Cycle Roundabouts

Yes it is about safety. But the intention of this system is to try and make the driver more aware and to slow down the traffic at the roundabout making it safer for pedestrians and cyclists. As someone pointed out, think if it was your child on a bike going around that roundabout.
I live in DK and this is the norm here and it seems to work. We have a lot more cyclists including a percentage of idiots that dont follow the rules and put themselves in danger, but drivers know to watch out for bikes as they do in places like Holland. You cant make an excuse out of a driver not paying proper attention to other road users, that's just unacceptable. The proposed solution with the lane separated by approx a cars length would seem to me to give ample visibility if drivers are paying attention.

What I don't understand is the comments from pedestrians and cyclists saying they find it confusing in the first article. I really cant see where the problem is. Maybe it's just the usual dinosaur mentality.
With respect, drivers not paying proper attention is a MAJOR factor in all road crashes - I'm not "making an excuse out of it" in fact, I offered an alternative layout. It is inevitably confusing since 1. its the first such, 2. we see it from above and they see it in two dimensions effectively and 3. the nature of roundabouts is to allow traffic to merge and cross without unnecessary delay. Traffic signals are safe because they separate movements in time. Here, everything, including pedestrians, is happening all at once. Rather better to drop speeds to 10 mph perhaps and allow time at such a complex junction ?
The last novel multi-mini roundabout was removed as too confusing. This may well be another.
 
Many studies especially in accident black spots have found the major contributing factor has been the design and layout of the junction itself, this roundabout for instance has a major flaw in it, a pedestrian crossiing for instance has to have a Belisha Beacon on each side, otherwise it is not a legal crossing, many crossing where there is a island or refuge in the middle of the crossing the placement of the Belish Beacons would determine whether it is a continuing crossing or 2 seperate crossings., there doesn't seem to be Belisha Beacons on the crossings at all.
As a Artic HGV Driver I can vouch that there are many junctions which put the motorist at a distinct dis-advantage because of their design, I often assk myself do the peple who actually design these things know what they are doing.
 
Last edited:
There are quite a few new rules going into the Highway Code, and please do not laugh you have to take these things seriously, here is just one...........

When opening your car door,instead of using the hand nearest the door, it means reaching across to open the door with the hand furthest from the door...your left hand if you are the driver.


(If you only have one arm...you maybe exempt).
 
Around here most of the footpaths are cycleways as well. The rule should be, if a cyclists and a pedestrian collide it is the cyclists fault, de facto.
Cyclist should be required to have third party insurance if they wear lycra or travel at more than 15 mph.
 
If you wear lycra and you weigh over 12 1/2 stone plus in your bedroom your just a little kinky, but 12 1/2 plus on a bike well thats just outrageous!🚴‍♂️
 
There are quite a few new rules going into the Highway Code, and please do not laugh you have to take these things seriously, here is just one...........

When opening your car door,instead of using the hand nearest the door, it means reaching across to open the door with the hand furthest from the door...your left hand if you are the driver.

(If you only have one arm...you maybe exempt).

This is called the Dutch Reach.

It’s a perfectly good habit to get into, not just to avoid opening your car door into the path of cyclists or other road users but also for any passengers getting out of the “traffic“ side of any vehicle. I use it all the time, particularly when travelling in taxis abroad.

I remember when the seat belt and drink driving laws were changed. Car drivers mocked them too.
 
Like i said before ALL cyclists should be made to have comprehensive insurance number plates and mandatory safety helmets
So I'll tell my 12yr old daughter and 13yr old son they'll need to start saving for their comprehensive insurance. Both have been accompanying me on the roads since they got the cycling test in P7 primary school ;-)
 
Might be absurd to you mate but at least if the tw!ts that ride our roads causing delays and hazards and do ride irresponsibly or dangerously they can at least be reported.
Just like cars and lorries can be now. i have a sign on my lorry saying if this vehicle is not being driven responsibly ring the number below
Why should cyclists have an exemption?
Insurance would pay for medical costs just like cars and lorries do and not impact the nhs,
Plus of course there would be tracebility for victims of accidents rather than just the colour of their lycra

That appears to be the crux of the matter, those intolerant of cyclists claim the roads as "theirs"...I seem to remember reading somewhere that 87% of cyclists owned cars and so also paid vehicle excise duty and presumably the other 13% were largely children below car driving age.

Vehicle excise duty has not been linked to road building, damage or repair for many years...the roads are owned and paid for by the citizens of this country whether pedestrians, horse riders, car, truck or cycle users.

"Many a cycle commuter in the UK has confronted a dangerous driver, only to be told they have no right on the road because they don't pay "road tax". But road tax was abolished in 1937 and replaced by Vehicle Excise Duty. This is a tax on cars, not roads, and it goes straight into the general Treasury fund"

Alan
 
To be honest I’m really not sure the car drivers here have necessarily thought things through.

For example, who is going to pay for the set up and running costs of that new computer system and administrative department to run the cycle and rider licensing scheme they all seem so keen on?

It will be part of the DVLA, funded by the DfT, so of course we’ll all end up paying for it through general taxation, and I fear this new system is not going to come cheap. We don’t exactly have a great history in the UK of the Public Sector successfully developing new software......remember the NHS National Program for IT?

We can’t just buy a system used elsewhere, as no other country seems stupid enough to have started one or, if they did, they soon realised it cost more to run than it raised in revenue. So, if no other country runs a bicycle and rider registration scheme we’ll be paying for it to be developed, tested and implemented ourselves. Which raises concerns about data security, since the details of every adult and child who has a bike will now be recorded on that database. As we’ve seen already with the DVLA and private car parks, this data soon gets sold, lost or hacked.

If that sounds like a lot of cost, what about the revenue?

Logically it would only be fair if the cycle fees are paid on a scale the same as for cars, as that would mean everyone sharing the same road space would pay in the same way. So a nice, equitable, emissions-based, tax. But that means that, just as cars that generate no emissions pay no VED, so bicycles would pay no VED. You can’t use the motorbike approach to charging either, as that’s based on engine capacity. So a flat fee then? So why not also charge for pedestrians, horses, e-scooters, etc. And what about all those bike hire schemes in big cities? Will all those need to licensed and the riders tested before using them?

So now the general public are likely getting no revenue and paying for a new department, a new computer system, their bike registration, their cycling training course, their insurance, their license plates, their children’s bike registration, their children’s cycling training course, their children’s bike insurance and their children’s license plates. Hardly a bargain.

And what about those license plates? How big are they going to be? Big enough for a car driver or pedestrian to read from a distance, presumably. So car license plate sized, and on the front and back of every bicycle, positioned so that they can be read. So cycle lanes will need to be bigger to allow for that extra space, or car drivers will suddenly find that overtaking a bicycle requires a lot more room, both of which will constrain car driving traffic even more.

In addition, and because all cyclists will now have to be professionally insured, this also means that there will suddenly be an army of expensive lawyers looking to prosecute car drivers for all manner of offences that currently get ignored. Perhaps cameras will become mandatory for cyclists, to reduce the cost of the premiums? Now that camera footage we see on Facebook will potentially become evidence in litigation. Every time a car passes too close to a cyclist, or strays into a cycle lane, or overtakes on a blind corner, or pulls out from a side road, it will be permanently recorded. Being delayed a few seconds will become the least of anyone’s worries.

As a result I imagine insurance premiums are going to suddenly become a lot more expensive, for those who obey the rules of the road just as much as those who ignore them.

Who will enforce such a scheme? Not the police, that’s for sure. Unless, that is, car drivers are somehow expecting all these new police officers to ignore their own traffic offences?

All this before even contemplating whether there’s a politician out there who is willing to stake their reputation on introducing this wonderful Bicycle Registration and Licensing Bill in Parliament....at a time when more and more people are taking up cycling having been encouraged to do so by those same politicians in order to reduce obesity, get fit, reduce the strain on the NHS and save the planet. Sounds entirely toxic. That’s certainly what Ken Livingstone found when he floated the idea of a registration scheme in London (Registration plate scheme shelved).

So, despite the wishes of some on here, I don’t see such a scheme happening any time soon. As soon as you delve into any detail behind the headlines it soon becomes apparent how completely illogical it all is.
 
Willie Gunn
Very well written and sensible !
One other way for cycling taxation is rear axel weight say £20 for a cycle per year ?
obviously car, van and lorry taxation will have to be moved up inline with the new cycle tax .
Or we could all just move on 😉
 
That appears to be the crux of the matter, those intolerant of cyclists claim the roads as "theirs"...I seem to remember reading somewhere that 87% of cyclists owned cars and so also paid vehicle excise duty and presumably the other 13% were largely children below car driving age.

Vehicle excise duty has not been linked to road building, damage or repair for many years...the roads are owned and paid for by the citizens of this country whether pedestrians, horse riders, car, truck or cycle users.

"Many a cycle commuter in the UK has confronted a dangerous driver, only to be told they have no right on the road because they don't pay "road tax". But road tax was abolished in 1937 and replaced by Vehicle Excise Duty. This is a tax on cars, not roads, and it goes straight into the general Treasury fund"

Alan

I'm not sure that's a very fair statement Alan. There are plenty like me (a cyclist myself) who do recognise everyone's rights to use the public highway but in doing so they should offer that same courtesy and respect to their fellow road users. In the case that I highlighted earlier, I have the proof which shows quite clearly that this particular group of cyclists determined that the road was for their sole use and sod anyone else. They were breaking all the guidelines and in doing so, were putting themselves and others at risk. It's not about tax ore insurance...it's about attitudes and behaviour.

I had one before lock-down come round a corner on a steep hill behind me. At the time, I was stationary, waiting behind a car that was turning right, off the main road. This cyclist couldn't stop in time, was going too fast for the conditions (slightly damp) and hit the back of my car before then losing his rag and ranting at me. When I got out of the car to check that he was ok, I silenced him very quickly and pointed out that had he been travelling at a speed safe enough to stop should he come round the corner, he would have had no problem. His view was that I should have "left room" for cyclists to get past on his left! This typifies a lot of the issues a lot of car drivers face and the attitudes towards perfectly reasonable drivers who do drive considerately. They are tarred as the villains, when the truth, like it or lump it, is there is plenty of evidence to demonstrate that (particularly) cyclists can be their own worst enemies.

I also ride a motorcycle and I can tell you that if I wasn't a considerate and defensive rider, I wouldn't be alive today. I have a lot more protection than any cyclist would wear yet they seem oblivious to the dangers that they sometimes put themselves in and they do need to learn to ride more defensively and be more hazard aware, especially if in large groups, they present themselves as a serious hazard in heavy traffic. They have the right to be there BUT need to observe the niceties and the guidance of the Highway Code equally as drivers ought to instead of blatantly ignoring it.
 
I'm not sure that's a very fair statement Alan. There are plenty like me (a cyclist myself) who do recognise everyone's rights to use the public highway but in doing so they should offer that same courtesy and respect to their fellow road users. In the case that I highlighted earlier, I have the proof which shows quite clearly that this particular group of cyclists determined that the road was for their sole use and sod anyone else. They were breaking all the guidelines and in doing so, were putting themselves and others at risk. It's not about tax ore insurance...it's about attitudes and behaviour.

I had one before lock-down come round a corner on a steep hill behind me. At the time, I was stationary, waiting behind a car that was turning right, off the main road. This cyclist couldn't stop in time, was going too fast for the conditions (slightly damp) and hit the back of my car before then losing his rag and ranting at me. When I got out of the car to check that he was ok, I silenced him very quickly and pointed out that had he been travelling at a speed safe enough to stop should he come round the corner, he would have had no problem. His view was that I should have "left room" for cyclists to get past on his left! This typifies a lot of the issues a lot of car drivers face and the attitudes towards perfectly reasonable drivers who do drive considerately. They are tarred as the villains, when the truth, like it or lump it, is there is plenty of evidence to demonstrate that (particularly) cyclists can be their own worst enemies.

I also ride a motorcycle and I can tell you that if I wasn't a considerate and defensive rider, I wouldn't be alive today. I have a lot more protection than any cyclist would wear yet they seem oblivious to the dangers that they sometimes put themselves in and they do need to learn to ride more defensively and be more hazard aware, especially if in large groups, they present themselves as a serious hazard in heavy traffic. They have the right to be there BUT need to observe the niceties and the guidance of the Highway Code equally as drivers ought to instead of blatantly ignoring it.

It is the idea or attitude (prejudice?) that somehow the motorist or trucker owns the road and are inconvenienced by interloper cyclists that I was drawing attention too.

It is only motorways that pedestrians, cyclists, moped and horse riders are not allowed on...even though the majority of them will have contributed to their building costs.

Of course I agree the intolerance towards other road users is to be condemned, whichever direction it is headed. It doesn’t make travelling safe for anyone.

But the vulnerability of any riders or pedestrians is of an entirely different order of magnitude to the harm that could be visited upon a motorist or truck driver, who’s main injuries are likely to be a few seconds or minutes added to their journey, or an earful.

I stopped commuting by bike after just too many instances of being over taken on blind bends, when you just know that an oncoming vehicle will cause the automatic reaction to swerve left and crush me. 5 seconds delay to get round the bend to see clearly, or risk my life. Too many chose to risk my life.

And yes, I have recently “assertively informed” a cyclist that he was very bad mannered. I reversed 200 metres down the hill to a passing place to allow an oncoming vehicle to get by...a cyclist had come up behind me so I had to reverse around him. As soon as the oncoming vehicle passed instead of waiting a few seconds for me to re-over take, the cyclist set off and pedalled slowly up the half mile of single lane steep hill and then proceeded past all of the passing places for the rest of the mile to the main road. I could have pushed past on the verge when it widened on the level bit but I was certainly not going to risk his life in case he wobbled...even if he expected me to. Just bad manners and unreasonable behaviour on his part. A 5 second wait for him versus a 5 minute delay for me.

On the same stretch of narrow lane from our cottage I reckon 30% of the drivers I meet will drive past a passing place after they have seen me and push aggressively towards me trying to make me reverse, even when I am in the ratty old Discovery and even a few times when I have been towing the trailer. Even more so when we are in the little Prius and she is driving.

Alan
 
Last edited:
... aggressively towards me trying to make me reverse, even when I am in the ratty old Discovery and even a few times when I have been towing the trailer. Even more so when we are in the little Prius and she is driving.

Sometimes there is a "valid" reason.

Same situation driving a tatty 110 and towing. The lady with which I am "tet a tet" is quite simply refusing to reverse into the passing place she has just passed.
Long short.
I dismount and have a chat.
Turns out she simply does not know how to select reverse gear - the stick had a catch you had to lift to stick it in R.

I actually reversed her car for her into the passing place, jump back into my truck and on we all go.
 
Back
Top