With e-scooters set to become legal in the near future, what does that mean for car drivers (the lowest class citizen) on the roads?

[Bletchleyite]

Totally agree with this. My point was that we don't do the prep work you allude to - far too often Cycle lanes are just painted on an existing road and that's that. You can't have a cycle lane just swerve round a bus stop on the level, or along the driver's side of parked cars. Yet because of political priorities, that's exactly what the UK does. 1m-wide cycle lanes with drain covers and leaf mulch are potentially deadly. I'm 100% behind reducing the space given to 4-wheeled vehicle in favour of building a proper cycleway.

Yes, agreed - just painting a line with a foot of space to its left is at best pointless and at worst actively dangerous.

 

[gabrielhj07]

Totally agree with this. My point was that we don't do the prep work you allude to - far too often Cycle lanes are just painted on an existing road and that's that. You can't have a cycle lane just swerve round a bus stop on the level, or along the driver's side of parked cars. Yet because of political priorities, that's exactly what the UK does. 1m-wide cycle lanes with drain covers and leaf mulch are potentially deadly. I'm 100% behind reducing the space given to 4-wheeled vehicle in favour of building a proper cycleway.

I'd like to second this. A half-baked solution is often worse than nothing at all.

 

[Roast Veg]

Interestingly they will be legalised not as bicycles/e-bikes (which is where I think they should sit) but as a special category of "low speed electric vehicle" for which presumably a driving licence will remain mandatory

A provisional and a 1 day compulsory basic training test is where I'd put it - that keeps the DVSA requirement to a pretty low level.

children won't be allowed to ride them

It would be pretty valuable to have 16 year olds on them to reduce school traffic in urban areas.

speed limits by law

Naturally, as there is for all powered vehicles.

possibly mandatory helmet wearing,

British Cycling would rather see increased ridership over mandatory helmet wearing, but this isn't active travel, so it's a toss up.

and possibly some sort of test, online perhaps?

That'd be as opposed to a 1 day CBT I suppose.

Places for people should take priority over places for motor vehicles, and as such things like one-way systems should be used in urban areas to make space for safe pedestrian and cycle (and scooter) facilities in our cities. This thread bemoans car drivers being at the bottom of the hierarchy - but in urban areas specifically that's exactly where they should be.

Agreed.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It would be pretty valuable to have 16 year olds on them to reduce school traffic in urban areas.

Good point. Though ensuring schools provide proper facilities for securely storing bicycles (i.e. supervised check-in and check-out and indoor storage - Dutch "bewaakte Fietsenstalling" style) would probably increase cycling to school which would be better due to the fitness benefit.

Naturally, as there is for all powered vehicles.

I meant more a fixed upper limit of say 20km/h, not just the signed speed limit (which they shouldn't really reach).

That'd be as opposed to a 1 day CBT I suppose.

Yes, I don't think they will be wanting to administer full CBT or testing for these. But a quick "click through this" theory training and online test would be easy to put in place.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Agreed

Agreed. I have recently take a couple of trips to the netherlands and their cycle lanes on main roads are very clearly demarcated from car and bus infrastructure. They do have the benefit of generally wider roads though.

The UK needs to stop building Cycle lanes where there isn't pace to do it properly, and to educate EVERYBODY (including Cyclists) that the road is a communal resource, and they have a responsibility to ALL other road users to not put them in danger.

In the UK I fear we seem to cherry pick the features that are easy to add and back off when some proper thinking, planning and spending is required.

Disagree. Places for people should take priority over places for motor vehicles, and as such things like one-way systems should be used in urban areas to make space for safe pedestrian and cycle (and scooter) facilities in our cities. This thread bemoans car drivers being at the bottom of the hierarchy - but in urban areas specifically that's exactly where they should be.

It need to be balanced across all requirements including public transport. We have to be careful to encourage greener transport modes without making enemies.

