Author Topic: Proposed Traffic Regulation Order banning cyclists from the A63  (Read 18940 times)

telstarbox

  • Loving the lanes
Re: Proposed Traffic Regulation Order banning cyclists from the A63
« Reply #25 on: 26 January, 2018, 05:36:47 pm »
I'm playing devil's advocate here and not supporting the cycle ban, but from a non-cyclist's POV, why should specifically cycle racing (as opposed to cycling in general) be permitted on an open public road?
2019 🏅 R1000 and B1000

LittleWheelsandBig

  • Whimsy Rider
Re: Proposed Traffic Regulation Order banning cyclists from the A63
« Reply #26 on: 26 January, 2018, 05:41:38 pm »
Because the racing on the public road that we are talking about is time trialling, not road racing in a bunch. TTing was designed specifically to be just a number of individuals riding down a road individually, not blocking traffic or being any different from any other individual riding down the public road whether riding to the shops or not.
Wheel meet again, don't know where, don't know when...

telstarbox

  • Loving the lanes
Re: Proposed Traffic Regulation Order banning cyclists from the A63
« Reply #27 on: 26 January, 2018, 05:49:13 pm »
Yes, but aiming to get round in the fastest time is still racing as opposed to general riding? The focus is different to riding to the shops where you're just concerned about getting there and back.
2019 🏅 R1000 and B1000

Chris S

Re: Proposed Traffic Regulation Order banning cyclists from the A63
« Reply #28 on: 26 January, 2018, 06:00:22 pm »
Because the racing on the public road that we are talking about is time trialling, not road racing in a bunch. TTing was designed specifically to be just a number of individuals riding down a road individually, not blocking traffic or being any different from any other individual riding down the public road whether riding to the shops or not.

Having encountered a time-trial whilst driving up the A19 dual carriageway between Thirsk and Teesside (not a cycle-banned section) I can't really agree with that. It was a singularly scary experience driving amid cyclists along there; not to mention, the high volume of traffic (including a lot of trucks - it's a very trucky road) forced into lane 2. It was horrible, and they shouldn't have been there IMO.

ETA: Probably this course: https://www.cyclingtimetrials.org.uk/course-details/t1002

LittleWheelsandBig

  • Whimsy Rider
Re: Proposed Traffic Regulation Order banning cyclists from the A63
« Reply #29 on: 26 January, 2018, 06:08:48 pm »
So you are saying that cyclists should be banned in toto from riding those roads for any reason. What alternative are you offering the cyclists you have just banned?
Wheel meet again, don't know where, don't know when...

LittleWheelsandBig

  • Whimsy Rider
Re: Proposed Traffic Regulation Order banning cyclists from the A63
« Reply #30 on: 26 January, 2018, 06:12:36 pm »
tbox, they are riding the public road as they are entitled to do and probably riding slower than the speed limit (although speed limits don't apply to cycles). Whether they are going barely fast enough to prevent moss growing on their northern side or at their anaerobic threshold is irrelevant. To most drivers they are going too bloody slow in either case.
Wheel meet again, don't know where, don't know when...

Chris S

Re: Proposed Traffic Regulation Order banning cyclists from the A63
« Reply #31 on: 26 January, 2018, 06:13:09 pm »
There are plenty of roads between Middlesbrough and Thirsk that aren't the A19.

Major trunk roads full of trucks and drivers with expectations of being able to drive at motorway speed unimpeded (yes, I know - that might not be right, but that's how it is) are no place for cyclists.

LittleWheelsandBig

  • Whimsy Rider
Re: Proposed Traffic Regulation Order banning cyclists from the A63
« Reply #32 on: 26 January, 2018, 06:14:30 pm »
I don't know that area, so can't comment about that specific road.

I do know that CTT regularly do risk assessments and traffic counts before allowing TTs to occur. Apparent risk does not equal real risk (refer cycle helmet, etc.).
Wheel meet again, don't know where, don't know when...

