CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure

New traffic signs regulations

(40 posts)

  1. neddie
    Member

    The Department for Transport’s new rules on signing open the way for safer and more convenient routes for cyclists and pedestrians.

    Measures common in other countries, such as parallel pedestrian and cycle crossings, cycle-specific traffic signals and count down timers for pedestrians, may now be used throughout Great Britain.

    http://www.sustrans.org.uk/blog/how-will-new-traffic-signs-regulations-affect-cyclists-and-pedestrians

    Posted 7 years ago #
  2. neddie
    Member

    Now it should be easy for the council to add exemption signs to all the the one-way streets...

    Let's imagine they could do this as quickly as they are installing bike parking. All one-way streets should be converted in a couple of months...

    <edd1e_h holds breath...>

    Posted 7 years ago #
  3. Murun Buchstansangur
    Member

    Puzzling in some respects, as there's been a countdown timer for peds on Argyle St in Glasgow for years & years.

    Posted 7 years ago #
  4. Aaargh! "pedestrian countdown unit at traffic signals indicating to pedestrians the time remaining to cross the road."

    Perfect way to make pedestrian hurry up and get off the road as quickly as possible.

    Better would be a countdown timer telling pedestrians how long they have to wait until the next green.

    Posted 7 years ago #
  5. Murun Buchstansangur
    Member

    Ah, time remaining to cross the road. That's not good. The ones I'm thinking of in London & Glasgow show the time until the next green man cycle, which is an OK-ish idea.

    EDIT: Just saw Stephan's post. The ones he mentions are already allowed, just not widely used outside central London.

    Posted 7 years ago #
  6. wishicouldgofaster
    Member

    Unsure if this will be a success or not. We have a number of existing items that are routinely ignored by drivers with no fear of police enforcement.

    Why will these be anything different?

    Posted 7 years ago #
  7. slowcoach
    Member

    I had wrongly assumed that countdown timers at signals were the option Stephan says is better - telling pedestrians how long they have to wait for a green ped, so they don't risk trying to cross in a small gap instead of waiting for a few more seconds. But no, according to Transport for London, the new 'Pedestrian Countdown at traffic signals tells you how long you have to cross the road after the green man light has gone out. A Road Safety study revealed two-thirds of pedestrians are confused about the amount of time they have to cross a road safely at junctions with traffic lights. Because Pedestrian Countdown shows exactly how much time is left to cross, pedestrians are less likely to panic or stop in the middle of the road. An off-street public trial of the technology showed that more than 85% of pedestrians felt safer and more confident when crossing the road with a countdown display.'

    Although the new rules on signs were prepared by the Department for Transport, since Monday the DfT are no longer responsible for the rules in Scotland and it is now up to the Scottish Parliament/Scottish Government/Transport Scotland to make any changes to the rules, including correcting several mistakes in the rules (eg references to wrong sections or items).

    Posted 7 years ago #
  8. @slowcoach Thanks for the info.

    There is something fundamentally odd here: The concept of "how much time pedestrians have left to cross the road".

    My understanding so far has been that pedestrians have whatever time it takes them to cross (although they should move as fast as can reasonably be expected). When motor traffic gets a green light that still means drivers have to wait until all pedestrians have cleared the junction, as there may still be people with disabilities etc who need longer.

    Basically the green man/woman/person is a signal that you can start to cross safely, but doesn't mean you have to be off the road when it goes out.

    At least that's how I remember it from driving school.

    Posted 7 years ago #
  9. slowcoach
    Member

    Stephan yes drivers/riders should check the road is clear before moving off even if there is a green light, but some don't.

    Some signals have on-crossing detectors to extend the time for pedestrians to clear the crossing - these cannot have countdown signs as the time left will vary.

    PS edd1e_h thanks for the link. The change for cycle lanes is to allow with-flow mandatory lanes without needing a Traffic Regulation Order. Contra-flow cycling signs for one-way streets would still need an Order, giving anyone the chance to object to it.

    Posted 7 years ago #
  10. neddie
    Member

    Contra-flow cycling signs for one-way streets would still need an Order...

    <edd1e_h releases breath...>

    Doh!

    Posted 7 years ago #
  11. dougal
    Member

    "My understanding so far has been that pedestrians have whatever time it takes them to cross (although they should move as fast as can reasonably be expected). When motor traffic gets a green light that still means drivers have to wait until all pedestrians have cleared the junction, as there may still be people with disabilities etc who need longer."

