Rule 130 - Hatched areas with a broken line

[davepoth]

IIRC it can be considered like a very wide dotted line down the middle of the road. There's another legal document to look at, the TSRGD, which lays down the law on how the markings and signs are supposed to be applied. The one we want is diagram 1040, on page 215.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploa...

What it says there is:

"Diagram 1040
Part of the carriageway which vehicular traffic should not enter unless it is seen by the driver to be safe to do so"

We can also look at the Traffic Signs Manual Chapter 5, page 23.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploa...

It says there:

"4.51 Diagram 1040 (figure 4-10) is intended to
divide opposing flows of traffic on two-way roads. It
may be used on the approach to refuges as a more
emphatic alternative to the warning line, or to lead
into diagram 1040.2. Where road studs are used,
they must be white, and should be uni-directional. In
diagrams 1040 and 1040.2, one of the boundary
lines is omitted when the marking is placed alongside
diagram 1049 delineating a bus or cycle lane.

4.52 Diagram 1040.2 (figure 4-11) may be used to
separate opposing flows of traffic where the warning
line is considered insufficient at hazards such as a
bend or the brow of a hill. Unless this marking starts
at a physical obstruction, e.g. a refuge, it should
always be preceded by the tapered marking to
diagram 1040. See paras 7.2 to 7.12 for guidance on
the use of hatched markings at a road junction."

So it's fine to go across if safe but it's supposed to designate a higher risk than the normal warning line.

[Blakewater]

It can often be found where there used to be a central "suicide lane" for traffic in both lanes to overtake with no solid white line on either side.

Here in August 2015 you can see the hatched area:

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.6795141,-2.81714...

In September 2014 it was one of the last places in the North West area to still have a stretch of road with this kind of central overtaking lane.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.6795245,-2.81707...

There were still the cross hatchings around the junction on the brow of the hill but the interpretation of how to use the road markings now errs much more on the side of caution than it used to.

[blank]

Where has the rule for diagonal lines bordered by a solid line gone?

Are they now just treated as normal solid lines as I'm sure they used to be something between a "should not" and a "must not"?

Note I'm asking about diagonal hatchings not chevrons.

[NuddyRap]

I agree with the general consensus here regarding broken whites and what constitutes necessary. With my step-father being a now retired police grade 1 advanced driver I've benefited from just some of his experience and as a result I've never hesitated to use that space, or any vacant turn lanes marked as such when necessary to perform an overtake. So far as he is concerned, it's completely fine to do that.

Regarding the solid whites, it's my understanding that spaces containing diagonal lines bordered by a solid white line are only to be used in exceptional circumstances (Emergencies, or when directed to [e.g, by emergency service personnel or roadworks]) and as such you should act as you would over any other solid white lane divisional marking.

[johnao]

NuddyRap said:

Regarding the solid whites, it's my understanding that spaces containing diagonal lines bordered by a solid white line are only to be used in exceptional circumstances (Emergencies, or when directed to [e.g, by emergency service personnel or roadworks]) and as such you should act as you would over any other solid white lane divisional marking.

Don't forget that if the white lines that border the diagonal lines (not talking about chevrons) are no more than 4 feet (1.2 metres) apart, then the whole lot MUST be treated as a solid white line system.

[Blakewater]

For a bit of variety you can have broken lines on one side of the cross hatchings and double white lines on the other, so you can go into the cross hatchings from the broken line side but not over the double white lines at the opposite side, as shown here.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.8715377,-2.75775...

[Red Devil]

johnao said:

NuddyRap said:

Regarding the solid whites, it's my understanding that spaces containing diagonal lines bordered by a solid white line are only to be used in exceptional circumstances (Emergencies, or when directed to [e.g, by emergency service personnel or roadworks]) and as such you should act as you would over any other solid white lane divisional marking.

Don't forget that if the white lines that border the diagonal lines (not talking about chevrons) are no more than 4 feet (1.2 metres) apart, then the whole lot MUST be treated as a solid white line system.

I can find no such regulation. A link to your source please.

TSRGD diagram 1040.2 specifies the permitted lateral min/max dimensions in mm between the broken border lines: 800/8000. Outwith those figures they will be non-compliant.

[johnao]

Red Devil said:

I can find no such regulation. A link to your source please.

TSRGD diagram 1040.2 specifies the permitted lateral min/max dimensions in mm between the broken border lines: 800/8000. Outwith those figures they will be non-compliant.

TSRGD Chapter 5, Page 31, diag 1013.1 - [max distance between solid white lines enclosing a hatched area is 1200mm]

See also TSRGD Chapter 5, Page 32, para 5.9 [see penultimate sentence]

[Vaux]

blank said:

Where has the rule for diagonal lines bordered by a solid line gone?

Are they now just treated as normal solid lines as I'm sure they used to be something between a "should not" and a "must not"?

Note I'm asking about diagonal hatchings not chevrons.

I think it's incorporated in Rule 165 prohibiting overtaking. 2004 HC said (Rule 109) - "...you should not enter it except in an emergency."

[Red Devil]

johnao said:

Red Devil said:

I can find no such regulation. A link to your source please.

TSRGD diagram 1040.2 specifies the permitted lateral min/max dimensions in mm between the broken border lines: 800/8000. Outwith those figures they will be non-compliant.

TSRGD Chapter 5, Page 31, diag 1013.1 - [max distance between solid white lines enclosing a hatched area is 1200mm]

See also TSRGD Chapter 5, Page 32, para 5.9 [see penultimate sentence]

Ah, ISWYM. We are talking at cross purposes. See below.

johnao said:

Don't forget that if the white lines that border the diagonal lines (not talking about chevrons) are no more than 4 feet (1.2 metres) apart, then the whole lot MUST be treated as a solid white line system.

Diagram 1013.1 is specific to a system of double white lines which everyone knows you can't cross. Had you referred to it originally there would have been no misunderstanding on my part.

[johnao]

Red Devil said:

Ah, ISWYM. We are talking at cross purposes. See below.

johnao said:

Don't forget that if the white lines that border the diagonal lines (not talking about chevrons) are no more than 4 feet (1.2 metres) apart, then the whole lot MUST be treated as a solid white line system.

Diagram 1013.1 is specific to a system of double white lines which everyone knows you can't cross. Had you referred to it originally there would have been no misunderstanding on my part.

I can't see what the problem was. We were discussing hatched areas, of undefined size, enclosed by solid white lines. The general perception is that these areas should only be entered in the case of an emergency, but that there is no specific offence committed by entering an area so designated. I was merely pointing out that if the diagonal hatched area is less than 1.2 metres wide, and enclosed with solid white lines, then it becomes a MUST NOT enter, because the hatched area is now designated as part of a double white line system. That was all. Hope that helps.

[mph999]

I'll overtake on broken hatchings - fact as I leave Thatcham on the A4, there is a nice long stretch which is the only safe overtaking opportunity for several miles. I'll wait till I've past the junction on the left, and providing there is nothing coming (or it's far enough away), and the lay by on the right is empty, or if the lorries that tend to use it have the curtains drawn in the cab, I'll overtake. If it's a multiple vehicle overtake I'll go all the way across to the other side, as opposed to sitting in the hatching (which is easily a cars width wide). As it's a popular overtaking spot it's pretty free from any debris.

[anonymous-user]

Just to revive this thread for a second, a road I frequently use is the A37 between Bristol and Yeovil and on one uphill section there is a crawler type lane for overtaking slow traffic up the hill. It's an NSL road.



Towards the end of the crawler lane you have the usual move left arrows and after the end of the lane there is a red hatched area surrounded by broken white lines on my side which stays the entire way round the corner you can vaguely see in the photo below. This is a corner which looks a little sharper than it really is (can be taken at a shade under the NSL really while maintaining the ability to stop in the distance I can see...etc.) and as a result you get Grandma thinking she needs to slow right down to 30/40.



My question is, say that I (hypothetically of course...) overtook Grandma on the chevrons (staying on the chevrons and not moving into oncoming traffic due to the solid line and the fact that doing that would be suicide), noting that even with the poor surface it is still possible to overtake someone going so slowly safely, is this legal? It is necessary that I enter them to carry out the overtake within the speed limit, and it is safe, so I'd assume that plod shouldn't have a problem with it (although it may warrant indecent gestures from Grandma).

[Dr Jekyll]

Jbeale96 said:

My question is, say that I (hypothetically of course...) overtook Grandma on the chevrons (staying on the chevrons and not moving into oncoming traffic due to the solid line and the fact that doing that would be suicide), noting that even with the poor surface it is still possible to overtake someone going so slowly safely, is this legal? It is necessary that I enter them to carry out the overtake within the speed limit, and it is safe, so I'd assume that plod shouldn't have a problem with it (although it may warrant indecent gestures from Grandma).

