Lane centre markings - any highways specialists?

[VxDuncan]

Hi,
I live in a town that has recently decided to stop putting markings down the centre of major (two-lane, single carriageway) roads when they have been resurfaced. This is causing major issues with people driving down the centre of the road, it's quite common to loose half your lane to a car coming the other way. This is made worse by the midlands way of overtaking parked cars by barging your way into the lane of the on coming traffic rather than giving way as you are the overtaking vehicle and waiting for a gap.

What's the legislation regarding centre lanes? Documents on the Highways England websites suggests a "two lane road, not less than 5.5m width" should always have centre line markings, yet this isn't what the council is doing. My girlfriend had to mount the kerb at the weekend due to somebody way out of lane and I'm grumpy enough to pick them up on it.

[RSTurboPaul]

Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions is 'the definitive guide' to how to do things, I believe:

https://tsrgd.co.uk/


That said, removal of the centre lines can be done on the basis of increasing driver uncertainty and therefore encouraging slower speeds and greater responsibility by drivers, on the basis they can't just barrel down a marked lane and anyone else in it is 'in the wrong' therefore can be honked/shouted at.

Done properly, and driven properly, a 'naked' highway should encourage greater road user interaction and be safer, but sadly I think you are experiencing the general decline in driving standards in a microcosm.

[markyb_lcy]

“greater road user interaction” is about right if drivers are having to take action to avoid oncoming badly positioned traffic.

The idea that not having the lines makes drivers go slower and therefore everyone safer is yet another manifestation of the obsession with “speed kills”. It’s an idiotic ploy if they’re doing it for that purpose.

I rather suspect though, they simply decided not to spend the extra money.

Country is going to the dogs, a tell thee

[Cat]

There is no legislation per se. Chapter 5 of the Traffic Signs Manual provides guidance in section 2.2.

Cat

[Galveston]

markyb_lcy said:

“greater road user interaction” is about right if drivers are having to take action to avoid oncoming badly positioned traffic.

The idea that not having the lines makes drivers go slower and therefore everyone safer is yet another manifestation of the obsession with “speed kills”. It’s an idiotic ploy if they’re doing it for that purpose.

I rather suspect though, they simply decided not to spend the extra money.

Country is going to the dogs, a tell thee

I'd agree with you if we were talking about high speed roads, but for anything urban (as per the OP) interaction between road users - and drivers actually being encouraged to think - is exactly what we should have.

[hutchst]

Cat said:

There is no legislation per se. Chapter 5 of the Traffic Signs Manual provides guidance in section 2.2.

Cat

The legal obligations are summarised in the introductory sections of the Manual that you linked. However, legal duties aside, it might make an interesting case for civil liability if it was alleged to have contributed to an accident where a positive decision to ignore guidance is involved.

[BertBert]

RSTurboPaul said:

That said, removal of the centre lines can be done on the basis of increasing driver uncertainty and therefore encouraging slower speeds and greater responsibility by drivers, on the basis they can't just barrel down a marked lane and anyone else in it is 'in the wrong' therefore can be honked/shouted at.
Done properly, and driven properly, a 'naked' highway should encourage greater road user interaction and be safer, but sadly I think you are experiencing the general decline in driving standards in a microcosm.

Ah yes the old make the roads more dangerous to make them safer doublethink. And of course if it does cause the obvious chaos and carnage it's not a dengerous road, it's dangerous drivers.
We should get rid of the driver's airbag and put a spike on the wheel instead. That'll make everyone safer drivers.
Bert

[Riley Blue]

BertBert said:

RSTurboPaul said:

That said, removal of the centre lines can be done on the basis of increasing driver uncertainty and therefore encouraging slower speeds and greater responsibility by drivers, on the basis they can't just barrel down a marked lane and anyone else in it is 'in the wrong' therefore can be honked/shouted at.
Done properly, and driven properly, a 'naked' highway should encourage greater road user interaction and be safer, but sadly I think you are experiencing the general decline in driving standards in a microcosm.

Ah yes the old make the roads more dangerous to make them safer doublethink. And of course if it does cause the obvious chaos and carnage it's not a dengerous road, it's dangerous drivers.
We should get rid of the driver's airbag and put a spike on the wheel instead. That'll make everyone safer drivers.
Bert

The thing is though, it often works e.g. remove traffic lights from roundabouts and traffic flows more freely with greater interaction and cooperation between drivers.

Motorists often moan about too many restrictions and too much regulation. Here's an example of shifting responsibility for their own safety back on to drivers. If they subsequently cause chaos and carnage then yes, they are dangerous.

BTW - I drive a car without airbags and only fitted seat belts two years ago.

[markyb_lcy]

Galveston said:

I'd agree with you if we were talking about high speed roads, but for anything urban (as per the OP) interaction between road users - and drivers actually being encouraged to think - is exactly what we should have.

They didn't quite say urban, they said they lived in a town. Towns are usually of a mix of urban, semi/sub-urban and sometimes even rural roads. They did mention parked cars so that would suggest at least suburban, possibly urban to me.

That aside, I disagree with you. I think it's more important to have lane markings in these circumstances where there is generally more to think about (other traffic, pedestrians, more junctions etc.

By your rationale, would it be "Safer" to add a random pothole every 20 metres or so? That will increase "road-user interaction" (especially with parked cars too) and force drivers to think. Hey why not go a step further and have pop-up hazards coming out of the potholes for people to dodge?!

[BertBert]

Riley Blue said:

The thing is though, it often works e.g. remove traffic lights from roundabouts and traffic flows more freely with greater interaction and cooperation between drivers.

I don't think that's the same at all. Traffic lights at roundabouts are purely a (usually poor) flow-control mechanism. Roundabouts function perfectly well (safely) without them. There is no interaction and cooperation specifically needed on a normal roundabout.
Bert

[Derek Smith]

It was discovered that at T junctions in similar circumstances, those controlled by Give Way lines have fewer and less serious accidents than those with Stop lines. It is counter-intuitive of course, but there were tests conducted with Stop lines being removed and replaced by Give Way lines and, remarkably, they were proved to be safer.

Despite all the evidence to the contrary, locals would normally criticise the local roads authority if they changed a Stop line to Give Way. They, it seemed, knew better.

I haven't seen any research with regards to removing the centre line in single carriageway roads, but am aware that overregulation of traffic can cause accidents. Leaving a driver to think can mean the road being much safer.

[Riley Blue]

Streets where I live have just been top dressed and the road lining team have been out re-painting the lines.

We've noticed that they aren't exactly as before, the roadside parking bays are now wider by a couple of inches. This has made made the traffic lanes narrower so that it's not now possible to pass on-coming cars as readily, parked cars now being parked further into the road and approaching cars now being nearer the centre line. As a result, traffic speeds have dropped.

[speedking31]

Derek Smith said:

It was discovered that at T junctions in similar circumstances, those controlled by Give Way lines have fewer and less serious accidents than those with Stop lines. It is counter-intuitive of course, but there were tests conducted with Stop lines being removed and replaced by Give Way lines and, remarkably, they were proved to be safer.

Despite all the evidence to the contrary, locals would normally criticise the local roads authority if they changed a Stop line to Give Way. They, it seemed, knew better.

I haven't seen any research with regards to removing the centre line in single carriageway roads, but am aware that overregulation of traffic can cause accidents. Leaving a driver to think can mean the road being much safer.

Meanwhile, in another part of town, local authorities are deliberately obstructing the sight lines on the approach to roundabouts to effectively turn a Give Way into a STOP. Go figure.

[RSTurboPaul]

speedking31 said:

Derek Smith said:

It was discovered that at T junctions in similar circumstances, those controlled by Give Way lines have fewer and less serious accidents than those with Stop lines. It is counter-intuitive of course, but there were tests conducted with Stop lines being removed and replaced by Give Way lines and, remarkably, they were proved to be safer.

Despite all the evidence to the contrary, locals would normally criticise the local roads authority if they changed a Stop line to Give Way. They, it seemed, knew better.

I haven't seen any research with regards to removing the centre line in single carriageway roads, but am aware that overregulation of traffic can cause accidents. Leaving a driver to think can mean the road being much safer.

Meanwhile, in another part of town, local authorities are deliberately obstructing the sight lines on the approach to roundabouts to effectively turn a Give Way into a STOP. Go figure.

Yep, they have this in a town I visit once in a while. All it means is people look at the RAB before the signs start (if they can do so and have the sight-line), maintain the speed they are traveling at, and throw out the anchors if something is actually coming when they pass the last board just before the give way line and can now see the traffic.

Much safer than just letting people see what's coming and plan a slot into the circulating traffic...

Edited by RSTurboPaul on Friday 2nd August 13:34