Does anyone know the legality of walking on a Regional Road?

Det Somerset

I am moving to a house that is about 300 metres from the nearest pedestrian footpath. I intend to take the train to/from work a lot and this would require me to walk the 300 metres of a Regional (Rxxx) Road before continuing my walk to the train station on footpath. The second 150 metres has a notable hard shoulder that would easily allow me to walk well away from traffic, but the first 150 metres are on a slight bend and the hard shoulder is about half a foot wide. To comfortably walk the distance, part of my body would be on the road. I have seen other pedestrians walk the same route, and they usually stop and stand in as far off the road as they can if a car passes, and that's what I would look to do as well, but I'm curious as to the legality of walking on the road in the first place.

Is it legal for a pedestrian to walk on a Regional Road? I am just concerned that if I was unfortunate to be involved in or cause an accident, would I be in the wrong or within my rights to have been walking there in the first place?

If anyone knows the answer to this, I would be grateful.

Thanks in advance.

Tonyandthewhale

Yes it's legal. The roads (apart from motorways) are for people, be they people in cars or people on foot or people on bikes or horses or motorbikes or whatever.

corktina

What an amazing question!

fwiw, if you are involved in an accident , it will be the motorists fault for not keeping a proper look out (in 99% of cases)

markpb

It's absolutely legal, just make sure you're visible at dusk/night.

wexie

markpb wrote: »

It's absolutely legal, just make sure you're visible at dusk/night.

can't emphasize this enough, (although you sound like you've enough common sense for this not to be an issue).

I drive on a lot of regional / back roads and it's terrifying to spot someone at the last minute as a driver.

I was driving home last night and at the last minute spotted someone on the wrong side of the road (back to me) dressed all in dark clothes, no hi-viz, reflector, light....no nothing :mad:

Det Somerset

Thanks for the replies. It seems like the answer is widely known by everyone but myself then!

In my defence, I've lived in the city centre all my life so have never had to consider walking on rural roads previously, and because I've had everything so central, I'm not a motorist either (hence the intent to use the train) so don't know the rules of the road.

Thanks again for the quick and clear answers. I'll brazenly and boldly walk the road however I want so, and to hell with motorists! (joking of course)

wexie

Det Somerset wrote: »

Thanks for the replies. It seems like the answer is widely known by everyone but myself then!

In my defence, I've lived in the city centre all my life so have never had to consider walking on rural roads previously, and because I've had everything so central, I'm not a motorist either (hence the intent to use the train) so don't know the rules of the road.

Thanks again for the quick and clear answers. I'll brazenly and boldly walk the road however I want so, and to hell with motorists! (joking of course)

Just think about it this way, if you couldn't walk on roads that don't have footpaths or hard shoulders then you wouldn't be able to go many places on foot in the country

markpb

Depending on where you're walking, you should be very careful when stepping in off the road. A lot of road edges are very rough and can have hidden holes that could trip you up or cause you to twist an ankle very easily.

Det Somerset

wexie wrote: »

can't emphasize this enough, (although you sound like you've enough common sense for this not to be an issue).

I drive on a lot of regional / back roads and it's terrifying to spot someone at the last minute as a driver.

I was driving home last night and at the last minute spotted someone on the wrong side of the road (back to me) dressed all in dark clothes, no hi-viz, reflector, light....no nothing :mad:

You seem to be a good person to ask whether my intention to get a high viz waistcoat such as the below to wear outside my coat be sufficient or would it be better to get something that has high viz sleeves as well? I suppose I could get an armband for the arm closest the road?

Vic_08

Det Somerset wrote: »

You seem to be a good person to ask whether my intention to get a high viz waistcoat such as the below to wear outside my coat be sufficient or would it be better to get something that has high viz sleeves as well? I suppose I could get an armband for the arm closest the road?

That would be more than adequate. Anything that reflects headlights will be obvious on a dark road, it is the fools wearing nothing but dark clothing that are dangerous.

MarkR

Make sure to walk facing oncoming traffic.

wexie

Det Somerset wrote: »

You seem to be a good person to ask whether my intention to get a high viz waistcoat such as the below to wear outside my coat be sufficient or would it be better to get something that has high viz sleeves as well? I suppose I could get an armband for the arm closest the road?

That should be sufficient, you can spot them a good bit away on a country road.

