Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Sat Jul 25, 2026 01:15

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 89 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 18:03 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 00:15
Posts: 5232
Location: Windermere
Maybe this should be in cycling thread - but I post it here as a WARNING!
The Government has given the green light for cyclists to be allowed to travel the wrong way up one way streets.
It is presently only a trial in Kensington - but will everybody take notice?

http://road.cc/content/news/8629-cyclists-be-allowed-ride-wrong-way-along-one-way-streets-london-trial

Road CC wrote:
Cyclists to be allowed to ride wrong way along one way streets in London trial
By Kevin Emery - Posted on 17 September 2009

The government is today set to announce that cyclists will be permitted to ride the wrong way along one-way streets under a change intended to encourage more people to give up their cars and get on their bikes.

The Department for Transport (DfT) is authorising a trial in the Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea in West London, in which a small plate saying ‘Except cyclists’ will be attached to poles carrying no-entry signs.

If successful, the DfT intends to extend the policy to the rest of Britain and permit thousands of one-way streets to become two-way for bikes. It believes that long diversions around one-way systems are a significant deterrent to new cyclists, who might be less confident about breaking the rules.

The CTC said: “We have been campaigning for two-way cycling on one-way streets for years and we are delighted that the government is finally permitting a sign that is easy to understand.

“It is a safe and sensible option that is standard in all other European countries, so we can’t believe it has taken so long to be accepted here.”

“The signs currently allowed are rather confusing for both motorists and cyclists and we have campaigned the DfT to use no entry except cyclists signs on all quiet one-way streets. We hope the success in Kensington & Chelsea will encourage all other local authorities to follow their lead and use a sign which people understand.”

Daniel Moylan, the deputy leader of the Conservative-controlled council, said that he was persuaded of the need to make the change after noticing that hundreds of cyclists a day were ignoring no-entry signs on Thackeray Street, which his home overlooks. And it’s a practice that Conservative leader David Cameron was caught on film doing in March last year, after he ignored a no-entry sign and cycled the wrong way down Dawson Place, a one-way street in Kensington & Chelsea.

This is the first time that the department has permitted an exception to the no-entry rule. Existing cycle “contraflow” lanes require authorities to build separate entrances for cyclists so that they do not have to break traffic rules. The cost of building these entrances, though, has deterred all but a tiny number of authorities from creating contraflow lanes.

Road.cc reported back in January that the City of London Corporation had announced a pilot scheme to allow two-way cycling in seven one-way streets to enable cyclists to avoid busy streets.

The streets where the changes were to be made are West Smithfield, Fann Street, Cloth Fair, Creechurch Lane, Finsbury Circus, Salisbury Court and Throgmorton Street.

A City of London Corporation spokesperson said that the proposals had only just been discussed at a planning committee this week but that they are expected to still go ahead.


Now all they need is permission to ride on the pavements, and to ignore the Highway Code! The publicity over this might lead to cyclists thinking they have carte blanche to ride the wrong way elsewhere.

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 18:10 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 19:08
Posts: 3434
Don't they already cycle the wrong way in one ways streets in Cambridge? I remember turning into a one way street in Cambridge back in the early eighties to be met by a line of cyclists going the opposite way.

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 18:40 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 14:26
Posts: 4364
Location: Hampshire/Wiltshire Border
How about exemption from all traffic laws? Oh sorry, they already have.

(Explanatory Note - Once again just raising the fact that cyclists are allowed on roads with no insurance, licensing or training requirements.)

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 19:14 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 22:50
Posts: 3267
Surely if cyclists are allowed to ride down a street that was previously one way it's not a one way street any more?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 19:17 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 22:50
Posts: 3267
malcolmw wrote:
How about exemption from all traffic laws? Oh sorry, they already have.

(Explanatory Note - Once again just raising the fact that cyclists are allowed on roads with no insurance, licensing or training requirements.)


Is there any legal requirement for cyclists to have insurance, licensing or training?

An exemption would surely excempt cyclists form such requirements, but there is no exemption right? I.e. these laws only apply to motorised vehicles.

Just like speed limits only applying to motorised vehicles does than mean cyclists are "exempted" from them (and pedestrians?)


Last edited by weepej on Thu Sep 17, 2009 19:57, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 19:51 
Offline
User

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 09:26
Posts: 350
There's a few cycle lane contraflows in my 'hood, the only problem being cars parked in the marked cycle lane. Personally I'd rather there wasn't a marked lane, just a sign saying the contraflow was allowed, as in Kensington!

As the CTC say, this is the way things have worked in Europe for years, no reason why it can't work over here.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 19:57 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 04:10
Posts: 3244
No change for me then, I'm used to cyclists cycling against the traffic flow.
As I'm used to them cycling across red traffic lights.
As I'm used to them cycling at night with no lights.
As I'm used to them cycling all-over the road when drunk.
As I'm used to them cycling across zebra crossings.
As I'm used to them cycling on pavements.
In fact: No change.

_________________
The world runs on oil, period. No other substance can compete when it comes to energy density, flexibility, ease of handling, ease of transportation. If oil didn’t exist we would have to invent it.”

56 years after it was decided it was needed, the Bedford Bypass is nearing completion. The last single carriageway length of it.We have the most photogenic mayor though, always being photographed doing nothing


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 20:13 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 22:50
Posts: 3267
jomukuk wrote:
No change for me then, I'm used to cyclists cycling against the traffic flow.
As I'm used to them cycling across red traffic lights.
As I'm used to them cycling at night with no lights.
As I'm used to them cycling all-over the road when drunk.
As I'm used to them cycling across zebra crossings.
As I'm used to them cycling on pavements.



