“Is one minute of your time worth someone’s life?” Zero cyclists injured since new bike lane installed – while driving times barely change; Cyclist blasted for “too bright” lights… and no hi-vis; Is a muddy Roubaix on the way? + more on the live blog

😈 👀 Coup d’oeil sur ce qui a fait la légende de #ParisRoubaix en ce week-end d’Enfer du Nord : pic.twitter.com/p7KobCokPM

— Paris-Roubaix (@parisroubaix) April 6, 2023

That’s it for the live blog this week. I hope you all have a wonderful – and mud-filled – Paris-Roubaix weekend...

We’re kicking things off on our pre-Easter live blog with a trip across the Atlantic, where a report on a new segregated bike lane in the Mid-Atlantic state of Maryland – which was, surprise, surprise, vehemently opposed by some local motorists – has shown that no cyclists or pedestrians were involved in collisions in the six months since the protected infrastructure was installed.

In comparison, in the nine months before the bike lane was put in place, six pedestrians and cyclists were injured in collisions involving vehicles, while one cyclist was killed after being struck by a driver.

According to MoCo360, last year over 8,000 people signed a petition opposing the installation of a protected bike lane and high visibility pedestrian crossings on the Old Georgetown Road in North Bethesda.

Biking Old Georgetown Road with @WABADC, @MoCoFSS & @actfortransit in support of Bethesda safety improvements and protected bike lanes. Great turnout - 100 plus! pic.twitter.com/yXkM3G7FhD

— Seth Grimes (@Seth4MC) January 8, 2023

The opposition to changes on the road, where 18-year-old cyclist Enzo Marcel Alvarenga was killed in a collision involving a motorist last June, were based on – as these things often are – concerns that the changes would extend the commuting time of drivers and confuse them.

So, what about the poor motorists? To what extent have they been affected by a new road layout which has so far succeeded in keeping the most vulnerable road users from being injured or killed?

Well, they’ve been delayed by a whole 30 seconds, even a minute, in one direction, at certain times of the day.

According to a report released by the Maryland State Highway Administration earlier this week, travel times for motorists heading northbound in the morning has increased by seven percent, or half a minute, since the bike lane was installed, while in the afternoon those travelling in the same direction face a stifling minute-long delay.

Heading southbound, travel times have barely been affected at all, and are currently sitting around pre-bike lane levels.

While local state delegate Marc Korman said that the whole thing was about “finding the right balance” (between road safety and motorists’ impatience, apparently), several cyclists on Twitter praised the report as evidence that “protected bike lanes are working”:

Over a 10-month period in 2022 there were 40 crashes on Old Georgetown Road. Since the bike lane installation, travel times have gone up by *one minute* at most, and there have been no crashes. Is one minute of your time worth someone's life? https://t.co/tadGRSHgD7

— Jane Lyons-Raeder (@janelyonsraeder) April 5, 2023

0 crashes from Oct. 22 to March 23 involving pedestrians or bikers is an amazing stat, compared to six-including a fatal one that took the life of an 18 year old from Jan to Oct. 22. Protected bike lanes are working.

— AJ Metcalf (@AJwatchMD) April 5, 2023

Also stoked to hear that incidents of injury collisions on Old Georgetown Road have decreased since their installation and no pedestrians or cyclists have been involved. Oh, and vehicle travel times are 30-60 seconds longer, tops. Yay for improved infrastructure!!

— Carly Tu (@carly_tu) April 4, 2023

Of course, some angry motorists still aren’t impressed, kicking off a few debates:

It is going to be pure hell in September.

— The Original Red Snapper (@httrredskin) April 4, 2023

It's going to save lives when the high school opens.

— mrzaius 🚸 🚲 🐘 (@MrZaius) April 4, 2023

Why do democrats insist we become a third world country? If this is your solution to alleviating traffic you need psychological help

— Steven (@MaVASteve) April 5, 2023

This is the type of safety solution used with great success in Germany, Holland, Sweden, Denmark, Switzerland, Norway, Austria. The most advanced countries in the world.
Third-world countries are more like the US in the 1960s, few bike lanes and bad overall on traffic safety.

— Urban Upgrade (@ForwardBike) April 6, 2023

Well, it’s nice to know that these arguments happen all over the world, eh?

A classic (and thoroughly terrifying) case of phone driving here – did she even look up once? – which ensured the distracted, and obviously very popular, motorist picked up six points and a £200 fine…

What caused this tight squeeze?
What went wrong?
You decide.#MM71XWL

Am I just a Poundland @theJeremyVine? Yes I am! pic.twitter.com/buuQOxFF8g

— ThatGuyOnTheBike (@TGonthebike) April 6, 2023

That's the interesting thing with phone use to my mind. It's easy to prosecute and comes with 6 points, so the police will always go for that.

— ThatGuyOnTheBike (@TGonthebike) April 6, 2023

… While also spawning a new nickname for Twitter user ThatGuyOnTheBike: the ‘Poundland Jeremy Vine’.

Turns out the OG Jezza Vine approves:

Like this!

— Jeremy Vine (@theJeremyVine) April 6, 2023

 

 

 

 

View this post on Instagram

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A post shared by Lewis Buchanan (@lewbuchanan)

Slow riding on cobbled climbs, sock height, sponsorships by adult subscription services… Is there anything the UCI won’t clamp down upon?

Hein and Pat, quiet at the back…

In the governing body’s latest quest to protect its glistening reputation (Hi, it’s Travis Tygart on the line), the UCI have sent a letter to Scottish pro mountain biker Lewis Buchanan, warning him that he won’t be able to take part in any of their races unless he drops his new sponsor, OnlyFans.

According to Innerleithen-born enduro rider Buchanan, the UCI told him that his deal with the subscription service (don’t pretend you’ve never heard of it) violates article 1.1.089 of their regulations, which states that:

Without prejudice of the applicable law, no brand of tobacco, spirits, pornographic products, or any other products that might damage the image of the UCI or the sport of cycling in general shall be associated directly or indirectly with a licence–holder, a UCI team or a national or international cycling competition.

Hmmm… the UCI were awful quiet about image-damaging sponsors when they let Ineos (petro-chemical fracking enthusiasts), Amgen (EPO manufacturers), and a host of oil states with dodgy human rights records walk brazenly through the front door of their HQ in Aigle.

> Cycling's most controversial sponsors

And speaking of the kind of thing OnlyFans subscribers enjoy, the UCI also seemed nonplussed about erotic website EasyToys sponsoring what was previously known as the Healthy Ageing Tour, complete with, ahem, interesting prizes for the winners of each state…

Prizes in women’s cycling are improving 😅. You can leave tips on how to use it in the comments😂 pic.twitter.com/Fh23MVG4vv

— Ellen van Dijk (@ellenvdijk) March 3, 2022

> “Prizes in women’s cycling are improving”: Ellen van Dijk awarded X-rated giftset – including sex toy and blindfold – after winning time trial

“As much as I’ve had criticism for my deal with OnlyFans for whatever reason, the positivity and understanding my supporters and fans have had has outweighed all that and it’s really allowing me to live a mint life, create more connections that can lead to life after riding and travel more and do more of what I love, which is riding and racing bikes,” Buchanan wrote on Instagram this week.

“The UCI are not really interested in learning more or being educated on it… so shame there. I wonder if OnlyFans came along and dumped a ton of cash and wanted to help the sport in a way, if that opinion/rule would be slid away a tad.”

Nail. Head.

We’re ramping up our efforts to boost road safety, targeting 27 of the country’s most dangerous roads with a further £47.5 million in funding. pic.twitter.com/UsFZarKA7A

— Department for Transport (@transportgovuk) April 6, 2023

The poor graphic designers at the Department for Transport will have a sleepless Easter break, after a graphic published alongside the DfT’s latest road safety announcement, has been widely panned on social media.

This morning, the DfT announced that it is committing £47.5 million to target 27 of England’s “most dangerous roads”. The scheme aims to enhance road safety measures on these high-risk roads by improving signage and road markings, and re-designing junctions.

However, the graphic accompanying the announcement – which features cyclists, pedestrians, and motorists navigating a road seemingly under construction – could have done with its own redesign, after several Twitter users noted that the road layout is not quite up to the DfT’s own standards:

This picture represents bad practice.

You’ve got a belisha beacon on a none standard crossing, that’s not on the desire line
The traffic management for the road works looks unsafe
The diversion sign should be yellow
Is the cycle lane 2way? It should retain priority
skiers?

— Cyclops Dave (@davelostdave) April 6, 2023

Where’s the ‘safety’ for people #cycling w flow ax the side roads? Why isn’t the #ped crossing on the desire line? @RantyHighwayman @WeAreCyclingUK @activetraveleng

— Ruth Mayorcas (@RuthMayorcas) April 6, 2023

I know the idea of the graphic is for clarity… but jeez… none of this is correct DfT 🤦‍♂️

— benlarderwashere (@nebredral) April 6, 2023

Is this a picture of the old badly-designed dangerous roads? Why put a zebra crossing set back from the junction when pedestrians have priority crossing the side road in a straight line? Why is the cycle lane not continuous?

— #99 (@HateToHate) April 6, 2023

It's just a shame that the illustration on the cover breaks just about all the design principles laid out in LTN1/20 S10.
Forcing cyclist going ahead to yield to all traffic going in or out of side roads.

Perhaps that's the before improvement picture? We can hope.

