Login Register
 °

Tailbacks after cyclist injured on slip road to A386

By This is Devon  |  Posted: September 17, 2012

Accident1
Comments (1)

A cyclist and a car collided on a busy route in Plymouth this morning causing huge tailbacks.

Police and paramedics were called to Meavy Way near Tavistock Road after the crash at 8:03am.

Police say a green Renault Clio and a cyclist collided near the opticians on Meavy Way slip road heading northbound.

The incident caused very heavy delays with rush hour motorists stuck in traffic as far back as Outland Road.

A police spokeswoman said: "Early reports indicate the cyclist, a 46-year-old man, has suffered cuts and bruises in the collision."

His injuries are not thought to be life threatening or life changing.

Read more from Western Morning News

Do you have something to say? Leave your comment here...

max 4000 characters
  • Watawally  |  April 30 2014, 2:07PM

    My guess is, the motorist caused the accident.

    |   1
  • blogtodi  |  September 20 2012, 10:26PM

    Yes, the drivers are charged and fined. The riders die. What price is that? An empty road is like a dry river bed...they don't happen often. It's what's in, or on, them that do the damage. Campaigns do not alter human nature. We are what we are and it seems, some monkeys behind the wheels of cars and lorries will always be intolerant drivers. The inexperienced ones know it all. It's easy to know what we should be doing. The problem is enforcing it. And that goes for cyclists too if there is ever to be any mutual respect.

    |   1
  • jackplane  |  September 20 2012, 7:48PM

    fact 88 cycle riders have been killed in england this year , look at the report on line and see how many drivers of cars ,lorrys , buses etc have been charged a very large ammount so point proved

    |   3
  • adyeades  |  September 20 2012, 7:14PM

    @blogtodi It looks as though you are right, we'll have to agree to disagree but I will make the following points on what you have said: '…drivers have to change the way they drive…'. No they don't, they simply need to drive the way they were taught to, with safety in mind and consideration to all road users whether reciprocated or not. (two 'wrongs' don't make a 'right') '…they have not got a solution for the increase in daily traffic…' There is no simple solution to this. Building more or wider roads to accommodate the increase just isn't sustainable. Efforts have to be made to reduce traffic by other means, and enticing people to use alternatives such as cycling, is a very viable option. '…cyclists are made to understand the rules and their responsibilities and start riding within the law.' I totally agree! I've already made this point on at least one occasion. It really frustrates me when I see other cyclists not doing this as it only adds fuel to your fire. 'It's like saying rivers aren't dangerous…' It just isn't the similar analogy at all, is it? Fast flowing, deep water with strong currents and steep banks… Of course rivers are dangerous! Why else is angling the most dangerous sport there is? An empty road, on the other hand, is a stable surface that doesn't move and you can't drown in so how can saying that 'roads are not dangerous' be considered 'churlish? 'People are getting killed, whether by their own stupidity or a driver's lack of attention; again, the results the same.' Yes, the end result is the same but if both motorists and cyclists were more aware of each other and respected each other as valid road users, the number of deaths and injuries would be significantly reduced. That's totally my point. 'Maybe, in say 30 years, the culture will change…' While I appreciate that people's attitudes, both motorists and cyclists, won't change overnight but I'd like to think we can do better than 30 years! 'There is a new campaign on the way called 'THINK!' aimed at drivers.' Yes there is. I've just visited the website. The campaign is aimed at both motorists and cyclists with advice for both on how to stay safe and 'look out for each other' on the road. This is the url: http://tinyurl.com/8vg6hpu I sincerely hope cyclists, as well as motorists heed this advice. This web based campaign looks like 'a small start' of an educational campaign I lobbied my MP for, but hey! Here it is! There will always be deaths amongst cyclists on the road just as there will always be deaths amongst motorists. The only real way these can be reduced is by looking at how each of us conducts our business on the road whether we drive or ride.

