A letter to Smiths of Gloucestershire, re the blind overtake of their van VE08NKX

Hello

I'm the cyclist the driver of your van VE08NKX chose to overtake on a blind corner on Belmont Hill, Somerset, at 15:46 on 25 November.

I'm the cyclist who shouted a warning to your driver that there was an oncoming car —a warning he chose to ignore:

And I'm the cyclist who videoed your van nearly hitting the oncoming car.


That car braked to avoid a collision, incidentally, and we both waved an acknowledgement to each other of how close it had been.

I've not got in touch before; I was waiting to see how Avon and Somerset Police were going to respond to the complaint that I'd filed online with them. As the time limit for them to file a Notice of Impending Prosecution has expired and they are yet to get in touch, the answer is: nothing.

Your driver has to consider themselves lucky to have not only avoided a head-on collision with an oncoming vehicle, but to avoid any form of punishment from the police for nearly doing so. That is despite the irrefutable video evidence showing them ignoring a shouted warning and overtaking where they had no visibility. If A&S Police were to adopt the prosecute-on-video-evidence policy which the Central Midlands Police are now operating, they would now be facing a choice between prosecution to Dangerous Driving or pleading guilty to the lesser offence of Careless Driving.

As it is: no prosecution, no pleading, no penalty, no points on their license, and no insurance premium.

That fact reflects as badly on our local police as it does on your employee.

Given the police's utter inaction, you can report to your driver that this particular near-crash won't result in any prosecution.

However, you do need to consider your brand tainted. It's clear from your website that you take site safety as seriously as it needs to be —but it's also clear from the video that your staff are treating off site safety with utter disdain. This driver endangered other road users in a van with your business name and telephone number painted on three sides of the vehicle, making identifying this employer trivial. The more incidents like this, the more videos of your drivers will go online, the more that safety theme gets devalued.

Please: tell your driver that in a world of helmet cameras and dashcams —the era of "getting away" with dangerous driving is over. If they drive dangerously in their free time, it is only the lives of themselves and others and their own driving license which they endanger. When they do it in company vehicles, it is your vehicles they are also threatening, your insurance premiums they are risking, and your brand that they are destroying,

The Psychology of Overtaking and VE08NXK

There is surprisingly little literature available online on the topic of The Psychology of Overtaking.

One paper you can find dates from 1997, Overtaking Road-accidents: Differences in Manoeuvre as a Function of Driver Age, by Clarke et al, of Nottingham University

Without going into the details, in particular questioning whether there's enough information on the general population of drivers and overtakers to reach conclusions about age, it does contain a good introductory summary of past work.

One quote in particular stands out

Wilson and Greensmith (1983) returned to the theme of the ‘‘inertial driver’’ in their multivariate analysis of drivers’ accident status in relation to observed driving patterns, gender and exposure. They report that accident-involved drivers drive more quickly ‘‘...and move around continually (especially overtaking) in traffic’’. The typical inertial driver differs from his high-exposure accident-free counterpart, in that he seems unwilling to change speeds in response to conditions by using gear changes, deceleration or braking.

This is interesting, as it does document a common behaviour you encounter on a bike: the driver willing to endanger themselves and others rather than tap on the brakes.

Here is a classic example on Belmont Hill, N. Somerset




Although it's a sharp bend, the gradient of the hill means that you can see oncoming traffic, especially when they have their lights on in the late afternoon. Look up to the top right of the picture and you can see a car coming down the hill. Bear in mind, it is still daylight, there may be an unlit vehicle or cyclist, and they would not be visible.

The presence of the car hasn't stopped the van VE08NXK from choosing to overtake precisely at the corner, going round the bend on completely the wrong side of the road. Either they hadn't looked or they didn't care. The driver coming down the hill was distinctly unhappy.

It would be really interesting to see what the reasoning of the driver was here. We cannot but suspect that it would be a "the cyclist forced me to make a dangerous overtake" claim, when really it was a "I was unwilling to adjust my speed in any way". Maybe we shall find out, having just reported them to A&S police as part of "Grass a Driver week".

Metrobus on the railwaypath? Again?

the West of England partnership, henceforth known as the Bringers of Woe, have a consultation on a transport vision for the future.

