I think this is a step forward.
http://road.cc/content/news/31550-rac-suggests-cyclist-left-turn-red-traffic-light-trials
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Cycling News
RAC suggests cyclist left-turn on red traffic light trials
(10 posts)-
Posted 14 years ago #
-
This problem should not occur where there are advanced cycle stop lines that allow cyclists to wait ahead of lorries
Yes. It shouldn't. I was considering installing click counters on my bike, one on each handlebar. I'd click the left one every time I was in an ASL box and the right one every time I was accompanied by a car. I'd honestly say it's about 30% of the time that the box is taken up.
There's no point inventing new and potentially confusing legislation when the existing ones have a blind eye turned to them. This morning i cycled along Broomhouse past about a 200m queue of cars sitting in the bus lane. I got to the front by cycling up the empty (?!) car lane to find a bus and a car in the ASL box. I couldn't get infront of either without moving forward into the pedestrian crossing and as I knew the bus was going the same way as me, I had to go even further to make sure the driver could see me and didn't flatten me as he pulled away from the lights.
Posted 14 years ago # -
There's no point inventing new and potentially confusing legislation when the existing ones have a blind eye turned to them.
And this idea has the potential to cause major confusion as well as resentment among motorists who will never know about it and assume cyclists are breaking the law.Posted 14 years ago # -
I don't like this idea for two reasons:
1. Stopping at red is one of the key principles of UK road rules - which is why red light jumping attracts so much attention. Change this for cyclists and motorists would soon be campaigning to be able to do so.
2. I have been places where this is legal and found it really unnerving to have vehicles creeping round a corner when crossing while the green man is on.
Posted 14 years ago # -
Any cyclist desperate to turn left before being signalled to do so can always just jump off, walk round then re-mount rather than trying to squeeze through and check oncoming traffic around the nose of the vehicle encroaching into the ASL.
I'm struggling to think of junctions without an existing left-turn filter which could benefit from this. It'd have to only be those where you're blocked whilst the oncoming traffic is allowed to proceed (which are generally those which already have a specifically-signalled filtering arrangement) rather than perpendicular traffic except in situations where almost no green-lighted traffic generally crosses the crossing to join the stream the cyclist would join by turning left. Cars would feel left out, though. Also, titling the report "Every Second Counts" creates what I'm sure is entirely the wrong impression of the overall aim being stopping nice motorists being held up by a boxful of left-turning cyclists.
Posted 14 years ago # -
I'm struggling to think of junctions without an existing left-turn filter which could benefit from this.
I've read that it would allow people to get clear of left-turning lorries. But I think it's daft to try to pass a waiting lorry or bus on the inside unless you're *really* sure you can get to the ASL before the lights change.
Posted 14 years ago # -
And this idea has the potential to cause major confusion as well as resentment among motorists who will never know about it and assume cyclists are breaking the law.
Not if there were signs indicating that it was acceptable to turn left at that location.
1. Stopping at red is one of the key principles of UK road rules - which is why red light jumping attracts so much attention. Change this for cyclists and motorists would soon be campaigning to be able to do so.
2. I have been places where this is legal and found it really unnerving to have vehicles creeping round a corner when crossing while the green man is on.
1. Law an order would not break down because cyclist had been allowed to turn left on red and the reason it can't apply to cars is because they take up a whole lane, whilst a bike can be safely overtaken at many junctions.
2. I've lived for years in places where this is legal (in the Netherlands) and didn't find it at all unnerving. Cyclists must stop if someone is crossing in their path, anywhere, any time, just as all motorists are required to stop if a person or child is in their path, even if the person shouldn't be there, even if they're lying in the road, deliberately causing an annoyance.
This is a perfectly logical improvement to traffic flow. I hate having to wait when it's blatantly obvious that my course doesn't intersect anyone else's.
Posted 14 years ago # -
When London allowed cyclists to use one way streets in both directions it seemed to cause a lot of confrontations between cyclists who knew their rights and motorists who weren't aware of the new law. I would support this idea if it was introduced on a wave of public information and education (I still inhabit a dream world where I think public education can help things improve).
Posted 14 years ago # -
I don't really see the point, to be honest.
First, it will inevitably make things much worse for pedestrians.
Second, if you're in a rush as it is, you can just throw your leg over and walk across the white line, not the end of the world.
Finally, a lot of people (myself included) who happily wait in a queue now would be massively tempted to try and get to the front if a red was effectively green. You could turn left on red, do an immediate u-turn and then left again to effectively bounce all red lights.
It would certainly get up motorists' noses, but I don't think that's a significant concern. People have a preformed opinion about cyclists and it's not influenced by actual their behaviour in any way, IMO.
Not a winner.
Posted 14 years ago # -
Second, if you're in a rush
set off earlier?
Posted 14 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
posts
