Giving Way to Pedestrians at a STOP Sign with a Raised Paved Sidewalk

nmur on 07/12/2020 - 22:17

It's my pleasure to finally submit a forum thread seeking clarification on a road rule, and proceed to get told by dozens of people that I should never be allowed near a car ever again.

There's this STOP sign at an intersection at the end of a one-way street (William St onto Pacific Hwy) in North Sydney that's located on a raised paved section of sidewalk. There does not seem to be an associated STOP Line, just the signs. It is not a pedestrian crossing, however, perhaps because of the almost seamless pathway that it provides for pedestrians, it's very common that people walking through won't even glance at any oncoming traffic of the one-way street. On the flip side, some pedestrians will stop completely to look and wait for cars to go through the intersection instead. From tailing other drivers through this intersection, I've observed a mix of interpretations from them as well.

On the RMS's site regarding interections, it's mentioned that at a STOP sign, "You must give way to any pedestrians crossing the road into which you are turning.", which doesn't say if the driver would have to give way to pedestrians crossing the road that they are turning out of.

Normally, even in the case where there's confusion, the cars and the people usually work it out eventually without too much stress. However, today, as I approached the intersection a pedestrian looking down at their phone wandered across the intersection without a care in the world, and shortly after, two other pedestrians followed the first as well. While I was waiting during these moments, another car behind me overtook me on the right side and hit the brakes pretty quickly to avoid the third pedestrian who they likely just saw, before peeling out of the intersection. I'm unsure if they thought I had stopped for no reason and decided to just around me, or if they understood what was going on but didn't want to wait for anyone.

I should also note that it's very difficult to see oncoming traffic on the right without stopping your car just before the Pacific Highway.

What should drivers do here exactly?

Also, interestingly, this raised path was only installed recently, as Google Maps shows it didn't exist back in Nov 2018.

I will regretfully abstain from creating an MS Paint image for the scenario as I feel the Google Maps screenshot would depict it better.

Poll Options

  • 72
    Drivers should give way to pedestrians
  • 2
    Pedestrians should give way to drivers
Automotive

Comments

  • [Deactivated] on 07/12/2020 - 22:20
    +9

    I will regretfully abstain from creating an MS Paint image for the scenario as I feel the Google Maps screenshot would depict it better.

    Nothing depicts road rules better than MS Paint images.

  • Godric on 07/12/2020 - 22:27
    +2

    I will regretfully abstain from creating an MS Paint image for the scenario as I feel the Google Maps screenshot would depict it better.

    False

  • jjjaar on 07/12/2020 - 22:30

    This looks like a slip lane. In that case, pedestrians have right of way.

    If it is not a slip lane, then the raised treatment put here has been done so to encourage drivers to slow down, but still technically the drivers have right of way. This is an example of where making a situation confusing is supposed to make all road users more cautious (though it doesn’t seem like the pedestrians are being more cautious).

    Edit: I stand corrected. After looking at the aerial it is not a slip lane.

  • [Deactivated] on 07/12/2020 - 22:38

    You even have to ask…

  • Thrift on 07/12/2020 - 22:46
    +12

    This is a continuous footpath treatment (pdf).

    pedestrian priority may be provided by continuous footpath treatments which are a continuation of the footpath parallel with the main street, at grade, without colour or texture change, across side street intersections.
    …
    Under the road rules, a footpath is a road related area. When entering, or crossing, a road related area from a road, drivers must give way to any pedestrians or other road users on the road related area.
    Therefore, where pedestrian priority is desirable but a regulatory pedestrian crossing is not warranted, a continuous footpath treatment that is not differentiated in colour and texture from the adjacent footpath may be a suitable solution.

    Unfortunately, a lot of drivers might not realise this until 'after the fact'.

    • nmur on 07/12/2020 - 23:14

      Thanks for looking up the detailed rules.

  • SF3 on 07/12/2020 - 22:50
    +3

    Treat it like driving in the carpark of a shopping mall. Just be careful whether you are a driver or pedestrian - like a shared zone… where nobody has full right of way… however as a driver, should pay more attention as you have the safety of a metal cage and the pedestrian don’t.

    Ultimately nobody wants any injuries whether a clear road rule exist or not commonly known.

  • MS Paint on 07/12/2020 - 23:14
    +5

    regretfully abstain from MS Paint

    I get this every night from MRS Paint

  • Eeples on 07/12/2020 - 23:24
    +1

    Would you say the driver that went around you wasn’t planning to stop at the stop sign?

    What an idiot.

  • SnoozeAndLose on 07/12/2020 - 23:25
    +1

    I think a dash cam footage will be good, hard to image to the situation on this one.

  • AustriaBargain on 07/12/2020 - 23:40
    +1

    A stop sign always means stop.

  • Stewardo on 08/12/2020 - 00:00

    I can see the stop line, it’s under the big S in your screenshot. But I agree it’s confusing and difficult for drivers, all designed with pedestrians in mind. You have to give way.

    Footpath continuity treatments extend the footpath treatments across crossing points. They are implemented in areas of high pedestrian activity and seek to prioritise pedestrian movement. Footpath continuity treatments have been widely implemented through Sydney.

    The following indicates the streets that meet the criteria with suitable traffic flows.
    Potential shared zones
    Little Walker Street
    Mount Street (E Walker Street)
    Ward Street
    Little Spring Street
    Denison Street
    Spring Street

    William Street (N Mount Street)

    The locations that may be potential shared zones have a high AM peak hour traffic flow, but may be approved by Roads and Maritime as they have high pedestrian volumes and narrow footpaths. Laneways with both high hourly and daily flows are not considered appropriate for shared zones.

    https://www.northsydney.nsw.gov.au/files/baa3311f-1b82-45fb-…

    • nmur on 08/12/2020 - 00:48

      Thanks for the link, super relevant.

      Interestingly, page 47 actually talks about this exact intersection, and at the time (2014) they stated they didn't consider a continuity treatment because of high traffic, and proposed reworking nearby intersections instead to manage pedestrian traffic, re-assessing this street later on. I guess five years later they did exactly that.

  • Euphemistic on 08/12/2020 - 06:57

    Stop line was the first thing i saw.

    • pegaxs on 12/12/2020 - 08:14

      Yeah, but there isnt a stop line… There is the line made by the concrete edging where it meets the asphalt, but it's not a "marked line"…

      Side note; Must be a nice part of town to live/work, as the motorcycle parking area is full of Ducatis, Vespas and Harley Davidsons…

  • tight-ass on 08/12/2020 - 08:01

    It looks to me as though someone else has installed the STOP control (not done by the RTA) & it shouldn't even be there?

    In WA at least, STOP signs are never installed without the corresponding STOP line. At an intersection with Give Way control a line can be installed without the sign. Also a STOP line or Give Way line should be set .6m back from a kerb line of the through road.

  • AndyC1 on 08/12/2020 - 08:49

    When William St enters the Pacific Hwy it's a T intersection, so "You must give way to any pedestrians crossing the road into which you are turning.", see https://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/roads/safety-rules/road-rules/int… for the T intersection rules.

    The give way to pedestrians in NSW changed about 10 years +/-X years ago, so if you have had your license for a while and did not know about the change you could get fined a the rules changed.

  • [Deactivated] on 08/12/2020 - 09:02
    +4

    I see a Stop sign, Stop line, continuous footpath, and a T intersection.

    All speaks to must give way to all traffic until clear to proceed.

    The car behind you was an idiot and could have injured someone.

    • nmur on 08/12/2020 - 10:15
      +1

      Isn't a STOP line usually a white, unbroken, painted line? I can only see a clear line in the photo of before they installed the continuous treatment.

