Red-painted crossing

[streaky]

^^^^^

It's an aspect of the, "YOU are responsible for MY actions. I am NOT accountable for them" dictum that is much purveyed in the past years. Not one that resonates with me.

Streaky

[herewego]

No it isn't. It's just some kids going to school and they need some consideration. When they've raised the money there'll be a pelican or whatever and then the OP will have to stop and he'll wish he'd just given them more space so he could get on his way sooner.

[Arese]

herewego said:

No it isn't. It's just some kids going to school and they need some consideration. When they've raised the money there'll be a pelican or whatever and then the OP will have to stop and he'll wish he'd just given them more space so he could get on his way sooner.

If there was a formal crossing there then I would be more than happy to stop. If I stopped now, just because a parent and kid was stood at the road, and they began to cross and got mowed down by a vehicle coming the other way, I'd be partly to blame ,no?

[Engineer1]

They are a st piece of road engineering, why make a "crossing" that has no legal force, especially if it can be obscured, it makes a pedestrian feel they have a right to demand vehicles stop, and potentially causes problems for drivers as the car infront slams on the anchors to stop for the none crossing. Atleast with lights or a "zebra" crossing there is a warning of its existence and an expectation to have to stop.

[TonyRPH]

herewego said:

TonyRPH said:

I find it strange how the responsibility of a pedestrian crossing the road now appears to fall on the motorist rather than the pedestrian.

This seems to be the new way forward in the absence of proper pedestrian education, and the car hostile society we Britons find ourselves a part of.

I don't think I would call a country with 30 odd million cars hostile to the car. Motorists have always had to take care of pedestrians simply because of the vulnerability. I don't see any problem with this. You give pedestrians room to make a mistake and you all get home for tea.

Perhaps I phrased that badly. It certainly wasn't meant to imply that we as citizens were hostile to the car.

[herewego]

TonyRPH said:

herewego said:

TonyRPH said:

I find it strange how the responsibility of a pedestrian crossing the road now appears to fall on the motorist rather than the pedestrian.

This seems to be the new way forward in the absence of proper pedestrian education, and the car hostile society we Britons find ourselves a part of.

I don't think I would call a country with 30 odd million cars hostile to the car. Motorists have always had to take care of pedestrians simply because of the vulnerability. I don't see any problem with this. You give pedestrians room to make a mistake and you all get home for tea.

Perhaps I phrased that badly. It certainly wasn't meant to imply that we as citizens were hostile to the car.

It's my fault, I was perhaps unwittingly being facetious. I knew what you meant, but can you see from some of the responses that people are not prepared to give way to the kids crossing the road until there's a pelican crossing forcing them to stop. Then they'll complain, as you did, that the motorist is downtrodden by all these controls.

[TonyRPH]

I certainly don't feel downtrodden by (official) pedestrian crossings.

However, it would appear that it's quite commonplace for pedestrians to simply assume that the presence of a crossing - and I'm specifically referring to zebra crossings here - means that they can simply wander straight into the road without even looking!

Then, if they are knocked over by a cyclist or passing car, the cyclist/motorist are immediately assumed to be at fault.

There is a lack of common sense I'm afraid.

I'm certainly not implying that pedestrians are always in the wrong - but surely before taking that step into the path of moving traffic, pedestrians should at least cast a cursory glance each way?

[herewego]

TonyRPH said:

I certainly don't feel downtrodden by (official) pedestrian crossings.

However, it would appear that it's quite commonplace for pedestrians to simply assume that the presence of a crossing - and I'm specifically referring to zebra crossings here - means that they can simply wander straight into the road without even looking!

Then, if they are knocked over by a cyclist or passing car, the cyclist/motorist are immediately assumed to be at fault.

There is a lack of common sense I'm afraid.

I'm certainly not implying that pedestrians are always in the wrong - but surely before taking that step into the path of moving traffic, pedestrians should at least cast a cursory glance each way?

Of course pedestrians should look after themselves by checking that cars are stopping for them. If a ped approaches a zebra crossing then I stop and no one has ever caused me any problem on a zebra as far as I remember, although a lollipop lady took exception to me once.
Drivers are not always assumed to be at fault. I saw a cop show a little while ago in which a lady driver had clipped a young lad crossing the road and put him in hospital. The cop said something like "It's wasn't your fault, the lad shouldn't have run across the road" and off she toddled. In an earlier accident investigation programme a driver had put two blokes in hospital by hitting them on a country road and the cops said "Well I can understand your explanation that one had jumped one way and the other had jumped the other way so you had no choice but to hit them both". No charge.

[Arese]

Well I've had a reply to my email from 'Road Safety Cheshire East':

Road Safety Cheshire East said:

Hello

Thank you for your message.

I will have a word with the police community support officers who cover this area and suggest that we do some education in the surrounding schools warning the children about the fact that the red area isn't a designated safer crossing place.

Not sure that will work.

[oldsoak]

Arese said:

Well I've had a reply to my email from 'Road Safety Cheshire East':

Road Safety Cheshire East said:

Hello

Thank you for your message.

I will have a word with the police community support officers who cover this area and suggest that we do some education in the surrounding schools warning the children about the fact that the red area isn't a designated safer crossing place.

Not sure that will work.

It probably won't, so the next thing to happen will be speed humps and chicanes installed as well as designating the area a 20mph zone. Unfortunately this extra street furniture isn't the sort that can be taken away when school isn't open so motorists will just have to grin and bear it...again.

[Parrot of Doom]

Not only that, but guess where the attention of the road user is focussed when traversing speed humps...

[Arese]

For around a mile before this area, there are speed bumps and chicane-type arrangements (which do nothing but cause traffic to back up).

[saaby93]

herewego said:

. I knew what you meant, but can you see from some of the responses that people are not prepared to give way to the kids crossing the road until there's a pelican crossing forcing them to stop.

pelican crossings dont force people to stop

[herewego]

saaby93 said:

herewego said:

. I knew what you meant, but can you see from some of the responses that people are not prepared to give way to the kids crossing the road until there's a pelican crossing forcing them to stop.

pelican crossings dont force people to stop

Really? You mean you think there should be physical barriers?

[saaby93]

herewego said:

saaby93 said:

herewego said:

. I knew what you meant, but can you see from some of the responses that people are not prepared to give way to the kids crossing the road until there's a pelican crossing forcing them to stop.

pelican crossings dont force people to stop

Really? You mean you think there should be physical barriers?

Not really, just a little knowledge that when the green man comes on, there's actually nothing thats stopped the traffic.
Similarly when the green traffic light comes on there's nothing stopping a pedestrian appearing in the road

[mph1977]

oldsoak said:

Arese said:

Spot on Streaky, that is my concern.

I can only assume that the school have painted this on the road.

It is a coloured road surface...a very expensive coloured road surface and it will have been laid by the local authority/council ...it is those idiots you want to be writing to not the school.

it sounds like a speed cushion which is being used as a crossing ... is there ( or should there be but they can't recruit one ) a 'lollipop operative' for the school