Perfectly legal.

[S. Gonzales Esq.]

There's something very similar on the A38 approaching Bristol Airport from the South. I regard it as a duty to sweep the surface occasionally.

[anonymous-user]

S. Gonzales Esq. said:

There's something very similar on the A38 approaching Bristol Airport from the South. I regard it as a duty to sweep the surface occasionally.

How very noble!

[anonymous-user]

Dr Jekyll said:

Jbeale96 said:

My question is, say that I (hypothetically of course...) overtook Grandma on the chevrons (staying on the chevrons and not moving into oncoming traffic due to the solid line and the fact that doing that would be suicide), noting that even with the poor surface it is still possible to overtake someone going so slowly safely, is this legal? It is necessary that I enter them to carry out the overtake within the speed limit, and it is safe, so I'd assume that plod shouldn't have a problem with it (although it may warrant indecent gestures from Grandma).

Perfectly legal.

Thought so, cheers.

[davepoth]

Jbeale96 said:

S. Gonzales Esq. said:

There's something very similar on the A38 approaching Bristol Airport from the South. I regard it as a duty to sweep the surface occasionally.

How very noble!

It does get very gritty, I've found.

[NuddyRap]

Jbeale96 said:

Towards the end of the crawler lane you have the usual move left arrows and after the end of the lane there is a red hatched area surrounded by broken white lines on my side which stays the entire way round the corner you can vaguely see in the photo below. This is a corner which looks a little sharper than it really is (can be taken at a shade under the NSL really while maintaining the ability to stop in the distance I can see...etc.) and as a result you get Grandma thinking she needs to slow right down to 30/40.



My question is, say that I (hypothetically of course...) overtook Grandma on the chevrons (staying on the chevrons and not moving into oncoming traffic due to the solid line and the fact that doing that would be suicide), noting that even with the poor surface it is still possible to overtake someone going so slowly safely, is this legal? It is necessary that I enter them to carry out the overtake within the speed limit, and it is safe, so I'd assume that plod shouldn't have a problem with it (although it may warrant indecent gestures from Grandma).

That red bit, on your side of the road, = go time.

[MaxSo]

davepoth said:

IIRC it can be considered like a very wide dotted line down the middle of the road. There's another legal document to look at, the TSRGD, which lays down the law on how the markings and signs are supposed to be applied. The one we want is diagram 1040, on page 215.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploa...

What it says there is:

"Diagram 1040
Part of the carriageway which vehicular traffic should not enter unless it is seen by the driver to be safe to do so"

We can also look at the Traffic Signs Manual Chapter 5, page 23.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploa...

It says there:

"4.51 Diagram 1040 (figure 4-10) is intended to
divide opposing flows of traffic on two-way roads. It
may be used on the approach to refuges as a more
emphatic alternative to the warning line, or to lead
into diagram 1040.2. Where road studs are used,
they must be white, and should be uni-directional. In
diagrams 1040 and 1040.2, one of the boundary
lines is omitted when the marking is placed alongside
diagram 1049 delineating a bus or cycle lane.

4.52 Diagram 1040.2 (figure 4-11) may be used to
separate opposing flows of traffic where the warning
line is considered insufficient at hazards such as a
bend or the brow of a hill. Unless this marking starts
at a physical obstruction, e.g. a refuge, it should
always be preceded by the tapered marking to
diagram 1040. See paras 7.2 to 7.12 for guidance on
the use of hatched markings at a road junction."

So it's fine to go across if safe but it's supposed to designate a higher risk than the normal warning line.

Resurrection...

This "safe to do so" and "necessary" business is a load of tosh to my mind.

Surely no bit of any road should be used unless it it safe and necessary to do so!! (Using the generally accepted interpretation of "necessary" - ie if you have decided to overtake and some of the width of road you need to safely get past happens to be hatched - so it becomes necessary to enter the hatched area).

The implication is that people are driving around on bits on unhatched road despite it not being safe and necessary to do so.

The hatching may, arguably, serve a useful purpose in separating traffic, but the safe and necessary conditions limiting the use of hatched areas are meaningless.

Road markings that lead to confusion and differences of opinion about what they mean are, quite clearly, bad road markings.