Plymouth City Council discriminates against cyclists

Some time ago I posted about some really iffy road "features" put in place in Devonport, Plymouth.
Basically, the roads have many cobbled strips inserted that span the full width of the carriageway. The gap between the cobbles is in places well over an two inches, and in places perhaps of that depth, too.

This doesn't show the worst!

This means it creates an uncomfortable, potentially lethal surface for cyclists.

I contacted the local ward councillor for Devonport, Mark Coker, seeing as this was on his patch. By pure coincidence, he's also the cabinet member for Transport on Plymouth City Council. My first email was sent on the 31st of January, 2013. So far I haven't yet received a straight answer from Plymouth City Council about this matter.

Oh, I've had a few replies. I've been told, on the 5th of February, that they'd be "in touch soon". On the 11th of February, I received an email that consisted in it's entirety simply of one (partial?) word - "Wed".
This I followed up on the 12th of February and waited patiently before again following it up on the 4th of March.

To my delight, I received an answer! That answer referred to an email I had never received, but stated that there was a meeting about the matter at the end of February, with action to be taken by the end of March.

On the 10th of April, given that I had seen no more responses and certainly no action, I emailed Councillor Coker again, sending him this:
"Given that you mentioned in your last email to me that action on issues raised will be by the end of March, and considering that there simply is no action at all regarding the cobbled strips across the carriageway, am I to assume that the council refuses to rectify the appalling manner in which it is actively discriminating against cyclists by failing to provide a safe, decent riding surface?"

On the 7th of May, having heard nothing in the meantime, I emailed Councillor Coker again, to ask why he was ignoring me. I received the following as a reply:
"Dear William

I am sorry that you feel that you have been ignored but that has not been my attention.

The new development at Kerr street has highlighted a number of problems as you are aware, The walk around by senior officers was completed and a number of action have been completed.

I have asked for the Assistant Director to contact you ASAP to explain the lessons learned from this development and he is happy to give you a call if you would prefer and follow up with an email.

Please let me know.

Regards

Mark"

On the same day, I also received this email from Clive Perkin, the Assistant Director for Transport & Infrastructure:
"Dear William,

Apologies if we have not yet provided an answer to you.  I am getting the information together on this development and will come back to you in the next couple of days.

Clive Perkin

Asst Dir for Transport & Infrastructure"

This was looking good! I had an email from the Assistant Director for Transport & Infrastructure saying he'd get back to me "in the next couple of days". Surely things would finally get moving. After all, a couple means two, doesn't it?

Apparently not.

On the 13th of March, having heard no more, I sent this email:
"Dear Clive,

Have you perhaps had any progress with this issue? I believe I've been extremely patient, seeing that I've been trying to get a straight answer since the 31st of January, but unfortunately all I've received since then was delay upon delay.

Mark Coker said in an earlier email that there's be an area walkabout in February and actions to follow by the end of March. As we're now mid-way through May it must be safe to assume that the council refuses to act on the appallingly poor road surfaces I have highlighted?

I really don't understand why there is a delay in getting information when there has already been an in-situ inspection, which led to no action whatsoever regarding this matter. What I am now asking is what the council will do to rectify this situation with the poor road surface on Ker Street (and surrounding streets) as well as what the council is doing to avoid a repeat occurrence elsewhere?

I look forward to receiving your timely response.

Kind regards,"

On the 20th of May and close to four months after first having emailed Councillor Coker, I was no closer to getting any answer. As a result, I sent this email to the Assistant Director of Transport and Infrastructure:
"Dear Clive,

On the 7th of May you gave me a commitment to update me within a "couple of days". Instead, it has been two weeks, and despite me having chased it up, there is still no response from you.

I must therefore conclude that you are ignoring me and that neither you, nor PCC have any interest whatsoever in answering the questions I have raised. 

Kind regards,"

Disappointingly, but given their track record, not unsurprisingly, I have had no response whatsoever.

Newer cobbled strips in the same neighbourhood appear to have been better built and do not have similar gaps between the cobbles, which shows either infrastructure is built in a random fashion, or they've realised that they've messed up. If the latter, at least that's a step in the right direction, though of course it doesn't fix the dangerous cobbled strips across the road.

The sad reality that I've been forced to accept is that Plymouth City Council is discriminating against cyclists by either putting in place, or knowingly allowing to be put in place road infrastructure that is dangerous to cyclists. When asked about it, they avoid any straight answers and play delaying games, perhaps hoping I'll forget about the matter.

Only, the trouble is I ride these roads daily, and I've already had to replace a rear wheel that was less than 5 months old. The ONLY reason why I'm not pursuing Plymouth City Council for the cost of that wheel is because it would be a bit hard to conclusively prove their cobbled strips had broken it.
However, should I suffer another wheel failure, I will pursue it as by then I'd be able to show a pattern.

Equally, should those cobbled strips cause me to fall, I will of course explore every legal option open to me. After all, roads are public infrastructure, and should be fit for purpose for ALL users.

In this instance (as with other examples) Plymouth City Council has again succeeded in discriminating against cyclists and that should never be allowed.

NCN27? Here? I don't think so!

In Devonport, Plymouth, I recently came across this sign:

This is on the corner of New Passage Hill and St Aubyn Road and clearly shows the route to be signed as NCN27.

Now NCN27 is the Devon Coast to Coast route that runs between Ilfracombe and Plymouth, but that ends at Millbay Docks in Plymouth, at the Continental Ferry Port. NCN2, which also runs through the city and which shares part of the route through Plymouth with NCN27, goes sort of near to where this sign is located - if you want to consider a mile or two to be near.

I imagine this was probably due to somebody at the council not being familiar with the route numbers, nor being too sure where the routes actually are but even if correct, that doesn't help cyclists from out of town who could easily be confused by incorrect signage.

NCN3 - Truro, Cornwall

I love Cornwall. It is a simply gorgeous county with stunning scenery and friendly people. Cornwall is home to the Camel Trail, and has many more traffic-free cycling routes.

There is a downside to Cornwall (aside from the roads that don't skirt hills, but instead perform a full frontal attack, up-and-over, every time) and that is that it isn't all that cyclist-friendly. Oh sure, riding routes like the Camel Trail can be bliss, despite the fact that it isn't a sealed surface and is at least in terms of surface quality vastly inferior to Devon's Tarka Trail, Granite Way and Drake's Trail.