Key points

1. More people are going to live in Bristol
2. More people are going to live Weston Super Mare, despite evidence to the contrary.
3. More people are going to live in middle of nowhere dormitory towns near bristol, and hold unrealistic expectations about being able to commute into the city 

So, they have come up with a vision. That's a sort of a value between "no idea whatsoever" and "have a clue". Interesting to read, and so derive goals not just of Bristol, but the Outer Wilderness

North Somerset doesn't want anyone cycling to Bristol. We knew that, but their map doesn't even show the existing Festival Way as "a strategic cycling route", let alone propose it actually continue the extra 1-2 miles to reach as Nailsea. Instead they want an uprated A38 and a few tens of millions making the M5 more dangerous by turning the hard shoulder off at peak hours. Most interestingly the A38 to go to the M5 in a new junction. It's not clear what that will do, but apparently "This corridor experiences severe congestion ". If that statements is true, then the adverts for the Junction 21 Enterprise Zone you see while wasting hours at passport checks at BRS are lies. The advert? "15 minutes to Bristol". The reality? Not a chance. Yet here we are, with North Somerset saying "good transport links" on the J21 site, yet "experiences severe congestion" in another. One of those two statements is false —and if its the advertising, someone may want to complain.

Suggest: N Somerset consider alternative transport options to sitting in a traffic jam on the M5, and be open about its issues in the J21 site.

South Bristol doesn't get a callout of its own, just coverage in Bath to Bristol corridor. There's a small problem here in that the key public transport route between the cities is the train —and central government have removed electrifying this stretch of line from their "vision". That is, not even on some random future deadline which they can postpone, it's an outright "we don't plan to do this". Which means that the one change which would have really improved carrying capacity on the line, reduced transit times and pollution from trains in the cities? Gone.



Saltford is promised a bypass.


They also discuss LRT -Tram- along "the A4 Corridor". That's an interesting term there, as it doesn't mean "Along the A4", it just means "along the Avon Valley". There are two other options there (ignoring tarmacing the river). There's the train line, and then there's the Bitton-Bath stretch of the Railway Path, the stretch which has the steam trainists practising their hobby on a weekend. Could this be time to reinstate steam trains between Bristol and Bath? Brunel would be proud —they didn't have electricity in his day, after all.

Suggest: residents of South Bristol may have transport issues of relevance too. Anyone who cycles in Bristol might want to look more closely at the LRT routing.

Avonmouth, Shirehampton and Clifton Villages



Still a vision of getting the Henbury train loop in; still a vision for some more stations. Gloucester Road to Filton  and beyond and Whiteladies Road/A4018 to Cribb's causeway down as Strategic Cycling Routes. We have no idea what that means, and suspect the WoEP don't either, other than it means "no need to care about it anywhere else". Not that being a strategic cycle route will stop anyone painting out the bike lane.

Other points

1. "enhancements to the public realm". This is planner-speak for spending money on brickwork rather than functional transport systems.
2. There's not a single mention or illustration, anywhere, of people walking other than the phrase "cycling-and-walking" where the money will be split and each group will get their half of a pavement which will now have a white line down the middle. Yet for the inner core of Bristol and Bath, walking is the primary transport option. (we have no idea what it is for W-s-M, it probably involves riding a goat). 
3. Page 14, or "other charging mechanisms.". That's either a parking tax, Low Emission Zone tax, or a c-zone charge.

And finally, a look to the north east. That dashed green line? "Light Rail Transport —Route to be determined"


Unless you are going to build a tram line down up Fishponds road, there is only one place to put anything in there: the Bristol to Bath Railway Path.

The last time the WoEP wanted to put a bus down there, there was a mass uprising of inner Bristol, with some support from outside. Doe they really think things will have got better now? Do they not realise that killing the path for the sake of a slightly faster commute to/from Emerson's Green is going to be acceptable? Not a chance.

Suggest: recognise that the traffic volume, walking and cycling, down the BBRP is higher than any tram can achieve, and doesn't cost £2.6B. Council would be better off filing plans to run trams down there into the box of "stupid ideas we will pretend we never considered".

Leigh Woods: nicer cars, more polite twats

One of our Bristol Traffic expendable tax-dodging reports was tasked to head over to Leigh Woods on a weekday morning, to see what all the fuss about the Clifton RPZ destroying the prestigous mock-rural suburb. It doesn't appear to be.

Watch this video and consider that all inboud traffic is paying £1/vehicle to drive into Bristol. The Clifton RPZ rollout does not seem to have discouraged this flow of traffic from the "nice but dull" parts of N. somerset, and the "simply dull" parts like Portishead. All the vehicles here will have come down the A369 from Portishead/Gordano M5 junction, or from Clevedon via Beggars Bush Lane. Yet despite the inner city waging a war on the hard-working motorist of the mock-rural suburbs, there's still a line of cars heading in.

What is notable, compared to inner Bristol, and even more so the Glasgow of Magnatom's videos, is

1. All the cars are nice, shiny and relatively new, with a bias towards the overweight SUV.
2. They all have their wingmirrors. This shows that they neither drive nor park in much of the city. These vehicles do not cross Whiteladies Road to points east.
3. There's nobody texting except P277FAL. This implies the flow rate of the traffic is higher than Gloucester and Whiteladies Roads.
4. When the self-important twat driving Mercedes EH03DHJcomplains to a cyclist that they are holding them when there is a bike lane, it's done in a genteel, polite, "could you use the cycle lane", rather than the stream of Glaswegian abuse or a screaming fit of the kind you'd see in Richmond.

That said. EX03DHJ is still a self-entitled wanker. He's just pulled out from the residential side road and is immediately on the horn because the cyclist is in the middle of the road in the line of slow moving cars, then comes up with the "I'm a cyclist myself, you see" cliche, while politely asking the tax-dodger to please use the cycle lane. It being nice sunny morning in Leigh Woods, the cyclist politely says no, rather than telling them to fuck off, the way you'd be expected to do in inner Bristol.

For those residents of the inner city, we have provided a translation

The Zone map that Clifton Tank Command Dare Not Show

Of all the maps that appear in the RPZ tank-battles, this is one that does not surface.



Its the map of where the air pollution levels in Bristol exceed the levels that are considered safe.

Look at that map. What stands out (to any resident of the city)

1. The entire city centre is an Air Quality Management Area. 
2. Clifton manages to dodge it, primarily by being above the town -though as it gets into Kingsdown and Windmill hill, height is not enough for the roads to stay breathable.
3. The roads into and out of the city are pollution hotspots. That includes Gloucester Road, Bristol's "most popular" cycle road.
4. The Frome valley pollution zone tracks the M32 perfectly.

We can't split the pollution into resident, business, public transport and commuter, apart from the Rupert Street bus & taxi only road —the one with the worst pollution in the city. Usually.

What we do know from the queues of cars on the A370 and A4 Portway every morning is the number of people who drive in to the city.  Any morning you can walk onto the Suspension Bridge and look down at the queue of cars who have done the portishead-M5-A4 route (and from other places, including Clevedon & Weston) and are now stuck in the Avon Gorge, fuming at the empty lane next to them along which park and ride buses whizz past. Any morning you can go to the footbridge above the M32 and look down at the line of near-stationary cars, all sitting with their engines on.

And in any inner-city area that is not an RPZ, you can watch the cars go round and round in circles looking for somewhere to park.

And now what -we have a  Somerset MP actually surfacing in the county to complain that Bristol's RPZ has had knock-on effects for Leigh Woods. Well, that's unfortunate —but not a reason for Bristol to attempt to do something about their air-quality. And an RPZ, if it actually helps alternate transport options in the area -including N. Somerset- will.

What's not covered here is that Leigh Woods has always experienced commuter parking -which was getting worse with the cost of crossing the Suspension Bridge, even before the RPZ went live. People who lived in the hinterlands weren't prepared to pay £2/day to drive over, and leigh woods became the cutoff point.

Well, Leigh Woods is free to roll out an RPZ too. As is Long Ashton. We can't say "but the roll-on effects" should stop any attempt at trying to make the city better to live and breathe in.

As for the residents of Portishead who say that Bristol is now trying to control where they work? 

Sorry. We are trying to control how people get to to work, to adopt options that aren't so literally poisonous to the city.

And the people who say "hold off until there's a viable alternative?" The residents of Portishead were all happy when the council spent £3M widening a roundabout, to reduce the time they spent queuing to get onto the M5 and then to work in Bristol or the North Fringe. £3M for what: one roundabout? Which, in a manner obvious to those of us who actually understand Queue Theory (it's not rocket science, you know), does nothing except move the traffic jams slightly closer to the city. North Somerset, under the guidance of Elf-King App Rees have spectacularly failed to get the Portishead Railway reopened for passenger traffic. They've actively opposed cycle facilities along their roads,  and actively campaigned against cycle routes through their two-cars-per-household-mock-villages.

It is the repeated choices and actions of the residents of North Somerset that have failed to provide that viable alternative to driving.  Why should Bristol care about those decisions? By leaving the city, these people abdicated their right to influence the decisions the city makes. And, in the hands of their democratically elected council, held back any form of progress. When they do attempt something, it fails so badly it gets ridiculed on national TV.

North Somerset are the hinterland of Bristol, not just geographically, but culturally.

Which is why we in the city can't afford to be held back by them.

We aren't trying to tell them where to work. We aren't even telling them how to commute.

What we are doing is saying "The road space and air quality in Bristol is too precious to waste on free commuter parking." By taking that away, anyone who wants to drive in still can —except they now get to pay for that right, so making the external costs of commuting in what is usually a single-occupancy vehicle tangible. In doing so it makes the now-internalized cost of driving in closer to that of using public transport, including the Avonmouth P&R site. It may even provide motivation for the residents of Portishead to push their councillors to get their thumbs out their arses and start working on this —maybe even setting up a Metropolitan Transport Authority covering the CUBA district, so actually giving them some input on Bristol's traffic plans. And, given there's an election coming up, maybe talk to their candiate MPs and say "will you do something for transport in the area other than staged photos in Leigh Woods?"

What we can't do is stop the RPZs and say "business as usual". Because its not just that everyone driving is causing congestion, they are helping poison the city.

Next time someone talks about resident parking zones, say "what about the air quality zones?". And if they don't have an answer, instead complaining how they have to use P&R instead of queueing to get into the city —you don't have to feel sorry for them at all.

Press Complaints Commission: it's OK to propose assaulting cyclists in a newspaper

A few days ago, we covered how the Western Daily Press -the "provincial" sibling to the evening post, printed an article advocating knocking cyclists off their bicycles if they were in the way.

Well, being a media outlet ourselves, we are never afraid to pick on our competitors, and complained to the press complaints commission.

After a couple of followup emails, we are pleased to announce that it is OK to print such articles -because it doesn't violate the Editor's Code of Practice.

The PCC considers complaints about specific allegations of breaches of the Editors’ Code of Practice. In order for us to consider your complaint, we do need you to explain how you believe that the Code has been breached.

You are correct to say that the police would be the appropriate authority to raise concerns about the incitement of violence; this is not a matter covered by the Clauses of the Code. If this is your concern, I would advise that you seek to raise it with the police.

Which raises the question: what happened in the great Matthew Parris "string them up" incident? Nothing:

The PCC said:

584 people complained about a comment piece article in The Times by Matthew Parris, published on 27 December 2007, headlined “What’s smug and deserves to be decapitated?”. The complainants were mostly cycling enthusiasts objecting to the suggestion that piano wire be strung acrosscountry lanes to decapitate cyclists, as a punishment for littering the countryside. The Commission said that the Code of Practice had not been breached, although it was pleased that Mr Parris had apologised for his comments.

This is interesting. There is a clause that says "The press must avoid prejudicial or pejorative reference to an individual's race, colour, religion, gender, sexual orientation or to any physical or mental illness or disability.". but: cyclists aren't any of that group unless you actually state that they are a bunch of madly evangelical troublemakers whose inability to adapt to modern society is a sign of psychological issues. Restrict your descriptions to "a menace" or "a nuisance" ant its OK.

It also means this: the Western Daily Press can say what it wants about cyclists, and only needs to apologise if it cares to.

Regional Press advocating violence against cyclists

We have mixed opinions of the Bristol Evening Post, and mourn the fact that whenever it tries to be more forward thinking -as in its coverage of gay marriage- the remaining readers find it offensive.

The Western Daily Press -the Somerset paper that seemingly never gets sold in the city- isn't trying to be so forward thinking, not with its Chris Rundle article "Cyclists are a nuisance on Somerset's roads and byways"

1. Columnist complains about cyclsts being on on shared path while he is warning
2. Same columnist expresses sympathy for people in the new forest who endangered cyclists and horses on roads by throwing tacks on the road -a crime for which the police are making enquiries
3. Columnist then complains about cyclists not being on a shared path while he is driving
4. Columnist expresses surprise that when he shouts "get off the road" to cyclists as he drives by that they are insulting back
5. Columnist proposes assaulting cyclists with a billiard cue

The author here clearly has some hate issues, or he is trying to be witty in the style of Matthew "string them up" Parris  by advocating violence against residents and visitors to the area.


And the Western Daily Press encourages this? Actually prints articles advocating violence against cyclists? As that is what they are doing.

Matthew Paris eventually apologised -after hundreds of Press Complaints Council complaints. We wait to see what the Western Daily and Chris Rundle do.

Before anyone says "we are coming out as a cycling organisation"  Not so. We give cyclists exactly the same respect we give anyone else in this city: nothing whatsoever. But nor do we go out of our way to run them over, shout abuse or try to hit them. Violence tends not to make the original problem go away -it just escalates things.

