- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Leicester cycle lane (cyclelane_user Twitter)Reports of Leicester delivery drivers removing bike lane wands to park – or just driving over them
If evidence were needed that some see pop-up bike lanes as nothing more than an inconvenience, one Leicester cyclist has photographed truck drivers not merely parking in bike lanes, but removing the wands that segregate the lane from motor traffic to do so. There is even a photo of one driver who has simply driven over one.
The straightforwardly-named @cyclelane_user yesterday posted a series of images of flattened or removed cycle lane wands.
Evidence wands removed to allow for parking ... @RideLeicester @CityMayorLeic @Leicester_News @OweniteAdam pic.twitter.com/fAfl3JfkcZ
— Cycle Lane (@cyclelane_user) November 27, 2020
The issue has been flagged to the Mayor of Leicester and at least one of the firms responsible, but without response.
It’s not uncommon for cycle lane infrastructure to be tampered with. Many of London’s low traffic neighbourhoods have been blighted by vandalism, while theft and deliberate damage led to the removal of two pop-up bike lanes in Teesside.
Pop-up lanes are also being removed for other reasons. West Sussex has removed several because "traffic has significantly increased," while a somewhat nebulous sense of ill-feeling about a lane in Shoreham-on-Sea has led to it being scrapped – even after the council voted to keep it.
Some would say this all seems symptomatic of a tendency to see pop-up lanes as things to be tolerated only in the short-term – perhaps no surprise given their billing as temporary measures.
Earlier this month 14 Conservative MPs – including former minister for cycling Robert Goodwill – appealed to transport secretary Grant Shapps to withdraw emergency active travel funding for such initiatives, arguing that millions of people are feeling “victimised” by “road restrictions.”
The letter was also supported by anti-cycling lobby groups Fair Fuel UK, the Association of British Drivers and the Motorcycle Action Group, as well as the Road Haulage Association.
Cycling UK rubbished the argument.
The charity’s head of campaigns, Duncan Dollimore, said: “If they listened to the experts, which is perhaps a big ask for some of them, they’d discover that investing in cycling and walking initiatives is incredibly cost effective; moves more people in less space, reducing rather than causing congestion; and boosts the local economy. Or perhaps they do know this, but the facts just don’t suit their narrative.
“They claim this policy is indefensible, but whilst the policy may not have been perfectly implemented, what’s indefensible is the short-sighted do nothing attitude these MPs are displaying to measures designed to enable more people to move around our towns and cities more efficiently, in a healthier socially distanced manner, whilst reducing air pollution and carbon emissions.
“But why bother about evidence, the environment and longer term solutions to endemic problems when you can blame everything on a cycle lane?”
Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn't especially like cake.
Latest Comments
- bensynnock 1 hour 56 min ago
Stick it in the road.
- Hirsute 2 hours 55 min ago
If you can't see a %^$&ing large tractor what ^%$£"!*ing hope is there that you will see a cyclist ?...
- chrisonabike 3 hours 13 min ago
Well if you *can* interview the original riders at all surely they worked, at least?...
- David9694 3 hours 42 min ago
Live: Car plunges over wall and lands on beach rocks...
- biking59boomer 3 hours 48 min ago
Looks like yet another bike share service that's going to fold because of selfish idiots.
- quiff 7 hours 52 min ago
Fair point - I was restricting myself to pedal bikes. As I've never spent that kind of money on anything though (mortgage doesn't count), it's kind...
- brooksby 8 hours 55 min ago
And finally: I wonder how many of the "more than 3,000" signatures on that petition are actually locals, who live or work there (and are not just...
- Doug_D 10 hours 30 min ago
Another book suggestion - I can highly recommend "Lost Summers and Half-Forgotten Afternoons: A Mint Sauce collection" - a beautifully presented...
Add new comment
16 comments
The way to handle this is for the council to just swing into action the normal way that parking infringements are handled. It is clear that interfering with infrastructure is an offence too. Just quietly crack on with the paperwork, fines, appeals process and so on. The council are geared to grind dissent down - it's how parking fines work, and it works for the vast majority of the time where enforced, and most of teh time even when it isn't. After a while, acting like a cock becomes the exception rather than the rule. Once companies are hit in their pockets, ad understand that they can't whine their way out of it, the message soon trickles down to drivers too.
Unless those wands are permanently fixed and/or electrified, some people will just move them to facilitate their parking. I've lost count of the number of times I've complained to Bristol City Council about people clearly having moved wands so as to park. One recently was an Enterprise Car Club car (I emailed Enterprise too, but never heard anything back...).
On the delivery lorries issue - have any Bristol road.cc readers experienced the fun when the Tesco Express in Clifton receives a delivery? A HGV parked on double yellows, about six metres from a junction and uphill of it (making visibility for coming out of that junction kind of interesting), and invariably during the evening rush hour. Not helped by the cars parked on double yellows opposite it to collect pizzas from the shop-that-used-to-be-Pizza-Provencale...
not just tesco's lorries either, many others also cause chaos. time to get councillors Paula & Jerome on the case as they are pretty good at sorting things out locally, or making a lot of fuss to get things resolved by others.
tbh it was bound to happen. we know the trucks need to park somewhere to deliver food and goods in the cities. when you dont solve that before allowing lanes for us, you end up with an impossible problem. and that will result in truckers hating cyclists and cyclists hating truckers, guaranteed. and who profits? neither cyclists or truckers.
whilst you might well say "but this doesnt solve that issue", why on earth is that huge truck remotely allowed in a city centre, just to deliver food ? and not only that during the day time, I thought there were planning rules on what times supermarkets could take deliveries precisely for this kind of reason.
My understanding is that most planning regs limits on delivery times are night time to avoid impacting the quality of life for those living nearby...the logistics (and construction) industry are probably loving the idea that bans on night time operations are removed
So the question is : shall we inconvenience cylists or motorists? Unfortunately the answer is a forgone conclusion in Britain. It may not be so clear cut in some other countries which value cycling as a form of transport and are willing to inconvenience motorists to achieve the desired result.
"trucks need to park somewhere to deliver food"
So why is the default choice to park in the cycle lane, obstructing active travel? Why not park in the street they drove in, obstructing motorised transport.
There seems to be a sense that holding up motor vehicles for even a few moments is somehow a tragedy of major proportions, whereas imperilling the lives of cyclists is of no importance.
There seems to be a sense that holding up motor vehicles for even a few moments is somehow a tragedy of major proportions, whereas imperilling the lives of cyclists is of no importance.
I am amazed at the surprise which is expressed so often at this. The lives of cyclists are of minimal importance to the police and the courts. You have seen the joke sentences, so how much evidence do people need? The police, as they say in Full Metal Jacket, talk the talk but definitely do not walk the walk. Look at the entirely discredited Safer Essex Roads Partnership: They're running loads of NDORS courses, which are even more of a joke than usual because you can now sit at home playing the Rub Out the Cyclist games on a big screen while 'attending' the course instead of having to play them quietly on the phone at the course. These courses are now just a fee you pay and are rewarded with a licence to offend again without any points already on your licence.
Look at the cyclist page where all these drivers confirm their beliefs that it's the cyclists to blame for incidents involving cyclists and they need more education. If the Essex Police wanted to walk the walk, they would not have dreamed up the nightmare criterion we have seen on this site that a close pass is only a close pass when the video shows that the cyclist has braked or wobbled to show that he has actually been hit properly.
I have been actually hit twice in Lancashire with the response by police in the first that it was only 'a momentary loss of concentration' on the part of the driver, so no further action. I had to go through two levels of complaint to even achieve the joke driver course, and there was no response to the second. They wouldn't get away with that now!Then I got the camera, and have been working hard at retaliation ever since. It's an uphill and thankless task against resolute police resistance, but I will carry on until they manage to 'get' me- make no mistake, the police see the enemy as people who report or are the victim of offences, not the people who commit them.
Having been a delivery driver there is always somewhere to park. It just might not necessarily be exactly where you want to. Tough, that's why the gods gave you Shanks Pony, and the Boss gave you a sack barrow.
My colleagues used to whine about it (still do I'll be bound). It was nuts, we were on job and knock, and also got time and a half OT - it really doesn't matter to delivery drivers, they get paid for their time, any inconvenience is on company quid.
It's pretty obvious that the Tories are all in favour of pro-cyclist measures unless a single driver of a motorised vehicle objects. A valid objection appears to consist of an objecter stating that the cycle lane is to blame for traffic jams.
As far as I can see from the pictures, those cycle lanes have continuous white lines and are mandatory, so the drivers are breaking the law by driving and parking in them. Has this been reported to the police?
Sadly not. Due to a change in legislation a couple of years ago it's no longer illegal to park in mandatory cycle lanes implemented after a certain date. As this is a new lane, there won't be parking restrictions without double yellow lines. From the photos it looks like there are no double yellows
https://www.cyclinguk.org/blog/underhand-law-change-undermines-mandatory...
Dammit, you're right, I'd forgotten about the crass stupidity of the rule change. Never mind, with the new golden age of cycling, I'm sure this will be put right soon; tomorrow, or the next day perhaps. It's not like the government have anything else on their plate.
However it is still a criminal offence to alter road signage etc.
Primarily this is to protect cones and signs for roadworks, but would apply to the wands...
The easiest fix here would probably be to catch them at it, then bill them for an emergency road closure to fix it...
I expect they could easily bill £4-5k+ by the time they have filed the paperwork for the road works (including the procedures to bypass notification periods), and done the works complying with necessary safety procedures... Plus I suspect the locations they are delivering to wouldn't be particularly happy about the disruption said works would cause...
Just to give an idea: https://www.surreycc.gov.uk/roads-and-transport/permits-and-licences/tem...
So surrey CC think the going rate for a normal closure is £2500 (including advanced newspaper notification), and add ~£900 for emergency TTRO's (which as far as I can see may only remove the requirement to give them 12 weeks to process the paperwork, without affecting the need for 3 weeks warning in press + at location...)
Yes in my fantasy "country worth living in" when they published the announcements of the road closure they'd also publish the name of the company caught vandalising the roads.
Sadly, it's highly unlikely they will hold these guys to account for their actions.
If you consider that someone like Robert Goodwill was previously Minister for Cycling and he's doing all he can to stop people cycling, it makes you wonder what the agenda of the Tory ministers in charge of Trade & Industry or the NHS actually is.