 |
| Sorry Mate, I Didn't See You! |
Monday 8 November 2010
Monday 1 November 2010
Things on the Rail I can do without
- Smashed champagne bottles (if you can believe that?)
- Sarcastic Impington Village College Kids
- Either of
- Branches (no, I do not mean twigs, I mean bloody huge branches)
- Big bits of wood (!)
- Dog sh*t
- Horse sh*t
- More dog sh*t
I'm sure the branches usually get where they are by falling from trees (duh!) but the wood??? I have one question: why?
#2 is an odd one. Children walking to school to Impington Village College use the rail. As I approach them they have in the past simply moved out of the way. However, they then discovered that I got annoyed if they made me stop before moving. Initially I told them that I was riding very fast & it'd be safer if they simply stood aside. I even told one girl on a bike that I'd lean against the rail and she could easily move past me. Somehow that didn't go down well either. Too late, I've given them the ammunition and now they always leave it to the last second to move. I have to come to a complete halt and then they move. The recent development is that they've now taken to telling me off when I don't thank them; like I'm going to say "thank you" if they make me stop first. grrr
As for 4 & 5. Well #5 is mostly around the stables at the NW corner of Histon. I am personally surprised that a horse can comfortably walk on the rail, let alone defecate on it! :-) #4 happens everywhere and just goes to show how little community spirit exists. People only clear up their dog sh*t where there's a sign threatening them with a fine for not or enough witnesses for the social unacceptability of it to pre-shame them into taking it home with them. Where there's no-one around and they think there's no victim, they just don't give a, well, sh*t!
Of course the thing that's missing from my list is the huge lumps of concrete that are temporarily there to stop traffic from joining the rail. I do wish they all left room for bikes to comfortably go round them, rather than having to come to a dead stop, de-clip your pedals and creep through a gap of about 10cm. :-(
Monday 25 October 2010
Riding on the A428!
Monday 25th, 11:04
According to the Cambridge News,
The article was published on the 24th and mentions 7.17pm and indeed was referring to the evening of Saturday the 23rd.
I was driving from Cambourne to Cambridge and was approaching the Dry Drayton exit when loads of Police cars with flashing blue lights appeared going both East and West. Turns out they were coming from Cambridge and doing "U" turns at the Cambourne exit to get to the scene.
The collision appeared to have happened mere metres from the start of the Eastbound off-ramp at the Dry Drayton exit. Indeed, there were big gouged skid marks running up the embankment after the start of the off-ramp.
My heart sank when I saw the bike on the edge of the road. I have to tell you, it was pitch black and I would have thought twice before riding along the A428.
I have ridden along the A14 quite a few times, but it's always been in broad daylight and it is often the case that I'm doing so when the traffic is so heavy I'm going faster than it is. Also, I almost always only have need to go North on the A14 and that means going along the side with the lorry park / lay-by etc. I spend well over 75% of my journey physically separated from the traffic-proper.
I decided to give it a try when I saw the blue "cyclists should ride this way" sign / road map thing. I figured if there are signs saying where the cyclists should ride I have license to ride there. When I figure out what these are called / get a photo I'll update this post.
According to the Cambridge News,
I (almost) saw this happen. :-("A 30-year-old man, from London, has also been arrested on suspicion of causing death by dangerous driving following the death of a cyclist yesterday.It follows a collision at 7.17pm on the eastbound carriageway of the A428 between Dry Drayton and Cambourne.The 53-year-old man was pronounced dead at the scene after being involved in a collision with a white Ford Transit van.The man arrested has been released on police bail, a spokesman for Cambridgeshire Constabulary said."
The article was published on the 24th and mentions 7.17pm and indeed was referring to the evening of Saturday the 23rd.
I was driving from Cambourne to Cambridge and was approaching the Dry Drayton exit when loads of Police cars with flashing blue lights appeared going both East and West. Turns out they were coming from Cambridge and doing "U" turns at the Cambourne exit to get to the scene.
The collision appeared to have happened mere metres from the start of the Eastbound off-ramp at the Dry Drayton exit. Indeed, there were big gouged skid marks running up the embankment after the start of the off-ramp.
My heart sank when I saw the bike on the edge of the road. I have to tell you, it was pitch black and I would have thought twice before riding along the A428.
I have ridden along the A14 quite a few times, but it's always been in broad daylight and it is often the case that I'm doing so when the traffic is so heavy I'm going faster than it is. Also, I almost always only have need to go North on the A14 and that means going along the side with the lorry park / lay-by etc. I spend well over 75% of my journey physically separated from the traffic-proper.
I decided to give it a try when I saw the blue "cyclists should ride this way" sign / road map thing. I figured if there are signs saying where the cyclists should ride I have license to ride there. When I figure out what these are called / get a photo I'll update this post.
Tuesday 19 October 2010
Close call with a BMW
Last night I was riding onto the dreaded Longstanton - Oakington no-vehicles road when a BMW tried to go around me whilst the driver was using his bloody iPhone (in his right hand [1])!
I (naturally) yelled at him to put the phone away and he came along side me & rolled down the passenger window. I yelled again to put his phone away (and that it was dangerous) and just as he was about to yell something back, another car came off the no-vehicles road head-on at the BMW. :-)
Of course he floored-it, rather than stopping (why that choice I wonder), & only just got out of the way of a bad collision, then he sped off, almost with his tail between his legs, point obviously conceded that he was reckless and should pay more attention the road.
Katie Price was just fined £1,000 for swerving into the path of oncoming traffic because she was distracted whilst using her phone. I almost wish this guy had had an accident, even if it had involved me, so that he could have been fined too and taught a lesson.
4 minutes after that I was on a blind bend on the same road and a black 8th generation European-shape Honda Civic overtook me even though I waved a hand at him & yelled not to go around me on a dangerous bend.
[Addendum]: This morning (Oct 19th 2010) the very same Civic was going to overtake me in the 30mph in St. Michaels with an oncoming car. It only decided not to when I waved it back. After the oncoming traffic passed by, the Civic screamed by at well over 40mph. What a complete and total moron!
Lord! 1.5 miles, 4 minutes and two close shaves. I hate the illegal drivers who use the no-vehicles road.
[1] I mention the right hand as it's plain that were it in his left hand and he wants to change gear, he can do so with a hand still on his steering wheel, but with a phone in his right hand then changing gear definitely means he's driving with no hands on the wheel at all!
I (naturally) yelled at him to put the phone away and he came along side me & rolled down the passenger window. I yelled again to put his phone away (and that it was dangerous) and just as he was about to yell something back, another car came off the no-vehicles road head-on at the BMW. :-)
Of course he floored-it, rather than stopping (why that choice I wonder), & only just got out of the way of a bad collision, then he sped off, almost with his tail between his legs, point obviously conceded that he was reckless and should pay more attention the road.
Katie Price was just fined £1,000 for swerving into the path of oncoming traffic because she was distracted whilst using her phone. I almost wish this guy had had an accident, even if it had involved me, so that he could have been fined too and taught a lesson.
4 minutes after that I was on a blind bend on the same road and a black 8th generation European-shape Honda Civic overtook me even though I waved a hand at him & yelled not to go around me on a dangerous bend.
[Addendum]: This morning (Oct 19th 2010) the very same Civic was going to overtake me in the 30mph in St. Michaels with an oncoming car. It only decided not to when I waved it back. After the oncoming traffic passed by, the Civic screamed by at well over 40mph. What a complete and total moron!
Lord! 1.5 miles, 4 minutes and two close shaves. I hate the illegal drivers who use the no-vehicles road.
[1] I mention the right hand as it's plain that were it in his left hand and he wants to change gear, he can do so with a hand still on his steering wheel, but with a phone in his right hand then changing gear definitely means he's driving with no hands on the wheel at all!
Monday 18 October 2010
Rail Riding
I shot this whilst riding on the Cambridge Guided Bus rail, approaching the underpass of the A14 just out from the Cambridge Regional College.
The rail is baby smooth, (by definition) traffic free and apart from the breaks where there are stations & crossings of/with real roads it is really fast.
Since veering off/to either edge would mean certain injury (going as fast as I do) one has to concentrate quite hard on the rail so watching the countryside isn't possible. For me this is a commute, so I'm prepared to pay that price.
p.s. I fixed the "Private Video" mistake.