There's a more crucial difference though - it seems most people who use the leisure routes in Cornwall tend to drive there, and this considerably negates the positives of these trails. It is rather intimidating to cycle on Cornish rural roads and even rural lanes often carry vehicles travelling at speed. This simply means that it becomes so much more important that the cycle trails are good, traffic-free routes to places that people need or want to go.

I'm not saying Devon as a county is better, but at least in West Devon, the cycle paths tend to be more connected and as such becomes routes to a destination, rather than a destination in itself. There's nothing wrong with turning a cycle path into a tourist attraction - in North Devon they're doing that rather well with the Tarka Trail - but it must serve a purpose beyond simply being a tourist attraction.

Recently I found myself in Truro with a bit of time on my hands, having just missed the train I was planning on taking. Truro, in case you didn't know, is the county capital of Cornwall and has a magnificent cathedral. I don't claim to be a world-expert on Truro, but I like what I've seen of the city during my fairly regular visits. Add native Cornish friendliness to all its other charming features and you're on to a winner!

When I travel to Truro by train, I typically take my bicycle along and so I decided to put the time I had to good use and go for a bike ride. Having spotted National Cycle Network Route NR 3 (NCN3) signs, I decided to follow it out of the city, along Newnam Road, which runs alongside the river. After some time, the NCN3 signs directed me up Gas Hill, which leads to some type of industrial yard. Just before, the cycle path veers off to the left along a traffic-free section that I can at best describe as less than impressive.

No, actually I'll correct that: that section of path is pathetic. But don't take my word for it - see for yourself:

This photo was taken looking back at where I came from, at the intersection with Lighterage Hill. As you can see, the traffic-free path was segregated, with the cyclists' section on the left. Yes, they actually do expect cyclists to ride along a path that is debris-strewn and practically completely blocked.

Further along things don't improve at all. The path follows an old dismantled railway, so the gradients are very mild, but the surface is appalling. Obviously some heavy machinery drove through while it was muddy and left huge ridges in it's wake. The surface is unsealed and strewn with broken glass in places. Some cutting back of vegetation must've taken place not all that long before I rode through, as the path was littered with broken bits of stick. Needless to say it was an environment just begging to get a puncture in, and it was no surprise when I got a puncture.

Cornwall County Council has a LONG was still to go to develop decent cycle infrastructure and I'll certainly avoid that part of NCN3 in future. Unless you ride a mountain bike with puncture-resistant tyre, I suggest you avoid it, too.

Your council is failing you

The title of this post may seem harsh, but it is nonetheless a fair and accurate description of the reality cyclists find themselves in.

This taxi driver came too close to CycleGaz

Spend five minutes talking to any cyclist that regularly rides on the road and chances are they'll tell you about near-misses and other run-ins they've had with especially buses and taxis. If you cycle yourself, you'll know exactly what I'm talking about.

Should you be cut up, threatened or even assaulted by a bus or taxi driver, your options are basically to contact the police (hahahahahahaaa! sorry - couldn't be helped!), contact the council (whahahahahahahahahahahaaaa!!) or contact the company involved (insert hysterical fits of laughter here).

The reality is nobody is interested. To the police, cyclists are at best a nuisance they'd rather not have to deal with and at worst, pests to be actively persecuted. Councils are simply not interested at all, and as for the bus or taxi company, yes well, good luck with that and enjoy wasting your time.

And yet...

If I wanted to start either a bus or a taxi company, I would be choosing to enter a supposedly tightly regulated industry. That regulation is controlled on a local level by the local council, who holds the powers to refuse or grant me a license to run such a company, based on a long list of conditions, which include my character.

When a taxi or bus driver behaves in an abusive or threatening manner towards any vulnerable road user, it should automatically become the responsibility of the local authority to step in. This is because ultimately they hold the final responsibility as they have seen fit to grant an operators license to the firm or individual concerned.

It is very much like the British Medical Council being responsible if they failed to address valid concerns about a doctor that steps outside the boundaries.

As such, it is my opinion that all local authorities therefore should run educational programmes to explain to bus and taxi drivers exactly how they should and shouldn't behave around vulnerable road users, with the explicit threat that abusive or dangerous behaviour from such drivers will result in their operators license being withdrawn.

A local authority is meant to be from the people, for the people. It is meant to look out for all people in its area, with an increased focus and responsibility on people that are more vulnerable.

Cyclists are extremely vulnerable road users and local authorities are complete failing to take basic steps to ensure we are kept safe on the roads.

Lack of periodically repeated education of commercial drivers results in so many taxi and bus drivers being clueless about cyclists. For example, the average bus or taxi driver appears to have no idea why cyclists sometimes ride in primary position, nor how much space they should leave when overtaking. These points lead to frustration and anger on both sides, but sadly it is usually the cyclists that are on the losing side. It is after all rather hard to argue with several tonnes of steel.

Local authorities should implement an on-going programme of educating taxi and bus drivers, and the relevant license-issuing department should vigorously investigate any complaints of poor road behaviour and implement appropriate sanctions.

But this simply won't start happening all by itself. No, it is up to us to convince our councils to step up to the plate and to protect innocent people from those drivers they have allowed to use our roads. For this to work, each and every single one of us needs to lobby our local councilors until they start taking this seriously.

Rebuilding my hybrid

Since getting my new bike I haven't ridden my hybrid even once. This isn't because I don't like it, but rather because it actually needs quite a bit of work.

My hybrid, aka The Trusty Steed

So this had me thinking - perhaps I should rebuild it completely. It's a Raleigh Pioneer, strong enough to batter a main battle tank to bits and ride away on afterwards (or nearly strong enough for that, anyhow) and far too good to get rid off.

Some time ago I fit Schwalbe Marathon puncture resistant tyres to it and as a result the bike didn't have a single puncture since fitting the new tyres. I believe I've done some 2 500 miles on those tyres. With it's 700C wheels and fairly chunky tyres, I used to ride it over pretty rough terrain, too.

Silver-grey in colour, it isn't exactly the most attention-seeking bike I've ever seen, nor the easiest on the eye, so I guess a frame respray is in order, perhaps a deep green, with some gold highlights? Also, currently it has straight bars, with bar-ends and I think a change to drops would be in order.

