Cyclists banned from stretch of A19 – but is there a viable alternative route?

There's quite a few posting here that maybe don't know the region or the road. I originate from the area, the A19 is like the M11/M4/M25/A1 or some other similar roads (10x worse than the A12 in Essex and I *never* see cyclists on there!). Its the closest thing to a motorway in the area for a good distance, the closest actual motorways being the A1(M) and A66(M) iirc.

Its a main artery for heavy lorries into and out of a significant industrial area and some sections go up to dual 5 lanes.
Its history is well covered here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A19_road

This is a (un)common sense as much as a driver behaviour issue. Having worked on highways around the country, the risk of being struck by a wandering HGV is huge, even when sat in a vehicle with full livery and flashing lights on a 3m hard shoulder, increase the volume of heavies and the likelihood is increased..

I'm sorry to hear of the death of this poor chap but as a few natives of the area have pointed out, its not wise to ride this road on a bike, everyone has a different perception of risk they are willing to take at the end of the day though.

How 2 juries managed to not reach a verdict is however beyond belief but we don't have the full record of the court to assist in understanding why.

When I read the original article I facepalmed so hard I almost hit the back of my head (you need a :facepalm: smiley). As I pointed out in an article that allowed comments, would they ban women from areas where rapes had been occurring or would they work to remove the rapists? They don't seem to be doing much to remove the cause of cyclists getting hit.

News report before the two trials collapsed -

http://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/a19-cyclist-death-trial-lorry-6295306

Quote:

“Witnesses reported seeing Mr Griffiths travelling between the rumble strip and the grass verge in the area known as the margin which is about a metre in width.

“Mr Dove was unable to say how he had not seen the cycle until he was 20 yards away. The front nearside of the HGV collided with the rear of the pedal cycle.”

The court heard CCTV footage of Mr Griffiths leaving his home in Wynyard showed he was wearing a high-visibility jacket which was partly obscured by a black rucksack.

He also had lights fitted to the front and rear of the Raleigh bike. Dove was arrested at the scene following the collision. The court heard that he told police he was unable to account for how the collision had occurred.

Mr Cleasby pointed out to the jury that other drivers on the dual carriageway had managed to avoid hitting the cyclist that morning.

Two juries failed to agree on verdicts.

I'm wondering how many of the jurors were drivers, perhaps with less-than-stellar driving skills of their own?

Realistically, driving offences are never going to be judged by the legal system in the same way as other offences are, its just never going to happen as long as huge numbers of people who vote and serve on juries themselves drive a lot.

Which is why I just can't agree with those who reckon the solution is tougher law-enforcement rather than physical separation. The former is an understandable desire but it just seems utterly impossible to achieve unless you happen to have a fascist government where El Generalismo happens to have an idiosyncratic hatred of cars (and most actual fascist dictators seem quite keen on them, really).

The A19 should be reclassified as the A19(M) in the same way as Newcastle Central Motorway, so that all other slow moving and other unsuitable vehicles are removed from this road, just another important trunk road in the north east that is no where near fit for purpose and has suffered from years of chronic under investment.
The issue shouldn't be that cyclists have been banned from this "mental" section of road, it should be that there has neither been nor is there an alternative now being constructed for cyclists and pedestrians.

Cyclists don't belong on these kinds of roads. Some roads should be just for cars. In a way I'd like to remove all roads where cyclists and cars couldn't coexist, but to do that I'd also need to reduce economic activity, tax take, and public sector services and benefits.

Women are lucky Highway England isn't in charge of rape investigation, because following their current line of reasoning women would be banned. Not good news for the continuation of the species.

So using your logic which other roads shall we not go on if 100% capacity ? Any road in the rush hour then ?

Your attitude just makes excuses for awful driving.

