# a metre matters



## PpPete (10 Jan 2014)

I see Richie Porte has endorsed this Aussie campaign 
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/richie-porte-pledges-support-for-amy-gillet-foundation

What do folks here think of a mandatory passing distance?


----------



## coffeejo (10 Jan 2014)

Absolutely impossible on some of the rural lanes round here. *shrugs*


----------



## Ganymede (10 Jan 2014)

Would love it. I've just come back from France and the 1.5m signs warmed the cockles (not that anyone was actually cycling in the Alps in a blizzard...).


----------



## Ganymede (10 Jan 2014)

coffeejo said:


> Absolutely impossible on some of the rural lanes round here. *shrugs*



I've got some one-lane roads round my way too - but they are exceptions in a lot of ways. But any road which is wider than 1 car + 1m - which is most roads - pretty much qualify.


----------



## doug (10 Jan 2014)

coffeejo said:


> Absolutely impossible on some of the rural lanes round here. *shrugs*



Not impossible - if the driver cannot give at least 1metre between their vehicle and the cyclists, then they must not overtake.

Getting it enforced may be impossible though


----------



## cosmicbike (10 Jan 2014)

Whilst I like the idea, the numpty's that give us 6 inches at the moment will believe it doesn't apply to them, since we don't pay road tax....


----------



## Linford (10 Jan 2014)

The roads in the UK are pretty much all too narrow.
My local commute has people riding on the wrong side of the solid white line (which is about 12" from the grass verge. they occasionally wobble out of that position for a drain. the cars/HGV's/Buses/Etc just usually blast past instead of waiting for a gap in the oncoming traffic.
The road needs to be widened by at least 2 metres on each side with a strip wide enough for cyclists to use it safely. I take a 2 mile mile detour when cycle commuting to avoid it (about 3/4 mile long). It is a very busy road


----------



## welsh dragon (10 Jan 2014)

People around here are gennerally very good about passing cyclists mainly because everyone knows everyone and give plenty of room. However, during the holiday season that all changes. People from the cities are bloody awful. We cant wait for them to go back home.


----------



## Ganymede (10 Jan 2014)

I think the putting up of signs like those in France could influence the general mindset. As welsh dragon says, most people are pretty good but if asked might not really know what the ideal is. "give 1m passing room or do not pass" + pic of bike could be a useful as a national memo?


----------



## ScotiaLass (10 Jan 2014)

I had a close call yesterday.
Some old git in a small Nissan Micra decided rather than wait 10 seconds, he would squeeze by me on the section of road which is narrowed and has bollards to reduce speeding. He almost clipped me!
I shouted something (unrepeatable here 'cos I is a lady) and gave him a sign which isn't in the Highway Code.
I felt better.


----------



## Spinney (10 Jan 2014)

What about passing in opposite directions? _Both _slowing right down is the only option there.


----------



## coffeejo (10 Jan 2014)

doug said:


> Not impossible - if the driver cannot give at least 1metre between their vehicle and the cyclists, then they must not overtake.
> 
> Getting it enforced may be impossible though


I would absolutely hate to cycle for 5 miles with a line of traffic behind me moving at 10-12mph (and you can reduce that to 3mph on some of the hills round here) because they're not allowed to overtake. I'd much rather positive education to encourage respectful road use and sharing rather than a blanket ban because it makes a good soundbite.


----------



## doug (10 Jan 2014)

coffeejo said:


> I would absolutely hate to cycle for 5 miles with a line of traffic behind me moving at 10-12mph (and you can reduce that to 3mph on some of the hills round here) because they're not allowed to overtake. I'd much rather positive education to encourage respectful road use and sharing rather than a blanket ban because it makes a good soundbite.



What I do is pull off the road when feasible - much rather that than them try to squeeze through when there isn't reasonable room


----------



## coffeejo (10 Jan 2014)

And this is why I don't think the campaign is at all logical as it's quite likely that you and I have differing opinions as to what constitutes "reasonable". (And yes, for me it varies depending on the type of road and the speed of the pass - someone squeezing past me at 5mph on a narrow road is fine; the same pass at speed is not, whether on that road or a major one.)

Edit: if the vehicle takes up the whole width of the road, I too will leap into the hedge to avoid getting squashed toes. Always great entertainment when thorns are involved.


----------



## Biddy Walton (10 Jan 2014)

Even if a metre/a car's width cannot be enforced, planting the idea in a driver's brain has got to be a good thing. Most drivers have no idea what it feels like to experience a close pass. Vague pronouncements of 'give cyclists space' do not help. They think they are giving enough space! 
Having to slow down assess if they can give that metre (+) will help our experiences on the road.
There is a Facebook page to disperse this message. Other 'positive shareable messages' coming soon too. Please do check out the page at https://www.facebook.com/aMetreMattersUK . It'd be great to have you 'Like' and 'share' the page and posts.


----------



## coffeejo (10 Jan 2014)

User13710 said:


> Doesn't the Highway Code recommend that slow-moving traffic (of any kind presumably) should pull over occasionally and let built-up tailbacks disperse? I know horseboxes and trailers are encouraged to do this, as well as tractors and combine harvesters etc. Give and take on both sides?


Oh I agree completely, and I do* but I can see the end result being a situation where cyclists have to pull over to let every single car pass if cars aren't allowed to overtake whilst we're still moving. In other words, I think such a law would create more problems than it seeks to solve, especially since the people most likely to do a close pass on major roads are the least likely to obey a specific law.

(* If I don't feel it's safe for an overtake / for me to pull over, I'll ride in the middle of the lane and pull over at the safest possible point. If the driver's hesitant and I'm fine with being overtaken, I'll encourage them past.)


----------



## coffeejo (10 Jan 2014)

User13710 said:


> All very good arguments for a code of behaviour rather than a new 'law'.


Indeed.


----------



## Biddy Walton (10 Jan 2014)

coffeejo said:


> Indeed.


or a bumper sticker?


----------



## young Ed (10 Jan 2014)

cosmicbike said:


> Whilst I like the idea, the numpty's that give us 6 inches at the moment will believe it doesn't apply to them, since we don't pay road tax....


it's emissions tax and i WOULD pay my £000.00 just to feel smug but they won't let me?
and i know what you mean by those that try to knock your quick release to tighten it for you!
but i do find so long as the motorists can see you they are more careful and considerate in the dark! found that out today on my first ride in the dark! 
Cheers Ed


----------



## Shut Up Legs (11 Jan 2014)

Even if a mandatory passing clearance law is created here (Queensland may have one in a few months), I agree it will be difficult to enforce. But the very fact that the law exists will probably be enough to reduce the number of close overtakes (well, that's my optimistic prediction, anyway) .


----------



## Glow worm (11 Jan 2014)

Saw someone on British TV yesterday saying 50 centimeters was too close. I'd no idea what 50 centimeters is in English so had to look it up. Apparently it's less than 2 foot which is, yes, definately way too close.


----------



## oldstrath (25 Jan 2014)

Linford said:


> The roads in the UK are pretty much all too narrow.
> My local commute has people riding on the wrong side of the solid white line (which is about 12" from the grass verge. they occasionally wobble out of that position for a drain. the cars/HGV's/Buses/Etc just usually blast past instead of waiting for a gap in the oncoming traffic.
> The road needs to be widened by at least 2 metres on each side with a strip wide enough for cyclists to use it safely. I take a 2 mile mile detour when cycle commuting to avoid it (about 3/4 mile long). It is a very busy road




Or the motorists need to learn patience. A properly enforced passing distance of 1.5 m would compel them to overtake only where genuinely safe, otherwise wait. Don't really see why anyone should have a problem. On a single-track road they wait for a passing place. They have to do it with tractors, don't really see why it's a big deal with bikes.

Proper enforcement would, of course, be the challenge.


----------



## Linford (25 Jan 2014)

oldstrath said:


> Or the motorists need to learn patience. A properly enforced passing distance of 1.5 m would compel them to overtake only where genuinely safe, otherwise wait. Don't really see why anyone should have a problem. On a single-track road they wait for a passing place. They have to do it with tractors, don't really see why it's a big deal with bikes.
> 
> Proper enforcement would, of course, be the challenge.



This is one of the busiest roads into a town with a population of 120,0000. The infrastructure needs upgrading to accommodate all who need to use it.


----------



## oldstrath (25 Jan 2014)

Linford said:


> This is one of the busiest roads into a town with a population of 120,0000. The infrastructure needs upgrading to accommodate all who need to use it.



Surely upgrading the infrastructure would be the best solution, but drivers in other EU countries cope with showing patience. Not killing people would seem more important than saving one or two minutes.


----------



## Linford (25 Jan 2014)

oldstrath said:


> Surely upgrading the infrastructure would be the best solution, but drivers in other EU countries cope with showing patience. Not killing people would seem more important than saving one or two minutes.



Drivers do already show patience. I see this every day I use it be that by car, motorbike....or when I do choose to cycle it. 
This manifests itself by the very long line of traffic forming behind a cyclist every time they use it...which does very little for cyclist/driver relations, increases pollution for the cyclists as every vehicle has to give it a big boot as they pass (poor for particulates), and means that the cyclists are given the tag of slow moving obstacles in an NSL.
What you are doing is taking the onus away from the people who manage the road network, and making that everyone else's problem.

I cycled in Spain a couple of months ago and they have a nice wide strip on each side of the road separated by a solid white line which you can comfortably ride in. I've seen this setup in the mainland, in the Canaries, the Balearic islands and also in Italy. I've also seen it in the States. 

The problem seems to be that you are more than happy to settle for the second rate road network which we pay handsomely for, and then blame everyone else for the lack of suitable capacity for the various different modes.....


----------



## Platinum (10 Feb 2014)

The problem with the majority of British roads is that they're the same medieval roads winding around the fields, going right through every little village, just with a layer of tarmac on top. Bad for cycling, bad for driving, bad for local residents. Newer roads of the wide, straight, dual carriageway nature, better for driving, are completely hostile to cycling, at least for the normal person.

Even the cycle lanes round here are just old medieval pathways. One crappy cycle path round here is proudly displayed on maps and websites, and also goes past a Historic Scotland towerhouse so should be expected to be usable at the very least, perhaps a nice day out with the family, but I had to email the council about it because I was either climbing over boulders or up to my ankles in frog spawn! (I was fobbed off.) Then I noticed the small print at the bottom of the map said the resource they used in preparing it was the 1860 OS map. Says everything.


----------



## Cubist (10 Feb 2014)

The forum is littered with posts about the police unable or unwilling to enforce mobile phone use and due care offences, including non-injury collisions, so until they are given sufficient resources to tackle current legislation, the creation of new offences would be pointless. Far better to engage in a more concerted campaign of mutual respect and safe, courteous conduct on the roads by all users.


----------



## jefmcg (10 Feb 2014)

It seems that it would have value, even if it was not enforced routinely. It would make it clear to drivers what they should do, it would be a slam dunk conviction to anyone who struck a cyclist while passing, and would help a cyclist's insurance claims.

In fact, even with the best will in the world, I think it would be a hard policy to enforce, as how would you prove it? In that respect it's similar to the law on opening a car door: no one gets a ticket for that unless they hit someone, but it's still a useful law.

(When I got my drivers licence in Australia, new drivers were not allowed to drink for the first 2 years of driving. I believe it was never enforced directly, but a young driver - typically new to alcohol too - didn't have to make guesses about how much they'd drunk, or if they were impaired. "No thanks, I'm driving" and no one would argue with you. If you were stupid enough to drink more than the general limit, then you'd get charged with both being over .05 and .00.)


----------



## Jody (14 Feb 2014)

Linford said:


> The roads in the UK are pretty much all too narrow.



It bugs me when you have an adequate size road but councils treble the width of the pavement and then make the road narrow. Must be with a view to slowing traffic down but in reality makes the roads more dangerous. It may just be 
more prevalent in South Yorkshire


----------



## jefmcg (14 Feb 2014)

Jody said:


> It bugs me when you have an adequate size road but councils treble the width of the pavement and then make the road narrow. Must be with a view to slowing traffic down but in reality makes the roads more dangerous. It may just be
> more prevalent in South Yorkshire


Happening on twickenham high street, as we speak


----------



## StuartG (14 Feb 2014)

Jody said:


> It bugs me when you have an adequate size road but councils treble the width of the pavement and then make the road narrow. Must be with a view to slowing traffic down but in reality makes the roads more dangerous. It may just be more prevalent in South Yorkshire


Pedestrians may disagree with you. There are more of them than cyclists and, hopefully, will continue to be so. Remember the pyramid.


----------



## theclaud (14 Feb 2014)

Jody said:


> It bugs me when you have an adequate size road but councils treble the width of the pavement and then make the road narrow. Must be with a view to slowing traffic down but in reality makes the roads more dangerous. It may just be
> more prevalent in South Yorkshire


How is taking taking space from motor vehicles to give it to pedestrians a bad thing?


----------



## Jody (14 Feb 2014)

StuartG said:


> Pedestrians may disagree with you. There are more of them than cyclists and, hopefully, will continue to be so. Remember the pyramid.



Maybe fine in London town. But in a little village where there are few people walking let alone shopping it kind of takes the p*** to see council money spent like that.

Don't get me wrong I am not anti pedestrian, or anti car or cyclist. But the main reason doesn't seem to be an increase pedestrians but used to make sure cars have to wait behind buses or trams.


----------



## Markymark (14 Feb 2014)

Jody said:


> But the main reason doesn't seem to be an increase pedestrians but used to make sure cars have to wait behind buses or trams.


....by preventing dangerous overtakes?


----------



## StuartG (14 Feb 2014)

Jody said:


> Maybe fine in London town. But in a little village where there are few people walking let alone shopping it kind of takes the p*** to see council money spent like that.


Oh I see, they don't have prams, kids or invalid carriages. How lucky you are.
Or is it they feel it safer to go by car?
I've lived down a country lane in mid Wales so I DO know what it is like without adequate footpaths.


----------



## Jody (14 Feb 2014)

StuartG said:


> I've lived down a country lane in mid Wales so I DO know what it is like without adequate footpaths.



It wasn't inadequate before and now it is over 20ft wide. Bit overkill for a pram you reckon? If they cared so much about pedestrians then they would widen the inadequate foot path over the bridge leading out of the village. Which isn't wide enough for a pram (approximately 18") and there is only one route out by foot.


----------



## Jody (14 Feb 2014)

0-markymark-0 said:


> ....by preventing dangerous overtakes?



No, to reduce the amount of time a bus has to sit in traffic. Nothing to do with dangerous overtaking.


----------



## Roadrider48 (15 Feb 2014)

A metre isn't very much atall. Why any motorist can't manage that is beyond me.
Considering I live in Central London, I have to say that most days all is good with the car/bike thing. But you do get the occasional tosser who sees cyclists as an inconvenience, and they have the "must pass" attitude wherever they are and whatever the road conditions say.


----------

