- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Turning the Corner (British Cycling).jpgBritish Cycling say Highway Code rule change could cut traffic queues by almost half
British Cycling’s Turning the Corner campaign is calling for a universal rule to give way when turning to reduce the risk of cyclists and pedestrians falling victim to left hooks. The organisation has recently commissioned research which revealed that such a move could also reduce motor traffic queue lengths by 43 per cent.
The UK is one of just three countries in the world which does not have a priority rule at traffic light junctions. As part of its campaign, British Cycling asked transport planners Phil Jones Associates to model the impact of the change at the Lea Bridge Road/Orient Way junction in Waltham Forest, Greater London.
Their research found that the change would reduce the amount of time all road users spent navigating a typical set of traffic lights. Queue reductions were largely attributed to a move from a three-stage traffic light sequence – where one phase is for pedestrians and cyclists – to a two stage sequence, where pedestrians, cyclists and motor vehicles can all go at the same time.
A simple amendment to the Highway Code could reduce motor traffic queue lengths by .
https://t.co/zqSYiIed7A #TurningTheCorner pic.twitter.com/hcSvnkwMoJ
— British Cycling (@BritishCycling) June 27, 2017
British Cycling’s policy adviser, Chris Boardman, said: “Simple changes to the Highway Code and regulations would not only make junctions safer spaces for all road users, it would also make them much more efficient, saving lots of time. The time saved at this single junction amounts to around six hours every year for regular car commuters – that’s a whole season of Line of Duty – and would reduce exhaust emissions by 17 per cent.
“Beginning the process of changing these rules to bring us in the line with the rest of the world would not be an onerous task – it is simply a case of updating the Highway Code and is something that the Transport Secretary could action tomorrow.”
Policy advocate Dame Sarah Storey added: “If you are new to driving or cycling in the UK, our junctions can be really confusing and dangerous spaces to navigate. We’re about 50 years behind most other countries in the world in solving this and it staggers me that our government is still dragging its feet. Bringing in this rule change is a no-brainer and I hope this research goes some way to educating decision makers on the way forward.”
Director of Highways and Traffic Management at Waltham Forest Council, Vala Valavan said: “We want to make it easier for everyone to travel no matter if you are driving, walking, cycling or taking the bus but the current rules at junctions make it difficult to maintain vehicle capacity. The results of this model show that it is possible to improve the efficiency of junctions and at the same time provide traffic protected routes for people walking and cycling.
“We hope that further research can be undertaken to show how it could work and meet the needs of all road users.”
Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn't especially like cake.
Latest Comments
- mattw 3 sec ago
These are more for people who can't pedal, or have weaker muscles who cannot walk far.
- mattw 4 min 16 sec ago
I've only just spotted this....
- Another_MAMIL 28 min 25 sec ago
I also liked Polartec NeoShell and was disappointed it was discontinued. Polartec RPM looks similar, but it's unclear how NeoShell and RPM compare....
- pockstone 39 min 38 sec ago
"Due to the increasing speed of bicycles..., we have to expect that such accidents will happen more often.”...
- mdavidford 2 hours 6 min ago
Seems probably even more appropriate than what I originally intended.
- slc 3 hours 18 min ago
Credit to the author for attending the opposition meetings and trying to understand their concerns, but I agree with hp. There has been significant...
- RoubaixCube 4 hours 18 min ago
I like how youre using a Mojito X to advertise an Mojito 3
- Basemetal 4 hours 39 min ago
The PU dip on the palm and fingers is over the knitted nylon so not chilly in use, and the material is thick enough to provide some cushioning. It...
- Geoff H 4 hours 54 min ago
“jumped-up, arrogant” cyclists motorists causing “carnage” and posing a risk to pedestrians everyone else. Fixed it ..........
- chrisonabike 5 hours 4 min ago
Given that - at least in UK- we have a mostly flip-flop political system and parties in power eventually run out of credit with the electorate -...
Add new comment
41 comments
Having tried various sealants that Orange Sealant works the best for bigger holes.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Orange-Seal-Endurance-Sealant-Injector/dp/B015M...
This proposition is quite different to yielding to pedestrians already crossing a side road.
However this works in other countries, I think there would be a fundamental issue here in the UK for all existing drivers in that it introduces a totally alien and unique circumstance of traffic overtaking on the nearside of the vehicle.
Everything that drivers are currently taught conforms to the basic principal of overtaking on the offside. Drivers are simply not programmed to check for faster vehicles approaching from the rear and overtaking on the nearside. Motorcyclists get taught to shoulder check before turning in either direction, or at least we used to. There would also be issues around vehicle blind spots, even if the driver does check. From the number of minor accidents at roundabouts caused by a driver rear ending the vehicle in front because they are concentrating on traffic that is on the roundabout, it would be easy to foresee a similar left turn scenario where the driver is expected to look backwards to check for vehicles overtaking on the nearside and runs into the vehicle in front. To add to a perfect storm, cyclists would actually be told and encouraged to ride down the nearside of HGV and PSV vehicles, a situation that we know from too many deaths is an awesomly dangerous place to be.
Although the long term benefit may be proved by looking at how this works in other countries, there must surely be a period of confusion and adaptation during which one would expect increased cyclist casualties. This proposal needs some really serious thought on the unintended immediate consequences.
You're right of course, there are complexities and I think when we say "simple to implement", we mean relatively to major construction works etc. It's not trivial. As I understand it, partly what they're getting at is fixing the problem of cycle paths effectively stopping at every side road, so this aspect is somewhat analogous to the pedestrian situation. For the rest of it, where there is no cycle path or lane and you're on the road, then there is still an onus on the cyclist not to charge up the near side of an HGV and hope for the best. There is still the overriding need to keep alert for potential dangers, make sure you've been seen etc. Same sort of thing that pedestrians should do when crossing with the green man, you still keep your eyes open. But this will help to stop the car coming from behind and left hooking.
Z
Overtaking on the nearside is legal in one-way streets and in "queuing" situations. British drivers are already familiar with this. They should also have been taught to properly check their mirrors for filtering bikes. (Yes, I know many people struggle with mirrors).
I agree. I can't understand the opposition to this. We're all bemoaning poor road safety, and congestion is a problem too, and then finally someone actually comes along with a proposal that is simple to implement, backed up by research, with demonstrated success elsewhere, and half you guys immediately shoot it down. So it's not perfect, so some tossers will ignore it like they do the rest of the Highway Code. Doesn't matter, it's still better than what we've got now.
I'm living in Finland now, I drive here and I cycle here. I've lived/cycled in the UK and Ireland too so I've seen both sides of this rule.
This change is ABSOLUTELY needed, and ALL cyclists should get behind this. I'm amazed by the comments here - you really think that the way things are now is better??
The current system gives priority to cars, which effectively gives drivers the right to slingshot around the corner without even looking.
The proposed change forces drivers to observe cyclists or walkers approaching on the footpath (or shared use path), 10 metres either side of a junction. To do this they need to slow to a crawl, look ahead and look over their shoulder. This doesn't just happen at junctions with pedestrian crossings, observation improves at all junctions and turning speeds get reduced.
Yes, there will be a learning period of a couple of weeks, but then it's done. A crowd of pedestrians staring down a driver who flew around a corner then had to slam on the brakes is very effective feedback.
One car stopped or slowing to allow pedestrians to cross means the cars behind have to stop or slow down too. Drivers will start anticipating this and look further down the road, which helps everyone.
Any minor delays to a journey will be more then compensated by improved traffic flow and quicker junction/traffic light cycle times (as per the research discussed here)
THE way to improve cycling safety is to improve driver awareness. Until drivers are forced to look for cyclists/pedestrians, they won't.
In reply to Atlaz's concerns above; pedestrians don't "launch" themselves out when you have a green. They've usually got a green light too. You - as a driver (or cyclist) - have to look first, check if there is anyone about to walk across, let them go, then drive on.
No, just thing that there are a lot of easier and more immediate things that need addressing well before this would ever get off the ground, let alone make any difference.
And due to a law change on the presumption of resonsibility for accidents, the currently system doesn't really give priority for cars. So that is an acutaly staturoty change in the law, no phaffing around with the Highway Code. Has it made much difference?
Call me stupid, but I don't understand the video or what its point is. Giving priority to pedestrians crossing the road is, unless I'm much mistaken, already in the road rules, regardless of whether they are on a ped crossing or not. To my understanding, a 'left hook' is when a driver turns left across the path of a cyclist who is otherwise contiuing straight ahead, and I don't see any demonstration in the video that shows or fixes that. I applaud any change in road rules which makes things safer and eases flow of the traffic, but I think the video doesn't illustrate this well.
As for those saying that this will make bugger all difference, recently we changed our road rules in NZ to cover the way traffic turning right across the stream of traffic give way to traffic turning left into the same road. It went without a hitch and has made a real difference to the traffic flow at congested intersections. 95% of drivers (like all your good selves) act within the law and drive correctly most of the time. If a rule adapts the behaviour of 95% of drivers surely that's agood thing? It might not have the corresponding effect on the accident rate as the 95% are only responsible for a much smaller fraction of the accidents, but to have the vast majority of drivers acting in a more predictable and safer manner is surely a good thing?
Except I didn't write that. As for those meanless stats...we'll they're meaningless. I've commuted, leisure rode, raced and toured all my life and not once has anyone asked me how many miles I've done or how many times I've been hit by a car. Massive wild-aresed guestimate at best.
Doesn't the highway code already give priority to crossing pedestrians on a minor road coming off a major one, does that work well? Try it, hey the pedestrians don't even get priority on the pavement that goes across the entrance to the garage forecourt outside my home. They might have it in law, but in physical reality...
The priority to crossing pedestrians rule is only a should rather than a must, so only advisory. Whether it would be any better observed if it were a must, would, I guess, depend on if it was ever enforced. I heard somewhere that it used to be stronger in older editions of the highway code.
(I confess I occasionally play chicken with motorists in regard to that rule- as long as I can stare them in the eyes while doing it - and so far have only been shouted at)
"You should; watch out go pedestrians crossing a road into which you are turning" so looking for them is advisory the text then continues "if they have started to cross, they have priority, so give way"
There is no should in that sentence it is quite explicit, pedestrians already crossing have priority. Nor could there be you either have priority or you don't there is no should have priority.
But, as we know, another one for education. Drivers already routinely view the advanced stop box for cyclists as part of "their" road and stop in them. I had a conversation with a driver who told me that I wasn't there when he stopped (I was literally alongside him in the cycle lane) so he was entitled to use it (obviously not true, that would be a normal road).
A welcome change but it would be better if councils moved give way markings back behind the pavement, and if continuous pavements and cycle lanes were used. Not expensive changes.
I would welcome this. Situations that require judgement and have an element of uncertainty tend to make drivers pay more attention and slow down. The big problems occur when drivers get bored and complacent.
Line Of Duty is an excellent drama.
Yet it's funny how nearly every country manages it without massive numbers of cyclist and pedestrian injuries and fatalities. Where I live a lot of junctions have pedestrian and cyclist priority after turning and it works fine. Less waiting for everyone.
It's telling that on a British cycling website there are still a significant number of people who can't imagine that it works properly despite evidence to the contrary
I think the real point is how much effort and commitment it would take to implement. It's not as simple as changing the highway code - if we only do that, new drivers will learn about it and the rest will likely have no idea (despite the requirement that everyone knows the up to date highway code, few actually do). There would need to be a massive education program and enforcement action too, which means money being allocated for both. If the education program focuses on the fact that it will actually save time for drivers, it would get through. With those things, it would be a brilliant change to implement; without, it's a recipe for disaster.
But if there are countries that use the system AND have worse accident records than ours, then what?
If you brought this in there would be carnage, mainly caused by the elderly. Not long ago they changed the long-standing traffic light sequence at a major junction, after some minor accidents and plenty of near misses they changed it back. People just couldn't adjust. It was the same when they changed a two lane junction from left = left and ahead, right =right, to left =left and right=ahead and right. Lots of honking and near misses and angry people stuck behind people turning right. They changed it back again.
Bring this shit in when nobody is actually driving a car and Johnny Cab is doing it.
So, am I right in thinking that this proposed change would mean that safely negotiating a junction would come down to the motorist accepting and understanding that they have to give way rather than the light sequence forcing them to do so? Yeah, like, that'll work just fine...
Yep, this.
I barely get 100m from the office before I've got impatient asshats playing chicken with me on my side of the road when their side is blocked by parked cars. Does anyone really believe that drivers will actually give way like this proposed idea?!
It will work. It involves motorists being in the habit of giving way to everyone when turning, pedestrians included. Once it's normalised that you give way when turning to anyone going straight ahead, you take the whole anti-cyclist don't pay road tax thing out of the equation. You just give way when turning. They do this in Australia and believe me motorists there aren't exactly cyclist loving angels, but this aspect works.
Yeah - of course it will. Just like not speeding, not driving under the influence, and generally not driving like a mechant banker as so utterly the norm.
As so utterly the norm. So make it less of the norm. Will this equal perfection? Sadly I suspect not. Is it a step in the right direction? Of course it is. Don't we want this?
I WANT 15m on the lottery this weekend. And it's a lot more likely to happen.
But if that's really true then we all should just give up and go back to bed, shouldn't we?
Can if you like. Or just get on with riding in the actual real world a day at a time, without pinning futile hope on some pie-in-the-sky behavioural change that is supposed to happen more or less by magic without any effective nforcement, save perhaps by private companies in major City centre junctions via CCTV for cash. That's the actual reality of Britain today, and that's not going to change in a month of Sundays, and it's completly futile in my humble opinion, to suppose it' will, no matter how attractive the sentiment.
I loved Frogger...
This is madness. It is bad enough turning a corner on green and having random pedestrians stepping out in front of you at the moment. I don't want people to just have licence to launch themselves out at you and I don't even drive. I don't understand how motorists can have the stopping distance unless you impose 10mph speed limit for turning. The status quo is fine.
And there should be no 'Should' about anything I choose to wear. Riders "must" have lights in the dark, that will be sufficent. In my experience it is Hi-Viz daudlers who are so slow that they think it will be fine to just run red lights, because everyone can see them, so they must be safe. You sir are a muppet, and not the entertaining kind.
Funny how it works just fine in most of the rest of Europe then isn't it?
Given just how bad British drivers are though I doubt this would work without the police to back up enforcing it. It's an attitude change as much as anything else, and the attitude of the average car first, me-centric British driver just won't care.
[/quote]Funny how it works just fine in most of the rest of Europe then isn't it?
Given just how bad British drivers are though I doubt this would work without the police to back up enforcing it. It's an attitude change as much as anything else, and the attitude of the average car first, me-centric British driver just won't care.
[/quote]
I reckon I've ridden in about 1/3 of the countries in Europe - nowhere comes close to the UK for cycle unfriendliness and agressive inconsiderate attitudes to riders.
Pages