Tuesday 12 October 2010
Ask the Council to fix Longstanton Road
I've just filled in the form here: http://tinyurl.com/3ae99w3 that the Council supply for reporting defective roads. It comes from one of their PDFs. :-/
It will come as no surprise to regular readers that my preferred solution to the contention over Longstanton Road is to re-surface it and then open it up fully.
Until that happens I'll happily condemn drivers who use the road, mostly because the utterly awful condition of the surface makes my bike and their car have to come together.
Once the surface is clean and I can ride on the left in comfort and safety I'd be happy to share the road, with the proviso that they stay under 40mph.
Jamie (who's brilliant blog I follow) regularly takes pictures of drivers en mass ignoring the no motor vehicles sign.
The Cambridge News has also done articles on the drivers getting Fixed Penalty Notices. This happens once every two years or thereabouts and does nothing to help the problem.
I've decided that only lobbying of councils, the Police and anyone else with influence will help.
It will come as no surprise to regular readers that my preferred solution to the contention over Longstanton Road is to re-surface it and then open it up fully.
Until that happens I'll happily condemn drivers who use the road, mostly because the utterly awful condition of the surface makes my bike and their car have to come together.
Once the surface is clean and I can ride on the left in comfort and safety I'd be happy to share the road, with the proviso that they stay under 40mph.
Jamie (who's brilliant blog I follow) regularly takes pictures of drivers en mass ignoring the no motor vehicles sign.
The Cambridge News has also done articles on the drivers getting Fixed Penalty Notices. This happens once every two years or thereabouts and does nothing to help the problem.
I've decided that only lobbying of councils, the Police and anyone else with influence will help.
Helmets on Handlebars.
What the hell? Why, why, why, why, why, why, why do people dangle their helmets from their handlebars instead of putting them on their heads??????
The most prolific culprits of this baffling crime are secondary school pupils. A good while back I used to work near(ish) to a secondary school and almost every child who rode a bike to it (that I saw) either wore no helmet or dangled the bloody thing from their handlebars.
Only this morning a fully grown adult (in his 30's maybe?) rode past me doing it too!
For those who don't know me, I'm an equal opportunity angry cyclist. :-)
I yell at fellow cyclists who jump red lights (I usually accuse them of making us all look bad).
I usually simply yell "helmet!" (good double entendre eh? ;-)) at people dangling the damned things instead of wearing them.
As a small follow-up to this: On Friday evening I was riding home and I overtook a guy riding without a helmet and carrying a quite large pack of nappies on his handlebars. :-O
Seems to me that a fella who has a nappy-wearing baby at home might think about sticking about a bit for the child & wear a helmet. I guess that's just how I might feel.
The most prolific culprits of this baffling crime are secondary school pupils. A good while back I used to work near(ish) to a secondary school and almost every child who rode a bike to it (that I saw) either wore no helmet or dangled the bloody thing from their handlebars.
Only this morning a fully grown adult (in his 30's maybe?) rode past me doing it too!
For those who don't know me, I'm an equal opportunity angry cyclist. :-)
I yell at fellow cyclists who jump red lights (I usually accuse them of making us all look bad).
I usually simply yell "helmet!" (good double entendre eh? ;-)) at people dangling the damned things instead of wearing them.
As a small follow-up to this: On Friday evening I was riding home and I overtook a guy riding without a helmet and carrying a quite large pack of nappies on his handlebars. :-O
Seems to me that a fella who has a nappy-wearing baby at home might think about sticking about a bit for the child & wear a helmet. I guess that's just how I might feel.
Friday 8 October 2010
Trashed Bike On Guided Bus Way
The wheels were crushed to heck, as shown in the close-ups.
I leaned it up against the fence. You can find it here:
View Larger Map
Gonna Buy One Of These
Thank Goodness I Don't Live In Toronto
Rob Ford, City Councillor for Toronto, Ontario, says in this YouTube video that cyclists who get run down on the roads are to blame for their own accidents.
It's simply because it's obvious that as long as you ride a bike on a road that's built for cars, trucks and buses, eventually you're going to get run down.
He calls it swimming with the sharks.
Here's a great example of drivers in Toronto; seems to me that the City Council might legally be partially responsible: the more you tell drivers they exclusively own the road the more you're responsible for their actions in asserting that right, no?
It's simply because it's obvious that as long as you ride a bike on a road that's built for cars, trucks and buses, eventually you're going to get run down.
He calls it swimming with the sharks.
Here's a great example of drivers in Toronto; seems to me that the City Council might legally be partially responsible: the more you tell drivers they exclusively own the road the more you're responsible for their actions in asserting that right, no?
Thursday 7 October 2010
The BP Petrol Station on Huntingdon Road
So I have frequent cause to ride down Huntingdon Road. I'm usually doing so at a time of day when the traffic is heavy and slow. This usually suits me fine except for when I'm passing the BP Petrol Station.
As you will note from this close-up of the exit, there are no signs warning departing customers to look out for cyclists.
The big problem comes from the slow moving traffic. Since they're moving slowly, they tend to flash cars to join the traffic. EVERY time that happens and I'm in the painted mandatory cycle lane
So I did some Googling and the legality of this is astonishing. Any collision would be (mostly) my fault! There's the 1973 case of a bus who pulled over near an emerging side road (to alight passengers, I think) and the bus driver flashed a car to emerge whilst the bus was stationary. The bus driver then saw an approaching motorcycle and started flashing and beeping madly to get everyone to stop. The car carried on out and hit the motorbike. The emerging car was found to be 1/3rd to blame for pulling out but the motorbike was found to be 2/3rds to blame for not foreseeing that the car might pull out!!!
Well since I cant get the cars to either notice or yield to my right of way, I thought I'd try & get BP to at least help by putting up a sign. Firstly BP told me that they don't actually own that station,someone else does and licenses the BP petrol sale rights & livery. So they passed on my request to the legal owners / managers. They declined my request saying
As you will note from this close-up of the exit, there are no signs warning departing customers to look out for cyclists.
The big problem comes from the slow moving traffic. Since they're moving slowly, they tend to flash cars to join the traffic. EVERY time that happens and I'm in the painted mandatory cycle lane
- The flashing (snigger) driver doesn't look for me
- The emerging driver doesn't look for me
- I'm going downhill at well over 20mph
- I have to skid or swerve to avoid the emerging car
So I did some Googling and the legality of this is astonishing. Any collision would be (mostly) my fault! There's the 1973 case of a bus who pulled over near an emerging side road (to alight passengers, I think) and the bus driver flashed a car to emerge whilst the bus was stationary. The bus driver then saw an approaching motorcycle and started flashing and beeping madly to get everyone to stop. The car carried on out and hit the motorbike. The emerging car was found to be 1/3rd to blame for pulling out but the motorbike was found to be 2/3rds to blame for not foreseeing that the car might pull out!!!
Well since I cant get the cars to either notice or yield to my right of way, I thought I'd try & get BP to at least help by putting up a sign. Firstly BP told me that they don't actually own that station,someone else does and licenses the BP petrol sale rights & livery. So they passed on my request to the legal owners / managers. They declined my request saying
- It's the County Council who should put up signs
- A sign would cause a hazard & block the emerging drivers view of the road
- Shan't! No, no, no, I don't wanna, go away nasty cyclist!
Tuesday 5 October 2010
Now Prosecute the Taxi Driver, Right?
On Tuesday March 9th, at around 5.30pm, in London this guy was cut up but a taxi so badly that he collided with the back of the cab. Sounds nasty.
During the ensuing conversation, where the taxi driver issued racial insults, the cabbie strangled the cyclist to unconsciousness with the cyclists scarf. When the cyclist came round, he was arrested for assaulting the taxi driver!!!
A witness who saw the cyclist being arrested tried to tell the arresting Police officer that he'd be a witness for the cyclist but was shooed away by the copper. :-(
Then the cyclist has to appear in court and defend himself against the egregious false allegation. It's only because the first witness went to a Police station and gave testimony that the cyclist's name was cleared.
I've got to say I truly hope the taxi driver is charged. Not only did he violently assault the cyclist and incorrectly call him a 'paki' (he's of mixed Irish, Scottish and English heritage :-D), so it was a racially motivated assault, but he wasted Police time and probably either gave false testimony or committed perjury.
The story in the London Evening Standard.
