[TCUG] Re: Pedestrian Crossing Zig-Zags & Decriminalisation of Parking Restrictions
- From: Dick Andrews <RAndrews@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "'tcug@xxxxxxxxxxxxx'" <tcug@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 16:36:02 +0100
DfT advise that it is not legal to have any other markings within the
controlled area of a pedestrian crossing. This is contained within the
pedestrian crossing regs of 1997 and as Paul says read them carefully
perhaps starting with pragraph 9 and the relevant paragraphs in schedules 1
- 3. You could make a traffic order and attempt to enforce it without the
double yellow lines in place as it is a lesser restriction, but I doubt your
solicitor would like it.
Dick
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alistair McClean [SMTP:alistair.mcclean@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: 29 July 2002 13:29
> To: tcug@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [TCUG] Pedestrian Crossing Zig-Zags & Decriminalisation of
> Parking Restrictions
>
>
> At Nottingham City Council we already employ Parking Enforcement Officers
> to
> enforce metered on-street parking spaces in Nottingham City Centre, and
> the
> authority is currently moving towards decriminalisation of all parking /
> loading restrictions within its administrative boundary.
>
> This has created a potential problem at pelican / puffin / toucans with
> zig-zag markings. It would appear that those involved in the decrim
> process
> are proposing that due to a potential lack of police enforcement on these
> zig-zags, they will be seen as a good place to park to escape the clutches
> of the council employed enforcement officers. Therefore TROs are being
> processed to allow yellow lines to be laid in all pedestrian crossing
> controlled zones, in addition to the zig-zags, to enable enforcement by
> the
> Officers.
>
> Our concerns in Traffic Signal Design are that, at best, the combination
> of
> yellow lines and zig-zags may not be enforceable, and that if there was an
> accident at a crossing site whilst a vehicle was stopped on the zig-zags,
> the authority would be liable as the 'no stopping at any time' message of
> the zig-zags would be contradicted by the 'no parking' message of double
> yellow lines (i.e. loading/unloading, picking up/setting down is
> permissible) (a no loading at any time Order is not proposed as this would
> require a public enquiry).
>
> I have been led to believe that other authorities in this situation have
> provided both yellow lines and zig-zags. If so, was authorization
> obtained?
> Does anyone have experience in this matter?
>
> Alistair McClean
> Traffic Signal Design - Nottingham City Council
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> Unless otherwise expressly stated, nothing in this e-mail shall, as
> between the City Council and the recipient and/or any other party, be
> deemed to constitute any contract or order or create any kind of
> contractual relationship.
> __________________________________________________________________________
> ________
>
> THE FOLLOWING WARNING IS GIVEN IS RESPECT OF ANY ATTACHMENTS
>
> 1. Whilst Nottingham City Council takes steps to prevent computer
> viruses from being transmitted via electronic mail attachments, it does
> not give any guarantee that attachments do not contain such viruses. You
> are strongly advised to undertake anti-virus checks prior to accessing any
> attachments to this electronic mail.
> 2. Nottingham City Council shall not be responsible for any detrimental
> reliance you place on any attachments and makes no representations or
> warranties of any kind with respect to any attachments or their contents
> and disclaims all such representations and warranties. In addition,
> Nottingham City Council makes no representations or warranties about the
> accuracy, completeness or suitability for any purposes of any attachments.
> Any attachments may contain technical inaccuracies or typographical
> errors. All liability of Nottingham City Council howsoever arising for
> any such inaccuracies or errors is expressly excluded to the fullest
> extent permitted by law.
> 3. Neither Nottingham City Council, nor any of its staff will be liable
> for damages arising out of or in connection with the use of any
> attachments. This is a comprehensive limitation of liability that applies
> to all damages of any kind, including (without limitation) compensatory,
> direct, indirect or consequential damages, loss of data, income or profit,
> loss of or damage to property and claims of third parties.
> 4. All brand names, product names and titles and copyrights used in any
> attachments, are the trade marks or trade names or copyrights of their
> respective holders. No permission is given by Nottingham City Council in
> respect of the use of any such brand names, product names or titles or
> copyrights and such use may constitute an infringement of the holder's
> rights.
>
> This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
> MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses
> **************************************************************************
> ******************************************************************
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> A message from the TCUG mailing list. For information about
> the list visit //www.freelists.org/webpage/tcug
-----------------------------------------------------------
A message from the TCUG mailing list. For information about
the list visit //www.freelists.org/webpage/tcug
Other related posts:
