Zebra crossings?

my3cents

This is a small annoyance of mine and I've no idea if I'm even right to be annoyed so I thought I'd ask here what the actual rules are for drivers and zebra crossings?

What I always do is wait until the crossing is clear before I drive over a zebra crossing, however what I notice most drivers doing is wait till the section of the road in front of them is clear but the pedestrians are still on the crossing and then drive across.

To explain further I could walk up to a pedestrian crossing and cars on both sides of the road stop for be but when I'm half way across the car I've already walked in front of will then drive on while I finish crossing.

So are drivers supposed to wait till the crossing is clear even if there is no chance of them hitting the person that is on the other side of the road but still on the crossing?

MadDog76

I'm not sure of the rules myself, I assume the driver is supposed to wait until the crossing is completely clear ........ but, come on, what difference does it really make to you as a pedestrian? The car stopped, you got to cross safely and the driver gets on with his journey ......... everybody's happy ....... or should be!

GM228

This is all the law has to say about it:-

Traffic and Parking Regulations 1997 (as amended):-

8(6) A driver of a vehicle approaching a zebra pedestrian crossing where traffic sign number RPC 001 (zebra pedestrian crossing) is provided shall yield the right of way to any pedestrian who has commenced crossing the road at the zebra pedestrian crossing.

GBX

So if they are passed your car why not carry on as long as it's safe to do so. No big deal. Just a peeve of yours OP.

iguana

I imagine it's ok to drive on if the pedestrian has passed you but you'd want to be 100% sure the way is clear. In cases where the crossing is broken by a traffic island between the lanes of traffic my driving instructor told me that they are effectively two separate crossings.

my3cents

GM228 wrote: »

This is all the law has to say about it:-

Traffic and Parking Regulations 1997 (as amended):-

Thats interesting. I had looked (googled) before posting the question and couldn't find a definitive answer and it seems there may not be one to be found.

my3cents

GBX wrote: »

So if they are passed your car why not carry on as long as it's safe to do so. No big deal. Just a peeve of yours OP.

Indeed, but I have noticed drivers getting more aggressive in moving forward so some will start when the pedestrian is still in front of them so they just about drive over the pedestrians heels.

Locally you have to add cyclists into the mix as we have lots of "zebra crossings" that are part of cycle ways and cyclists seeing cars stopped for a pedestrian can be a lot quicker getting onto a crossing than drivers expect.

kirving

The driver should wait until the crossing is completely clear. Completely understand the OP's point, where aggressive drivers pass very close behind pedestrians who have only just crossed out of that lane.

GM228

my3cents wrote: »

Thats interesting. I had looked (googled) before posting the question and couldn't find a definitive answer and it seems there may not be one to be found.

That's the only thing written about them on the books, anything else you may find would simply be a suggestion or recommendation on how to act as opposed to a legal rule.

MadDog76

Kevin Irving wrote: »

The driver should wait until the crossing is completely clear. Completely understand the OP's point, where aggressive drivers pass very close behind pedestrians who have only just crossed out of that lane.

Why exactly?

Tell me how

MadDog76 wrote:

Why exactly?

It's bordering on being pedantic, I know, but my view is to let the finish passing based on the following scenario.

What happens if a pedestrian had passed half of the crossing and then suddenly realises they forgot something and turn sharply back in the direction they came from. They were on the crossing thus "in control of it" and wouldn't expect to see a car driving on to it.

So, like yourself OP, I'm generally inclined to let them finish crossing. For larger roads with some sort of an island in the middle, I do drive on once they've passed my side.

Think the law in such a case would generally involve a discussion around "driving with due care and attention".

Muhammed_1

What happens if a person keeps on crossing back and forwards?

Are they committing an offence?

What if a group of people conspire amongst themselves to keep a crossing occupied?

It seems to me that the cars would have no choice but to yield.

Could the Guards prevent this behaviour?
On what grounds?




It's similar to how some people think that a car canot be undertaken in any circumstances. What happens if a person drives in the rightmost lane at 50km/h on the M50?
Must all traffic travel below that speed?

Some people say yes as a car cannot be undertaken.

redbel05

When I was learning to drive, I was reprimanded by my driving instructor for doing what the op said, ie. driving on once the pedestrian had left my lane, but not finished crossing the road.

He told me that the only time that you can do this is where there is an island in the centre. In which case you treat it as if it were two separate zebra crossings.

my3cents

redbel05 wrote: »

When I was learning to drive, I was reprimanded by my driving instructor for doing what the op said, ie. driving on once the pedestrian had left my lane, but not finished crossing the road.

He told me that the only time that you can do this is where there is an island in the centre. In which case you treat it as if it were two separate zebra crossings.

Thats how I was taught but my lessons where 40 years ago in the UK so I've no idea what is taught here.

From the point of view of passing a test I would totally agree with your driving instructor, but once you have passed it seems there isn't any law that specifically says thats the way it should be done.

kirving

MadDog76 wrote: »

Why exactly?

Because it's only a single zebra crossing, so the pedestrian still has control of it.

Take the reverse scenario, but is exactly the same from the pedestrians point of view - do you think it's okay to drive through your side of the crossing before the pedestrian has reached that side?

An island in the middle and it's a different story of course.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Special Circumstances

redbel05 wrote: »

When I was learning to drive, I was reprimanded by my driving instructor for doing what the op said, ie. driving on once the pedestrian had left my lane, but not finished crossing the road.

He told me that the only time that you can do this is where there is an island in the centre. In which case you treat it as if it were two separate zebra crossings.

Some instructors spout awful rubbish though.

"If you're parking facing down a hill put the car in reverse or first if you are facing up a hill but NEVER first if you you're facing down the hill or reverse if you are facing up"

"You should indicate right if going for the twelve of clock exit on the standard 4 point roundabout"

Etc etc.

my3cents

Special Circumstances wrote: »

Some instructors spout awful rubbish though.

"If you're parking facing down a hill put the car in reverse or first if you are facing up a hill but NEVER first if you you're facing down the hill or reverse if you are facing up"

"You should indicate right if going for the twelve of clock exit on the standard 4 point roundabout"

Etc etc.

I don't think the instructor was wrong in this case. Would you on a test drive across a zebra crossing when their was someone still on it?

Special Circumstances

my3cents wrote: »

I don't think the instructor was wrong in this case. Would you on a test drive across a zebra crossing when their was someone still on it?

I wouldn't be sitting there revving it ready to launch it the minute the pedestrians heel left "my" half of the road.
Likewise, would I always 100% wait until the person had fully departed the crossing on the other side... no.

It's one of these grey areas like disabling or removing emissions control equipment on a diesel engine. Really you shouldn't but who's really going to stop you up over it?

I'm just saying... driving instructor "facts" would historically have been somewhere between taxi driver "facts" and pubtalk.
Not sure if they go through any formal training themselves in more modern times? Off topic I suppose.

Oh... a test drive. Of course I would drive all the time exactly as I would on a test drive. For shizzle.

MadDog76

Kevin Irving wrote: »

Because it's only a single zebra crossing, so the pedestrian still has control of it.

Take the reverse scenario, but is exactly the same from the pedestrians point of view - do you think it's okay to drive through your side of the crossing before the pedestrian has reached that side?

An island in the middle and it's a different story of course.

The Law is unclear on the issue so I think I'll continue to use reasonable logic, ie. proceed when it's safe to do so.

Veloce150

MadDog76 wrote: »

The Law is unclear on the issue so I think I'll continue to use reasonable logic, ie. proceed when it's safe to do so.

The law means you cannot obstruct a pedestrian who is crossing. Passing behind the pedestrian and in close proximity, is not expressly prohibited but could be deemed to be inconsiderate and could bring a sanction if a Garda formed an opinion and brought a successful prosecution.

MadDog76

Veloce150 wrote: »

The law means you cannot obstruct a pedestrian who is crossing. Passing behind the pedestrian and in close proximity, is not expressly prohibited but could be deemed to be inconsiderate and could bring a sanction if a Garda formed an opinion and brought a successful prosecution.

Is being inconsiderate illegal in your world?

Veloce150

MadDog76 wrote: »

Is being inconsiderate illegal in your world?

It is in Ireland.

"51A.— (1) A person shall not drive a vehicle in a public place without reasonable consideration for other persons using the place."

MadDog76

Veloce150 wrote: »

It is in Ireland.

That doesn't apply to proceeding through a zebra crossing when safe to do so though.

Veloce150

MadDog76 wrote: »

That doesn't apply to proceeding through a zebra crossing when safe to do so though.

One can be inconsiderate without endangering anyone.

MadDog76

Veloce150 wrote: »

One can be inconsiderate without endangering anyone.

I am allowed to proceed onto a zebra crossing when it's safe to do so, the Law doesn't say otherwise.

Veloce150

MadDog76 wrote: »

I am allowed to proceed onto a zebra crossing when it's safe to do so, the Law doesn't say otherwise.

Only if you do so in a considerate manner.

MadDog76

Veloce150 wrote: »

Only if you do so in a considerate manner.

Inconsiderate/considerate is based on personal opinion and nothing more ........ best ignored when driving safely on the road.

Veloce150

MadDog76 wrote: »

Inconsiderate/considerate is based on personal opinion and nothing more ........ best ignored when driving safely on the road.

Your opinion of your driving would be weighed against the opinion of a Garda and ultimately, a court.

MadDog76

Veloce150 wrote: »

Your opinion of your driving would be weighed against the opinion of a Garda and ultimately, a court.

Well, as any Garda will tell you, Gardai are very careful when it comes to their own personal opinion when charging an individual with a "crime" ........ there's nothing more embarrassing, both personally and professionally, for a Garda than a Judge viewing their opinion as unreasonable, illogical or pedantic which it most certainly would be in regards the situation you described on a zebra crossing.

Garda: "Your Honour, I observed the driver driving through the zebra crossing after the pedestrian walked past his car."

Judge: "And?"

Garda: "Well, your Honour, it was ....... em ........ eh ........ just kinda rude in my opinion."

Judge: "Get the f*ck outta here!!!"

What's next!??!!? Being charged with "bad manners" because a Garda observed me not holding a door open for a lady!!?!!??!!! :rolleyes:

Veloce150

MadDog76 wrote: »

Well, as any Garda will tell you, Gardai are very careful when it comes to their own personal opinion when charging an individual with a "crime" ........ there's nothing more embarrassing, both personally and professionally, for a Garda than a Judge viewing their opinion as unreasonable, illogical or pedantic which it most certainly would be in regards the situation you described on a zebra crossing.

Garda: "Your Honour, I observed the driver driving through the zebra crossing after the pedestrian walked past his car."
Judge: "And?"

"The driver passed, revving the engine, less than 1 metre away at more than 50kph and the elderly pedestrian, using a walking aid, who felt in fear for her safety has been afraid to go to Church since. Would you like to hear her?"