Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Please note that it is not permitted to have referral links posted in your signature. Keep these links contained in the appropriate forum. Thank you.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules

White lines - who decides?

Options
  • 18-01-2008 6:38pm
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 24,071 ✭✭✭✭


    Who is responsible for deciding what kind of white lines should be painted on a road? As an example, take the N69 between Tralee and Listowel. A couple of years ago, there were a lot more places where you could overtake, than there are now. Somebody, in their infinite wisdom, has painted single white lines, where a lot of the broken white lines used to be. On the other hand, there are some stretches of broken white lines, where you would have to be either suicidal, or have a rocket-propelled car, to even attempt to get past someone. Have they got them the wrong way round? What’s the game? Is this happening all over the country? That particular road has become an infuriating bottle-neck, where you’re stuck behind a slow-moving vehicle for most of it’s length.


Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,570 ✭✭✭Rovi


    Lazy ass-covering in my opinion.
    It's much easier to slap a solid line down the middle of the road than to survey it and mark it properly for the use and convenience of everybody.
    There's also the 'be seen to do something' syndrome, whereby any traffic accident is good reason for a solid line at the scene, whether the incident involved a vehicle 'on the wrong side' or not.

    I've been saying for years that there should be no such thing as a single solid line.
    In my opinion, there should be double solid lines, where overtaking is prohibited from both directions, and parallel solid/dashed lines, where overtaking is prohibited from one direction and allowed from the other.
    A single dashed line is self explanatory.

    There are loads of examples around of where you round a bend (with a single solid line) unto a perfectly decent straight, perfect for an overtake, but you can't legally do so because the solid line continues for another one or two hundred meters, there to prohibit overtaking when approaching the bend from the opposite direction.
    So you wait for the end of the solid line only to find the overtaking opportunity rapidly vanishing due to oncoming traffic or a ridiculously short dashed section of line before it goes solid again before the next bend.

    There are more than a few fine straights with solid lines followed by bends with dashed line around too. :rolleyes:


  • Registered Users Posts: 21,464 ✭✭✭✭Alun


    Rovi wrote: »
    Lazy ass-covering in my opinion.
    It's much easier to slap a solid line down the middle of the road than to survey it and mark it properly for the use and convenience of everybody.
    There's also the 'be seen to do something' syndrome, whereby any traffic accident is good reason for a solid line at the scene, whether the incident involved a vehicle 'on the wrong side' or not.
    They did this recently on the Kilmacanogue to Laragh and Glendalough road when they resurfaced part of it. Strangely there is a section just after you come out onto the flat after the Long Hill that has double lines for some reason, and then they turn into single ones. Go figure.
    I've been saying for years that there should be no such thing as a single solid line. In my opinion, there should be double solid lines, where overtaking is prohibited from both directions, and parallel solid/dashed lines, where overtaking is prohibited from one direction and allowed from the other. A single dashed line is self explanatory.
    They do exactly this in the UK .. not a single single white line to be seen.
    There are loads of examples around of where you round a bend (with a single solid line) unto a perfectly decent straight, perfect for an overtake, but you can't legally do so because the solid line continues for another one or two hundred meters, there to prohibit overtaking when approaching the bend from the opposite direction.
    So you wait for the end of the solid line only to find the overtaking opportunity rapidly vanishing due to oncoming traffic or a ridiculously short dashed section of line before it goes solid again before the next bend.
    I ignore these :D (Where I know from experience that this is the situation, that is!)


  • Registered Users Posts: 78,404 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    It is for the local road engineer to decide. If it is a national route, the NRA might have an input.

    Tell me what the difference is between a single and double solid white line?


  • Registered Users Posts: 21,464 ✭✭✭✭Alun


    Victor wrote: »
    Tell me what the difference is between a single and double solid white line?
    Essentially nothing, except that if you're going to adopt the (eminently sensible) idea of having part solid / part dashed lines at the start and end of overtaking stretches it just looks a bit odd if you jump from single solids to these and vice versa.


  • Registered Users Posts: 24,071 ✭✭✭✭ejmaztec


    Would anyone consider that it could be a nice little earner for the Traffic Corps, where they might catch someone hopping over the line, where once it was legal, fine-free and safe to do so? Perhaps I'm being paranoid


  • Advertisement
Advertisement