What should I do when I get to this part of the road?

[ctrlindustries]

moderator note: the stuff about helmets and high vis has been weeeded out and sent to viewtopic.php?f=19&t=114110

I have tried calling TFL on this matter but they are not very helpful.

On Brighton road (A235) in Croydon, there is a cycle lane heading North.... and at the junction of Kingsdown Avenue and Brighton Road where the Toby Carvery is and the Golf Shop and Laithwaites wine.... if checking on google steet view..

The cycle lane comes to an end and zig zag lines commence for a pedestrian crossing....

Do I have to stop at the end of the advisory cycle lane and wait in case any vehicles are coming into the side roads from the main road or can I just keep cycling? An angry guy in a white van as i cycle through beeped at me and when he started to accelerate said to me that I can't keep cycling down the zig zags and have to wait on the cycle lane until it is clear as there is no under taking or over taking on the zig zags.... Google says motorized vehicles and non don't have to play this game and can undertake.. but the cycle lane does come to an end temporarily because of the zig zags...

What do i do in this cirucmstance because it now freaks me out that a car will just hit me while im cycling across a junction and if i should have stopped my insurance won't cover my bike or worse, my medical. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

[Bez]

Would it come as a surprise if I said that the van driver was talking out of his exhaust pipe?

[AdamS]

Here? https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.34916 ... 312!8i6656

My interpretation of your post is that there was a queue of motor cars (either stationary or slow moving) at the crossing and you passed them on the inside. One honked at you and then had 'words' when he caught up. Correct? If so, I'm not sure where turning vehicles come in.

If I recall correctly the zig zags do mean no overtaking (on either side). Some one will be able to point to the regulations and whether they apply to cyclists.

Regardless of the legality of passing a vehicle and regardless of the existence of a cycle lane, you must always keep your eye out for turning vehicles and be willing to hold back if necessary. Some drivers do not look out for cyclists adequately. Better to avoid a collision than be injured but righteous.

[Bez]

If I recall correctly the zig zags do mean no overtaking (on either side). Some one will be able to point to the regulations and whether they apply to cyclists.

They don't.

[drossall]

This seems wrongly to conflate several different issues.

On the face of it, the side roads are irrelevant (in law - although you might still have to watch out for drivers doing unpredictable things). And if you had to give way, there'd be dashed lines across the end of the cycle way - the normal give way markings on the road. No give way markings and other signage, no requirement to give way.

So, the issue as I understand it is whether you can proceed through the crossing (with or without side roads). Is that correct?

Although I know in general terms that overtaking on zig zags isn't allowed, I confess I had to look up the details. This, interestingly also from Croydon, points out that that only applies to motor vehicles overtaking the nearest motor vehicle to the crossing. You're on a bike, so it doesn't apply.

The general sense, of course, is that vehicle users (cyclists or drivers) shouldn't endanger pedestrians using the crossing, by trying to zoom across when another vehicle is blocking the view of whether the crossing is clear. You should obey that principle regardless of fine points of law. That said, it's not clear from where the driver was coming - was he ahead and you passed on the inside, or did he come from behind, or did he come from the side road (in which case, if he believes that you being in a cycle lane means he has priority, he's dangerous). If you could tell us more about how things started out, it might be easier to be precise.

Some things that may help:

• As a cyclist, you are a road user, with broadly all the rights and responsibilities that that means. So, for example, if a driver would have priority, so would you.
• That applies also to overtaking and being overtaken, except that the Highway Code recognises that two-wheelers will filter (a better name than "undertaking) on the left or right in stationary and near-stationary traffic, and says little except that this requires care on all sides, i.e. from motorists to expect it and two-wheelers to do it cautiously.
• If you need to give way, there will be signage and road markings to say so (but, on a bike, expect the unexpected from other road users!) You should know how to recognise them (and know the rest of the Highway Code).
• Some cycle lanes do end in give way markers (but not, as far as I can see, the ones that you are thinking of), and you must obey them. Some cyclists choose not to use such lanes, on grounds of practicability for getting anywhere when you're constantly giving way.
• Where you are the vehicle being overtaken, by definition the driver is overtaking. On a normal single carriageway, that means that you are in the traffic lane and the driver isn't, even if a constant stream is overtaking you (because you move out of lane to overtake, and the Code requires drivers to do so when overtaking cyclists). This applies unless there are two traffic lanes, or a traffic lane and a cycle lane, for example. There is no concept in law that I have come across to allow cyclists (except in cycle lanes or when filtering) to be regarded as somehow left of the main traffic lane. Recognising that can affect the way that you assess situations such as this - although it's not always wise to act on it, because others may not!

[Vorpal]

I believe that the OP means https://www.google.no/maps/@51.349002,- ... 312!8i6656

Unless there are some significant details left out, WVM is full of cattle poo.

That said, if I were using that route, I would move out into the middle of the lane somewhat before the cycle lane ends, unless traffic is stopped, in which case I might (carefully) filter.

[ctrlindustries]

Thank you to all for your help. I am very gratfeul for the level of attention and detail you have given me for my question.

My concern is that i have already almost been hit on that road in the mornings when there is stand still traffic and cars coming up that way. But who is at fault? I drive and cycle dependant on how far I go. I'm one of the rare few on both sides of the coin so I don't jump red lights and obey the highway code. It really annoys me when cyclists ride around with no helmet or visibility clothing because they don't feel cool and just jump the lights. If i could horn on my bike I would but then they are surprised when they are injured or under a lorry and we hear more tragic stories because people didn't take the proper precautions.

If I am cycling down that path and I am hit by a car coming into a junction and visibility of me is not 100% I take caution but in that area there are a lot of fast drivers who unfortunately don't have the same level of due care and attention. Same in London....

[tykeboy2003]

An angry guy in a white van as i cycle through beeped at me

Tell him to go boil his head.

Just looked at it on streetview and there is nothing there to suggest that you have to give way to anyone. You're on the main carriageway (cycle lanes don't make a blind bit of difference to that) and overtaking is prohibited in the zig-zags so any vehicle passing you at that point has technically broken the HC regulations. Any vehicles coming from either side road must give you priority. Anyone who gets any of that wrong should (in my opinion) re-take their driving test.

[Bez]

My concern is that i have already almost been hit on that road in the mornings when there is stand still traffic and cars coming up that way.

Traffic is at a standstill and cars are coming? Not sure I follow.

But who is at fault?

Hmm.

I'm one of the rare few on both sides of the coin so I don't jump red lights and obey the highway code.

This reads as an insinuation that people who don't drive disobey the Highway Code and that those who do, do. That's quite a factually inaccurate view.

It really annoys me when cyclists ride around with no helmet or visibility clothing

It annoys some people when people think that not wearing these things is a big deal.

they just jump the lights…then they are surprised when they are injured or under a lorry and we hear more tragic stories because people didn't take the proper precautions.

Have you analysed the recorded data to find out how many casualties involve a cyclist jumping a light and ending up under a lorry? I think you might be surprised. And have you thought about how effective a bit of polystyrene is when you're under a lorry?

Cyclists are legally free to pass motor vehicles in the zig zags. Drivers are advised to look out for them doing it. Cyclists are advised not to do it at junctions. Regardless of fault the cyclist will come off worse. I would simply decide my own behaviour based on those facts and then let other people get on with riding in whatever clothes they see fit.

[RickH]

In the OP's case there are effectively 2 lanes becoming 1. Even with 2 full (motor) traffic lanes, when they merge into one there is no requirement for cars in one of the lanes to stop & wait for traffic from the other lane to clear before proceeding.

There is a potentially legally more awkward situation at the end of a cycle lane near me in Horwich (Streetview link - the cycle lane marking are partly obscured by the more recent red paint for the 20mph zone but have since been repainted). My reading of the markings means, in theory, I am expected to give way to vehicles coming from behind on my right hand side & turning left into the side road. I tend to leave the cycle lane early to circumvent any problems (& I haven't actually had a problem there yet).

[Vorpal]

If I am cycling down that path and I am hit by a car coming into a junction and visibility of me is not 100% I take caution but in that area there are a lot of fast drivers who unfortunately don't have the same level of due care and attention. Same in London....

If you are in the cycle lane or the main travel lane, a car entering form the side road should give way to you. However, if you are cycling along the kerb, they are less likely to see you, independent of what you are wearing, or how well lit up you are.

Most drivers look for other traffic in the middle of the main traffic lane. That's one of the reasons that I would 'take the lane' there, unless it's congested. It might be a little bit slower, but it is much safer.

The logic is nicely laid it out in Cyclecraft by John Franklin. Bikeability courses are also based on the content.

[thirdcrank]

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.34916 ... 312!8i6656

I presume this is the streetview.

drossall has the legal side and more besides correctly. "Legal advice" from disgruntled drivers, often beginning "you should of..." generally has no value. As you so rightly say, if there's a crash it's often the cyclist who comes off worst but that doesn't alter the law. It's hard to give advice on how to deal with a knucklehead who is convinced they are right, but timid riding can make things worse. It's a fine line between being assertive and being reckless but you need to try to draw it.

John Franklin's book "Cyclecraft" gives some useful advice.

http://www.cyclecraft.co.uk/book.html

It's situations like this that prompt some riders to get a helmet or bike camera (or both) to record what happens. An ignorant diatribe can make entertaining viewing on youtube.
===============================================================

[Lance Dopestrong]

Thank you to all for your help. I am very gratfeul for the level of attention and detail you have given me for my question.

My concern is that i have already almost been hit on that road in the mornings when there is stand still traffic and cars coming up that way. But who is at fault? I drive and cycle dependant on how far I go. I'm one of the rare few on both sides of the coin so I don't jump red lights and obey the highway code. It really annoys me when cyclists ride around with no helmet or visibility clothing because they don't feel cool and just jump the lights. If i could horn on my bike I would but then they are surprised when they are injured or under a lorry and we hear more tragic stories because people didn't take the proper precautions.

If I am cycling down that path and I am hit by a car coming into a junction and visibility of me is not 100% I take caution but in that area there are a lot of fast drivers who unfortunately don't have the same level of due care and attention. Same in London....

it realy annoys me when people can't go about their daily business without sticking their nose into other people's.

[ctrlindustries]

I wish to clarify my statements from earlier.

[relegated to the ghetto by a moderator]
3. Many cyclists ride past me in London and jump the lights and are do simply have less protection than being surrounded by metal on all sides.
4. Most adult drivers are NOT cyclists also. They can cycle but the majority of drivers do not also cycle to work otherwise we would look more like Amsterdam.
5. There is no 100% way to stay safe but anything that decreases risk is great.


That is all I wanted to communicate. I just like to do things properly.

Thank you to those who clarified that I don't HAVE to stop but of course I would rather stay injury free.

[gaz]

There is a potentially legally more awkward situation at the end of a cycle lane near me in Horwich ...

Ye gods, that's awful. Positively invites a left hook, not to mention traffic heading towards you can turn across your path because you have to "Give Way".