Left-Turn-on-Red for Cyclists

MJohnston · 27-08-2015 12:22pm #1

Reading this piece about contra-flow cycle lanes, I was wondering if there has ever been any consideration for a legalised 'left turn on red' for cyclists?

This would be similar to the situation with cars in the USA where they can turn right on red after a stop, and must yield to any traffic, and any pedestrians on a cross-walk.

I'd also be curious about a 'continue after stopping' rule for red lights at pedestrian-only crossings. Any consideration ever been given to this idea in the UK or Ireland?

the groutch · 27-08-2015 3:08pm

hopefully not, it's dangerous enough for pedestrians as is having to be on the lookout for cyclists breaking reds, even without legitimising it.

MJohnston · 27-08-2015 3:16pm

the groutch wrote: »

hopefully not, it's dangerous enough for pedestrians as is having to be on the lookout for cyclists breaking reds, even without legitimising it.

Thanks, but I don't think you read exactly my post.

punisher5112 · 27-08-2015 9:49pm

Op terrible idea and a concept that would not work here.

They don't care about lights and sure a lot of cyclist cycle straight out of side roads and into traffic as it is and without looking.

Cookie_Monster · 28-08-2015 1:00am

In theory it should be the case with all traffic IMO. However the Irish, be it motorist or cyclist, show daily that the current rules cannot be followed by anyone so implementing this would turn into a monumental cluster**** of a situation and will only lead to more accidents and injuries

Banjoxed · 28-08-2015 5:51am

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

In theory it should be the case with all traffic IMO. However the Irish, be it motorist or cyclist, show daily that the current rules cannot be followed by anyone so implementing this would turn into a monumental cluster**** of a situation and will only lead to more accidents and injuries

For "yielding to pedestrians" read "shouting or charging at pedestrians". I'd never vote for anyone advocating this.

rosmoke · 28-08-2015 6:05am

It's pointless even for cars that they have to wait for green to go left, in most of the countries there have to yield to pedestrians and cars, even in Ireland for .. let's say 40% of the crossroads, why not here? The level of population is quite small, you have to wait for green when nobody is crossing, especially outsite of city center in areas like Lucan or Clondalkin!
It's not safer to stop at a red light to go left if nobody is crossing, it's just pointless, it's wasting time and petrol.

I'm not saying this should be the case in all crossroads, just in the ones where there aren't too many pedestrians, and if traffic participants can't follow the road signs they have to learn how to drive more carefully.

se conman · 28-08-2015 6:27am

I theory it would make sense but in Ireland you would see an even greater rise in the "He came out of nowhere" excuse.

28-08-2015 6:37am

Being permitted to turn left at the (red) lights makes perfect sense at most junctions for all traffic except where there is a light controlled pedestrian crossing incorporated into the sequence.
In these circumstances then a flashing amber could be installed to avoid holding up traffic unnecessarily.

MJohnston · 28-08-2015 10:04am

Typical thread about cycling - loads of people complaining about cyclists then the conversation gets taken off topic about cars

-_-

28-08-2015 10:16am

MJohnston wrote: »

Typical thread about cycling - loads of people complaining about cyclists then the conversation gets taken off topic about cars

-_-

All traffic, not just cars.

Mint Sauce · 28-08-2015 10:20am

the groutch wrote: »

hopefully not, it's dangerous enough for pedestrians as is having to be on the lookout for cyclists breaking reds, even without legitimising it.

The cyclists would still have to give way to pedestrians crossing.

What about the pedestrians who carry on walking across a road against on coming traffic when they have a red man.

MJohnston · 28-08-2015 10:31am

punisher5112 wrote: »

Op terrible idea and a concept that would not work here.

They don't care about lights and sure a lot of cyclist cycle straight out of side roads and into traffic as it is and without looking.

I really don't understand your argument here at all.

First lets get this out of the way - there are loads of cyclists, pedestrians, and drivers who ALL flagrantly ignore their respective road laws and etiquette. Nobody is blameless so can we stop sniping at particular groups? Take it to Liveline please.

Right then, if loads of cyclists already ignore lights, then how would it make things less safe to formalize, educate, and enforce a framework whereby they could legally and safely make certain turns?

