London Banter - View Single Post

[email protected] · April 15th 09, 02:57 PM posted to uk.transport.london

In article ,
(JNugent) wrote:

Tony Dragon wrote:

Tom Crispin wrote:
On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 23:58:49 +0100, JNugent
wrote:

"Cyclists may legally be able to go through red traffic lights
under plans being considered in London.
"More than a third of fatal cycling accidents in London involve
cyclists being hit by heavy vehicles turning left, Transport for
London (TfL) said."

Two things:

(a) Boris isn't TaL, and
(b) it doesn't stand a chance of being enacted by Parliament, as it
would mean that there were two completely different rules in force
in the UK.

I think that you are wrong on both counts.

(a) About the only thing Boris does have executive control over is
TfL.
(b) In a year or a little over a year Parliament could be filled with
Boris' pals. Besides, it may not require Parliament approval - a
little white paint on the road defining a mandatory cycle lane
without a stop line for left turning cyclists is all that should be
required. Junctions like that already exist in the UK, albeit with
the cycle lane bumping up onto the pavement past the lights.

Cyclist, mandatory cycle lane, do the two things go together?
But yes you are probably correct, but there should still be a stop
line, other cycles could be using the road.

In the "solution" proposed above by TC, the route would not be
through a red light, and as a system, it could only be put into
place at enormous cost for the works necessary (and would probably
never be extended to all lights for that reason).

The reports speak of "going through red lights", not "being
provided with an alternative route not subject to lights".

That's a different matter altogether.

We have red lights in Cambridge with a green light showing only a cycle
symbol attached so cyclists can always go at bus gates.

--
Colin Rosenstiel