing protocol ("I sat upright and the number went up a little while later").
Your correction is accurate - it's almost always been "the (lack of) thought that (doesn't) count". "Massive" - less than a billion a year spent on active travel (trying to catch up / building a network across the entire country) Not massive - 6 billion every year (2026-2030) spent on road *maintenance* of existing "already built, goes everywhere, very convenient" road network for inactive travel Ultimately the reason "cycle infra" is *needed* is those unbelievably colossal amounts spent every year (and for more than a century now) on making mass motoring not just viable but apparently the "best choice" for most journeys. As the Dutch and others have shown, the majority of people *are* prepared to cycle and even mix with very light, slow local motor traffic *if* cycling is also made safe and convenient for the whole of their journey (including secure parking at both ends). (The history of the financial drivers of the current situation are a complex topic but note that while people complain about "crumbling roads" and underfunded motor infra - with some reason - by us continuing the fuel duty escalator freeze (for example) we're actually helping motorists pay *even less* for that activity / subsidising more of the cost of driving than ever.)
yes, but people will still object - which was my point.
So ' Priority of Road Users' and 1.5 metre clearance at 30mph has been been reduced to 'sharing'? NCN route 2 here in South Hams is an absolute scream with white vans, tractors and total idiots who refuse,or are totally incapable,to reverse on high Devon banked lanes ...means you have to get off and pedal back to a passing place....could be at that all day...so I don't bother...
@MaxiMinimalist Agreed. The big problem I see now is today's parents grew up being driven to their schools, and therefore, see private motor vehicles as the only viable form of transport. The vast majority of UK infant and primary schools have a catchment area that is within easy walking distance from home to school. Yet, the traffic caused by pupils being driven to/from school is astonishing. Banishing the "School Run" should be a priority for all schools.
When I was a kid (that was during the previous millenium when phones were connected to a plug in the wall), I rode my bicycle to school, music academy, sport grounds, parties even during the winter. The government didn't have to spend, correct that, didn't have to think of spending massive amounts of money to build cycling specific infrastructures. Over the past 3 or 4 decades, cars have grown bigger, taller, safer (for their drivers) and faster. Meanwhile, motorists have become abusive, aggressive, hypersensitive to people moving on two wheels, aka cyclists. Spending billions upon billions on new infrastructure won't address the crux of the matter. Sadly.
58 thoughts on “Why don’t cyclists use cycle lanes? Because it’s a car park; Government shuts down latest mandatory helmet question; Toughest job in pro cycling commentary; Police horse rider catches phone-using driver; Strike day, bike day + more on the live blog”
There’s been some problems
There’s been some problems with horse riders losing their way at night, so they now sell saddles with lights fitted so the riders can see more clearly.
It’s basically saddle-light navigation
People at some stables I pass
People at some stables I pass sometimes tell me this is causing problems. Lots of riders are now rushing in there in the evenings to borrow their power supply then milling about, leaving horses and riders scattered everywhere. They call it the “charge of the light brigade”.
hawkinspeter wrote:
Ba-Dum, tish…
hawkinspeter wrote:
Chapeau
hawkinspeter wrote:
So you’re saying they can see more clearly now the rein has gone?
It’s a night-mare for those
It’s a night-mare for those poor, victimised otherwise law-abiding drivers on their phones.
I never use the cycle lane
I never use the cycle lane for this reason among many others. It’s safer and easier to just ride in the middle of the road. Cars can see you and just have to slow down and wait to safely drive on the other side of the road to overtake, so you don’t risk getting knocked over. And there’s the bonus of not having to ride in the dirty gutter. We cyclists deserve better.
I realised recently that if
I realised recently that if you ride past a certain level/speed the responsible thing to do is to go on the road with the other fast and dangerous vehicles. If you’re zipping past the bikes in the bike lane, you’re a danger to the other cyclists and pedestrians near them..
ChuckSneed wrote:
You mean lane rather than road.
You mean drivers not cars, as cars cannot see.
I wonder what percentage of
I wonder what percentage of drivers are okay with mounted police catching them? Probably need a gallop poll to find out.
PC Plod breaks into a canter
PC Plod breaks into a canter
Driver subsequently banned
Driver subsequently banned under trotting up procedure…
Local knowledge: the white
Local knowledge: the white SUV you can see on the streetview image above, with its BOLAS flashing, is parked there for 1-2 hours Every. Single. Day. (during the week, anyway), and belongs to the noodle shop. The bit it’s parked on is double yellows and painted as entry to the cycle lane, but hasn’t been protected with wands.
Driver gets 14 year sentence
Driver gets 14 year sentence for manslaughter: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-64961466
How could that be
How could that be manslaughter and not murder? What could the intention of a driver who hits a person on a motorbike deliberately at 70mph after chasing them possibly be anything other than to kill them? Manslaughter requires that there was either lack of intent or diminished responsibility. Neither seems to be the case here.
The last line of the report:
The last line of the report:
makes it sound as though a defence was accepted that she was chasing him and misjudged closing speeds; in the absence of any video or witness evidence that she deliberately deviated in order to hit him it would be pretty difficult to prove murder. It sounds like one of those cases where only the culprit can really know whether or not she deliberately crashed into him.
Indeed. There did seem to be
Indeed. There did seem to be a ‘reason’ for the driver to be chasing the motorcyclist – to follow what she thought was a stolen vehicle. Proving mens rea is very difficult and it sounds as though the driver had no motive for killing the motorcyclist; especially since in doing so she would likely have destroyed the vehicle she apparently wanted to recover.
(NB. I use the word ‘reason’ carefully but I in no way mean to imply that recovering a stolen vehicle justifies driving at far in excess of the speed limit)
The prosecution doesn’t need
The prosecution doesn’t need to convince the jury that the accused intended to kill the victim, only that they intended harm and that serious injury or death were a likely result. Weirdly, attempted murder does require that death was the intent which is why it’s harder to get convicted of.
I can only assume that the proecution team thought a jury might buy a defence of “I didn’t intend to knock him off” so murder wouldn’t stick, but they had a decent chance of a manslaughter conviction.
Murder requires more than
Murder requires more than intent to harm – it requires intent to kill or cause grievous bodily harm, and requires the defendent to feel sure that death or GBH to the victim is a virtual certainty as a result of their actions.
So that is a relatively high bar for the intent. It is not enough to intend harm and be aware that serious harm is possible, or even probable.
https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/homicide-murder-and-manslaughter
Patrick9-32 wrote:
Initially they were charged with murder: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-61825383
I guess they couldn’t prove there was intent.
I’m thinking these horse puns
I’m thinking these horse puns in the comments were not the mane point of road.cc’s article about mounted police.
Are mounted police officers
Are mounted police officers clip-clopped in?
Clem Fandango wrote:
For god’s sake, rein in the comments; they’re making me bridle.
Mane focus of video?
Mane focus of video?
Driver was having a ‘mare that day.
Pleased to see the police
Pleased to see the police taking a different tack on policing road safety. I hope they’re also stopping riders jumping red lights – particularly tall ones.
The horse thing is great, but
The horse thing is great, but really no need. A simple walk along the pavement on any urban road with congested traffic will turn up dozens of mobile-using drivers. See’em all the time.
Sriracha wrote:
They need the horse as a witness.
Otherwise the driver won’t
Better hope it wasn’t a gelding as they can’t testify.
I think it serves to prove
I think it serves to prove the effect that phones have on driver attention, in that they fail to notice a police officer towering above them on a horse.
Your comment reminds me of
Your comment reminds me of this video:
RE: Will Norman’s comments on
RE: Will Norman’s comments on London cycling. On one hand, he’s just reflecting “man in the street” views on this. However it’s a bit sad coming from someone who’s supposed to be leading progress on this – surely you could have chosen something a bit more positive? Not entirely surprising from him though – when he was appointed he and team seemed to have zero grasp of transport cycling (link to archived version of David Arditti’s old site).
Compare and contrast with Chris Boardman.
This is as usual all a result of this being right at the very start of cycling (possibly) becoming a recognised normal mode of transport in London again. It’s not really a big issue where cycling is normal. Indeed in those places the focus is on how to make it *easier* for cyclists to keep up a good speed as having lots of stop-start is a great way to make cycling effortful. On the flip side, in urban areas average motor vehicle speeds can be below a normal person’s cycling speed due to waiting at lights. Making cycling more direct / avoiding lights (or the main motor infra entirely) is a great way to make this mode attractive and travel more efficient.
As with any activity once you get enough people though you’ll find some people doing odd things…
“Hackney is an importer of
“Hackney is an importer of traffic, with 40 per cent of vehicle journeys neither starting or ending in the borough”
Can anyone explain what this is supposed to mean?
If 40% of vehicle journeys in/through Hackney neither start nor end in Hackney, doesn’t that mean that 60% of vehicle journeys in/through Hackney do start or finish, or start and finish in Hackney?
The comment made seems to imply that Hackney’s traffic problems are caused by outside influence, but in fact the majority of journeys seem to involve Hackney as a start/finish/both.
It’s clear to me. Something
It’s clear to me. Something doesn’t have to be the majority to be significant. If they could magically remove 40% of the cars from their roads, wouldn’t that have a huge affect on the convenience of the remaining drivers who are starting and/or ending their journeys in Hackney?
(at least until induced demand kicked in)
I don’t see why they’re
I don’t see why they’re focusing on that 40% though, which is why I don’t understand why they even mention it. LTNs are supposed to have a double benefit of reducing the traffic coming through the zone as well as reducing the amount of vehicle journeys required for people within the zone by making active travel more attractive.
If they’re saying “look we can have an LTN that prevents traffic coming through and it’ll only remove 2 in 5 cars, the other 3 in 5 will still be here, and they’ll probably be moving faster too”, I think that’s a pretty rubbish solution.
I just don’t understand what the point of the statement is.
Nah – people always take what
Nah – people always take what they do themselves as a “given” and want to point to others as causing the problems. I bet “keep the roads for local residents, down with these off-comer motorists” is always a winner…
More sensibly – 40% of traffic is still a lot of vehicles. As others have pointed out motor traffic is so space-inefficient that quite small changes in the numbers can make a noticable difference. Allowing for induced demand / traffic evaporation effects of course (locals might just make more trips by car locally…).
Don’t see any contradiction myself. If 40% of the traffic on the current through-routes (which are likely to be significant for within-borough trips to get from A to B also) disappeared maybe there’d be e.g. more support for taking space for a cycle track? That could certainly feed back to make cycling a more attractive mode for some of the 60% of traffic making journeys within-borough or terminating / leaving there, no?
A complete argument depends
A complete argument depends on absolute numbers too not just percentages. On the other hand, I was under the impression that a lot of the idea was to reduce the number of 2-5 km car trips – which would mean most of those that both start and finish in a London-sized borough – so you need to do something about the 60% too, or removing the 40% alone just makes life easier for the 60% driving. You discourage unnecessary motor travel by filtering, ULEZ, congestion charging (the stick) and adding high quality cycle tracks (the carrot).
Jitensha Oni wrote:
Good point. And yes the short trips are indeed the low-hanging fruit for modal shift. I don’t know the motivation of the LA. I was wondering whether it was an attempt to get locals on-side by pointing at those outside the borough. Of course there is always a danger that if you make more space on roads other drivers will come along and to fill the space…
Plus their residents might
Plus their residents might not like it if they got clamped the moment they tried to exit their neighbouring boroughs on non common borders.
The police certainly used
The police certainly used their horsepower to reign that cowboy in, they weren’t foaling around and it was a sure bet they were favourites to win that race and saddled him with a night mare even if he claimed neigh officer only a foal uses a mobile phone whilst driving.
OK I’m done 😉
Wait i forgot to ask did the
Wait i forgot to ask did the horse go neigh naw neigh naw as a siren ?
OK definitely done 😉
Bravo… you’ve got the bit
Bravo… you’ve got the bit between your teeth now!
You take the prize for best
You take the prize for best effort so far….. at a canter I may add
“rein in”
“rein in”
Let’s not stirrup a fuss, it
Let’s not stirrup a fuss, it was still funny…
I think they should ban these
I think they should ban these low-horsepower vehicles from the carriageway…
Definitely snaffled a prize
Definitely snaffled a prize with those puns, now change tack and tackle something else.
Four wheel drive caught out
Four wheel drive caught out by for hoof drive
Cyclists not just invisible
Cyclists not just invisible to drivers apparently but also to their own government…
Yup. Expect Labour to
Yup. Expect Labour to proudly carry on this policy of ignoring cycling should they get in though…
Viewed from Scotland the SNP aren’t exactly stellar either but we have at least a commitment to a reasonable chunk of the transport budget – eventually. And sections of actual “looks a bit like NL” cycling tracks are getting installed to give an East-West (frequently) separated route across the city centre.
Clearly our roads are only
Clearly our roads are only for motorists! The usual old car-centric agenda.
Don’t forget pedestrians…
Don’t forget pedestrians…
https://www.watfordobserver.co.uk/news/23383562.woman-nearly-dies-falling-jubilee-road-sinkhole/
Rendel Harris wrote:
Given a choice between more cycle lanes and all potholes removed, I’d take the smooth surfaces
wycombewheeler wrote:
How about smooth-surfaced cycle lanes? It shouldn’t be either/or, should it? We can afford £4BN to raise the tax-free allowance for people who can afford to put £60k a year into their pension fund but we have to slash active travel funding?
wycombewheeler wrote:
Depends on how you define “smooth surface” – seeing as every aspect of road repair is tailored purely to car use (from which potholes are considered for repair, to repair methods), with no other transport types considered – in my experience many of the repairs are more dangerous to cyclists than the potholes they replace.
BalladOfStruth wrote:
for clarity – cat litter on the road is not a smooth surface
That Spectator article is
That Spectator article is great.
Steve K wrote:
Those five words rarely appear together in that order.
Apparently in the seventies,
Apparently in the seventies, at the height of his fame, Art Garfunkel, one half of pop superduo Simon and Garfunkel, liked nothing better than to hitchhike through the Derbyshire Dales and Peak District. I don’t know if he ever went to Wigan railway station though. Also famous actor Paul Newman used to holiday in the Peak District. Apparently Elvis Presley was sent on a secret mission to the moon under the Nixon administration, but he never went to the Peak District as far as I know.