City Centre Zebra Crossings

topper75

Anyone else concerned at the implementation of pedestrian crossings of late in the city centre?
If they are well-placed they can be excellent. I'm not sure if this is the official or unofficial 'opening' of a new one on Catherine St! One step above the opening of an envelope if you ask me.



However one in particular bugs me a little. It is at the Catherine St./Roches St. cross. As you drive down Roches St. (for you can only drive down) the first one you encounter at the Catherine St. junction is fine (right of pic below). I find it quite useful and pretty safe as a pedestrian. The one at the other side of the junction(left of pic below), less so. A motorist cannot clog the yellow hatched box. So they must have a clear path to proceed. However in this case they must ensure not only to have a clear forward path but to ensure that no pedestrians are using the zebra crossing. If the motorist sits in the box awaiting a pedestrian, they then block the downtown flow on Catherine St.

keane2097

topper75 wrote: »

...

...they must ensure not only to have a clear forward path but to ensure that no pedestrians are using the zebra crossing...

...

What's the problem with doing the above?

Mc Love

Roches St. & Catherine St. Junction was poorly designed, they probably wanted to go pedestrian but lost heart halfway through and came up with that.

Cookiemunster

keane2097 wrote: »

What's the problem with doing the above?

When traveling down Roches St when somebody steps onto the Zebre crossing you have to stop on the yellow box, meaning that to obey one rule of the road, you have to break another one. While I don't think it's much of an issue, it was pretty dumb to set up the junction this way.

The Specialist

Strikes me as an absolutely pointless spot for a crossing - if you have a pair of eyes in your head and aware of your surroundings, there is never an issue crossing the road there. It doesn't exactly see O'Connell street levels of traffic during the day.

geotrig

The Catherine street /roches street one bugged me for a while but I've adjusted to it and think in general we look at all pedestrian crossing wrongly. i probably still use it wrongly
I Like the pedestrian crossing out in castletroy and ul area , they are all raised and think that is a good feature especially as it controls drivers speed coming to them and makes all more aware in general I think its good features to add that help in the safekeeping of pedestrians.

keane2097

Cookiemunster wrote: »

When traveling down Roches St when somebody steps onto the Zebre crossing you have to stop on the yellow box, meaning that to obey one rule of the road, you have to break another one. While I don't think it's much of an issue, it was pretty dumb to set up the junction this way.

I know the junction quite well, I drive on it regularly. You just have to wait until both crossings are clear before taking off. If someone is a few steps away from the second crossing and walking towards it you just wait till they have crossed.

Cookiemunster

keane2097 wrote: »

I know the junction quite well, I drive on it regularly. You just have to wait until both crossings are clear before taking off. If someone is a few steps away from the second crossing and walking towards it you just wait till they have crossed.

When there's other traffic and buses and trucks, it's not always possible to see both crossings and the footpaths to see if anyone is coming. As I said it is badly designed.

keane2097

Cookiemunster wrote: »

When there's other traffic and buses and trucks, it's not always possible to see both crossings and the footpaths to see if anyone is coming. As I said it is badly designed.

Wha? I've never had my view of either crossing blocked by other traffic and I'm about three feet off the ground in an Audi TT.

In any case, how could you possibly be making the judgement that you have a clear path through the yellow box if you can't see the pedestrian crossing directly after it?

Cookiemunster

keane2097 wrote: »

Wha? I've never had my view of either crossing blocked by other traffic and I'm about three feet off the ground in an Audi TT.

In any case, how could you possibly be making the judgement that you have a clear path through the yellow box if you can't see the pedestrian crossing directly after it?

I have in the past been blocked by buses and trucks from seeing everything, but more importantly I think you missed the bit in my earlier post where I said it's not much of an issue. As I said it's just a badly designed junction.

keane2097

Cookiemunster wrote: »

I have in the past been blocked by buses and trucks from seeing everything, but more importantly I think you missed the bit in my earlier post where I said it's not much of an issue. As I said it's just a badly designed junction.

That's fine. You can repeat yourself till you are blue in the keyboard, but as far as I'm concerned there is no problem with sitting and waiting until both crossings are clear to proceed.

No problem bar crap driving obviously, of which there is no shortage in Limerick.

geotrig

half the problem is you just cant judge what pedestrians are doing i.e going straight turning to go up down roches street etc , many at time i've been stopping at the fine wine side and then the person would turn the corner and not cross the road
There is a lot to be looking out for as a driver in such a small place with cars edgeing out of catherine st also so its easy be caught out and end up having to stop in the box.

Cookiemunster

keane2097 wrote: »

That's fine. You can repeat yourself till you are blue in the keyboard, but as far as I'm concerned there is no problem with sitting and waiting until both crossings are clear to proceed.

No problem bar crap driving obviously, of which there is no shortage in Limerick.

A properly designed junction should not leave the possibility of having to disobey one rule of the road to obey another.