During the ensuing conversation, where the taxi driver issued racial insults, the cabbie strangled the cyclist to unconsciousness with the cyclists scarf. When the cyclist came round, he was arrested for assaulting the taxi driver!!!
A witness who saw the cyclist being arrested tried to tell the arresting Police officer that he'd be a witness for the cyclist but was shooed away by the copper. :-(
Then the cyclist has to appear in court and defend himself against the egregious false allegation. It's only because the first witness went to a Police station and gave testimony that the cyclist's name was cleared.
I've got to say I truly hope the taxi driver is charged. Not only did he violently assault the cyclist and incorrectly call him a 'paki' (he's of mixed Irish, Scottish and English heritage :-D), so it was a racially motivated assault, but he wasted Police time and probably either gave false testimony or committed perjury.
The story in the London Evening Standard.
Friday 1 October 2010
Morning from hell.
So this morning, I had a really rough ride in.
It was spitting and I figured the rain would get worse so I put my lights on, only to find after a few hundred metres that the batteries were flat in my headlight. So I dutifully turned round, went home and changed them: perhaps I'll carry some spares from now on?
Time passes, the road whizzes by and eventually, after some calm, I enter the airfield road.
As I was entering the infamous "S" bend a Ford Focus screeches up behind me and beeps angrily. He goes round me & I confess I shouted at him, so he does a 4-wheel skid to a halt & this is him just before getting out to shout back at me. I'm upset that my picture is blurred, but at least you can tell it's a blue-ish Focus.
OK, then, after this guy drives off and I'm 75% through the airfield road a Citroën C3 Picasso AJ59FHF pulling a trailer carrying an Alko lawnmower hurtles past me in the opposite direction. Well I was already angry & he was going very fast and was well into the middle of the road, so I shook my fist at him. He does a "U" turn, follows me into the next village, goes on, turns round again and comes back and then drives into me, knocking me down (I won't overstate it: I was standing still (on the bike) & he bumped hard into me bending my mudguard, but I did fall off the bike)! Another sodding blurred picture. :-( We had a few angry words a) the guy was well over 50 and should know better, b) He asked why I was angry & in reply to my telling him he was driving illegally on a No Vehicles road he actually pointed at the No Vehicles sign and shouted "Except for Access!" :-O
It stuns me the amount of morons who think that "Except For Access" means ignore this sign & drive all the way through.
As I'm picking up my bike, a white Escort van pulls up to me allegedly to ask if I need help but he actually hits my front wheel again!!!! It was slight and in hindsight I reckon it was accidental, but give a guy a break will you?
So he pissed off back onto the airfield road (for the second time!) and as I had his license plate in my photo I declined the offers of help from three cars who watched it all happen. Behind them was an 80 seater coach - great big purple thing - and several other cars: a regular traffic jam on a road where vehicles are banned! This guy rammed a stationary cyclist with over 6 cars and a coach all watching him. Incredible.
You know: I fully recognise that my shouting a bad drivers and shaking my fist at them makes things worse. I really should stop, simply out of self preservation, if nothing else. It's just that the bastards beep at me & drive like bloody lunatics all illegally on a road that's basically a glorified tractor, taxi and bike lane. The injustice lights my blue touch-paper.
It was spitting and I figured the rain would get worse so I put my lights on, only to find after a few hundred metres that the batteries were flat in my headlight. So I dutifully turned round, went home and changed them: perhaps I'll carry some spares from now on?
Time passes, the road whizzes by and eventually, after some calm, I enter the airfield road.
It stuns me the amount of morons who think that "Except For Access" means ignore this sign & drive all the way through.
As I'm picking up my bike, a white Escort van pulls up to me allegedly to ask if I need help but he actually hits my front wheel again!!!! It was slight and in hindsight I reckon it was accidental, but give a guy a break will you?
So he pissed off back onto the airfield road (for the second time!) and as I had his license plate in my photo I declined the offers of help from three cars who watched it all happen. Behind them was an 80 seater coach - great big purple thing - and several other cars: a regular traffic jam on a road where vehicles are banned! This guy rammed a stationary cyclist with over 6 cars and a coach all watching him. Incredible.
You know: I fully recognise that my shouting a bad drivers and shaking my fist at them makes things worse. I really should stop, simply out of self preservation, if nothing else. It's just that the bastards beep at me & drive like bloody lunatics all illegally on a road that's basically a glorified tractor, taxi and bike lane. The injustice lights my blue touch-paper.
Thursday 30 September 2010
Commercial Culprits
Here are the names of the companies whose drivers I regularly see breaking the law, driving the Airfield Road.
- J. Kilborn & Sons (Longstanton)
In fairness this isn't a commercial vehicle, it's just one of the employees going to work every day
He gets a listing here because he's a complete loony who swears at me and makes gestures with his hands when he sees me - no idea why - O'Dell Heating & Plumbing (Longstanton)
- The Royal Mail
- DHL (Bar Hill)
- Durman Stearn Civil Engineering
- Majestic Plumbing & Heating (AD04GVY, White Van, overtook me on a blind bend at considerable speed)
- R J Tryer
- Cambs Lock & Safe (MN56VJK, aggressively overtook me on the blind "S" bend)
- The Highways Agency (not working on the road, just driving through it to work)
NoGuidedBus.com now provides RSS feed
I had a brief email chat with "J", the figure behind http://www.noguidedbus.com and subsequently J. has implemented an RSS feed of the web site headlines. :-)
Excellent news for those of us who prefer to be prodded, rather than poll a web site for it's updates.
The feed URL is: http://www.noguidedbus.com/feed.xml
Excellent news for those of us who prefer to be prodded, rather than poll a web site for it's updates.
The feed URL is: http://www.noguidedbus.com/feed.xml
Wednesday 29 September 2010
CGB Won't Start Carrying Buses Until Q2 2011!
The Cambridge News reports (amongst other things) that Cllr Sir Peter Brown has said that he thinks the Cambridge Guided Bus won't start carrying buses until the second quarter of 2011.
Over at Keep Pushing Those Pedals, Jamie has a really great posting on the CGB, as he rode a loop route from Cambridge to St. Ives and back.
It is of national disgrace that both our County Council and this building contractor have failed to work together well enough to build this thing even remotely close to on time and I'm certain the rest of the country will regard it as a total white elephant.
I confess my vested interest in the CGB is it's cycle path. I'm certain that it won't be tarmac-ed over until close to when the buses go live.
Over at Keep Pushing Those Pedals, Jamie has a really great posting on the CGB, as he rode a loop route from Cambridge to St. Ives and back.
It is of national disgrace that both our County Council and this building contractor have failed to work together well enough to build this thing even remotely close to on time and I'm certain the rest of the country will regard it as a total white elephant.
I confess my vested interest in the CGB is it's cycle path. I'm certain that it won't be tarmac-ed over until close to when the buses go live.
Monday 27 September 2010
A Bike Wouldn't Have Done This
A 16th Century stone arch at Scone Palace in Perthshire, Scotland has been accidentally driven into by a van and completely destroyed.
Before and After:
Scone is where, during the middle-ages, the Kings of Scotland were crowned down to Alexander III.
I don't mean to down on cars arbitrarily but this bloody wall pre-dated cars themselves by about half a millennium for Christs sake!
Before and After:
Scone is where, during the middle-ages, the Kings of Scotland were crowned down to Alexander III.
I don't mean to down on cars arbitrarily but this bloody wall pre-dated cars themselves by about half a millennium for Christs sake!
Thursday 23 September 2010
Clarification on the Poll
I received an email asking me to add a choice to the poll along the lines of:
However since voting has taken place, I can't clarify that now.
Please vote, if you haven't, Longstanton District Councillor Alex Riley has taken an informal poll of the residents of Longstanton and I'd love to rebut his poll with one of my own. :-D
Leave the road alone but properly enforce the vehicles exclusionWell I meant for the first choice - "Nothing - it's fine the way it is" - to embody that.
However since voting has taken place, I can't clarify that now.
Please vote, if you haven't, Longstanton District Councillor Alex Riley has taken an informal poll of the residents of Longstanton and I'd love to rebut his poll with one of my own. :-D
Wednesday 22 September 2010
Longstanton says to Oakington: Get Stuffed!
On September 14th, Longstanton District Councillor Alex Riley asked his email list of Longstanton residents to vote on whether to fully open the road between Oakington and Longstanton or to keep it closed to normal traffic.