Traffic lights on roundabouts, cyclists and tinted windows

Bristol Traffic does have a twitter account, which rarely gets used for the following reason "to spend time on twitter is to waste an important life". Yet we do get notifications on messages sent to @BristolTraffic, as it is a way for little people to contact us. We obviously care more for little people to call up our Stokes Croft "adult content" fulfilment centre, get redirected to our Luxembourg sales office for Bristol Traffic s.a.R.L, buy entertainment products from the tax-efficient locality and then have us deliver them to anywhere within the former Avon county.

Today, we get a tweet from one Andrew Fawkes:

@bristoltraffic Would you like to R/T this? Even turning them off at peak times would help congestion! Thank you.

Pet hate: traffic lights on roundabouts. RBs were designed to keep traffic flowing. Please r/t if you agree and let's keep traffic flowing!

@AndrewWFawkes is proud to be a "Marketing consultant, career coach, classic car activist, MotoGP fan, guitarist & singer in a band and lots of other spare time activities!", based in Somerset UK".

Somerset is of course the elf-kingdom, which is where important people live, despite the fact that Bristol council is trying to push bike lanes into the kingdom -against the elf-folk's wishes. Everyone who commutes in up the A370 gets stuck somewhere in the way by anti-car policies of the inner city.

The traffic lights on roundabouts are merely a detail -and not one we care much for ourselves.

We are actually against them for a number of reasons.

1. By making it safer for cyclists to cross, they make it easier to cycle round the city, so encouraging cycling.
2. The James Barton Roundabout has a special light for buses coming from the M32 direction, so encouraging bus use.
3. Sometimes we have to wait at them for up to 30s
4. Sometimes when we pull out just as it goes red, our van blocks other traffic who then get upset.
5. The lights on the James Barton and St Pauls roundabouts are still on at 4am, where the only traffic is our van on an emergency delivery of inflatable sex aids to some of our St Andrews customers.

What we aren't sure about is the idea that turning them off at peak times would help congestion.

Having to put traffic lights on a roundabout is an indication that the roundabout has entered a failed state; that without them you woudn't get fair access to the roundabout.

Because a feature of a roundabout is that you can pull out, which can only be done if one of two conditions are met

1. There's nobody on the roundabout.
2. The roundabout is very busy, but traffic is exiting onto your road, so you can pull out as they turn off.

At peak hours, the "nobody on the roundabout" condition is not met, so we depend on the "traffic exiting" condition.

If people don't turn off onto your junction, you don't get out -leading to what is known in queue/scheduling theory as starvation.

For anyone trying to cycle over a roundabout when someone pulls out, this is why we do it. It's not just because we hate the cyclists for being there and not paying -it's because the only way to pull out in a busy roundabout 

Here, for example, is the car AE59JGU pulling out in front of a bicycle on the St Michaels roundabout. It's not that they didn't see the bicycle -it is that it was a weekday morning, and the only way to get out was to cut up the cyclist. There was no reason for the cyclist to catch up with them and say "please don't cut me up like that -it makes you look bad in the video". That was just selfish behaviour by a cyclist that shouldn't have been there.

While covering this incident, notice that the car had tinted windows. This is a great feature from a game-theory perspective, as it introduces more uncertainty into the negotiations. There is no way the tax -dodger could make eye contact with the driver, to see them and for them to see you. Instead, the dark windows depersonalise the car " there is nobody in there that cares -this is only a machine", as well as stopping the cyclist from even imagining that they've been seen.

Given that uncertainty, slowing down is the only thing the tax-dodger could do -creating the opportunity for the audi to pull out. Such an incident discourages the city-folk from cycling, so making easier for commuters from the Elf-Kingdom to come in to the city and so create wealth.

To summarise then:

• Traffic lights do hold up traffic, but not always at peak hours, as they make the scheduling of junction ingress fairer.
• If the council does remove them, we have to correct for this scheduling by pulling out when you don't have the right of way
• Cyclists are much safer to pull out in front of than buses
• Tinted windows are great for reducing the confidence of cyclists, so making it easier to pull out in front of them.

Andrew -thank you for your opinions! We have summarised our views on the matter!

This is why the Battle for Flax Bourton must be won now

Some people must have seen our post and and an estimate of 30-40 bicycles an hour and peak times and thought "so what?

This is what. This is the bike path that the petitioners harassed the Elf King himself, about, the one in jeopardy, the one he said should only be built if the sheep used their existing cycle paths. As far as Flax Bourton is concerned, using those cycle paths is bad enough. When this route is finished, their quiet life will be destroyed.

Look at it. 3-4 metres, wide, already built out, with the trees cut back. Raised enough to make it hard to swing onto. And already being scoped out.

The narrowing of the road means that the paint between the the lanes will be removed, forcing us to drive slower. If the 50 mph speed limit is dropped to 30, that will add another minute to the Flax Bourton to Long Ashton school run, again, threatening a lifestyle people paid into.

