Informal Zebra Crossings
- Thread starter presta
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
mjr
Comfy armchair to one person & a plank to the next
- Location
- mostly Norfolk, sometimes Somerset
That'll take a lot of paint to do every side road. It would probably be better to put some of the "THINK! Road Safety" signs up near problem junctions saying "Give Way To People Crossing At Junctions, You Dimwit! (Highway Code Rule H2, paraphrased)" so bad drivers don't make the mistake of assuming they only need to give way at the side roads with paint.
Of course, they junctions they're trying first are ones with no cycle tracks, but that may be because Westminster still doesn't have many cycle tracks not on TfL-controlled roads.
Of course, they junctions they're trying first are ones with no cycle tracks, but that may be because Westminster still doesn't have many cycle tracks not on TfL-controlled roads.
Bristolian
Senior Member
- Location
- Bristol, UK
Whilst I applaud Westminster council's motivation, I question the wisdom of their solution.
What is an "informal" Zebra crossing? Surely it's either a Zebra or it's not - there's nothing that I can find in the Zebra, Pelican and Puffin Crossings Regulations and General Directions 1997 (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1997/2400) for anything but "formal" crossings. Maybe I missed it?
If local HAs go around inventing non-standardised road structures it's just going to confuse road users (of all ilks and persuasions) and will likely reduce the safety of pedestrians. Not to mention the potential exposure to litigation should someone be injured or killed when using one of these crossings.
What is an "informal" Zebra crossing? Surely it's either a Zebra or it's not - there's nothing that I can find in the Zebra, Pelican and Puffin Crossings Regulations and General Directions 1997 (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1997/2400) for anything but "formal" crossings. Maybe I missed it?
If local HAs go around inventing non-standardised road structures it's just going to confuse road users (of all ilks and persuasions) and will likely reduce the safety of pedestrians. Not to mention the potential exposure to litigation should someone be injured or killed when using one of these crossings.
Drago
Legendary Member
- Location
- Suburban Poshshire
II think that's why it's 'informal' Mr B.
Not an actual crossing as it doesn't meet the minimum legal spec, but a visual indicator for car drivers that people should be given way to in order to cross there.
I'm in two minds, but I guess that's what the trial is there to test.
The trial or litigation is easy to resolve - due to the new law motorists must give way to people crossing or waiting to cross there, and the markings are nothing more than a visual reminder to motorists of that. It's the legislation that makes it a crossing point, not the white paint.
Not an actual crossing as it doesn't meet the minimum legal spec, but a visual indicator for car drivers that people should be given way to in order to cross there.
I'm in two minds, but I guess that's what the trial is there to test.
The trial or litigation is easy to resolve - due to the new law motorists must give way to people crossing or waiting to cross there, and the markings are nothing more than a visual reminder to motorists of that. It's the legislation that makes it a crossing point, not the white paint.
markemark
Über Member
On my ride home they replaced a mini roundabout with a 4 way junction that nobody seems to have priority. It doesn’t make any sense. For the first couple of weeks everyone slowed as nobody knew what to do. Great. But since then the cars now just push on through. Whereas as a cyclist I got to go on the roundabout and had priority whilst on it now I have to run the gauntlet.
I really don’t like these new ambiguous road markings. As all it does is enable the biggest to just push through. Make it clear so everyone understands.
I really don’t like these new ambiguous road markings. As all it does is enable the biggest to just push through. Make it clear so everyone understands.
mjr
Comfy armchair to one person & a plank to the next
- Location
- mostly Norfolk, sometimes Somerset
They can be enforced as careless driving, same as if the paint wasn't there, but it won't be an offence under RTRA s.25, which driving into an occupied zebra would be. I don't understand why they've called them "informal" instead of "lightweight" or "mini" or something. An informal crossing is totally unmarked and without dropped kerbs or anything.
How often are zebra crossings enforced anyway? There already seems to be a general attitude that it's OK to speed up and get across before the person can get a foot out.
cyberknight
As long as I breathe, I attack.
- Location
- Land of confusion
I have a mini rab near me and people going straight across regularly ignore those turning with right of way and plow across whether your in another car or a bicycle .
mjr
Comfy armchair to one person & a plank to the next
- Location
- mostly Norfolk, sometimes Somerset
I think Boardman had Manchester test them when he was comissioner. No idea what he found.
Private zebras vary. Tesco and Morrisons are cheapskates but Sainsbury and Waitrose have yellow balls, bollards and natty crossing signs, which I think is more than legally required on the highway.
markemark
Über Member
The markings I am referring to have similar on all 4 approach roads that all meet. 2 are side roads. The other two are a major road. It used to be a mini roundabout. When on it I used to have priority. Now nobody has priority. So cars just push through. It’s horrid.
