New Highway Code

[Ming the Merciless]

Allocation of space for pedestrians is disproportionate

 

[cyberknight]

and dont forget cars with one occupant are subject to a surcharge

 

[BoldonLad]

The really worrying thing about this is that it has become obvious that very large number of drivers have no idea what is in the current highway code, and nor do most journalists, and haven't bothered to look. A significant minority have no intention of looking at the new edition either.

Very true!

 

[MontyVeda]

One thing that motorists do not seem to realise is when a pedestrian is walking very close to the kerb - especially if they have a bag and/or wide shoulders
I have often had to move out from my normal riding position in traffic to stay clear of a pedestrian
Especially as they can, on occasion, be unpredictable

Same actually applied to bushes and trees branches, especially in summer - driver don't really register them but a cyclist will have to ride further out.

in that case, you're generally cycling too close to the kerb.

 

[lazybloke]

and dont forget cars with one occupant are subject to a surcharge

Don't stop there.

Surcharges should apply to:
Every empty seat
Each additional exhaust pipe (especially if they are only decorative)
Every decibel of noise above ambient (engine noise and audio system are charged at different rates)
Garish colours
Dazzling lights
Spoilers
Tinting of front windows/windscreen

Etc

 

[hatler]

Busses can be really infuriating! The Top Gear programme with Richard Hammond was a prime example ! Cutting him up , pulling out in front of him and squeezing him out .
In the old days bus stops had lay-bys in which a bus would stop allowing the free flow of traffic . In those days they also had conductors which meant that the bus could move off once everyone was aboard . Here the busses stop at the side of the road with the nose near the kerb and the tail blocking the whole road whilst passengers pay the driver .
It's consideration for other road users . It doesn't take a lot of effort to just to move over to allow a vehicle past.
A

Not having a layby for a bus stop is all the thing now in the London suburbs.

And rightly so.

Allowing the mostly single-occupancy vehicle traffic to pass the bus means that the bus joins the back of a longer queue at the next set of lights. This effectively prioritises car drivers over bus passengers. That's certainly not what's best for all.

The Downs-Thomson paradox (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downs–Thomson_paradox) states that the equilibrium speed of car traffic on a road network is determined by the average door-to-door speed of equivalent journeys taken by public transport.

In other words, get the buses to run a route faster, and all travellers benefit from shorter journey times.

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

in that case, you're generally cycling too close to the kerb.

If there is constant traffic I generally ride as far to the left as I reasonably can - depending, of course, on the road surface, grids, debris and all that
Looking at other cyclists that I see then this seems normal - at least round here

 

[Solocle]

If there is constant traffic I generally ride as far to the left as I reasonably can - depending, of course, on the road surface, grids, debris and all that
Looking at other cyclists that I see then this seems normal - at least round here

If that's closer than 0.5m then it's too close according to the new highway code.

​

Rule 72​

Road positioning. When riding on the roads, there are two basic road positions you should adopt, depending on the situation.

1) Ride in the centre of your lane, to make yourself as clearly visible as possible, in the following situations

• on quiet roads or streets – if a faster vehicle comes up behind you, move to the left to enable them to overtake, if you can do so safely
• in slower-moving traffic - when the traffic around you starts to flow more freely, move over to the left if you can do so safely so that faster vehicles behind you can overtake
• at the approach to junctions or road narrowings where it would be unsafe for drivers to overtake you

2) When riding on busy roads, with vehicles moving faster than you, allow them to overtake where it is safe to do so whilst keeping at least 0.5 metres away, and further where it is safer, from the kerb edge. Remember that traffic on most dual carriageways moves quickly. Take extra care crossing slip roads.

Rule 67​

You should

• watch out for obstructions in the road, such as drains, service covers and potholes, positioning yourself so you can move to the left (as well as to the right) to avoid them safely

I presume that you can't move to the left to avoid a pedestrian's bag!

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

If that's closer than 0.5m then it's too close according to the new highway code.

​

Rule 72​

Road positioning. When riding on the roads, there are two basic road positions you should adopt, depending on the situation.

1) Ride in the centre of your lane, to make yourself as clearly visible as possible, in the following situations

• on quiet roads or streets – if a faster vehicle comes up behind you, move to the left to enable them to overtake, if you can do so safely
• in slower-moving traffic - when the traffic around you starts to flow more freely, move over to the left if you can do so safely so that faster vehicles behind you can overtake
• at the approach to junctions or road narrowings where it would be unsafe for drivers to overtake you

2) When riding on busy roads, with vehicles moving faster than you, allow them to overtake where it is safe to do so whilst keeping at least 0.5 metres away, and further where it is safer, from the kerb edge. Remember that traffic on most dual carriageways moves quickly. Take extra care crossing slip roads.

Rule 67​

You should

• watch out for obstructions in the road, such as drains, service covers and potholes, positioning yourself so you can move to the left (as well as to the right) to avoid them safely

I presume that you can't move to the left to avoid a pedestrian's bag!

No - 0.5 m does sound too close most of the time - too little room for movement to the left if needed - I suppose I would normally be between that and 1m if there is a constant stream of traffic on a good road surface
also - 0.5m is rather close to the dents where the grds have dropped a bit and generated a pothole type thing

sorry if I gave the impression I ride closer - although I had not notice the 0.5m bit before - thanks for pointing that out

 

[MontyVeda]

...
sorry if I gave the impression I ride closer - although I had not notice the 0.5m bit before - thanks for pointing that out

It was the suggestion of moving out for broad shouldered pedestrians that made it seem like you were riding inches from the kerb

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

It was the suggestion of moving out for broad shouldered pedestrians that made it seem like you were riding inches from the kerb

Yes - it did seem a bit that way - I have nearly been hit by a pedestrian walking 4 abreast and using her arms to emphasise something - which would have been OK if she wasn;t walking right on the edge
so basically I give pedestrians walking on the egde a wide berth - apart from anything else you never know it they are just going to suddenly decide to turn directly in front of you.

Which is starting to make me sound like a car driver in the comments section on the Daily Fail on a story about cyclists!
Pedestrians don't pay road tax you know!!!

 

[KnittyNorah]

It was the suggestion of moving out for broad shouldered pedestrians that made it seem like you were riding inches from the kerb

I have lived in places where the pavement 'allowance' for pedestrians was so narrow that even slender people could not pass each other on the pavement without checking for traffic coming within inches. Where you could be stuck for what seemed like ages (but was probably a couple of minutes) if someone with a pushchair or shopping trolley was using that bit of pavement and where people in wheelchairs simply did not venture onto the High Street as they would need a police escort to safely get to the Co-op.
Thankfully I don't live there any more. But there are lots of places like that.
I can easily see how a cyclist could be knocked off their bike from either side, no matter where on the road they were riding.

 

[mjr]

I have lived in places where the pavement 'allowance' for pedestrians was so narrow that even slender people could not pass each other on the pavement without checking for traffic coming within inches.

<fourth-yorkshireman> One pavement on the main river bridge in our village is so narrow that you cannot walk over it without checking for wide vehicles approaching and it's best walked putting one foot in front of the other. Across the road, the other pavement is marked as a cycleway but the bit over the bridge was not widened like the rest of the route. Because it's a bit narrow, some bright spark put up "CYCLISTS DISMOUNT" signs, but it is not wide enough to walk alongside a bike. Maybe 80cm. Tricyclists, cargo bikes and mobility scooters have to use the road and fortunately, the narrow bit is short enough with wide passing places at either end, for give-and-take by the remaining users not to be too awful.
</fourth-yorkshireman>

The highway code is largely silent on this shoot, but it'll be interesting whether Active Travel England start using LTN 1/20 to push for bridge upgrades.

 

[KnittyNorah]

<fourth-yorkshireman> One pavement on the main river bridge in our village is so narrow that you cannot walk over it without checking for wide vehicles approaching and it's best walked putting one foot in front of the other. Across the road, the other pavement is marked as a cycleway but the bit over the bridge was not widened like the rest of the route. Because it's a bit narrow, some bright spark put up "CYCLISTS DISMOUNT" signs, but it is not wide enough to walk alongside a bike. Maybe 80cm. Tricyclists, cargo bikes and mobility scooters have to use the road and fortunately, the narrow bit is short enough with wide passing places at either end, for give-and-take by the remaining users not to be too awful.
</fourth-yorkshireman>

The highway code is largely silent on this shoot, but it'll be interesting whether Active Travel England start using LTN 1/20 to push for bridge upgrades.

We don't need bridge upgrades - we need them downgraded to how they used to be. Medieval width - spacious enough for people having a conversation, pack animals and a handcart or two to pass each other going in both directions, and smoothly-surfaced enough so that no-one trips up or bites their tongue.
That's all.
If we weren't always having to defer to the ubiquitous tin-box-on-wheels, narrow bridges and narrow pavements would be plenty wide enough. Wide enough even for emergency vehicles in, you know, emergencies - especially without people leaving empty tin boxes all over the place to make the place look hideous.

 

[cyberknight]