CROSSING PLACES

Evening Post, Volume CXXIII, Issue 147, 23 June 1937, Page 12

CROSSING PLACES

TWO-SIDED BARGAIN

LIGHTS AND NO LIGHTS

RIGHT-OF-WAY RULES

From correspondents' letters upon the subject of pedestrian crossing places it is clear that there is a good deal of misconception as to what are the obligations upon the driver on one hand and the pedestrian on the other, with the consequence that each blames the other and no one gets any further forward. The rules are in fact quite straight ahead and simple.

Astonishing though it may be quite a number of people have asked why are the new lanes marked with diagonal lines sloping either way from the centre of the road. This "herringbone" design has been adopted, first because it makes the lanes more conspicuous, so that neither the pedestrian nor the motorist will have the excuse that he or she did not see them, and, secondly, that the contrasting angles of the cross lines and the halfway vertical marking clearly divide the roadway into two lanes. There is no hidden meaning in these workings. The general regulation governing the use of the herringbone crossings is that if a pedestrian is using such a crossing properly, that is, walking over at a reasonable pace, the motorist must give him the right of way. EXCEPTION TO THE RULE. There is another clause which has led to a good deal of misunderstanding and exchange of expressions of mutual ill-will between walkers and drivers. This clause says that at intersections or other points where traffic is being directed by points officers or by light signals the general rule is overridden and that motorists' and pedestrians must both observe the signals and directions of. the pointsmen or the lights. The marked crossings over Whitmore Street, at the Central Library, the Wakefield-Cuba Streets intersection, or over Jervois Quay, near the Fire Station, normally have no officer control and so the general rule, applies: drivers are supposed to give the right of way to pedestrians who are using the lanes in a reasonable way. At Courtenay Place, the Taranaki and Cuba Street intersection, the corner of Willis and Manners Streets, and the Bank of I>Jew Zealand corner either traffic officers or lights control the flow of traffic during the.greater part of the day, and at such points the pedestrian must follow the signals just as the motorist does. He cannot barge across the crossing place irrespective of the traffic signals. This is the first point which the traffic inspectors are dealing with in an attempt to educate drivers and walkers in sensible road practice, and yesterday they were stationed at various intersections and held back pedestrians who started across the roadway without regard to traffic signals from pointsmen or lights. The only satisfactory crossing place from the point of view of both drivers and walkers is across Jervois Quay to and from the Queen's Wharf gates. Here the traffic is very heavy and generally fast, but - the light control is positive and when traffic is stopped the pedestrian has a clear way in front of him. He is definitely catered for, and at that point he can see clearly that provision is made for him. That is not so at other main street intersections for traffic may, at the change of the light, go straight ahead or turn left or right, and the light signal cycles are fixed with more regard for vehicular flow than for pedestrians. Traffic officers, too, start and stop traffic flow with more regard for vehicles than for walkers, except whera elderly people and women with children are waiting to cross. SINGLY, OB IN GROUPS? For this pedestrians themselves are largely to blame, for it is not possible for a points officer to hold up a line of cars for each of six pedestrians in turn, but if these six pedestrians stood at the kerb waiting for a signal for them to start across together they would have some greater claim to the notice of the officer. If, at an intersection where there are lights they deliberately walk against the signals they are asking for trouble, except that, as suggested above, the light cycles at some intersections are not reasonably satisfactory from the pedestrian's point of view. To return to the general rule that at .marked crossing places where there are no lights or manual control the pedestrian has the right of way: here the regulation is a farce, for neither driver nor walker observes it. If it is to remain a farce.then the lines may as well be painted out, but if it is to be given a real meaning, as one way of making city streets not only safer, but more comfortable for people in cars and people on foot, then both parties to the bargain will have to take their parts fairly. No greater safety and no greater street comfort will be had as a result of pedestrians abusing drivers and drivers characterising pedestrians as all below standard mentality. The pedestrian must meet his obligations by using the marked • crossings and must follow traffic directions, just as the motorist must carry out his side of the road safety plan. Since the crossing regulations have been given publicity there has been a noticeable improvement in their observance, but there is still a long way to go, and the remaining distance will be the more quickly covered when drivers and walkers stop glaring and swearing at each other and recognise that there is a fair way out of danger for both of them.