Chris S

Re: Proposed Traffic Regulation Order banning cyclists from the A63
« Reply #33 on: 26 January, 2018, 06:18:48 pm »
This might help: https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.2552418,-1.3472331,3a,75y,176.31h,85.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8AMZaQCPtq6OACKyZem3vg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

Think A14 Newmarket bypass (also a TT route I think); this section of the  A19 is the primary road route between the A1/M1 corridor and the heavy industry on Teesside.

LittleWheelsandBig

  • Whimsy Rider
Re: Proposed Traffic Regulation Order banning cyclists from the A63
« Reply #34 on: 26 January, 2018, 06:20:48 pm »
And the A63 road relates to the A19 how? What alternatives are there to the A63?
Wheel meet again, don't know where, don't know when...

Karla

  • car(e) free
    • Lost Byway - around the world by bike
Re: Proposed Traffic Regulation Order banning cyclists from the A63
« Reply #35 on: 26 January, 2018, 06:37:24 pm »
There are plenty of roads between Middlesbrough and Thirsk that aren't the A19.
The A19/A168 is a road I've used plenty of times, both for transport and for TTing.  There are other roads  that go in broadly the right direction but it's still the fastest way of getting north/south on a bike if I need to get a move on. 

The road between Thirsk and Middlesbrough has several TT courses: it's used at all distances, starting from both ends.  There will frequently be two short events running on the same day, one from Yorkshire and one from Teesside.  I've just tried to add up the number of times  I've  TT'd on there and I've literally lost count. 

All that time,  I've felt completely safe.  I've never had a problem with being cut up, close passed or anything of that nature.  There's never been a particularly large amount of  traffic on there: I've ridden on many busier roads, both getting in and out of big cities and also when I've  been touring and have needed to take a direct route. 


Quote
Major trunk roads full of trucks and drivers with expectations of being able to drive at motorway speed unimpeded (yes, I know - that might not be right, but that's how it is) are no place for cyclists.

Why though?  Do you think the cyclists are at risk because they are at danger of  dying?  In which case, referring to the A63, let's repeat:

The A63 is a safe road.
The cyclists  on the A63 are not in danger.
You may think what they are doing is dangerous, but it isn't.
The road has been heavily used by time triallists for 20 or 30 years, hundreds of thousands of race miles, with a good safety record.  The one single death was the rider's  own fault.
Fear of danger is not a reason to ban cyclists from the A63.

Chris S

Re: Proposed Traffic Regulation Order banning cyclists from the A63
« Reply #36 on: 26 January, 2018, 06:49:50 pm »
It's unpleasant for drivers - driving at fast dual carriageway speed (NSL basically) in close proximity to vulnerable road users. I'd feel the same if they were ramblers - it's not about the cycling.

Of course, you may not care about how drivers feel - and I have a certain sympathy there too, on occasions.

mattc

  • n.b. have grown beard since photo taken
    • Didcot Audaxes
Re: Proposed Traffic Regulation Order banning cyclists from the A63
« Reply #37 on: 26 January, 2018, 06:52:03 pm »
Quote
It's unpleasant for drivers

They should put that in the proposal; how could anyone NOT be persuaded by that logic??
Has never ridden RAAM
---------
No.11  Because of the great host of those who dislike the least appearance of "swank " when they travel the roads and lanes. - From Kuklos' 39 Articles

Karla

  • car(e) free
    • Lost Byway - around the world by bike
Re: Proposed Traffic Regulation Order banning cyclists from the A63
« Reply #38 on: 26 January, 2018, 06:52:46 pm »
This might help: https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.2552418,-1.3472331,3a,75y,176.31h,85.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8AMZaQCPtq6OACKyZem3vg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

Think A14 Newmarket bypass (also a TT route I think); this section of the  A19 is the primary road route between the A1/M1 corridor and the heavy industry on Teesside.

The traffic levels on the A19 and A14 are quite different. 

How do I know?  Because the A15 at Newmarket is indeed a TT course, it's called the E2, I've ridden it ...

... at 4:45 in the fcuking morning. 

To stick to the same traffic limits that CTT have been using ever since the 1960s, events on the A14 now start as early as 4:45.  The A19 isn't so heavily trafficked, so events can run at saner hours of the day while staying within the same low-traffic levels.

Graeme

  • @fatherhilarious.blog 🦋
    • Graeme's Blog
Re: Proposed Traffic Regulation Order banning cyclists from the A63
« Reply #39 on: 26 January, 2018, 07:58:28 pm »
Ed, the owner of the local bike shop in North Ferriby, was on Humberside Radio talking about this TRO. He used crashmap to come up with the figure that in the last five years there have been 271 motoring accidents - compared to the 6 cycling accidents that the police are using as justification to request a TRO from Highways England. Given the police are requesting it I don't hold out much hope of my letter of objection over-turning it.

However, apart from racing they are prohibiting us from riding at any time 'for our own safety'. Great. So at 1am I can't ride from Welton to Melton on an empty piece of tarmac - I have to wiggle through the village or use the cycle path and hope I don't hit debris from the A63 which has been littered onto the adjacent paths.

I'm fighting this because the same argument could easily be applied to any trunk road - and that would be the end of cycling as anything other than a recreation activity. According to Cycling UKs info on TROs, Highways England is required to consult road haulage and freight associations - so I'm hoping they'll speak up for cyclist's rights.

271 motor accidents. Perhaps drivers should only be allowed on the A63 one at a time. Or perhaps encouraged to play with Scalextric instead of driving.

A note on the local TT - most of the people I meet in Welton are supportive, I know the church is.

Anyway - the most important thing for anyone who wants to object, is to write before the 19/Feb to:

Director,
Operations Directorate (Yorkshire & North East),
Highways England,
3rd Floor South,
Lateral,
8 City Walk,
Leeds,
LS11 9AT

Quote Order Title:
“The A63 Trunk Road (North Cave Interchange to Daltry Street Interchange) (Prohibition of Cyclists) Order"

Re: Proposed Traffic Regulation Order banning cyclists from the A63
« Reply #40 on: 28 January, 2018, 10:59:12 am »
I always wonder whether these things have a completely bizarre, but common sense answer.

Surely the Highways Authority have a "duty of care" to "To maintain public roads to a standard that ensures they are safe and passable"

If they have failed to fulfil the duty by allowing the road to become unsafe for then there should be a legal obligation to make it safe.

Unfortunately it would take a lot of clever lawyering to enforce that resolution to the problem

For instance given the incidence of accidents, would an enforced 30 mph limit keep everyone on the road and improve safety for both

Graeme

  • @fatherhilarious.blog 🦋
    • Graeme's Blog
Re: Proposed Traffic Regulation Order banning cyclists from the A63
« Reply #41 on: 28 January, 2018, 02:34:44 pm »
It used to be 50mph with traffic lights, but as junctions were upgraded to bridges and slip roads, and as traffic flow improved, speed restrictions were lifted.

The speed limit isn't a big deal really, enforcement of it is. If there are people in the outside lane doing 70 or 80 mph then I can see how those at 60 mph in the inside lane are frightened at having to change lanes to avoid a cyclist.

As a resident of the villages the A63 passes through - it would be nice if the traffic were a little more calm.

Next Saturday I notice that I'm using a couple of sections of dual carriageway during the Straight on at Rosies Audax. I'm not bothered by that, but wonder how long before Highways England are banning more cyclists from roads 'for thier own safety'.

Graeme

  • @fatherhilarious.blog 🦋
    • Graeme's Blog
Re: Proposed Traffic Regulation Order banning cyclists from the A63
« Reply #42 on: 28 January, 2018, 03:55:01 pm »
Sunday afternoon on the A63. Traffic, but not rush hour.

https://tinyurl.com/y737ufpw

Re: Proposed Traffic Regulation Order banning cyclists from the A63
« Reply #43 on: 28 January, 2018, 04:37:23 pm »
Next Saturday I notice that I'm using a couple of sections of dual carriageway during the Straight on at Rosies Audax. I'm not bothered by that, but wonder how long before Highways England are banning more cyclists from roads 'for thier own safety'.

OT - None of the roads on that route are likely to be managed by Highways England who are only responsible for a small fraction of trunk roads.  I don't think I've used one on an Audax route, though there's a local one I ride occasionally in the early hours.
Not that the local authorities responsible for most of the roads are likely to be any more considerate to cyclists, but at least we have an opportunity to get to know them and have some dialogue before it comes to opposing bans.


Graeme

  • @fatherhilarious.blog 🦋
    • Graeme's Blog
Re: Proposed Traffic Regulation Order banning cyclists from the A63
« Reply #44 on: 28 January, 2018, 08:00:56 pm »
Great response to the situation by Cycling Time Trials: https://www.cyclingtimetrials.org.uk/articles/view/283

Re: Proposed Traffic Regulation Order banning cyclists from the A63
« Reply #45 on: 30 January, 2018, 01:32:29 pm »
He used crashmap to come up with the figure that in the last five years there have been 271 motoring accidents - compared to the 6 cycling accidents that the police are using as justification to request a TRO from Highways England.

I would suspect that the roads are used by more than 45 times as many motor vehicles as bicycles so, statistically[1] the number of cycling accidents are more common that motor vehicles. Accident rates should be considered in terms of vehicle miles not outright number of accidents.

([EDIT] Even if it is higher rate than for motor vehicles it should be considered in relation to other similar roads as the CTT response suggests, I'd expect the accident rate is the same or lower than other similar roads)

I still wouldn't want to see cycling banned on that stretch though, it sets a dangerous precedent and is treating the symptom and not the underlying problem.

1. 6 instances is not enough to form a sound statistical judgement on anything though.
"Yes please" said Squirrel "biscuits are our favourite things."

rogerzilla

  • When n+1 gets out of hand
Re: Proposed Traffic Regulation Order banning cyclists from the A63
« Reply #46 on: 30 January, 2018, 01:42:34 pm »
Drivers think we should wear helmets to protect us from them, too.
Hard work sometimes pays off in the end, but laziness ALWAYS pays off NOW.

mattc

  • n.b. have grown beard since photo taken
    • Didcot Audaxes
Re: Proposed Traffic Regulation Order banning cyclists from the A63
« Reply #47 on: 30 January, 2018, 03:08:00 pm »
He used crashmap to come up with the figure that in the last five years there have been 271 motoring accidents - compared to the 6 cycling accidents that the police are using as justification to request a TRO from Highways England.

I would suspect that the roads are used by more than 45 times as many motor vehicles as bicycles so, statistically[1] the number of cycling accidents are more common that motor vehicles. Accident rates should be considered in terms of vehicle miles not outright number of accidents.

([EDIT] Even if it is higher rate than for motor vehicles it should be considered in relation to other similar roads as the CTT response suggests, I'd expect the accident rate is the same or lower than other similar roads)

I still wouldn't want to see cycling banned on that stretch though, it sets a dangerous precedent and is treating the symptom and not the underlying problem.

1. 6 instances is not enough to form a sound statistical judgement on anything though.

You could argue that the cyclists aren't having accidents - they are just the ones getting hurt when drivers crash into stuff. It looks like a very safe road to cycle on - driving seems more accident-prone.

Which would lead us back to removing/reducing car traffic ...
Has never ridden RAAM
---------
No.11  Because of the great host of those who dislike the least appearance of "swank " when they travel the roads and lanes. - From Kuklos' 39 Articles

Re: Proposed Traffic Regulation Order banning cyclists from the A63
« Reply #48 on: 30 January, 2018, 05:20:09 pm »
You could argue that the cyclists aren't having accidents - they are just the ones getting hurt when drivers crash into stuff. It looks like a very safe road to cycle on - driving seems more accident-prone.

Probably, but one cyclist fatality in 2013 on that road was a head down TT-er cycling into the back of a stationary caravan (which had suffered a tyre blowout).

That, I agree, is nothing to do with that specific road but we know that incident rates on some roads are higher than others but there's no evidence that the road here is any worse than others.
"Yes please" said Squirrel "biscuits are our favourite things."

Re: Proposed Traffic Regulation Order banning cyclists from the A63
« Reply #49 on: 31 January, 2018, 10:35:17 pm »
The irony is the caravan collision wouldn't have happened if the A63 there had a hard shoulder...which the M62 has immediately to the west has but is banned to non-motor+<50cc vehicles.