I usually wear something like that and then have little blinking LED's on my dogs, don't fancy my chances getting hiviz jackets on them

wildefalcon

Also carry a torch, it makes a difference.

Det Somerset

markpb wrote: »

Depending on where you're walking, you should be very careful when stepping in off the road. A lot of road edges are very rough and can have hidden holes that could trip you up or cause you to twist an ankle very easily.

Thanks for the warning. I've walked it once in broad daylight and there is a tight grassy verge inside the hard shoulder with thick dense bramble bushes inside the grass. It's not possible to walk on the grass, but it is possible to step into it while a car passes without much fear of falling into it. That said, I will take your warning on board and take great care, especially in the dark.

In fact, I'm now considering it is probably a good idea to take a flashlight so that I can be more sure of my footing whether there are cars passing or not. And don't worry, I won't forget to deflect it from a motorist's eyes if one passes at the time.

Thanks again for your advice

Det Somerset

wildefalcon wrote: »

Also carry a torch, it makes a difference.

Just literally made that realisation seconds before reading your post. Thanks for the advice. I do think it is going to be necessary alright.

wildefalcon

If you use a back pack, get a red flashing bike light and hang it off the back, sometimes the backpack can hide the hi-vis stuff. Enjoy your walking, and the freedom from the hassles of owning a car!

Det Somerset

wildefalcon wrote: »

If you use a back pack, get a red flashing bike light and hang it off the back, sometimes the backpack can hide the hi-vis stuff. Enjoy your walking, and the freedom from the hassles of owning a car!

I will have a back pack but I expect to carry it by my side for the short distance I will be on the road in order to make sure the high viz jacket is visible, but I'll consider the flashing light as well now, thanks.

munchkin_utd

its legal to walk on every regional road except the Limerick tunnel, which has bye laws against it.

there are signs on the jack lynch tunnel saying its not allowed, and its definitely not designed for pedestrians BUT until someone can produce a copy of the law which says its illegal, I have the sneaking hunch that its actually not banned at all - so could also be legal there too.

otherwise, Ireland (thanks to a system in which politicans see attending funerals, to create an aura of "soundness", as more a priority than legislating) has no ready made framework to specify a road as a vehicle only (pedestrians banned) road like you have in the rest of the world - so all national roads are open fare for whatever you want to do.

But when the road traffic laws are so broken that (till a few tweaks a few months ago) to penalise a faulty headlamp required a summons, appearance in the court AND attendance in person by the actual guard in question, you have to expect such things.

corktina

Is the Limerick Tunnel a Regional Road/ THe Jack Lynch isn't for sure.

wexie

corktina wrote: »

Is the Limerick Tunnel a Regional Road/ THe Jack Lynch isn't for sure.

Either way, I woulnd't recommend walking through either, legal or not.

munchkin_utd

corktina wrote: »

Is the Limerick Tunnel a Regional Road/ THe Jack Lynch isn't for sure.

ach bugger, I misread the title to be a national road rather than regional road.

The Limerick Tunnel is a national primary route.

either way, the only road type that has bans on pedestrians is the Motorway network and even on national roads theres no ban on pedestrians except in the few limited cases, and theres no framework in place to extend that, nor signage to indicate a "motorised traffic" only road.

CatFromHue

Det Somerset wrote: »

You seem to be a good person to ask whether my intention to get a high viz waistcoat such as the below to wear outside my coat be sufficient or would it be better to get something that has high viz sleeves as well? I suppose I could get an armband for the arm closest the road?

These guys are good because they have the hi viz panels (the grey panels).

I bought a cycling jacket that is bright yellow but only has small hi viz panels and while in daylight it's very striking in the dark it's not great. I now cycle in the dark with a hi viz jacket like the above as well as my cycling jacket.

coylemj

Det Somerset wrote: »

I suppose I could get an armband for the arm closest the road?

I wouldn't bother with an armband if there are multiple reflective strips on the hi-viz jacket as in your picture.

Regarding the torch, don't be cheap with your choice. Get a good one, doesn't have to be a big heavy thing just make sure it's powerful and bright.

This is meant partially for safety in terms of cars, but mainly for you walking in the dark and seeing potential trip hazards or when stepping into the verge

Macy0161

Det Somerset wrote: »

I will have a back pack but I expect to carry it by my side for the short distance I will be on the road in order to make sure the high viz jacket is visible, but I'll consider the flashing light as well now, thanks.