    I can confirm from the weekend's revelry that 30-odd drunken Hibs fans who stop halfway across the road and start dancing are reasonably effective at stopping traffic.

    The rest of the work was done by the zebra crossing though. Drivers would still happily try to "squeeze past" anyone not dancing on the zebra crossing, so I think it was at least partly the legal standing of "pedestrians on a marked crossing" that prevented the drivers from just barging through in all cases.

    Posted 7 years ago #
  12. mgj
    Member

    Why would anyone want to cycle against the flow of motorised traffic on a one way street? Without protection/proper markings it would be dangerous in the extreme; is there anywhere it works well in Edinburgh (I'm aware that other traffic systems are available, but we don't live in Holland)

    Posted 7 years ago #
  13. Klaxon
    Member

    I do this somewhat frequently on Hill Place and it's certainly aggrieving to both parties when someone comes the other way.

    The 'advisory contra flow cycle lane' is always parked in leaving little room to pass.

    Posted 7 years ago #
  14. chdot
    Admin

    "is there anywhere it works well in Edinburgh"

    Yes.

    Canaan Lane.

    Posted 7 years ago #
  15. Greenroofer
    Member

    There's also a short bit of road in Dunfermline with a cycle lane contra to the traffic flow. I've never met a car on it, and at present the paint gives out near parked cars at the other end from this Streetview image, but it's a useful cut through (a bit like Canaan Lane)

    Posted 7 years ago #
  16. Greenroofer
    Member

    ...although having looked at in more detail on Streetview, I think I may have been riding the wrong way along some of it. It looks from Google as if the bike route turns off onto a pavement and wanders off at some point, but the signage and paint on the ground are both pretty invisible. Bizarrely, if you follow the road to the end you'll find another contraflow bike lane, so who knows what's supposed to happen?

    Posted 7 years ago #
  17. acsimpson
    Member

    Greenroofer, I believe the one way exemption for cyclists applies to the whole length of Foundry Street. They just didn't continue the cycle lane the whole way. It reapears just after the parking bays end at the other end of the street. Your end might be OK but overall it's a very odd exemption.

    Posted 7 years ago #
  18. rbrtwtmn
    Member

    "is there anywhere it works well in Edinburgh"

    Yes, it works pretty well on Leamington Road - here.

    And this isn't even legal.

    Sure it's not ideal, but with a bit of tweaking it could be made actively safe (and legal).

    This is used so much that it occurred to me just now to see if it was recorded on Google Streetview. Here we are I think.. And this image helps to see what it looks like at rush hour.

    Posted 7 years ago #
  19. Everybody cycles illegally in the wrong direction in David Brewster Rd and nobody seems to have problems with it.

    Posted 7 years ago #
  20. Why would contraflow cycling be more dangerous than cycling in any narrow street where oncoming cars can't pass? Or am I thinking too continental now?

    Posted 7 years ago #
  21. Roibeard
    Member

    @Stephan - serious question this time...

    Why would contraflow cycling be more dangerous than cycling in any narrow street where oncoming cars can't pass? Or am I thinking too continental now?

    On the continent, if you met an oncoming driver on a two-way, single track road, with passing places, would they force a cyclist to dismount/go offroad so that the driver could pass rather than using the passing place on the driver's side?

    This happens in Edinburgh.

    Now if the driver perceives the cyclist is "going the wrong way" (regardless of legality), how would the driver react on the continent?

    I'm guessing that here the driver will force the cyclist off the road, based on my experience, possibly "safely", or possibly through force or causing fear.

    In and around the Inch, drivers overtaking parked cars (hence on the wrong side of the road) often expect cyclists to vanish, take to the footway, dismount, or even cross the road in front of the driver to use an offside passing place rather than the driver deviate from their path.

    For such reasons, even if driver behaviour is different on the continent, I'd like to have:

    1) the tissue of protection offered by oncoming drivers being told, and repeatedly reminded, that cyclists may use the road against the flow of motorised traffic.

    2) sufficient width to permit safe passing of oncoming drivers, travelling at the speed limit.

    The alternative to 2 is to play chicken with the driver until they stop, then move round their stationary vehicle.

    That's my family's approach, but it requires much more assertiveness (and a thick skin for the subsequent abuse) than the average UK resident cares to exercise!

