Laws on ASLs clarified

User avatar
meic
Posts: 19355
Joined: 1 Feb 2007, 9:37pm
Location: Caerfyrddin (Carmarthen)

Re: Laws on ASLs clarified

Postby meic » 1 Mar 2013, 8:58am

We could start a protest group who subvert accepted road procedure by strictly obeying this law. Those living in Telford could well find themselves in front of "the beak" for obstruction.
I did try it out once with the rather deflating result that the car drivers didnt bat an eyelid at me stopping before the ASZ. :lol:
Yma o Hyd

User avatar
honesty
Posts: 2445
Joined: 16 Mar 2012, 3:33pm
Location: Somerset
Contact:

Re: Laws on ASLs clarified

Postby honesty » 1 Mar 2013, 9:04am

I have to say I was not aware of this rule. I've been happily cycling into ASL boxes on red and stopping there. Seems a bit rediculous to go into the box from the feeder lane on the left to then have to cut back across a lane of traffice (that could have a green to go left) so I can go on straight, which is exactly what I would have to do here: http://maps.google.co.uk/?ll=51.019294,-3.105531&spn=0.001154,0.00284&t=m&z=19&layer=c&cbll=51.019341,-3.106161&panoid=zQg7IJ-DE4QITEeloX2IcQ&cbp=12,25.48,,0,11.06

User avatar
gaz
Posts: 13229
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent, car park of England

Re: Laws on ASLs clarified

Postby gaz » 1 Mar 2013, 9:14am

661-Pete wrote:No-win situation, for the cyclist, so it seems. I think this needs urgent action. Either a change in the law, or all ASLs of this type must be painted out, pronto. Seeing as none of this helps to foster good relations between cyclists and other road users, we need urgent action here. CTC RtR officers?


I wouldn't bother a RtR officer with this. The highwaymen should have designed it in accordance with the manual.

Coloured Tarmac Man (optional) should have marked the feeder lane and your pan handle suggests he did. White Paint Man was then let loose to complete or refresh the scheme, and got it wrong.

So either the highwaymen need to give White Paint Man a boot up the behind and send him back to put it right.

Write to them yourself if you are concerned about the situation.

Edit - I stand corrected, no TRO required for an ASL, incorrect info now deleted.
Last edited by gaz on 1 Mar 2013, 11:36pm, edited 1 time in total.
Hand wash only. Do not iron.

User avatar
661-Pete
Posts: 7866
Joined: 22 Nov 2012, 8:45pm

Re: Laws on ASLs clarified

Postby 661-Pete » 1 Mar 2013, 9:24am

honesty wrote:I have to say I was not aware of this rule. I've been happily cycling into ASL boxes on red and stopping there. Seems a bit rediculous to go into the box from the feeder lane on the left to then have to cut back across a lane of traffice (that could have a green to go left) so I can go on straight, which is exactly what I would have to do here: http://maps.google.co.uk/?ll=51.019294,-3.105531&spn=0.001154,0.00284&t=m&z=19&layer=c&cbll=51.019341,-3.106161&panoid=zQg7IJ-DE4QITEeloX2IcQ&cbp=12,25.48,,0,11.06

Your example doesn't even have a 'pretend' feeder lane, as I can see by looking at the junction from a different angle! My example is this, it hasn't changed since Google visited. Notice how the first stop line goes right across.
Pete

Et qui rit des curés d'Oc?/De Meuse raines, houp! de cloques./De quelles loques ce turque coin./Et ne d'anes ni rennes,/Ecuries des curés d'Oc. - Louis d'Antin

User avatar
honesty
Posts: 2445
Joined: 16 Mar 2012, 3:33pm
Location: Somerset
Contact:

Re: Laws on ASLs clarified

Postby honesty » 1 Mar 2013, 9:25am

They've altered it since then, it has a silly little diagonal on the very far left...

Interestingly this is the other side of the same junction here as you can see this has the little diagonals on the left of both lanes. This actually to me seems a reasonable compromise to what is a pretty stupid law.
Last edited by honesty on 1 Mar 2013, 10:06am, edited 1 time in total.

Richard Mann
Posts: 427
Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 12:46am

Re: Laws on ASLs clarified

Postby Richard Mann » 1 Mar 2013, 9:56am

They're going to change the regs so you can cross the first line wherever you like. Don't fret about it.

And you don't need a TRO to establish an ASL.

kwackers
Posts: 12217
Joined: 4 Jun 2008, 9:29pm
Location: Warrington

Re: Laws on ASLs clarified

Postby kwackers » 1 Mar 2013, 9:58am

Richard Mann wrote:They're going to change the regs so you can cross the first line wherever you like. Don't fret about it.

Which is how it should be and how I've always treated them.

User avatar
meic
Posts: 19355
Joined: 1 Feb 2007, 9:37pm
Location: Caerfyrddin (Carmarthen)

Re: Laws on ASLs clarified

Postby meic » 1 Mar 2013, 10:03am

It does seem that in real life compliance by car drivers or cyclists is on a voluntary basis with very little self-regulation either.
Yma o Hyd

kwackers
Posts: 12217
Joined: 4 Jun 2008, 9:29pm
Location: Warrington

Re: Laws on ASLs clarified

Postby kwackers » 1 Mar 2013, 10:58am

meic wrote:It does seem that in real life compliance by car drivers or cyclists is on a voluntary basis with very little self-regulation either.