      • [Deactivated] on 08/12/2020 - 11:00
        +2

        Your image with white continuous lines marked with orange in obligatory MS Paint:
        https://i.imgur.com/jip90TD.png

        Another image of the street, slightly further down with white continuous lines marked with orange in obligatory MS Paint:
        https://i.imgur.com/xyvJiZA.jpg

        Also note in the second image, also highlighted, the entrance of the driveway is marked in white paint, also indicating no parking, and an orange box around the "No Parking" sign.
        The street has areas of no parking indicated by the sign and white lines, and the white line indicating the stop line at the footpath.

        I don't even live in Sydney and can see that clear as day.

        Also, in regards to your comment "You must give way to any pedestrians crossing the road into which you are turning.", that footpath is parallel with the road you are turning in to, therefore it is part of the road you are turning in to, and thus, you must give way to those walking across the footpath.

        This isn't rocket science.

        • nmur on 08/12/2020 - 12:08
          +1

          That's just the colour of the concrete though, rather than paint. Does that still count?

          • Stewardo on 08/12/2020 - 12:21
            -1

            @nmur: Nah it’s not the concrete. Roll forward on the street view you will see a white stop line and then bitumen then a line of granite paving.

          • [Deactivated] on 08/12/2020 - 12:31

            @nmur: The second photo clearly shows it as paint. Whilst they may have used concrete in places, it's still a clear indication of line markings compared to regular bitumen, and is in line with the No Parking sign.

          • [Deactivated] on 08/12/2020 - 14:15

            @nmur: I've just taken another look. It is quite clearly paint:
            https://i.imgur.com/2N6QZuf.jpg

            • pegaxs on 12/12/2020 - 08:19

              @[Deactivated]: I've looked at it a dozen times now and it's concrete edging, not white paint.

              • [Deactivated] on 12/12/2020 - 11:14

                @pegaxs: That's your opinion. I see paint in several of the photos on Google Maps.

                • pegaxs on 12/12/2020 - 17:55

                  @[Deactivated]: That's your opinion, but that is 100% fresh, recently laid concrete. It is the new black ashphalt coupled with the new, very light grey of the fresh concrete that gives it the appearance of being a painted line, but it isnt.

                  What you're trying to tell me is they just went around and painted every street in the area with 12" wide white lines up against the gutter and masked off and neatly went around all the drainage grates… No worries, Champ. ;)

                  Next up…

                  Also note in the second image, also highlighted, the entrance of the driveway is marked in white paint, also indicating no parking, and an orange box around the "No Parking" sign.

                  And to add insult to injury, yellow lines are used to denote "no parking", not white. (#yellowlinesmatter)

                  From the NSW delineation standards manual (Section 3, Pavement Markings);

                  3.4 Colour

                  3.4.1 General

                  All longitudinal and transverse pavement markings in NSW are WHITE in colour, with the exception of yellow being used in the following circumstances:
                  (a) Line markings denoting parking restrictions.                   See Section 3.7.4.
                  (b) Centre lines and edge lines on roads experiencing snow. (Note: Where yellow edge lines are used they will also denote parking restrictions, therefore, any permissive parking signs must be removed)

                  Oh, whoopsie. Seems that parking is permissible here. So both of your MS Paint drawing above and the information attached to them is incorrect.

                  Added to that… Under Section 4: Longitudinal markings, under 4.7, the road edge side markings are 15cm wide, not 30cm and would not start against the gutter.

                  Edge lines are not used adjacent to kerb and gutter but E1 lines may be used to define the boundaries between moving and parking lanes. For warrants on their use in these circumstances

                  Lol… Whoopsie again.

                  I don't even live in Sydney and can see that clear as day.

                  But you are telling the guy that lives/works in the area that when they told you "they are not painted", you told OP they were wrong… oh kay… Who to believe, the guy that regularly drives the area, or a guy that has never been there and lives interstate…

                  that footpath is parallel with the road you are turning in to, therefore it is part of the road you are turning in to

                  Again, wrong. The raised section is a continuation of the footpath. This turns the raised part of the road (now a footpath) into a "road related area". You have to give way because you are entering or crossing a road related area. You have to give way on entering the raised area, and then again when you are leaving it. You have to give way twice because you are entering the "road related area" and then again when you are leaving the "road related area".

                  This isn't rocket science

                  For you, it seems it is.
                  Please, for the love of the traffic gods, don't come to NSW and drive.

                  • [Deactivated] on 13/12/2020 - 18:19

                    @pegaxs: Considering my photos from Google Maps shows both signs saying no parking except for police vehicles, and also clearly painted lines over areas of the street, I'm quite happy with my deductions. If you think I painted those in MS Paint, then thank you for your compliment for being so good.

                    I also clearly said they have to give way to turn in to the road. Not sure where you deduced I said otherwise.

                    Clearly the person who lives and drives there (the OP) has confusion otherwise they wouldn't have made the post in the first place. And Google Maps shows several indications of how they should drive in the area, as pointed out by many people, other than myself. As you said yourself, whoopsie.

                    Have a good day.

                    • pegaxs on 13/12/2020 - 19:41

                      @[Deactivated]: You said that;

                      Your image with white continuous lines marked
                      slightly further down with white continuous lines
                      the driveway is marked in white paint, also indicating no parking
                      The street has areas of no parking indicated by the sign and white lines

                      White lines do NOT indicate parking restrictions. If the white lines even existed, they would be there as "edge markings". The issue for you here is; They do not paint "edge markings" adjacent to gutters, (as pointed out in the NSW road markings handbook). They certainly don't paint them that wide (again, handbook) and they don't make them all neat around the drainage grates (RMS/Council would just paint over things). You may think they are painted white, but rules, regulations, legislation and logic tells you, they are not painted (well, all that plus OP, who lives there saying it isn't painted. And that driveway is clearly not painted)

                      The street has areas of no parking indicated by the sign and white lines

                      Added to this, my photo shows a parking area that exists which also has (according to your observation) a "white line" that restricts parking. How is the Coca Cola truck able to park there if there is a "white line"?? According to you, that cant be right.

                      If you think I painted those in MS Paint, then thank you for your compliment for being so good.

                      You painted the yellow lines in your MS Paint photos. Yellow lines would be the correct colour for designating "No Parking" not "white" (which, ironically, is the colour of relatively fresh concrete.)

                      I also clearly said they have to give way to turn in to the road.

                      Yes, but you said it for the wrong reason. What you "originally" said was;

                      therefore it is part of the road you are turning in to

                      You said it was because the footpath was "part of the road" when, in fact, it is not. It is because the footpath is a "road related area". You have to give way to pedestrians on the raised area, NOT because it's part of the road you want to turn into, but because "it's a road related area" that you are entering.

                      Clearly the person who lives and drives there (the OP) has confusion otherwise they wouldn't have made the post in the first place

                      The confusion was over what road rules applied to the raised section of road, not about if the road was fresh concrete or painted. There is no confusion on OP's part about that, as they stated;

                      That's just the colour of the concrete though, rather than paint.

                      So, let's do a quick round up of what you have said;

                      White lines = No parking <- Wrong. It's yellow lines for parking restrictions. (Source: Road Marking handbook/Road Rules)
                      Painted white <- Wrong. Too neat, wrong width, not painted next to gutters, wrong colour for parking restrictions. (Source: Road Marking handbook/OP seeing so)
                      Raised section is part of road you are tuning into <- Wrong. It's an extension of the footpath, which is a "road related area". You need to give way twice (Source: ARR 74 and 75)

                      Whoopsie

                      I'm quite happy with my deductions.

                      If they were mine, I wouldn't be. Rocket surgery is hard…

  • crashloaded on 08/12/2020 - 17:44
    +2

    If you shut your eyes there's no signs either.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join