I've just watched the repeat of Traffic Cops shown on Monday, and they stopped a woman in a Berlingo for having gone through a red light. However, she went over the first stop line on amber and only crossed the second stop line ahead of the cyclists' area on red.
Since amber is still stop, I understood there were still grounds for issuing a ticket, not helped by it taking ages for her to pull over, but it seemed harsh.
However, I wasn't sure of the rules and so checked the online Highway Code, and found out that both stop lines do apply. If the lights go to red before reaching the second line, you must stop behind that second line.
I must admit I didn't know that. The number of times I've read the Highway Code, I'm surprised I had forgotten it - at least I know now. Must be the bad influence of living in London, where many times now I've nearly been knocked over when crossing a road on foot by cars ignoring the lights, even with police cars waiting at the junction (once was a police car itself).
While I'm posting this thread, does anyone know if traffic lights are allowed to have staggered stop lines? Near where I live, there are a few junctions with three lanes for going ahead, but two of those drop into one just after the junction. If I'm in one of the lanes that merges, I never draw up alongside a car already waiting, instead staying half a car length back (or forward). It then means that my car, the one in the other lane, and all the ones behind us, are pre-staggered, ready to zip merge. If the stop line was staggered, the traffic would do this automatically, reducing the fight for the front or the of opposite both cars letting the other to go first, holding everyone up.
|
I saw the same episode, but to me, as the officer said, the replay thing showed that the lorry went through on amber but she went through on red.
|
|
I agree she did go through on red, but the second line of the two.
|
|
At junctions that have lights at the entrance, and another set on the far side, you can, in the appropriate circumstances, have crossed the first set on amber but then reach the second set on red. Are you supposed to stop in the middle of the junction, or legally cross on red?
|
At junctions that have lights at the entrance and another set on the far side
It's crossing the Stop line that is the issue - once you've passed that then you carry on.
Regarding Advanced Stop Lines, we have a lot of those in our area (Chester) and it seems that only a tiny % of people know what they mean - most ignore the first line altogether.
|
Does this mean than in effect you have a valid reason for stopping on the Green marked area that is for cycles only?
Should they now start cross hatching the Green area with yellow lines to make it a Box area??????;)
|
Does this mean than in effect you have a valid reason for stopping on the Green marked area that is for cycles only?
You only have an excuse when you've already crossed the first line when the light goes to red. Otherwise you're committing an offence.
Highway Code 178
Advanced stop lines. Some signal-controlled junctions have advanced stop lines to allow cycles to be positioned ahead of other traffic. Motorists, including motorcyclists, MUST stop at the first white line reached if the lights are amber or red and should avoid blocking the way or encroaching on the marked area at other times, e.g. if the junction ahead is blocked. If your vehicle has proceeded over the first white line at the time that the signal goes red, you MUST stop at the second white line, even if your vehicle is in the marked area. Allow cyclists time and space to move off when the green signal shows.
>>Should they now start cross hatching the Green area with yellow lines to make it a Box area??????;)
Absolutely not. Because that would cause confusion about whether cyclists have some exemption on box junctions that don't apply to other motorists.
Motorists in my opinion don't know what the Highway Code says about advance stop lines. If they did, using them properly isn't an issue.
As a cyclist, I find the advance stop areas useful, but they're are frequently blocked by ignorant drivers. I also get trouble from car drivers who don't like cyclists pushing to the front of the queue and once through the junction do dodgy overtakes where there's not enough room, just to make a point. I sometimes deliberately don't go to the front of the queue to avoid this - X5 vs cyclist is no contest. But then I win on VED !
|
|
Only ever noticed this at one set of lights with advanced stop lines (Edinburgh, Kaimes Xroads, N bound) is a plate on the traffic light pole - it reads "Do not fill the cycle reservoir". Have to assume it is aimed at car drivers otherwise bikes wouldnt use the "reservoir"!
|
|
|
|
Regarding Advanced Stop Lines we have a lot of those in our area (Chester) and it seems that only a tiny % of people know what they mean - most ignore the first line altogether.
I have'nt seen these "advance stop lines" locally (I don't get out much), I take it they are at least 23 metres before the main stop line in a 30 mph zone as that is the stopping distance. If not then what is the point of them ?
|
We have red areas for cyclists just in front of the main stop line at traffic lights (along with a narrow strip on the left feeding into the cyclists' stop area. The distance is only about twice the length of a bicycle and certainly not 23 metres as mentioned above.
I've seen very few cyclists use them, especially if straight on is the only choice; it's much safer to keep to the left in their shortish red area up to the lights.
|
|
|
|
It's crossing the Stop line that is the issue - once you've passed that then you carry on.
Suppose these lights are at a busy crossroads with a box junction filling the intersection, but on the approaching roads there is a car length or two after the stop line before the box junction markings start. If I am waiting at the stop line, when my light goes green I can carry on. But if the road ahead (I am going straight on) is blocked by e.g. a queue of traffic the other side of the box junction, I immediately stop again two car lengths later at the entrance to the box junction because my route out isn't clear. If the queue ahead of me doesn't clear until my lights have gone red again, as I understand it I am entitled to proceed as soon as the queue is clear and I can get all the way across the box junction, regardless of the red light in my direction. The stop light no longer applies to me because I have already legally crossed the stop line.
But this is a busy crossroads. There will be traffic crossing in front of me from both sides. Who has priority - me or them, or is it a free-for-all at that point? There is no Give Way line where I am waiting between the stop line and the start of the box junction.
Clearly, in practice I would not drive out in front of other traffic on the off-chance that I had priority. But I would proceed across the box junction with no regard to the colour of the traffic lights if the crossing road was clear. I think I'm entitled to do so from a Rules of the Road point of view, but I also wonder how traffic light cameras intended to catch people driving through red lights cope with this situation. Anyone know?
|
|
My observations are that most drivers treat the stop lies as merely advisory. I was always taught that the whole of the vehicle should be behind the line if at all possible, not (as seems current practice these days) just the driver's nose!
|
|
|
It's crossing the Stop line that is the issue - once you've passed that then you carry on.
And in particular the key point I'm making, that I didn't originally realise and I'm sure lots other don't, is that there are two stop lines that apply independently but from the same traffic light.
In BillPayer's link, there is a pretty useless one pictured where the first stop line extends across the whole side of the road with no cycle lane beforehand. In that case, the two stop lines apply to both cyclists and other road users. If the lights are red before a cyclist reaches the red area, he can't actually legally go into the red area until the green.
In GJD's example, as long as you have cleared both stop lines (or equally if there is only one before the box), I believe the green light conditions apply, meaning proceed if safe to do so. It would therefore be free-for-all, much the same as if the traffic lights had failed. Just a case of hoping all drivers have sensible judgement.
I think traffic light cameras have to take two pictures to show you have crossed on red, one before the line and one after. In your example, there would have been no reason for the cameras to take a picture of you behind the line(s) because the lights were green. It would only have one or two pictures of you beyond the line.
|
If thelights are red before a cyclist reaches the red area he can't actually >> legally go into the red area until the green.
Hi James, do you know where that's spelled out? I can well believe it and I've seen it before as the excuse for some p poor access lanes into ASLs- the sort where using them invites being squashed by a leftbound bus or HGV.
But there are plenty of them in London with no access lane.
|
|
The only place I would gather it's spelled out is the highway code as posted by audi dave, or the underlying legislation. There's a similar comment made on page 4 of Bill Payer's link, with better picture on page 10. The cyclist can't enter the shaded area without crossing the first stop line.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
While I'm posting this thread does anyone know if traffic lights are allowed to have staggered stop lines?
The set of lights in Esher High Street has a staggered stop line (south bound on Old Portsmouth Road).
|
|
|
