“Good to see those who don’t pay road tax getting priority”: New “unsafe” Dutch-style roundabout will add 45 minutes to journeys in hilly city where “most people can’t cycle”, confused drivers say + more on the live blog
SUMMARY
Is DIY aero testing finally here, and is it really a substitute for the wind tunnel? We used the hotly anticipated Body Rocket system to find out...
> What we learnt using the “world’s first real-time aerodynamic drag force measurement system for cyclists”
I wonder why Jamie never asks me to do these kinds of tests? Oh yeah, because I’m not aero or fast. That makes sense now…
Soudal Quick-Step replace Julian Alaphilippe… with another goateed French rider
Jokes about Gallic facial hair (and corny pun-based transfer videos) aside, this is a shrewd move by Patrick Lefevere’s squad, replacing Tudor Pro Cycling-bound Alaphilippe with flyweight climber Valentin Paret-Peintre.
The 23-year-old enjoyed a breakthrough season for Decathlon-AG2R this year, finishing fourth overall at the Tour of the Alps and winning a stage of the Giro d’Italia, and will slot nicely into the increasingly grand tour-oriented Belgian outfit as both a mountain stage hunter and a key lieutenant on the climbs for Remco Evenepoel, as he plans to topple Pogačar and Vingegaard’s supremacy at three-week races.
We haven’t even handed out the final rainbow jerseys of the year yet, and 2025 is already shaping up nicely.
For the (Commuting) week that’s in it: A beginner’s guide to cycling to work
> A beginner’s guide to cycling to work — save money and feel healthier and happier commuting by bike
Mixed Relay Madness: Is the world championship’s oddest event set to be the most exciting race yet?
It’s fair to say that, since being introduced in 2019 in Yorkshire, the mixed team time trial relay hasn’t quite captured the imagination of cycling fans around the world.
In fact, my main memories of last year’s mixed relay in Glasgow consist of awkwardly hanging about the warm-up tent behind the start ramp, nearly bumping into André Greipel, and watching Stefan Bissegger knock back a couple of beers while bored out of his skull at the post-race press conference.
The race itself? Errrr, not so much (apart from Marlen Reusser’s crash, to be fair).
But all that apathy could change dramatically this morning, as the 20 nations participating in today’s mixed relay TTT are set to take on the hardest course yet – a 53.6km brute containing 894 metres of climbing and featuring a loop each for the men and women of the tough city circuit that will define the weekend’s road races.
That means an ascent each of the 1.1km-long, eight per cent Zürichbergstrasse and the longer 2.3km Witikon hill, which averages 5.7 per cent.
And which also means the potential for gaps to open as riders struggle and each nation’s pair of three-rider teams attempt to keep things tight, with the time taken on the second rider to cross the line – so there’s very little margin for error on a course so hilly.
Though reigning champions Switzerland (featuring Bissegger and Elise Chabbey) will certainly back themselves on home roads, they’re without Reusser as she recovers from a long-term illness, which leaves the race wide open.
A very strong Italy team consisting of Filippo Ganna, Edoardo Affini (second and third in the men’s individual time trial on Sunday), Mattia Cattaneo, Elisa Longo Borghini, Soraya Paladin, and Gaia Realini will surely fancy themselves for gold, as will an on-fire Australia team led by world and Olympic champ Grace Brown and backed by Michae Matthews, Ben O’Connor, Jay Vine, Brodie Chapman, and Roby Roseman-Gannon.
But don’t discount Juliette Labous and Bruno Amirail-led France, a very powerful Danish team, or the United States either.
Could we finally have the first mixed relay TTT cracker on our hands this afternoon?
And even if the racing isn’t great, as we saw at the European championships a few weeks ago or back in 2022 in Wollongong when Annemiek van Vleuten crashed right at the start, fracturing her elbow (and we all know what happened a few days later), you can always count on the mixed relay for some kind of drama, anyway.
“Pavements are for people, but more and more people are using e-bikes on them”
Cyclists have accused walking and wheeling charity Living Streets of pandering to the “culture war” over electric bikes, after a councillor shared an email from the charity asking its members to reach out if they had a “negative” experience with e-bikes or e-scooters, ahead of a Sky News segment on the issue.
However, Living Streets has explained to road.cc that their stance is based on “illegally modified e-bikes and riding e-bikes dangerously on the pavement”, while reiterating that “pavements are for people” and that cycling on them is illegal.
Read more: > Cyclists accuse Living Streets of stoking “culture war” over electric bikes, but walking charity claims it is only opposed to “illegally modified e-bikes and riding e-bikes dangerously on pavements”
‘Miss, Miss, can we bunk off school for a few hours to watch Tadej, Demi, and Remco on a training ride? Please?!’
Absolutely love this. Local primary school have come out to watch the cyclists. Not every day world class sporting events come to your village. #Zurich2024 pic.twitter.com/uph1G5NSG2
— Alex Stone (@AlexStone7) September 25, 2024
Pro cycling logic: 4 Jours de Dunkerque changes from six-day stage race to two separate events, featuring a five-day stage race plus one-day race
Believe it or not, in a classic case of cycling weirdness, the Four Days of Dunkirk stage race hasn’t lasted for four days for over 60 years.
But things are about to get even weirder for 2025.
In a bid to attract team with the prospect of more juicy UCI points, the six-day flat stage race, won last year by Sam Bennett, is set to be split into two separate events next May: a one-day race, followed by a slightly shortened five-day stage race.
But both races will still be called the Four Days of Dunkirk… Got it?
