The drivers shouldn't be punished for bad design of the road. A separate bike road should be constructed.
The media has made a big deal about how tragic it is for the cyclists - which it is, but much less about how tragic it is for the driver. Remember, it's not like drivers want to hit cyclists or other soft traffic participants.
That's why I propose a separate bike road, even if it is quite an expensive undertaking. But it will make all the road users feel safe. Or -- at least -- safer.
It's the same in London, a city with notoriously poor cycling infrastructure and narrow streets due to long history. Ok, it's the "left turn" mirror image version due to driving on the left not right side of the road, but otherwise the same.
The highway code is a bit more nuanced than you on this topic: http://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/road-junctions.html
it is safer for the vehicle driver to not make that assumption, it is safer for the cyclist not to be in that position as you point out; and primarily, it is safer if the road layout does not put these different vehicles in the same space.
Making a couple of second allowance to protect the lives of other road users seems reasonable to me.
That said I don't live in an area with high cycle use - in the small UK city I'm in you're more likely to be stopping to avoid a drunk or a teenage boy doing wheelies.
>and runs into me //
Cleverly worded, but if you use your mirrors properly ... what's that phrase "hell is other road-users"?
I don't ever follow that rule when cycling, it does seem dangerous, but it is the rule, regardless of whether you disagree. You should always check blind spots when turning left, and you should have been coached to do this when learning to drive.
The uniform vehicle code (which is the basis of many state road rules in the US) states the following:
>> Any person operating a bicycle... shall ride as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway except under any of the following situations
>> [...]
>> When reasonably necessary to avoid conditions including [...] substandard width lanes that make it unsafe to continue along the right-hand curb or edge. For purposes of this section, a "substandard width lane" is a lane that is too narrow for a bicycle and a motor vehicle to travel safely side by side within the lane.
A cyclist riding as close to the edge of a given lane as practicable will leave roughly 2 feet between the edge of the bicycle's handlebar and the edge of the lane. The cyclist is about 2 feet wide. In a lot of states in the US, there is a requirement that a least 3 feet of space is left between the cyclist and the overtaking vehicle.
2 + 2 + 3 = 7 feet. A passenger vehicle in the US is about 6 feet wide. A commercial vehicle (e.g., truck/lorry or bus) is about 8.5 feet wide. The typical lane width ranges from 10 to 12 feet. For a 10 foot wide lane, a cyclist taking up 7 feet of space only leaves 3 feet of space for a 6 to 8.5 foot wide vehicle (5 feet for 12 foot wide lanes). That means that the two vehicles cannot safely travel side-by-side within the lane.
So, according to the UVC, there isn't a requirement to keep toward the edge of the lane in most cases.
I haven't checked to see whether the UK highway code has a similar exception to the "stay to the left part of the lane" rule.
The other problem with keeping towards the edge of the lane as opposed to riding near the middle is that the cyclist is less visible to overtaking, cross, and oncoming traffic because they're hidden by other motor vehicles or not in the field of view of a lot of drivers.
Here's the (brief) rules for roundabouts: http://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/rules-for-cyclists-roundabout...
Most cycling proficiency courses here in the UK will tell cyclists to ride more centrally when in a narrow lane, which is good advice. A cyclist is also legally allowed to do that.
It gets a bit fuzzy though when there's a cycle lane provided.
A lot of times, the cycle lane is really too narrow to safely ride in. It really ought to be a minimum of 4 feet wide (allowing a 1 foot space on each side of the cyclist if they're centered in the lane. Some that I've seen aren't even as wide as the handlebars on the bike.
Where I live, a cyclist isn't required to use the cycle lane even if one is present. Do you know whether the same applies in the UK?
(Also the stupid unsafe cycling advice of staying to the left. Take the lane and take the correct lane, please.)
All bike lanes get green, and get to sort themselves out, but crucially all car lanes get red.
As someone who regularly drives, bikes, walks and uses public transport in Copenhagen, it is blatantly obvious that people just don't know how to handle right turns involving both cars and bicycles correctly. Car drivers will leave space open on their right (between the car and the curb), instead of putting the car as close to the curb as possible (which is taught in driver's ed). Bicyclists will pile into this space, and when the light turns green, it becomes almost impossible for the driver to turn right, because of the bikes already there, as well as the additional bikes coming from behind, completely ignoring the right blinker on the car.
The mitigation of this problem is two-fold. Firstly, the drivers should not leave open space on their right, when turning right. Secondly, cyclists need to grow a sense of self-preservation and not dive into that space, even if it's open. Large vehicles need to have some distance from the curb in order to complete the turn, but that should not be seen as an invitation to cyclists.
Isn't that how it should be ? I'm not in DK, but in LV traffic laws in such a situation they should ignore the blinker, the driver must wait and turn right only after everyone going straight e.g. those bicycles and also pedestrians crossing the road he's turning to; since the vehicle turning must yield to everyone else.
And 26.6 "...Ved svingning til højre må den kørende ikke være til ulempe for cyklister og knallertkørere, der kører lige ud. ..." saying that vehicles turning right must yield to cyclists going straight?
Of course, bicyclists will just jump the curb, ride on the sidewalk or overtake on the left, because everyone wants to be in front.
Which is precisely why right-turning drivers should leave no gap between the car and the curb, to claim their space, as it were.
For some reason, we seem to have a lot of car/bike/ped conflicts.
E.g. this shot in google maps - https://www.google.lv/maps/@56.9578862,24.1189538,3a,75y,240... ; it's green for cars, but red for the bike lane on the right side.
About your mitigation strategy: that would solve the problem but unfortunately the cyclist won't stop behind the car. The cyclist would turn left to overtake the stopped car. I don't like to do that because it puts me in the middle of the road or to the right of another car. It also requires some space to maneuver and a car could be arriving from behind me and close the gap.
Usually stopped cars don't hit cyclists (but watch out for doors). I look at the traffic light and refrain from overtaking the car (both on the left and on the right) if it's about to turn green.
That way, there will be no cyclists blocking the car from turning safely, and the driver will only have to yield to pedestrians in the crossing. To put it bluntly, it's because they're idiots.
And yes, obviously you check your mirrors and do a good shoulder check, that goes without saying.
But you ALSO pull to the curb after checking mirrors+over your shoulder, to claim the lane while preparing for your turn. You pull in either in front of or behind the cyclists, because the dangerous situations happen when you're side by side.
If there's a bike lane, you obviously don't pull across that, this only applies for streets without bike lanes.
Also the way the UK's bike lanes are set up encourage cyclists to get in front of other traffic at traficlight controlled junctions - normalises undertaking.
The intersection is designed so right turning cars can make the turn at about 15-25mph when they have the green. The same green that the cyclists have. Cyclists must wait at a position that puts them slightly behind the right turning driver and the design simply doesn't allow a cyclist to inch forward enough to change that. If you were designing an intersection that will get cyclists killed, this is how you would do it.
My approach is to stop at the green light and hit the pedestrian "beg button" and wait for the walk signal on the next light cycle (a minimum 2 minute wait). This is still no guarantee that drivers will actually yield to me, but at least it gives me a chance to be seen. Even waiting, and having the walk signal and right of way, drivers get irrationally angry at having to wait a few seconds for me to cross. A few don't wait and swing wide right in front of my path. Fun Times.
No excuse of "bad design" can work for blowing across a crossroaded "Give Way" at 37mph. That's reckless in any situation.
I'm talking about this place: https://goo.gl/maps/2JwZGyzLPGG2