    Robert

    Posted 7 years ago #
  22. this ^^^

    I've used the Bread Street contraflow bus lane, and had a driver deliberately move into it, drive straight at me, swerve back and shout that I was cycling the wrong way.

    Essentially you answered your own question by asking further if you were thinking too continental. Simply, yes. Though we need to change matters somehow, so need to start somewhere. But in essence I think at the moment it's more dangerous simply because our drivers are unaware of it, and are generally more aggressive in dealing with perceived wrongs (not even actual wrongs, as in my Bread Street).

    I'd be cautious about using examples where lots of cyclists ignore the law and say 'no-one has a problem with it'. I've a friend on Valleyfield Street. Prime example of a road where there should be a contraflow given it links to and from the Meadows, but it doesn't, and cyclists still cycle the wrong way down it, and the residents are really hacked off about it. Not that you'd know unless you spoke to someone who lived there.

    Posted 7 years ago #
  23. crowriver
    Member

    There's another 'informal' contraflow on Maryfield Place which pretty much works. Many cyclists use it as the alternative side streets require carrying one's bike up a flight of steps to London Road. To my mind it should either be made 'official' as a contraflow, or else through traffic should be stopped from using it, e.g.. by placing a row of bollards at the London Road end. Once upon a year the street was two-way traffic, but was AFAIK made one-way to lessen rat running and to facilitate parking on both sides of the street. It is still used as a rat run, hence why I think it would be good to prevent through traffic. I've been meaning to start up a local campaign about this for years, but never quite got round to it.

    Posted 7 years ago #
  24. neddie
    Member

    Chicken and egg situation.

    Motorists will continue to charge down one-way streets at the speed limit or greater if no cyclists are ever going to be coming the other way.

    If cyclists were expected to be coming the other way on all one-way streets, aka continental, perhaps drivers eventually get the message and calm down a bit.

    It's a bit like taking the child of a druggie mother into care. Without the child she doesn't have much to live for, and spirals deeper & deeper into drugs. With the child, she may decide to clean-up. There is a risk to the child initially, same as there is to cyclists initially.

    Posted 7 years ago #
  25. "I'd be cautious about using examples where lots of cyclists ignore the law" - isn't that the point to legalise a situation that is mostly dangerous because people take it onto themselves to punish others?

    When there are locations where a lot of people already cycle against the flow, why not make it legal? Is that much different from allowing cycling in parks, for example, a few years ago?

    Posted 7 years ago #
  26. @Roibeard There is no short easy answer. While there is also bad driving on the continent, what is much less is the attitude trying to "punish" other road users for perceived mistakes/law breaking which seems not uncommon here - not only among drivers, but also quite a few cyclists, in my experience.

    All the contraflows that I have seen worked quite well and are not more dangerous than any other road.

    Just to be clear, cyclists are not automatically allowed to ignore all one-way streets, but the council can decide to exempt cyclists and has to put up the correct signs. Of course councils make a decision where it is safe, and probably wouldn't do it on a dual 70kph (40mph) racecourse.

    I don't really understand the fierce opposition here. The new regulations just give councils more options to create contraflows where suitable, it doesn't suddenly allow cyclists to ignore laws or something. Still, where a one-way is regularly ignored, it could be an indication that this would be a good location to allow contraflow.

    Posted 7 years ago #
  27. neddie
    Member

    Leamington Rd:

    There are often quite a few pedestrians walking on the road, both against and with the flow of traffic (as mentioned by rbrtwtmn). Mostly they are avoiding the narrow, broken and sometimes fouled pavement and being hemmed in by parked cars.

    Is it so different to have a cyclist going the 'wrong way' on this road, than some pedestrians?

    Seems to me like a ideal road to be closed to motor traffic. The only loss would be approx 6 permit spaces.

    Posted 7 years ago #
  28. @Roibeard Another point is that the contraflows that I know on the continent have quite a lot of cycle traffic, so everybody expects to meet cyclists.

    I don't think the Inch is a good example. I had bad and good experiences there, but I also see that some drivers just try to force through against other cars.

    Posted 7 years ago #
  29. chdot
    Admin

    "and the residents are really hacked off about it"

    Is that for (understandable) 'safety reasons' or are the supremely law-abiding?

    Posted 7 years ago #
  30. chdot
    Admin

    "The only loss would be approx 6 permit spaces."

    ThisISEdinburgh.

    Posted 7 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin