Every cyclist in the land will now surely have heard
of the plan to ban cyclists from using a 15-mile stretch of the A63
dual-carriageway at Hull, which forms part of the V718 time trial course, one
of the fastest courses in the land.
Tour de France winner Sir
Bradley Wiggins recorded a 17-58 “10” here in May 2015.
Cycling UK, the national cycling charity, have
called the proposed ban “ludicrous” and demanded it be scrapped. They threaten
legal action. Cycling Time Trials (CTT) is also strongly opposed, as you might
imagine.
This is Highways England’s idea - the company
appointed by the government to manage the trunk and A-road network and, would
you believe, promote cycling!
They want a Traffic Restriction Order (TR0) banning
cyclists from using the section
of the A63 Trunk Road between North Cave Interchange and Daltry Street
Interchange.
They cite six accidents – including one fatal - to
cyclists in five years on this road as reason for their concern. Not all were
in CTT events.
Opponents of the ban say
this is not evidence based and the accident
rate to cyclists simply
do not merit such drastic action.
They point out there have been nearly 300 accidents
involving motor vehicles and yet no talk of banning the motor menace, or
slowing it down.
They use the generic term “cyclists”, not time
trialling specifically. But it seems likely that time trialling on this stretch
of road is the target.
According to a local radio source, the police have
long considered it unsafe to organise competitive events on this stretch of
road.
The irony is, of course, die hard testers benefit
from traffic flow and like racing on these roads. It has been a debatable point
for decades now, time trialling on busy fast dual-carriageways which have
become motorways in all but name. Well, it seems Highways England may force the
issue!
I felt uncomfortable time trialling on such big roads a long time ago,
when the A3 in Surrey had a makeover and was transformed into super-fast wide
“motorway” style dual carriageway way, with slip roads as wide as airport
runways!
Traffic was still relatively light in the event I
rode, but I felt at risk and never went there again. But that was my perception
of risk!
I felt happier on smaller country roads, but it has
been argued that smaller roads may be no safer!
What we do know for certain is that cycling is not
in itself dangerous; the danger comes from others. And that is not being
addressed.
However, the main concern here is not that time
trialling may be banned from a road even some local time triallists consider
too dangerous to race on, but the dangerous precedent such a ban will set for
other roads deemed “dangerous” for cyclists.
“Dangerous” for no other reason than for the past
70-80 years, the needs of cyclists have been neglected and designed out of the
road system.
It is further evidence of successive government’s
laisse faire approach to transport ever since car ownership began to grow back
in the early 20th century.
For the dream fostered then and reinforced by
marketing ever since is that drivers must be able to go where they like, when they
like, quickly and with the least inconvenience.
CLEAR
CYCLISTS OUT OF THE WAY!
Highways England’s twisted logic is that because
cyclists can’t keep up the 65mph flow of traffic they are therefore in “danger”.
So they’ll clear them out of the way.
Bollocks. Cyclists can’t keep up with traffic on the
rest of the 200,000-odd miles of the national road network either, which they
have every right to ride.
Expect other stretches of road to be banned to
cyclists, too - you can bet on it - if Highways England is allowed to get away
with this.
Meanwhile I know of no major initiative by the police to collar the millions of thickheads illegally using
mobile phones while driving, many of them texting which means they aren’t even looking!
CTT
urge cyclists to object
Cycling Time Trials National Secretary Stewart
Smith is urging all cycling club members to lodge a complaint with Highways
England. But he advises don’t mention
time trialling! For fear, I suppose, of adding wood to the fire!
I wonder if he realises his desire to keep quiet
about time trialling harks back to the sport’s clandestine Victorian origins.
Back in the 19th century there was
widespread opposition to road racing on the highway which led to a ban on an
early form of massed start road racing. (Read Peter Whitfield’s absorbing
account in his book “Time, Speed and
Truth. A history of Time Trialling 1890 – 2010”.
This ban led to the formation of time trialling in
1895 – riders separated by minute intervals and not so noticeable! This was the
brain child of F.T. Bidlake, the “Father
of time trialling”.
Races were called “events” and held in secret on
roads identified only by a course number, just like today, and all to escape
the notice of the police!
In 2018, perhaps it’s time for CTT to cast off this
cloak of secrecy and brazen it out.
CYCLING UK PLAN LEGAL ACTION
Meanwhile, Cycling UK, the
national cycling charity, and point out that such a ban runs contrary to
Government and Highways England policies and agree it will set a dangerous
precedent which could lead to more restrictions.
https://www.cyclinguk.org/press-release/highways-england-a63-cycle-ban-labelled-ludicrous-cycling-uk
Duncan Dollimore,
Cycling UK’s head of campaigns said:
“Highways England’s
approach to the A63 is entirely unreasonable and lacks both evidence and
analysis. It’s hardly surprising cyclists can’t keep up with motor vehicles on
an A-road, but it is ludicrous to use that as one of the reasons for banning
them.”
He adds that no
evidence was provided on the numbers of cyclists on the A63 which would allow
for an injury rate to be ascertained.
“Cycling UK would urge Highways England to
re-consider their plans and stop going against both their own and the
Government’s cycling policies.”
I asked Roger Geffen,
Policy Director at UK Cycling, could Highways
England legally
enforce this ban?
Geffen told me: “We
shall see. Our objection has been crafted in the hope that it will either
dissuade Highways England (HE) from adopting this TRO or, failing that, that it
will enable us to bring a legal challenge through the Cyclists’ Defence Fund,
if they were to proceed with it.
“I’d
prefer to dissuade HE from adopting this TRO to start with, so that we don’t
need to threaten legal action in the first place!”
Objections
to the proposed ban should be made in writing not later than Monday, February 19,
2018, and posted to:
The Office of the Director, Operations Directorate (Yorkshire &
North East), Highways England, 3rd Floor South, Lateral, 8 City Walk, Leeds, LS11 9AT. The
objection should quote the reference 'The A63 Trunk Road (North Cave
Interchange to Daltry Street Interchange) (Prohibition of Cyclists Order)'.
For details of Peter Whitfield’s fine book: “Time Speed and Truth – a history
of time trialling 1890-2010”, email him at: PWWHITFIELD1@GMAIL.COM
Bingers will know I have ridden a few time trials. I’ve even won one (Clarence Wheelers Medium Gear 10) but time trials were never my first love. I never really locked on to the idea of riding a personal best. I always preferred the idea of who you beat on the day.
ReplyDeleteMaybe then I am not the best person to comment on the use of the V718. The A63 is a dual carriageway which is basically an extension of the M62. Many drivers would not notice the transition from motorway to dual carriageway. I would not ride this course due to concerns for my own safety.
However, it does rile me when public departments use ridiculous arguments such as cyclists not being able to keep up with the flow of traffic. If that is their thoughts they should be applying for a minimum speed of 65mph on that stretch of road and applying it to all vehicles.
Only applying the rule to cyclists is discrimination so I will heed the call and voice my opinions to Highways England.