The saddle would simply have to be a Brooks, in honey and with matching bar-tape on the drops. Furthermore, I'd like to add faux-leather covers over the chain-stays, to give a bit of additional protection to the frame there.

The rack that is currently on the bike is on it's last legs and simply has to go, and be replaced with something else a bit more decent.

I'm happy with the wheels on the bike, though I'm toying with the idea of spraying them, to colour-match the frame. Naturally I'd leave the outside rim walls bare, as that is where the brakes grab on. Now to do this properly, I'd have to disassemble the wheels completely, mask them, spray them, then rebuild the wheels from scratch, perhaps using stainless steel spokes and brass nipples.

I'm thinking that if I'm going to go through that whole process I may as well rebuild the front wheel around a hub dynamo. I'm not at all certain if I should fit a front rack, or simply go for a bar-bag. Time will tell on this one, I guess.

The bike needs a new bottom bracket and a new chain. All cables need to be renewed too, but with changing from straight bars to drops, that was always going to be required anyway.

I'm somewhat stuck on what to do for mudguards and actually would rather like wooden ones, with brass stays.

Obviously this will be a longer-term project that I'll work on as and when time and finances allows, but I think, once done, my old Raleigh would be a very nice fast tourer.

Losing my bearings

I've been annoyed for a while now by a clunking noise my bike was making. It's a new bike and I got it in January, but I have already put 1000 miles on it, mostly commuting but with several leisurely rides thrown in for good measure.

It sounded like it was coming from the chainrings area, but I ruled any issues with the chain, deraileur or chainring out quite quickly. After all, the clunking noise occurred regardless whether I was pedalling or not, so it simply couldn't have been drive-related.

When I got the bike, it came with what my friend Simon describes as bear-trap pedals. These are platform pedals with plastic clips that go over the toes and as far as I'm concerned, they're only good for trying a bike out, and I wouldn't want to ride with those pedals all the time.

In view of this, I removed my battered and bruised SPD pedals from my old bike and fitted them to the new bike. These are Bike Hut SPD pedals, bought from Halfords ages ago and despite being effectively a supermarket brand, they've served me well over the years. However, they were near the end of their life!

Having ruled out the drive-train as culprit and cause of the clunking noise, my next obvious suspects were the pedals, although normally you'd expect to feel if there's something seriously wrong with the pedals more than you'd hear it.

As I needed new pedals anyway, I ordered a pair of Shimano SPDs. These are actually seen more as mountain bike pedals, but I wasn't about to change pedals and cleats. Besides, I like SPDs.

When the new pedals arrived, I quickly whipped off the old ones and put the new ones on, then took the bike for a quick spin. It was hush quiet, leading me to believe that I had finally gotten rid of the annoying clunking.

Sadly (and predictably) this was a very short-lived respite and soon the clunking was back.
More detailed investigations then revealed what I should've found earlier: the problem was with the wheel bearings on the back wheel. Annoyingly, a significant number of Triban 3 owners have had problems with wheel bearings.

This left me with a straightforward choice: do I return it to the shop and ask them to fix it, or do I fix it myself? Given that the nearest Decathlon store is in Reading, even if they did the work for free it would still be cheaper to pay a local bike shop to fix it than to travel up to Reading and back.

In the end I decided to fix it myself. Never having done this before, I figured I couldn't really make it any worse than it already was!

Now if you know a bit about fixing bikes, you'll have come across cone spanners. On a bicycle wheel, there is a certain nut that is shaped somewhat like a cone, and is therefore called a cone. The bearings are held between the cup, which is part of the actual hub, and the cone.

Of course I don't own a cone spanner, which made it seem that I wouldn't be able to fix the wheel myself at all. Fortunately, with things like this I can be a bit pig-headed and proceeded with the job using two adjustable spanners. This allowed me to hold the drive-side cone with one spanner, while I undid the locknut on the other side. Once the locknut came off, there were two washers and a spacer that simply slid off, exposing the cone so I could get at it with the adjustable spanner.

When I finally opened it all up, there was a shumpkin-coloured* liquid that came out, with grease of the same colour. I used a small screwdriver to nudge the bearings out from each side, after I have completely removed the axle from the wheel, then set about cleaning the bearings up.

The non-drive-side bearings all had a coppery tinge to them and weren't shiny at all, while the drive-side bearings were all still shiny. Regardless, I replaced all the bearings, after having cleaned the inside of the hub, the cups, the cones and the axle thouroughly. Next, I re-assembled the wheel.

Now my good friend the Interweb told me that you should pretty much hand-tighten the cone, then fit all the washers, spacers, etc. back, before fitting the wheel back on the bike. Importantly, the bearings should be a bit loose when the quick-release skewer isn't fitted and tightly closed yet. The QR skewer adds the additional pressure needed to ensure the bearings aren't too tight, or too loose.

This is exactly what I had done, and when I tightened the QR and spun the wheel, it was as silent as could be and spinning freely.

Well chuffed with myself and my newly-acquired wheel-fixing skills, I took the bike out for a quick 10 mile run and it was absolutely fine. I've since done over 100 miles on the wheel and it's STILL fine, so I guess it's properly fixed.

And the repair bill? Well, if you must know, I spent the princely sum of £3-50 on the bearings and a small tube of grease.

*Shumpkin - the colour you get when mixing sh*t and pumpkin

East of Plymouth

It is a well-known fact that the city of Plymouth benefits from having the rather lovely Drake's Trail, a (mostly) traffic-free cycle path that leads from the city all the way to Tavistock, via Yelverton, and includes the Plym Valley path.

Indeed, Plymouth is the end-point (or start-point, depending on your direction of travel) of the Devon Coast to Coast cycle route, also known as National Cycle Network route 27, or NCN27 for short. Furthermore, the city is the starting point for those crossing from France to continue cycling the Velodyssee route, which in itself is part of EuroVelo 1.
Then there is NCN2, which links the city with Ivybridge (and further) via a sort-of acceptable cycle route. NCN2 of course continues into Cornwall, through the luscious Mt Edgecombe estate (where it sadly also pretty much disappears, pending further route devlopment work).

It would therefore seem natural to assume that Plymouth is covered very well by longer-distance cycle routes.

And yet, if you tried cycling East, out of the city, and not head off towards Ivybridge, but instead stay nearer the coast, you will sooner or later find you are forced to cycle on the A379. This is a fairly busy, narrow A-road and is the main route for traffic between Plymouth and Kingsbridge.