I honestly believe that if you say to cyclists "red light means stop, check, and then proceed when clear" that the situation will become far safer for everyone. The main issue with cycling safety in this country is that there are no guidelines, and there are ****load of tourists cycling, so everybody cycles in a completely different way. Formalize things, make them known, and make them simple and easy to understand.

If the rule is as currently "cyclists must always wait for a green vehicle light", then unfortunately it will be broken - there are numerous reasons too. In my experience there are certain lights that won't ever turn green unless a heavy vehicle is present to trigger the pressure pads. There are situations too where there are all-way pedestrian greens where it is much safer for the cyclist, and more convenient for vehicle traffic if the cyclist proceeds during the pedestrian phase. Coming down O'Connell Street everyday, avoiding the weaving Dublin buses, taxis, coaches, and tour buses is extremely perilous, and when you encounter a red light (where there is a pedestrian crossing and no pedestrian, such as frequently happens outside the Savoy), I generally proceed when it is safe before any green light because it's safer for me, and safer for the vehicles behind me.

cdebru · 28-08-2015 12:50pm

punisher5112 wrote: »

Op terrible idea and a concept that would not work here.

They don't care about lights and sure a lot of cyclist cycle straight out of side roads and into traffic as it is and without looking.

So they are already doing it so it wouldn't work ???

The op makes perfect sense, it doesn't give the cyclist any right of way above other traffic, it has the benefit of allowing cyclists away in front of traffic "legally" when they are most vulnerable.

The second idea is good as well, pedestrian only crossings come to a stop yield to any pedestrians on the crossing and proceed when the way is clear, again it doesn't give cyclists any rights above the pedestrians on the crossing and allows cyclists to get away from a stop before other traffic.

it is just recognising in law what is common sense, blasting through a pedestrian crossing would still be illegal as would pulling out in front of any traffic or pedestrians when making a left turn. The cyclist would always have to yield to those who have the right of way nothing changes there.

MJohnston · 28-08-2015 1:01pm

A couple of interesting pieces about this topic - seems as though it is legal (although obviously a right turn) in parts of Netherlands:

https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2012/10/25/cycling-past-red-lights-its-legal-in-the-netherlands/

And that London has considered it in the past too:

http://www.londoncyclist.co.uk/should-cyclists-be-allowed-to-turn-left-at-red/

And the Parisian model seems like it has the best definition of what should be allowed:

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-33773868

"the change only affects right turns or going straight on at a T-junction - in other words where the cyclist can hug the pavement."

Seems like in most cities, cyclist fatalities come from getting caught beside turning heavy vehicles - which is exactly why most cyclists will ignore red lights at these kinds of junctions, you feel unsafe and vulnerable and getting ahead of the traffic (and therefore fully visible) always feels like a much safer move.

Cilar · 29-08-2015 3:39am

Allowing left turn (or more exactly right turn) is common in more advanced countries such as the Netherlands belgium or france. There is a sign for cyclists on the traffic light pole where right turn is allowed

Muahahaha · 29-08-2015 3:27pm

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

In theory it should be the case with all traffic IMO.

Agreed, being able to turn left at a red light with no danger would be a great idea

However the Irish, be it motorist or cyclist, show daily that the current rules cannot be followed by anyone so implementing this would turn into a monumental cluster**** of a situation and will only lead to more accidents and injuries

Agreed to but it all comes down to enforcement. The penalty and/or fine for breaking the law is rarely the consideration people have, its all about whether or not you'll get away with it or not. With little enforcement its no wonder all kinds of shenanigans are happening on Irish roads. We have pedestrians breaking red lights and getting pissed off at cyclists who do the same, then we have motorists who also break red lights but feel a moral high ground over cyclists because motorists only break them when they're red for 3 seconds whereas cyclists do it all the time they're red.

Its mad out there, between pedestrians, cyclists and motorists (of which I am all 3) loads are breaking the rules of the road and they're doing it because there is little to no enforcement.

Icepick · 29-08-2015 4:23pm

We should have dedicated bicycle paths that avoid road signals in the first place.

29-08-2015 11:37pm

Icepick wrote: »

We should have dedicated bicycle paths that avoid road signals in the first place.