   
Look at it. Our tax money. It's on the opposite side of the road from the footpath, so there won't be "badly behaved cyclists" "riding on pavements amidst pedestrians". No, they will be cycling as fast as they do now -sprinting to and from Backwell, on this new £1.2M route running parallel to the A370.

Every one of those cyclists could endanger a motorist.

The Elf King said he wouldn't pay attention to petitions from people outside Long Ashton, pressuring him to build this blatant war-on-motoring facility. Well, he caved in. Hopefully he'll listen to the next petition, from local folk.

"Local Roads for Local People! And better commuter routes into the Bristol City Centre"

This is what we want!

The festival way: exposing Long Ashton to the city

Why all of a sudden the problems? When the Flax Bourton to Backwell route has existed for over a year? It's this: a wide bike path from Ashton Court to the western end of Long Ashton.

It runs parallel to the A370, it doesn't have the cars or buses of the Long Ashton road, and even runs alongside the schools.
 

It's designed to give the cyclists an A-road of their own. And because of that, they are coming out. Which is making Flax Bourton suffer.

Back in September, Elf King Ap Rees, leader of the Somerset-Elf-Folk, said "We're spending all this money on cycle ways and yet I'm always getting complaint that say the cyclists don't use them -they use the roads instead!".

It turns out worse than this. Some of the cyclists are using the cycle ways that they spent all the money on -and endangering people by doing so.

When we visited Rosemount Road on a (sunny) February sunday, we saw three cyclists in the space of five minutes. At that rate: thirty six an hour. Thirty-six cyclists that are cyclists are "posing a danger to pedestrians and motorists". And behind it all -the council trying to change the residents behaviour, to make them cycle with their families to school, then on to the city.

Farleigh Green Residents Association chairman Michael Barnes said: "Now the Festival Way route is completed we are seeing a lot more cyclists coming through the estate.

"The issue for residents is safety as the route follows narrow roads through the estate with the longest having no pavements.

"There are at least three blind corners giving no visibility for motorists, cyclists or pedestrians and there have been several collisions and many near misses involving cars, pedestrians, children and cyclists."

He added: "We are not anti-cycling and many of us enjoy cycling."

We have some bad news:  if you think it is bad now, it will only get worse.

Rosemount Road, Flax Bourton -ruined by the cyclists

The residents of Rosemount Road, Flax Bourton didn't just move the countryside for fields and trees.

They moved for the rural dream: a cottage like house with room for two cars. One for one of the parents -and in modern society, that could be the dad- to drop the kids off at school in Long Ashton before driving into the city; the other for the other parent to go straight in down the A370, via a short stretch of road.


Already Bristol city threaten this dream, with their war on motoring. Closing Prince Street Bridge to through traffic makes getting from the south of the city harder. Imposing 20 mph speed limits in South Bristol has killed the rat-runs, leaving only the traffic-clogged Coronation Road. Adding residents parking in Redcliffe has even destroyed some of the near-city parking available to Somerset commuters.

All this was bad enough, but now the city is bringing the war on motorists to the villages!

Look above: a nice cul-de-sac; lots of space to turn around in.

But turn 180 degrees round and what do you see


That's right -a bike route. Going all the way from Flax Bourton to Backwell. And its used! You can see above, that even on a February weekend there is someone out there pretending to enjoy themselves

 

Look at the quality of it! Can you not see what the council is trying to do here -it's not just encouraging cyclists from the city to come out, it's trying to change the behaviour of the residents themselves! It's trying to say "why drive? Why not cycle to Nailsea and get a train into the city or Abbey Wood at the North Fringe?" It's saying "why not go for a bike ride -for fun- with your family on a weekend?" It's saying: you should consider cycling to work in the city
 

In the distance, you can see them: the cyclists. They are coming.

This is why the village has to act. If they do not, they will be turned into the mindless Dutch-style families that Bristol is trying force down our throats.

If they wanted to cycle, they'd live in Southville or Montpelier! Instead they chose to move out here, to realise a dream of a quiet road, two cars, and a drive down the A370 every morning. All this will be destroyed by the council -unless they can persuade the council to change its mind, and ban cyclists from these roads.
 

"we're not anti-cycling, but" -flax bourton joins the bikelash

This site has been quiet recently -but then our business model isn't based on having a high visitor count and then selling adverts to advertisers who want to sell things to those people who visit the site regularly (i.e. losers). We haven't been visiting the evening post much either, not since they started demanding access to the contact details of all gmail accounts.

