How much space needed for cyclist coming opposite way.
Discussion
This is why the Highway Code (rule 243) states that you shouldn't park within 10 metres of a junction, so this sort of thing doesn't happen. Therefore the fault here is in the placement of those parking spaces. Before any confused pedants point out that rule 243 states 'unless in a parking space', I am simply stating that it's a bit stupid to put parking spaces that close to a junction for the very reasons that rule 243 was written. Nevertheless, it happens. The same issue is presented with traffic calming chicanes on some roads I've driven on.
Given that the awkward road layout pre-disposes itself to disputes like this, both road users need to show some common courtesy - I would say that the correct thing to do if the car driver has already started the manouvre and can't abort, is for the car driver to give the cyclist as much space as possible, slow right down, and fold in wing mirrors if they have this feature. The potential risks of such a junction should be apparent to any approaching car driver - what if a car comes charging around the corner! You'd have to stop dead and potentially even reverse to avoid a collision. The cyclist equally has an obligation to slow right down and squeeze through the gap - they shouldn't be taking a blind junction that quick anyway; what if there was someone crossing the road, a broken down car in the road, etc etc? As with most things, there's an obligation to both parties.
Given that the awkward road layout pre-disposes itself to disputes like this, both road users need to show some common courtesy - I would say that the correct thing to do if the car driver has already started the manouvre and can't abort, is for the car driver to give the cyclist as much space as possible, slow right down, and fold in wing mirrors if they have this feature. The potential risks of such a junction should be apparent to any approaching car driver - what if a car comes charging around the corner! You'd have to stop dead and potentially even reverse to avoid a collision. The cyclist equally has an obligation to slow right down and squeeze through the gap - they shouldn't be taking a blind junction that quick anyway; what if there was someone crossing the road, a broken down car in the road, etc etc? As with most things, there's an obligation to both parties.
Johnnytheboy said:
Toltec said:
Johnnytheboy said:
I'd be interested to know the rule on this as I encounter the same cyclist a lot on my morning commute on a lane about 1.5 cars wide. As he invariably cycles straight past any passing place between us as we head towards each other, I assume he's comfortable to be be passed quite closely, but the look he usually gives me makes me think otherwise!
He is probably thinking that he can use the road without having to straddle the centre line so you should be the one giving way. Similar to you passing parked cars on your side when there are none on the other side, you should be the one giving way.
So if he shoots past a passing place, he's kind of lost the ability for me to give him more than half-a-car's width in total.
I'd say you should just slow down to maybe 15-20mph a good couple of seconds before before you pass, if there is a passing place you reach first then use it, though if he never uses one he reaches first then and you are sure it is always the same person as you say they cannot be that bothered.
What happens if you clearly take the centre of the road before he reaches the passing place? If you want to push it you could come to a stop in the centre if he just rides past the passing place.
Always used to annoy me when I was cycling and a car passed me then immediately stopped because a car was coming the other way when I wouldn't have needed to stop. From your cyclists POV it is a lot more work for him to speed up again from a stop than it is for you.
ETA: Think of it this way, if he was in a car one of you would be stopping at that passing place and the other would be slowing right down to pass so really he is probably saving you time...
Edited by Toltec on Friday 22 September 15:20
RobM77 said:
This is why the Highway Code (rule 243) states that you shouldn't park within 10 metres of a junction, so this sort of thing doesn't happen. Therefore the fault here is in the placement of those parking spaces. Before any confused pedants point out that rule 243 states 'unless in a parking space', I am simply stating that it's a bit stupid to put parking spaces that close to a junction for the very reasons that rule 243 was written. Nevertheless, it happens. The same issue is presented with traffic calming chicanes on some roads I've driven on.
