Two 'lanes' into one...? Nearly an accident...!

Honest John Back Room » Motoring discussion
View Threaded
Fri 5 Feb 2016 10:39
Two 'lanes' into one...? Nearly an accident...! - Rossd01
Hi all,

First post here so firstly...hi! I am wondering if you can help with a slight issue that i faced today with merging lanes - its happened once previously, so figure it would be best to iron it out once and for all!

On driving in rush hour traffic this morning, the situation was:

- a residential street, flats on either side with rows of local shops beneath the flats.
- before the rows of shops begin, the street is 2 lanes at each side and the markings dividing the lanes (NOT the central divide between oncoming traffic - that remains) disappear during the rows of shops. Basically, to the untrained eye, the shopping area section looks to have two very wide lanes seperated by the central painted line. After the shopping area, the markings appear again, showing two lanes going forward and two lanes which are oncoming.
- during this shopping area, there are single yellow lines and parking bays which basically use up the outside lane on each side. Crucially, these bays do not allow parking during rush hour to ease traffic flow (i've seen vehicles get ticketed)....i assume this is why the lane markings change.

So, what happened this morning is there is a big line of cars on the inside lane, with none attempting to drive next to the yellow line. To me, that completely defeats the purpose of having these traffic restrictions in place, and they were acting as if the inside 'lane' was a no go area. Now granted, sometimes people have partially merged into this lane, sitting in the middle (yeah, why not!) or there are illegally parked cars, so it's not always completely clear. But, today it was clear for the full length so I drive up this lane, probably much to the annoyance of those waiting like sheep in the inside lane, so much so that as traffic progresses forward and approaches the two lane markings again, someone merges from my right, nearly causing an accident...i get out the car, all manner of profanity ensues. On their part, merging without indicating and to nearly deliberatly cause an accident because they are annoyed was possibly one of the worst pieces of driving I have ever seen (thereby why i had to get out the car).

So, my question is - how is this section of road to be treated? If i am wrong, i will put my hands up and say, absolutely. What i will say is i drive efficently, i do not hesitate, i value safety, and i always pay attention - my driving record should ahow this i.e. 15 years, no accidents, no speeding tickets, nothing.

The option is its two lanes, which makes total sense during rush hour and supports why these traffic restrictions are in place for parking, or its one lane with totally pointless traffic restrictions.

Whats your thoughts folks?

Edited by Rossd01 on 05/02/2016 at 10:49

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Fri 5 Feb 2016 11:04
Two 'lanes' into one...? Nearly an accident...! - FP

"Inside/outside"? I'm confused. In the UK the extreme left is the inside. Yellow lines are on the inside.

The situation is a grey area. Sometimes two lanes are clearly marked, sometimes there's not quite enough room for two and the markings disappear. There's no clear right of way and if you drive up alongside a stationary queue you should expect to give way at some point. But it is clear the other driver didn't look or signal. However, if there had been a collision, I'm positive the insurance companies would call it 50:50 and if the police were involved and decided to prosecute they might well charge both you and the other driver with careless driving.

"i get out the car, all manner of profanity ensues. On their part, merging without indicating and to nearly deliberatly cause an accident because they are annoyed was possibly one of the worst pieces of driving I have ever seen (thereby why i had to get out the car)."

No - you did not HAVE to get out of the car and by doing so you raised the heat. As soon as someone does that, it looks like road-rage. Nor can you impute "nearly deliberately... because they are annoyed" to the other driver - you do not know the workings of their mind.

Edited by FP on 05/02/2016 at 11:11

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Fri 5 Feb 2016 11:09
Two 'lanes' into one...? Nearly an accident...! - RobJP

Without seeing the actual stretch of road involved, it's impossible to say. You may be able to find a picture of the road on Google Earth 'street-level' view, and you could post a link to such a picture on here.

However, you would be in the wrong for getting out and 'all manner of profanities' ensuing. In no way you 'HAD' to get out of the car. Nobody forced you to do so.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Fri 5 Feb 2016 11:25
Two 'lanes' into one...? Nearly an accident...! - Rossd01
Hi folks,

Thanks fot the quick replies! Didn't expect that, i appreciate it.

Sorry - i was almost confusing myself re inside/outside lanes, fully aware of their designation, i think i got my words mixed up. That said, i think you guys got the general gist.

Ok, that sort of clarifies that - i would agree with the police assigning 50% fault either way if they as an observer looked at the evidence, though all being said i wouldn't exactly be happy as i was placed in that situation as a result of the merging car, which merged not slightly ahead of me (say to clip my nose) but literally alongside me...had i not hit the brakes, i would have been fully sandwiched between the other car and the kerb. The big question was whether i was allowed to be in that lane to begin with - i guess its circumstancial and the jurys still out.

Also, getting out of the car - first time that has ever happened, and for the record i was the one that didn't use profanities...the words that came out of her mouth were atrocious. It was one of the worst pieces of driving i have ever seen.

Ill see if i can find a photo and post it!

Edited by Rossd01 on 05/02/2016 at 11:27

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Fri 5 Feb 2016 12:01
Two 'lanes' into one...? Nearly an accident...! - Rossd01

Hi again folks,

Ok, here's a photo - sorry, not googles best attempt (part of the road was also obscured by the flats themselves including shading on a rare sunny day) but its the general gist of whats going on:

http://s13.postimg.org/6w2vnv0jb/screenshot_129.jpg

The cars are waiting in line at traffic lights, evidently its non rush hour as there are parked cars on the single yellow lines to the left. During rush hours, cars cannot park here and this is basically the 'lane' that i was in.

Not to skew opinions, but i believe there is more than enough room for 2 cars and the traffic restrictsions support that to ease traffic flow during congested times. Or, everyone just waits in a line with no parked cars to their left...

