In a 20 zone, I see. I don't think cyclists should have the right to cycle as though there's no vehicle in front of them in such areas. I think overtaking and then turning left across a cyclist is a very different thing to what's happened here.
The car was indicating with plenty of time, the cyclist should have been prepared to stop even if the right of way was theirs (I don't know if it was or not, but I don't think so).
Even though cars are supposed to stop at a zebra crossing you don't just walk out blindly, it's similar - take due care regardless.
I believe the driver should have to give way to traffic in the cycle lane. Admittedly it was poor decision making by the cyclist.
Which starts about three metres before the turning. Cyclist says on twitter he saw the car indicating but thought car was turning further up the road which is never a good assumption. Cyclist was however behind for a long time so driver must have known cyclist there or thereabouts.
Both careless imo as well as bad luck in terms of timing of switch to cycle lane.
That the cyclelane had just started literally feet before the turning probably explains the accident, and is a matter for the council.
I think that's moot, because the turn was into a business driveway not a road - and cycle lanes have to start somewhere.
Though I'd say there should have been some provision far earlier, from before the roundabout.
Interesting one, and not entirely 100% either way.
On general principles I'd say the cyclist is the more vulnerable and the motorist has to be on the look out all the time for hazards like that. The bike was behind for a while so no reason why the motorist shouldn't have picked it up earlier, especially if he/she was planning to turn left. In a 20mph zone, you kind of have to expect cyclists nipping up the inside.
In mitigation, the motorist did signal in good time and it's hard to see why the cyclist didn't spot that and stop. Not sure the cycle lane makes much difference to all this, and it is a dumb place to start one.
I'd go for 70/30 motorist/bike. Looks like a slow speed, low impact collision, so I trust nobody hurt.
The driver was technically at fault; the cyclist was unobservant at best or plain stupid at worst.
Edit: 'plain stupid': Since the cyclist says in the tweet replies that he'd seen the indication but assumed the driver was going to turn into the next junction (a junction that's so far off we can't see it in the video), wtaf was said cyclist doing undertaking at that point?
ETA: Modifed view after seeing (after other comments) that it was a cycle lane. Cyclist therefore has priority in theory, so driver should give way. Main thought is that it's a really silly place to start a cycle lane what looks to be only a few metres before a turning! As a cyclist, I'd stil be doing what I described above, I think, but the driver is more culpable than I initially thought.
Another example of why painted cycle lanes are pretty useless really.
They are fine because they usually keep the cars out and that gives space on the road. But as in this case I wouldn't look at them as a protective cloak against motorised vehicles.
They induce close passes and don't prevent people parking in them. A waste of paint.
We need to distinguish between solid line Mandatory Cycle Lanes. and dotted line Advisory Cycle Lanes.
One reason that fits intuition is because these lanes are very easily blocked legally ( eg parking, unloading etc - Kengington High Street as it is now) that induces far more conflict as bike riders are forced to merge and separate unprotected from motor traffic multiple times, which is one of the most dangerous manoeuvres of all.
The thing is, whatever your view on asylum seekers, or where to house them, or indeed on the planning laws, the Government is duty bound to obey the existing laws as they stand. Simply thinking they can ride roughshod over their legal obligations and ignore all the other authorities involved shows a degree of arrogance and incompetance that I would have called remarkable had it been any other organisation. It just seems to be par for the course with this lot.
Listened to the new Stones single. Not bad at all! The guitar riff time travels from long ago and makes the journey intact. I'd say it's the best original single ever released by a rock band of average age 80.
Listened to it last night. Liked it so much I have immediately put the album on my wish list.
I was as much relieved as pleased by liking it. The Stones do mean something to me (my first crush, kind of) and I wouldn't want them putting out bad or mediocre music in their dotage. I'd be sad if that happened.
There is something rather strange about the loony-right hatred for Obama. A man who hasn't been President (or in any position of political power) now for nearly seven years. And followed by their own Poster Boy Trump, who didn't undo any of the 'bad things' Obama clearly did.
Like the UK in Russia, Obama lives rent free in the loony right heads.
Hard to imagine why he exercises them so much, I'm struggling to see what made Obama different from any other president before or since. A real head scratcher.
I think to some extent the Trump/Maga thing is a backlash against having to tolerate a black man in the White House.
The thing is, whatever your view on asylum seekers, or where to house them, or indeed on the planning laws, the Government is duty bound to obey the existing laws as they stand. Simply thinking they can ride roughshod over their legal obligations and ignore all the other authorities involved shows a degree of arrogance and incompetance that I would have called remarkable had it been any other organisation. It just seems to be par for the course with this lot.
You'd have thought this Government of all governments would know the cultural and historical significance of RAF Scampton.
So taking this all together for movement this year, the Conservatives are up accross the patch, but not by much. Labour is retaining their votes in the Red Wall seats, but there is a material switch to the Lib Dems in the Blue Wall.
This must despite rather than because of Sir Ed Davey because he's completely invisible.
He should come with an audible warning in case people don't see him: "Warning; this politician is reversing."
Listened to the new Stones single. Not bad at all! The guitar riff time travels from long ago and makes the journey intact. I'd say it's the best original single ever released by a rock band of average age 80.
I've not listened yet. Best Stones single since...?
I'll say since One Hit (To the Body) 1986. Although despite my fandom I couldn't swear to have heard all the intervenings.
Oh so not that good then! Last genuinely good Stones single was Miss You (1978) IMHO. If disco's not your thing you'd have to go back to the 1974 offerings, before I was born!
Start Me Up (1981).
I actually think Jagger’s recent “Strange Game” theme for Slow Horses is pretty good.
I've never really got the love for Start Me Up, it's always left me cold. I like some of their early singles and one or two late era songs but between 68 and 72 they mine an incredible musical seam that raises them above almost any other artists IMHO. Let It Bleed is probably my all time favourite record by anyone.
I do like Start Me Up but I'm with you in ranking Miss You way above it.
Those comments by the mayor of New York City are quite something. Saying the city is in danger of being destroyed by 10,000 illegal migrants a week arriving.
Have you ever heard of these guys? Wythall Estate wine near Ross. Just been to their vineyards and house. Jamie Wythall took me round and explained that the house is 600 years old and has always been occupied by the Wythalls. It’s incredible
Also their white wine is superb, the rose is excellent and they even make a decent Pinot Noir
Comments
Edit: 'plain stupid': Since the cyclist says in the tweet replies that he'd seen the indication but assumed the driver was going to turn into the next junction (a junction that's so far off we can't see it in the video), wtaf was said cyclist doing undertaking at that point?
TFL did research work on police collision / injury data which showed that Advisory Cycle Lanes increase casualties amongst people riding bikes.
https://findingspress.org/article/18226-cycling-injury-risk-in-london-impacts-of-road-characteristics-and-infrastructure
One reason that fits intuition is because these lanes are very easily blocked legally ( eg parking, unloading etc - Kengington High Street as it is now) that induces far more conflict as bike riders are forced to merge and separate unprotected from motor traffic multiple times, which is one of the most dangerous manoeuvres of all.
A similarly counter-intuitive-for-some piece of research was that pedestrian 'safety' barriers (my term: cages) at crossings increase casualties. When TFL looked at around 100 junctions where the barriers had been removed, the junctions became much safer.
https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/car-news/102772/removing-safety-railings-cuts-pedestrian-deaths
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/west-lindsey-district-council-issues-notice-at-raf-scampton-for-contractors-to-cease-all-works/ar-AA1gqzsg?
The thing is, whatever your view on asylum seekers, or where to house them, or indeed on the planning laws, the Government is duty bound to obey the existing laws as they stand. Simply thinking they can ride roughshod over their legal obligations and ignore all the other authorities involved shows a degree of arrogance and incompetance that I would have called remarkable had it been any other organisation. It just seems to be par for the course with this lot.
*hums Dambusters March in an ironical fashion*
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ellis_Island#First_immigration_station
Have you ever heard of these guys? Wythall Estate wine near Ross. Just been to their vineyards and house. Jamie Wythall took me round and explained that the house is 600 years old and has always been occupied by the Wythalls. It’s incredible
Also their white wine is superb, the rose is excellent and they even make a decent Pinot Noir
Yay English wine