Clarification of *these* lines

[Hiijinx]

Have seen similar looking threads regarding this issue but was not sure if these were the lines in question or not.



Above is a photo of the same stretch of road in 2009 and again in 2012 - as seen it used to be clear cut overtaking allowed, but since then has changed to these broken white lines filled with hash markings.

The highway code quotes:

130

Areas of white diagonal stripes or chevrons painted on the road. These are to separate traffic lanes or to protect traffic turning right.

if the area is bordered by a broken white line, you should not enter the area unless it is necessary and you can see that it is safe to do so
if the area is marked with chevrons and bordered by solid white lines you MUST NOT enter it except in an emergency

If these are the correct lines mentioned above, why do they cover the whole stretch of road when turn rights are few and far between - I am wondering as to why else they are there, is it to discourage people overtaking who are not 100% sure on the law such as me?
The amount of times I have been behind Mr 40mph - but not sure of the legality. Is my overtake "necessary" ?

What would you do when it was safe to do so and would you do it again if you had a police car behind you?

(Very much interested in anyone familiar on this route, what is your approach on this road? Steyning Road, A283)

[martine]

The hatched area is there to make the road look narrower than it is to encourage drivers to keep their speed down...it's quite legal to use the area to overtake if it's safe.

Here's another one...
here

It's a very wide road but has a 40 limit.

[Mr Cholmondeley-Warner]

No matter what the colour, shape, bumpiness or other characteristics of areas such as those, there's only one question which you need ask yourself - "is the line bordering it solid or broken?" *. If it's broken, you can cross it. Obviously, it's not there just because they had some white paint left over, it's to focus your mind a little, so look out for right turns, entrances, laybys, narrowing of the road (apart from that caused by the hatchings), debris in the central area which builds up because people don't tend to go in there etc. Other than that, fill your boots!

* you could argue you should also look to see if the markings are diagonal lines or chevrons, but chevrons should only occur inside solid lines, so question 1 still applies

[GJD]

I am wondering as to why else they are there, is it to discourage people overtaking who are not 100% sure on the law such as me?

Could be, I guess. The hatchings also provide some lateral separation between the opposing traffic.

The amount of times I have been behind Mr 40mph - but not sure of the legality. Is my overtake "necessary" ?

I don't know why the word 'necessary' is in the highway code. It's only effect seems to be to add confusion (perhaps that is why it's there). Does it mean that you should ask yourself, "is the overtake necessary?", or "in order to overtake, is entering the hatching necessary?". I tend to think the latter, for two reasons: firstly, like you I've no idea how to assess whether any overtake is 'necessary', and secondly because the law - as distinct from the highway code - sheds some light on the matter. See diagram 1040.2.

The description for a hatched area with a broken boundary says "Length of road along which drivers should not overtake by passing through the marking unless it is seen by the driver to be safe to do so". Since one obviously shouldn't cross any centre line to overtake unless one has seen that it is safe to do so, I treat these hatchings the same as any other broken centre line when it comes to overtaking.

As Mr C-W says, do look out for the hazards that the hatchings might be trying to alert you to. And also, bear in mind that the hatched area itself isn't driven on very often and can accumulate gravel and other detritus which might might grip a bit interesting just as you are accelerating to overtake. If the surface looks suspect, you might consider crossing the hatchings completely, into the other lane.

What would you do when it was safe to do so and would you do it again if you had a police car behind you?

I'd quite happily enter or cross the marking to overtake and I wouldn't be put off by a police car behind.

[dombooth]

http://goo.gl/maps/DgAkV

There's one local to me that's legal for overtakes (done it).

http://goo.gl/maps/1g1l5 - How about these then? Since the inside lines touch the outsides is it right/legally enforceable etc?

Dom

[GJD]

http://goo.gl/maps/1g1l5 - How about these then? Since the inside lines touch the outsides is it right/legally enforceable etc?

If it's no wider than 1.2m, that's diagram 1013.1 B, which is a wider variation of, and has the same meaning as a solid double white line.

[michael769]

My view of the purpose word "necessary" is to get across the idea that one should not wander into the area without having a good reason to do so.

So when overtaking entering is indeed necessary (in order to complete the overtake), on the other hand wandering into the area whilst distracted by fiddling with one's CD player is not.

[7db]

I agree with GJD - the second of dombooth's images is a DWL system. Just look at the end in case you're in doubt.

I take "necessary" to mean that if there's a crash you'll have to explain why you were there and what you did to check it was safe for you to be there. It's a totally different meaning of necessary from eating the cabin boy when you're a bit peckish.

[Big Err]

I am wondering as to why else they are there, is it to discourage people overtaking who are not 100% sure on the law such as me?

I hate these arrangements, they narrow the lanes, pushing the traffic closer to the edge of the road where there is a higher probability of debris and puddles, and removes any safety zone for cyclists or pedestrians. Meanwhile removing traffic from that central metre or so will result in a build up of debris that will become airborne if someone enters that area.

I've never experienced or seen any research that conclusively says it reduces speeds in free flow conditions, and by using the marking to inhibit overtakes, is the rest of the route similarly marked? Would the end of that marking signify an overtaking opportunity?

I'd prefer lane narrowing by introducing hard strips that provide some protection to the verge/footway and allow extra room in the channel for surface water run off. Stick to the good old hazard and standard centre line markings and save the hatching for ghost islands on junctions.

[PeterE]

Some have turn-in arrows, suggesting that the designers are expecting drivers to cross the hatched area to overtake.

[MGF]

...

If these are the correct lines mentioned above, why do they cover the whole stretch of road when turn rights are few and far between - I am wondering as to why else they are there, is it to discourage people overtaking who are not 100% sure on the law such as me?

...The description for a hatched area with a broken boundary says "Length of road along which drivers should not overtake by passing through the marking unless it is seen by the driver to be safe to do so". Since one obviously shouldn't cross any centre line to overtake unless one has seen that it is safe to do so, I treat these hatchings the same as any other broken centre line when it comes to overtaking.

Theseparallel broken lines are confusing but GJD has the correct definition.

'Necessary' isn't used in the definition and the lines simply warn one to be careful when overtaking, which, as GJD notes, is a prerequisite for an overtake in any situation.

[michael769]

Some have turn-in arrows, suggesting that the designers are expecting drivers to cross the hatched area to overtake.

The turn in arrows are mandatory where a DWL system is about to start.

[7db]

Unless there's an island with 610 keep left anchoring them.

[crr003]

http://goo.gl/maps/1g1l5 - How about these then? Since the inside lines touch the outsides is it right/legally enforceable etc?

If it's no wider than 1.2m, that's diagram 1013.1 B, which is a wider variation of, and has the same meaning as a solid double white line.

Is there any variation allowed on the 1200mm in practice, or is the 1200 an absolute maximum?

[Big Err]

Is there any variation allowed on the 1200mm in practice, or is the 1200 an absolute maximum?

To be in accordance with the regulations they must conform with the diagram. If they are wider than the measurement given (allowing for tolerances) they do not conform and are therefore technically not enforceable.