Sheff Council - Shalesmoor Road Layout

[Tony 10]

1 minute ago, ECCOnoob said:

You first.  

 

Come on. Money where your mouth is, since you starting beating this old drum and clearly making wild assumptions about some tragic accident to further your obvious agenda.

 

It's been pointed out that clearly it is not possible to avoid every single potential risk of a cyclist crossing a live traffic junction and potentially coming into collision with another vehicle. It is clearly not feasible to apply completely segregated cycling infrastructure across every single part of the road network. It is clearly obvious that there has to be some compromise on the roads which are used by both cyclists and other vehicles.

 

So go on, give some good reasons as to why exactly cyclists should have priority over other road users.  Why should motorised vehicles be subjected to a seemingly increasing number of heavy restrictions, partial or entire road closures, detours, road narrowing or other such measures which obviously cause significant inconvenience just for the benefit of cyclists. 

 

Why should they get the preferential treatment?

I would have thought it is perfectly clear that I believe my commute in the car is no more important that your commute on your bike.  Only a Grade A Berk would think that cyclists have preferential treatment and I hope we can both agree that you aren't a Grade A Berk. 

 

So, over to you, why should motorised commuters should be prioritised over bicycle commuters? 

[Mr Bloke 1,445]

5 minutes ago, Tony said:

You seem to be struggling for an answer but I'll wait in the hope that you've got a good one.    

 

The question was: Why should motorised commuters should be prioritised over bicycle commuters? 

Hmmm...

It's certainly a difficult one to answer!

 

Which category do electric bikes fall into please, Mr Tony?

[Tony 10]

3 minutes ago, HeHasRisen said:

"I can't believe there isn't a special cycle lane on the M1 motorway"

That's a very fair question. Why isn't there a special cycle lane on every motorway? It sounds like a very good idea that you have just hit on.

[HeHasRisen 3,399]

Now you are being deliberately obtuse

 

[onewheeldave 22]

45 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

Yes but to do that, a perfectly legal access road leading to a specific location would have to be closed to vehicles.

 

 

Which was the case during the time the bounderied cycle path was in place.

46 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

 

 

Thus the point is,  unless we are going to close every single potential Junction where cyclist might crossover ( which is simply ridiculous) - this very same type of accident could have happened in a million other locations just as easily.

 

 

No-one's arguing for closing 'every single potential Junction.....'- like I said, this particular stretch of road is especially unsafe for cyclists.

48 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

 

 

Notwithstanding all this endless tit-for-tat argument, nobody has still proven categorically that the truck was at fault.  Whose to say the injured cyclist wasn't to blame.

No one is saying they weren't. It's just irrelevant to Tonys post, as, if the old path had remained in place this accident couldn't have happened, even if the cyclist was to blame in this instance.

[alchemist 37]

48 minutes ago, Tony said:

Why should motorised commuters should be prioritised over bicycle commuters? 

Because there is more of them?  Its a thing in life that the balance is towards the majority

[Tony 10]

And it didn't happen at any one of a million other locations. It happened at one which was previously safe, that's been made deadly by Sheffield City Council. 

[HeHasRisen 3,399]

Deadly? Has the person in hospital died since the Tweet a few pages back was posted?

[onewheeldave 22]

47 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

Why should bicycle commuters?

1. they don't pullute

2. the more people cycle the less the load on the NHS to manage chronic lifetime diseases caused by inactivity

3. currently the balance is way too skewed to motorists- prioritising the safety of cyclists is simply correcting an existing imbalance.

[Tony 10]

3 minutes ago, alchemist said:

Because there is more of them?  Its a thing in life that the balance is towards the majority

Whooaa! I'm not letting you have that one @alchemist  There are far more pedestrians than motorists and they get even less priority than cyclists! 

 

 

Come on, have another go. It's okay to agree with a pro-cycling argument you know, your knob won't fall off  if you do  

Edited September 24, 2021 by Tony

[onewheeldave 22]

24 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

 

 

It's been pointed out that clearly it is not possible to avoid every single potential risk of a cyclist crossing a live traffic junction and potentially coming into collision with another vehicle. It is clearly not feasible to apply completely segregated cycling infrastructure across every single part of the road network. It is clearly obvious that there has to be some compromise on the roads which are used by both cyclists and other vehicles.

 

 

And it has been pointed out that that is a strawman 'argument' as no-one is suggesting it is possible to 'avoid every single potential risk of a cyclist......'  or to 'apply completely segregated cycling infrastructure across every single part of the road network'.

 

Clearly, in the case of especially dangerous roads like this one, it is feasable to put a proper cycle lane in place [the fact it was in place for several months should indicate that it is possible].

[ECCOnoob 1,040]

1 minute ago, Tony said:

I would have thought it is perfectly clear that I believe my commute in the car is no more important that your commute on your bike.  Only a Grade A Berk would think that cyclists have preferential treatment and I hope we can both agree that you aren't a Grade A Berk. 

 

So, over to you, why should motorised commuters should be prioritised over bicycle commuters? 

What you mean like closing off an entire road junction causing drivers to detour and reducing what was an arterial dual carriageway route from the city centre into a trundling single carriageway.

 

That in my eyes is clear inconvenience to motorists and giving a favourable position to cyclists.  In other words, preferential treatment.

 

Without any such stupid installation of the temporary cycle lane both vehicle drivers and cyclists can still freely travel on it, use it and they could both still have equal access the various side roads.

 

Do you get the point yet?