You can get reflective back pack covers too.

coylemj

Would walking on the right side of the road with a red light to the rear not potentially cause confusion to following traffic? A motor bike for example coming around a bend behind you in darkness could mistake you for a cyclist on the left side of the road and there could be unfortunate consequences.

corktina

tell it to Cork Co Council, locally they have a long stretch of crash barrier with then reflectors the wrong way round and I even noticed a section of the M8 with incorrect reflectors lately. (I have complained, no action taken as yet).

wexie

corktina wrote: »

tell it to Cork Co Council, locally they have a long stretch of crash barrier with then reflectors the wrong way round and I even noticed a section of the M8 with incorrect reflectors lately. (I have complained, no action taken as yet).

no way?!

thats gotta confuse the hell out of the drunk drivers

Cookie_Monster

coylemj wrote: »

Would walking on the right side of the road with a red light to the rear not potentially cause confusion to following traffic? A motor bike for example coming around a bend behind you in darkness could mistake you for a cyclist on the left side of the road and there could be unfortunate consequences.

During darkness you should be walking with traffic if you have lights, no?

highvis jackets, torches, flashing lights etc is all a bit over the top. The OP is walking along 300m of road for heavens sake. The flash on your smartphone and the correct app is all that's required to see and be seen.

foggy_lad

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

During darkness you should be walking with traffic if you have lights, no?

highvis jackets, torches, flashing lights etc is all a bit over the top. The OP is walking along 300m of road for heavens sake. The flash on your smartphone and the correct app is all that's required to see and be seen.

Where there is no footpath you should be walking on the right hand side of the road facing oncoming traffic. This applies in daylight as well as During the hours of darkness.

Macy0161

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

During darkness you should be walking with traffic if you have lights, no?

highvis jackets, torches, flashing lights etc is all a bit over the top. The OP is walking along 300m of road for heavens sake. The flash on your smartphone and the correct app is all that's required to see and be seen.

You'd still face the traffic.

Might be a bit ott, but depends on the stretch of road really. Doesn't sound great that even with a hard shoulder pedestrians feel the need to stand in tbh. Hi vis vest and an led pocket size torch take little effort really.

Det Somerset

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

During darkness you should be walking with traffic if you have lights, no?

highvis jackets, torches, flashing lights etc is all a bit over the top. The OP is walking along 300m of road for heavens sake. The flash on your smartphone and the correct app is all that's required to see and be seen.

I appreciate and welcome the difference of opinion and understand where you are coming from, but having been out at the house last weekend at 6pm (about the time I'd be returning home) there are no street lights, it's pitch dark, and the 300m is on a slight blind bend so traffic on one side of the road can't see oncoming pedestrians until they are right on top of them. It's this tight section where I've seen people stand in. If it was a straight road with long sightlines, I would probably lean more towards your own view as it's such a short distance, but with the way it is and the number of times I expect to be 'rolling the dice' in the coming years, I don't mind going to the extra effort of making myself as visible as possible.

Also thanks to the others who added their advice overnight.

Cookie_Monster

Macy0161 wrote: »

You'd still face the traffic.

I only mention it as a running event I have this weekend requires us to run with the traffic while we have light on during the hours of darkness and it makes sense.

Det Somerset wrote: »

I appreciate and welcome the difference of opinion and understand where you are coming from, but having been out at the house last weekend at 6pm (about the time I'd be returning home) there are no street lights, it's pitch dark, and the 300m is on a slight blind bend so traffic on one side of the road can't see oncoming pedestrians until they are right on top of them.

In this case you definitely cross and walk with the traffic on the bend, this is standard practice on any corner where you cannot see as far as you would like and where motorists are unlikely to be able to see you in good time.

Iwannahurl

Det Somerset wrote: »

I am moving to a house that is about 300 metres from the nearest pedestrian footpath. I intend to take the train to/from work a lot and this would require me to walk the 300 metres of a Regional (Rxxx) Road before continuing my walk to the train station on footpath.

I don't want you to identify your location, OP, but just as a matter of interest is your house in what could be called a built-up area?

It doesn't seem satisfactory to me that the only pedestrian route to a train station would be so potentially dangerous.

That said, and now that I think of it, I'm aware of narrow roads in Dublin only 800 metres from Portmarnock Station where the footpaths are minimal to non-existent.

One thing I would suggest in relation to reflective material, since it has been mentioned in this thread, is that it should be placed where it is most likely to indicate pedestrian movement. Reflective strips on the torso are fairly static but when they are situated over the major joints they serve to indicate the movement and form of a pedestrian ("biomotion") thereby enhancing detection and recognition distances for motorists.

Det Somerset

I don't want you to identify your location, OP, but just as a matter of
interest is your house in what could be called a built-up area?

It doesn't seem satisfactory to me that the only pedestrian route to a train
station would be so potentially dangerous.

I'm 300 metres from the end of the 'urban sprawl' of the local town. It's the best of both worlds. I've a country house and the peace and tranquillity that comes with it, but I'm only a 20 minute walk from the town centre or a 3 minute walk from the housing estates on the edge of town, and that's where the footpaths stop, understandably. Past my house there are only a few other country houses scattered along the main road so it wouldn't make sense to have a footpath out as far as my house.

One thing I would suggest in relation to reflective material, since it has been
mentioned in this thread, is that it should be placed where it is most likely to
indicate pedestrian movement. Reflective strips on the torso are fairly static
but when they are situated over the major joints they serve to indicate the
movement and form of a pedestrian ("biomotion")
thereby enhancing detection and recognition distances for motorists

I was thinking about this as well myself, and an armband or two would probably be a good idea for the reasons you've suggested.

Iwannahurl

Disclaimer: as the study I linked to above states, fluorescent and reflective gear increases visibility but the road safety effects in terms of injury prevention are not known.

This very morning, coming home after the school run and wearing my usual splash of hi-viz, I was nearly hit by a motorist as she failed (refused?) to yield and sped through a roundabout, eyes wide open and looking right at me.

wildefalcon

You can't legislate for tired/distracted/mentally unfocused/idiot drivers; I was nearly run down yesterday crossing at a lights controlled pedestrian crossing - The driver just drove through the red light, I had to jump out of the way on to the opposite footpath

What can you do?

As a driver I can't, hand on heart, say I've never done the same, it happens. Wet, dark evening, condensation on the windscreen, lots of distractions etc.

As a walker all you can do is improve the odds of been seen.

When I'm out on the bike I wear a big hi-vis builders jacket - ugly, bulky, but warm, dry and swaddled in reflective stuff. So far so good.

bambergbike

Det Somerset wrote: »

Past my house there are only a few other country houses scattered along the main road so it wouldn't make sense to have a footpath out as far as my house.

Hmm... Why should you NOT be catered for as a pedestrian living in the countryside, where dangerous driving (i.e. not being able to stop within the distance drivers can see to be clear) is often rife? To the point where you are considering strategies to protect yourself from people who are possibly not spending equal amounts of time considering their responsibility to protect you?

Obviously I don't want you to reveal your exact location either, I'm speaking in general terms, so what I'm saying may not fit your context, but ...

...if you follow the road for 5 or 10 km out from town do you eventually come to a village or another town or a bigger cluster of houses? I completely accept your point that the demand for pedestrian facilities on the road is probably low or virtually non-existent because the distances are too great for most potential pedestrians, but I wonder if there is some latent or supressed demand for a safe cycling route that could possibly also be used by pedestrians like yourself if it existed (sharing would be safe for all but the fastest cyclists, given the tiny numbers of pedestrians). It could be much quicker for 16 year olds living locally to bike 10 km into school (and the same distance home) than to get a school bus that picks teenagers up from lots of different places, or get a lift with a parent starting work an hour before school starts. Especially if these teenagers have electric bikes or scooters. But if their mammies won't let them cycle because the roads are dangerous, that demand will remain supressed untill the road is made safe through traffic calming or enforcement measures or an alternative is provided.

In a way, safe dedicated routes for pedestrians and cyclists are actually needed far less IN towns than they are needed BETWEEN towns. Within urban areas, traffic speeds are slower and drivers expect to encounter vulnerable road users, so the protection offered by a footpath or cycle track is less critical. Between towns, motor vehicles go much faster than they do in towns, and sharing can become quite uncomfortable and dangerous, especially when traffic volumes and traffic speeds are high and roads are narrow and bends are blind. As on your road, and in lots of other semi-suburban locations where regional roads get busier as they approach towns. Those are often the scariest roads in the country for walking and cycling, as you can get a nasty combination of high traffic speeds, high traffic volumes and very little space.

The "protection" offered by dedicated cycle and pedestrian facilities is also much more useful in rural areas like these with very infrequent junctions than it is in urban areas with loads of junctions where "protection" often just results in complicated junctions that are either dangerous or slow to get through or both. (Imagine trying to turn right from a cycle lane that runs left of left-turning traffic. You either need separate lights for the cyclists and the left turning traffic, or you have a dangerous free-for-all when the lights go green for everybody at the same time.

Conclusion: in urban areas, 30 km/h (and lower) speed limits and (cyclist/pedestrian-friendly) traffic calming are often more useful than dedicated space for everybody. In rural areas, dedicated space can really come in handy. If you live in a rural area and are worried about traffic, ask for some space! It won't have any immediate effect, but you will at least be letting your council know that some demand for facilities exists.

As far as hi-viz goes, I find it useful during daylight on dull, wet days. It won't stop a complete idiot who isn't looking from hitting me, but it seems to make motorists who would otherwise see me and pass too close anyway give me a wider berth as a sort of thank-you for being co-operative and somehow doing my bit to make their lives easier. I don't really like the idea that I should have to try and appease motorists like this, but, well, it seems to work, and I value my comfort.

galwaycyclist

What bambergbike said.

As to the legal question in the thread title. As I understand it , in the UK and Ireland- pedestrians, cyclists and people riding horses enjoy a common law right to make lawful use of all public roads other than motorways.

The regulations for pedestrians are here.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1997/en/si/0182.html

The legal situation for motorists is different. Drivers of motor vehicles have no right to drive them on public roads. Instead they must first obtain a permission - or licence - under the provisions of the Motor Car Act of 1903 and the succeeding road traffic acts.

Capt'n Midnight

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

I only mention it as a running event I have this weekend requires us to run with the traffic while we have light on during the hours of darkness and it makes sense.

When there are large groups you travel in the direction of traffic with people with lights at each end.

http://www.rulesoftheroad.ie/

Det Somerset

bambergbike wrote: »

Hmm... Why should you NOT be catered for as a pedestrian living in the countryside, where dangerous driving (i.e. not being able to stop within the distance drivers can see to be clear) is often rife? To the point where you are considering strategies to protect yourself from people who are possibly not spending equal amounts of time considering their responsibility to protect you?

Being perfectly honest, I prefer the fact that there isn't a footpath linking my house to the rest of the built up housing estates. I think it offers a greater sense of privacy. I would expect we won't be included in any (or at least as many) door to door salesmen marketing drives, Jehovah's witness calls etc than if we had an easy pedestrian route. We also would fear that kids might be more inclined to snoop around, hang out on our front walls if we were a safe short stroll away. One of the reasons we wanted to move to the 'countryside' was to get away from that side of things, so if the 'price to pay' is making myself more visible when I walk the road, I'm quite happy to make that little extra effort which I'm sure won't be any effort at all once I get used to it.

I wouldn't argue with what you say overall though. You make a lot of sense with the points you've raised.

Iwannahurl

Det Somerset wrote: »

Being perfectly honest, I prefer the fact that there isn't a footpath linking my house to the rest of the built up housing estates.

... kids might be more inclined to snoop walk around, hang out on our front walls if we were a safe short stroll away.

We have that in our neighbourhood. It's called "community" I guess.

Sure they abuse the trees in our garden if they're let, like young chimps in the jungle, but they're all kids playing together, and that's a good thing.

Meanwhile the kids in the neighbouring estate are climbing over a 2.5m wall to get to school and the shops via our street, while their counterparts in 'rural' areas 5-10 km away have to be driven everywhere.

Det Somerset

Iwannahurl wrote: »

We have that in our neighbourhood. It's called "community" I guess.

Sure they abuse the trees in our garden if they're let, like young chimps in the jungle, but they're all kids playing together, and that's a good thing.

Meanwhile the kids in the neighbouring estate are climbing over a 2.5m wall to get to school and the shops via our street, while their counterparts in 'rural' areas 5-10 km away have to be driven everywhere.

That comes across as a bit snide. Some people like kids, other people don't. My wife and I dislike kids, and have had negative experiences of them SNOOPING around our current property. I'm glad for you that you seem to like kids, but we don't and are happy we won't have to put up with them when we move. Each to their own, and all that.