Today though, something draws us in again: the bikelash is back.

The last decent bikelash we had in the area was in Long Ashton, where the Elf-King himself proclaimed that cyclists were arrogant and that trying to petition him to complete a bike path was sheep-like.

Today, just east of Long Ashton, the village of Flax Bourton joins in the Evening Post Official Bikelash!

Yes, in a picturesque modern rural housing estate, residents are warning that cyclists are a risk to pedestrians and car drivers!

Here is the area.

Rosemount Road is a classic example of a late twentieth century, early 21st interpretation of that rural dream, a country village.

In the background, the birdsong-like hum of the A370, offering the elf-folk access to the city, or Bristol airport, if that is their place of employ. (some day we should cover the airport. If it weren't so anti-all-other-modes-of-transport, including flight, we'd accuse it of being at war with motorists).



Like a traditional village, there are no pavements, just verges to drive over and so justify the 4x4.

 
Like a tradional village there is always somebody petty with a keep of the grass sign and stones to mark their territory.

Unlike the city, there is room for more than one car per household. And, when washing your car on a Sunday afternoon, you can leave the door open without fear that your car will be stolen and the insurance company laugh at you for doing so.
 

According to Zoopla, these houses sell for just under £500K, money well spent to get away from the city and its stress.
In these quiet cul-de-sacs, there is enough space for children to happily bounce and scoot around without fear of being killed by a passing bicycle.

But not anymore. Not now that Somerset council is partway through bulding a quality off-road bike path all the way from the city centre to this rural dream.


They are trying to bring the city to the countryside, to destroy the rural commuter lifestyle these people have worked so hard to attain.

This is the front line in the Bikelash!

The Elf Kingdom and its rains

Somerset got its name from Sommer- Sett; the land only inhabitable in Summer, In winter it flooded.

\\
little change then.

West End of the Long Ashton Route

At the west end of the Long Ashton road, there's a double mini roundabout.

Classic cycle paths marked in fading paint provide a safe off-road route between the junctions where the plebs of the 47% are rightfully denied rights of way.
\

Due south, a nice segue into the A370 as the Dual Carriageway begins. That 40mph sign is one of those "pretend" signs; the curves on that approach road are designed to help you accelerate up to speed.

This is why we don't want to encourage cycling, cyclists will only get in the way on the left turn here, expose themselves to risk, get run over, and then blame innocent motorists. They say there is safety in numbers, but there is only one number that is safe: zero.

 

Some people may say "this is classic unplanned mediocrity", They are mistaken.

as you can see from the signs at the mini roundabout, the Elf-Kingdom's Highway Laboratory is adjacent to these junctions, these roads, these cycle paths.
  
These roads, these bike paths, these junctions are not accidents. They are by design, and the designers drive along here every day, looking at their work and being proud.

We in the Bristol Traffic Team salute the Highway's Laboratory Staff! The roads outside their offices are a great experiment in how all of Somerset's roads could be! The sooner the better!

The Long Ashon Path

In the elf kingdom, we visited the road where the campaigners campaigned, sheep like, for an off-road alternative to the 50 mph road -probably involving some pavement widening.

They are being greedy. Look, there is already some space for them under the hedgerows!

Yet despite these facilities, they cycle in the road! No wonder the elf-folk complain!




At the end of the route, we see exactly the pedestrian/cyclist conflict points people discuss, as a piece of white paint demarks the route where cyclists can get onto the pavement by a roundabout, with 5 metres of traffic free cycling.

Yet again, some of the tax dogers use the roundabout! Despite the money spent on paint!


While we agree that there is no justification for a bike path, here, we will point out is that the claim that this is for pedestrian safety is bogus. Nobody walks here.

Where they do walk is on Yanley lane, Long Ashton, There is a school behind this blind corner where the speed drops from 60 mph to 30 mph, yet the entirety of the pedestrian safety here is a sign saying "school" and "look out for pedestrians" -signs too small to read when you are doing 60mph.
 
There is no way that the residents of Long Ashton to say that they care about pedestrians being hit by cyclists when they don't care about their own children being hit by cars except to spend 50 quid on a road sign.

No, that's a totally bogus argument and they should feel embarrassed to be so blatantly hypocritical, "We would rather have a risk of schoolkid/car collisions than accept any traffic calming or pavement on yanley lane", destroys the argument "we can't have a cycle path on a widened pavement that nobody ever uses".

No, they should stop lying and come out fighting, the way the elf-king himself has done. This cycle lane should be stopped because the tax-dodgers are undeserving plebs who are never grateful for anything.