Originally NCN2 was meant to run parallel to the A379 and to this day there are NCN2 markers on a short stretch of traffic-free path built mostly along the course of the disused Yealmpton branch line.
Parts of this cycle path are pretty good, with a smooth tar surface and, as is usually the case with paths built on disused railway lines, gentle gradients that help make it a pleasure to ride along here. The good parts are outside the Plymouth City limits, while the parts of the path inside the Plymouth city limits are atrociously poor. Those parts are unsurfaced, often extremely muddy, eroded, overgrown and generally unpleasant.

Yes, there is a pattern here: Plymouth does not believe in maintaining cycle paths at all - a severely short-sighted approach visible all over the city.

Seeing as this path is so poor, it really is no option for anybody not on a decent mountain bike, with the right skills, and who is prepared to get mud splattered all over them while riding there. It is also a far slower option than going by road.

And that leaves us with the A379. Between Plymouth and the village of Brixton it has a 40mph speed limit, which predictably many drivers treat as a legal minimum. Past Brixton, the speed limit is 60mph and if you were to cycle along here you should be prepared for drivers that overtake you extremely closely while doing 60mph (or more).

Even more scary than cars speeding past like that is when heavy articulated trucks do so! Having said that, I have to say in my experience by far the greatest majority of truck and bus drivers along this road will wait behind cyclists until it is safe to overtake, then give cyclists enough room when overtaking.

There was a Sustrans-supported plan to extend the existing traffic-free path all the way to the village of Yealmpton, which would have meant cyclists could avoid the A379 altogether, at least between Yealmpton and Plymouth. Sadly, this idea was shot down by the Bastard family, who own Kitley Estate, as they refuse to grant permission for the route over the estate.

And yes, that was an extremely short-sighted decision as having the path could have brought a great deal of additional custom to Kitley House, which was run as a hotel. Kitley House, as a separate business not affecting Kitley Estate, has since gone into administration. It really puzzles me, in this day and age to find businesses that would actively obstruct potentially lucrative sources of new customers, as they appear to have done here.

There are plans for a different route, to run very close to the A379, but that route will have such steep gradients that people in wheel chairs won't be able to use it at all and indeed many cyclists may stuggle with the gradients. Also, the alternative route would be far narrower - an inferior option in every aspect.

Mind-bogglingly, the Bastard family stated they'd permit this alternative route to proceed only if an agreement was made not to try an re-open the disused railway route for a further 25 years! Even more mind-bogglingly, that absolutely ridiculous condition was accepted.

Devon County Council has a pretty good track record when delivering cycling infrastructure, though sadly outside Exeter that ability only seems to exist in West Devon. The South Hams, through which this route goes, appears to be absolutely backwards in supporting cycling.

West Devon Borough Council clearly states that they see cycling as a key method to improve the economy of the almost entirely rural area. The South Hams, however, has a completely different demographic and some villages, like Newton Ferrers, is almost a ghost town during winter, due to the high number of homes there belonging to second-home owners.

With so many affluent people living there, this simply means that the South Hams' economy is far stronger, and it therefore appears that the South Hams Borough Council feels they don't have to pander to cyclists' needs to further their economy. Besides, people driving large, expensive 4x4s or luxury German cars typically don't want "their" roads full of cyclists, so politically cycling essentially has NO support at all.

So where does this leave us? With no firm plans for any path between Plymouth and Yealmpton, not in a good position at all.

For starters, there is Sherford, a planned new town of around 7 000 homes to be built in the South Hams. This will create a huge increase in traffic along the A379, through the village of Brixton and into Plymouth and by itself was one of the primary reasons behind the East End traffic scheme that resulted in Gdynia Way being widened to three lanes.

While there are on-carriageway cycle lanes along Billacombe Road, eastbound from the roundabout with Pomphlett Road to just past the Elburton roundabout and westbound from just before the Elburton roundabout to the Stenaway Road roundabout, these are likely to disappear. Plymouth City Council has plans for putting in dedicated bus lanes along Billacombe Road, leaving no road space for cycle lanes.

At Laira Bridge, the old railway bridge will be re-opened as a cycling and foot bridge towards 2014/5 but ultimately that is to allow the pavements on Laira Bridge to be taken away to allow more traffic lanes.

Clearly far from hope for the future, it actually seems that cycling out towards Yealmton will become more unpleasant, more intimidating and more dangerous, with the only bit of good news for cyclists being the fact that they'd be able to filter through the gridlock created by all the extra traffic.

Is this the future we really want? Is this really how to make cities, towns and villages more liveable and people-friendly? When will we learn that it is folly to plan, design and built almost exclusively for the car?

My Tour of Britain Predicament

With great expectation I've been awaiting the route and dates announcement for the 2013 Tour of Britain.
Last year, I cycled out to meet up with my friend Simon and his wife, after which we cycled out to Merrivale (a Devon stage King of the Mountains segment outside Princetown) and I was rather hopeful that the Tour would again be going past Merrivale this year.

Sadly, that isn't the case at all. The 2013 Tour of Britain's Devon stage, stage 6, starts in Sidmouth and ends at Haytor, on Dartmoor. Also, while last year's Devon stage was over a weekend, this year it is on a Friday.

Now being on a Friday isn't in itself much of a problem - I can simply take a day's leave. The trouble is it takes place on the 20th of September, which is also my daughter's birthday.
As this is outside the school holidays, we'd still need to get kids to school, same as any normal week day. As I sold my car some time ago, we only have my wife's car and she'll be needing it on the day.

Now the end of the Devon stage is at Haytor, which is roughly 29.25 rather hilly miles away from where I live and I can easily cycle out there. Of course, riding out also means avoiding the inevitable gridlock that ensues when thousands of spectators choose to drive to an event and jam the roads full of cars.

If you've ever been to any such event, you'd know there's an awful lot of standing around waiting. As a result, it's a really good idea to carry snacks and drinks with you, thus increasing the weight you carry when cycling there, which means it will take a little longer to get there.

Also, the nearer the finish of a stage, the more people there are and the more people there are, the earlier you have to arrive to get a good spot. I expect people would start waiting from at least 7am onwards and by the time the riders actually finish the stage there will be thousands pressed together, trying to catch a quick glimpse.

