-
Is there a good reason why the "look right" and "look left" pavement writing is not used on any of the major cycle paths?
I don't think so. I suspect they simply didn't think of it. Frankly, I wouldn't put that down there but instead force riders to look properly. With the instructions, it makes it appear as if the onus is on the walker rather than the rider, and as there are far more walkers, it is much easier to educate those fewer people operating machines. (Placing the onus on the more vulnerable road user is an old 'Road Safety' strategy that has never worked in any way other than putting people off walking and cycling.)
As you imply, on a bidirectional segregated track it would have to be 'look both ways', as they are much narrower than a regular section of carriageway, but the likelihood of being hit by someone coming along on the side that you first step onto would still be higher. Remember that the 'look left/right' exhortations at junctions in Central London are aimed at tourists who largely come from countries where driving or riding is on the right and whose instinct is to look in that direction, so it would seem rather pointless on bidirectional tracks.
Also, why are the roads that cut across give ways and not Stops? The amount of people who have pulled across and nearly hit me is silly. This turned into more of a rant than expected. But I need answers.
'Stop' is only used very rarely in this country (unlike, say, the US). If I recall correctly, in very busy environments 'stop' leads to increased crashes (e.g., rear-end crashes) than the more flexible give-ways. I can't remember where I read that, though.
You are reading a single comment by @Oliver Schick and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
Oliver Schick
Is there a good reason why the "look right" and "look left" pavement writing is not used on any of the major cycle paths?
Having nearly been knocked off a few times by peds it occurred to me that there is signs on the ground at road crossing points saying which way to look. But on the cycle path across Blackfriars and beyond there is nothing.
If a motorist splats a ped that equals one casualty, if a cyclist hits a ped that equals (at least) two casualties.
Surely it is 50% more effective to be putting great big "look both ways" signs on the cycle paths?
Also, why are the roads that cut across give ways and not Stops? The amount of people who have pulled across and nearly hit me is silly. This turned into more of a rant than expected. But I need answers.
Is it simply a case of bad planning/non cyclists designing cycle paths or is there reasons for these things?