Understanding Cycle Lanes

[johncarnie]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9318687/City-investor-slams-Met-police-failing-prosecute-van-driver-crashed-10-000-bike.html

This caught my eye, and you can argue till the cows come home about "whose fault it was" on those columns and you will not change the average Daily Fail readers hatred of cyclists.
However what I did notice was the lack of knowledge of contributors when it came to cycle lanes. Many had viewed the site of the accident of Google Street View (I don't know how recent this view is, and things might have changed/improved since then) and seen that the actual cycle lane broken white line was not present at the bus stop just before the New Kings Road/Peterborough Road junction and in fact the cycle lane lines did not reappear until after the pedestrian crossing zig-zags (although there was a cycle marking on the actual crossing). Many thought that because there were no cycle lane lines painted on the road that the cycle lane actually finished at the bus stop!
I must admit, with all the various "cycle lanes" that I encounter, it's probably not surprising that the average driver (me included) are confused and sometimes misinformed.

[thirdcrank]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... -bike.html

That's the correct link

If I've got it right, this is a streetview of the junction

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.47283 ... 384!8i8192

Again if I've got it right, this is a view of the junction from the side the van driver was approaching.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.47274 ... 384!8i8192

[Jdsk]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9318687/City-investor-slams-Met-police-failing-prosecute-van-driver-crashed-10-000-bike.html

That's the correct link

If I've got it right, this is a streetview of the junction

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.47283 ... 384!8i8192

Again if I've got it right, this is a view of the junction from the side the van driver was approaching.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.47274 ... 384!8i8192

Thanks x2. Studying the layout now.

Edited: Thanks x3.

Jonathan

[johncarnie]

Oops, this lockdown is making me computer illiterete (and I can't spell either)!

Oh, and thanks for correcting!

[Stevek76]

The cycle lane continues through the zebra, that's why the zigzags are offset from the pavement.

It's not particularly relevant for blame here as the turning van is required to yield to traffic on the major movement regardless of lane markings. That said, with the limited camera evidence I'm not surprised the met declined to charge. A careless charge is probably not going to stick if challenged. From a defensive cycling perspective I'd be treating the stopped van in the adjacent lane as a big warning sign even if I couldn't see the one waiting to turn.



Painted lanes are generally inadequate and useless and this is a good example of why. Whole road needs a redesign with physically demarked cycle tracks and clear priority over side roads.

[thirdcrank]

Playing about a bit with streetview, here's what another rider thought about approaching this junction in the gutter

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.47287 ... 384!8i8192

[Pete Owens]

The lack of understanding of cycle lanes comes mainly from cyclists who mistakely believe they are intended for our benefit, don't understand the dangers of them and so are lured into pulling off stupidly dangerous stunts such as overtaking high sided vehicles on the wrong side through a junction.

[mikeymo]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9318687/City-investor-slams-Met-police-failing-prosecute-van-driver-crashed-10-000-bike.html

That's the correct link

If I've got it right, this is a streetview of the junction

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.47283 ... 384!8i8192

Again if I've got it right, this is a view of the junction from the side the van driver was approaching.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.47274 ... 384!8i8192

Thanks x2. Studying the layout now.

Edited: Thanks x3.

Jonathan

It may be worth studying the CCTV footage of the actual collision too.

[mikeymo]

It's not particularly relevant for blame here as the turning van is required to yield to traffic on the major movement regardless of lane markings.

Just wondering, is it possible to "yield to traffic" that is not visible?

[mjr]

It's not particularly relevant for blame here as the turning van is required to yield to traffic on the major movement regardless of lane markings.

Just wondering, is it possible to "yield to traffic" that is not visible?

Yes. We have to treat high vehicles as blind corners. Shared blame in this incident IMO, even if that share is expected to change in the next highway code edition.

[mikeymo]

It's not particularly relevant for blame here as the turning van is required to yield to traffic on the major movement regardless of lane markings.

Just wondering, is it possible to "yield to traffic" that is not visible?

Yes. We have to treat high vehicles as blind corners.

Thanks. Is there a reference to this in the Highway Code? Or some legislation or suchlike.

[Pete Owens]

It's not particularly relevant for blame here as the turning van is required to yield to traffic on the major movement regardless of lane markings.

Just wondering, is it possible to "yield to traffic" that is not visible?

If we are interested in improving safety rather attributing blame then we need to go beyond seeking to decide who is at fault for any particular crash (usually based on marked priorites) and instead look at what circumstances make crashes more likely. If you arrange a junction so crossing vehicles are approaching from an unexpected direction, or out of sight of each other then mistakes are likely to be made.

[thirdcrank]

.... It may be worth studying the CCTV footage of the actual collision too.

Did you reach any conclusions?

[mjr]

Just wondering, is it possible to "yield to traffic" that is not visible?

Yes. We have to treat high vehicles as blind corners.

Thanks. Is there a reference to this in the Highway Code? Or some legislation or suchlike.

No specific legislation as far as I know. The Highway Code contains generalities like "Take care near road junctions as you may have difficulty seeing other road users, who might not notice you" in Rule 62 (Cycle Tracks), "Do not ride on the inside of vehicles signalling or slowing down to turn left" in Rule 72 (Junctions on the left — and given that not all drivers signal, this means being cautious overtaking any slowing vehicle at junctions) and "Getting too close to large vehicles, [...] will obscure your view of the road ahead" in Rule 164 (Overtaking Large Vehicles).

Of course, all but one of those also apply to motorists, plus there are specific warnings to motorists to look for and give way to cycleways, so it's not only the cyclist to blame if it goes wrong like this.

[mikeymo]

.... It may be worth studying the CCTV footage of the actual collision too.

Did you reach any conclusions?

Yes.