I have to admit I don't much like being squeezed from all sides in a crowd like that and besides, it certainly means leaving my bike unattended. And no, in case you were curious, the Dartmoor National Park Authority doesn't install sheffield stands all over the moor, just in case somebody wants to lock their bike up.

That means I realistically should pick a different spot. The first problem with that is simple: Haytor is the part of the Devon stage of the Tour of Britain that is nearest to where I live, which means picking a different spot will be further away, and will take longer to get there.

If it wasn't on my daughter's birthday I could simply have left home at stupid o'clock in the morning, and have cycled to wherever I needed to be. That way I could have arrived early enough to get a good spot.

However, there is simply no way I will not be at home to wish my daughter a happy birthday when we wake her for school in the morning. That simply means the earliest I'd get to the Tour of Britain would probably be from 10h30 onwards.

And before you suggest it, I'm quite convinced my daughter wouldn't believe me if I told her that she actually was born on the 21st! No, even suggesting that might dramatically shorten my life expectancy, so I'll move on rapidly.

I've walked around Merrivale often, and I know the area well. As a result, I knew beforehand where would be a good spot and where wouldn't be. I have no such familiarity with Haytor and the surrounding area, which places me at a distinct disadvantage here.

So I'm open to suggestions: where you YOU think would be a good spot to go and see the Devon stage of the 2013 Tour of Britain?

Here's a zoomable map of the Devon stage: http://www.devontourofbritain.co.uk/race/route/

Crash!

OK, so it was well overdue. Yes, I came off my bike, something I hadn't done for years.

Now I'd love to be able to say that it was during a race, or perhaps while doing some trick riding (I do ALL my own stunts, you know) but the reality is far more mundane:
I clipped a kerb.

Now I don't normally ride very close to the kerb at all, but this was a bit different.

For starters, there was a Land Rover that gave me a very close overtake, as I approached the roundabout on Billacombe Road where I crashed. No, it wasn't his fault that I crashed - that honour belongs to me and me alone - but he did annoy me, especially seeing as lane 2 was clear and he could easily have moved over when overtaking me.

It was bitterly cold, apparently the coldest day in March for 27 years, and we had very strong winds, which were mainly head winds as I cycled home.

Coming out of the roundabout, I glared after the Land Rover (which had taken the first exit while I was going straight) for a moment too long. This meant my focus wasn't totally where it ought to have been, on the road, and I cut the corner a bit when leaving the roundabout.

This brought me very close to the kerb, and a sudden gust of wind pushed me over just enough to clip the kerb, and down I went.

Fortunately the bike escaped without damage, except for some minor damage to the bar tape. My panniers offered the bike quite a lot of protection, which I'm grateful for.

Time for a new helmet!

I was pretty lucky, too! I ended up with a bit of a road rash on my left knee (though the cycling tights I was wearing had no holes in), a scrape on my right ankle and as I later doscovered at home, a bruise on my left cheekbone. Other than that I was fine.

I ended up with a few holes in my winter neoprene gloves, which is annoying, but also underlines why I never ride without gloves. In this case, if I weren't wearing gloves I am convinced my hands would have been bleeding all over.

My helmet made quite a noise as it scraped along the tar and I distinctly remember thinking that I was rather glad it was my helmet and not my head being scraped. I wear a helmet exactly for reasons like this - to protect me from relatively minor scrapes and falls - and I'm fully aware it will probably do NOTHING to protect me in the event of a crash with a car.

Moral of the story? Keep your blinking eyes and focus on the road. Sometimes it seems I'm a slow learner!

Dear Police...

Dear Police,

Like most people, I admire you for the often tough job you do and I understand that you are under-resourced, and your budgets are being squeezed from all sides. Yet despite this, you continue to do the job, and I'd like you to know we're grateful for that.

Since they were small, I've raised my kids to respect the law and the police, and I have consistently told them the police are to be trusted and not feared.

Having lived in a police state, where people were beaten up and even murdered by police for simply having a differing political view, I absolutely love the fact that in the UK most officers don't carry firearms, and have no need to travel in convoys inside heavily armed armoured vehicles.

Given the above, please accept my assurances that I am supportive of the UK police.

However (and you knew this was coming, didn't you?) that doesn't mean I automatically agree with everything you do, nor does it mean that you don't make mistakes.

Ian Tomlinson was a mistake, but a bigger mistake was how the police closed ranks, instead of trying to pinpoint, isolate and rid themselves of the small amount of rot that was in their midst.
When you have a boil, you have to lance it. Simply covering it up will NOT make it go away and indeed often will simply cause the rot to grow and spread. Owning up to mistakes will raise the trust in and respect for the police.

There are other mistakes, too, some of which I don't think you're consciously aware of. Allow me to elaborate: Nowadays, most police officers are drivers, either at work, or in their private lives. That is quite understandable, as driving is seen as the "normal" way of getting around in the UK, as well as further afield.

It is therefore quite easy, and rather predictable, that many (most?) police officers fall prey to the mental attitude that drivers are somehow elevated above all other road users. More important in some way, and that their time is more valuable than that of any other road users.

It is a well-established fact that most police forces won't act on reports of drivers overtaking cyclists without giving sufficient space, as the police feel such a measure is subjective, and consequently hard to enforce. Even when cyclists provide video evidence, the typical response from police is that since no actual collision occurred, the matter is best ignored.

Two things immediately follow from this: cyclists, on the one hand, report fewer and fewer incidents to the police, as they know it will only result in a complete waste of their own time, while drivers, on the other hand, learn through experience that they can overtake cyclists dangerously closely with impunity.

Neither of these are conducive of safe and fair road usage or policing. And yet the police appears appalingly blind to this.

I therefore have a challenge for you.

I would like ALL senior officers, from Superintendent upwards, to commute by bicycle every day for a minimum of one month, and NOT in police uniform.

During that time, I'd like such officers to cycle on the road whenever reasonably possible, with the acid test being what the majority of other cyclists are opting for. In other words, if there is a traffic-free cycle path, yet most cyclists avoid using it, then these officers should also avoid using it.

Specifically, I'd like them to NOT use crap "cycle infrastructure" that serves no purpose other than removing cyclists from the road and in doing so, allowing drivers yet more freedom.

I have done a small social media experiment, asking people on Twitter to let me know of a single instance where a driver has been ticketed for violating an Advanced Stop Line, or ASL. That tweet received a great many re-tweets, several bemused replies, and not ONE known instance of such an event taking place.

I have asked some police forces directly, as have others via Freedom of Information requests, and I can now say that to the absolute best of my knowledge, no driver in the UK has ever been fined for violating an ASL.

As a result, surely you can see why cyclists believe police all over the UK don't particularly care about cyclists on the roads and instead only prefer to become involved after an actual collision. And sadly, when cars, vans, or trucks collide with cyclists, the end result is often fatal.

And where is the preventative policing? Where are the warning letters sent out to drivers for having overtaken cyclists at speed, narrowly missing them? Why are police vehicles still involved in such behaviour themselves?

So come on, all you senior police officers. When you've commuted by bicycle, when you have first-hand experience of how a minority of drivers intimidate and bully cyclists on a daily basis, perhaps then you would start prioritising this matter.

And by prioritising this, maybe, just maybe, you can save some of your officers from the heart-breaking task of having to inform some cyclist's loved ones that the cyclist won't be coming home anymore.

Update:
Dear Senior Police Officers, please add a comment to indicate that you (and hopefully your team) will accept the challenge. If you haven't cycled for many years, please indicate so and let us know roughly which areas your commute may take you through and we'll see if we can get local cyclists to ride along with you.

Cycle Routes

A good cycle route is one that goes somewhere people want or need to go. That's a very simple concept to understand, but apparently some people have trouble with it.

On NCN27, between Yelverton and Tavistock, lies the hamlet of Grenofen. Once, before Grenofen Tunnel was re-opened as a cycle route, NCN27 skirted the edge of the hill upon which Grenofen was built, before heading straight up that hill, veering off shortly before actually reaching Grenofen.

There were plans to continue NCN27 through Grenofen, in fact, through the grounds of the local pub, the Halfway House. For some reason or the other, those plans ground to a halt and in due course the tunnel route was opened.

Of course, the tunnel route is infinitely better - not only because it extends the traffic-free cycling right into Tavistock, but more importantly because it cut out that very steep and long hill. In doing so, this section of the route suddenly became useable by families and occasional cyclists, who before would have avoided cycling simply to avoid the big hill.

However (and you knew this was coming, didn't you?) there is a problem: the people of Grenofen, sandwhiched between the busy A386 and somewhat quieter Whitchurch Road, are effectively cut off from NCN27, despite the fact that it passes right under their homes.

Sure, it is entirely possible to cycle along Whitchurch Road into Tavistock, before turning off on Anderton Lane and joining NCN27 there, but that is not a family-friendly route and involved several reasonable size hills.

This isn't the only such example just on NCN27, let alone further afield. In Bideford, NCN27 passes through East-the-Water, which is opposite the river from the heart of the town. There is a long and rather narrow bridge over the river, but it is NOT a cycle-friendly route! In fact, the edges of the kerb are rubbed shiny by the wheels of large HGVs.

In Bideford there are numerous empty shops, yet the town council refused to classify one of the two pavements over the bridge as shared space and in doing so they absolutely ensured no cyclist riding through Bideford on NCN27 would cross the bridge to spend money in the town.

Cycle routes must be connected to communities. They must offer good cycling routes, with numerous places to join and leave the route. Signage should be such that a complete stranger to an area should have NO need whatsoever to consult a map, a compass, a GPS device, nor any other navigational tool to find their way around.

Cycle route signage should be visually distinct, and not merely a small NCN sticker stuck on a lamp post somewhere. The signage should clearly direct people to shops, places of entertainment, sports facilities and more and crucially, from those places there should be clear signage back to main arterial cycle routes.

Here's a simple example from the Bristol - Bath cycle path - have a look and see what I mean:

Signage painted on the path Simple & effective

As you can see, people joining the route at this point don't have to have a good sense of direction, or be familiar with the local area. All they need is the ability to read and they'd know which way to go.

Equally, on the path the exit points are named, much like what you'd find on a motorway. This makes navigating the route so much easier, especially for people who don't have local knowledge. Can you imagine the chaos that would ensue on motorways if all signage was to be removed?

I have a few questions to whomever designs and constructs cycle routes:

1. Why is signage typically lacking, or extremely poor when present?
2. Why are the routes not designed to include important stops along the way?

NCN27 bypasses Great Torrington and the only realistic way to get from the cycle route to the town, or vice versa, is to cycle on the A386 - NOT a pleasant or subjectively safe experience!
Equally, the tarred access road used by construction crews while Gem Bridge was being built is now gated and locked, resulting in a vital link between Gem Bridge and the A386 being closed. Admittedly this may be due to the land owner, though surely this should and could have been negotiated  at the start?

What I'm proposing is not revolutionary, nor can the highway engineers claim, as the Highways Agency recently did, that they're not trained to deliver what I'm referring to.

The reality is that when roads are designed for cars, signage is a critical element, and they don't cut corners there. From most cities or towns there'd be signs directing traffic towards arterial roads, motorways, etc. Obviously on those aterial roads and motorways there are signs showing the names of junctions, cities and towns, or sometimes entire areas, e.g."The North".

So why is that same principle not also followed when putting cycle routes in place? Why are cycle routes allowed to bypass towns, villages and hamlets and why is there no "cycle route past shops"-type diversions? Why are there no distances shown on what little cycle route signage does exist?

We need to normalise cycling if we ever want to grow it, and putting in place cycle routes that go where people want or need to go is a good start. Ensuring adequate signage is in place and multiple points of entry and exit to such routes exist will further improve things.

A good cycle route goes where people want or need to go. One that doesn't isn't a good cycle route. It's that simple.

British Cycling Ride Leader

Yes, indeedy - I am now a British Cycling Ride Leader. Well, all truth be told, I'm an assistant Ride Leader as I don't yet hold a valid first aid certificate. Once I have the first aid certificate, I'll be auto-promoted to full Ride Leader.

I attended a one-day training course yesterday in Plymouth, along with 9 other people. I knew one person already from the Plymouth Cycling Campaign meetings, but hadn't met any of the other delegates before.

Now you're probably wondering what the Ride Leader course is all about, right? I'm sure you have heard of Sky Rides, large event in selected cities where roads are usually closed to cars and given over to cycling. There are smaller versions of these, called Sky Ride Local, which may take place on roads, traffic-free paths, or a combination. These rides are organised, and led by Ride Leaders.

