posted 2 years ago

Cycle Streets With 15mph Limit And No Overtaking

New Cycle Streets Could Cut Road Casualties

The Government is considering introducing cycle streets where cars cannot overtake bikes or exceed fifteen miles per-hour. This proposal – that has been revealed via the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions consultation document – could be implemented in cities such as London, Manchester, Birmingham, Newcastle upon Tyne and Oxford. Routes would be lightly trafficked with a high number of cyclists. The purpose of the initiative is to reduce the number of cyclists killed and injured. The typical figure is more than one-hundred deaths per-annum and nineteen thousand injuries. As such, motorists that flout the rules could be fined one-hundred pounds and receive penalty points. The latter could increase the cost of motor insurance, etc. This initiative – which is described in the consultation document as “bold” - mimics similar concepts in Holland and Germany which ensure cyclists receive priority over cars.

Further Proposals To Make Cycling In The United Kingdom Safer

The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions document has revealed other concepts to make riding safer. They relate to traffic signs, road markings, etc. and include: 

  • Cycle safety mirrors (trixi mirrors).
  • 'No Entry Except Cycles' signing.
  • Cycle filter signals.
  • Use of a red cycle aspect on cycle-only traffic lights.
  • Cycle route branding - for example, wider national use of Transport for London's Cycle Superhighways branding and the new Quietways signing.
  • Larger Advanced Stop Lines to provide more capacity for cyclists.
  • New road markings to help indicate cycle routes through junctions.
  • Wider cycle lane markings.
  • The use of the square white elephant's footprints markings to indicate the route for cyclists through a traffic signal controlled junction.
  • Greater flexibility in designing twenty miles per-hour zones and limits.
  • Advanced Stop Lines covering only part of the width of the road - for example, across one lane only. 
  • Removing the requirement for signs indicating off-road cycle routes to be lit.
  • Allowing smaller signs for off-road cycle route.
  • Allowing zig-zag markings at pedestrian crossings to be offset from the kerb by up to two metre, to allow cycle lanes to continue through the controlled area.
  • Where pedestrian zone signs include the 'no motor vehicles' sign, the zone will be referred to as a 'pedestrian and cycle zone'. This will help people's understanding of the difference between the 'no vehicles' and 'no motor vehicles' signs.
 

First of all why do most motorists seem to jump on the road tax issue? It's not even road tax it's vehicle excise duty, a charge for using the vehicle and it doesn't pay for the roads, that comes from local funding and all that pay tax pay this! Why also do motorists assume that because we ride a bike we don't also have a car and are therefore also paying VED? That said I do agree with some of the comments, particularly in relation to the way some ride. There is a thrill to doing a bit of weaving in traffic but don't push your luck and do accept the consequence of an accident you are in or cause due to this. I believe if cyclists (and I am one) were to ride within the laws motorists would be more tolerant and not moan about extra cycle lanes etc. or at least not as much! It doesn't have to be a war it should be an alliance :-)

Bullet point two (from the bottom). Does that mean cyclists are free to run down crossing pedestrians? :D

While on a daily basis I witness the irresponsible antics of motor vehicle drivers, I cannot at the same time condone the death wish behaviour of some cyclists. Use of mobiles phones, earphones blocking their hearing, riding on PEDESTRIAN pavements, jumping red lights, overtaking on zig-zags at crossings....do you want me to go on! A 15 mph speed limit might have its merits but some communities are struggling to even have 20 mph limits provided because "not enough fatalities have taken place"! In my village the Lycra brigade use the road as a race track so even they would not keep to any speed limit. As for there being priority for cyclists in Holland.....that is not a model to follow: just do not go there! Let's all get on Shank's pony for a change!

As motorists and cyclist, I welcome wholeheartedly these proposals. Most UK Highways depts work on a principle of as many motor vehicles as possible to be moved as quickly as possible and the needs for vulnerable cyclists and pedestrians to be secondary to this. The priority should be that vulnerable road users come first not last. I note there has been the customary rant about cyclists paying for their facilities. The fact is all highways are paid for from general taxation, so why should cyclists be penalised.