— Sean Foster 💉💉💉💉 (@Bishop0151) April 6, 2023

Or maybe the DfT is just being clever, and showing us how desperate the situation on our roads has become? Maybe…

Meanwhile, road safety supremo Mark Hodson was on hand to note the biggest threat on our roads:

No such thing as a "dangerous road".... It's the people using them that are the issue... https://t.co/YsUJh26yqs

— Mark Hodson (@markandcharlie) April 6, 2023

 I like the homage to cycling history of this one…

But I also like the airy wistfulness of this…

Decisions, decisions…

> Is Trek’s new road bike really aluminium? Updated Émonda ALR features new frame with Kammtail aero tubing and fully integrated cables 

Outrageous cyclist is caught brazenly ignoring Britain's widest cycling lane. A local person is calling for fines for cyclists who 'don't use the expensive paths'.😂
https://t.co/cGGH4jGM5I via @MailOnline

— Santiago (@sntiago_bolanos) April 6, 2023

It looks like the bike lane every anti-cycling enthusiast loves to hate is back in the news this week, with even a stone-filled, rollercoaster-like surface not enough to convince the Daily Mail that cyclists can, actually, if they want, ride on the road – even when a (rubbish) cycle lane is nearby…

Absolute mystery why no-one is using this cycle lane. pic.twitter.com/ZQnTKiMzf7

— Jon (@Jontafkasi) April 5, 2023

We’ll have more on the Mail’s bike lane fetish soon, but here’s a taster of some of the baffled reaction from the cycling world:

It's covered in a loose surface but the main issue is the driveways. Each one will be like riding a roller coaster.

— Jon (@Jontafkasi) April 5, 2023

Snap. pic.twitter.com/sLunALp3fE

— Peter Swain (@peteretlewolff) April 5, 2023

Looks more like a roller coaster ride than a cycle lane. Rather than asking why are people reluctant to use sub-standard cycle lanes, we should be asking why are UK councils delivering such poor quality?

— paul gannon (@paulgannonbike) April 5, 2023

@MailOnline @theJeremyVine totally expecting the mail to publish this scandalous cyclist ignoring cycle lane story!!#brazen pic.twitter.com/juWcsDCY9l

— matthew griggs (@Griggzie) April 5, 2023

Over in yesterday’s live blog comments, road.cc reader Shake wrote: “I rode down that road recently, and as can be seen in that photo, it's so littered with stones you're almost guaranteed a puncture. Plus as you would expect, the lane stops and starts all the way along the road.”

But go on, tell us why it should be “illegal” for cyclists to ignore the cycle lane…

Schrödinger's cyclist as I was waiting at some temporary lights on the way back from the allotment this evening

A very thoughtful and eloquent van driver paused on his way through and leant out his window:

“Oi. Your light’s too bright”

“....and put some fucking hi-vis on”

— Dr Johnny Bananas (@barbedquill) April 5, 2023

Some have suggested that this particular exchange may well belong in the internet’s notorious ‘Didn’t Happen’ hall of fame… But judging by the replies, the van driver’s impressive display of motoring doublethink isn’t an isolated phenomenon:

I was approached by a mini bus driver would told me I required “reflectors” on my pedals… this is me, the front rider…reflection he said! https://t.co/WYPuYgWByq

— Wayne™ (@Dog_in_a_hat) April 6, 2023

 Can’t believe you left the house without your reflectors, Wayne…

I've been told a number of times that my front light is too bright. I switch it from 800l to 200l when I get onto the road section of my commute, and they still don't like it!
I wish they'd all get together and decide just how bright they want our lights to be. It's very tiring!

— Shez (@Sh3zz4) April 6, 2023

I've had a few people moan about my lights but I've never owned one anywhere near as bright as any car headlights

— Riker's Trombone (@Rikerstromboner) April 5, 2023

Graeme even claimed that he was once pulled over by the police for being, wait for it, “too visible”:

I have actually been pulled over by the police for being too visible!! 1 rainy November Tuesday night. Apparently they could see me for miles! And they were frightened I might distract motorists. I was asked to switch them off and cycle home on the pavement.

— Graeme Steen ✊🏼✊🏾✊🏿 (@bigsteeno) April 5, 2023

Maybe, as some pointed out, the van driver wasn’t actually that concerned about the cyclist’s attire and kit, and was more interested in his ongoing game of anti-cycling bingo (inspired by a certain Mail article from yesterday)…

"Half the cyclists in my town ride without lights...and the other half dazzle other road users."

"Half of them wear stupid plastic hats...& the other half don't wear helmets."

"They ride too fast...except when they ride too slow."

Cheap anti-cycling rhetoric is limitless

— George Weeks (@GeorgeWeeks2014) April 6, 2023

Bless him. He probably just read a cycling article in the Daily Mail.

— Shez (@Sh3zz4) April 6, 2023

And finally, Robert came along on the thread to ask the pertinent questions:

Was he driving a hi-viz vehicle?

— Robert Jamieson (@RobertJ42913260) April 6, 2023