Ride Leaders escort and chaperone new cyclists or people who are not confident cycling on roads. If you're an experienced cyclist that regularly ride on roads, chances are you'll find led rides too restrictive. However, as a large part of the training is practical, it goes without saying that all delegates also had a chance of being in the group that was being led, as opposed to being a Ride Leader.

My initial dislike of being chaperoned soon disappeared and it wasn't until another delegate called Rob expressed it into words that I realised the reason why: even as an experienced cyclist, riding in the group means you can almost completely relax and that you don't need to be as ultra-alert as is normally required when riding in traffic.

And therein lies the secret of these led rides: less experienced, nervous or even new cyclists can ride on roads, shared with cars, when in a group like this. The Ride Leaders ensure the group moves as a unit and they do most of the "keeping safe" work, allowing group members to simply relax and enjoy the ride.

Now obviously a typical led ride won't take in the roads we were on yesterday - these roads were picked specifically to teach us how to control the group in traffic, while allowing the trainer to assess our skills. Usually led rides would take place on quieter roads with fewer hazards.

That's another secret of the led rides: the routes are recce'd beforehand, to the point that Ride Leaders need to do a risk assessment for the route. This may sound like 'elf-n-safety gone mad, but actually it is quite good, in that it forces Ride Leaders to have contingency plans in place, and more. All of which of course serves to make the rides a more enjoyable experience for group members, and that is what it is all about: getting more people on their bikes.

Yes, they may start out only ever going on led rides, but in time should have built up the confidence and skills to ride whenever they choose.

As for what is happening next, well, I have to wait for my Ride Leader's kit to come through, and liaise with other Ride Leaders to hook up and deliver rides. As "payment" for the course and the Ride Leader kit, I have to commit to delivering at least 6 rides over spring, summer & early autumn, which isn't a big ask. In fact, I'm hoping to deliver more.

Ride Leaders also get a year's worth of free British Cycling membership and as part of that are covered under British Cycling's public liability insurance. All in all I feel it was a day well spent and I'm looking forward to doing the led rides.

If YOU are interested in becoming a Ride Leader, find some more details by clicking here. My understanding is that places are limited on the courses being offered around the country and certainly on our course there was a reserve list of over ten people that wanted to go on the course, but couldn't get a place.

A broken law is no law at all

In the UK we have Advanced Stop Lines (ASLs) at many traffic lights. Some people call these the "cyclist's box".

Rule 178 of the Highway Code says this about ASLs:
"Advanced stop lines. Some signal-controlled junctions have advanced stop lines to allow cycles to be positioned ahead of other traffic.
Motorists, including motorcyclists, MUST stop at the first white line reached if the lights are amber or red and should avoid blocking the way or encroaching on the marked area at other times, e.g. if the junction ahead is blocked.
If your vehicle has proceeded over the first white line at the time that the signal goes red, you MUST stop at the second white line, even if your vehicle is in the marked area. Allow cyclists time and space to move off when the green signal shows."

Seems pretty straighforward, doesn't it?

Except we have a few problems, starting with the fact that apparently most drivers don't have a clue why ASLs exist in the first place, and some drivers get very annoyed at cyclists filtering through traffic to take their place at the front in the ASL.

Motorcyclists appear to suffer some confusion and seem to think ASLs were put in place for them and them alone. Often I have been unable to get into the ASL as it was full of motorbikes.

ASLs exist to allow cyclists to filter to the front and position themselves right in front of other traffic, This is to increase their visibility and reduce the likelihood of a cyclist being squeezed out by impatient drivers anxious to get through a junction, and NOT to annoy drivers. Sadly, as most drivers appear to be clueless about ASLs, it seems too many do get annoyed by cyclists doing what the DfT suggests they do, and filter into the ASL.

In Plymouth, it is quite normal to see cars, vans, trucks, buses and especially taxis pull right into the ASL. I normally try to point out, in a friendly manner, to such drivers that the ASL is reserved for cyclists, and most of the time when I do so I am met with a torrent of abuse, especially from taxi drivers.

Sadly, from time to time I have seen police vehicles pull into the ASL, and that I find a massive problem. After all, if that is the example set by police, is it any wonder that ordinary drivers violate ASLs at will and with total impunity?

This made me wonder about how serious the police are about doing something about these traffic violations. After all, supposedly violating an ASL should land a driver with a Fixed Penalty Notice and three points on their license. Clearly I'm not the only one wondering about this.

With this in mind, I submitted a Freedom of Information request to Devon and Cornwall Police, asking (amongst other things) how many FPNs were issued by them over the past five years for drivers violating ASLs.

This was their reply:
"there are more than one offence that may cover violating the advance stop lines such as ‘Contravene give way sign/lines’ or ‘Contravene a traffic sign other than parking’ and therefore as per Q10, no information is held on the number of tickets issued in the last 5 years but it would exceed the appropriate limit if the time scale was refined to 12 months."

They pointed out that "The Central Ticket Unit has confirmed that the tickets are only held for 12 months and there is no way to identify the location of offences prior to 2012" and "If you were to refine the request to just the last 12 months then the request would have to be refused as it is estimated that to locate, retrieve and extract the specific information is likely to take longer than 18 hours" 

The translation of the above then is something along these lines:
We do not consider such offenses important enough to keep seperate data on them and it would take too long to go dig out each FPN, read it and tally up the totals, therefore we cannot answer the question. 
I quite understand and sympathise with this task taking too long, but I find it odd that this info isn't recorded in a computerised system, making retrieving it a matter of a few mouse clicks.

There is a bigger issue at stake here, of course, in line with the Broken Windows Theory. The concept is that the more drivers ignore cycling infrastructure put in place specifically to make cyclists more visible, and therefore safer, the less safe cyclists are on the roads.

When our public protectors, the police, start joining in with the negative behaviour effectively they are demonstrating through their actions (if not their words) that they condone such negative behaviour from drivers. 
That simply means that because drivers had pushed the limits of the boundaries, and found that the boundaries had moved as a result, drivers are taught that they can "work" the system by ever increasing negative road behaviour.

This inevitably leads to some drivers overtaking cyclists in dangerous manner, leaving incredibly small gaps. Cyclists, meanwhile have learnt that the police won't act on these dangerous overtakes "as there was no collision" and unfortunately drivers have learnt they can do so with impunity, leading to increasingly dangerous driving.