He asked that the vote take the form of the recipients relying with one of two words: "open" and "closed".
He didn't give any real argument either way, no facts, no resources, he just asked for people to express their opinion.
Well a follow-up email came out yesterday with the results. I'll quote the email at the end of this article, but I feel the headlines are:
To me, the interesting point seems to be that the residents of Longstanton care so little for the well-being of the Oakington residents, their neighbours, that they're happy to break the law on a minute-by-minute basis, just to save a few minutes on their journey, all of this, against the overwhelming public opinion of the residents of Oakington against having their village remain a small speed-bump on a rat-run to / from Cambridge.
I can't help think there's a kind of NIMBYism here. You see, Longstanton has a by-pass. A shiny new no doubt multi-million pound by-pass that traffic from the villages to the West of Longstanton can use to get to the A14. Longstanton used to be a rat-run but isn't any more. But Oakington still is a rat-run, oh yes. But that doesn't matter, because Longstanton isn't and so I (says the Longstanton resident) don't care. Ya boo sucks to the residents of Oakington, I've got a by-pass and I'm all right!
Lastly I'll mention his second observation: namely that cyclists have "*vigorously* accosted" him and that cyclists complain about aggressive driving.
Cllr Riley: I am one of the cyclists in question and when I spoke to you on this matter I definitely feel I did not accost you. I did, however, beg you and beg you to help rescue me from the homicidal criminals that break the law every hour of every day in your constituency. Also, the driving is almost inconsequential in comparison to the violence of the scum-bags who get out of their cars and threaten me with death for having had the insane temerity to move rightwards on the road (to avoid a huge pot-hole) when they are (illegally) driving past me! I here-within accuse you of being an apologist for the violent. Shame on you.
As promised, here's the letter in full. Cllr Riley writes:
He asked that the vote take the form of the recipients relying with one of two words: "open" and "closed".
He didn't give any real argument either way, no facts, no resources, he just asked for people to express their opinion.
Well a follow-up email came out yesterday with the results. I'll quote the email at the end of this article, but I feel the headlines are:
- Longstanton is a village of some 2000 odd residences
- His list has 280 addresses
- 142 people replied
122 voting to open the road
20 to close it
- Oakington residents were polled by their local news letter in 2008 and overwhelmingly voted to close the road
- Longstanton Parish Council (LCP) have told O&WPC that they will be very unlikely to ever support (financially or otherwise) doing anything to help close the road.
To me, the interesting point seems to be that the residents of Longstanton care so little for the well-being of the Oakington residents, their neighbours, that they're happy to break the law on a minute-by-minute basis, just to save a few minutes on their journey, all of this, against the overwhelming public opinion of the residents of Oakington against having their village remain a small speed-bump on a rat-run to / from Cambridge.
I can't help think there's a kind of NIMBYism here. You see, Longstanton has a by-pass. A shiny new no doubt multi-million pound by-pass that traffic from the villages to the West of Longstanton can use to get to the A14. Longstanton used to be a rat-run but isn't any more. But Oakington still is a rat-run, oh yes. But that doesn't matter, because Longstanton isn't and so I (says the Longstanton resident) don't care. Ya boo sucks to the residents of Oakington, I've got a by-pass and I'm all right!
Lastly I'll mention his second observation: namely that cyclists have "*vigorously* accosted" him and that cyclists complain about aggressive driving.
Cllr Riley: I am one of the cyclists in question and when I spoke to you on this matter I definitely feel I did not accost you. I did, however, beg you and beg you to help rescue me from the homicidal criminals that break the law every hour of every day in your constituency. Also, the driving is almost inconsequential in comparison to the violence of the scum-bags who get out of their cars and threaten me with death for having had the insane temerity to move rightwards on the road (to avoid a huge pot-hole) when they are (illegally) driving past me! I here-within accuse you of being an apologist for the violent. Shame on you.
As promised, here's the letter in full. Cllr Riley writes:
I was taken aback by the scale of response to my last email about the Airfield Road. My village email list contains about 280 local residents and half of you have taken the trouble to respond. The voting so far is:Open the road: 122 votesClose the road: 20 votesThis is only a straw poll, and not every person in the village was consulted. But the conclusion is inevitable. If you know others who might not yet have voted, by all means suggest that they do. All it takes is the one word Open or Closed to be sent to myself.I sifted out any who in error voted twice and I classed any who said “Yes” as wanting it open and those who said “No” as wanting it closed (there were actually 2 of each).A number of you sent me reasoned arguments in favour of your position. I haven’t replied to any of these, but I have read them all carefully. Some made the point that the one word answer hardly sufficed. I see what they mean, but the way our democracy works is via the sledgehammer approach of a simple vote one way or the other.If you CTRL-click on the following, you will find quite a lot of interesting information:From this it emerges that our own Parish Council undertook in late 2008 to distribute a questionnaire round the whole village. I hope this will happen shortly. I gather that the police have indicated that they do not intend to continue actively policing the road until the affected communities have been consulted.I happen to live on St Michael’s and it was delightfully peaceful when the road was being resurfaced and there was no traffic at all. But I see my responsibility as being to represent the views of the whole of the village.I would like to list some of the points that have been made about this whole issue:
1. Oakington residents (which probably means those living in Longstanton Road, Oakington) have historically been opposed to the road being open, whereas Longstanton residents have in general been more in favour.
2. According to the police, the main complainants this time around were cyclists – and certainly I have been very “vigorously” accosted on this matter by a couple of cyclists. They claim that drivers on the airfield drive aggressively so far as cyclists are concerned. There is no excuse for aggressive driving but the fact that one is breaking the law just by being on the Airfield road might actually encourage recklessness.
3. St Michael’s and Woodside contain a number of houses which are very close to the road and for them heavy and speeding traffic are a nuisance, a hazard, and even damaging to their properties. One of the great ironies of the present restrictions is that fully-laden double-decker buses can quite legally use the airfield road.
4. There is a lot of speeding takes place down St Michael’s / Woodside and this would potentially get much worse if the road were opened up to all traffic. Some of you suggested traffic calming measures. The kind of priority system we already have on entering the village via School Lane might help, but speed bumps are generally reckoned to cause much more damage to neighbouring properties than no speed bumps. Maybe the tendency to speed would reduce if using the airfield road were not itself illegal.
5. Several responders made the point that even if those in other parts of the village wish to use the road, those in Woodside and St Michael’s would be resolutely opposed. Well, based on the poll results so far, that’s not the case. There actually seems to be a slender majority of those living on these two roads in favour of the airfield road being opened.
6. It would not solve the problem to close the road and to back this up with either a gate (to which all local farmers, taxi drivers and emergency services had keys) or rising bollards (ditto). This would be very expensive (how would you power the bollards?) and regrettably very open to vandalism (e.g. gates welded shut) owing to its remote location. Vandalism could have fatal consequences if an emergency vehicle were prevented from driving across.
7. Last, but not least, I have always taken a fairly relaxed view about all this because when (no, not if) Northstowe actually happens, the plans are for the road to be totally closed because the main access road to Northstowe, a dual carriageway, will cut straight across the airfield road. Pedestrian and cycle access will be maintained, but it is hard to see that a flyover across the dual carriageway, capable of taking all road traffic, could be afforded.
If anyone feels I have failed to make significant points, please let me know and I’ll make them another time. In the mean time, please vote if you wish to and have not yet done so.RegardsAlex
Tuesday 21 September 2010
So I've set up twitter to get fed my blogger posts.
My twitter ID (is that the right terminology?) is @cambcyclist.
My tweets are unprotected and I'll start twitpic-ing (?!?) soon.
A couple of weeks ago I bought a (very cheap) clip-on MicroSD camcorder.
I'll start uploading videos of my ride when I get the chance too.
My twitter ID (is that the right terminology?) is @cambcyclist.
My tweets are unprotected and I'll start twitpic-ing (?!?) soon.
A couple of weeks ago I bought a (very cheap) clip-on MicroSD camcorder.
I'll start uploading videos of my ride when I get the chance too.
Wednesday 15 September 2010
The Oakington & Westwick Perspective
Back in November 2008 Oakington & Westwick Parish Council had something very interesting to say on the issue of the Airfield Road.
So here's my reading of this.