Yes you should try to make sure the way is clear before proceeding, but that doesn't preclude the possibility of someone that you hadn't seen stepping onto the crossing after you've entered the yellow box.

geotrig

I feel the one near the locke/st Mary Catherdal is a good addition but could have been implemented slightly better ,not sure if the bend helps it before hand coming from corbally and the fact the locke seem to have deliviries at that side doesnt help either ,but I've seen numerous people drive though it not noticing people waiting to cross, that may be due to it being new to be fair.

keane2097

Cookiemunster wrote: »

A properly designed junction should not leave the possibility of having to disobey one rule of the road to obey another.

Yes you should try to make sure the way is clear before proceeding, but that doesn't preclude the possibility of someone that you hadn't seen stepping onto the crossing after you've entered the yellow box.

The rules of the road are that you must not enter a yellow box area unless you can clear it without stopping. Not 'try your best to but if a bus and truck are blocking your view of the pedestrian crossing just nose across and sure it's probably all clear anyway'.

If someone steps out in front of you on any yellow box in the country you have to stop whether there's a crossing or not. Is stopping in this case breaking the rules of the road? Debatable I guess, but in the case where you have to stop because you failed to adequately check a very well marked crossing 15 feet away you are probably just doing it wrong.

phog

These improvements for pedestrians were made possible because of the flow traffic away from the city towards the tunnel, imagine the possibilities for the city if we had the Northern Distributor Road available too

The Specialist

keane2097 wrote: »

The rules of the road are that you must not enter a yellow box area unless you can clear it without stopping. Not 'try your best to but if a bus and truck are blocking your view of the pedestrian crossing just nose across and sure it's probably all clear anyway'.

If someone steps out in front of you on any yellow box in the country you have to stop whether there's a crossing or not. Is stopping in this case breaking the rules of the road? Debatable I guess, but in the case where you have to stop because you failed to adequately check a very well marked crossing 15 feet away you are probably just doing it wrong.[

This is incorrect - pedestrians do not have any right of way to blindly stroll out across any road with moving traffic. The same goes for crossings - I nearly rear ended some muppet in Dooradoyle earlier this week because he slammed on the brakes while going 50kph because someone was approaching the crossing, not even at it. Traffic stops when it is safe to do so, if it's travelling too fast to stop safely within distance then the pedestrian should wait.

keane2097

The Specialist wrote: »

This is incorrect - pedestrians do not have any right of way to blindly stroll out across any road with moving traffic. The same goes for crossings - I nearly rear ended some muppet in Dooradoyle earlier this week because he slammed on the brakes while going 50kph because someone was approaching the crossing, not even at it. Traffic stops when it is safe to do so, if it's travelling too fast to stop safely within distance then the pedestrian should wait.

If I gave the impression that I think pedestrians have right of way to walk into oncoming traffic I can only apologise.

geotrig

The Specialist wrote: »

This is incorrect - pedestrians do not have any right of way to blindly stroll out across any road with moving traffic. The same goes for crossings - I nearly rear ended some muppet in Dooradoyle earlier this week because he slammed on the brakes while going 50kph because someone was approaching the crossing, not even at it. Traffic stops when it is safe to do so, if it's travelling too fast to stop safely within distance then the pedestrian should wait.

This is why i think the raised crossings in castletroy/ul really work .takes some of the guess work out of slowing down.
I'm not saying raise all of them just the busier ones woth road and pedestrian traffic.

topper75

keane2097 wrote: »

If someone steps out in front of you on any yellow box in the country you have to stop whether there's a crossing or not.

I know of no such convention in the RotR. Are you talking about somebody walking out into traffic when they shouldn't?

I probably didn't detail the issue fully in my OP.
As you come down Roches St. in a car, your decision to proceed is now dependent on fulfilling three different conditions at once:

• No pedestrians standing on either side of the road at zebra 1
• At least one vehicle-length free space at the back of the queue (more often than not there is a queue) in the lower section of Roches St. you are driving into
• No pedestrians standing on either side of the road at zebra 2

Arguably there is the fourth condition - checking that no vehicle on Catherine St. is going to make a rash move from the left to take advantage of your hesitancy.

This is a bit of an onerous calculation on busy days with pedestrians moving in all directions on the paths of two of our key retail streets and many buses and trucks obscuring vision.

I think the second zebra was ill-considered - at the very least its location flush with Catherine St. They should have positioned it one vehicle length down Roches St. such that a driver can cross the yellow box at least and THEN consider proceeding on zebra 2.

jbkenn

The Specialist wrote: »

This is incorrect - pedestrians do not have any right of way to blindly stroll out across any road with moving traffic. The same goes for crossings - I nearly rear ended some muppet in Dooradoyle earlier this week because he slammed on the brakes while going 50kph because someone was approaching the crossing, not even at it. Traffic stops when it is safe to do so, if it's travelling too fast to stop safely within distance then the pedestrian should wait.

An FYI for pedestrians from the Rules of the Road, because most of them seem to be clueless, and as for cyclists using pedestrian crossings, don't get me started.

You do not have the right-of-way over other traffic until you actually step
onto the crossing. Never step onto the crossing if this would cause a
driver to brake or swerve suddenly.

