Car clamped by DCc

Spook_ie

But surely the center line deliniates the carriageway into two lanes, left hand lane and right hand lane, inbound lane/outbound lane, east bound lane/west bound lane etc. I see where you are coming from in that the line isn't designated as a lane marking but would a court hold it as a defacto lane division?

Victor

Spook_ie wrote: »

But surely the center line deliniates the carriageway into two lanes, left hand lane and right hand lane, inbound lane/outbound lane, east bound lane/west bound lane etc.

Yes, they are "lanes" in the normal meaning of the words. However, a "traffic lane" is a specific type of lane.

ForestFire

Can someone post a example of where you can legally park with a solid white line, pointing out the 3 "(traffic)lanes" and which line(s) can be solid?

dccaresuckers

I'm appealing but I have to recognise than Ireland is the únic country that has different s terminologies for lane and traffic lane. I'have to do some CSI, take measurements width and length to see if they are proper center road lines or RRM003. If they are broken or faded they may lead to confusion ..

dccaresuckers

I'm appealing but I have to recognise than Ireland is the únic country that has different s terminologies for lane and traffic lane. I'have to do some CSI, take measurements width and length to see if they are proper center road lines or RRM003. If they are broken or faded they may lead to confusion ..

dccaresuckers

ForestFire wrote: »

Can someone post a example of where you can legally park with a solid white line, pointing out the 3 "(traffic)lanes" and which line(s) can be solid?

Buff but examples with less and semms to be allowed

dccaresuckers

One

dccaresuckers

Maybe?

Time

dccaresuckers wrote: »

Maybe?

Oxmantown Road has parking bays both sides of the road, there’s a two lane road with a single lane for carriage in each direction. You’re clutching at straws

dccaresuckers

By law they aren't traffic lanes. There is a solid white lane starting from the turn, on the bottom of the pic.  Legally they can  not park it seems.

Time

dccaresuckers wrote: »

By law they aren't traffic lanes. There is a solid white lane starting from the turn, on the bottom of the pic.  Legally they can  not park it seems.

Legally they can because those spaces either side of the carriage way are designated for parking, there are even pay and display signs there. I know because I have friends who live there. In fact look at street view for yourself and see.

dccaresuckers

Yep you are right. ... I have checked it know well.

dccaresuckers

Difficult to find one example

dccaresuckers

I have lost 80 EUR

dccaresuckers

:P:D...

GM228

dccaresuckers wrote: »

I'm appealing but I have to recognise than Ireland is the únic country that has different s terminologies for lane and traffic lane.

Many countries operate the same. In fact AFAIK very few countries actually define "lane", just like Ireland they usually only define "traffic lane".

Take the UK for example, they do not define lane in traffic law, but they do define traffic lane, and it's pretty much the same as here:-

"traffic lane"

a part of the carriageway intended for use by vehicles travelling in a particular direction or reserved for use by vehicles of a particular type and separated from other parts of the carriageway by road markings

The only difference between Ireland and the UK is they also recognise a bus lane and cycle lane as a traffic lane.

dccaresuckers wrote: »

I'have to do some CSI, take measurements width and length to see if they are proper center road lines or RRM003. If they are broken or faded they may lead to confusion ..

Measurement will not achieve anything as RRM 002 (the broken centre line) and RRM 003 can have similar measurements as legislation allows for approximate dimensions, not absolute dimensions.

In any case, going by the location where your vehicle was parked (as per this post), your car was next to RRM 001 so the measurement of the broken lines would be irrelevant.

dccaresuckers

Road markings in the UK. But only the RRM003?

GM228

dccaresuckers wrote: »

Road markings in the UK. But only the RRM003?

I'm not sure what you are asking/stating here?

dccaresuckers

I mean in Ireland you need RRM003. If not it isn't considered a trafic lane. Maybe in the UK ,two solid lines and other road marks different than RRM003 can create a trafic lane. Two RRM001 can create a trafic lane. ?

degsie

dccaresuckers wrote: »

I have lost 80 EUR

Maybe start a gofundme? :cool:

dccaresuckers

Well. Being honest. I didn't know that law applies. But a bit unfair considering they cut the yellow lines on that right spot leading to confusion.
They may consider to reduce it...

dccaresuckers

If the boarders go fund me. I will stop the car there, with the keys on the lock and engine on, hidded inside the car,waiting untill they come to clamp my car , and leaving the place suddently.
And I will record it, always if that isn't illegal. if is Illegal won't do it.

GM228

dccaresuckers wrote: »

I mean in Ireland you need RRM003. If not it isn't considered a trafic lane. Maybe in the UK ,two solid lines and other road marks different than RRM003 can create a trafic lane. Two RRM001 can create a trafic lane. ?

The UK operate the same way, except the road markings are designated differently, in Ireland traffic signs are either designated starting with "RRM", "RUS", "RPC" or "M" depending on the type of sign, in the UK everything is designated starting with "Diagram" irrespective of the type of sign.

Their equivalent of our "RRM 003" is known as the "Diagram 1005".

Their equivalent of our "RRM 002" is known as the "Diagram 1008", and they have no equivalent of our RRM 001 as they have no solid white lines which are designated as centre lines.

We are going well off topic now.

dccaresuckers

Thanks I have learnt a lot. In Spain there is the concept of lane.

dccaresuckers

I hadn't seen the lines that indicate parking bay, tbh. That's why I have said you were right.