The residents of Oakington were petitioned by their local newsletter for their opinion. This was, in the opinion of the Parish Council, not done with the proper amount of explanation of the pros and cons. This notwithstanding the village residents appear to have overwhelmingly voted to close the road. It seems common knowledge and / or opinion that only the village shop and the pub object. That's not really a surprise. The businesses get passing trade, the residents get lots of traffic.
Here's an interesting thing: any changes to the road would almost certainly need the full cooperation and participation (read: funding) of Oakington and Westwick Parish Council (OWPC) with Longstanton Parish Council (LPC). LPC know full well that their residents so enjoy the access into Cambridge through this road that they have explicitly stated (according to the article linked about) that they are very unlikely to agree to fund or contribute to any measure that closes the road - even including any consultation about said.
With OWPC and LPC diametrically opposed in opinion, the status quo has persisted and always will.
We are all doomed. :-(
So here's my reading of this.
The residents of Oakington were petitioned by their local newsletter for their opinion. This was, in the opinion of the Parish Council, not done with the proper amount of explanation of the pros and cons. This notwithstanding the village residents appear to have overwhelmingly voted to close the road. It seems common knowledge and / or opinion that only the village shop and the pub object. That's not really a surprise. The businesses get passing trade, the residents get lots of traffic.
Here's an interesting thing: any changes to the road would almost certainly need the full cooperation and participation (read: funding) of Oakington and Westwick Parish Council (OWPC) with Longstanton Parish Council (LPC). LPC know full well that their residents so enjoy the access into Cambridge through this road that they have explicitly stated (according to the article linked about) that they are very unlikely to agree to fund or contribute to any measure that closes the road - even including any consultation about said.
With OWPC and LPC diametrically opposed in opinion, the status quo has persisted and always will.
We are all doomed. :-(
The Guided Bus Rail, Sheep & Concrete
This morning I was riding on the Cambridge Guided Bus rail, between Histon and Oakington and I met this fella on the wrong side of the fence.
I did wonder how I might discover who owned the field from which the sheep had come so I could contact them and let them know about the escape. :-)
The other thing I'd noticed before was that the concrete that stops vehicles from entering the Guided Bus road was missing in Histon on both sides of Station Road. Interesting.
I did wonder how I might discover who owned the field from which the sheep had come so I could contact them and let them know about the escape. :-)
The other thing I'd noticed before was that the concrete that stops vehicles from entering the Guided Bus road was missing in Histon on both sides of Station Road. Interesting.
An Open Letter to Alex Riley
Yesterday Alex Riley, District Councillor to and resident of Longstanton sent out an email asking the people of Longstanton to vote (with one single word, "open" or "closed") to indicate whether the Airfield Road should be physically closed to all traffic (including Cyclists I assume) or have the No Vehicles restriction entirely removed.
I am writing this open letter to Councillor Riley to explain why I think the answer isn't quite as simple as one word.
I hope that this new discussion, very welcome though it is, takes into account more opinion that those who currently aggressively break the law.
I am writing this open letter to Councillor Riley to explain why I think the answer isn't quite as simple as one word.
An open Airfield Road that isn't completely re-surfaced and doesn't have a cycle path will be astonishingly worse than a closed one.
As I understand it, the reason Cyclists would like the road the stay closed is because there are just so many pot-holes that it's impossible to ride a bike along it without moving about the road some.
The cars that drive illegally along the road usually do so at great speed and when they find a bike cycling around a pot hole they try and deliberately run them down, beeping their horns as they go, all at 60mph.
To get attacked for being a few feet "too far to the right" by a car being driven illegally on a No Vehicles road at hugely inappropriate speed is galling to say the least.
Plus, the road is part of Sustrans National Cycle Route 51, why should Cyclists give way to illegally driven cars on what is seen in some quarters as a wide Cycle path?
Personally I would only accept the road becoming unrestricted and open to all traffic if the speed limit were reduced to 40mph, the road were completely re-surfaced to remove all the pot-holes and for a cycle path to be painted in so that cars are explicitly reminded that they have a duty of care to cyclists.
This, and only this, kind of Airfield Road would then service the needs of all it's users, not just the short-cut taking, A14 avoiding, criminals that currently treat it as their own private race track.
Finally, although I applaud you for opening a discussion on this issue, you have done so without giving any background or explanation (balanced, of course) whatsoever about the pros and cons. You have, in effect, simply asked for a gut reaction. This isn't debate, it's an opinion poll. I would have preferred the former.
Yours,
-C.C.
I hope that this new discussion, very welcome though it is, takes into account more opinion that those who currently aggressively break the law.
Tuesday 14 September 2010
FixMyStreet
If you ride along the Airfield Road and think it should be re-surfaced, why not register your opinion on FixMyStreet.
The report specific to the above is: http://www.fixmystreet.com/report/120562
I'm going to add some photos soon, but all votes would count, I'm sure.
The report specific to the above is: http://www.fixmystreet.com/report/120562
I'm going to add some photos soon, but all votes would count, I'm sure.
Tuesday 7 September 2010
The Safety Of Cycling
This is a very interesting read on the relative risks of cycling as compared to other road users including pedestrians.
The big points that stood out for me were:
However, despite that we're treated like the enemy. Shocking.
The big points that stood out for me were:
- Cycling being perceived as a high risk use of the road is a myth.
- As cycling use increases (both en mass and by the individual), fatality rates decrease.
- Point 2 for the crowd comes likely from a 'safety in numbers' thing.
- For the individual, the more you cycle the better at it you are and the better at reducing your risk you become.
- The best way to reduce the risk even further is to encourage more cycling, mostly through improving cycling infrastructure (like wider roads / less pinch points)
- Other countries in the EU have drivers that respect cyclist quite a bit more than the UK drivers do (how embarrassing to be out-done on courtesy by the Europeans!)
However, despite that we're treated like the enemy. Shocking.
Nice Photo
Here's a nice shot of three vehicles all violating the No Vehicles sign at the Oakington entrance to the Airfield Road. (It comes via Cyclestreets)
I did once challenge a commercial vehicle driver if he'd seen the sign and his response was that he had and was using the road as access to Longstanton. :-D I did laugh. I pointed out that that did not count as access to which all I got was shoulder shrugging.
I'm going to make a rogues gallery of companies that have staff breaking the law with commercial vehicles. Since I don't need the assistance of either the Police or the DVLA to get their attention.
I did once challenge a commercial vehicle driver if he'd seen the sign and his response was that he had and was using the road as access to Longstanton. :-D I did laugh. I pointed out that that did not count as access to which all I got was shoulder shrugging.
I'm going to make a rogues gallery of companies that have staff breaking the law with commercial vehicles. Since I don't need the assistance of either the Police or the DVLA to get their attention.
Thursday 2 September 2010
Get Cycling Sorted
I just submitted this to www.cyclingsorted.com.
Marking a spot on the Airfield Road I wrote:
"This is the No Vehicles road in between Oakington and Longstanton.
It is locally referred to as "The Airfield" road.
I ride along this road twice a weekday.
Traffic is legally and explicitly excluded, except for taxis & mopeds & tractors going to the farm.
However 1000 cars a day use it as a rat run.
(I'm assuming) Since cars are explicitly excluded, it isn't maintained and it is utterly covered in pot holes.
Because it's covered in pot holes I have to cycle quite a distance from the 1m zone that bikes usually occupy and I also have to move about the road a bit.
This should be fine if there were no cars, but in the 3 minutes I take to cross this 1 mile stretch of road I'll usually be passed by 20 cars (10 in each direction) - many of them exceeding the 60 mph National Speed Limit in place, some doing so overtaking both me and another car that's overtaking me at the same time.
I have been repeatedly beeped at, threatened with violence and actually rammed off the road once by criminal and completely insane car drivers who think I'm in the wrong for riding around a pot hole.
Please, please, please get this road re-surfaced and have a non-exclusive cycle lane painted in."
and was given reference 24936.
Marking a spot on the Airfield Road I wrote:
"This is the No Vehicles road in between Oakington and Longstanton.
It is locally referred to as "The Airfield" road.
I ride along this road twice a weekday.
Traffic is legally and explicitly excluded, except for taxis & mopeds & tractors going to the farm.
However 1000 cars a day use it as a rat run.
(I'm assuming) Since cars are explicitly excluded, it isn't maintained and it is utterly covered in pot holes.