    |   4
  • blogtodi  |  September 20 2012, 4:08PM

    @ adyeades - Well, I think we agree to disagree. For such a small minority cyclists get a lot of publicity for the wrong reasons. That drivers have to change the way they drive to accommodate people who want to cycle on the road is ludicrous. It will never happen in the short term. All the rules in the Highway Code are observed by most drivers, but sadly not many cyclists. The government are encouraging cyclists, that's not in doubt, but maybe that's because they have not got a solution for the increase in of daily traffic. It's a way of hiding their lack of funds. By providing subsidies and urging people to start using a cycle on main roads throughout the country they are as guilty for the increased deaths as anyone. I agree that there are many bad drivers around but considering the percentages, cyclists far outweigh them when it comes to inconsiderate road use. I can only hope that cyclists are made to understand the rules and their responsibilities and start riding within the law. Saying roads are not dangerous is also churlish. It's like saying rivers aren't dangerous, just the water. Whatever the semantics, the results are the same. People are getting killed, whether by their own stupidity or a driver's lack of attention; again, the results the same. Maybe, in say 30 years, the culture will change and there will better conditions for cyclists; cycle routes and more mutual consideration, but until then there will more deaths. And it is such a waste. There is a new campaign on the way called 'THINK!' aimed at drivers. I hope that cyclists take heed too.

    |   -5
  • adyeades  |  September 20 2012, 3:31PM

    @blogtodi Thanks for your input. Your opinion is a valid one. My categorisation is based on experience yes and I stand by it. It's should also be taken into consideration that we only remember the wrong-doers on the road and in life in general. After all, when was the last time a motorists said 'Wow! Look at that cyclist; they really know what they're doing...'? Same for cyclist and I do this also. Moan about the @*#$ who cut me off etc but don't tend to remember the good drivers who left plenty of room when passing. You say any cyclist will 'inevitably break the law' but isn't the same true for most motorists. I'm by no means perfect and will openly admit it. Can you? You make several references to cyclist riding on pavements as an example of law breaking, but wait! Aren't you the one who'd see cyclists excluded from the road altogether? So, where exactly, in your fantasy world, are we allowed to cycle? In the @#$& sky? And you talk to me about absurdity! The government is doing all it can it entice people from their cars in favour of bicycles. They're even giving people 'free money' to buy such machines! So, do you really think the same government will see cyclists excluded from our roads? No! And, anyone who thinks that it will happen is delusional. Cyclists will never be excluded from the highways so get used to that fact and get used to their presence. When you encounter one on the road, hope that they don't do anything silly but always be on your guard in case they do. That's exactly how I treat motorists when I'm cycling. Hell, I even wave to those waiting at junctions as I pass to say 'Hey! Thanks for NOT running me over!' When you talk about identifying drivers and providing proof of fault before 'offering' 'attitude training' or 're-educating', I guess you haven't spent too much time on the YouTube website then. As an increasing number of motorists, motorcyclists and cyclists are utilising portable video technology to record their journeys in a hope that the footage will vindicate them of wrong-doing in the event of a Road Traffic Collision, they are also uploading footage of the wrong-doings of others to YouTube. Just search for 'bad driving uk' and all will be revealed. I'm told some insurers are now searching for would-be clients' registrations on YouTube before offering them a policy. When you talk about roads being dangerous, I'll reiterate just for you. Roads are not dangerous. Sound bizarre I know but it's true. A Road is incapable of jumping up and hitting people. People using roads without consideration for all road users are dangerous and they are the ones who should be excluded, not cyclists. Segregation is not the answer, education and understanding is. And for those who fail to respond to education, exclusion! Simples!

    |   6
  • blogtodi  |  September 20 2012, 9:21AM

    @adyeades - I'm guessing you have based your categories on observation and not reliable statistics. Saying that your group C are a minority for cyclists, I feel is miscalculated. Given that there are only a small percentage of bikers on the road, they do seem to have a large influence. From what I have seen, if you watch a biker for more than a mile or so they will inevitably break the rules; mount the pavement to get past a set of red lights, pull out from a parked vehicle without looking behind or signalling, not signalling at all, swerving in and out of lanes, overtaking on the left past a left turn junction without looking, riding across pedestrian crossings, riding two abreast on busy roads, taking shortcuts on footpaths through residential estates...the list goes on. These are not a minority of bikers. They do it, of course, because they can. They feel the bike gives them the opportunity to save time, distance and energy. But it isn't saving their lives in the long run. Again I will reiterate that drivers are no better but have more protection when things go wrong. To say some drivers need 'attitude training' or 're-educating' is absurd. You have to identify those drivers, prove a fault with there driving and provide retraining? The roads are a dangerous place for vulnerable users. Segregation is the only way for cyclists to remain safe. And that should not include shared paths; pedestrians feel the same about bikers as bikers feel about drivers. That's something bikers should think carefully about the next time a pedestrian 'gets in the way'.

    |   -12
  • adyeades  |  September 19 2012, 7:27PM

    This article has the potential to blow this Motorist/Cyclist debate wide open. I've read comments on both here and the 'Tailbacks after cyclist injured on slip road to A386' article and I can honestly say it comes down to this. Motorists are split into one of the following categories with regard to cyclists: A) Those who understand what it must be like to ride a bike in a busy city. Understanding the additional hazards cyclist face and understand why experienced cyclists take certain actions in traffic to safeguard themselves. They'll always give them the room they need with the mutual respect they deserve as valid road users. B) Those who don't really understand what it's like but are happy to give cyclists the room they need. C) Those who just don't care and want EVERYONE else out of their way so that they can get to where they want to quickly without any regard for any other road user, regardless of how many wheels there are on their machine. Cyclists, on the other hand, fall into the following categories: A) Those who always cycle diligently, courteously and always in accordance with the Road Traffic Act and Highway Code. These cyclists don't jump road lights, cycle on pavements and always signal their intentions when changing lanes, turning etc. They are fully aware of additional hazards in different traffic situations and will adopt a correct and safe road position appropriate for the situation. These cyclists are also aware of which cycle facilities are useful and which are dangerous together with when and when not to use them. B) Those that, while cycling within the code, could be more aware of different hazards and how to negotiate them safely by adopting the correct position in the road (ie. NOT in the gutter) and thus do better to safeguard themselves. C) Those that cycle with complete disregard for all Traffic Regulations and other road users. These are the ones you see running reds, not stopping at crossings, cycling on pavements or jumping from pavement to carriageway without even looking. Luckily, motorists and cyclists in Category 'C' are a small minority. These are the ones who need 're-educating' or 'attitude re-adjustment'. Unfortunately, Category 'A' is also a minority. Most people fit somewhere in Category 'B'. In the interest of generating a better understanding and perhaps leading to a more harmonious relationship between cyclists and motorists, I'll try and explain how a Category 'A' cyclist conducts their business on the road. Cyclists who have any kind of formal training will be aware that there are two riding positions, 'Primary' and 'Secondary'. The 'Secondary' road position is to the left of the lane you occupy but NOT in the gutter. This position allows faster vehicles to pass more easily when there are no hazards and it is safe for them to do so. The 'Primary' road position is in the middle of the lane you currently occupy. Now this is where some motorists say 'WHAT!' Basically, a good cyclist who is fully aware of the hazards of different traffic situations will know when to adopt the Primary Riding Position. Some examples are when passing parked vehicles to avoid the 'DOOR ZONE', negotiating any junctions including roundabouts, riding through 'pinch points' created by traffic islands etc or when the road isn't wide enough for a vehicle to pass safely, to name but a few. But why do this? Why get in peoples way like that? Basically a good cyclist will acknowledge when it is not safe to be overtaken by another vehicle. Adopting this position prevents following vehicles overtaking in hazardous situations simply by 'making like a slow car'. So, if you're in your car following a cyclist who is in the middle of the lane, there's probably a very good reason. Having said that, a good cyclist will also relinquish Primary when no longer needed and acknowledge the following driver with a wave as they pass. They will also seek places to pull over if necessary to allow faster traffic to pass.

    |   10
  • gedonyajanner  |  September 19 2012, 11:57AM

    @kevin If you bother to read all comments you'll find your own comments a little silly as he was wearing both, lights wouldn't have been required at that time of day. From eye witness and supposedly CCTV it was a case of car wanting to get in front of a bus accelerating hard to be in front and hitting the cyclist in the process. If I came on here and posted a comment every time I saw a car being driven in a poor manner or breaking the law I'd never be off the site! But the " a cyclist did this and a cyclist did that" forget about the poor driving of most motorists on the city.

    |   13
  • blogtodi  |  September 19 2012, 11:53AM

    @ gedonyajanner - I do put a lot of effort into driving. I consider myself a considerate driver and don't compare myself with any other drivers. My standards are high. I certainly see more bad riding than I do bad driving and that's worrying considering the percentage of bikers on the road. I get annoyed because some bikers seem oblivious to their own stupidity and being on a bike that makes them more vulnerable than in a car. I think if biking becomes more popular the government will eventually tax it somehow, whether by licencing/registration or compulsory insurance I'm not sure, but I think they will have to contribute to the increased cost of resources to deal with bikers one way or the other. Like cycling incidents, it's inevitable.

    |   -13

      YOUR COMMENTS AWAITING MODERATION

       
       
       

      MORE NEWS HEADLINES