Given that the awkward road layout pre-disposes itself to disputes like this, both road users need to show some common courtesy - I would say that the correct thing to do if the car driver has already started the manouvre and can't abort, is for the car driver to give the cyclist as much space as possible, slow right down, and fold in wing mirrors if they have this feature. The potential risks of such a junction should be apparent to any approaching car driver - what if a car comes charging around the corner! You'd have to stop dead and potentially even reverse to avoid a collision. The cyclist equally has an obligation to slow right down and squeeze through the gap - they shouldn't be taking a blind junction that quick anyway; what if there was someone crossing the road, a broken down car in the road, etc etc? As with most things, there's an obligation to both parties.
This is a fair summary in my view. I think in reality the parking space is 10m from the junction, just, but the corner has a decent radius on it hence can be taken on a bike at a fair pace. If it's opposing vehicles, there probably is room for two cars to pass, v carefully, but generally either party wait as appropriate as there isn't room for two vehicles and door opening space. Plus yes, people do charge round the corner and one or both then pull up sharply, it's something you have to be aware of.Given that the awkward road layout pre-disposes itself to disputes like this, both road users need to show some common courtesy - I would say that the correct thing to do if the car driver has already started the manouvre and can't abort, is for the car driver to give the cyclist as much space as possible, slow right down, and fold in wing mirrors if they have this feature. The potential risks of such a junction should be apparent to any approaching car driver - what if a car comes charging around the corner! You'd have to stop dead and potentially even reverse to avoid a collision. The cyclist equally has an obligation to slow right down and squeeze through the gap - they shouldn't be taking a blind junction that quick anyway; what if there was someone crossing the road, a broken down car in the road, etc etc? As with most things, there's an obligation to both parties.
The issue I have here, is that because it's physically and tbh easily possible to fit car and bike into the gap, people do that, then when one party seems to want to be the arse about the issue 'obstruction on your side so that even though you're already passing you should instantly disappear so I don't have to slow down / harm my Strava time' or whatever thought process is going on, then per your last sentence it just seems an abdication of responsibilities and obligations to other parties.
FiF said:
RobM77 said:
This is why the Highway Code (rule 243) states that you shouldn't park within 10 metres of a junction, so this sort of thing doesn't happen. Therefore the fault here is in the placement of those parking spaces. Before any confused pedants point out that rule 243 states 'unless in a parking space', I am simply stating that it's a bit stupid to put parking spaces that close to a junction for the very reasons that rule 243 was written. Nevertheless, it happens. The same issue is presented with traffic calming chicanes on some roads I've driven on.
Given that the awkward road layout pre-disposes itself to disputes like this, both road users need to show some common courtesy - I would say that the correct thing to do if the car driver has already started the manouvre and can't abort, is for the car driver to give the cyclist as much space as possible, slow right down, and fold in wing mirrors if they have this feature. The potential risks of such a junction should be apparent to any approaching car driver - what if a car comes charging around the corner! You'd have to stop dead and potentially even reverse to avoid a collision. The cyclist equally has an obligation to slow right down and squeeze through the gap - they shouldn't be taking a blind junction that quick anyway; what if there was someone crossing the road, a broken down car in the road, etc etc? As with most things, there's an obligation to both parties.
This is a fair summary in my view. I think in reality the parking space is 10m from the junction, just, but the corner has a decent radius on it hence can be taken on a bike at a fair pace. If it's opposing vehicles, there probably is room for two cars to pass, v carefully, but generally either party wait as appropriate as there isn't room for two vehicles and door opening space. Plus yes, people do charge round the corner and one or both then pull up sharply, it's something you have to be aware of.Given that the awkward road layout pre-disposes itself to disputes like this, both road users need to show some common courtesy - I would say that the correct thing to do if the car driver has already started the manouvre and can't abort, is for the car driver to give the cyclist as much space as possible, slow right down, and fold in wing mirrors if they have this feature. The potential risks of such a junction should be apparent to any approaching car driver - what if a car comes charging around the corner! You'd have to stop dead and potentially even reverse to avoid a collision. The cyclist equally has an obligation to slow right down and squeeze through the gap - they shouldn't be taking a blind junction that quick anyway; what if there was someone crossing the road, a broken down car in the road, etc etc? As with most things, there's an obligation to both parties.
