Speed Limits and Cycle Lanes
Cycle Hereford believe that the road network should be managed fairly, so that the bicycle is as safe and convenient as the motor car for getting around town. (And to encourage people out of their cars — an aim of the County’s Local Transport Plan — cycling should really be safer and more convenient!)
It’s not at all obvious why cyclists (and pedestrians) should bear a greater burden of risk than people in motor cars and why intimidation should be a factor in deciding how to travel. Or why cyclists should be restricted to routes which are indirect, incomplete and uncomfortable. There are very few trips that can be made entirely on specially provided cycle infrastructure and much of what is provided sooner or later (usually sooner) dumps the cyclist back onto busy streets.
Our solution to the problem of making the entire road network in Hereford suitable for cycling is very simple. 20mph should be the maximum speed on streets where motorised traffic isn’t dominant or shouldn’t be. These are streets where self-powered road users (people who use their own energy to get around) and motorised road users mix, because the streets are residential, for shopping, schools etc. or are too narrow to allow adequate separate space for pedestrians, cyclists and motorised traffic. The reason for a 20mph limit is very simple: the risk that a collision will occur or will result in death or serious injury is greatly reduced at speeds of 20mph and below.
On streets where motor traffic can be permitted to dominate, speeds higher than 20mph should be accepted only if there is ample space for pedestrians AND full width cycle lanes in both directions on the carriageway.
Our proposal would benefit everyone, especially pedestrians. It would pose very little inconvenience for motorists.
We submitted a question to the full council, meeting Friday the 16th of July 2010, to ascertain their view on this life-or-death question. You can read their reply here. It’s not obvious how very limited use of 20mph speed limits and cycle lanes, and the continued insistence that cyclists have ‘routes’ while drivers have an entire road network amounts to a ‘right of cyclists to use the carriageway’.
We will be developing this campaign.
December 20, 2010 at 11:32 am
I live in Hereford south of the River, & most of my journeys in & around Hereford are by bicycle. I think the Council’s response to the 2 questions put to it by Cycle Hereford is totally unacceptable for the following reasons:
1. There are too many places in Hereford (like the roundabout near the Cattle Market) which are potentially hazardous for cyclists; a friend recently told me she does not cycle there because she feels it’s too dangerous.
2. Council’s failure to adopt more traffic calming measures (including 20mph zones) flies in the face of Government policy guidance
3. By failing to do more, the Council is actively discriminating against cyclists in favour of drivers of motor vehicles.
I very much look forward to a time when I can legally cycle both east & west across the City centre without having to dismount or get tangled up with vehicular traffic.
January 13, 2011 at 12:01 pm
I choose not to drive, for environmental and financial reasons, and as the bus service from the nearest village is inadequate, unco-ordinated and decreasing, I cycle almost everywhere. Intimidation is a common experience, with most drivers leaving inadequate space, to say nothing of the noxious fumes emitted to which other (less polluting, more sustainable and conscientious) road users are disproportionately subjected.
I have repeatedly asked for support from the local councillors, including a former mayoress, and a former mayor, and a local councillor, particularly since I was knocked off by a car that failed to give enough space when overtaking. I have made requests such as: speed control, traffic lights and a crossing for the busy road in the centre of the village, implementation of the Highways Act 1980 that states no obstruction may be made without permit to other road users, ie: hedge cuttings – farmers are not excempt.
My questions have thus far come to no avail, despite being of benefit to a broad swathe of the populace including pedestrian and equestrian road users, and all those to young, old, unable or unwilling to use private motorised road transport (ie: the usual subjects of discrimination). Many of the car-drivers I have spoken to report punctures from hedge-cuttings, contradicting Natural England’s claims (see below).
In fact, when I forwarded the mass email regarding 20mph speed limits and the general speeding issue, to my councillor, she ignored the part about speed limits and claimed that speeding was beyond her remit as it is a societal problem. She beleives cycling to be an activity of leisure and therefore not of everyday importance to those on low incomes. Might this be the ideology behind the waymarked cycle networks that loop in circles rather than linking settlements. Her response to the issue of hedgecuttings on the lanes highlighted the guidelines of Natural England, which claim:
‘The tyres of motor vehicles are rarely punctured, but there is a real risk to bicycles. Blackthorn in particular can cause lameness in livestock, so it is advisable to keep stock and bicycles away from hedges that have recently been cut. Thorns break down in wet weather fairly quickly and along roads and tracks motor vehicles soon crush them, so the risk is usually acceptable after a few weeks.’ (Robert Wolton, NE, 2007)
It is disappointing that a conservation organisation should undervalue the urgency of need for unhindered cycling in the countryside. Bikes and horses create minimum roadkill, no exhaust fumes, noise pollution nor do they require carparks or create traffic problems.
Unfortunately, the bird breeding season is commonly infringed upon (illegally), and there are many hedges cut towards the end of the summer (eradicating the wild harvest of hedgerow fruits) and later flailed hard as winter looms. The obvious solution is to lay hedges, on a +/- 10yr cycle, creating better wildlife habitats, stockproof boundaries, reducing fossil fuel dependency and pollution, less debris, and retaining the integrity of our rural crafts.
The Enclosure Movement that saw the dispossession of the common people, urbanisation, industrialistion, and the need to commute to work. I find it lamentable that so many landowners now refuse to employ sufficient people even to manage the hedges that once signalled the end of the freedom of the commons and continued rise of the landed elite, preferring mechanisation. The Conservative Party, formed in order to protect the interests of the landed, now hold a political stranglehold on our county and it is of no wonder that their response to cyclists’ campaigns is disappointing.
Once, when chatting about the topic in a local bike shop, I learnt that a UK bike manufacturer also made tractor parts, including hedgecutters and the blowing/sweeping appendages that cleared the debris from the road. Farmers would buy the cutters but refuse to buy the equipment to clear up after themselves!
I believe that our communities suffer when we pass each other couped up in cars unable to communicate with more than a quick nod or beep.
I also hope that one day, if cars are not banned outright for all their deleterious consequences, that they should at least be subjected to the kinds of public health warnings curently labelled onto tobacco products; exhaust fumes also contain benziene and carbon monoxide, and contribute to health disorders such as athsma and obesity.
Of course, the ecologically destructive investments made as individuals in private transport and collectively in bypasses etc are ultimately futile: the inevitable is dawning as Peak Oil Phenomenon rears its head. Cyclists: we were here first and we shall have the last laugh!