Ian wrote:

"Martin Underwood" wrote in message Ian wrote in


If you have
difficulty stopping at the correct line you shouldn't be driving.

In my experience, in wet weather (when the road is shiny) or at night,
it's very hard to see that there's a cycle box from a distance so you plan
your braking based on the assumption that the stop line is level with the
traffic light pole. Then as you get closer, you suddenly discover that you
need to stop further back that you'd anticipated.

The solution to this is to move the traffic light poles back so they are
level with the car stop line.


How about the cycle lane on the nearside of the road on the approach to the
traffic lights? If you can't see that you need your eyes tested. If you can
see it then you should anticipate that there is likely to be a cycle box at
the traffic lights.

Is that really the case? It seems most illogical to me! The benefits of
having a cycle box are far greater where there's no cycle lane.

--
Aidan Stanger
http://www.bettercrossrail.co.uk

In message of Sat, 29 Apr
2006 19:58:47 in uk.transport.london, Aidan Stanger
writes
Ian wrote:

"Martin Underwood" wrote in message Ian wrote in


If you have
difficulty stopping at the correct line you shouldn't be driving.

In my experience, in wet weather (when the road is shiny) or at night,
it's very hard to see that there's a cycle box from a distance so you plan
your braking based on the assumption that the stop line is level with the
traffic light pole. Then as you get closer, you suddenly discover that you
need to stop further back that you'd anticipated.

The solution to this is to move the traffic light poles back so they are
level with the car stop line.


How about the cycle lane on the nearside of the road on the approach to the
traffic lights? If you can't see that you need your eyes tested. If you can
see it then you should anticipate that there is likely to be a cycle box at
the traffic lights.

Is that really the case? It seems most illogical to me! The benefits of
having a cycle box are far greater where there's no cycle lane.


Such a situation should never exist. A cyclist can only bypass the first
stop line via the cycle lane - that one is new to me.

I am going to quote http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2002/20023113.htm#10
Meaning of stop line and references to light signals
43. - (1) Subject to paragraphs (2) and (3), "stop line" in
relation to light signals for the control of vehicular traffic means -
[snip]
(2) Where the road marking shown in diagram 1001.2 has been placed
in conjunction with light signals, "stop line" in relation to those
light signals means -

(a) the first stop line, in the case of a vehicle (other than a pedal
cycle proceeding in the cycle lane) which has not proceeded beyond that
line; or
(b) the second stop line, in the case of a vehicle which has proceeded
beyond the first stop line or of a pedal cycle proceeding in the cycle
lane.

Diagram 1001.2 is in http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2002/023113am.gif
--
Walter Briscoe

In message , Walter Briscoe
writes

Such a situation should never exist. A cyclist can only bypass the
first stop line via the cycle lane - that one is new to me.

The requirement for an advance stop box to be fed by a cycle lane is
relatively new. There are older examples where this doesn't happen, e.g:

http://www.ctc.org.uk/_CTC/images/Ca.../GYork0397.jpg

http://www.ctc.org.uk/_CTC/images/Ca...licy/F1036.jpg
--
Paul Terry