Because it's covered in pot holes I have to cycle quite a distance from the 1m zone that bikes usually occupy and I also have to move about the road a bit.
This should be fine if there were no cars, but in the 3 minutes I take to cross this 1 mile stretch of road I'll usually be passed by 20 cars (10 in each direction) - many of them exceeding the 60 mph National Speed Limit in place, some doing so overtaking both me and another car that's overtaking me at the same time.
I have been repeatedly beeped at, threatened with violence and actually rammed off the road once by criminal and completely insane car drivers who think I'm in the wrong for riding around a pot hole.
Please, please, please get this road re-surfaced and have a non-exclusive cycle lane painted in."
and was given reference 24936.
Tuesday 31 August 2010
At Last!
On my way home on Friday I found the Cambridgeshire Police stopping all motor vehicles on the Oakington Airfield Road, issuing tickets (I'm assuming £60 fixed penalties) for violating the No Vehicles directive.
They told me that on that day so far they had issued 70 and had done more than that the day before.
They also commented that the traffic had been relentless and constant!
I was just reminded that one driver was found to have no drivers license; I actually saw the foolish chap walking back into Longstanton carrying several bags & (presumably) moaning on a mobile phone.
That's (about) 200 dumb or arrogant drivers slapped on the wrist for breaking a law they clearly think doesn't apply to them. I was even lucky enough to witness a truck and two motorbikes getting tickets whilst 4 cyclist were passing by.
Just as I arrived, the infamous black Audi RJ52NXS who works at J. Kilborn & Son, was driving off looking very angry. Ha ha! Serves you right, nasty so-and-so.
Amazingly as I left the airfield road there was a trio of cars about to enter and they actually had the cheek to slow down and ask me if the Police were still there. Naturally I said "no." :-D
They told me that on that day so far they had issued 70 and had done more than that the day before.
They also commented that the traffic had been relentless and constant!
I was just reminded that one driver was found to have no drivers license; I actually saw the foolish chap walking back into Longstanton carrying several bags & (presumably) moaning on a mobile phone.
That's (about) 200 dumb or arrogant drivers slapped on the wrist for breaking a law they clearly think doesn't apply to them. I was even lucky enough to witness a truck and two motorbikes getting tickets whilst 4 cyclist were passing by.
Just as I arrived, the infamous black Audi RJ52NXS who works at J. Kilborn & Son, was driving off looking very angry. Ha ha! Serves you right, nasty so-and-so.
Amazingly as I left the airfield road there was a trio of cars about to enter and they actually had the cheek to slow down and ask me if the Police were still there. Naturally I said "no." :-D
Tuesday 3 August 2010
Six-point lorry campaign can reduce road danger for London cyclists
I think the campaign to reduce the danger lorries present to cyclists and pedestrians in London is great, but I wonder how the points contained can be applied to the streets of Cambridge.
I myself have been riding down a long straight cycle path on Huntingdon Road and I found myself to the left of a large lorry that then proceeded to simply wander into the cycle lane.
I was next to the passenger door upon which I banged whilst screaming. The lorry left the cycle lane and I lived.
All the talk of avoiding the front-left zone around a lorry were not relevant to a lorry that wasn't turning left, it was just squashing up against the kerb.
I used the Albtrans web site to complain; that was months ago and I received no reply.
I was next to the passenger door upon which I banged whilst screaming. The lorry left the cycle lane and I lived.
All the talk of avoiding the front-left zone around a lorry were not relevant to a lorry that wasn't turning left, it was just squashing up against the kerb.
I used the Albtrans web site to complain; that was months ago and I received no reply.
Monday 28 June 2010
Another ordinary day
OK, so this morning was an ordinary morning like so many others. :-)
At 8:00 I was about to enter the "S" bend in the Oakington airfield road when I was beeped at by this Toyota Yaris, license AG59NXM.
I stopped, took her picture and was just about to ride off when she got out and explained that I was in the middle of the road.
I simply replied that I was merely going around the holes in the road and that vehicles were banned anyway so I thought she was being unfair. You can see the queue of traffic building up behind her in the 30 seconds that this all took to happen. About 1 minute later, well after the "S" bend we were just entering, a dirty-orange coloured BMW overtook all of us easily doing 80 mph, beeping wildly as he went.
Then, 7 minutes later, all way over nearly in Girton, I was in the shared-use cycle-path / pavement and this Honda Note license AK09L?? slows down next to me with his window open and the driver leans over his wife (not easy given his build) and yells: "what's your fucking problem?!?!?!?" and drives off!
Finally, I was approaching a zebra crossing, in town, when I see a woman pushing a pram and pulling a dog making motions to cross it. So naturally I stopped and she did look pleasantly surprised whilst she began crossing that zebra, but then an instant later a middle-aged guy on a bike sails over the same crossing missing her by a mere inch. She was initially shocked, but then oddly smiled. She looked at me, grinned and said: "That man works at the Police station; he had a badge on his tie!" We think he was the receptionist or some other civilian worker, because his badge was like a shop worker, not a Police ID.
At 8:00 I was about to enter the "S" bend in the Oakington airfield road when I was beeped at by this Toyota Yaris, license AG59NXM.
I stopped, took her picture and was just about to ride off when she got out and explained that I was in the middle of the road.
I simply replied that I was merely going around the holes in the road and that vehicles were banned anyway so I thought she was being unfair. You can see the queue of traffic building up behind her in the 30 seconds that this all took to happen. About 1 minute later, well after the "S" bend we were just entering, a dirty-orange coloured BMW overtook all of us easily doing 80 mph, beeping wildly as he went.
Finally, I was approaching a zebra crossing, in town, when I see a woman pushing a pram and pulling a dog making motions to cross it. So naturally I stopped and she did look pleasantly surprised whilst she began crossing that zebra, but then an instant later a middle-aged guy on a bike sails over the same crossing missing her by a mere inch. She was initially shocked, but then oddly smiled. She looked at me, grinned and said: "That man works at the Police station; he had a badge on his tie!" We think he was the receptionist or some other civilian worker, because his badge was like a shop worker, not a Police ID.
Wednesday 10 March 2010
Do Not Cross The Solid Central Line!
This solid central line on Girton Road is there for a reason. The law very clearly states that you must not cross the line unless you're passing either a stationary obstacle or a vehicle travelling at less than 10mph. I don't need to brag about routinely cruising at 20mph to get across the point. The idiot drivers who risk my life can see their own speed and make a sane observation.
It's just so clear that a) the line's there for a reason, b) should a vehicle approach head on you can bet your last dollar that the vehicle who's crossed the solid line to overtake a bike will pull in, to avoid the oncoming vehicle, and happily squash the bike they had no right to be overtaking in the first place!
This happens to me about once a month. :-(
It's just so clear that a) the line's there for a reason, b) should a vehicle approach head on you can bet your last dollar that the vehicle who's crossed the solid line to overtake a bike will pull in, to avoid the oncoming vehicle, and happily squash the bike they had no right to be overtaking in the first place!
This happens to me about once a month. :-(
March 9th 2010
As dated above, the following vehicles drove straight through the Longstanton / Oakington airfield road, without stopping and thus violating the "No Motor Vehicles" road sign:
- W394MBJ
- GL03CRU Lilac Honda Civic overtook on sharp bend entering airfield road from Longstanton
- F951SMK Volvo blue 340
- PJ59TXR BMW grey
- AJ53NYK Ford S-max
- S584AVE
- RC04CHC Mazda red
- BL54YCR
- NH53NFP Micra grey
- VU05WFV Astra grey
- FL52LHH black
- A Police Car! I missed the plate
- AF56GXH Honda grey
- R608BDA Ford Fiesta red
- EN54WWE Seat grey
Magdalene Street and the Priority Misconception.
When I ride through the dip in Magdalene Street, having just come down Castle Street I very clearly have priority. Not only is there a huge sign telling me that I do, but you may spot the Give Way line and upside-down triangle on the other side of the dip, to let the oncoming traffic know that I have priority.
Well about once a week a car comes screaming through the dip straight at me. Today it was a bright red new model mini. As it approached the Give Way line I could see it wasn't stopping and I waved my arms at it wildly trying to tell it not to carry on into the frighteningly narrow and constricted dip. It didn't work and I had to skid to a virtual dead stop so that the car could go by without me crashing into the bollards that protect the pedestrians.
