[Closed] £60 fines and CCTV crackdown on drivers who stop in bike boxes at lights

See above.

[img] [/img]

And also, please remember that if (while the light is red) you enter the ASL on a bike without using the filter lane, or you enter one like this: http://goo.gl/maps/HRjty that doesn't have a filter lane then you're breaking the law. (Crossing the solid white line, even on a bike, is illegal while the light is red)

I don't know if there are any like that in London but will other councils be able to rake in fines from cyclists, who use the 'not legal' infrastructure that the council has built?

Edit: Mind you, the same council also came up with this bit of crystal clear bike signage, so they're not exactly a beacon of good design. http://goo.gl/maps/kkoVb

I'm all in favour of this - it's a red light jump, it should be discouraged.

And for those asking what motorcyclists should do - they should not filter to the front unless it's safe to do so. After several close calls with motorcyclists either cutting into ASL's without looking, or trying to turn left after pulling into the right side of the ASL (or vice versa), they're absolutely a danger to cyclists.

If you're 'caught' in the box when the lights turn red because you're in nose-to-tail traffic then you've done nothing wrong [b]so no fine.[/b]

The fact is that the MET are already supposed to be doing this.

https://www.gov.uk/using-the-road-159-to-203/road-junctions-170-to-183
highway code, crystal clear as ever.

Junkyard...sorry mate... I was being ironic....I know what amber means, but my experience at traffic lights suggests that many others take it as a cue to accelerate.

I agree that in some places this is essential but accidents do happen, why not clear things right up and make it a yellow hatched box.

However the cyclist v's motorist debate is getting boring now,not all car/van/truck drivers are out to get us, and accidents do happen. IF we want to enforce the highway code to the word we need to start setting an example too.

I was out with a group the other day and very few signaled in traffic, even less gave time for manovours and i saw a few cars cut up then the cyclists get arsey with the motorist. and the unwillingness of a lot of cyclist especially on Yorkshire's b roads to unbuch creating room is ridiculous.

I wont be riding with that group again.

got sauce? Didn't see any mention of that in the article

Advanced stop lines. Some signal-controlled junctions have advanced stop lines to allow cycles to be positioned ahead of other traffic. Motorists, including motorcyclists, MUST stop at the first white line reached if the lights are amber or red and should avoid blocking the way or encroaching on the marked area at other times, e.g. if the junction ahead is blocked[b]. If your vehicle has proceeded over the first white line at the time that the signal goes red, you MUST stop at the second white line, even if your vehicle is in the marked area. Allow cyclists time and space to move off when the green signal shows.[/b]

And if you want to look for the law itself

Laws RTA 1988 sect 36 & TSRGD regs 10, 36(1) & 43(2)

It's not in the article because there's not really any need, it's not against the law, never has been, so no fine.

Junkyard...sorry mate... I was being ironic.

Glumpton you have moved the goalposts

What about the situation where stopping for the first stop line would be an emergency stop and dangerous, but stopping for the second one would be safe? Do they just batter on through?

[b] Motorists, including motorcyclists, MUST stop at the first white line reached if the lights are amber or red[/b]

Would you like to discuss the initial scenario you were or stay smug about a different one?

I would assume the situation above [ you are excited about]relates to slow moving in traffic jams as I fail to see how you could stop between the first and the second box given they are about 5 feet apart

I am giving you the benefit of the doubt that you are actually being serious

fair enough bails, the article mentioned something about changing the legalities of it wasn't sure whether they were going to change that bit aswell.

I would assume the situation above [ you are excited about]relates to slow moving in traffic jams as I fail to see how you could stop between the first and the second box given they are about 5 feet apart

That's not something I would assume. In fact it's the opposite to what I'd do. If traffic is moving slowly I'd stay behind the first stop line until the junction was clear.

[i]Read the highway code, you can enter them as long as your exit is clear, otherwise they'd have to say no right turns (or stop oncoming trafic).[/i]

READ THE HIGHWAY CODE you say? Maybe you ought to first before quoting incorrect information.

AFAIK You can drive onto a box junction and stop, as long as either your exit is clear or you are the first vehicle.

Hmm, looks like its not only the first vehicle, but I'm pretty sure that use to be the rule.

[i]Rule 174 of The Highway code states the following:

"Box junctions. These have criss-cross yellow lines painted on the road (see 'Road markings'). You MUST NOT enter the box until your exit road or lane is clear. However, you may enter the box and wait when you want to turn right, and are only stopped from doing so by oncoming traffic, or by other vehicles waiting to turn right.
[/i]

SO how does it work?

This:

[i]MUST stop at the first white line reached if the lights are amber or red[/i]

Makes sense.

But to get into this situation:

[i]If your vehicle has proceeded over the first white line at the time that the signal goes red, you MUST stop at the second white line, even if your vehicle is in the marked area[/i]

You've surely broken the first law.

ASLs in London are a joke. I probably find them with only cyclists in them 1 time out of 100. I hope they do this and do it soon.

Motorbikes seem to think the ASL is their own zone and usually push through cyclists to get to the front - thanks your exhaust tastes lovely 🙄

Buses are pretty much always in them and often over the other stop line as well. Delivery vans will normally be fully parked in them. Taxis are variable - some obey, some do not. Private hires always stop in them. I have heard some choice comments mentioned to drivers in them. A favourite was a courier telling an Addison Lee driver that he shouldn't be there, but the next time he sees a picture of a 'fat ****' painted on the raod, he could park on that

Bandito: not if the traffic is moving very slowly.

So the light is green and you cross the first line and put your car completely within the box and stop, because the car in front of you is stopped.

Then the light goes amber->red. You're in the box but you didn't cross the first line while it was red so it's okay.

[b]b r[/b]: No idea what you're talking about tbh, you tell someone they're quoting 'incorrect information', then repeat what they've said in a verbatim copy from the Highway Code 😕

And for those asking what motorcyclists should do - they should not filter to the front unless it's safe to do so.

So filter and stop between the cars, no big deal for them, they can get free and clear. And if you followed them on a bicycle and got stuck between two queues of traffic, well that was a situation you should have seen coming.

You probably couldn't legally enter the ASL from that point anyway without crossing a solid white.

If the law is the law and no moaning, then they should target the most flagrant ASL rule breakers of them all first - cyslists!! Everyday I see dozens enter each ASL straight through the solid white line.

bails

It says you can stop in a boxed junction as long as you are turning right and your exit is blocked. Its quite clear, and has pretty much been so as long as I can remember (been driving over 30 years).

[i]Motorbikes seem to think the ASL is their own zone and usually push through cyclists to get to the front - thanks your exhaust tastes lovely [/i]

But we are there for the same reason as you, safety and an ability to accelerate out of the way.

[i]So filter and stop between the cars, no big deal for them, they can get free and clear[/i]

So we can get squashed? You've never ridden a m/c I take it?

bails

It says you can stop in a boxed junction as long as you are turning right and your exit is blocked. Its quite clear, and has pretty much been so as long as I can remember (been driving over 30 years).

Right...I know.

But when [b]thisisnotaspoon[/b] said that, you told him he was wrong. Hence my 'confused' face.

"[b]Read the highway code, you can enter them as long as your exit is clear, otherwise they'd have to say no right turns (or stop oncoming trafic).
[/b]"
READ THE HIGHWAY CODE you say? Maybe you ought to first before quoting incorrect information.

EDIT: Maybe I misunderstood what he was saying about the right turns. We agree, anyway!

But we are there for the same reason as you, safety and an ability to accelerate out of the way.

So sit at the back of it then, not infront of the cyclists

So filter and stop between the cars, no big deal for them, they can get free and clear

So we can get squashed? You've never ridden a m/c I take it?

Commute on one every day, ridden for over twenty years. I was trying to make the point that in a lot of circumstances a motorcycle refusing to enter an ASL is worse for cyclists than the biker, as they end up stuck behind him.

But we are there for the same reason as you, safety and an ability to accelerate out of the way.

So sit at the back of it then, not infront of the cyclists

So you'd rather we accelerated past/between you once you'd started wobbling along, not eased through while you're stationary?

Right - here's the deal in words that you can all understand.

Some rules of the road:
You don't drive like a muppet,
Emergency stops are for emergencies only (lights changing to amber when you are less than you are less than a safe stopping distance away from the line is not an emergency),
You drive safely,
You don't do anything that would cause a crash,
You pay attention to the road and everything around you.

Those are absolute givens - You cant stick to those then you shouldn't be on the road. We all in agreement? Good.

You are on a journey which takes in three sets of traffic lights, two have an ASL and the other does not, later on in the journey there are two other junctions with yellow boxes. You are approaching the first set of traffic lights - one with no ASL - you are less than a safe stopping distance from the line when the lights change - you keep on going because it's not an emergency and to stop would see you pass the stop line. You are now approaching the second set of traffic lights - again you are less than a safe stopping distance from the lights when they change - you do not stop at the first line because it would be dangerous and it's not an emergency - you do stop at the second line though because that is far enough away to allow you to stop safely. You are on your way again and are approaching the third set of traffic lights which has an ASL where you are wanting to turn right - there is a yellow box junction and a queue of traffic also waiting to turn right - there is no filter and you are 2nd in the queue. The lights turn to green - the first car goes into the yellow box because all that is preventing them from clearing the yellow box is the oncoming traffic - you stay where you are behind the first stop line because you are not allowed to enter the yellow box and to proceed beyond the first stop line would leave you open to blocking the area reserved for cyclists between the two stop lines. When the car in front clears the yellow box you can take their position if the lights allow. Eventually you clear the junction - you are now faced with another yellow box - this time you want to go straight ahead - there are no traffic lights, but traffic is queuing anyway. The yellow box clears, but there is not enough room to fit your car on the other side of the yellow box - you stay where you are until there is enough room to proceed without stopping with any part of your vehicle in the yellow box. You continue on the rest of your journey safe in the knowledge that you haven't broken any laws.

So you'd rather we accelerated past/between you once you'd started wobbling along, not eased through while you're stationary?

I'd prefer you weren't in the ASL at all in the first place, but if you insist, then I don't to sit there sucking up your exhaust fumes.

As for once the lights have changed, then I'd want you to perform a safe overtake when possible. I certainly don't want you riding like a prize tit and accelerating between cyclists 🙄

personally I dunno about motorbikes in bus lanes/asls, seems reasonable for them to use them i guess, but no idea what the arguments against are.

I'm pretty sure about it. They shouldn't be there. It's no fun at all being buzzed by m-bikes travelling at speed when you're cycling in a bus lane. Likewise getting to an ASL and not being able to enter because it's full of m-bikes.

Amber lights are timed so from a certain distance you have enough time to stop before you go through the lights. Unless they change the timings or move the lights this will just encourage more dangerous acceleration through amber, since the stopping distance will be so much shorter.

There's so much wrong with this statement I'm not even going to comment. It's actually rare to NOT see someone pass the lights on red in London. Sometimes some seconds after the light has changed. MOST of the ASL infringement I see is avoidable and you can be damn sure if people think they'll be fined they'll be a lot more careful.

the 'only enter an ASL through the dotted line' bit is just a red herring. Many ASL's aren't even painted with a dotted line and where there is it's in the gutter on the inside of a potentially left turning traffic lane (remind me how the majority of cyclist deaths occur again?). However, filter down the right of traffic and currently you regularly find yourself stuck on outside since the ASL is blocked (cars or m-bikes).

[url= http://departmentfortransport.wordpress.com/2013/03/05/the-road-to-hell-is-paved-with-asls/ ]Ultimately ASLs are a joke anyway[/url]. They'll be better if they're enforced but they're a minor intervention at best and they can't cope with any volume of cyclists. In the Netherlands they've pretty much disappeared by all accounts - they don't install them now and remove them when junctions are updated.

[i]I'm pretty sure about it. They shouldn't be there. It's no fun at all being buzzed by m-bikes travelling at speed when you're cycling in a bus lane[/i]

You'd just prefer buses and taxis sat on your ar5e then?

I think that having m/c's in bus lanes at least makes other drivers (and pedestrians) take a second look before pulling across them. They don't particularly care about a cyclist, they can't do any damage - but a 250kg m/c is another matter.

the 'only enter an ASL through the dotted line' bit is just a red herring

and I believe that's in the process of being rescinded anyway.

You'd just prefer buses and taxis sat on your ar5e then?

I'd rather have a properly segregated lane without any of them.

Failing that I'd rather just have the buses - easily visible and no chance of them trying to squeeze past when there isn't really enough space. Worst of all are the motorbikes - fast moving, more difficult to see (especially when moving through a line of stationary traffic to get to the bus lane). Take the lane to stop cabs pushing past and they're passing without a lot of space. Rarely seem to obey the speed limit.

Allowing motorbikes to use bus lanes made cycling in them more unpleasant. I've not noticed any positive side benefits.

I certainly don't want you riding like a prize tit and accelerating between cyclists

This +1. If there are m-bikes who wait at the back of the ASL I try to wave them past before the far side of the junction.

I've had people fail tests because they have gone into the " bike box " as I call it, but only when they simply have not braked hard enough and gone over the first line.

The speed on approach was fine but simply going in it " coz me mum does " is not a valid excuse 🙄

( sometimes no matter what you teach them, on test mum knows best " coz I'm on me test ")

Away from work, it really get on my ( well 😉 ) when a vehicle stops in a bike box. It's either they simply do not care, are daft, or don't realise but, majority of times, follow the offending vehicle, and you will see speeding, bad positioning, squeezing through gaps etc so anything they brings these kind of motorists to book is good in my opinion.

On the bike, I went to the side of a people carrier that had stopped in a bike box and deliberately went close to the drivers window. Think I shocked the woman but I said " funny looking bike love " at which point I got told to ...... Off so sums it up althougher. OK I was a bit cheeky, but that reaction was unneeded.

[i]Allowing motorbikes to use bus lanes made cycling in them more unpleasant. I've not noticed any positive side benefits.[/i]

If you rode a m/c you would. Or the opposite, when they take it away (A4127 between A40 and M40).

Anyway, the clue is in the name, Bus Lane. So neither of us has a right to be there, but for both of us been allowed in makes the journey both quicker and safer.

Should us m/c-ists petition TfL to get you cyclists out?

Bus lanes are there for public transport - which is a social good - as it reduces pollution and congestion for a given volume of people. Cycles are allowed in for the same reason.

I can see the advantage of motorbikes for the individual but not for society. Most are excessively noisy, ridden too fast and have pretty poor emissions. I don't deny that there are big advantages for motorcyclists in being allowed to use bus lanes but I think it was a mistake.

The research I saw also seemed to point that the reverse of what you claim is true - made it [url= http://lydall.standard.co.uk/2010/06/motorbikes-in-bus-lanes-make-it-more-dangerous-for-all-on-two-wheels.html ]more dangerous for everyone[/url]

CTC position [url= http://www.ctc.org.uk/campaigning/views-and-briefings/motorcycles-in-bus-lanes ]here[/url]

I was under the impression that if someone drove into my boot, that's their problem: inattention, inadequate gap or whatever.

Has it changed? Is it ok to tailgate now in that there London?

I can see the advantage of motorbikes for the individual but not for society

I don't mind them too much - little L-plate scooters are good for dragging behind. 20mph limits in bus lanes would help - might slow the Streethawk-wannabes down a bit.

I was under the impression that if someone drove into my boot, that's their problem: inattention, inadequate gap or whatever.

That's not a lot of help if you're a cyclist. I've had people give me a blast of horn for not jumping a light that was amber (that in my view I'd have crossed at red) and more than once had people in cars undertake me to jump a red light after I've stopped. Shit, I've seen people undertake other cars to jump red lights on a good number of occasions.

Bus lanes are there for public transport - which is a social good - as it reduces pollution and congestion for a given volume of people. Cycles are allowed in for the same reason.

Weird figures in the linked article:
[i]New research published by Transport for London today found that the collision rate for cyclists using bus lanes increased 273 per cent.
...
Figures also show that, over a 10-month comparison period, the rate of motorbikers being in a collision in a bus lane increased 133 per cent.

[b]But bizarrely the collisions were not between pedal cyclists and bikers - but between vehicles and bikers, and vehicles and cyclists.[/b][/i]

So the motorcycles are making cyclists crash into cars? I doubt there's a causal link. Something like (for an example) introducing more (or even just one more) cycle lanes that run up the left hand side of traffic at busy junctions during that period could account for the increase in cyclist collisions. And the sample sizes these figures are taken from are too small for real statistics, cyclist collisions rose from 7 to 21, for example. That could be a single critical mass ride meeting one white van.

The only negative effect on cyclists from bikers sharing bus lanes is a diminished sense of privilege.

they also have an annoying habit of blocking the gaps they can't squeeze their wing mirrors/ bars through that I can on a bike.

Motorcyles are often a superior solution to cycles,

Altho we seem to be ignoring the taxis which I reckon have even less claim to be using bus lanes, IMO

*having difficulty finding the stats.

Motorcyles are often a superior solution to cycles, they take up a similarly small amount of space and have the same jam busting powers in town with far more useful range and speed outside of it.

but are noisy and polluting.

The only negative effect on cyclists from bikers sharing bus lanes is a diminished sense of privilege.

That's just bollocks. This is actually a cycling forum isn't it? I have to remind myself sometimes. Putting bikes in bus lanes and calling it a cycle facility (Barcrap supershitways) is a bad enough joke to start with. Nowhere else considers that a useful intevention. Privilege? FFS

Even if there is no change in actual safety (which I dispute) there is a definite decrease in perceived safety. I'm an experienced, confidant, cyclist and I dislike intensely being close passed by a fast moving motorbike in a bus lane. It will absolutely have a negative effect on take up of cycling and completely fails the 'would you let an unaccompanied 10 year old' test

It's pretty obvious that some people here haven't actually tried riding bicycles on the road for any length of time.

Incidentally they did try cracking down on ASL infringement in Edinburgh last year.

Police ran a four day crackdown on motorists in ASLs and cyclists (though not motorists) jumping red lights.

In that time they warned 106 motorists for ASLs, 26 cyclists for RLJing, and another 6 cyclists for pavement riding.

That seems pretty fair to me.

http://road.cc/content/news/58059-edinburgh-police-warn-more-100-motorists-encoroaching-advanced-stop-lines

The breakdown of the ASL infringers was interesting too:
"53 private car drivers were warned for stopping in ASLs, plus drivers of 34 black cabs, 15 public service vehicles including coaches, and four buses. Some 85 per cent of motorists stopped were male."

(Naturally [url= http://www.scotsman.com/news/transport/police-collar-138-drivers-and-cyclists-in-traffic-crackdown-1-2279522 ]the comments in The Scotsman[/url] complained about cyclists always breaking the rules..)

One of the letters in yesterday's Standard was demanding that at the very least the cameras on ASLs were turned off at night when he did the majority of his driving and 'there are no cyclists about'.

Some 85 per cent of motorists stopped were male

what percentage of all motorists were male? I bet it was 60-70%.

Yeah good example of a context-free stat that brakes - almost as useful as:

"..between 2004 and 2009, 74 per cent of cycle casualties in the city were injured at or within 20 metres of a junction..."

In other news, 74 percent of minor Edinburgh roads have a junction every 40 metres or less... 😀

That's just bollocks. This is actually a cycling forum isn't it?

No.

One of the letters in yesterday's Standard was demanding that at the very least the cameras on ASLs were turned off at night when he did the majority of his driving and 'there are no cyclists about'.

WTF? What was his reasoning exactly? "I shouldn't have to obey the law when it's dark?"

WTF?

my thoughts exactly.

It's the same thread of logic that sees bus lanes being peak hours only and parking allowed in cycle lanes at night. All those cars find somewhere to go during the day, and you don't need to increase the capacity of roads when they're not busy (ie off peak).

Today I ran a red light. I was sitting stopped at a red traffic light, behind the first stop line. Looked in the mirror as is my wont. Say this Edinburgh Council scaffy wagon coming towards me a bit fast - driver had a panicky look on his face, front of the truck was very low as i there were braking very harshly - like an energency stop. I pulled forwards to make sure that my kids who were in the back of my car weren't going to get a truck to the back of the head head. They guy eventually stopped about a foot from my rear bumper which was by now beyond the second stop line. Morals of the story - when sitting at the lights - keep an eye on whats happening behind you and sometimes laws need to be broken. Had I stayed behind the line I dread to think what would have happened.