They have to cross the road at some point, no matter how dedicated they are.

monument · 30-08-2015 1:04am

[Deleted User] wrote: »

They have to cross the road at some point, no matter how dedicated they are.

I'm guessing what he means is Dutch-like cycle paths -- even at a junctions with traffic lights, generally bicycles turning left (their right) and going straight along the top of T-junctions are excluded from traffic lights. The pedestrian-cyclist interaction happens outside of the traffic lights.

Although around larger roads the Dutch also often have full grade segregation using underpasses or bridges.

Another means of 'full' segregation is four-way all-green sequence for bicycles only or green for bikes on different legs of the junction at the same time motorists have green on other legs or movements.

Icepick · 30-08-2015 10:20am

Deleted User wrote: »

They have to cross the road at some point, no matter how dedicated they are.

Read OP. No crossing involved.

30-08-2015 10:21am

Icepick wrote: »

Read OP. No crossing involved.

Read the post that I was responding to!

monument · 30-08-2015 4:46pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Read the post that I was responding to!

He wrote the post which you reported to.

He's referring the avoiding signals in the same type of movements as described by the OP. This is standard with Dutch cycle paths.

cdebru · 30-08-2015 5:33pm

There is actually one on North King Street turning on to Queen street, the cycle lane cuts in before the lights to allow cyclists turn left without stopping for the red light.

bk · 31-08-2015 10:49am

monument wrote: »

I'm guessing what he means is Dutch-like cycle paths -- even at a junctions with traffic lights, generally bicycles turning left (their right) and going straight along the top of T-junctions are excluded from traffic lights. The pedestrian-cyclist interaction happens outside of the traffic lights.

Yup, in Ireland, most roads look like this:

Footpath - Traffic Lights - Cycle Path - Road

Which means the traffic lights apply to cyclists. In the Netherlands they normally look like:

Footpath - Cycle Path - Traffic Lights - Road

Which means the traffic lights don't apply to the cyclist and the cyclist can legally continue through the top of a T junction or turn right while ignoring the red light.

bk · 31-08-2015 1:15pm

Excellent example of what I'm talking about here.

Notice how the cyclist can turn right without stopping:

Screen%20Shot%202014-07-31%20at%2001.27.58.png?itok=4mlDNzPh

Screen%20Shot%202014-07-31%20at%2001.27.58.png?itok=4mlDNzPh

Also these lights are staggered, the pedestrians and cyclists get a few seconds more to walk/cycle straight ahead before the cars are allowed to turn right.

Cookie_Monster · 31-08-2015 9:24pm

bk wrote: »

Excellent example of what I'm talking about here.

Notice how the cyclist can turn right without stopping:

Also these lights are staggered, the pedestrians and cyclists get a few seconds more to walk/cycle straight ahead before the cars are allowed to turn right.

is that little set of lights (currently red) on the pole not for cyclists?

cdebru · 01-09-2015 5:45am

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

is that little set of lights (currently red) on the pole not for cyclists?

No that is a red right turn arrow, the light for the cyclist is up and to the right of the last cyclist in the picture.

the groutch · 01-09-2015 10:26am

but if that photo is accurate and you're giving cyclists and pedestrians a green at the same time, are the cyclists turning right not still cutting across the pedestrians who are crossing at the time?

MJohnston · 01-09-2015 10:41am

the groutch wrote: »

but if that photo is accurate and you're giving cyclists and pedestrians a green at the same time, are the cyclists turning right not still cutting across the pedestrians who are crossing at the time?

The pedestrians have zebra crossing stripes, which indicates that cyclists should give way to them. This is perfectly reasonable imo - I always give way to pedestrians when they're crossing legally and I think most do too.

Macy0161 · 01-09-2015 10:43am

I know it's a separate issue from the left turn, but as it's come up there are a few around where the cyclepath isn't affected by traffic lights, including at T junctions.

On the N11 inbound, most of the pedestrian crossings in from Loughlinstown (except the one near Trees Road), plus Mount Merrion and Booterstown Avenue T junctions. Outbound, the cycle path isn't under the control of the traffic lights at Fosters Avenue, and again most of the pedestrian lights (including the one at Tree's Road). I know there's other issues with the N11 cyclepaths, but shows it can and is done in the state.

Left-Turn-on-Red for Cyclists

Comments