Cyclists face new traffic lights in Regent's Park
Discussion
"Cyclists in Regent's Park will face new traffic lights aimed at improving pedestrian safety after a series of crashes and near misses.
The Royal Parks charity said work had begun to install three signal-controlled crossings on the Outer Circle – a 2.7-mile (4.3km) road in Westminster that is one of the capital's most popular cycling routes.
The new crossings will be located at Monkey Hill Gate, Chester Gate and Kent Passage. Cyclists caught jumping red lights by police could face an on-the-spot fine of £50."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c150n02d10po
Given that there are very few police around and cameras don't work on cyclists, is this all a bit pointless?
The Royal Parks charity said work had begun to install three signal-controlled crossings on the Outer Circle – a 2.7-mile (4.3km) road in Westminster that is one of the capital's most popular cycling routes.
The new crossings will be located at Monkey Hill Gate, Chester Gate and Kent Passage. Cyclists caught jumping red lights by police could face an on-the-spot fine of £50."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c150n02d10po
Given that there are very few police around and cameras don't work on cyclists, is this all a bit pointless?
Hitting a pedestrian is my biggest fear while cycling, even if it's them that's caused the crash.
That said, there's a few sets of lights on my way to work that I blow through if there's no one there, usually because it's 5am or midnight, or I legitimately go round them using the shared cycle/pedestrian pavement.
It's a motorists thing to be obsessed with traffic lights for cyclists. If I have to sit here they must do as well.
But equally pedestrians need protection too and I wouldn't enjoy cycling somewhere where there's so many people milling around, I'll stick to playing with cars.
That said, there's a few sets of lights on my way to work that I blow through if there's no one there, usually because it's 5am or midnight, or I legitimately go round them using the shared cycle/pedestrian pavement.
It's a motorists thing to be obsessed with traffic lights for cyclists. If I have to sit here they must do as well.
But equally pedestrians need protection too and I wouldn't enjoy cycling somewhere where there's so many people milling around, I'll stick to playing with cars.
mgv8 said:
If you have been to that park, you will know there are quite a few police around. They also do a lot of targeted work there. It will work, but just sad that walkers can not cross with out looking.
Whilst staying near Skipton this year I was cycling down a road when a pair of ped's just stepped out in front of me from behind a van, completely looking the other way.He remonstrated with me saying I should have used my bell to tell them I was there (not sure why I would as they were hidden behind the van) I shouted back, "perhaps you should have enough self-preservation to look before crossing the road".
ChocolateFrog said:
Hitting a pedestrian is my biggest fear while cycling, even if it's them that's caused the crash.
That said, there's a few sets of lights on my way to work that I blow through if there's no one there, usually because it's 5am or midnight, or I legitimately go round them using the shared cycle/pedestrian pavement.
It's a motorists thing to be obsessed with traffic lights for cyclists. If I have to sit here they must do as well.
But equally pedestrians need protection too and I wouldn't enjoy cycling somewhere where there's so many people milling around, I'll stick to playing with cars.
would you drive through a red light at midnight/5 am in your car if no one was around?That said, there's a few sets of lights on my way to work that I blow through if there's no one there, usually because it's 5am or midnight, or I legitimately go round them using the shared cycle/pedestrian pavement.
It's a motorists thing to be obsessed with traffic lights for cyclists. If I have to sit here they must do as well.
But equally pedestrians need protection too and I wouldn't enjoy cycling somewhere where there's so many people milling around, I'll stick to playing with cars.
simon_harris said:
ChocolateFrog said:
Hitting a pedestrian is my biggest fear while cycling, even if it's them that's caused the crash.
That said, there's a few sets of lights on my way to work that I blow through if there's no one there, usually because it's 5am or midnight, or I legitimately go round them using the shared cycle/pedestrian pavement.
It's a motorists thing to be obsessed with traffic lights for cyclists. If I have to sit here they must do as well.
But equally pedestrians need protection too and I wouldn't enjoy cycling somewhere where there's so many people milling around, I'll stick to playing with cars.
would you drive through a red light at midnight/5 am in your car if no one was around?That said, there's a few sets of lights on my way to work that I blow through if there's no one there, usually because it's 5am or midnight, or I legitimately go round them using the shared cycle/pedestrian pavement.
It's a motorists thing to be obsessed with traffic lights for cyclists. If I have to sit here they must do as well.
But equally pedestrians need protection too and I wouldn't enjoy cycling somewhere where there's so many people milling around, I'll stick to playing with cars.
Would you drive over the speed limit at midnight/5 am on an empty motorway if no one was around?
simon_harris said:
ChocolateFrog said:
Hitting a pedestrian is my biggest fear while cycling, even if it's them that's caused the crash.
That said, there's a few sets of lights on my way to work that I blow through if there's no one there, usually because it's 5am or midnight, or I legitimately go round them using the shared cycle/pedestrian pavement.
It's a motorists thing to be obsessed with traffic lights for cyclists. If I have to sit here they must do as well.
But equally pedestrians need protection too and I wouldn't enjoy cycling somewhere where there's so many people milling around, I'll stick to playing with cars.
would you drive through a red light at midnight/5 am in your car if no one was around?That said, there's a few sets of lights on my way to work that I blow through if there's no one there, usually because it's 5am or midnight, or I legitimately go round them using the shared cycle/pedestrian pavement.
It's a motorists thing to be obsessed with traffic lights for cyclists. If I have to sit here they must do as well.
But equally pedestrians need protection too and I wouldn't enjoy cycling somewhere where there's so many people milling around, I'll stick to playing with cars.
Simpo Two said:
The risk of ignoring traffic lights is rather greater than doing 35 in a 30 IMHO.
But, if we're being pedantic, they're both laws and all laws should be obeyed - and being on a bicycle doesn't make people exempt.
But he said a motorway...so that's 75 in a 70, so entirely different from 35 in a 30. If we are being pedantic that is.But, if we're being pedantic, they're both laws and all laws should be obeyed - and being on a bicycle doesn't make people exempt.
Simpo Two said:
The risk of ignoring traffic lights is rather greater than doing 35 in a 30 IMHO.
But, if we're being pedantic, they're both laws and all laws should be obeyed - and being on a bicycle doesn't make people exempt.
Personally, I'm a pragmatist. I've driven through red lights before - when stuck. In certain circumstances, the letter of the law can be a bit silly, and, because road infrastructure is generally designed around cars, you encounter more such situations on a bike.But, if we're being pedantic, they're both laws and all laws should be obeyed - and being on a bicycle doesn't make people exempt.
My goto example is this. Another law, HC Rule 130 for reference, but backed up by TSRGD.
Legally speaking, you must not cycle in the hatched area up this hill except in an emergency. Perhaps from my position when taking the photo, you can infer where I was cycling... no admissions here
Regarding traffic lights, I think there's a good argument that it's legal to pick your bike up and walk across the junction on red. Absurd, but I think you'd no longer be considered the "vehicular traffic" to which light signals apply.
If you can pick up your car and do the same... well, I'm definitely not going to argue with you!
So they are adding traffic lights to a road with a high rate of collisions between vehicles and pedestrians crossing the road so that pedestrians have a way to get priority instead of having to yield to traffic (and I expect taking risks because gaps aren't actually big enough).
So the only difference from what, 70-90% of other pedestrian crossing installations is the vehicles are bicycles instead of cars...
ts get away with jumping lights). (I suspect because we don't use cameras (expensive, sabotage, political campaigning against effective mesures and prosecuting cyclists being cheap and easy compared to prosecuting drivers - couple of officers flag them down on side of road vs needing 50x as much space to stop cars and much higher risk from drivers having a couple of tons of vehicle...).
So the only difference from what, 70-90% of other pedestrian crossing installations is the vehicles are bicycles instead of cars...
BlueJazz said:
Given that there are very few police around and cameras don't work on cyclists, is this all a bit pointless?
We could argue about the effectiveness of cameras if we actually regularly used them for drivers - statistically cyclists are more likely to be prosecuted than drivers relative to harm caused (yes, even with how many tts get away with jumping lights). (I suspect because we don't use cameras (expensive, sabotage, political campaigning against effective mesures and prosecuting cyclists being cheap and easy compared to prosecuting drivers - couple of officers flag them down on side of road vs needing 50x as much space to stop cars and much higher risk from drivers having a couple of tons of vehicle...).Simpo Two said:
The risk of ignoring traffic lights is rather greater than doing 35 in a 30 IMHO.
But, if we're being pedantic, they're both laws and all laws should be obeyed - and being on a bicycle doesn't make people exempt.
Your first sentence is very dependent on the circumstances. If the vehicle ignoring the traffic lights is a bicycle turning left at a red when the road (and pavement) can be seen to be clear, then the only risk is being stopped by a police officer and given a small fine. If the vehicle is a car in the same situation, there is a very real risk of being captured on a camera and receiving a much larger fine and points on a licence.But, if we're being pedantic, they're both laws and all laws should be obeyed - and being on a bicycle doesn't make people exempt.
A car doing 35 in a 30 represents increased risk to all other road users.
The law clearly regards speeding in a car to be a much more serious offence than running a red light on a bicycle.
simon_harris said:
ChocolateFrog said:
Hitting a pedestrian is my biggest fear while cycling, even if it's them that's caused the crash.
That said, there's a few sets of lights on my way to work that I blow through if there's no one there, usually because it's 5am or midnight, or I legitimately go round them using the shared cycle/pedestrian pavement.
It's a motorists thing to be obsessed with traffic lights for cyclists. If I have to sit here they must do as well.
But equally pedestrians need protection too and I wouldn't enjoy cycling somewhere where there's so many people milling around, I'll stick to playing with cars.
would you drive through a red light at midnight/5 am in your car if no one was around?That said, there's a few sets of lights on my way to work that I blow through if there's no one there, usually because it's 5am or midnight, or I legitimately go round them using the shared cycle/pedestrian pavement.
It's a motorists thing to be obsessed with traffic lights for cyclists. If I have to sit here they must do as well.
But equally pedestrians need protection too and I wouldn't enjoy cycling somewhere where there's so many people milling around, I'll stick to playing with cars.
I mean, if you can't look left and right and judge whether it's safe to pull out of a junction, how on earth do you cope with give way signs?
Whether on a bicycle or in a car, proceeding with caution through a red light is not inherently more dangerous than emerging from a side street into a main road. Indeed, I would suggest that someone sneaking through a red light at a deserted junction at 3 am is taking much less of a risk than someone emerging into a gap that's "just about big enough" in fast moving traffic on a busy road at peak time.
The main purpose of most traffic lights is to manage traffic flows, rather than being a safety feature per se. There's no real need for them outside busy periods. I used to live in a US state where the sequence changed between about 10 pm and 6 am. Instead of red/amber/green they either flashed red (which meant "give way") or flashed green ("you have right of way"). It worked well, carnage did not ensue, driving in the city at night was quicker and easier. I'm firmly of the view that we should implement something similar here.
80sMatchbox said:
simon_harris said:
would you drive through a red light at midnight/5 am in your car if no one was around?
Yes, this was a common practice when I was a teenager. It made for a safer situation.How on earth would driving your car through a red light be safer than waiting at it when you are a teenager?
ChocolateFrog said:
It's a motorists thing to be obsessed with traffic lights for cyclists. If I have to sit here they must do as well.
I think you are right. They can get arsey with motorbikes filtering to the front too (I ride both) someone once nudged my motorbike in their car when I filtered up front (on purpose) and I know motorbike riders whi sit in traffic instead of filtering as they can't handle the aggro they get from car drivers.. However, I think most of the animosity towards cyclists and red lights is probably down to the sheer quantity of helmet cam cyclists out for a prosecution these days - which then creates the "them and us" sentiment and the, "do as you preach" sentiment.I'd add that Cycling Mickey has probably done more damage to the general perception of cyclists than anyone else in the world :-)
Personally, on my bycicle - red light - if there is no one crossing, no peds near, and its clear in all directions, I'm going through. That's a whole different ball game to jumping lights in busy pedestrian areas.
Edited by Griffith4ever on Friday 16th January 09:07
Solocle said:
Traffic lights will generally detect cars. But bikes, it's like a lottery. Can sit waiting for ages then they immediately turn green as soon as a car appears.
Would you drive over the speed limit at midnight/5 am on an empty motorway if no one was around?
Two sets near me that do this, both on rural-ish junctions. Would you drive over the speed limit at midnight/5 am on an empty motorway if no one was around?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff