Etape Caledonia Sabotaged

[Will1985]

I wonder what would happen if a similar act was perpetrated in Monaco this weekend?!? It's a similar situation where the roads are closed for about 6 hours each on Thursday, Saturday and Sunday, once a year.

 

[rossh]

I wonder what would happen if a similar act was perpetrated in Monaco this weekend?!? It's a similar situation where the roads are closed for about 6 hours each on Thursday, Saturday and Sunday, once a year.

I'm not against the Monaco Grand Prix, I just think it would be better if they had it on open roads.

PS Buy some gifts and chocolate.

 

[gadgetmind]

Anyone know of a list of anti-event campaigners?

From what I read, no-one really seems to be anti-event, just anti the roads being closed for hours at a time. Various alternatives to closure were suggested, but all were rejected. I suspect they were rejected as the closed-road nature was part of the initial concept and no-one wanted to part with what they saw as their USP.

I'm a keen cyclist, and very much being cyclists rights. But I really do think it's important that everyone tries to understand the POV of others, and a key part of this is everyone being prepared to share key resources such as roads.

The locals seemed to be prepared to share their roads with cyclists, but the organisers of the event weren't prepared to share with locals and insisted on closure. What's so wrong about the tack incident is that it mostly affected those taking part in the event whereas it's the obstinacy of the event organisers that's driven the wedge between locals and cyclists.

Who knows where it will end? I hope that dialog over the coming year can find common ground and find a solution that works for all parties.

Ian

 

[Waspie]

The locals seemed to be prepared to share their roads with cyclists, but the organisers of the event weren't prepared to share with locals and insisted on closure.

I can understand why some people are irritated at the road closures but I find it difficult to see why the feelings go much further than irritation. The road I live is closed for 5 and a half hours this Sunday for the Edinburgh Marathon, I don't run in the marathon but I am quite happy to be a little inconvenienced so thousands of people can enjoy a great event. (I realise shutting a rural road is a little different from shutting urban roads)

I don't think closing a road for 4 hours in a year could really be seen as not 'sharing' the road. I'm sure roads are shut for longer over a year due to crashes etc.

Anyway, I'm not sure how safe it would be to keep the narrower roads open for motor vehicles given the volume of cyclists on some parts of the course the other week.

 

[adscrim]

But I really do think it's important that everyone tries to understand the POV of others, and a key part of this is everyone being prepared to share key resources such as roads.

I still don't understand why the closed road solution can't work for everyone. What is there that need to be done so badly on a specific day that can't be accomodated? Locals have 8-12 months notice of when the roads will be closed for half a day.

If emergency assistance was needed the road closure wouldn't stop it. I was passed easily by ambulances on two occassions and all those around me got out of the way in an appropriate manner.

Church services - parishioners could walk or cycle or indeed (as I believe happened at one church) the service could be moved to a later time.

Business losses - the event not only brings people into the area on the weekend, it brings them in weeks and months before the event. I myself passed through the area on my bike specifically becasue of the event, and stopped to eat in Aberfeldy. Our staff day out is at Highland Safari this year, after someone here was alerted to their presence at last years event.

Also, IMO, the event is too large to be held on open roads. Cars travelling in the same direction as the course would be forced to travel at the speed of the cyclist due to the number of them in the road leading to overtaking being largely unsafe. The likelyhood of this leading the dangerous overtaking is high and best avoided.

 

[Crackle]

From what I read, no-one really seems to be anti-event, just anti the roads being closed for hours at a time. Various alternatives to closure were suggested, but all were rejected. I suspect they were rejected as the closed-road nature was part of the initial concept and no-one wanted to part with what they saw as their USP.

I'm a keen cyclist, and very much being cyclists rights. But I really do think it's important that everyone tries to understand the POV of others, and a key part of this is everyone being prepared to share key resources such as roads.

The locals seemed to be prepared to share their roads with cyclists, but the organisers of the event weren't prepared to share with locals and insisted on closure. What's so wrong about the tack incident is that it mostly affected those taking part in the event whereas it's the obstinacy of the event organisers that's driven the wedge between locals and cyclists.

Who knows where it will end? I hope that dialog over the coming year can find common ground and find a solution that works for all parties.

Ian

The solution is stay in for 3 or 4 hours. Where I lived in the highlands there was a yearly event on the one singletrack road, it was left open. A journey that took 20 mins took 2 hours with the event running. Only a moron would want to use the road at that time, far better to sit in the garden with a beer and watch it all go past. It's really not hard. I've no sympathy at all with that kind of local feeling, it's not like they're special or anything. Events happen everywhere, embrace them.

 

[Waspie]

Events happen everywhere, embrace them.

Couldn't agree more.

Except when they close the main road near my house on a Friday evening for a fancy dress parade and I'm faced with a two mile dash from the bus following a few post work beers.

There should be special contingency plans for forgetful drunk people with full bladders.

 

[HLaB]

The locals seemed to be prepared to share their roads with cyclists, but the organisers of the event weren't prepared to share with locals and insisted on closure.

Some of the roads could be shared but with 3,500 cyclists most of the roads would not be suitable. Its also 90% of the attraction of the event cyclist know they will be safer. There was a trajic article posted here recently where a TTrialer on open roads was knocked off his bike and killed.

Church services - parishioners could walk or cycle or indeed (as I believe happened at one church, the service could be moved.

I read one comment in a paper from one of the folks that lived along one of the closed roads, stating how good the Etape folk had treated her and her friends, running a special bus for them and treating them to breakfast in a hotel.

 

[gillan]

have acre (maybe facilitated by the Council?) not looked at experiences elsewhere i.e. mainland europe, where cycling events like close roads on a far more frequent basis

they could share experiences and learn way to acomodate the event with little disruption to their own lives and probably even a benefit (isn't this what 'twinning' was meant to acheive?)

i do have a slight beef with them (acre) insofar as the event is held on roads which are paid for by the taxpayer. Remote roads are far more expenisve to maintain for far fewer users. In effect a nice rural lifestyle is made affordable through the redistributive nature of the tax system

sometimes those that raise the taxes require some payback, e.g. a road closure order. If acre want an exclusive say as to what happens to the road, maybe they should pay for it themselves....

this is all that has happened here and only for 4 hours or so a year, with plenty of notice and to the benefit of up to £1m injection of money into the local economy

 

[asterix]

..I've no sympathy at all with that kind of local feeling, it's not like they're special or anything. Events happen everywhere, embrace them.

Yup, having lived for many (many) years near York's racecourse we are well used to organising life around the hoards of racegoers, some drunken on racedays. It's all part of life's etc, and so forth.

 

[Noodley]

From what I read, no-one really seems to be anti-event, just anti the roads being closed for hours at a time.

That is the same as being anti-event. "Hours at a time" - surely you mean "for a few hours once a year"?

 

[gadgetmind]

That is the same as being anti-event

No, it really isn't. The local residents and businesses seem to have made it very clear that they are happy for the event to go ahead but want a few tweaks made. These tweaks would greatly reduce the negative social and economic impact of the event but wouldn't affect the enjoyment or fund raising aspects.

Take a look at the Great Yorkshire Bike Ride. Similar length, over 1500 people taking part, similar amounts (per head) raised for charity, but other road users aren't banned from the roads, so it receives pretty much universal support.

I don't live there, and have no intention of taking part, so I don't really have any great reason to pick "one side" or another. I just wish that the organisers would consider being a wee bit more understanding and flexible as there wouldn't really then be sides to pick.

Ian

 

[Noodley]

No, it really isn't. The local residents and businesses seem to have made it very clear that they are happy for the event to go ahead but want a few tweaks made.

Wrong again. A very few people who live locally are not happy - the majority are. The few cannot seem to get their head around the need for the roads to be closed for this event to be a success; as it would appear you can't. The USP of this event is closed roads. No closed roads = it's just not going to happen. So anti-closed roads = anti-event.

 

[Noodley]

Take a look at the Great Yorkshire Bike Ride. Similar length, over 1500 people taking part, similar amounts (per head) raised for charity, but other road users aren't banned from the roads, so it receives pretty much universal support.

Okay I took a look. Not much similarity there at all really. 2000 less riders, organised by the CTC as a 'bike ride' not a sportive, from reading the 2008 report it would appear there were concerns raised about 2/3 riders riding abreast leadinf to impatience and potential accidents, plenty of alternative roads available....

 

[gavintc]

Wrong again. A very few people who live locally are not happy - the majority are. The few cannot seem to get their head around the need for the roads to be closed for this event to be a success; as it would appear you can't. The USP of this event is closed roads. No closed roads = it's just not going to happen. So anti-closed roads = anti-event.

You are spot on Noodley. Some of route's roads are exceptionally narrow and would not take ONE car and ANY cyclists - single track with passing places. this event could not be run on the current roads without being a closed road event - just too dangerous.