It would be good to return to the sensible position from the road signage and management on parking which operated in the pre 'yellow everywhere days. Rather than have masses of yellow paint and yellow signs showing where we cannot park cars we return to a rule that you put a sign up where you CAN park cars, and leaving a car unattended and parked anywhere else on the carriageway is an obstruction to the movement of traffic. This would remove any doubt or misunderstanding in what a parking restriction was, and thus the disputes over parking fines. It would also allow councils to focus on the sole mandated task in providing a road for MOVING traffic. With (at a rough estimate) 50-60% of the road surface in an urban area not required for moving traffic - proved by the fact that there are parked cars sitting on it , for the 96% of time that a typical car sits parked, the local councils could concentrate on repairing only the roads needed for moving traffic and return the bits not required for this either to the owners of the land on which the road sits, or offer a contract to a car park operator to manage the areas not required for moving traffic as a car park, and reflecting the market value of the parking spaces so provided. Given that the land generally belongs to the frontager (ie the land under the road outside your house may belong to you) the car park operators would pay ground rent for the spaces provided on the former road. The other signs missing in the list are for pedestrian priority, a key part of how a pedestrian zone needs to be managed, and level crossing signs for level crossings in poor condition where the uneven surface might bring down a motorbike or bicycle, plus one to highlight a need for using an audible warning of approach - like the whistle boards for train drivers where visibility of other road users ahead may be restricted.

I don't think the Holland/Germany thing will work here. Most of their roads are wider than ours. So instead of making our streets narrower to make room for un-used cycle lanes get rid of grass verges and extra-wide pavements. I agree with others on this subject regarding cyclists taking a proficiency test -- I took one fifty years ago - is it still in force or is it something else scrubbed to save money.

when they (idiots on bikes)pay for it they can have whatever they want until then they should follow to highway code and stop using the roads as if they have a death wish

I drive and cycle - I feel safe driving but when cycling my safety is at risk from impatient drivers determined to reach their destination 30 seconds earlier. The roads need to be made safer for cyclists. It's a crack down on bad driving not cycling that is needed - Deaths caused by cars - typically around 1000 per year. Deaths caused by cyclists typically 0-3 per year. Speaks for its self.

yes I drive a car and ride a motor cycle, I used to ride a push bike years ago. but lets face the fact and reality of it all yes there are bad motorists, but lets face the fact of things cyclists should be traind and certified competent to ride one I all to often see cyclist just pull out of nowhere and they all to well just shoot of off the pavement giving the motorist no chance at avoiding them and there the ones shouting the loudest about the dangers on the roads, I have seen pedestrians nearly knocked over on pavements by them so I think that they should be insured and taxed plus there push bikes should go through a yearly mot for push bikes as there are a few that are unroad worthy also have you seen those stupid morons that ride one that they are to big for you know where they when pedalling the have to stand UP ON THE PEDALS TO PEDAL THE ROCKING THE BIKE FROM SIDE TO SIDE THERE I HAVE HAD MY SAY SO ITS DOWN TO THE BLOODY GOERNMENT TO GET OF IT`S ARSE AND GET IT RIGHT ALL THEY SEEM TO DO IS CAUSE PROBLEMS AND MORE PROBLEMS

Keith Wait - it won't be addressed until walking becomes a fashion, like cycling is now. Allow 5 to 10 years for hipsters to rediscover it. Until then sit at home.

In Germany & Holland there are cycle lanes separate to the road & they undertake training with a test also. Both in Germany & Holland the pedestrian takes priority over the cyclist & all obey traffic signals etc & stay off the road.

Cycle only streets! Most cyclists will still ride along the pavement anyway : and a lot faster than 15mph. When will the safety of pedestrians be addressed?

How can we have a speed limit at such a speed that it cannot be enforced? Speedometers are incredibly inaccurate at 20mph and more do at 15!!!

Doesn't matter the road user, as there are so many bad drivers out there no matter the vehicle. I've seen so many red light jumpers whether cyclists or motor vehicle users that you need to wait a few seconds before leaving a green light due to the untold recklessness of others. Road users where I live seem to think the minimum speed is above 40mph and there are some really arrogant users. There are cyclists who think that the red light isn't for them, and then there are pedestrians who don't even look when crossing the road and then shout at you when you sound the horn to let them know of there stupidity. Trouble with these type of rules, is the people in control are too afraid to invest in infrastructure, which means proper cycle lanes segregated from the motorist for there safety and ours. Also, there is a real lack of police presence on the road to knock those that continually break the law. Heck, just look at the police interceptor program's. The fines and court rulings don't mean squat when it comes to some of the serious things people do on the road. And people are still driving one handed while using there mobile phone. That fine doesn't mean anything either.

Will I, when cycling,have to use a neglected potholed litter strewn cycle lane regardless of safety? I would be quite happy for the maintenance of cycle lanes here in Edinburgh, especially if some drivers are taught/forced to stay out of them. And yes, I drive, pay various VEDs am insured and actually have cycle insurance too. Everyone just needs to rub along respecting eachother and there would be no need to spend lots of money.

Where cycle lanes are provided it should be a legal requirement to use them

@Terry Cooper @Steve Bussey You don't pay road tax; you pay VED, a tax on your vehicle based on carbon emissions or engine size. The carbon emissions that a cyclist will produce will be less than tax band A, £0.00 for 12 months. You do not pay for the use of the roads. General taxation, income tax, vat, fuel duty, cigarette duty, alcohol duty and council tax pay for the roads we use. The council that you live in will get 75% from the above, known as central government, and the rest will come from council tax payers, known as local government. @ Andrew Frost What about the bad motorists, you know, the ones who don’t indicate, don’t give way, run through red lights, perform a bad overtakes, tailgate, lane hog, bock the road to get some chips from the chip shop, inconsiderate to other road users, go over the speed limit, don’t know that you have to give way to drivers already on the motorway, don’t let emergency vehicles past, drunk drivers, people who think they pay road tax and many more. Problem is there are good and bad on both sides but you don’t recognized that.

Who said cyclists dont pay insurance? i have a road bike and i pay insurance, i have cars and pay car tax (which does not pay for the roads). people that spout rubbish about cyclist should look up the facts, my income tax pays for the roads not the tax on my car! (its a pollution tax)

Why do some people assume cyclists have no insurance and pay no tax? Apparently 80% of cyclists drive cars too! I cycle, I have insurance, a full driving license to drive cars and motorcycles and pay over £400 a year car tax (which is not road tax!).

Look you lot I tax and insure two motor vehicles but choose to cycle to work 1, for fitness and 2, to keep cars off the road so you morons have less cars on the road. I obey the laws of the road but some idiot car users think they have priority over cyclists and drive like knobs its about time cyclist had more protection from you.

Control freaks gone mad, give a person a uniform, and they think they can control all. Why doe a car driver or motor cyclist have to have a mandatory test, a licence, insurance and road tax before they can even set a wheel on a public street? Cyclists who I call urban terrorists have no training, no licence no insuarance and contribute NOTHING to the road tax take, all they do is break near enough every law, and then when they end up in hospital, its always the car drivers fault. Wake up you stupid shower of brain dead to$$pots who dream up these mad schemes, got a life and leave the law abiding citizens alone for a change, you continually think of more and more ways to pick our pockets, go pick someone else's for a change.

Cyclists are the only road users who are not required to pass a test, have insurance, have any vehicular identification or pay for road use. Nobody wants to see anyone injured, but the cyclists need to be made more aware of their own actions. The cash cow called 'the motorists', will end up paying for all the proposed measures. Make the cyclists pay. My guess is that they will object to that proposal immediately. How much would the accident rate drop if all cyclists were required to be identifiable via a registration number & therefore be traceable. The number of cyclists ignoring traffic lights would also drop. It's time to wise up. The cyclists have had an easy time. Now it's time for a change.

The ever increasing number of bad cyclists on our roads is the factor that is contributing to the increased injury and death figures so let us blame the motorists!! When will the powers that be see this and start clamping down on bad cycling. Red light jumping, pavement riding, no lights at night, aggressive behaviour towards other road users,ignorance of the Highway Code, to name but a few. Hey government here is a money spinner for you "Cycle Licences" something about £200 per year to help pay for emergency services when you get knocked off your bike whilst jumping a red light!

Cyclists if you want to youse the road pay road tax and have insurance . Even take a proficancy test to get cheaper insurance .

The anti car brigade are in full flow! The result of such initiatives will be to make careless cyclists - and there are plenty of them - even more blase about how the ride. Cyclists should hold minimum 3rd party insurance (kids too)and be banned from riding two or more abreast. This will make drivers frustrated and a frustrated driver is not as safe as a calm driver!

Madness!! absolute Madness!! What happens when a cyclist is only travelling at 5mph? Will this stop cyclists travelling against the traffic flow? Why should the cyclists be able to travel through pedestrian crossings, near my home there are regular near misses with pedestrians at a crossing near the railway station, cyclists go through the red lights and dodge passengers with luggage. Madness!!