Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

“An absolute mess” – Cycling UK slams confusing law on parking in cycle lanes

Rules depend on whether infrastructure was there before 2016 - and whether there are double yellow lines

“Confused? You will be,” ran the catchphrase at the end of the plot summary that opened each episode of the cult late 1970s US comedy TV series, Soap – and it’s one that 40 years on could equally be applied to the issue of parking motor vehicles in cycle lanes in the UK.

As we reported on the live blog this morning, the charity Cycling UK has joined other members of the Cycling & Walking Alliance in welcoming a House of Commons Select Committee report into pavement parking – but with one important caveat.

That caveat is that a 2016 update to the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions has created a situation whereby the illegality or otherwise of a motorist parking their vehicle inside a mandatory bike lane – one delineated by a continuous white line, rather than a broken one – depends on whether or not the lane in question was installed before or after the update to that legislation.

So, if the lane was there before the update, no parking is allowed; if afterwards, it’s fine – unless there is a double yellow line (which, of course, often get ignored by many drivers anyway).

Clearly, it's frustrating when you're riding in a cycle lane, mandatory or otherwise, and have to move out into the main carriageway to avoid parked vehicles, and certainly until now we've assumed that if it's a solid white line, they are there illegally.

But next time you’re riding in a mandatory cycle lane without double yellows, ask yourself the question, was this built before or after 2016?

If it’s a route you’ve ridden regularly over the past few years, you may know the answer – if not, it’s pure guesswork, and the same would apply to any motorists (a minority, we suspect) who would wonder about whether or not it is legal to park in a cycle lane.

We wouldn’t be too hopeful of local authority enforcement officers – you know, the council operatives formerly known as traffic wardens – knowing the difference either.

Roger Geffen, Cycling UK policy director, is calling on the Department for Transport (DfT) to revert to the pre-2016 situation, saying that it “made this change without letting local authorities or other stakeholders know, let alone consulting on it.

"We're now in the situation where the DfT has to reverse these changes or else amend the Highway Code in a way which would worsen cycle safety as part of a review that's meant to improve it.

"It's an absolute mess, as we've now two different types of mandatory cycle lanes that look identical but legally are very different,” he added. “Cycling UK is keen to re-engage with the DfT to resolve this issue as a matter of urgency."

Author’s note: I snapped the contraflow mandatory cycle lane in the picture accompanying the article in Acton, West London earlier this year; but given I’ve only been coming to this area since late 2017, I have no idea whether or not it pre-dates the 2016 legislation, though it does have double yellow lines ...

Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.

Add new comment

18 comments

Avatar
quiff | 4 years ago
0 likes

ktache - I might have misunderstood your point, but that's exactly the issue. At present, pavement parking outside London is not against the law and so cannot be penalised, even though it's self evident that a law must have been broken in order to get the car onto the pavement. DfT is recommending a change to that. It used to be the case that it was illegal for a vehicle to "use" a cycle lane, but in 2016 DfT downgraded this to "drive in", so the same situation now applies as with pavement parking - if nobody sees you actually drive it there, you can't be penalised.     

Avatar
ktache | 4 years ago
3 likes

Outside London, parking on the pavement is not against the law.  Driving on the pavement is however illegal, how do the manage to get those vehicles onto the pavement without driving onto an on it?

Avatar
Hirsute replied to ktache | 4 years ago
1 like
ktache wrote:

Outside London, parking on the pavement is not against the law.  Driving on the pavement is however illegal, how do the manage to get those vehicles onto the pavement without driving onto an on it?

Fork lift truck.
Makes it easier to fit into those tight spaces too !

Avatar
Hirsute | 4 years ago
1 like

The reporting hasn't been as clear as it should, it suggested that something had happened recently rather than over 3 years later, someone noticed something.

Although I'm not sure parking meets the exemptions of Part 7, Section 12 (3) to (5)

Avatar
quiff replied to Hirsute | 4 years ago
0 likes

hirsute wrote:

The reporting hasn't been as clear as it should, it suggested that something had happened recently rather than over 3 years later, someone noticed something.

Although I'm not sure parking meets the exemptions of Part 7, Section 12 (3) to (5)

Agreed - in most cases a vehicle parked in a mandatory cycle lane will realistically have been driven or ridden there in contravention of the 2016 rules. I can however see that an enforcement authority could face a "Mr Loophole" sort of argument that they couldn't prove either (a) that the vehicle was in fact driven or ridden there; or (b) that, if the cycle lane has hours of operation, that it was driven / ridden there during those hours. All of which makes enforcement subect to challnge and therefore makes it much easier for them just to turn a blind eye. 

Avatar
Hirsute | 4 years ago
0 likes

What I don't follow is the delineation of offences between different years. It's still the same markings.
Are there any other supposed anomalies in these 2 rather large documents?

Avatar
quiff replied to Hirsute | 4 years ago
0 likes

hirsute wrote:

What I don't follow is the delineation of offences between different years. It's still the same markings. Are there any other supposed anomalies in these 2 rather large documents?

Good point, I glossed over that. The 2016 regulations seem to have repealed the 2002 regulations, so I suspect that in fact it's the case that you can now legally park (but not ride / drive) in any mandatory cycle lane - worse overall, but better than the unmanageable mess that would be created by having different rules for infrastructure according to its age. 

EDIT - to be fair, the latest Cycling UK blog seems to recognise this is a rule change rather than two inconsistent rules in tandem, as was previously reported

Avatar
quiff | 4 years ago
0 likes

Thanks, spotted that this morning - it postdates our speculation above, but seems to confirm what I guessed. Extract:

"the wording of the relevant law in TSRGD (remember that bible of traffic signs?) had changed. The 2002 version had said that the solid white line denoted a prohibition against mandatory cycle lanes being “used” by other vehicles during their hours of operation. The 2016 revision of TSRGD had replaced the word “used” with “driven, or ridden”... Absurdly, DfT initially tried to claim that using a mandatory cycle lane didn’t include parking in it – so nothing had changed. "  

Avatar
yourealwaysbe | 4 years ago
2 likes

Late to the party, but here's an in depth explanation by CyclingUK:

https://www.cyclinguk.org/blog/underhand-law-change-undermines-mandatory...

Avatar
quiff | 4 years ago
0 likes

spen - I suspect we're the only two people who care, but I think a cycle track is separate from the road, and a cycle lane is part of the road, and that they are treated differently:

The definition of cycle track in The Highways Act is actually as follows, in s.329: “cycle track” means a way constituting or comprised in a highway, being a way over which the public have the following, but no other, rights of way, that is to say, a right of way on pedal cycles [F3(other than pedal cycles which are motor vehicles within the meaning of [F4the Road Traffic Act 1988]] with or without a right of way on foot."

It's worth noting that "highway" in this context includes but it not limited to roads, because "cycle tracks", "carriageways", "footways" and "bridleways" are all defined in the same way, so they can all be considered forms or parts of a highway.

Rather than defining a cycle track, I think the section you've quoted basically clarifies that a highway authority can build a cycle track (as defined above) alongside a road without having to comply with certain requirements which would apply were it not alongside a road - it doesn't mean a cycle track is always on or alongside a road.

The TSRGD meanwhile distinguish between cycle tracks (as defined above) and cycle lanes, which are "part of a carriageway of a road". Rules 62 and 63 of The Highway Code (admittedly only guidance, not legislation) bears this out - it suggests that cycle tracks are "normally located away from the road, but may occasionally be found alongside footpaths or pavements" while cycle lanes are along the carriageway (i.e. road). In practice I expect this means a cycle track is physically separated from the road, e.g. by a kerb, while a cycle lane is part of the road. 

So my interpretation is that while you are right that s.21 RTA prohibits driving or parking on cycle tracks, it is not relevant to cycle lanes (which are part of the carriageway), but the TSRGD prohibit riding or driving (but not parking) a motor vehicle in a cycle lane. 

It's still a mess though.  

Avatar
spen | 4 years ago
0 likes

Quiff - the definition of a cycle track used in the RTA is from the Highways Act and dfines a cycle track as being "in or by the side of a highway maintainable at the public expense"

Avatar
spen | 4 years ago
1 like

I had a look at the TSRGD yesterday and compared the 2008 and 2019 versions and I couldn't see a change.  The TSRGD also only lays out what signs and road markings are to be used, not what can and cannot be done on the roads.

 

The online version of  section 21 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, the bit which governs parking in cycle lanes, shows no changes and no pending changes.

 

Can any one point to a link for the change? 

Avatar
quiff replied to spen | 4 years ago
0 likes

spen wrote:

I had a look at the TSRGD yesterday and compared the 2008 and 2019 versions and I couldn't see a change.  The TSRGD also only lays out what signs and road markings are to be used, not what can and cannot be done on the roads.

The online version of  section 21 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, the bit which governs parking in cycle lanes, shows no changes and no pending changes.

Can any one point to a link for the change? 

I also spent far too much time yesterday trying to work this out. s.21 RTA 988 relates only to cycle tracks, which are distinct from cycle lanes. The TSRGD don't create offences, but they do stipulate what can and cannot be done in the sense that TSRGD 2016 says at Part 7, para 12 (as hirsute quotes above and I quoted in the live blog yesterday) "a vehicle, other than a pedal cycle, must not be driven, or ridden, in the cycle lane during the cycle lane’s hours of operation (which may be all the time)". There are other provisions which then cross refer to the RTA 1988 to make contravention an offence.

However, it still wasn't clear to me in what way Cycling UK says this is a change from the previous position. The best explanation I could come up with is that the TSRGD 2002 provide that a cycle lane may be "used" only by pedal cycles (see schedule 6, diagram 1049, and the definition of 'cycle lane' in regulation 4); whereas the TSRGD 2016 downgrade this by saying vehicles other than pedal cycles must not be driven or ridden in a cycle lane. Parking in a cycle lane arguably falls foul of the 2002 regs, but not the 2016 regs (leaving aside the practicality that in most scenarios you would first have to drive into a cycle lane in order to park in it).     

Avatar
ConcordeCX | 4 years ago
1 like

The only reasonable way out of this mess is to do away with the blunt instrument of solid lines versus dashed lines, and to introduce solid lines=no entry, no parking, and Morse-coded lines, or perhaps even Braille since so many drivers are obviously blind, specifying the times and conditions under which they may enter or park in the bike lane.

 

Avatar
brooksby replied to ConcordeCX | 4 years ago
3 likes

ConcordeCX wrote:

The only reasonable way out of this mess is to do away with the blunt instrument of solid lines versus dashed lines, and to introduce solid lines=no entry, no parking, and Morse-coded lines, or perhaps even Braille since so many drivers are obviously blind, specifying the times and conditions under which they may enter or park in the bike lane.

In all fairness, how many times do you actually see mandatory/solid-white-line cycle lanes outside of That There London?  The vast majority are two feet wide with a hatched white line, in my experience.

Avatar
HoarseMann | 4 years ago
4 likes

Maybe it’s like how it’s illegal to drive on a pavement, but if you park on it that’s fine, we won’t ask how you got there.

Avatar
Hirsute | 4 years ago
0 likes

But what 2016 update ?

2016 No. 362
ROAD TRAFFIC
The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016

Mandatory with flow cycle lanes
12.—(1) This paragraph applies to the road marking provided for at item 7 of the sign table in Part 6—
(a) when that marking is being used to separate a cycle lane from another part of the carriageway; and
(b) where the direction of travel along the cycle lane and the part of the carriageway from which it is separated is the same.
(2) Subject to sub-paragraphs (3) to (5), the marking conveys the requirement that a vehicle, other than a pedal cycle, must not be driven, or ridden, in the cycle
lane during the cycle lane’s hours of operation (which may be all the time).
 

Can you provide a link to the SI that gives this new effect ?

 

 

Avatar
Sriracha | 4 years ago
1 like

How does this square with rule 243:
"Rule 243
DO NOT stop or park:
...
where you would obstruct cyclists’ use of cycle facilities

except when forced to do so by stationary traffic."

Latest Comments