The issue I have here, is that because it's physically and tbh easily possible to fit car and bike into the gap, people do that, then when one party seems to want to be the arse about the issue 'obstruction on your side so that even though you're already passing you should instantly disappear so I don't have to slow down / harm my Strava time' or whatever thought process is going on, then per your last sentence it just seems an abdication of responsibilities and obligations to other parties.
The Highway Code is quite clear on the amount of room one needs to give a cyclist, and it's quite a bit (e.g. at least a car's width when passing). The main reason is that cyclists, especially on road bikes, frequently need to avoid potholes, badly levelled drains or manhole covers etc. If it really was in any way tight for the cyclist then I would stop completely and wait. Yes, they shouldn't be going around a blind bend at a speed they can't stop at, but someone else's stupidity does not excuse other people from putting that idiot in danger; it's every driver's responsibility to do what they can to make a given situation as safe as possible.
RobM77 said:
The Highway Code is quite clear on the amount of room one needs to give a cyclist, and it's quite a bit (e.g. at least a car's width when passing).
Does it, where?Highway Code said:
Rule 163
...give motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car (see Rules 211 to 215)....
Rule 212
When passing motorcyclists and cyclists, give them plenty of room (see Rules 162 to 167). If they look over their shoulder it could mean that they intend to pull out, turn right or change direction. Give them time and space to do so.
Rule 213
Motorcyclists and cyclists may suddenly need to avoid uneven road surfaces and obstacles such as drain covers or oily, wet or icy patches on the road. Give them plenty of room and pay particular attention to any sudden change of direction they may have to make.
...give motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car (see Rules 211 to 215)....
Rule 212
When passing motorcyclists and cyclists, give them plenty of room (see Rules 162 to 167). If they look over their shoulder it could mean that they intend to pull out, turn right or change direction. Give them time and space to do so.
Rule 213
Motorcyclists and cyclists may suddenly need to avoid uneven road surfaces and obstacles such as drain covers or oily, wet or icy patches on the road. Give them plenty of room and pay particular attention to any sudden change of direction they may have to make.
If you're in your car and straddling the line and the other road user (doesn't have to be a bike) wouldn't cross the dividing line then YOU should give way.
Same as if you were driving towards a car and it swerved around a parked car into your way. "Meet and Greet" is what I vaguely remember it being called when I learnt to drive. The side of the obstruction is the side that should give way.
Obviously that's theoretical, and sometimes it's impossible, but if you are on the wrong side of the road, you need to be sensible. Sadly, it seems that many drivers cars, bikes whatever forget this and just charge through regardless of the situation.
Little less haste at times wouldn't hurt.
te and it always make me confused when I read here and elsewhere about people that proudly post essentially that they are incompetent and cant deal with other road users without having a melt down!
Speeds are kph NOT mph
Same as if you were driving towards a car and it swerved around a parked car into your way. "Meet and Greet" is what I vaguely remember it being called when I learnt to drive. The side of the obstruction is the side that should give way.
Obviously that's theoretical, and sometimes it's impossible, but if you are on the wrong side of the road, you need to be sensible. Sadly, it seems that many drivers cars, bikes whatever forget this and just charge through regardless of the situation.
Little less haste at times wouldn't hurt.
shost said:
One thing they don't yet teach is the larger the speed diferential the bigger the gap should be. I've no problem with slow traffic passing a bit close if its narrow. But same gap on a NSL would be terryfying.
I agree with this entirely. Hence the "wider the rider" thing in Australia (I think) I don't NEED 1.5metres if the car is doing 25 and I'm doing 20. But if I'm doing 20 and the car is doing 70 be nice to not get buffeted by the wind wake. As ever. 95% of road users are fine and understand and do this. The other 5% are ste and it always make me confused when I read here and elsewhere about people that proudly post essentially that they are incompetent and cant deal with other road users without having a melt down!Speeds are kph NOT mph
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff