Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() John Rowland wrote: The City Of London Police have announced that they will prosecute not only drivers who go through the final stop line when the traffic light is reds, but also drivers who go through the initial stop line before the cycle box. About time too. I can only recall two occasions on my daily cycle commute when there haven't been cars in the cycle box. The rule about not enroaching the cycle box has been in the highway code for some years now but is being blatently ignored. It looks like the only way to get people to follow the rules is to enforce them. Even the cars which stop behind their line manage to drift forward to the cycle line on most occasions This makes it noticeably harder to stop legally during the amber phase. How? Why are you driving if you can stop at the white line before the lights. Maybe something they can do to help you would be to have a set of repeater lights I don't see how the police can do this without lengthening the amber phase to compensate, but even that doesn't really help. I think the only fair solution is to remove the final stop line - since cyclists have no license plates, the final stop line no longer serves any purpose It does - it tells me where to stop my bike. It's purpose is to make it safe for me to cycle by not letting me cycle through a junction while there is conflicting traffic snip Incidentally, I waited immediately behind the cycle box yesterday for the green light for turning right from Silvertown Way to George Street, and after about five minutes the driver behind tapped on my window and informed me that the sensor only activated if I pulled my car forward onto the green box! So I presume you reported the fault? |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Chris! wrote:
John Rowland wrote: The City Of London Police have announced that they will prosecute not only drivers who go through the final stop line when the traffic light is reds, but also drivers who go through the initial stop line before the cycle box. About time too. I can only recall two occasions on my daily cycle commute when there haven't been cars in the cycle box. On a busy road, that is legal and expected. |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In ,
Nick Finnigan said: Chris! wrote: John Rowland wrote: The City Of London Police have announced that they will prosecute not only drivers who go through the final stop line when the traffic light is reds, but also drivers who go through the initial stop line before the cycle box. About time too. I can only recall two occasions on my daily cycle commute when there haven't been cars in the cycle box. On a busy road, that is legal and expected. Why? |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Brimstone wrote:
In , Nick Finnigan said: Chris! wrote: John Rowland wrote: The City Of London Police have announced that they will prosecute not only drivers who go through the final stop line when the traffic light is reds, but also drivers who go through the initial stop line before the cycle box. About time too. I can only recall two occasions on my daily cycle commute when there haven't been cars in the cycle box. On a busy road, that is legal and expected. Why? Walter has posted HC rule 154 which shows it is legal. If vehicles are close together, one will generally have proceeded over the first white line at the time the signal turns red. |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Nick Finnigan" wrote in message Brimstone wrote: In , Nick Finnigan said: Chris! wrote: John Rowland wrote: The City Of London Police have announced that they will prosecute not only drivers who go through the final stop line when the traffic light is reds, but also drivers who go through the initial stop line before the cycle box. About time too. I can only recall two occasions on my daily cycle commute when there haven't been cars in the cycle box. On a busy road, that is legal and expected. Why? Walter has posted HC rule 154 which shows it is legal. If vehicles are close together, one will generally have proceeded over the first white line at the time the signal turns red. Only if the driver ignores the meaning of an amber traffic light. Ian |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ian wrote:
"Nick Finnigan" wrote in message Walter has posted HC rule 154 which shows it is legal. If vehicles are close together, one will generally have proceeded over the first white line at the time the signal turns red. Only if the driver ignores the meaning of an amber traffic light. Nope. If the vehicles are close enough, one of them will have to wait between the different Stop Lines, in order to obey the HC and the law. And vehicles approaching traffic lights in London are often close enough to stop a Taxi pulling into the gap. |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Nick Finnigan" wrote in message Ian wrote: "Nick Finnigan" wrote in message Walter has posted HC rule 154 which shows it is legal. If vehicles are close together, one will generally have proceeded over the first white line at the time the signal turns red. Only if the driver ignores the meaning of an amber traffic light. Nope. If the vehicles are close enough, one of them will have to wait between the different Stop Lines, in order to obey the HC and the law. And vehicles approaching traffic lights in London are often close enough to stop a Taxi pulling into the gap. So you are talking about the case where a car is in a queue moving slowly forward. The traffic lights change from green after he has passed the first stop line and before he has passed the second line. TSRGD2002 Section 5 paragraph 43 says, '2) Where the road marking shown in diagram 1001.2 has been placed in conjunction with light signals, "stop line" in relation to those light signals means - (a) the first stop line, in the case of a vehicle (other than a pedal cycle proceeding in the cycle lane) which has not proceeded beyond that line; or (b) the second stop line, in the case of a vehicle which has proceeded beyond the first stop line or of a pedal cycle proceeding in the cycle lane.' The road marking in the diagram is a stop line incidentally. However, red light cameras are not normally activated until a few seconds after the lights have turned red and they take two photos a short time apart to show that the vehicle was moving after the red light came on. If a car stopped at a red light inside the cycle box he hasn't committed an offence unless he entered the box whilst the red light was on. In which case he would have passed the first stop line a few seconds after the traffic lights went red. Ian |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ian wrote:
"Nick Finnigan" wrote in message Walter has posted HC rule 154 which shows it is legal. If vehicles are close together, one will generally have proceeded over the first white line at the time the signal turns red. Only if the driver ignores the meaning of an amber traffic light. You seem to have a different interpretation of the regs to me, and I can't see why, so here a simpler example: You are driving (a motor vehicle) at a safe and legal speed, with no other vehicles moving in your direction for 200 yards, approaching some (green) traffic lights which have these two stop lines in front of them. Then the lights change to amber; you move your foot to cover the brake pedal, and realize that you can not (physically, and so safely) stop before reaching the first stop line. You can, however, stop safely before passing the second stop line. You can also get past the second stop line before the lights change to red (based on experience). What legal options do you have? Which is the best one? |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Nick Finnigan wrote:
You are driving (a motor vehicle) at a safe and legal speed, with no other vehicles moving in your direction for 200 yards, approaching some (green) traffic lights which have these two stop lines in front of them. Then the lights change to amber; you move your foot to cover the brake pedal, and realize that you can not (physically, and so safely) stop before reaching the first stop line. You can, however, stop safely before passing the second stop line. You can also get past the second stop line before the lights change to red (based on experience). What legal options do you have? Which is the best one? Stop at the second line. Though as the lines are so close together it's rarely as cut and dried as this. Stopping halfway betwen would still allow a bike to fit in front of you, and is worth doing if you can. Colin McKenzie |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Nick Finnigan" wrote in message Ian wrote: "Nick Finnigan" wrote in message Walter has posted HC rule 154 which shows it is legal. If vehicles are close together, one will generally have proceeded over the first white line at the time the signal turns red. Only if the driver ignores the meaning of an amber traffic light. You seem to have a different interpretation of the regs to me, and I can't see why, so here a simpler example: You are driving (a motor vehicle) at a safe and legal speed, with no other vehicles moving in your direction for 200 yards, approaching some (green) traffic lights which have these two stop lines in front of them. Then the lights change to amber; you move your foot to cover the brake pedal, and realize that you can not (physically, and so safely) stop before reaching the first stop line. You can, however, stop safely before passing the second stop line. You can also get past the second stop line before the lights change to red (based on experience). What legal options do you have? Which is the best one? Legally you should stop at the second stop line. That is what it says in TSRGD2002 Section 5 paragraph 43 (b). As I understand it, red light cameras are normally only active a few seconds after the red light has come on and they are activated by movement. They take two photos with a gap between them to prove motion. So a red light camera wouldn't detect a stationary vehicle in the cycle box. To be detected it would need to cross the first line a few seconds after the red light came on. Ian |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
TfL's latest scam - charging twice for a bus journey | London Transport | |||
Nice oyster scam | London Transport | |||
Ticket scam | London Transport | |||
Suspected Scam Oyster on Buses | London Transport | |||
petrol scam | London Transport |