Cycle / Zebra crossing - rules?

[simon.r]

A few of these crossings (cycle lane immediately adjacent to a zebra crossing) have appeared on my local routes:

Anyone know what the legal position is re. priorities on the cycle crossing?

 

[glasgowcyclist]

I've asked about this too with no clear answer. I would *assume* that the standard rule of traffic only having to give way once a pedestrian sets foot on the crossing applies to the cycle part too, in that you'd need to commence your traverse to gain priority. I've been unable to pin down anything in legislation to clarify it though.

I've been lucky so far in that, whenever I've used one, drivers have anticipated my intention and stopped to wave me across.

 

[stoatsngroats]

https://www.sustrans.org.uk/sites/d...chnical Note 17 - Cycle Zebras compressed.pdf

Interesting, and the way I understand it, the cyclist would have to give way to vehicles.

It was written a few years ago though.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

The current zebra crossing regulations make no provision for anyone other than pedestrians to have precedence so it wouldn't be wise to rely on my earlier assumption. Instead, the only sure way to assert precedence would be to dismount and walk across, which kind of defeats the purpose.

 

[stoatsngroats]

Or wait, it doesn’t appear to be a very busy road, and that was the point I think, regarding the Canterbury model in the Sustrans report I linked to.
I wouldn’t dismount to cross that one which Simon.r showed, but I’d be happy to wait if necessary.

 

[Globalti]

Or move to the Netherlands.

 

[Deleted member 26715]

Looks like a recipe to disaster to me, only way to make it work is add lights & none of these stupid new cheap design ones where there is no overhead warning

 

[HLaB]

Its the same as the current rules for pedestrians at zebra crossings, the only give way lines are for cars, how much faith you put in that is another question

 

[IanSmithCSE]

Good morning,

http://content.tfl.gov.uk/lcds-chapter5-junctionsandcrossings.pdf

Top of page 14 (or possibly 12!) 5.2.6 Priority crossings

Seems to suggest that cyclists on the cycle part between the orange beacons have the same rights as pedestrians on the zebra crossing.

It would seem impractical to place a large non priority area within the beacons, but this is just another opinion from browsing the net though!

Bye

Ian

 

[simon.r]

http://content.tfl.gov.uk/lcds-chapter5-junctionsandcrossings.pdf

That document references The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016, ( http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/pdfs/uksi_20160362_en.pdf ) which says, on page 436:

22.—(1) The give-way line marking provided for at item 54 of the Part 2 sign table (and shown in the diagram at item 53) conveys to vehicular traffic proceeding
along the carriageway towards a Parallel crossing—
(a) the position at or before which a vehicle must be stopped (“the stop position”), and
(b) a requirement to stop at, or before, the stop position, if a pedestrian or cyclist is on the carriageway, for the purposes of using the crossing, within the part of the crossing intended for (as the case may be) pedestrians or cyclists.
(2) Where there is a refuge for pedestrians or cyclists, or central reservation, on a Parallel crossing, the parts of the crossing situated on each side of the refuge or central reservation are to be treated, for the purposes of this paragraph, as separate crossings.

I think that's clear - cyclists using the cycle part of the crossing have the same priority as pedestrians using the zebra part of the crossing.

Obviously still wise to look before crossing though

Edit - for reference the official term for these looks to be ‘parallel crossing’.

 

[NorthernDave]

Looks like a recipe to disaster to me, only way to make it work is add lights & none of these stupid new cheap design ones where there is no overhead warning

^^^ This - it looks like an accident waiting to happen.

Thanks to the posters above for listing the legal stuff, but how many motorists are going to
A) be aware of that (regardless of the fact that they should be) and
B) would you trust to notice you and then stop and give way?

 

[classic33]

^^^ This - it looks like an accident waiting to happen.

Thanks to the posters above for listing the legal stuff, but how many motorists are going to
A) be aware of that (regardless of the fact that they should be) and
B) would you trust to notice you and then stop and give way?

A local "cycling champion" could do with getting on his bike and checking that bit for himself.

 

[stoatsngroats]

^^^ This - it looks like an accident waiting to happen.

Thanks to the posters above for listing the legal stuff, but how many motorists are going to
A) be aware of that (regardless of the fact that they should be) and
B) would you trust to notice you and then stop and give way?

Well, I’m not sure I would have been aware, without this post, but, as a cyclist choosing to cross here, I would wait for a gap. As a driver, approaching whilst someone (ped or cyclist) I would give way if it was safe for me to do so.

I think is is an interesting solution, and applaud their efforts to introduce such crossings.

 

[JtB]

Road features need to be intuitive, not all motorists / cyclists / pedestrians in the UK have read the latest edition of the British Highway Code or are even English speaking. What for example are the priorities of a raised section of the road without markings which to pedestrians look like a footpath and to drivers look like a speed bump?

 

[berty bassett]

Doesn’t a dotted white line mean give way ? - not that I would want to test my theory