What, all of them?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 21:16 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 23:28
Posts: 1940
weepej wrote:
Surely if cyclists are allowed to ride down a street that was previously one way it's not a one way street any more?



Liebchen :love:

Ja. you are right here.

Beacon towns have the cycle lanes .. Legal. I think this make nightmare for cyclists' safety in real term :roll:

Peyote.. EU ist EU und the laws are rigid. As a cyclist . you would hate Swiss law as do the drivers :wink:

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien
!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 21:29 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 11:11
Posts: 194
Location: Kent
Why don't they understand? I like my car, I don't want to "give it up". They act as though it is smoking for christ's sake :x I don't mind if cyclists get their own contraflow lane. Cyclists are people, car drivers are people, why can't everyone get along? I used to cycle a lot. Predominantly bombing down a hillside in all wheather conditions but a bit of road as well. I don't get why these official guys can't just live and let live.

_________________
Currently undergoing training with the I.A.M.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 21:33 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 23:28
Posts: 1940
I could mnot agree more Flynn :love:

By way . they trial only in 4 road. All other would break law here :popcorn:

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien
!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 22:04 
Offline
Supporter
Supporter
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 13:45
Posts: 4042
Location: Near Buxton, Derbyshire
[quote="Peyote" ]As the CTC say, this is the way things have worked in Europe for years, no reason why it can't work over here.[/quote]

In Europe there is a long established tradition of respecting cyclists as legitimate road users. In Britain, as exemplified by the some replies in this thread, cyclists are regarded as a nuisance who get in the way of the real owners of the road.

Pedantically, if it is legal for cyclists to travel both ways on a street where motorised traffic is restricted to a single direction it is incorrect to refer to them as travelling the "wrong way" at any time.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 22:28 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
dcbwhaley wrote:
In Europe there is a long established tradition of respecting cyclists as legitimate road users. In Britain, as exemplified by the some replies in this thread, cyclists are regarded as a nuisance who get in the way of the real owners of the road.

I don't think anyone said or implied that; yes there were comments about how many of the cyclists use the road (breaking HC rules), but not simply being there (within the rules).


I agree that one-way systems are a PITA for cyclists, but without cycle lanes segregating them from oncoming traffic (especially the faster cyclists), I fear such schemes could end up being a pain in the neck - literally and repeatedly! (I saw a nasty image on Google images when searching for such streets :( )

I don't know for a fact, but I suspect these "other European countries" where this scheme was successful, had wider roads than London?

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 22:34 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 22:50
Posts: 3267
Steve wrote:
I don't think anyone said or implied that; yes there were comments about how many of the cyclists use the road (breaking HC rules), but not simply being there (within the rules).



A thread about making some one way streets into two way streets (for cyclists only) is subject to a predjudiced off topic rant about cyclists in general, along with "Once again just raising the fact that cyclists are allowed on roads with no insurance, licensing or training requirements" and you're saying it wasn't implied that cyclists are a nusiance?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 23:07 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
weepej wrote:
... "Once again just raising the fact that cyclists are allowed on roads with no insurance, licensing or training requirements" and you're saying it wasn't implied that cyclists are a nusiance?

Sorry, but I can easily see that really doesn't follow - there is no logical connection between the two. The former is about documents and training, the latter is about simply being there.

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 23:11 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 22:50
Posts: 3267
Just looking at the title of this thread again, it does look quite funny:

Quote:
Cyclists to ride wrong way up 1 way street - legally!


Like the OP is disappointed that they can't do it illegally any more.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 23:15 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
weepej wrote:
Like the OP is disappointed that they can't do it illegally any more.

Again:

the issue is about how the roads are used (breaking HC rules), not that they are used by them. How circular!

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 23:24 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 22:50
Posts: 3267
Steve wrote:
weepej wrote:
Like the OP is disappointed that they can't do it illegally any more.

Again:

the issue is about how the roads are used (breaking HC rules), not that they are used by them. How circular!


Ernest wrote:

"The Government has given the green light for cyclists to be allowed to travel the wrong way up one way streets."

Patently not true.

Some streets are being turned into two way streets for cyclists only.


Last edited by weepej on Thu Sep 17, 2009 23:29, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 23:29 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
weepej wrote:
"The Government has given the green light for cyclists to be allowed to travel the wrong way up one way streets."

...

Some streets are being turned into two way streets for cyclists only.

If there is no dedicated cycle lane in these schemes (and I believe there won't be but stand to be corrected) then I reckon this is quite a correct description.

Regardless, this doesn't validate earlier claims that posts in this thread imply that 'cyclists are regarded as a nuisance'.

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 23:33 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 22:50
Posts: 3267
Steve wrote:
Regardless, this doesn't validate earlier claims that posts in this thread imply that 'cyclists are regarded as a nuisance'.


Well, I can see that clearly myself.

jomukuk's post is clearly predjudical, Ernest's post is cleary inflammatory, malcolmw's post states that cyclist are exempt from certain road laws when they simply do not apply (which is very different from exemption).

[Edit, too add malcolmw's post is also predjudicial and inflammatory, i.e. "How about exemption from all traffic laws? Oh sorry, they [people on cycles] already have.". Er no they haven't!]

I strongly suspect your post is intended to keep a lid on things too, it would be interesting to have seen how this discussion developed without a referee!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 89 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 215 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.047s | 13 Queries | GZIP : Off ]