Green advance stop zones at traffic lights

[Goldfang]

What is the legal situation regarding the advanced stop zones for cyclists at traffic lights? We have had these installed on all the major junctions in town, but no-one driving a car appears to take any notice of them. One driver that I remonstrated with told me that 'they are purely advisory, and that if there are no cyclists about cars can stop on them'. At the other end, an old school CTC type told me that it is an offence for a car to stop on them. Who is right here? My aging copy of the highway code makes no mention of them.
Regards, goldfang.

 

[ian turner]

<H4>178

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. 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.

There is an online edition of the highway code</H4>

 

[Davidc]

I think it's a fixed penalty £60 and 3 penalty points.

Might be wrong though.

 

[Dan B]

It is an offence to cross the STOP line into the box when the light shows red. The only legal way to enter an ASL is using the "feeder" bike lane leading up to it, and obviously you need to be on a bike for that to be legal.

Most police are completely uninterested in enforcing them, though. The problem is twofold: (a) that they have to witness the line being crossed at red or they can't do anything (after all, the driver might have driven into the box while it was on green and then been caught there when the lights changed); (b) that the penalty available is the same as for jumping the light completely - as, technically, that's exactly the offence that has been committed - and many people feel that £60 plus 3 points is a bit harsh for an offence which is widely viewed as minor

I don't have much of an opinion on it personally, but I do find it funny when drivers complain that "all cyclists jump red lights" but see nothing wrong in doing it themselves this way. Point that out to them and suddenly they take a much more pragmatic approach ...

 

[HLaB]

Its a while since I've looked at the literature but its illegal for a driver to simply roll in, however there is a reasonable degree of leeway if the lights change just after they've crossed into it, it may be safer for them to stop (right turners are an example).

 

[ohnovino]

I was in Altrincham last weekend and almost every junction had ASLs. About 90% of them didn't have a feeder lane for bikes, which AFAIK means it's impossible for cyclists to use them legally.

I'm sure its a minor oversight and nobody really minds/cares, but there's that voice in the back of my head saying it's a deliberate trap - they're going to wait for cyclists to cross the first solid white line and then fine them for a RLJ

 

[HLaB]

I was in Altrincham last weekend and almost every junction had ASLs. About 90% of them didn't have a feeder lane for bikes, which AFAIK means it's impossible for cyclists to use them legally.

I'm sure its a minor oversight and nobody really minds/cares, but there's that voice in the back of my head saying it's a deliberate trap - they're going to wait for cyclists to cross the first solid white line and then fine them for a RLJ

Its City of Edinburgh Policy to paint new ASLs without feeder lanes so that you can enter where you wish and don't feel constrained to filter up on the left side of traffic.

 

[ohnovino]

Its City of Edinburgh Policy to paint new ASLs without feeder lanes so that you can enter where you wish and don't feel constrained to filter up on the left side of traffic.

That's a far better way of doing it.

I have a horrible image of someone wanting to turn right on a three-lane road: they cycle up the inside, and then cross in front of the queuing traffic just as the lights go green

 

[buggi]

it is legal to filter through queuing traffic, therefore you don't need a feeder/filter lane to enter an ASL. As said, it's better if there isn't one so you can choose how you wish to filter (either on the left, centre or on the right depending on how many lanes)

 

[Dan B]

It is legal to filter through queuing traffic, yes, but it is not legal to cross the STOP line if the lights are red. This law applies to all vehicles including cycles.

Yes, it's a stupid law. But it's still the law

 

[Norm]

it is legal to filter through queuing traffic, therefore you don't need a feeder/filter lane to enter an ASL.

Unfortunately, that common sense approach isn't how the law works. The solid white line at the "front" of the box is the stop line and anyone crossing it is, technically, jumping the lights. As Dan B, amongst others, says, the only legal way into an ASL when the lights are red is through the feeder lane.

 

[snorri]

Its City of Edinburgh Policy to paint new ASLs without feeder lanes so that you can enter where you wish and don't feel constrained to filter up on the left side of traffic.

I attended a cycle related meeting in Edinburgh a few years ago when the rep from the local police whispered that no action could be taken against vehicle drivers abusing the ASLs in the city. The system worked on goodwill and ignorance at that time, perhaps it's changed now.

 

[2Loose]

I am just surprised that someone colours them green around your way!

Nottingham roads could do with some colour.