Spook_ie

GM228 wrote: »

Many countries operate the same. In fact AFAIK very few countries actually define "lane", just like Ireland they usually only define "traffic lane".

Take the UK for example, they do not define lane in traffic law, but they do define traffic lane, and it's pretty much the same as here:-

"traffic lane"

a part of the carriageway intended for use by vehicles travelling in a particular direction or reserved for use by vehicles of a particular type and separated from other parts of the carriageway by road markings

The only difference between Ireland and the UK is they also recognise a bus lane and cycle lane as a traffic lane.





Measurement will not achieve anything as RRM 002 (the broken centre line) and RRM 003 can have similar measurements as legislation allows for approximate dimensions, not absolute dimensions.

In any case, going by the location where your vehicle was parked (as per this post), your car was next to RRM 001 so the measurement of the broken lines would be irrelevant.

As I said a traffic lane heading east and a traffic lane heading west, the east lane and west lane sometimes being further subdivided on the approach to junctions to make 3 traffic lanes, I think if it went to court a judge may well side with the defacto argument that there are 2 traffic lanes on a normal road, therefore at the location mentioned by the OP there are three traffic lanes.

GM228

Spook_ie wrote: »

As I said a traffic lane heading east and a traffic lane heading west, the east lane and west lane sometimes being further subdivided on the approach to junctions to make 3 traffic lanes, I think if it went to court a judge may well side with the defacto argument that there are 2 traffic lanes on a normal road, therefore at the location mentioned by the OP there are three traffic lanes.

Victor and myself have already explained this to you when you previously mentioned it, Peregrinus and kronnn have also shown why this is not the case previously in the thread.

There is no defacto argument to be made that there are 2 traffic lanes on a normal road, it is something specifically dealth with by legislation and the Traffic Signs Manual and no ambiguety is left.

7.13.16 It is important that Lane Lines, RRM 003 (see following paragraphs), which separate traffic travelling in the same direction, should not be mistaken by drivers for centre line markings, which separate traffic travelling in opposite directions. Consequently, where Lane Lines are provided on single-carriageway roads, the 150mm line width should be used for Broken Centre Lines.

7.3.45 Lane Lines, RRM 003, (lane guidance markings) are used to divide the carriageway into two or more lanes for traffic travelling in the same direction. Their use can ensure that available carriageway space is used to its maximum. In helping vehicles to maintain a consistent lateral position, they also offer safety benefits and should be used wherever possible.

Irish law does not operate on the concept of traffic lanes operating in each direction, it works on the concept of a roadway with oppositve traffic flow, only the traffic flow itself can have a traffic lane.

The prohibition of parking relates to traffic lanes which are defined and traffic lanes can only run parralel to each other in the same direction, they can't (in accordance with the law) create reverse traffic flow.

Spook_ie

GM228 wrote: »

Victor and myself have already explained this to you when you previously mentioned it, Peregrinus and kronnn have also shown why this is not the case previously in the thread.

There is no defacto argument to be made that there are 2 traffic lanes on a normal road, it is something specifically dealth with by legislation and the Traffic Signs Manual and no ambiguety is left.





Irish law does not operate on the concept of traffic lanes operating in each direction, it works on the concept of a roadway with oppositve traffic flow, only the traffic flow itself can have a traffic lane.

The prohibition of parking relates to traffic lanes which are defined and traffic lanes can only run parralel to each other in the same direction, they can't (in accordance with the law) create reverse traffic flow.

Sorry going to have to disagree with your interpretations, a solid white line must logically act as a lane marking as the traffic on either side of it is constrained to that lane and that direction of traffic flow

GM228

Spook_ie wrote: »

Sorry going to have to disagree with your interpretations, a solid white line must logically act as a lane marking as the traffic on either side of it is constrained to that lane and that direction of traffic flow

I think you have missed the point made (several times by several posters) that meaning of centre lines and traffic lane lines is set out in black and white in legislation, in terms of traffic law we are dealing with "traffic lanes", not "lanes", as provided for by legislation, Irish law does not support the common understanding of a lane in the context we are discussing, in fact "lane" in and of itself does not enter Irish law in any context in relation to road traffic.

You may have also missed the point that the quoted document is not my interpretation, rather a direct quote from a ministerial order issued under the Road Traffic Act 1961, it makes a very clear important statement - "Lane Lines, RRM 003....which separate traffic travelling in the same direction, should not be mistaken by drivers for centre line markings, which separate traffic travelling in opposite directions", it simply can't get any clearer.

Spook_ie

GM228 wrote: »

I think you have missed the point made (several times by several posters) that meaning of centre lines and traffic lane lines is set out in black and white in legislation, in terms of traffic law we are dealing with "traffic lanes", not "lanes", as provided for by legislation, Irish law does not support the common understanding of a lane in the context we are discussing, in fact "lane" in and of itself does not enter Irish law in any context in relation to road traffic.

You may have also missed the point that the quoted document is not my interpretation, rather a direct quote from a ministerial order issued under the Road Traffic Act 1961, it makes a very clear important statement - "Lane Lines, RRM 003....which separate traffic travelling in the same direction, should not be mistaken by drivers for centre line markings, which separate traffic travelling in opposite directions", it simply can't get any clearer.

Still going to disagree with you,I just don't see anything in any of the arguments that says a center line can't be a traffic lane boundary, especially when related to a single or double continuous white lines doesn't delineate the edge of a traffic lane