Where an advisory or mandatory cycle lane passes a traffic island, the lane markings should always be continued past the island.

The lane width should not reduce as it passes the island, and MUST NOT fall below 1.2 metres (this is now the generally accepted minimum cycle lane width).

Advisory lane markings will need to be used past the refuge unless the refuge to kerb width is around 4 metres or wider (ie use advisory markings unless wider vehicles which may use the route such as buses and lorries can avoid overrunning into the cycle lane).

This design should prevail even for narrower carriageway widths - ie even if all motor vehicles would have to overrun into the cycle lane; in Camden the narrowest likely refuge to kerb width is 3 metres.

See below for a diagram illustrating the above solution with a bus and car passing where the kerb to refuge width is 3.4 metres on each side of the island.

Three of the most compelling reasons for this policy are:

1. It reinforces cyclist priority in the case of car/cycle conflict at the pinch-point, and encourages motorists to think in terms of lane discipline when overtaking.
2. Loss of cycle facilities just at the point where they are needed most is responsible for some of the loudest and most legitimate complaints from cyclists. The cyclist is left wondering where they are supposed to go, and what they are supposed to do, at this point.
3. Loss of lane markings subconsciously inform the motorist that cyclists will conveniently de-materialise.