You can see how this is set to spiral ever more out of control, placing cyclists at increasing risk.

Police, by and large, drive around. Yes, of course there are foot patrols and even some cycle police but overwhelmingly police drive. It is therefore only natural that they increasingly have the same point of view of the average driver, a point of view that is rather intolerant of cyclists and this is evidenced by police vehicles overtaking cyclists without giving them enough space. There are a number of YouTube videos showing such poor road behaviour from police drivers.

My next challenge now is to find evidence of ONE, just one driver that received a Fixed Penalty Notice and points of their license for having violated an ASL. I've asked on Twitter but had no results, and now I'm asking you here to help me.

Please speak to people you come into contact with, family, friends, colleagues at work and ask around. Let's see if we can find that ONE example.

Because I don't think we will. I think the police believe cyclists are at best to be tolerated and that they feel it isn't a worthwhile usage of their time to prosecute drivers for such traffic violations.

I hope I'm wrong, I really do, because if not then things are far worse for cycling in the UK that we've believed to date. The trouble is, despite wanting to be wrong about this, I suspect I'm not.

The hill is not in the way, the hill is the way

Plymbridge Road, going towards Plympton*

Somebody far wiser than me once said the hill is not in the way, the hill IS the way. (If you know who to attribute this to, please let me know?)

On my new commute I have a fair few hills, which reminded me of this thought.

See, we can moan and grumble as much as we want, but if the road we find ourselves cycling on goes up and over a hill, then moaning and grumbling will do nothing to help us ride up and over that hill.
On the contrary, moaning and grumbling would probably make it harder, and make the hill seem bigger and steeper than what it really is.

Sometimes, what is truly needed is just simple acceptance of the reality of the situation. In this example, the reality is that we're cycling on a road that goes up and over a hill. That leaves us with two choices: we can cycle up and over the hill, or we can turn back and try an alternative route. Anything else would simply leave us to stagnate.

Sometimes there are no alternative routes and sometimes it can be impossible to go back, however much we may wish to. In such cases it becomes even more important to stop wasting time, effort and energy on moaning and grumbling, and instead simply get on with the job of riding up the hill.

Clearly this motto hold true for cycling as well as for life in general. Sometimes life trips us up. It happens, and there is usually diddly-squat you can do about it other than brush yourself off and continue as best you can. Moaning and grumbling only serves to amplify the negative at the expense of the positive, and therefore doesn't help at all.

And besides, riding up hills makes us stronger. It builds muscle, fitness and character, which isn't a bad reward for our efforts, now is it? After a while, certain hills no longer seems so big, or so steep, as we get better at dealing with hills. Next thing you know, you forget all the pain and suffering, but you get to keep the muscles strength, the fitness and the character.

Sometimes, it makes sense to intentionally pick the road that goes up and over the hill. Because the hill is not in the way, the hill is the way.

*The photo is certainly a hill, but not part of my commute

Not Your Typical Ride Report

I'm an experienced cyclist, aren't I? After all, I ride confidently in heavy traffic, and I ride thousands of miles every year, I know my Highway Code, my commute is 12 miles one way and I'll often go out on my bike for a whole day's riding.

And yet, I feel like a complete novice!

When I get on my bike, I reach for the brakes. It's what I do, it's what I've done for years and years. Only I miss the brakes, because they're in a different place!
When I ride, I get aches and cramps!

And why is all this happening?

I'll tell you! Because I got a new bike, that's why!

See, for years and years I've been riding a mountain bike, then a hybrid. For almost ten years I've been riding with straight bars and a reasonably upright position.

My friend Simon warned me that it would probably take a bit of time to get used to the new bike. That was good, honest advice that I acknowledged, but filed away under "oh, but I'm a very experienced cyclist and I know what I'm doing!" and thought no more of it.

Untill I took my new bike out on the road. In case you didn't know, I got a road bike, racing red with dropped bars, skinny wheels and all. Specifically, I got a B'Twin Triban 3.

The first ride I knew was going to be an "adjustment" ride, to get the seat position just right and adjust the handlebars, so I didn't have any high expectations. Just as well, for as I started swinging my leg over, the bike moved. The bike moved because I was on a downhill and though I grabbed for the brake, I grabbed where the brakes are on my hybrid. As a result, I grabbed some air instead of brakes!

Setting off was OK, though I immediately noticed how dramatically different the balance and handling was. Let me put it this way: compared to the Triban 3, my hybrid is like a rather docile horse next to a racehorse. The hybrid is forgiving and the 700c 35 wheels absorb a great deal of road bumps.

With the Triban, when riding over a penny you can almost feel which side of the coin is facing up! And while I have a lot of praise for the Triban, "forgiving" doesn't immediately spring to mind when I think of riding it.

Then there's the position. As you'd expect, the riding position is far more forward and with my hands on the brake hoods, a lot of my body weight is supported by my hands, and I'm simply not used to it.

Where I live we have MANY hills. In fact, finding a level road is almost impossible. That means, when going down hills I need to use the brakes. A lot! Only, as my body isn't used to the riding position, it wasn't all that long before my hands started complaining a bit, especially when using the brakes on a downhill.

I stopped a fair few times during the very first ride to make various adjustments, then rode home again. Later I took it out for a second, shortish test ride and made a few more small adjustments.

The following day was Sunday, which offered a chance to go out for a longer ride. This was the first "proper" ride on the new bike and I was in for at least one more surprise: when riding up a hill, I rose off the seat to stand and pedal and for a moment the bike was all over the place!

Now this sounds like a negative review - it isn't. Rather, it is a realistic review highlighting issues that I didn't anticipate despite having been forewarned.

Most of the ride was very nice, especially seeing as the long-absent sun came out to play for the duration and on the biggest uphill of my commute I set a new personal record, even if I did have cramps in my hands and forearms, from braking when riding down that hill first.

Overall I think it is a fantastic bike and any quirks I encountered I am sure are due to my not being used to riding a finely-balanced road bike. As such, things are sure to improve over time. My biggest bugbear are the hand cramps, but I'm sure that won't last very long before my body adjusted to the new bike.

If you decide to make the transition to a road bike and (like me) you hadn't ridden one since the 80's, can I suggest you mentally prepare yourself for the changes?