Yes, agreed - just painting a line with a foot of space to its left is at best pointless and at worst actively dangerous.

I think you are right. Just because a cycle lane is, say, 1m wide does not mean the motor vehicle must be driven right up close to that line. I give cyclists as wide a berth as I can or I wait until I can pass.

Good point. Though ensuring schools provide proper facilities for securely storing bicycles (i.e. supervised check-in and check-out and indoor storage - Dutch "bewaakte Fietsenstalling" style) would probably increase cycling to school which would be better due to the fitness benefit.

Ironically, my feeling with the car school run is that many of these children that are being taken by car could easily walk the distance involved. For those children further afield a school bus would be better, then at least the children involved are used to public transport instead of being trained from an early age to only consider the car. Instead I see councils reluctance to spend on the very transport mode we want people to consider - public transport.

I meant more a fixed upper limit of say 20km/h, not just the signed speed limit (which they shouldn't really reach).

A fixed upper/ceiling limit for two wheeled vehicles with such small wheels makes sense.

Yes, I don't think they will be wanting to administer full CBT or testing for these. But a quick "click through this" theory training and online test would be easy to put in place.

I am a bit concerned. The types of click through training I have seen tend to just be a box ticking exercise without really ensuring any learning has happened.

I find myself wondering how close to the thoroughness of motor vehicle training and testing we need to get for bicycles etc. After all these modes are all sharing the same roads.

 

[The Ham]

Totally agree with this. My point was that we don't do the prep work you allude to - far too often Cycle lanes are just painted on an existing road and that's that. You can't have a cycle lane just swerve round a bus stop on the level, or along the driver's side of parked cars. Yet because of political priorities, that's exactly what the UK does. 1m-wide cycle lanes with drain covers and leaf mulch are potentially deadly. I'm 100% behind reducing the space given to 4-wheeled vehicle in favour of building a proper cycleway.

Which is why the guidance on cycle design has been sufficiently updated in the form of LTN 1/20 which advises against just white lines.

 

[jon0844]

The main difference is that officially at least, e-bikes in the UK should be pedal assist and not fully electric, meaning you still have to be pedaling to get any boost from the electric motor (though of course in reality there are plenty of grey market add ons and downright illegal e-bikes that are sold that circumvent all that). While e-scooters are full self propelled once you are on them.

Because of that, e-bikes are still classed as bicycles which means you don't need a license or insurance etc, but e-scooters are classed as a motor vehicle like a motorbike is, but because you essentially can't get insurance for riding one because that category simply doesn't exist yet, it is illegal to ride them on public roads (which is why its legal to buy one, but not to ride it on a road).

I have noticed a lot of people whizzing along on e-bikes without pedalling, and some seem to go at quite some speed. I knew that speed limiters could be quite easily overcome, but didn't even think about the fact they need to actually pedal too.

The thing is, if scooters are legalised then I suspect the 'new' people getting them may well follow the rules, especially if they didn't buy one until then because they knew they couldn't use them.

The people using them today clearly don't give a stuff about the law, so why would anyone expect them to respect other pavement or road users now or in the future? Of course they'll do whatever they want, and it will be down to proper enforcement, which in many areas seems non-existent - or attract the usual 'haven't they got anything better to do?' comments from people who would suddenly care if they or someone they cared about got injured or killed.

I've also witnessed some e-scooters doing at least 40-50mph or more (I live near a university and a great deal of students have them to get around, albeit not all at such speeds) and I think you can now get some that will go even faster.

Good luck to the rider TBH, because they're almost certainly on borrowed time before having a quite spectacular accident.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 May 2022 ==

Which is why the guidance on cycle design has been sufficiently updated in the form of LTN 1/20 which advises against just white lines.

During Covid, I saw some pretty good cycle lanes go in on roads that had a clear break from motorised vehicles in the form of a kerb or bollards. Of course, many people complained and over time they got taken away.