The whole dotted line thing is a fudge to give legal credence to the idea that cyclists can cross the first line.

As both a cyclist and a driver I understand why they exist, therefore I stay out of them in my car and go into them on my bike.
The argument about paint and gaps is one of semantics and of very little interest other than to prove (to me at least) that trying to drag an antiquated system into the 21st century is fraught and perhaps we really should consider a complete overhaul...

Geriatrix
Posts: 1852
Joined: 23 Oct 2007, 1:33pm
Location: Caterham

Re: Laws on ASLs clarified

Postby Geriatrix » 1 Mar 2013, 2:52pm

The MET advice contradicts John Franklin's cyclecraft:

It is always unsafe to use a kerbside cycle lane to reach an advanced stop line and then to turn right across the waiting area.

If you intend to turn right, position normally towards the centre of the road, as if the cycle lane were not there. Move forward to the advanced stop line if it is safe to do so, but otherwise stay with the traffic.

(my underline)

So John Franklin and therefore Bikeability is training us to break the law?
Given that Bikeability is endorsed by the DfT, who's right, the MET or DfT+Franklin+Bikeability?
For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled - Richard Feynman

User avatar
661-Pete
Posts: 7866
Joined: 22 Nov 2012, 8:45pm

Re: Laws on ASLs clarified

Postby 661-Pete » 1 Mar 2013, 3:16pm

Richard Mann wrote:They're going to change the regs so you can cross the first line wherever you like. Don't fret about it.

Is there a link for this?

If they allow cyclists to cross the first line on the red, there should a corresponding rule allowing motorists to cross the second line on red (but not the first line of course). This is so that they don't come to a stop in the ASL area.
Pete

Et qui rit des curés d'Oc?/De Meuse raines, houp! de cloques./De quelles loques ce turque coin./Et ne d'anes ni rennes,/Ecuries des curés d'Oc. - Louis d'Antin

Geriatrix
Posts: 1852
Joined: 23 Oct 2007, 1:33pm
Location: Caterham

Re: Laws on ASLs clarified

Postby Geriatrix » 1 Mar 2013, 3:30pm

661-Pete wrote:
Richard Mann wrote:They're going to change the regs so you can cross the first line wherever you like. Don't fret about it.

Is there a link for this?

If they allow cyclists to cross the first line on the red, there should a corresponding rule allowing motorists to cross the second line on red (but not the first line of course). This is so that they don't come to a stop in the ASL area.

This is a topic on another cycle forum and one of the members has posted that Regulation 10 of The Traffic Signs Regulations & General Directions 2002 does not apply to ASL markings (I have asked for a reference). If that's true then the MET's advice is bunk no regs need to be changed.
For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled - Richard Feynman

Geriatrix
Posts: 1852
Joined: 23 Oct 2007, 1:33pm
Location: Caterham

Re: Laws on ASLs clarified

Postby Geriatrix » 1 Mar 2013, 3:59pm

Here is the relevant bit from the original circular issues by the MET referenced by the OP:
Laws RTA 1988 sect 36 &TSRGD regs 10,36(1) & 43(2).

The ASL should have a lead - in cycle lane so that cyclists can legally gain access to the reservoir ahead of the motorists’ stop line. Cyclists are not permitted to gain access through the solid white line, by entering the cycle box in this way they are also committing the offence of Contravening a Red Traffic Contrary to section 36(1) of the Road Traffic Act 1988, regulation 10 of the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002 and Schedule 2 to the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988.

Please could I ask that you circulate this message on your forums.

Yours Sincerely

Karen Harrison 545TD
SCO15
Metropolitan Police Traffic
Roadsafe
Empress State Building.


Here is Regulation 10 to which Ms Harrison refers. ASL's are described in diagram 1001.2. If you read through the regulation you will see that diagram 1001.2 is not referenced anywhere in regulation 10. Reg 10 does not therefore apply to ASL's.

Ms Harrison from the MET should issue a correction and circulate.
For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled - Richard Feynman

Geriatrix
Posts: 1852
Joined: 23 Oct 2007, 1:33pm
Location: Caterham

Re: Laws on ASLs clarified

Postby Geriatrix » 1 Mar 2013, 4:53pm

thirdcrank wrote:I wonder if there is anybody one here who has received that actual email. :?

I ask for two reasons:

I'd be interested to read the full text.

Receiving the email seems to imply having previously reported something via Roadsafe, so I'd be interested to know how that went.


Here is a link to a CycleChat thread following the same topic. The OP posted the text of the original letter from the MET.
For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled - Richard Feynman

JohnCKirk
Posts: 114
Joined: 27 Jun 2010, 12:39am

Re: Laws on ASLs clarified

Postby JohnCKirk » 1 Mar 2013, 5:00pm

Geriatrix wrote:Here is a link to a CycleChat thread following the same topic. The OP posted the text of the original letter from the MET.


One interesting point to note - the original letter has a couple of broken links, presumably because they're internal URLs. You can see them in the CycleChat version, but I replaced them with real links on my blog. I was meaning to email Ms Harrison about that anyway, so I can mention the fact that diagram 1001.2 isn't listed at the same time.