Cars regain priority at Yarm cycle path crossing

deblemund wrote:

I *only* know about Rule 170 because I learned it on my cycling proficiency test about 30 years ago. I still obey it in my car because I was taught it on my bike.

Other than the general invitation to "learn the Highway Code", it was not touched upon in driving lessons about 10 years after that.

Perhaps things have changed, and perhaps my experience is unrepresentative. I hope so / doubt it.

I have been driving 8? years now, and it hadn't changed at that point, I just made the conscious effort to try and understand as much of the highway code as I could. I have also made the conscious effort to check events that I am unsure about, ie roundabouts and which lane to use!!

I strongly believe VERY few people ever bother, and that the code Is free, if you have the internet, makes it more depressing. Hardly surprising though.

antigee wrote:

cycling isn't really very high up the agenda for the local council in our city district of Melbourne, Aus but one of the local paths has quite a few of these

I guess if sight lines are poor the authorities could always make it a Stop sign /Line for drivers so they have to be a bit more cautious

As an aside I really hate those temporary speed humps in the picture above. They use them in Sydney along the Barangaroo construction site and for a while in Leichhardt on approach to pedestrian crossings. In the wet they're lethal to ride over, but the biggest risk is cars just drive around them by cutting into the cycle lane without looking or indicating.

There's also a smaller version which is basically two 1 foot long humps placed where a cars wheel would normally be but again it just prompts drivers to treat them as a chicane!

mrmo wrote:

remind me, who has priority at junctions?

Rule 170 of the Highway Code specifically says “(Pedestrians) who have started to cross , have priority”. My interruption is that doesn’t mean a pedestrian can step off the kerb into the path of a vehicle turning at the junction.

When you are cycling along a road and about to turn left into a side road, you notice a pedestrian walking along the pavement, who will step out onto the road you are about to turn into, at the same time you will arive at that point; do you stop to let them cross ? Or is your expectation that they will stop at the kerb and look, on seeing you turning they will wait for you to pass before stepping onto the road ?

So the concept of cycle traffic on paths having priority over motor vehicles turning from a road, like they do in the Netherlands, is something new in the UK. I do of course think it is a great idea and the way forward. But I can see a problem that unless the junction layout is designed well and the signs make it 100% clear to drivers they have to stop to give-way to a cyclist on the path, something drivers aren’t currently used to doing in the UK, it will lead to dangerous situations.

Pete B wrote:

Rule 170 of the Highway Code specifically says “(Pedestrians) who have started to cross , have priority”. My interruption is that doesn’t mean a pedestrian can step off the kerb into the path of a vehicle turning at the junction.

If the pedestrian is crossing they are crossing, there is a white line at junctions for a reason, if the car has to cross the line then by definition of a line the car doesn't have priority. It is one of the many issues on the roads where everyone has been cowed by the car lobby. Think of how zebra crossings are meant to work, the moment the pedestrian has stepped into the road they are incharge, and yes the highway code does contradict itself!!!! but I would say rule 195 trumps rule 19, because 195 says drivers MUST stop, whereas 19 suggests pedestrians don't try and cross if there are any cars.

Maybe we need to look at the continental model again and place zebra crossings at every junction to reinforce who is in charge?

And yes the laws do need to be changed to clarify cycle paths where they cross roads.