Near me, almost all the dedicated cycle lanes have gone. Why? They didn't impact travel flow for vehicles and it's a total waste of money to remove them, as well as sending out a message that cycling obviously isn't considered important.

I don't cycle that much right now, but I know the value of providing good facilities so that more people can feel confident and safe cycling, which in turn gives more space for vehicles! Everyone wins.

 

[JamesT]

During Covid, I saw some pretty good cycle lanes go in on roads that had a clear break from motorised vehicles in the form of a kerb or bollards. Of course, many people complained and over time they got taken away.

Near me, almost all the dedicated cycle lanes have gone. Why? They didn't impact travel flow for vehicles and it's a total waste of money to remove them, as well as sending out a message that cycling obviously isn't considered important.

I don't cycle that much right now, but I know the value of providing good facilities so that more people can feel confident and safe cycling, which in turn gives more space for vehicles! Everyone wins.

Because the perception was that they were making things worse for vehicles. People sitting in motor vehicles stuck in a jam looking at what they perceive to be under-used space that their vehicle could use.
Unfortunately motorists are a vocal minority and politicians are always concerned about decisions that might mean they won't get re-elected. Cyclists = young person = someone not likely to vote. Whereas motorist = old person = likely voter.
Hopefully election results like the recent ones in Oxford may turn the tide somewhat. Oxford have started implementing Low Traffic Neighbourhoods, where roads are blocked to through private motor vehicles with bollards/planters or ANPR. This has produced the usual outraged reaction and a number of independent candidates stood on a platform of removing LTNS. None were elected. (Not that it would have made any difference if they had, the elections were for the City Council, roads are a matter for the County Council.)

 

[py_megapixel]

Because the perception was that they were making things worse for vehicles. People sitting in motor vehicles stuck in a jam looking at what they perceive to be under-used space that their vehicle could use.

Which is utter nonsense, because a lot of the time there wouldn't be room for an extra lane in the road anyway (bikes take up less space than cars!), but the cyclists getting in a car instead would make the traffic worse.

Same with bus lanes. A frequent, efficient bus service moves many more people per hour than a car lane. You can make an extra car lane by converting a bus lane. But that will annoy and slow down bus passengers as their bus is now stuck in the traffic, and if some of them - even only a small proportion - get in a car instead, the new space created by the bus lane will quickly be swallowed up and the traffic will be as bad as it was before but with more noise and pollution.

 

[jon0844]

It's funny how it is proven to work (getting more people onto bikes and into buses) and drivers then benefit from quieter roads. It's not rocket science, and yet people here still can't see how it could work! They only need to look around the world!

I am not a fan of closing roads and making driving harder for motorists. That's not the solution. It won't get people out of cars and onto buses. A regular bus service, at a decent price, and running from early to late so you can get to and from work, and maybe go out shopping/socialising after work, is what gets people to realise it's better to use a bus. Less stick, more carrot.

Likewise, make cycling safer and more convenient (i.e. faster) and people will give that a go too.

What's best is that you can mix and match. Drive when you go shopping or carrying luggage, cycle to/from work or school, use the bus for longer journeys or when it's bad weather.

Scooters as they stand (to keep on topic) aren't a good alternative as people are using them illegally and dangerously. Fix that and they could work, although I am somewhat cynical.

 

[Wolfie]

I don't know how the UK is managing this issue. In Portugal, the benefit of an e-Scooter over Bicycles is that they are allowed on all forms of public transport for free.
They are easy to stow and thus are regarded as hand luggage.

TfL have completely banned e-scooters and e-unicycles from all of their services and premises after a fire caused by battery issues.

 

[Bletchleyite]

TfL have completely banned e-scooters and e-unicycles from all of their services and premises after a fire caused by battery issues.

But that's because they're cheap, unregulated, imported junk. If legal ones require UKCA or CE certification, that can include ensuring the battery and charging mechanism is safe.

A massive trick was missed by not regulating or even banning sale prior to road-legalisation.

 

[Wolfie]

But that's because they're cheap, unregulated, imported junk. If legal ones require UKCA or CE certification, that can include ensuring the battery and charging mechanism is safe.

A massive trick was missed by not regulating or even banning sale prior to road-legalisation.

Agreed, but way too late now unfortunately.

 

[py_megapixel]

I am not a fan of closing roads and making driving harder for motorists. That's not the solution. It won't get people out of cars and onto buses. A regular bus service, at a decent price, and running from early to late so you can get to and from work, and maybe go out shopping/socialising after work, is what gets people to realise it's better to use a bus. Less stick, more carrot.

You have to do that to some extent, though, because you simply cannot provide a consistently high quality bus service on a route which is shared with car traffic, apart from on roads quiet enough to never get congested even at peak times.

 

[jon0844]

Yes, but I was referring to some councils that have declared all out war on the motorist by closing roads, implementing terrible one way schemes (some of course are necessary) and also making parking impossible or excessively expensive.

Did they then provide an excellent jointed up bus network at the same time?

 

[PeterC]

Which is utter nonsense, because a lot of the time there wouldn't be room for an extra lane in the road anyway (bikes take up less space than cars!), but the cyclists getting in a car instead would make the traffic worse.

Same with bus lanes. A frequent, efficient bus service moves many more people per hour than a car lane. You can make an extra car lane by converting a bus lane. But that will annoy and slow down bus passengers as their bus is now stuck in the traffic, and if some of them - even only a small proportion - get in a car instead, the new space created by the bus lane will quickly be swallowed up and the traffic will be as bad as it was before but with more noise and pollution.

A lot of the new bike lanes that i have seen were created by closing the bus lane.

 

[Bletchleyite]

A lot of the new bike lanes that i have seen were created by closing the bus lane.

You often don't need continuous bus lanes, as can be seen by going to Germany, the Netherlands etc it just needs to be the length of a typical queue at a junction and include a traffic-light overtake at the end. This means that isn't always a problem if done well.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Yes, but I was referring to some councils that have declared all out war on the motorist by closing roads, implementing terrible one way schemes (some of course are necessary) and also making parking impossible or excessively expensive.

Did they then provide an excellent jointed up bus network at the same time?

NO, the opposite. In Croydon they diverted the bus routes further away from the town centre.

A lot of the new bike lanes that i have seen were created by closing the bus lane.

In Croydon Two lane wide road has been swallowed up for bicycles.

You often don't need continuous bus lanes, as can be seen by going to Germany, the Netherlands etc it just needs to be the length of a typical queue at a junction and include a traffic-light overtake at the end. This means that isn't always a problem if done well.

In London I see many routes where, as you say, the bus lane is not continuous. But the risk is the bus lane is there for the parts of the route where cars would also benefit !.

 

[jon0844]

You often don't need continuous bus lanes, as can be seen by going to Germany, the Netherlands etc it just needs to be the length of a typical queue at a junction and include a traffic-light overtake at the end. This means that isn't always a problem if done well.

The queues will reduce as more car users switch to the buses, so the lanes aren't quite as important as the 'quality' of the buses. And by that I mean, the routes, service frequency, pricing etc.

I guess if the bus lanes are nearly always empty, or the buses are, then it's far easier to convert them back to normal vehicle use and then any chance at improving things disappears.

(This is now going very off topic!)

 

[MattA7]

I can think of many reasons why I doubt e-scooters or e-bikes will be popular.

1) practicality- in a car you have space to keep your luggage, shopping etc. they are also unlikely to be suitable for persons with disabilities.
2) comfort- in your car you are shielded from the elements and have the ability to control the temperature in the passenger compartment
3) regulations- if you are subject to similar requirements to motorcycle/scooter riders such as requiring a license, wearing a helmet etc then they is probably very little incentive to getting a e-bike/e-scooter. You may as well just use a car or motorcycle/moped.

