Stop Lines at Traffic Lights

Discussion in 'General Cycling Discussions' started by Pseudo, 18 Sep 2015.

  1. Pseudo

    Pseudo Active Member

    When a traffic light is red, you stop at the solid stop line.

    At this location:

    https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.4...riW_BRlINhpg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1?hl=en

    the stop line is broken for cyclists. The traffic lights are a pedestrian crossing, but the presence of the broken line implies that cyclists can ignore the traffic signals (or maybe treat them as a give way sign). So, where do cyclists stand legally if the pass the signals at red?

    And here's another location:

    https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5...Q_6EURfrbLaQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1?hl=en

    cyclists have their own infrastructure, with their own signal head, but no stop line. So, do we have to obey the traffic signal, and if we do, where are we supposed to stop?
     
  2. Globalti

    Globalti Legendary Member

    What are these stop lines and red lights people keep mentioning on here? Never see 'em where we cycle:

    June%202015%20Dales_zpsomcv5qbe.jpg
     
    gavgav, Tomtrumps, kiriyama and 6 others like this.
  3. winjim

    winjim A youth of interminable age

    In the first case, the line is broken to enable cyclists to mount the dropped kerb of the toucan crossing onto the pavement on the left which is shared use. In the second case, legally I don't know, but if it looked like I was about to hit a pedestrian, I'd probably think about stopping.

    It's just more stupid overcomplicated supposedly helpful but actually really confusing infrastructure.
     
    Last edited: 18 Sep 2015
    Pseudo, Simpleton and Illaveago like this.
  4. shouldbeinbed

    shouldbeinbed Rollin' along

    Location:
    Manchester way
    Aren't the short broken lines simply the demarcation lines for the pedestrian crossing?
     
  5. vickster

    vickster Legendary Member

    Red means stop for cyclists as well as cars regardless of the paint on the road. Seems simple enough to me
     
    Dirk, boydj, glasgowcyclist and 6 others like this.
  6. winjim

    winjim A youth of interminable age

    I think maybe given a good lawyer and a sympathetic magistrate you might be able to argue the point.
     
  7. summerdays

    summerdays Cycling in the sun Moderator

    Location:
    Bristol
    Yes I think that would be the case. I must admit when they took about 3 weeks to reinstate the stop lines after resurfacing I did wonder if there was an accident whether the council would have been held liable. And I did see more cars fail to stop at the red light without the line there. If people can get off parking fines due to incorrect line markings then the same might be true of red lights without the Stop Line.

    I wonder what the legislation is for temporary traffic lights as they don't have stop lines?
     
  8. vickster

    vickster Legendary Member

    Well if there's a risk that I might be squashed by a truck or I might mow down a ped, I'm going to stop at a red light regardless. The light is the bit I look at, not the lines on the road
    Ymmv :smile:
     
    Clanghead, winjim and shouldbeinbed like this.
  9. shouldbeinbed

    shouldbeinbed Rollin' along

    Location:
    Manchester way
    IANAL but IDHCS

    I think the difference between a missing parking line with no quite so blatantly visible additional instruction(*) and a missing line from work ongoing or recently completed, directly in front of working traffic lights would be a stretch even for Nick Freeman to defend.

    (*l Unless of course you park slap bang under a no/parking/restriction sign.

    I would sugest that for temporary traffic lights, it is unreasonable to expect a line to be painted and the colour of the light determines what you do. Also the temporary lights I encounter all have that helpful red board that says when red light shows, wait here pretty much where a white line would be.
     
    summerdays likes this.
  10. PeteXXX

    PeteXXX Cake or ice cream? The choice is endless ...

    Location:
    Hamtun
    In the second link, I'd be too busy navigating the road surface to notice much else..
     
    Clanghead and annedonnelly like this.
  11. deptfordmarmoset

    deptfordmarmoset Full time tea drinker

    Location:
    Armonmy Way
    I believe that for the second one the road has a stop line for vehicular traffic further back and the cycle lane feeds off just before that line. So stop if you're on the road, proceed according to the usual peds have priority principle if using the cycle lane.
     
    Pseudo and vickster like this.
  12. winjim

    winjim A youth of interminable age

    What if the light's red? Where do you stop?
     

    Attached Files:

  13. deptfordmarmoset

    deptfordmarmoset Full time tea drinker

    Location:
    Armonmy Way
    Somewhere where you're not going to hit anybody and, preferably, where you can see the lights change - I'm still astonished by the number of cyclists who advance so far over the stop line that they can't see when it changes to green.
     
  14. Dan B

    Dan B Disengaged member

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2002/3113/regulation/43/made
    So, if no line, stop before the sign: if no sign, stop before the signal itself. Seems pretty clear
     
    subaqua, winjim and summerdays like this.
  15. sidevalve

    sidevalve Über Member

    Red = stop simples. Temp lights must have a 'wait here' board in it's place. Why are we still apparently trying to find excuses for ignoring basic traffic rules ?
     
    jonny jeez and shouldbeinbed like this.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice