Jump to content


Photo

Red Tarmac & Pedestrians?


  • Please log in to reply
8 replies to this topic

#1 skinnyminny

skinnyminny

    Speeding Along Now

  • Noobies
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 338 posts
  • Location: York
  • Local Club: Geeks N Freaks

Posted 26 November 2014 - 09:31 AM

This may be a stupid question but I'm going to ask it anyway....

By the local primary school there are dropped kerbs with tactile paving to cross the road, and the Tarmac inbetween them is coloured red. The kids and parents use it as a pelican crossing ie 'we're crossing now without looking and woe betide you if you come within 10m of little Johnny.'

Interested to know what the official rules are on this - I've had a google and can't find anything hard and fast. Just don't remember covering anything remotely like it in my driving lessons - red Tarmac was just a 'warning' for a hazard, not a type of crossing at all. But to a pedestrian it would look like a definite crossing it's only maybe a metre wide and crosses the street from the two dropped kerbs.

#2 firstmini

firstmini

    I love Carlos W more than my mini.

  • Noobies
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 113 posts
  • Location: Northamptonshire

Posted 26 November 2014 - 09:42 AM

We've got crossing that are red painted stripes with the black tarmac at the local shopping ctr, was told by a local taxi driver they are just crossings for pedestrians to use instead of wandering through traffic, stepping out from inbetween parked cars etc and cars dont have to actually stop, however pedestrians think otherwise & just walk out infront of cars expecting them to do an emergency stop!



#3 RedRuby

RedRuby

    One Carb Or Two?

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,201 posts
  • Location: County Durham
  • Local Club: No

Posted 26 November 2014 - 09:50 AM

As far as I am aware the use of red Tarmac is only to warn of potential hazards, ie people crossing or school nearby, it has no formal meaning in law. It can however lead to potentially dangerous situations because of its appearance when people wrongly think it is a crossing point which gives them a right over motor vehicles that infact does not exist in law. If you wanted to be cynical you could of course think it is red to hide the blood stains from collision with said pedestrians.

#4 skinnyminny

skinnyminny

    Speeding Along Now

  • Noobies
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 338 posts
  • Location: York
  • Local Club: Geeks N Freaks

Posted 26 November 2014 - 09:54 AM

Thought as much. Typical example of council not actually thinking about what they're doing. Love the blood stain disguise. Brilliant!

#5 evansisgreat

evansisgreat

    One Carb Or Two?

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,095 posts
  • Local Club: Not yet

Posted 26 November 2014 - 10:11 AM

Red tarmac and mono blocking are techniques used by town planners to basically blur the lines of car and pedestrian priority. Although it sounds very dangerous its been shown to cut the speed of cars significantly.

I know of a few roads near me that are monoblocked and it seems to confuse a lot of drivers. These drivers think its a pedestrian zone, reducing traffic. I was taught how to use these techniques in architecture school, so I always spot them now. They can increase safety and be very effective if used properly, sounds like they've not done it well in your case.

#6 sonikk4

sonikk4

    Twisted Paint Polisher!!!

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,885 posts
  • Name: Neil
  • Location: Oxfordshire

Posted 26 November 2014 - 01:33 PM

We have something very similar just up the road from me. The local school has a bit of a rat run of road running alongside it although primarily it's access to the three off shoot roads to the houses where we live.

Now because of the school there are speed reduction signs (20mph) and three very wide speed humps with flat tops. Now each one of these has tactile edges plus the red covering on top. There are no signs whatsoever to indicate these are nothing more than speed reducing measures. Not Pelican Crossings or Zebra Crossing that we all know about.

And yes the upper and middle ones do get treated as crossings BUT as to the law behind these well that remains a very grey area. I might get the boss on the case as she is a whizz at finding out info like this. Personally I feel these are speed reducing measures and not dedicated crossings.

I sometimes stop but other than that I normally carry on obviously as long as nobody is walking across. There are still some stupid parents that feel that parking on the double yellow lines is allowable especially on the school run. Well ladies and gents it's not. It's illegal and bloody stupid. I just wish on occasions like this that the traffic fascists were about.

#7 Dan

Dan

    On Sabbatical

  • TMF+ Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,354 posts

Posted 26 November 2014 - 07:04 PM

It's called an 'informal crossing point' and is ludicrous. There are loads near me. The government's 'Safer Routes to Schools' programme has put them in all over the place. It's not quite the same as a shared space (as mentioned above, no delineation between pedestrian, cycle and traffic areas), which it is proven reduces traffic speeds and accident rates. These are put in just because they are cheaper than a crossing and don't require planning. There is no change in traffic priority at them. Borehamwood High St for example has loads of blue signs telling motorists 'Caution, pedestrians crossing on speed humps' but absolutely no legal road markings to provide those pedestrians with priority. It would be a legal nightmare if someone ploughed through a load of people on one. If there isn't a proper legal road marking altering the fact, cars have priority.

#8 skinnyminny

skinnyminny

    Speeding Along Now

  • Noobies
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 338 posts
  • Location: York
  • Local Club: Geeks N Freaks

Posted 27 November 2014 - 06:46 PM

Thanks so much guys I thought that was the case - now to have a moan at the parents who step into the road without looking!! (Not that I would, being the least confrontational person in the world, but in my empowered dream world they'd get an earful!!!)

#9 Alex_B

Alex_B

    Doesn't put foot in mouth enough!

  • TMF+ Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,573 posts
  • Location: Eastbourne

Posted 27 November 2014 - 08:17 PM

We have something very similar just up the road from me. The local school has a bit of a rat run of road running alongside it although primarily it's access to the three off shoot roads to the houses where we live.

Now because of the school there are speed reduction signs (20mph) and three very wide speed humps with flat tops. Now each one of these has tactile edges plus the red covering on top. There are no signs whatsoever to indicate these are nothing more than speed reducing measures. Not Pelican Crossings or Zebra Crossing that we all know about.

And yes the upper and middle ones do get treated as crossings BUT as to the law behind these well that remains a very grey area. I might get the boss on the case as she is a whizz at finding out info like this. Personally I feel these are speed reducing measures and not dedicated crossings.

I sometimes stop but other than that I normally carry on obviously as long as nobody is walking across. There are still some stupid parents that feel that parking on the double yellow lines is allowable especially on the school run. Well ladies and gents it's not. It's illegal and bloody stupid. I just wish on occasions like this that the traffic fascists were about.

Isn't it fun that little bit of road! I cut through there most days coming home from Uni and its usually school kicking out time and a nightmare!

Cars sitting right on my bum due to the fact I actually slow down for the speedbumps unlike everyone else it seems and the random crossing parents, the kids are ok, they wait by the side of the road but adults just go for it!






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users