A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » Regional Cycling » UK
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Near Miss of the Day 472: Illegal overtakes at pedestrian crossings



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 25th 20, 01:19 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Simon Mason[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,244
Default Near Miss of the Day 472: Illegal overtakes at pedestrian crossings

QUOTE:
Today’s video in our Near Miss of the Day series shows two separate incidents in which motorists not only made a close pass on bike riders, but also did so at pedestrian crossings marked with zig-zag lines – which, as road.cc reader John, who submitted the footage, points out in a very detailed analysis is also illegal.

He said: “The Highway Code is quite explicit: ‘You MUST NOT overtake the moving vehicle nearest the crossing’. Though technically in the underlying legislation cycles do not count as vehicles (Laws ZPPPCRGD regs 18, 20 & 24, RTRA sect 25(5) & TSRGD regs 10, 27 & 28) it is hard to interpret the HC as written, in any other meaning than ‘Don’t overtake at pedestrian crossings’. Let alone overtake in a manner that potentially puts people in danger.

“In the first clip, the blue BMW, despite good forward visibility of the me (the cyclist) for some distance appears to make no moderation of speed and no attempt to give sufficient passing margin. Overtaking on the crossing itself whilst a vehicle passes in the opposite direction. Had the driver slightly eased off the accelerator and shown any ability at linking observation to forward planning they could have easily overtaken into a clear space in the stream of oncoming traffic. Whilst the pass didn’t feel incredibly dangerously close it definitely felt like there was little room for error.

“Comments often state that passes sometimes do not look as close on camera as they felt at the time so I subsequently went back to take some measurements. The car tyre goes over the line 76 inches from the kerb. Allow another 7 inches for the mirror = 69 inches. My line of travel is 2 to 3 inches off the points of the zig zag lines which puts the centre line of my bike at around 33 inches from the kerb. I feel this is an entirely appropriate secondary riding position as per RoSPA etc and an old motorcyclist habit of avoiding white lines as they can be significantly different in terms of grip than unpainted tarmac. My handlebars are a whopping 29 inches end to end so with elbows I’m going to claim that the far right hand edge of my roadspace, i.e taken up by parts of me comes to approx. 48 inches from the kerb.

“This places the passing distance mirror tip to elbow at just over 20 inches or around 1/3 of the proposed guidelines of 1.5m.”

John continued: “In the second clip I’m out riding with a friend. We are travelling side by side approaching a pedestrian crossing immediately before a busy roundabout. We are freewheeling the downhill section here as there is a pedestrian waiting at the crossing and we are anticipating that the lights will change. I don’t know what speed we were travelling at but it was quite appropriate given the crossing and the busy roundabout ahead. The white car comes up quite fast from behind in a 30mph limit and the driver sounds the horn. Courtesy beep or “get outta my way” beep? The car then overtakes on the pedestrian crossing as the lights are changing and at the same time as a car approaches in the opposite direction, close passing me before slithering onto the roundabout and taking the first exit to join the queue of traffic in the High Street.

“In both these clips I am wearing a dayglo multicoloured cycling top and bright yellow helmet. The Cycliq rear camera is in medium flash mode. I have a full driving licence, own several motor vehicles on which I pay “road tax” and I carry third party insurance. As far as I am aware I have committed no moving traffic violation in the run up to either incident – well maybe my pedal reflectors are missing. Please also note, no swearing, verbal interaction, gesticulation or ninja style over the handlebar drop kick attempts to the passing vehicles.

“What have I done wrong to cause these drivers to consider that they have the right to put me and others at risk for very little benefit to themselves?

“Both incidents submitted to Hertfordshire Constabulary via their online reporting portal for antisocial driving with request for video footage.

https://road.cc/content/news/near-mi...ossings-277497
Ads
  #2  
Old September 25th 20, 02:34 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
TMS320
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,875
Default Near Miss of the Day 472: Illegal overtakes at pedestriancrossings

On 25/09/2020 13:19, Simon Mason wrote:
QUOTE:

“This places the passing distance mirror tip to elbow at just over 20
inches or around 1/3 of the proposed guidelines of 1.5m.”


He misunderstands the guidelines (like many whinging motorists saying
how unfair it all is). Diagrams to illustrate the guidelines show a
wheel to distance of (59 inches).

He estimates wheel to kerb at 33 inches. Therefore the car's wheel needs
to be 92 inches from the kerb. At 7 inches for mirror plus 15 inches for
elbow, means a guideline mirror to elbow gap of 37 inches (0.94m).

John continued: “In the second clip I’m out riding with a friend. We
are travelling side by side approaching a pedestrian crossing
immediately before a busy roundabout. We are freewheeling the
downhill section here as there is a pedestrian waiting at the
crossing and we are anticipating that the lights will change.


Riding side by side on a fairly busy urban road (not against the rules
but isit wise?) but he critices an overtake? It was still sufficiently
far from the roundabout, assuming the driver wasn't about to turn left.

  #3  
Old September 25th 20, 05:16 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
JNugent[_12_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 805
Default Near Miss of the Day 472: Illegal overtakes at pedestrian crossings

On 25/09/2020 13:19, Simon Mason wrote:

QUOTE:
Today’s video in our Near Miss of the Day series shows two separate incidents in which motorists not only made a close pass on bike riders, but also did so at pedestrian crossings marked with zig-zag lines – which, as road.cc reader John, who submitted the footage, points out in a very detailed analysis is also illegal.

He said: “The Highway Code is quite explicit: ‘You MUST NOT overtake the moving vehicle nearest the crossing’. Though technically in the underlying legislation cycles do not count as vehicles (Laws ZPPPCRGD regs 18, 20 & 24, RTRA sect 25(5) & TSRGD regs 10, 27 & 28) it is hard to interpret the HC as written, in any other meaning than ‘Don’t overtake at pedestrian crossings’. Let alone overtake in a manner that potentially puts people in danger.

“In the first clip, the blue BMW, despite good forward visibility of the me (the cyclist) for some distance appears to make no moderation of speed and no attempt to give sufficient passing margin. Overtaking on the crossing itself whilst a vehicle passes in the opposite direction. Had the driver slightly eased off the accelerator and shown any ability at linking observation to forward planning they could have easily overtaken into a clear space in the stream of oncoming traffic. Whilst the pass didn’t feel incredibly dangerously close it definitely felt like there was little room for error.

“Comments often state that passes sometimes do not look as close on camera as they felt at the time so I subsequently went back to take some measurements. The car tyre goes over the line 76 inches from the kerb. Allow another 7 inches for the mirror = 69 inches. My line of travel is 2 to 3 inches off the points of the zig zag lines which puts the centre line of my bike at around 33 inches from the kerb. I feel this is an entirely appropriate secondary riding position as per RoSPA etc and an old motorcyclist habit of avoiding white lines as they can be significantly different in terms of grip than unpainted tarmac. My handlebars are a whopping 29 inches end to end so with elbows I’m going to claim that the far right hand edge of my roadspace, i.e taken up by parts of me comes to approx. 48 inches from the kerb.

“This places the passing distance mirror tip to elbow at just over 20 inches or around 1/3 of the proposed guidelines of 1.5m.”

John continued: “In the second clip I’m out riding with a friend. We are travelling side by side approaching a pedestrian crossing immediately before a busy roundabout. We are freewheeling the downhill section here as there is a pedestrian waiting at the crossing and we are anticipating that the lights will change. I don’t know what speed we were travelling at but it was quite appropriate given the crossing and the busy roundabout ahead. The white car comes up quite fast from behind in a 30mph limit and the driver sounds the horn. Courtesy beep or “get outta my way” beep? The car then overtakes on the pedestrian crossing as the lights are changing and at the same time as a car approaches in the opposite direction, close passing me before slithering onto the roundabout and taking the first exit to join the queue of traffic in the High Street.

“In both these clips I am wearing a dayglo multicoloured cycling top and bright yellow helmet. The Cycliq rear camera is in medium flash mode. I have a full driving licence, own several motor vehicles on which I pay “road tax” and I carry third party insurance. As far as I am aware I have committed no moving traffic violation in the run up to either incident – well maybe my pedal reflectors are missing. Please also note, no swearing, verbal interaction, gesticulation or ninja style over the handlebar drop kick attempts to the passing vehicles.

“What have I done wrong to cause these drivers to consider that they have the right to put me and others at risk for very little benefit to themselves?

“Both incidents submitted to Hertfordshire Constabulary via their online reporting portal for antisocial driving with request for video footage.

https://road.cc/content/news/near-mi...ossings-277497


So "John" (whoever he is) says:

QUOTE:
“The Highway Code is quite explicit: ‘You MUST NOT overtake the moving
vehicle nearest the crossing’. Though technically in the underlying
legislation cycles do not count as vehicles (Laws ZPPPCRGD regs 18, 20 &
24, RTRA sect 25(5) & TSRGD regs 10, 27 & 28) it is hard to interpret
the HC as written, in any other meaning than ‘Don’t overtake at
pedestrian crossings’. Let alone overtake in a manner that potentially
puts people in danger."
ENDQUOTE

But is he correct in his "interpretation"?

Is he right in thinking that the Highway Code is authoritative on a
question of law?

Is he even right in his a priori assumption that a bicycle isn't a vehicle?

Remember, he specifically mentions the overtaking of a "moving vehicle",
which clearly has to be distinguished from a stationary vehicle (well,
unless John wants to have his cake and eat it, that is, and heavens
forfend, eh?).

What does the law (rather than "John") say?

The relevant legislation is The Zebra, Pelican and Puffin Pedestrian
Crossings Regulations and General Directions 1997; UK Statutory
Instruments 1997 No. 2400.

It is an offence to overtake (with a motor vehicle), the nearest *motor*
vehicle (whether moving or stationary) to a pedestrian crossing (subject
to other bits about being within the controlled area, traffic direction,
etc).

That's provided by Regulation 24, which reads (in full):

QUOTE:
24.—(1) Whilst any motor vehicle (in this regulation called “the
approaching vehicle”) or any part of it is within the limits of a
controlled area and is proceeding towards the crossing, the driver of
the vehicle shall not cause it or any part of it—

(a) to pass ahead of the foremost part of any other *motor* vehicle
proceeding in the same direction; or
(b) to pass ahead of the foremost part of a vehicle which is stationary
for the purpose of complying with regulation 23, 25 or 26.

(2) In paragraph (1)—

(a) the reference to a motor vehicle in sub-paragraph (a) is, in a case
where more than one motor vehicle is proceeding in the same direction as
the approaching vehicle in a controlled area, a reference to the motor
vehicle nearest to the crossing; and

(b) the reference to a stationary vehicle is, in a case where more than
one vehicle is stationary in a controlled area for the purpose of
complying with regulation 23, 25 or 26, a reference to the *stationary*
vehicle nearest the crossing.
ENDQUOTE

Observant readers will notice that two separate concepts exist here for
vehicles, the "motor vehicle" and the (any) "vehicle".

Note that 24 (1), as modified by 24 (1) (a), only prohibits the
overtaking of any motor vehicle by another motor vehicle within the
limits of the crossing.

24 (1), as modified by 24 (1) (b), prohibits the overtaking by a motor
vehicle of any vehicle (including a handcart, bicycle, wheelbarrow or
any other equally important class of conveyance) but *only* when that
"vehicle" is *stationary* for the purpose of complying with any of
Regulations 23, 25 or 26. It does not apply to the overtaking of a
moving vehicle other than a motor vehicle.

You can look this up for yourself of course, but for the sake of
convenience, I'll tell you that Regulation 23 applies only at Pelicon or
Puffin crossings where the red light is showing for the relevant
traffic. It is obvious that overtaking the nearest *stationary* vehicle
in such circumstances will usually involve passing a red traffic light
as well, so that's fairly non-controversial, I suggest.

Regulation 25 applies to all vehicles and obliges the driver, rider or
pusher to accord precedence to a pedestrian within the confines of the
crossing. So in order for Regulation 24 91) (b) to apply to the
overtaking of a bicycle, wheelbarrow, handcart, etc), it needs to be
*stationary* (I stress that) and to have stopped for the purpose of
according precedence to a pedestrian on the crossing (!). It does not
apply when the "vehicle" is (still) moving. It does not apply if there
is no pedestrian present.

Regulation 26 applies in the same way as Regulation 23 (at Pelicons and
Puffins, controlled by traffic lights) and extends the prohibition on
passing the nearest vehicle within the marked area when the lights are
flashing amber (so no controversy there either, just as with 23).

If "John" can't "interpret" that, it's because he hasn't read it and
understood it.

The Highway Code, as valuable as it may be, is not a statement of the
law. Only the law is that.



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Near Miss of the Day 438: Horsebox driver overtakes cyclist soclosely that rider could bang the door Simon Mason[_6_] UK 20 July 12th 20 09:10 PM
Near Miss of the Day 423: HGV driver overtakes cyclist ... into pathof another lorry Simon Mason[_6_] UK 3 June 17th 20 07:21 PM
Near Miss of the Day 410: Driver overtakes cyclist into path ofapproaching car Simon Mason[_6_] UK 0 May 17th 20 08:17 PM
Overtaking & Filtering at Pedestrian Crossings AndyC UK 6 November 11th 08 12:18 AM
Pedestrian Crossings Sir Lex Australia 28 May 30th 05 03:43 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:13 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.