A trip to the Elf Kingdom

our range rover went out to the Elf Kingdom in a follow up to the Long Ashton Saga.

It has this strange kind of terrain, that is all green, with roads that finally justified our ownership of a 4x4 that rarely leaves clifton.

If Somerset is the Elf Kingdom, what is that whiteness in the far distance?

Yes, it is a shining city, the last bastion of the Men of the West -Gondor

Here we can see the fortresses on the hill, Dun--st-Michael, home to the fabled white tower, the "Chimney of St Michael's Hospital". Behind the city, the green hills of the Shire of South Gloucester.

When Tolkien introduced the elf-lands and Gondor to the masses, one thing he failed to discuss was how the Elves commuted into Gondor down the A370 every day. For that is truly how the Elf-folk visit the city of men.

Elf-King Ap-Rees: get the sheep-like cyclists off the roads

There's a BBC Radio Broadcase in which Elf-King Ap-Rees, Deputy-King of the Elf-Kingdom of North Somerset, denounces cyclists as arrogant as the "cyclists use the cycle ways instead of arrogantly ignoring them and cycling on adjacent roads".

The issue was a petition"ill-judged and unnecessary" that stirred up people to sign a petition that demanded that the council actually approved of the cycle path by the 50 mph road from Long Ashton to Cambridge Batch. It was always going to be built, just "a bit of a quibble" with Long Ashton Parish Council. Like the way they slowed down the provisioning of a cycle route alongside the A370 by Ashton Court -there were concerns that the council would reject it the way they rejected the Ashton Court stretch of the route -the bit that would cut across the newly-expanded Ashton Court car park.

"We're spending all this money on cycle ways and yet I'm always getting complaint that say the cyclists don't use them -they use the roads instead!"

 Why is his language so inflammatory?

"I'm glad it is! I want cyclists to realise that other people see this money being spent on cycle ways and actually object when the cyclists don't use it. Especially when we have 60 mph roads, and we have a cycle way absolutely adjacent to it -and yet you still find cyclists using that (ed: the road?). They cycle through pedestrian areas, you know, which they're not supposed to do..."

why have you approved this then?

"We want to encourage cycling. We want to encourage cyclists to use the cycle ways. What I'm hoping is that as a result of this...and it's not everybody, you just get a few cyclists -just as you get a few motorists doing things wrong. The trouble is they set a bad example -erm- to everybody else"

People who don't live in the vicinity of Long Ashton have no influence over the decision as as they "have one sheep-like point of view "

Elf King App Rees is the one politician who will stand up and say the prejudiced ill-informed views that we live by! Only he is the one not afraid to call cyclists sheep-like. Indeed, he's proud of it!

"I'm always getting complaints from people about the behaviour of cyclists..."

That said, we don't like this idea of saying "local decisions only". Because that's going to come back to haunt the commuters of N Somerset when Bristol City starts rolling out anti-commuter strategies like speed limits.

Similarly, we worry about the quote : "North Somerset Council has to consider all road users and the decision will be made with that in mind, not to just satisfy a cycling lobby."

This surprised us as we didn't know there was a cycling lobby in N. Somerset. That phrase "all road users" scares us. Why should we -the tax payers- care about the cyclists? If he's going to start taking their interests into account, what will this mean to  features like the new Portishead/M5 junction, where the Elf King said "the misery of prolonged hold-ups for motorists in this area should be a thing of the past.". See that? No need to acknowledge the existence of cyclists there, let alone the need to consider them at a new junction. Similarly, when he's considering parking charges in Portishead, will he actually worry about the needs of tax-dodgers who may want to cycle there rather than all the people who petitioned against the charges? We hope not!

Finally, "sheep-like". Again, that could equally well be applied to most of the people who write to him complaining about tax-dodging cyclists being in the way on the roads or on the pavements. That's the same class of insult as one of the two groups on the Evening Post comment pages calling the other lot "inflexible and narrow minded". No, you don't want to go there.

Elf-King App Rees does like those emails complaining about cyclists, so feel free to contact him on such topics, or where he stands on the battle of Mordor.

While we know he doesn't accept emails from cyclists outside the Elf Kingdom of Long Ashton, we don't yet know if he loves getting message from outside the Shire congratulating him on being the first Evening Post commenter to get radio time on a regional station listened two by a double-digit audience!

N Somerset school parking

This is Northleaze primary school, long ashton. There is a road between this school use only car park and the school, but there is a zebra crossing. This gives the kids the walking to school experience without the parents schedule being too badly disrupted by having to walk the kids to school and then run home to drive to work.

Why doesn't anywhere in Bristol have decent parent parking like this?