 

[zwk500]

I can think of many reasons why I doubt e-scooters or e-bikes will be popular.

Equally, they will be popular because
1) Cost - they are cheaper than a moped or a car
2) Size - you can carry it pretty much anywhere in a shoulder bag
3) Flexibility - you can drive it through any other human sized gap, so bollards and chicanes are only minor penalties, not stopping you going on any footpaths.

Regardless of what the rules and regulations say, people will ride them on pavements and footpaths, and they will ride them not wearing helmets/safety gear. Not every user, but a noticeable amount.

 

[The Ham]

I can think of many reasons why I doubt e-scooters or e-bikes will be popular.

1) practicality- in a car you have space to keep your luggage, shopping etc. they are also unlikely to be suitable for persons with disabilities.

For most trips that most people undertake they are carrying very little.

It's not uncommon for some (and I'm not saying that you are suggesting it, just that some go further than your comment) to suggest that they have to have a car because they need to move a large item (such as sofa, fridge, etc.), however that's quite a rare event.

2) comfort- in your car you are shielded from the elements and have the ability to control the temperature in the passenger compartment

Over the last few days it's rained, yet I've not got wet, even though I've walked to and from work. Why am I saying this, to highlight that not every day that it rains is a day that someone walking/cycling/scooting.

There are times when cars have their wipers on constant (probably only just about need then), and yet I don't even bother putting the hood of my coat up. It's not uncommon for me not to bother to stop to put my coat on. Not that I'm willing to get wet, but rather whilst the rain is heavy enough to need constant appears for someone walking through it there's not enough to need a coat.

As such I suspect that car drivers perceive train as worse than I do. As such justify their need to drive.

Nearly every day I walk to and from work, yet it's rare that it's very heavy rain.

Even somewhere rebound for being wet, there's 200 wet days in the Lake District. However even then someone outside for an hour over the course of the day may well start dry for a lot of those at days.

3) regulations- if you are subject to similar requirements to motorcycle/scooter riders such as requiring a license, wearing a helmet etc then they is probably very little incentive to getting a e-bike/e-scooter. You may as well just use a car or motorcycle/moped.

Agree, assuming everything else is equal, add it's not there's a good chance that there be a reasonable number of people using scooters.

Not least, as the cost of insurance would likely be much less (for instance cycle insurance if often given away with membership of a cycling body).

 

[BingMan]

The thread title is clearly false when in many areas one must push the button twice to cross, and be trapped in an island between two car lanes. All because we can't possibly stop both directions of traffic at the same time!

I have to cross a junction diagonally on my way to the office and it involves five separate uncoordinated set of pedestrian lights each effectively saying "Wait you pathetic piece of low life until it is convenient for your betters to allow to to cross the road"

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 May 2022 ==

Equally, they will be popular because
1) Cost - they are cheaper than a moped or a car
2) Size - you can carry it pretty much anywhere in a shoulder bag
3) Flexibility - you can drive it through any other human sized gap, so bollards and chicanes are only minor penalties, not stopping you going on any footpaths.

Regardless of what the rules and regulations say, people will ride them on pavements and footpaths, and they will ride them not wearing helmets/safety gear. Not every user, but a noticeable amount.

And a significant number will be injured when pedestrians loose patience with their behaviour. Cyclists are very vulnerable.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 May 2022 ==

Bikes, mobility scooters, now e-scooters.... What towns and cities really need is a designated, safe, lane for those of us capable of walking more than 100 yards without mechanical assistance!

We could call it a pavement.

And ban bikes (and e-scooters etc) from using it .....

Maybe fine those who do?

Oh, wait ....

Abd it could double up as a place to park cars.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 May 2022 ==

Poles to protect cyclists form the attitude that Cars own the road, and the pavements, and cycle lanes, because they pay "road tax", which of course does not exist.

Actually cyclists pay the same vehicle excise duty as the drivers of electric cars

 

[Peter Sarf]

I have to cross a junction diagonally on my way to the office and it involves five separate uncoordinated set of pedestrian lights each effectively saying "Wait you pathetic piece of low life until it is convenient for your betters to allow to to cross the road"

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 May 2022 ==

So what does the red traffic light mean to a car (etc) driver ?.

And a significant number will be injured when pedestrians loose patience with their behaviour. Cyclists are very vulnerable.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 May 2022 ==

I am getting nervous of being hit by the increasing numbers of FAST cycles / eScooters when I walk on the pavement. Older people have brittle bones that break easily and do not heal as quickly.

Abd it could double up as a place to park cars.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 May 2022 ==


Actually cyclists pay the same vehicle excise duty as the drivers of electric cars

You are right but you can be sure that in the future the cheaper/free to tax cars will get larger and larger excise duty levied on them as the number of less green vehicles declines.

 

[lachlan]

So what does the red traffic light mean to a car (etc) driver ?.

Car drivers are sat in comfy seats, sheltered with their choice of music. And at said junction they likely have to wait once, maybe twice whereas the pedestrian has to wait up to five times. The thread title is nonsense.

 

[DC1989]

I am getting nervous of being hit by the increasing numbers of FAST cycles / eScooters when I walk on the pavement. Older people have brittle bones that break easily and do not heal as quickly.

I would be more nervous about being one of the 25,000 pedestrians killed or seriously injured by cars every year rather than one of the 100 by cyclists (mostly by those on the pavement because the roads are too unsafe)

Though I do agree that many of these new illegal E-Bikes riden by Deliveroo employees etc are a problem. They are basically motorbikes in all but name !

 

[Bletchleyite]

Fundamentally there shouldn't be any bikes, scooters or similar ridden on the pavement. The fact that there are is yet another symptom of the lack of street policing that has developed since the 1980s or thereabouts.

 

[DC1989]

Agreed - but 88% of drivers exceed the speed limit too. They go hand in hand

 

[Peter Sarf]

Fundamentally there shouldn't be any bikes, scooters or similar ridden on the pavement. The fact that there are is yet another symptom of the lack of street policing that has developed since the 1980s or thereabouts.

It is this lack of nipping small misdemeanours in the bud that leads to a lack of discipline.

Agreed - but 88% of drivers exceed the speed limit too. They go hand in hand

I cannot believe it is as much as 88% but speeding is still an issue. Worse still with speeding is that the rest of us who endeavour not to exceed the limit have to suffer speed bumps which I cannot go over as fast as the limit implies. Further more I believe the very people who do not give a damn about the speed limit (let alone the safety reasons for limits) do not give a damn about other peoples well being and certainly do not care about the effect of the speed bumps on their car (damage) that the rest of us have to endure (to a lesser extent). So I would like to see speed limits enforced by humans.

 

[trebor79]

Yes, the Queen's Speech said legislation will be brought forward in this Parliament. Interestingly they will be legalised not as bicycles/e-bikes (which is where I think they should sit) but as a special category of "low speed electric vehicle" for which presumably a driving licence will remain mandatory and children won't be allowed to ride them. Safety was also mentioned, so I'd expect speed limits by law and possibly mandatory helmet wearing, and possibly some sort of test, online perhaps? I suppose an advantage of a licence being required is that a ban could be given for misuse. It would be good if purchase required a licence to be produced.

I suppose it also provides for future regulation of other classes of low-speed electric vehicle which have not yet been invented.

When is it considered likely that e-scooters will actually become legal? This year? Next year? Later than that?

They are available to rent now in Bristol, Cambridge and other cities. I think it's a pilot scheme. You have to download an app and provide your driving licence. Fiend and I used a couple in Bristol at the weekend to get back to a mates after a night out. It was more fun than a cab and no more expensive.
I'm not sure they are particularly safe though, there were definitely moments on busy roads I felt very exposed and a little nervous.