And the UCI wonders why football fans struggle to get into cycling…
Latest Strava updates announced… in time for me finally, finally setting up an account (still haven’t used it yet though)
> Strava adds ‘Quick Edit’ option to make it easier to edit and customise key details for your ride uploads
Blow for Tadej Pogačar as Matej Mohorič ruled out of world road race championships with palm injury
Slovenia’s bid to propel Tadej Pogačar to a Triple Crown-completing world road race title this weekend hasn’t exactly been smooth sailing so far.
Earlier this week, Luka Mezgec found his front wheel wedged under a motorist’s Audi in a near miss that left the Jayco-AlUla feeling like he’d “burned” one his cat’s lives.
[A.S.O./Pauline Ballet]
And now, former Milan-Sanremo winner Matej Mohorič, expected to be a key lieutenant for Pogačar in the early part of the hilly road race in Zurich, has been ruled out of Sunday’s rainbow jersey contest after failing to fully recover from a palm injury sustained in a training crash ahead of last weekend’s Sea Otter Europe gravel race in Girona.
Slovenian national coach Uroš Murn has said that Mohorič needed stitches following his crash and that a check-up on Wednesday deemed him not fit enough to race on Sunday. The Bahrain-Victorious rider will be replaced Matic Žumer, who rides for the Sava Kranj Cycling Continental team, but is still expected to defend his gravel world title in Leuven on 6 October.
Women’s version of Milan-Sanremo to take place in 2025, reports suggest, as Trofeo Alfredo Binda set to move dates to accommodate La Primavera
You know that long, interminable portion of Milan-Sanremo when nothing really happens (basically the first 240km)?
Well, we’re on the cusp of finally being given a reason to avert our gaze from the gently rolling peloton, as reports from Belgium suggest that race organisers RCS are set to confirm that a women’s version of La Primavera will return to the calendar for the first time in two decades in 2025, and take place on the same day as the men’s monument.
Jasper Philipsen wins this year’s men’s Milan-Sanremo ahead of Michael Matthews and Tadej Pogačar (Zac Williams/SWpix.com)
A women’s Sanremo, called the Primavera Rosa, was briefly held from 1999 to 2005, and featured the final 118km of the traditional route, culminating in the iconic Cipressa and Poggio finale.
But with other major classics such as Paris-Roubaix and Liège-Bastogne-Liège capitalising on the growth of women’s cycling over the past decade, there have been steady murmurings in recent years that Sanremo was set to make a return to the women’s scene, especially in the wake of organisers RCS taking over the Giro d’Italia Women.
One fly in the ointment, however, was the calendar clash between Sanremo and the Trofeo Alfredo Binda, the longstanding and highly prestigious women’s classic, established in 1974 and won in recent years by Italian stars Elisa Balsamo and Elisa Longo Borghini, which takes place the day after Sanremo.
(Zac Williams/SWpix)
With the hilly classic located in Cittiglio, 350km north of the Ligurian coastal city, holding both Sanremo and Binda on the same weekend would have ushered in a physical and logistical nightmare for the riders and teams.
However, according to Wielerflits, an agreement has been reached between the race organisers, with Binda reportedly set to move its position in the calendar to a week earlier to accommodate the relaunched women’s Sanremo, meaning that Strade Bianche, Alfredo Binda, and Milan-Sanremo could form a tasty consecutive three weekends of women’s classics racing in March.
(Alex Whitehead/SWpix.com)
Wielerflits has also reported (as per the UCI’s archaic rules) that the 300km length of the men’s race will not be replicated for the women, with a start in Genoa and a route confined to the Italian Riviera – and its tension-packed finale – earmarked for next year, but not yet confirmed.
If a women’s Sanremo does go ahead in 2025, it will leave Il Lombardia as the only men’s monument without a women’s equivalent. But with RCS ramping up its involvement in the women’s side of the sport in recent years, you’d assume it’s only a matter of time before the Race of the Falling Leaves joins in the fun.
UDH? Should I go see the doctor about that?
> What is UDH and is it the future of all bikes? SRAM’s Universal Derailleur Hanger explained
“I’m a little bit greedy”: Grace Brown’s fairytale farewell to cycling continues as Australia win enthralling mixed relay team time trial, beating Germany by just 0.85 seconds
Well, it’s fair to say this afternoon’s mixed relay team time trial at the world championships in Zurich certainly lived up to the lofty billing I bestowed upon it earlier today.
On one of the most relentlessly tough TTT courses you’re ever likely to see, which saw riders getting dropped like flies on the circuit’s steep climbs, Grace Brown’s fairytale farewell to cycling continued, as the Olympic and world time trial champion propelled Australia to another world title, pipping an impressive Germany by just 0.85 seconds at the line.
In what was inarguably the most exciting and finely poised TTT since the event was introduced at the worlds in 2019, just a handful of seconds separated Australia, Germany, and Italy in the closing stages of the 53.7km race.
(Zac Williams/SWpix.com)
While lacking the star power of some of the other nations, a perfectly balanced German team headed by Liane Lippert and Max Schachmann looked on course for their first world title in the discipline, averaging over 44kph on the difficult, technical route.
But after an astutely judged ride by the men’s team of Michael Matthews, Jay Vine, and Ben O’Connor – Vine and O’Connor setting a strong and steady pace on the climbs so they could utilise Matthews on the lightning fast run-in – Brown, aided by Ruby Roseman-Gannon (who was dropped on the climb) and Brodie Chapman, capitalised again on her stunning form to launch a storming, last-ditch effort in the final kilometres, overhauling the Germans by less than a second in a pulsating finale.
(Zac Williams/SWpix.com)
A Ganna and Longo-Borghini fronted Italy, however, faded in the closing kilometres, but still lost by just eight seconds, and finishing 16 seconds ahead of France and almost two minutes ahead of Denmark in the process.
“I think I’m feeling a little bit greedy – I need a few more rainbow jerseys in my closet!” Brown, who has added a whole other dimension to the concept of ‘going out at the top’, said at the finish.
“But this one’s really nice, it’s a great vibe to do it with the whole Aussie crew. Yeah, really exciting.”
“It was a hard one,” Matthews added. “I think Jay put me to the sword straight away on that first climb, I think we averaged 650 watts from bottom to top. There wasn’t much recovery, we just had to stick together as a team as much as possible and keep the speed up.
“We came in with the fastest time, and we knew we had a really strong women’s team to finish it off.”
(Alex Whitehead/SWpix.com)
Of course, while the racing was thrilling, the TTT wasn’t without its organisational hiccups. During the first wave of teams earlier in the afternoon, confusion reigned as the UCI commissaires mistakenly waved off the UCI World Cycling Centre’s women’s team… after Algeria’s men had crossed the line, leaving the Algerian women left perplexed and confused on the start ramp.
Well, it wouldn’t be a worlds TTT without a bit of chaos, would it?
“Calling on drivers to ‘show consideration’ is not enough”: Sustrans slams Northern Ireland government for failing to implement pavement and cycle lane parking ban – and instead asking motorists to “take a moment and think before you park”
As live blog regulars will know all too well, Belfast’s drivers have a certain flair for blocking cycle lanes and pavements.
In fact, if you took a quick spin around the city right now, you’d find a litany of examples of bike routes and footpaths littered with abandoned vehicles.
Like this one, from Monday’s blog…
Or this one:
And this sideways, ‘fill the cycle lane at all costs’ classic:
Oh, and this regular cycle lane blocking sight outside a popular food van:
Years and years and no resolution even after a cyclist was hospitalised on this cycle lane #BigFishParkingLane #RO63XGT pic.twitter.com/gScOVnTXKi
— Brian Shannon (@BrianShannon123) August 27, 2024
Faced with a bad parking epidemic, Northern Ireland’s Department for Infrastructure launched a consultation on the matter, which saw the majority of respondents call for a general pavement parking ban in the city, to clamp down on these selfish motorists.
So, what did the department do? It sent out a social media post asking drivers to #thinkbeforeyoupark, and to “please park with consideration for everyone including those who walk, wheel, or cycle”.
🚘🚗🅿️ We’re calling on drivers to show consideration for others in our society when parking.
This includes not:
❌ Blocking access to properties with your vehicle
❌ Parking partially or wholly on a pavements unless signs permit it
❌ Parking on cycle lanes during times of… pic.twitter.com/HWB5bJnzdn
— Department for Infrastructure (@deptinfra) September 24, 2024
“We’re calling on drivers to show consideration for others in our society when parking,” the DfI said in the post.
“This includes not: Blocking access to properties with your vehicle; Parking partially or wholly on a pavements unless signs permit it; Parking on cycle lanes during times of operation; Parking in spaces for designated users e.g. disabled parking bays.
“Please take a moment and think before you park.”
This thoughts and prayers approach to illegal parking was, unsurprisingly, condemned by active travel charity Sustrans’ Northern Ireland branch.
“Calling on drivers to ‘show consideration’ is not enough,” the charity wrote.
“You carried out a consultation, with the majority of respondents calling for a general pavement parking ban. What was the point of it?”
Well, considering the Northern Ireland government’s longstanding and much-maligned approach to active travel – just today, plans to pedestrianise a small, narrow street in Belfast’s buzzing Cathedral Quarter have been put on hold due to “underfunding” – the question may rightly be asked: What’s the point of the Department for Infrastructure?
“If drivers adhered to speed limits and the Highway Code, we wouldn’t need this sort of infrastructure”
I’m sure you’ll not be surprised to learn that a few of our readers aren’t convinced by some of the arguments emanating from Sheffield that the city’s maiden Dutch-style roundabout will cause an uncontrollable outbreak of confusion and chaos.
In fact, as Tom noted in the comments section and as evidenced by the below photo, the roundabout in question already has a dreaded pedestrian crossing on one exit.
“It’s not that unusual,” Tom said. “Also, Highway Code Rule 187 in regards to roundabouts says: In all cases watch out for and give plenty of room to pedestrians who may be crossing the approach and exit roads.”
Meanwhile, Smoggysteve, who lived for a while in Germany on the Dutch border, assessed in-depth (how long do you get for your lunch Steve?) the reasons why some people are aghast at what, after a go or two, is perfectly straightforward infrastructure to navigate:
These roundabouts work quite well in the Netherlands. They are everywhere and considering the entire system of roads is very cycling focused it helps that this means there are far fewer cars on the roads to begin with. You get much less inner-city traffic and it’s mostly concentrated to the motorway. So expecting them to just slot into a much busier ecosystem is a little naive.
But I look at various other UK road anomalies/novelties such as the magic roundabout in Swindon. To look at it from the air it looks madness. When you actually drive it a few times it makes a lot more sense.
Why? Because people adapt. How do people navigate roads they are unfamiliar with? How do I know, when I get off the ferry in Calais that I don’t drive on the left? A bit of research? Maybe a road sign as a reminder? How do I know not to drive over that bump back bridge at 30mph? Oh yeah, another sign. That prepares me for what is ahead.
Most of the arguments (whinges) by people who haven’t even experienced it yet is just plain laziness or refusal to accept change. Nothing more. What would these people ever do if they drive abroad where you may encounter this type of roundabout, but with the added obstacle of it flowing the other direction?
Clem Fandango also wasn’t having the arguments against Cambridge’s own Dutch roundabout, especially the claim that it adds 45 minutes onto drivers’ journeys (while they simultaneously avoid using it).
“I’ve told you a million times, do not exaggerate!! Even if it does, maybe, I don’t know… walk or cycle instead if you can. It’s obviously quicker,” they said.
“I love the ‘Sheffield is hilly’ argument,” added Jh2727. “Surely all the more reason that Sheffield should be building stuff like this – they can’t do a lot about the hills, but anyone who takes on the hills of Sheffield surely deserves the best possible cycling infrastructure.”
And Tony concluded: “If drivers adhered to speed limits and the Highway Code, we wouldn’t need this sort of infrastructure.”
Amen.
“Good to see those who don’t pay road tax getting priority”: New “unsafe” Dutch-style roundabout will create “chaos” and add 45 minutes to journeys in hilly city where “most people can’t cycle”, confused drivers say
Next month, Sheffield’s cyclists will get their first taste of what it’s like to cycle in the Netherlands (kind of), when the city’s first-ever ‘Dutch-style’ roundabout is completed.
First introduced in the UK in Cambridge in 2020 and based on a design made popular in the Netherlands (hence the name), the new roundabout layout at West Bar in Sheffield, work on which began in April last year, offers priority to cyclists and pedestrians, with motorists asked to give way to more vulnerable road users on entering and exiting the roundabout.
Zebra crossings are installed at each arm of the roundabout, giving pedestrians priority over drivers, while a one-way protected cycle lane will move clockwise around the infrastructure, providing dedicated space for those on bikes.
These two new features, Sheffield City Council says, will also manage the speed of traffic using the roundabout, “increasing safety for everyone”.
However, judging by some of the comments made on social media and on local radio, it’ll take a while before everyone in Sheffield is convinced.
“Let’s make it safe for all road users, let’s put a system in place that nobody has used before. What could possibly go wrong?” asked Sheffield United fan Bulmer on Twitter.
“A zebra crossing on the exit of a roundabout. That’s not going to cause any accidents, is it?” echoed SJT.
“Good to see those not paying any road tax are being given priority on the road,” added Andy Cutts. Classic.
“I’m all for these roundabouts, but I’m concerned that drivers don’t know how to negotiate them,” another Twitter user said.
> More collisions at UK’s first Dutch-style roundabout than old layout, figures reveal
And on BBC Radio Sheffield, some listeners claimed the roundabout would cause the same “chaos” witnessed in Cambridge since 2020.
Last year, figures provided by Cambridgeshire County Council showed that there were more reported collisions at the Dutch-style roundabout in its first three years (ten, three of which were serious) than in the years prior on the old layout (six).
However, the council was also keen to point out that the number of cyclists using the roundabout had increased by almost 50 per cent since 2017, meaning those on bicycles accounted for 11.4 per cent of all traffic users in 2022. Equally, pedestrian usage had also risen by about 30 per cent.
One Radio Sheffield listen told the programme that she lived in Cambridge for two years and described it as “chaos”.
“On average it put 45 minutes on a journey. Terrible idea, locals avoid it and call it crazy,” she said.
“This roundabout was proven to be unsafe in Cambridge,” fellow Sheffield-resident Richard added. “Someone needs to tell the council that Sheffield is built on seven very high hills and most people can’t ride a cycle here.”
> Tory activist criticised for “anti-cyclist” and “jingoistic” opposition to new roundabout
However, the outlook wasn’t all doom and gloom as the West Bar roundabout nears its big unveiling.
“Yes, they’re brilliant. Well done for putting one in,” cycling campaigner Dan Brothwell said on Twitter.
“I’m looking forward to this being finished. It will make it much safer and pleasanter to cycle through that area,” another user said.
“All the comments moaning – Go to Europe and see how it’s done,” added Gary. “It’s a proven method and works perfectly fine. The only reason it doesn’t work is because the driver doesn’t understand or doesn’t want to!”
Meanwhile, the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (RoSPA) said the roundabout layout has been found to have reduced serious incidents in the Netherlands by about 46 per cent.
“Giving equal precedence to all road users such as cyclists, as well as pedestrians, creates a more inclusive environment while maintaining smooth vehicle flow,” Caitlin Taylor, road safety manager at RoSPA, said.
“However, educating drivers will be crucial to prevent confusion and incidents, and clear signage and awareness campaigns will also be essential to ensure all road users understand the new layout.”
Cycling UK, however, noted that while the plans are a positive step in the right direction, cycling can only be properly encouraged in Sheffield by a well-connected network of safe routes in the city.
“While these changes help make it safer for people cycling, unless they’re part of a comprehensive, joined-up network of safe cycle lanes, we won’t see a surge in people getting on their bikes,” Cycling UK’s Sheffield-based senior policy officer Monica Scigliano said in a statement.
“If we truly want to encourage more people to make their everyday local journeys by bike, it’s crucial that well-designed cycle lanes connect to other local networks beyond the city centre.”
However, the local council is adamant the new Dutch-style roundabout forms part of broader plans to do exactly that.
“Sheffield is changing, and the way people get around is also transforming, we’re making it safer, easier and greener for you to enjoy everything the city has to offer,” the local authority’s transport chair Ben Miskell said.
“The introduction of the new Dutch-style roundabout will continue that, linking in perfectly with award-winning Grey to Green offering along with our other regeneration projects at Castlegate, Attercliffe, West Bar and Heart of the City among many others.”
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.
57 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
@TrainWalkWheel at least one person on here seems to have better understanding of these than I do but AFAICS the model is even less likely to lead to good outcomes than happened with eg. a certain UK bus company. The one notorious for moving into an area, putting the existing providers out of business by running more services for pence and losing money, then - having captured the market - jacking up the price and dropping services. At least in that case the intention was presumably to deliver a self-sustaining service in the end (albeit perhaps a worse, overpriced one). But AFAIK mass bike share itself has never made money directly. So one wonders what the end plan is if any one of these market-share-capture firms actually won? (Presumably that isn't important and it's all about trading / financial shenanigans in some way. I doubt they could hold the local authority to ransom for the extra cash...)
Alas it's another part of "because cars / 'change', we can't just copy a well-proven design eg. from NL" On top of this is the UK "not invented here" making it up / no expertise or standard designs AND a "we must fit cyclists in around existing road space" causing strange contorted layouts. So what happens is we get things like bi-directional cycle *lanes* (not separated cycle paths) because cheapest / easiest to patch in. So that means that pedestrians don't have a space to wait *after* crossing the cycle space and *before* they have to deal with the road. (It also puts another block in the way of cycling convenience at traffic lights - say at a T-junction - because unlike NL the lights then apply to cyclists going straight on, whereas in NL that would be an informal cycle path crossing for pedestrians with no lights applying to the cycle path part - so cyclists just keep rolling).
In 2019, Shanghai and other Chinese major cities implemented strict regulations and clean-up operations tp remove millopns of abondoned dockless bicycles that had created public nuisances and blocked pavements. One can't blame local authorities for taking actions in order to stop a messy situation triggered by unruly users.
@Jakrayan Criticising people for not riding primary is like criticising a victim of domestic abuse for cringing when their partner threatens them with their fist. People don't ride in the gutter because they want to, they do it because if they don't they know there's a better than even chance that in any given ride at least one driver will be so affronted by the ENTITLED BIKE NONCE TAKIN' UP THE WHOLE ROAD!!!11 they'll do a deliberate punishment pass that could kill you or leave you maimed for life. Getting over in the gutter isn't a great solution, but multiple uncomfortable but not life-threatening passes is better than one potentially catastrophic one. It shouldn't be a cyclist's responsibility to put their life at risk just to remind drivers to obey the rules of the road they should be doing regardless. And as for "just getting off and walking", putting aside the reality that a ridden bike takes up *less* space than one with the rider walking alongside and so I'd argue the most considerate way to use that inadequate infrastructure(presumably there are no safe alternatives within a reasonable distance or why would anyone on a bike be using it at all) would be to proceed across on the bike at walking pace and then stop and put your foot down if someone needs to get by you; plenty of people use bikes as mobility aids and so "just get off" isn't as simple as it's made out to be. A couple of years back I had the worst sprain of my life, I could barely even hobble for two weeks and had a huge honking brace on my foot, had to sleep on the sofa downstairs because climbing them was a no go. I could still ride my bike though, do my shopping, see my mates - plenty of people have impairments that aren't temporary, to them "just get off" is tantamount to saying "just stay home". Let's keep it a benjamin as the kids say: "shared responsibility" and "keeping everyone safe" are, literally, copouts. They've framed the entire campaign so they can justify only taking actions that don't piss off drivers, and don't require them to actually do any work except harassing a few cyclists as they do a lunch run to the local Greggs, because that's the level of seriousness police in this country - in an institutional sense - believe road crime deserves.
"Scott says that it ‘redefines cable routing in the mountain bike industry’. While we’re yet to see if that claim rings true" I have a Spark RC Pro (2022) with mechanically controlled components. Because we use the front brake lever on the drive (right) side in the UK I have the rear brake hose and two cable housings (dropper and shock) on the NDS entering the headset. On my current bike I use 3.0mm Jagwire housing with no problems. I can install them by just pushing them through the headset without dismantling it. The new 2027 Spark has two openings either side of the headset so it is set up for a rear brake to be on the DS (right). Maybe they are dismissing countries that have the UK's brake lever configuration.
The first link is to one of their cycling computers.
To be fair when I'm out on the roads, car or bike, I see very many instances of people cycling who could be doing better. Ignoring the delivery riders, most of whom we know aren't actually riding bicycles / Ebikes, the most common issue I see is people riding too close to the edge of the road. Yes, drivers absolutely should do better, however this type of riding does little to discourage drivers from overtaking, and they will still pass too closely leaving the rider with FA room to the left either. So educating riders as to how to ride more safely isn't a bad idea IMHO. As for that narrow bridge, if it's popular with pedestrians I don't see how getting off and walking a few yards is a massive issue. And I'm normally in SPD-SL road cleats!
Indeed. Some lanes are so narrow, and with overgrown vegetation, that the driver may not be able to see anything behind in his wing (door) mirrors, and vans usually don't have a rear window so no rear-view mirror either. Much easier in this situation to just turn around and head back to the nearest farm gate, it won't be far. After all, 'share the road' works both ways. And before someone comments to say if you drive where you can't clearly see what's behind you, that driver may have no choice - deliveries, tradespeople etc.
So we can add time travel to his list of talents? Is there nothing the man can't do?
"Arguably the best way to carry panniers on the front of pretty much any bike" The thing that is missing from this sentence is the qualification "...that doesn't have the right bosses for a typical low rider rack" The horizontal tube seems too low which means careful pannier selection to avoid a ground clearance issue. Also the panniers are going to be quite far forward which is less than ideal. If you have the bosses then I'd argue you're much better off with something else e.g. a Tubus Duo which places the panniers at a good height and allows them to sit behind the axle minimising the effect on steering.
