Traffic lights giving cyclists a head start - Bristol

prestavalve
Posts: 126
Joined: 24 Dec 2020, 8:03pm

Re: Traffic lights giving cyclists a head start - Bristol

Post by prestavalve »

Stevek76 wrote: Using your words [...] :wink:
I see what you did there.

Taking up your point about the importance of perception, if cycle lanes and extra lights and so forth create the perception that "that's the space for cyclists" then is that not a problem? By trying to change the minds of the hypothetically nervous masses by building cycle lanes, to make cycling "safe", aren't we tacitly reinforcing the idea amongst non-cyclists that cycling infrastructure is a prerequisite to getting on your bike?

From another thread, I saw this:
mjr wrote: As often pointed out, much of England doesn't even need to build. It could simply convert quiet lanes into a pretty direct cycling network, by such things as point closures (bollarding or three-quarter gating) and one-way for motoring.
Bollards on quiet country lanes are needed for cycling why? It's insidious this attitude.
Last edited by prestavalve on 15 Apr 2021, 3:47pm, edited 1 time in total.
Bmblbzzz
Posts: 6249
Joined: 18 May 2012, 7:56pm
Location: From here to there.

Re: Traffic lights giving cyclists a head start - Bristol

Post by Bmblbzzz »

Okay, I think I said yesterday that the green cycle symbol was only one set of lights. That was wrong, it's on all three (sensibly).

As for the possibility of the green cycle symbol confusing motorists, yes, that is likely to happen as is often the case with new procedures. People will quickly get used to it, because it's not fundamentally confusing any more than the common juxtaposition of red light and green arrow is. What might have more confusion potential is the eye-level mini lights, which are phased to the cycle green but without cycle symbols. So they go red+amber then green while the main light is still red. I'm not sure how obvious they are to motorists (but they do resemble the lights used on French traffic lights in the 80s). In any case, not much bad will happen from motorists mistakenly following the mini-lights rather than the proper ones; they'll just drive off a couple of seconds earlier than they're meant to. By the same token, not much advantage is given to cyclists following the cycle lights.
xerxes
Posts: 142
Joined: 10 May 2013, 7:22pm

Re: Traffic lights giving cyclists a head start - Bristol

Post by xerxes »

mjr wrote: 13 Apr 2021, 3:47pm It also reduces the risk of trying to reach an advanced stop box, as the green bike gives a few seconds warning that motorists are about to get a green light.
Yes, I can see how that might be useful. However the onus should really be on motorists to be aware when cyclists are filtering past.
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20297
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Traffic lights giving cyclists a head start - Bristol

Post by mjr »

prestavalve wrote: 15 Apr 2021, 2:16pm From another thread, I saw this:
mrj wrote: As often pointed out, much of England doesn't even need to build. It could simply convert quiet lanes into a pretty direct cycling network, by such things as point closures (bollarding or three-quarter gating) and one-way for motoring.
Bollards on quiet country lanes are needed for cycling why? It's insidious this attitude.
Would you please correct that misattribution?

Bollards are needed on some country lanes to stop motorists from hijacking them willy-nilly and increasing motor traffic levels to the point where they become unattractive for cycling. This has been done to some by putting a gravel section in the middle and that makes the whole route less motored (probably deters most sat-navs from routing along it), but I would prefer to keep the tarmac.

I don't see what how that's on-topic in a discussion of green cycle traffic lights?
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20297
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Traffic lights giving cyclists a head start - Bristol

Post by mjr »

prestavalve wrote: 15 Apr 2021, 12:06pm Out of interest, has anyone ever shouted "you belong on the cycle path" at you? Has anyone not had this happen at one time or another?
Not those exact words, no. I've had some hand signals which I think meant they felt I should have been on the cycleway but could have meant they thought I shouldn't take the lane.

But I have been shouted at to "get off the road" in places with no cycleway and once even had a passing motorist shout at me to "get on the road" when I used a cycleway to pass them! :lol:

I've also had various other things shouted at me while cycling on the road. Some motorists are just angry. Driving is often a very disappointing and rubbish experience, nothing like what's shown on TV.
Ever heard anyone down the pub arguing that they, in fact, love cycle paths because it keeps cyclists off the road?
Nope. Anyone trying that in a high-cycling area might not have a good time.

Conversely, would any cyclist other than an extreme sports nutter or some sort of masochist ever say how much they love riding among heavy vehicles that could easily kill them if a driver spends too long looking at their phone?
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 19793
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: Traffic lights giving cyclists a head start - Bristol

Post by [XAP]Bob »

prestavalve wrote: 14 Apr 2021, 11:11am
PT1029 wrote: I see where you are coming from, I am happy to take a lane. Being told you should ride out in the road to keep safe/hold up the traffic (depends on your view) is exactly the reason why people don't cycle - they think the roads are just too dangerous/drivers aggressive to cycle safely on..
But they are wrong.

Why should policy be based on a misperception held by non-cyclists? Doesn't creating special conditions for cyclists (like these lights) accept, and even promulgate, the premise that cycling is dangerous and requires such allowances if it is to be done safely?
Let's have a look at a place which has a good safety record, as well as a high modal share of cycling...

Oh look, cycling specific lights, and good segregated infrastructure.

It's not that the roads are numerically unsafe, but that they *feel* unsafe, which means people don't cycle, so there are fewer cyclists so the roads *are* a less safe space than they could/should be.

Pedestrian light phases don't imply that walking is particularly dangerous, I don't see why a cycle phase should be any different.... It might be better as a dedicated "all way" cyclist green, or at least a "multiway" cyclist green, so that motorists can't decide that cyclist green means nothing is coming the other way.
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.
prestavalve
Posts: 126
Joined: 24 Dec 2020, 8:03pm

Re: Traffic lights giving cyclists a head start - Bristol

Post by prestavalve »

mjr wrote: Conversely, would any cyclist other than an extreme sports nutter or some sort of masochist ever say how much they love riding among heavy vehicles that could easily kill them if a driver spends too long looking at their phone?
Try riding everyday in Malaysia's largest urban corridor with a three year old on the back :shock: Now, that's certainly not enjoyable. Every other car is an MPV and roads are designed to dump you onto the nearest four or six lane strip.

I will absolutely concede that when I fancy a nice ride to work every morning just now, I get off the A road and take the back lanes. No doubt about that. Never felt the need for bollards on them though.

I do regularly get an earful from drivers who pass me about using a particular cycle lane that heads out of town: probably because the road that it runs alongside is dotted with substantial roundabouts and, surprise, surprise, I take the lane when I approach them and traverse them as one should. It's mostly along the lines of "there's an f*ing cycle path" and suchlike, although the last one involved a very nice young gentleman in a tricked out white Subaru who pulled alongside me and told me that I should be on the cyclepath because "I can't see you" - which posed an existential conundrum (I have lights and fluro helmet and, on that day, strips).
XAPBob wrote: It's not that the roads are numerically unsafe, but that they *feel* unsafe, which means people don't cycle, so there are fewer cyclists so the roads *are* a less safe space than they could/should be.
More cyclists are the solution: I don't want to wait for the infrastructure to come along, that's all.
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20297
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Traffic lights giving cyclists a head start - Bristol

Post by mjr »

prestavalve wrote: 15 Apr 2021, 4:05pm I will absolutely concede that when I fancy a nice ride to work every morning just now, I get off the A road and take the back lanes. No doubt about that. Never felt the need for bollards on them though.
Those ones might not need them, then. Some would benefit from them, else they get full of cars whenever there's a slight queue on the A road.
I do regularly get an earful from drivers who pass me about using a particular cycle lane that heads out of town:
It sounds like the problem is the drivers more than the cycle lane, but let's not hold it against all of either.
[...] told me that I should be on the cyclepath because "I can't see you" - which posed an existential conundrum
Best reply I've heard for that is "so who are you talking to, then?"
(I have lights and fluro helmet and, on that day, strips).
Ah. Urban camouflage! ;)
More cyclists are the solution: I don't want to wait for the infrastructure to come along, that's all.
Of course, when you get enough cyclists to flood an area, the infrastructure becomes pretty irrelevant. Remember the pictures of when factories used to kick out hundreds of cyclists: you couldn't see the paint on the road and the few motorists weren't moving for a while.

Better infrastructure gets us more cyclists. It's not the only way, but it does seem to help. We're not waiting for it either, but we've spent decades proving and reproving that promotion and encouragement alone isn't enough, or that there's any point trying to ignore the infrastructure which gets built anyway: if we ignore it, then the requests of the motoring lobby go unopposed and that's usually bad for us. I suggest it's worth dealing with some of the designed-for-motorists junk out there, such as bad traffic lights.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
wjhall
Posts: 259
Joined: 1 Sep 2014, 8:46am

Re: Traffic lights giving cyclists a head start - Bristol

Post by wjhall »

It's not so much a junction as a small gyratory.
Which is why coming up Park Street I usually dismount, walk across the crossing and remount to ride up University Road.

I have not been there recently enough to have seen this advance start light, but it seems to have no real advantage. When I do ride round from Park Street I am already coping with whether or not to take the lane on the approach to it, in fact as soon as I enter Park Row; the answer to that question being that there is no other way to get to these lights from the top of Park Street. You will be riding with traffic behind you as you approach the lights, throwing in a short delay so that they can get a run up at you on the next leg is not an improvement. In fact if possible I would attempt to use the stop at the light to let at least some cars get in front of me: apart from sudden reversing there is little that cars in front can do. This you will see demonstrated by the rougher sort of cyclist running red lights on Gloucester Road. With correct timing they can go up the road in a gap between cars, but they need the full phase not just a few seconds start to do that.
Bmblbzzz
Posts: 6249
Joined: 18 May 2012, 7:56pm
Location: From here to there.

Re: Traffic lights giving cyclists a head start - Bristol

Post by Bmblbzzz »

wjhall wrote: 15 Apr 2021, 4:44pm
It's not so much a junction as a small gyratory.
Which is why coming up Park Street I usually dismount, walk across the crossing and remount to ride up University Road.
That's quite a neat idea. Especially now that University Road is barriered off! If I've come up Jacobs Wells Road I usually turn right at the top and then take University Road, unless the traffic is very quiet or I'm feeling very fast and daring, just cos going round the "gyratory" bit of Queens Road (and then up Queens Avenue and Elton Road) can feel a bit pressured. I suppose for going up Whiteladies Road, you could keep to the left and then use the crossing in front of the Victoria Rooms, but it might be a bit inconvenient.

Which reminds me, do you remember the short-lived road markings when they tried to cram two lanes into that end of the "gyratory" by the Boer War statue, one each for Whiteladies and going right round? That didn't last long.
[/quote]
Stevek76
Posts: 2084
Joined: 28 Jul 2015, 11:23am

Re: Traffic lights giving cyclists a head start - Bristol

Post by Stevek76 »

prestavalve wrote: 15 Apr 2021, 2:16pm Taking up your point about the importance of perception, if cycle lanes and extra lights and so forth create the perception that "that's the space for cyclists" then is that not a problem? By trying to change the minds of the hypothetically nervous masses by building cycle lanes, to make cycling "safe", aren't we tacitly reinforcing the idea amongst non-cyclists that cycling infrastructure is a prerequisite to getting on your bike?
It's not something that needs reinforcing, nor is it hypothetical (shedloads of evidence about why cycling rates declined so heavily after the advent of the motor car and which locations have managed to turn that around). It's simply the stark reality for the vast majority of people. It is fantasy to think you can convince these people otherwise and there are zero cases of that approach ever being successful.

The only proven approach is the dutch one. High quality space for everyday transport cycling which is a combination of physically separated cycle tracks on arterials and filtered side streets where the motor traffic volume is low and slow enough that the typical person does not find it off-putting. The high quality part is key and where most UK efforts fall down, the problem being that high quality requires deprioritising motor traffic which generates a great deal of noise from a small group of people that puts off politicians, there is little use in providing a route that solves the safety aspect if it's an otherwise highly inconvenient one through giving way at every side road, taking a long detour and sharing space with pedestrians.

As for these specific lights, I have mixed feelings on them because, as I noted, they mostly only help existing cyclists and aren't the kind of thing that's really needed.

That Bristol is making such a fuss about them is a reflection of how useless Rees has been as mayor over the last 5 years on transport. He was elected on a manifesto that partly dog whistled to the motor vote about 'reviewing' RPSs & 20mph limits (which of course went nowhere as, like most such measures, they're actually popular once they go in) and has been a barrier to anything that might hinder the motorist.

Sadly it seems likely we'll be stuck with him for at least another 3 years. Hopefully he'll move on to 'greater things' after a second term, or we just get to scrap the post.
Last edited by Stevek76 on 15 Apr 2021, 7:14pm, edited 1 time in total.
The contents of this post, unless otherwise stated, are opinions of the author and may actually be complete codswallop
Jdsk
Posts: 24486
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Traffic lights giving cyclists a head start - Bristol

Post by Jdsk »

Stevek76 wrote: 15 Apr 2021, 6:43pmThe high quality part is key and where most UK efforts fall down, the problem being that high quality requires prioritising motor traffic which generates a great deal of noise from a small group of people that puts off politicians, there is little use in providing a route that solves the safety aspect if it's an otherwise highly inconvenient one through giving way at every side road, taking a long detour and sharing space with pedestrians.
... prioritising over motor traffic... ?

Jonathan
Stevek76
Posts: 2084
Joined: 28 Jul 2015, 11:23am

Re: Traffic lights giving cyclists a head start - Bristol

Post by Stevek76 »

Oops, was supposed to say deprioritising!
The contents of this post, unless otherwise stated, are opinions of the author and may actually be complete codswallop
Jdsk
Posts: 24486
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Traffic lights giving cyclists a head start - Bristol

Post by Jdsk »

Got it from the general thrust of the argument!

Thanks

Jonathan
Bmblbzzz
Posts: 6249
Joined: 18 May 2012, 7:56pm
Location: From here to there.

Re: Traffic lights giving cyclists a head start - Bristol

Post by Bmblbzzz »

Stevek76 wrote: 15 Apr 2021, 6:43pm As for these specific lights, I have mixed feelings on them because, as I noted, they mostly only help existing cyclists and aren't the kind of thing that's really needed.
They might become helpful if they become widespread. But I doubt they will.
That Bristol is making such a fuss about them is a reflection of how useless Rees has been as mayor over the last 5 years on transport. He was elected on a manifesto that partly dog whistled to the motor vote about 'reviewing' RPSs & 20mph limits (which of course went nowhere as, like most such measures, they're actually popular once they go in) and has been a barrier to anything that might hinder the motorist.
Unfortunately his reviews didn't quite go nowhere. In both cases they left what Ferguson had put in place but froze it there. So we've had no expansion of the 20mph zones or the RPZs, both of which were originally planned to expand to cover more of the city, and no increase in the price of the residents' parking permits, thus no incentive on central residents to reduce car ownership.
Post Reply