You must not cross within the area marked by zig-zag white lines if these
are provided on either side of a zebra crossing. If they are not provided,
you must not cross within 15 metres of the crossing.

If there is a central island, treat each side as a separate crossing.

Always watch carefully for approaching traffic.
Place one foot on the crossing to indicate that you wish to cross.
Wait until traffic has stopped before you start crossing.

keane2097

topper75 wrote: »

I know of no such convention in the RotR. Are you talking about somebody walking out into traffic when they shouldn't?

Yes. If someone walks in front of you when they shouldn't you are obviously going to stop in the yellow box rather than plough over them. You will then obviously have 'broken' the rules of the road, but it's not really your fault in the case of someone just plunging into oncoming traffic.

If you have to stop in the box because someone correctly uses a pedestrian crossing but 'oh jeez I couldn't see them because my view was blocked by a bus' then in my eyes you are certainly at fault. The zebra crossing is maybe 30 feet away (tops?), across a yellow box. If you can't see it you are breaking the rules of the road by entering the junction.

The Rules of the Road convention in question is not 'don't stop in a yellow box'; it's 'you must not enter a yellow box area unless you can clear it without stopping'. The distinction is actually pretty important in my mind.

I agree that at that junction you have a few different things to keep an eye on but it's not rocket science to check if the two crossings are free before you enter the junction. I mean, if you take off at the corner with the Off License and someone then walks onto the zebra on the other side in the three seconds it takes you to get there they must have been less than two or three steps away surely?

topper75

keane2097 wrote: »

...I mean, if you take off at the corner with the Off License and someone then walks onto the zebra on the other side in the three seconds it takes you to get there they must have been less than two or three steps away surely?

Aye two or three steps away but intending to walk down to Ahern's butchers, intending to go up to Fine Wines, intending to suddenly turn around and walk back toward's Gleesons, or intending to cross the road?

I can't get into their minds. By the time they have put their foot on the crossing to 'claim' the road and I brake for them, I'm sitting in the yellow box. I'm blocking Catherine St. traffic. Meanwhile more pedestrians arrive and begin to cross. I could be blocking that box for up to 20 seconds with a good run of people crossing on a Saturday.

topper75

Here is another shot from Google Maps that may illustrate the issue:
[IMG][/img]

Imagine you are driving the black car in lower left, driving down Roches St. There are no walkers crossing zeb1. Good. That eliminates that. Fish van is in your way. You cannot seeing walkers on the far path that might be about to 'claim' the road. You hold. You don't want to clog the yellow box. You don't want to clog zeb1 either. You stay put. Meanwhile white van progresses. Silver car also sees a free junction (you are 30m back and stationary) and progresses. AGAIN your view of what is happening on zeb 2 is obscured.

Opting for the lesser of two evils, I will simply clog the yellow box in order to make progress. But this is really the council's doing.

It is a potential mare when both zebras are busy on a Sat afternoon. And all because the person who painted zeb2 flush with Catherine St. did not think things through. Either create a car space before zeb2 or change the entire thing to a proper green man crossing.

Mr.H

topper75 wrote:

.......One step above the opening of an envelope if you ask me.

Sure didnt we do it for years with winning streak. Nothing like a good old fashioned envelope opening if you ask me

TheDiceMan2020

I wish they'd alter the traffic lights on Patrick Street outside Boojum and behind Arthur's Quay as the flashing green man is way too quick for comfort.

Cetyl Palmitate

topper75 wrote: »

Here is another shot from Google Maps that may illustrate the issue:
[IMG][/img]

Imagine you are driving the black car in lower left, driving down Roches St. There are no walkers crossing zeb1. Good. That eliminates that. Fish van is in your way. You cannot seeing walkers on the far path that might be about to 'claim' the road. You hold. You don't want to clog the yellow box. You don't want to clog zeb1 either. You stay put. Meanwhile white van progresses. Silver car also sees a free junction (you are 30m back and stationary) and progresses. AGAIN your view of what is happening on zeb 2 is obscured.

Opting for the lesser of two evils, I will simply clog the yellow box in order to make progress. But this is really the council's doing.

It is a potential mare when both zebras are busy on a Sat afternoon. And all because the person who painted zeb2 flush with Catherine St. did not think things through. Either create a car space before zeb2 or change the entire thing to a proper green man crossing.

It's the middle of the city. Cars shouldnt be the dominant force. If that means waiting in a yellow box for someone to cross a pedestrian crossing so be it.
A preferable solution would be reducing Roches street to 1 lane of traffic and removing the majority of parking space. Keep some as loading spaces for deliveries etc.

mgbgt1978

Unless you have just now become the new RSA director....."it is illegal to enter a yellow box unless your way is clear".


That's the current law, regardless of any views you may have on traffic policy.

....and why shouldn't cars be the dominant force (on the road). Pedestrians can then be the dominant force on the pavement. Then when pedestrians wish to cross the road they can simply use the relevant pedestrian crossings, and motorists can just obey the rules of the road. It's not that hard for everybody to just follow the rules.