57 thoughts on ““Good to see those who don’t pay road tax getting priority”: New “unsafe” Dutch-style roundabout will add 45 minutes to journeys in hilly city where “most people can’t cycle”, confused drivers say + more on the live blog”
“A zebra crossing on the exit
“A zebra crossing on the exit of a roundabout. That’s not going to cause any accidents, is it?” echoed SJT.”
No. Bad driving will. Any other information you need to improve your driving, SJT?
Alarming (yet predictable) how many people don’t realise the exit of a roundabout already has very similar rules to those of a zebra crossing.
Yeah, that quote could be
Yeah, that quote could be translated thusly:
“I love to mash the gas pedal as I exit a roundabout, as the G-forces make it feel like I’m accelerating out of the Antony Noghes corner at the Monaco Grand Prix. At the moment, if I were to hit a pedestrian crossing when I do that, it’ll be dismissed as an accident. This’ll change that, so I think it is a disgrace!”
GMBasix wrote:
I’m trying to think of a difference, but none come to mind. The wording might be different, but it amounts to the same thing – to be honest that is my biggest bug bear with the wording changes to the highway code, the could have clarified it further by adding the words “just like a zebra crossing”.
Isn’t the current Transport
Isn’t the current Transport Secretary an MP in Sheffield? Just sayin’…
Yes!
Yes!
She’s fucking clueless though.
Quote:
Even if we’re generous and he actually means Vehicle Excise Duty, does he know that EVs don’t pay it either? Does he wish to ban Teslas from the roads of Sheffield??
And certain classes of
And certain classes of commercial vehicles. And horses/horse drawn carriages. And of course, pedestrians. I hope Andy Cutts doesn’t walk anywhere, without paying Road Tax for each pair of shoes.
Don’t forget those classic
Don’t forget those classic Rolls Royces, traction engines etc.
brooksby wrote:
NB: we’re going to have to update this argument for 1 April 2025: Gov.uk – How the Vehicle Excise Duty (VED) changes from 1 April 2025 will affect your vehicle.
Technically it doesn’t matter
Technically it doesn’t matter because no taxes, whether direct to HMRC or to another Government department, directly pay for anything other than paying off the Government’s overdraft with the Bank of England.
Any and all money the Government pays out is new money created by the Central Bank (which is owned by The Treasury) extending the Governmnet’s overdraft. Be that for roads, NHS, prisons, MOD, local Government etc. And the Government subsidies paid for the DVLA, National Highways and local authorities specifically for road infrastructure is far greater than that collected via VED.
Of course, this is the better
Of course, this is the better argument to lead with. Just flagging that the “VED is a pollution tax” / “some drivers don’t pay VED” argument is dropping down the priotity list.
brooksby wrote:
I certainly wouldn’t disagree with that motion, but probably for somewhat different reasons
My diesel from 2014 had zero
My diesel from 2014 had zero “road tax”. Go figure. I also want to know how much general tax Andy Cutts pays because I reckon I have paid more tax than him over the past decade so when he sees me on my bike he should get out of my way because I pay more for our roads than he doesn. Its such an utterly retarded argument, much like basically every cycling bingo but this one particularly annoys me. Most cyclists also own a car so they do pay the mythical “road tax”.
Not to mention VAT on their
Not to mention VAT on their overpriced cycling paraphernalia, oh, and Income Tax, National Insurance, Stamp Duty, Customs Import Duty, Capital Gains Tax and all manner of government theft yet to be enacted..
Gordon took vat off cycling
Gordon took vat off cycling helmets, thankfully, but I’d already bought a couple by then,
“on average it puts 45 mins
“on average it puts 45 mins on a journey” (despite all the locals avoiding it…).
Uh-huh. I’ve told you a million times, do not exaggerate!!
Even if it does, maybe, I don’t know…walk or cycle instead if you can. It’s obviously quicker numbnuts.
It added “45 minutes on a
It added “45 minutes on a journey” – AND now locals avoid it?
Meanwhile – very busy “Dutch roundabout” does indeed slow down some motor traffic, but most likely the throughput of people is similar or has increased…
Maybe they should start using
Maybe they should start using it again – can’t still be taking an added 45 mins if they all stopped using it….. OR did it attract an equivalent amount of additional vehicle usage from non-locals (is it a tourist attraction?).
Either way. I call BS (she didn’t provide a receipt)
Clem Fandango wrote:
That’s why it added 45 minutes to journeys – 10 minutes out of your way to get to it, 10 minutes to get back to your route after, and 25 minutes enjoying driving round and round it.
If it’s genuinely adding 45
If it’s genuinely adding 45 minutes to a journey (which of course it isn’t) then surely this reflects that it is being well used by pedestrians and that drivers are having to stop at the zebra crossings. So it’s working.
AidanR wrote:
If “having” to stop for pedestrians adds 45 minutes, there we clearly a lot of drivers who were previously failing to stop. So clearly it’s necessary.
Exactly. Or many pedestrians
Exactly. Or many pedestrians just avoided it altogether, which the stats suggest.
TBH though I really
TBH though I really disbelieve the wilder delay numbers it just sounds like:
“We had a massive traffic sewer which nobody in their right mind would cross at busy times. Obviously we didn’t provide a pedestrian crossing as that would hold up drivers. Nor did we do a grade-separated crossing e.g. an expensive underpass or bridge *. So nobody crossed and drivers reached the limit where they were just slowed by all the other drivers. Now we’ve encouraged vulnerable road users to cross and something has given – to whit a little motor traffic capacity at busiest times”.
Again – think the Dutch wouldn’t do it this way. First reduce the motor traffic (if needed) then put in infra which is suited to lower motor traffic flows…
* Not that sending people walking through a tunnel or a “concrete trench in the sky” is convenient for them – that’s “safety via less convenience” or “move the vulnerable road users out of the way”. The best thing would be to send the motor traffic up or down (cars don’t care about small hills). However that’s really expensive don’tchaknow? Just for a few people walking and cycling? Are you quite mad? …
indeed – but it only counts
indeed – but it only counts as “working” if it doesn’t inconvenience drivers you see.
To be fair, she didn’t say
To be fair, she didn’t say what journey/mode of transport the 45 minutes applied to.
It could be it takes 45 minutes longer to walk round it than just cross directly over it.
Of course, she could be Scottish and her “four tae five” minutes has got lost in translation.
Having lived in Germany tight
Having lived in Germany right on the Dutch border where I could cycle and drive frequently, there are things I would like to point out in both sides of the argument..
These roundabouts work quite well in the Netherlands. They are everywhere and considering the entire system of roads is very cycling focused it helps that this means there are far fewer cars on the roads to begin with. You get much less inner city traffic and it’s mostly concentrated to the motorway (or autosnelweg). So expecting them to just slot into a much busier ecosystem is a little naive.
But I look at various other UK road anomalies / novelties such as the magic roundabout in Swindon. To look at it from the air it looks madness. When you actually drive it a few times it makes a lot more sense. Why? Because people adapt. How wise do people navigate roads they are unfamiliar with? How do I know , when I get off the ferry in Calais that I don’t drive on the left? A bit of research? Maybe a road sign as a reminder? How do I know not to drive over that bump back bridge at 30mph? Oh yeah another sign. That prepares me for what is ahead.
Most of the arguments (whinges) by people who haven’t even experienced it yet is just plain laziness or refusal to accept change. Nothing more. What would these people ever do if they drive abroad where you may encounter this type of roundabout, but with the added obstacle of it flowing the other direction?
The logic in some comments ie non road tax payers, blah. Ignoring the obvious , since when were pedestrians classed as non tax paying road users? Are they so self centred they can’t even abide people on foot? Children walking to school for example. Sorry, these people assume the only way a child arrives at school is in an SUV right to the gate like they are dropping off a VIP in a war zone.
Which always changes my mindset from let’s help educate these people and help them adapt to plain Fuck Em.
Isn’t this just a normal
Isn’t this just a normal roundabout, with a single vehicle lane, and crossings on the exits/entrances?
What’s to get used to?
People [peds, cyclists, etc] waiting to cross … drivers stop. Just like if there was a vehicle already on the roundabout.
People waiting to cross on the exit … drivers stop. Just like any other crossing.
Or is it the one lane on the roundabout itself that forces lazy drivers to observe lane discipline?
As I understand it (looking
As I understand it (looking on Google Maps) it is 5 sattelite mini roundabouts, around a larger island which is effectively a roundabout the goes the wrong way – looks horrible.
The problem as I see it in the UK, we bring in trial schemes but if they are succesful we don’t roll them out all over the country so that they become the norm, instead they are piecemeal and dependeant on the conservative opinions and prejudices of individual engineers and planning officers.
I think maybe the drivers’
I think maybe the drivers’ fear is “if I have to stop for a crossing when I’m exiting a roundabout, someone might hit me from behind”. People said the same about waiting to let pedestrians cross side roads when the HWC changed – “but I’ll get rear ended by someone who’s not expecting me to stop”. Course the same logic doesn’t seem to stop people pulling out in front of you on a roundabout or conversely blocking a roundabout – when it suits them.
Smoggysteve wrote:
It’s not naive – it’s simply either using the wrong tool or using a tool in an inappropriate way, because we have the wrong mindset from the get-go.
I’m a big fan of this sort of thing – but like most infra they “work” best under certain conditions and may not be safe or useful under others.
Even in this country we have the notion of limits to traffic flows (normally we’re only interested in motor traffic flow…) for different designs. Quite rightly the Dutch have determined that these designs only “work” within certain parameters – here a (by UK standards) low maximum flow of traffic and at low speeds (almost always 30kmh or below I think). If the flow or speed is much higher then you either reduce it first or the roundabout is the wrong tool *.
These are not “traffic calming” infra so sticking them in to a system which is too busy with the idea of reducing traffic is going to instead reduce safety for cyclists and pedestrians, or reduce their convenience – AND trigger drivers.
* In the UK because we’re motor-traffic focussed we’re apparently blind to distinctions between a high-capacity “turbo roundabout” – ONLY for motor vehicles – and one of these (well … can’t agree to do things differently).
chrisonabike wrote:
You kind of just described nativity right there . Wrong mindset – lack of wisdom or judgement.
id call that naive
Fair enough. I go for “not
Fair enough. I go for “not invented here!”. Or “hubris / cynicism” – thinking your “new” idea is amazing and/or not really caring about the outcome because it’s not really important like motor transport is (or it’s not your money).
I’m likely too cynical myself but lots of UK cycle infra designs seems to lack the innocence of “naive”.
There are lots of things ‘not
There are lots of things ‘not invented here’ that people eventually learn to assimilate into their lives. Some are easier than others. Some are seamless and some take huge culture shifts.
But hey, you go with cynicism if it makes ya happy bud.
Is it Christmas already?
Is it Christmas already?
Nobody panic, but Garmin is
Nobody panic, but Garmin is down. I repeat, Garmin is down.
I love the ‘Sheffield is
I love the ‘Sheffield is hilly’ argument… surely all the more reasons that Sheffield should be building stuff like this, they can’t do a lot about the hills, but anyone who takes on the hills of Sheffield surely deserves the best possible cyling infrastructure.
The People’s republic of
The People’s republic of Yorkshire has a proud tradition of breeding competent cyclists precisely because the whole county is rather hilly.
I mean, nobody cycles in
I mean, nobody cycles in Switzerland, or Scandinavia, or the North of the Netherlands …
I don’t want to bring up e-bikes in what is essentially “we just don’t want to do something so we’ll find a reason” argument … but EAPCs exist and are rather known for “flattening out hills”.
It is very wearing that road
It is very wearing that road.cc writing staff in effect behave like anti-cycling trolls, or platform the comments of anti-cycling trolls.
The Sheffield scheme looks great, and I would have liked to see presented in a positive way here.
Quote:
Mutter… mutter… Pope… Catholic… Bears… Woods… mutter… mutter…
brooksby wrote:
If Deliveroo were serious about stopping illegal delivery vehicles, then they could just offer a meal refund if the customer provides evidence that it was delivered by a dodgy vehicle.
hawkinspeter wrote:
If.
But luckily those people delivering food for them have nothing to do with Deliveroo. They just happen to be doing work instructed by Deliveroo, in Deliveroo livery, and be paid by Deliveroo. They’re not employees and really I’m amazed anyone would bring that company’s good name up in this context…
And the riders have to buy
And the riders have to buy the liveried accessories.
Deliveroo and their ilk don’t
Deliveroo and their ilk don’t give a shit!
Here in Nottingham I’m constantly remonstrating with delivery riders for riding on crowded pavements. That their bikes are illegal is the least of my worries.
Quote:
That would be football, where there are three National Leagues, a League One that’s the third tier, a Championship that’s the second tier, and a Champions League where most of the teams aren’t champions?
mdavidford wrote:
That would be football, where there are three National Leagues, a League One that’s the third tier, a Championship that’s the second tier, and a Champions League where most of the teams aren’t champions?
Don’t forget the injured players who aren’t actually injured (but roll around holding their legs, anyway)
I wonder whether more
I wonder whether more footballers or cyclists end up cripples though. And whether more footballers or cyclist have brain damage.
Rugby players can develop
Rugby players can develop brain damage, footballers start their career with it
Not a fan then? Or just
Not a fan then? Or just sceptical about the risks?
Don’t get me started.
Don’t get me started.
Roll around like they’ve been shot, while those allegedly soft lycra twats pick themselves up and get on with it!
Does pain get more, the more you earn?
Quote:
That roundabout already has a pedestrian crossing on one exit. It’s not that unusual. Also, highway code Rule 187 in regards to roundabouts says:
In all cases watch out for and give plenty of room to
It’s pretty hard to have
It’s pretty hard to have pedestrian crossings only on the entrance to roundabouts and not exits, unless you want a lot of people stuck in the middle of the road.
If drivers adhered to speed
If drivers adhered to speed limits and the highway code we wouldn’t need this sort of infrastructure. Tha majority of people who don’t pay road tax are dead people, there are some stupid people who think they pay road tax, but there’s no hope for them.
Tony W. wrote:
“We” are those cycling already so in a sense “we” don’t. But it would be nicer.
Also for all the people who don’t cycle all those short trips which are easily cycleable (may of those driving or in motor vehicles) * well, it seems they do need it. The evidence is that the only places where a significant percentage of journeys are cycled rather than driven it has taken the creation of such infra for that to happen. (Here’s an “it was built and then they came” case).
As a cyclist and pedestrian actually the sort of infra I don’t need is … a roundabout, at all! If there are only cyclists and pedestrians a 3.5m lane (or greater, or two of them) is not just unnecessary – it’s a nuisance for pedestrians to cross. Nor do I need traffic lights, nor crash barriers … those are only “because cars”. All cost a LOT more to build and maintain than cycle / pedestrian only stuff.
So … yeah – this cycle infra is actually as much “car infra” as anything. But it doesn’t need to be “everywhere” – just where we haven’t / can’t tame the car sufficiently e.g. where there’s a lot of motor traffic and/or it’s going at a high speed, or there are very large motor vehicles like trucks or buses.
* Luckily I believe – just – there is “hope for them” in that they are humans, same as they have elsewhere. And in NL, parts of Scandinavia, Seville… they do cycle a lot more short trips than here. The conditions needed to get people to do so are in fact rather simple and are well understood. However setting up those conditions is incredibly hard. But e.g. in Seville they have actually made that change.
“Please take a moment and
“Please take a moment and think before you park.” NI Department of Infrastructure.
I lived in Belfast about thirty years ago, and the DoI was extremely resistant to anything that might make cycling slightly less dangerous then. Good to see nothing has changed and the DoI give precisely as many flying flamingoes now as they always did.
We all know that most drivers won’t do anything that makes it slightly inconvenient for themselves, and asking them nicely to be considerate of others is rather like asking the Great Bugblatter beast of Krall to please think before they bite your head off.
If the UK is stuck in the 1990s when it comes to cycling, NI must still be in the 1950s. DoI, Dinosaurs of Infrastructure.
“On average it put 45 minutes
“On average it put 45 minutes on a journey. Terrible idea, locals avoid it and call it crazy,” she said.
45 minutes? Are they waiting for a very slow walker to walk around the whole bloody roundabout?? Couldn’t possibly be all the other cars causing the delays.
West Bars dutch style
West Bars dutch style roundabout?
Looking forward to Dan Walker getting knocked off and thanking his helmet for saving his life.