Edited by Rossd01 on 05/02/2016 at 12:10

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Fri 5 Feb 2016 12:18
Two 'lanes' into one...? Nearly an accident...! - RobJP

Having had a look at the picture, it appears (to me) blatantly obvious that there is one lane of traffic in each direction. The parking areas, whether in use or not, are not 'running lanes'.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Fri 5 Feb 2016 12:22
Two 'lanes' into one...? Nearly an accident...! - slkfanboy

There is no sign in your photo of the two lanes, I asume that they are outside the of the photo.

My take on this is that it is simply a two lanes that changes into a single lane section then back again into a two lanes.

The action of driving though the parking bays is infact over taking on the wrong side.

The traffic is correctly avoiding the parking bays in case some parks.

I sure from my discription you can decide who is wright/wrong IMHO.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Fri 5 Feb 2016 12:31
Two 'lanes' into one...? Nearly an accident...! - Rossd01

Thanks again folks,

Ok, that helps in getting somewhere to clarify this. Again, the photo is non-rush hour which is why there are parked cars. Where the lanes are clearly defined are further along the road, obscured by the flats.

So...let me get this straight...its looking like the consensus here (which again, i'm greatful for your input) is that it is one lane in each direction, all be it fairly wide lanes that COULD take 2 cars easily if you consider the distance to the kerb.

Why would there be parking restrictions to prohibit parking at the kerbs if these areas cannot be used during rush hour (sign posted as between 7.30am-9.30am AND 4.30pm-6.30pm) and you're still restricted to same side of the 'lane'? If the situation is as the above, it just seems to contradict the need for parking restrictions.

In the morning, i've seen parking attendants ticket a plethora of cars parked on these single yellow lines (say, parked from the previous night or simply just nipping into the shop to get their morning rolls) but yet the above alludes to this being an area of the road that can never be used during rush hour anyways...?

Edited by Rossd01 on 05/02/2016 at 12:35

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Fri 5 Feb 2016 12:39
Two 'lanes' into one...? Nearly an accident...! - RobJP

The parking restrictions in rush hour are to ensure the free flow of traffic. NOT to 'create' an extra lane.

Else there would be a lot of congestion with people driving/reversing into spaces, maneuvering, waiting for a minute while someone pulled out of a space, etc.

EDIT : just seen the first line on your first post. Welcome and hi too !

Edited by RobJP on 05/02/2016 at 12:40

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Fri 5 Feb 2016 12:44
Two 'lanes' into one...? Nearly an accident...! - nailit

Ross, if you think the markings are bad, have a read of the topic on here 'insanity'!

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Fri 5 Feb 2016 13:16
Two 'lanes' into one...? Nearly an accident...! - xtrailman

That photo shows only one lane each way, if you was under taking you was in the wrong IMO, blatant queue jumping.

Unless that photo isn't getting your message across correctly?

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Fri 5 Feb 2016 13:20
Two 'lanes' into one...? Nearly an accident...! - Rossd01

Thanks for all the replies folks!

xtrailman - my issue is the parking restrictions which logically could be seen as 'creating' extra space to be used during peak times (the initial photo shows cars parked during non-peak times). I've managed to get another photo of an unobscured section of the road further along the street - the road is wide enough for 2 cars on both sides along the full length (previous photo included), and the markings reappear:

http://s12.postimg.org/x2vfgg831/screenshot_130.jpg

That said, it looks like I stand corrected - the restrictions have been explained to me on here to improve the flow of traffic by limiting cars pulling in and out of a parked position on the single yellow line, with the vacant 'cars width' of tarmac along the single yellow line to remain during peak times. If the consensus is that the traffic has to remain single file, so be it. Logically, i can see how it can be that way though i still think two lanes would be possible (sorry, traffic is bad enough here at peak times, anything to improve the flow more! :). I do feel that the other driver merging, whilst directly beside me, was unfathomable and poor judgement on their part.

Interesting though re how parking is restricted in this one instance - i never really thought about it to limit cars pulling in and out (which restrospectively can impact traffic flow), i always thought it was to improve flow by creating more space for cars i.e. you create an extra lane at peak times, the tailback cuts in half.

Duly noted however! :)

And thanks for that post re white lines...that is indeed worrying! I use white lines quite a bit to know exactly my precise alignment, ensuring no drifting between lanes. Not that i consciously have to do it, but they are an important part of road signage. Here we go then...being on the drivers that decide a lane is 12 feet wide and they need all the space....!

Edited by Rossd01 on 05/02/2016 at 13:29

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Fri 5 Feb 2016 13:38
Two 'lanes' into one...? Nearly an accident...! - galileo

Some of the major roads round here have 'part time' bus lanes, only restricted at peak times, with a second running lane outside.

So the bus lane next to the kerb is usable outside those hours, my experience is that 90% of drivers stay out of these and creep along in the second lane, when I legally use the bus lane, a few will move into it and follow me.

Other routes, as in the OP's example, have 'parking spaces' marked out, which I always avoid, it is not worth the hassle of approaching a parked car and having to wait for a space to pull out.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Fri 5 Feb 2016 22:38
Two 'lanes' into one...? Nearly an accident...! - Brit_in_Germany

Also, with cars parked on each side it looks as though two buses could not pass easily. If this were the reason, a temporary bus lane would have the same effect but might be more complicated to introduce.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link

10 warranty myths exposed

Here’s how to sort the fact from the fiction when it comes to car warranties.

Cheap Car Warranties

We give you the low down on how to save on insurance, little-known tricks and tips, what insurance groups mean and how to use insurance aggregators to beat insurers.

Insurance group finder and how to save on insurance