I think that just like the sign that's on my side telling me I have right of way, there should be a similar, but inversed, sign on the other side, as clearly a Give Way line just isn't explicit enough for the moron drivers in Cambridge.
Well about once a week a car comes screaming through the dip straight at me. Today it was a bright red new model mini. As it approached the Give Way line I could see it wasn't stopping and I waved my arms at it wildly trying to tell it not to carry on into the frighteningly narrow and constricted dip. It didn't work and I had to skid to a virtual dead stop so that the car could go by without me crashing into the bollards that protect the pedestrians.
I think that just like the sign that's on my side telling me I have right of way, there should be a similar, but inversed, sign on the other side, as clearly a Give Way line just isn't explicit enough for the moron drivers in Cambridge.
Tuesday 9 March 2010
Equal Opportunity Angry Cyclist
One thing that I chuckle about is that I'm just as likely to shout at another cyclist who's riding poorly as I am to shout at a driver of a vehicle who's driving poorly.
Take traffic lights, for instance. I detest it when a cyclist runs over a red traffic light. It especially annoys me when I'm doing the right thing and waiting at it at the stop line. They've come up from behind me, seen me waiting at the red light and clear thought the though look at that idiot, waiting at a red light like a lemon!.
Cyclists who run red traffic lights make all the other cyclists look bad. Since we're the minority, there's a requirement that we not stand out and make other road users think we're all damned idiots.
Though to keep things balanced I should add that my current pet peeve is car drivers who are driving along side a brightly coloured cycle lane full of bikes and then they slow down to let out some car trying to join the traffic (or worse, cross the lane to go the other way) from the left.
Why can't these drivers look in their mirrors and see if the car they're letting out would be driving straight into the path of a cyclist coming along the cycle lane behind them? What makes my blood boil about this particular infraction is that the driver doing the letting out has just driven past a whole heap of bikes and should bloody-well know that the cycle lane is full of bikes and that the car they're letting out is going to suddenly present a huge stationary metal wall to a fast moving bike.
Take traffic lights, for instance. I detest it when a cyclist runs over a red traffic light. It especially annoys me when I'm doing the right thing and waiting at it at the stop line. They've come up from behind me, seen me waiting at the red light and clear thought the though look at that idiot, waiting at a red light like a lemon!.
Cyclists who run red traffic lights make all the other cyclists look bad. Since we're the minority, there's a requirement that we not stand out and make other road users think we're all damned idiots.
Be warned: if you ride over a red light near me I will shout at you, to not do so! :-)
Though to keep things balanced I should add that my current pet peeve is car drivers who are driving along side a brightly coloured cycle lane full of bikes and then they slow down to let out some car trying to join the traffic (or worse, cross the lane to go the other way) from the left.
Why can't these drivers look in their mirrors and see if the car they're letting out would be driving straight into the path of a cyclist coming along the cycle lane behind them? What makes my blood boil about this particular infraction is that the driver doing the letting out has just driven past a whole heap of bikes and should bloody-well know that the cycle lane is full of bikes and that the car they're letting out is going to suddenly present a huge stationary metal wall to a fast moving bike.
March 8th 2010
As dated above, the following vehicles drove straight through the Longstanton / Oakington airfield road, without stopping and thus violating the "No Motor Vehicles" road sign:
- K917GAN
- N694SCU Peugeot blue
- P1RSA VW burgundy
- KU59AEV Truck
- AF06KYJ Toyota silver
- DS54NKP Astra
- LL51NYZ silver
- J7JLD Hyundai grey overtook on bend with oncoming traffic!
- EF06JXD Vauxhaul mpv blue
- KA07YJK VW Golf black
- AM51RGZ VW Beatle turbo black
- KE51HVW?
March 3rd 2010
As dated above, the following vehicles drove straight through the Longstanton / Oakington airfield road, without stopping and thus violating the "No Motor Vehicles" road sign:
- R917GAN Fiat black
- P482EFC Ford Escort blue
- KP53OHG Golf silver
- BK53TXB
- S414LER Renault Megane red
- GN06RWW Truck no missing rear license plate
- SC04WFE Peugeot 207 silver
- P834CAV VW Polo green
- AA08UVN Mini
- KY54WDA Peugeot grey
- WD04WZX Peugeot 307 blue
- KF54FLP Van white
March 4th 2010
As dated above, the following vehicles drove straight through the Longstanton / Oakington airfield road, without stopping and thus violating the "No Motor Vehicles" road sign:
- Y252UBF Vauxhaul Corsa
- KB05KNX BWM grey
- R371TFL Ford Escort estate blue
March 5th 2010
As dated above, the following vehicles drove straight through the Longstanton / Oakington airfield road, without stopping and thus violating the "No Motor Vehicles" road sign:
- B1MAW
- L999DAY Mercedes silver
- AC08CTY yellow
- AB08YFM Citroen red
- K892LTR
- E929MJD Micra grey
- P693RVL
Tuesday 2 March 2010
March 2nd 2010
As dated above, the following vehicles drove straight through the Longstanton / Oakington airfield road, without stopping and thus violating the "No Motor Vehicles" road sign:
- Y167HNP Vauxhaul Astra Van White
- YV02OYH Ford Focus Black
- AP02SKX Vauxhaul Corsa Blue
- AJ59CFZ
- MF57WRE
- AO55XUW
- AE04GZM
- KP07UUF VW Golf Black
- AE05NBX BMW Black, 1 series
- KJ04ZMK Citroen Picasa, grey
- KP57JUX Mercedes blue
- AP02SKX
Just one thing:
If you're close enough for me to hit your side window with my fist you're too bloody close, move away NOW!
There's this common event where a car decides to overtake me but doesn't care whether there's anything that's going to stop them from completing the manoeuvre. If this impediment is that there's traffic coming, it's even worse, because the end result is always that when the car is abreast of me, it sees the oncoming vehicle and simply pulls over to the left to avoid hitting it head-on. Of course all it then achieves is to drive into me, squashing me to the kerb and nearly killing me. A vehicle from the Wheelie Bin Cleaning company did this to me once, only it was their bin cleaning trailer that they drove into me!
There's this common event where a car decides to overtake me but doesn't care whether there's anything that's going to stop them from completing the manoeuvre. If this impediment is that there's traffic coming, it's even worse, because the end result is always that when the car is abreast of me, it sees the oncoming vehicle and simply pulls over to the left to avoid hitting it head-on. Of course all it then achieves is to drive into me, squashing me to the kerb and nearly killing me. A vehicle from the Wheelie Bin Cleaning company did this to me once, only it was their bin cleaning trailer that they drove into me!
February 30th 2010
As dated above, the following vehicles drove straight through the Longstanton / Oakington airfield road, without stopping and thus violating the "No Motor Vehicles" road sign:
- S900ACP Ford Focus Grey
- T810GNM Renault Laguna Gray
- P693RVL VW Golf Blue
- AM02O?F Toyota
- R842NMO Chrysler People Carrier Purple
- BU56FVO Ford Van White
- R833VAV Ford Escort Grey
- AJ51UEF Vauxhaul Corsa Blue
- SY59UHT White Van "Vulcan"
- LM53GVY
- GGS860 White Van - Italian Plate Vehicle - Overtook me on sharp bend at exit of airfield road, very scary
Friday 26 February 2010
Did I mention....?
One thing that I've been meaning to write about is what it's like to share this road with even calm drivers. My previous writings have focused on the insane, but they're clearly not the majority of drivers using this road.
It takes me about 10 minutes to ride through this stretch of road. During that time, if it's night, my eyes completely adjust to the darkness. This means that when a car comes towards me it completely blinds me and I can't see where the edge of that road is. The driver thinks that just because they've dipped their main beam I'm OK. Well that's just wrong. Plus, after the car's gone, now my eyes can't see in the dark either, having adjusted some to the lights.
The end result is that if I'm riding in the dark and I see a car coming, I just stop and pull over.
The speed limit is set to the National Speed Limit, which for a single lane in the countryside has, if I'm right, a limit of 60mph. Let me tell you this: when a car comes past you with a gap of a few feet and it's doing 60mph it's TERRIFYING. It's especially scary since you know that in about 5 feet there's a hole 12 inches wide that you've got to go round and the drive neither can see it nor cares nor is expecting you to have to go round it and so only leaves 3 feet space.