Some of the comments on here reveal a breathtaking level of ignorance. The road is already at 100%+ capacity at peak times. Cyclists need to stay off it for their own safety and use the viable alternatives. And I say that as one of those cyclists. Militant anti motorist cyclists boil my piss. Talk sense for god's sake

Simple solution make it into a single carriageway and use the other lanes as cycle lanes.
How do we seem to have the most incompetent people in Govt, councils, planning, policing. I lived in Germany in the early 90's it was a pleasure to cycle around, law's in place, infrastructure in place and yet in the UK 25 years on the authorities still run around with their thumbs up their bum, as if we are asking for solutions that don't already exist in the world. There again same goes for recycling and green energy

I cycle through the area in question on a regular basis. I wouldn't even consider using the A19 along that stretch - because I value my life. I'm sure 99% of other local cyclists would share my opinion. There are much safer alternatives to travel north-south using Billingham/Norton/Stockton etc, which are the routes I use. Cyclists with sense simply don't use this road, so the ban is largely pointless. The road doesn't need making cycle friendly - it's a major trunk road and is going to stay that way. In fact it is planned to widen it to three lanes in the near future. So lets stop bashing motorists/police/authorities and be sensible

I could ride an horse down it though.

If you can demonstrate that this is a popular corridor for everyday users then would make a better case for the HA to use some of their funding for 'Cycle Proofing' http://road.cc/content/news/141045-transport-secretary-says-%C2%A3100-mi...

Worth getting in touch with the relevant Local Authority to see if this is one of the schemes put forward.

If it isnt a stretch of corridor that would be used by 'everyday' cyclists then doubtful to be prioritised.

I am sorry but cycling down the A19 is madness. Its a 70mph road Ffs. You simply cant cycle down it safely. I live in Hartlepool and drive up and down the road all the time...I also love cycling but would never in a million year go cycling down the A19!!!

Try and use the transporter bridge maybe? 60p for a bike but at least you will be alive...

My first thought was, looking at the road in the picture "Who'd cycle down there in the first place?". Then, after some of the comments on here, I checked Google maps and it seems that they can't really afford roads up there (joke). I feel sorry for you guys if the only roads you have to ride are like this and shared with psychopaths in cars.
Surely councils can be lobbied? Can't the carriage way be separated from the cycle track with concrete barriers? Banning cyclists is to treat the symptoms and not the cause.

Incidentally, I agree with LeverMonkey; if the cycle track is a separate lane the truck shouldn't have been in it in the first place. Now it's cyclists fault for being in cycle lane shared with truck, so best to remove cyclists.

Stories like this make me feel depressed! They are supposed to be public roads. The "police are enforcing the ban...?" What the fuck are they doing about all the speeding, aggressive and down right dangerous driving? Answer NOTHING effectively.

If they end up killing someone then the courts hand out suspended sentences, there is no life-time driving ban, the world has gone crackers.

I put the root cause with those useless wankers we are obliged to vote for every few years, they really FULL OF SHIT!

So proposed order published in the London Gazette on 21/05/2015
Objections lodged by 12/06/2015 (22 days)
Order enacted on 13/07/2015 (31 days)

F**k me, they railroaded that one! It normally takes six months just to decide what biscuits to have.

On the continent a lot of high speed roads have separate cycleways and footpaths running parallel to them. Surely this would have been a better solution. Bet that would take 53 years instead of 53 days though.

On a serious note - This feels like the very thin end of a very large wedge. If you decide to ban cyclists from any road where there has been a cycling fatality in the last ten years ... in the interests of safety ...

This is the order as it apeared in the london gazette - https://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/2336689

TBH I went to Stockton a few weeks ago and found the roads from the town centre back onto the A19 a total nightmare. I don't ever want to do it again in a car and can't imagine why anyone would want to ride it.

But again, someone is killed and the answer isn't to do something to regulate the actions of drivers but to proscibe the actions of the innocent party (although, as ther driver was found not guilty (no surprise there), technically there wasn't a guilty party). Stupidly British to the end.

I think this is the relevant route on cyclestreets: http://www.cyclestreets.net/journey/45433435/ . The fastest route it suggests is 50 minutes, almost entirely on the A19, the slower route is 70 minutes and still uses a substantial part of the A19.