The end result is that if I'm riding and I hear a car coming I start maniacally looking over my shoulder ever 3 seconds to see how fast and close the oncoming car is.
What I'm trying to get across here is that ever single vehicle using this road makes life very hard for cyclists.
It takes me about 10 minutes to ride through this stretch of road. During that time, if it's night, my eyes completely adjust to the darkness. This means that when a car comes towards me it completely blinds me and I can't see where the edge of that road is. The driver thinks that just because they've dipped their main beam I'm OK. Well that's just wrong. Plus, after the car's gone, now my eyes can't see in the dark either, having adjusted some to the lights.
The end result is that if I'm riding in the dark and I see a car coming, I just stop and pull over.
The speed limit is set to the National Speed Limit, which for a single lane in the countryside has, if I'm right, a limit of 60mph. Let me tell you this: when a car comes past you with a gap of a few feet and it's doing 60mph it's TERRIFYING. It's especially scary since you know that in about 5 feet there's a hole 12 inches wide that you've got to go round and the drive neither can see it nor cares nor is expecting you to have to go round it and so only leaves 3 feet space.
The end result is that if I'm riding and I hear a car coming I start maniacally looking over my shoulder ever 3 seconds to see how fast and close the oncoming car is.
What I'm trying to get across here is that ever single vehicle using this road makes life very hard for cyclists.
February 26th 2010
As dated above, the following vehicles drove straight through the Longstanton / Oakington airfield road, without stopping and thus violating the "No Motor Vehicles" road sign:
- B518DFT Blue Skoda
- SC04WSE Grey Peugeot 207
- JT53TAY Burgundy Ford Fiesta
- YP02VHN Black Golf
- GY53TAE Van from O'Dell
- S315BJE
- RC04THC Red Mazda
- RJ52NXF
- AJ04HLV
- FH51NCD
- R761GEW Black BMW
- C18TLB Grey Mazda 6
- AZ51EGP White Van
- E929MJO Micra blue
- LT53AWV white van
- AE52CHZ Blue Ford Ka
- PJ151TXK Red Passat
- YA56GYY BWM Estate overtook me at speed on blind bend!
- T388UEB VW
- Y553CAV Red
- AJ04XHP
- AFZ8ECV Suziki Silver
February 25th 2010
As dated above, the following vehicles drove straight through the Longstanton / Oakington airfield road, without stopping and thus violating the "No Motor Vehicles" road sign:
- GNNOHZ
- LC08XHA
- R747XRJ
- AG53FGS
- The incredibly stupid Y726GTC overtook me at speed in the rain on a blind "S" bend missing me by mere millimetres.
- CA07PYZ
- TJ51PXK
- S38SCE
- YF07BWW
- KW59BXF
Thursday 25 February 2010
February 24th 2010
As dated above, the following vehicles drove straight through the Longstanton / Oakington airfield road, without stopping and thus violating the "No Motor Vehicles" road sign:
- White truck RE04FWP
- Red Honda Civic N733PJO
- Grey? Honda Accord RE54PJU
- Yaris EE52UKP
- YA06YSU
- OY03FXJ
- EX52WML
- Red Golf P393HRP
Wednesday 24 February 2010
Oakington Airfield Road
I cycle through Longstanton quite often, though at quite varying times.
The road from Longstanton to Oakington goes past the former airfield of Oakington Barracks.
The road there, used to be crossed by an actual runway, but isn't any more.
Because of the history, or maybe for other reasons, the law excludes all motor vehicles (except Taxis and Mopeds) from the road.
Note that there's an exception to that exclusion: 'Except for Access'.
There's a farm, some stables and the former airfield gets raced on during the summer.
So the only vehicles supposed to be driving on this road are either taxis or those going to these specific destinations.
What is explicitly excluded is drivers going straight through from Longstanton to Oakington, using this road as a short-cut.
Also of note is that this road is National Cycling Route 51. There are nice signs telling you so and according to the map I just linked to there, this section of Router 51 is allegedly Traffic Free!
Since the law excludes vehicles from routinely driving on this road, those responsible for such things never repair the road: it is pothole city! In fact, in the last year, the road approaching the "No Motor Vehicles" sign was re-surfaced, but the re-surfacing stopped just short of it. :-(
So cyclists using National Cycling Route 51 have to ride a lot nearer the middle of the road than they normally would - no problem, there are no cars to avoid right? ;-)
With any luck you'll understand the points I'm making here:
There's a very dangerous blind "S" bend in the road where drivers still overtake cyclists at great speed. They know fine well that should they meet a car coming in the other direction their instinct will be to swerve left away from the path of the oncoming car but straight into the cyclist they couldn't wait 20 seconds to overtake safely.
For me, the most shocking thing is not that drivers break the law and drive along the road in question. What's moist shocking is that so many of those who choose to do so, do so and then take it several steps further, becoming insane with rage, aggression and violent behaviour.
Thus I propose:
Until it happens, I'm going to document all the occasions where it seems clear to me vehicles are breaking the law (driving straight through the road, talking on mobile phones whilst driving etc).
The road from Longstanton to Oakington goes past the former airfield of Oakington Barracks.
The road there, used to be crossed by an actual runway, but isn't any more.
Because of the history, or maybe for other reasons, the law excludes all motor vehicles (except Taxis and Mopeds) from the road.
Note that there's an exception to that exclusion: 'Except for Access'.
There's a farm, some stables and the former airfield gets raced on during the summer.
So the only vehicles supposed to be driving on this road are either taxis or those going to these specific destinations.
What is explicitly excluded is drivers going straight through from Longstanton to Oakington, using this road as a short-cut.
Also of note is that this road is National Cycling Route 51. There are nice signs telling you so and according to the map I just linked to there, this section of Router 51 is allegedly Traffic Free!
Since the law excludes vehicles from routinely driving on this road, those responsible for such things never repair the road: it is pothole city! In fact, in the last year, the road approaching the "No Motor Vehicles" sign was re-surfaced, but the re-surfacing stopped just short of it. :-(
So cyclists using National Cycling Route 51 have to ride a lot nearer the middle of the road than they normally would - no problem, there are no cars to avoid right? ;-)
With any luck you'll understand the points I'm making here:
- The road is a rat-run between Longstanton and Oakington.
- The vehicles that drive along it do so at great speed (keen, I'm assuming, to get off the illegal road ASAP, or because of point 1 above are in a rush and are choosing to break the law to save some time).
- Cyclists riding down the road have to move about the road quite a bit to avoid potholes: this drives the illegal motorists absolutely crazy!
- Everyone responsible for this road (the Police, the local Council etc) disavow any responsibility for the conflict that inevitably arises.
- Cyclists are regularly forced into either potholes or the grass verge to make way for homicidal motorists driving aggressively and at extremely excessive speeds for an unmaintained road.
- Cyclists daring enough to attempt to avoid potholes when there are cars on the road are met with daily threats of violence, highly aggressive and extremely vulgar language and vehicles deliberately swerved into their path.
There's a very dangerous blind "S" bend in the road where drivers still overtake cyclists at great speed. They know fine well that should they meet a car coming in the other direction their instinct will be to swerve left away from the path of the oncoming car but straight into the cyclist they couldn't wait 20 seconds to overtake safely.
For me, the most shocking thing is not that drivers break the law and drive along the road in question. What's moist shocking is that so many of those who choose to do so, do so and then take it several steps further, becoming insane with rage, aggression and violent behaviour.
Thus I propose:
- A series of severe speed bumps would at least slow down the illegal traffic.
Not just one at each end - drivers will simply speed up in between.
- Repair the tarmac so that cyclists can use this road without having to choose between potholes and veering into the path of speeding, illegal motorists.
Until it happens, I'm going to document all the occasions where it seems clear to me vehicles are breaking the law (driving straight through the road, talking on mobile phones whilst driving etc).
Tuesday 23 February 2010
Introduction
I'm a semi-frequent cyclist in and around Cambridge.
This blog will be some rambling thoughts, accounts of scary incidents and a few well chosen missions centred on being a cyclist who rides a bike where I ride a bike! :-)
I hope you either enjoy it or are at least stimulated by it.
This blog will be some rambling thoughts, accounts of scary incidents and a few well chosen missions centred on being a cyclist who rides a bike where I ride a bike! :-)
I hope you either enjoy it or are at least stimulated by it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)