
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
<title>Omission of yellow lines between crossing studs at signal-controlled juncti</title>
<link>https://members.theihe.org/forums/posts.aspx?group=214541&amp;topic=1781702</link>
<description></description>
<lastBuildDate>Sun, 7 Jun 2026 17:11:58 GMT</lastBuildDate>
<pubDate>Mon, 3 Mar 2025 17:08:11 GMT</pubDate>
<copyright>Copyright &#xA9; 2025 Institute of Highway Engineers</copyright>
<atom:link href="https://members.theihe.org/forums/topic_rss.asp?group=214541&amp;id=1781702" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"></atom:link>
<item>
<title>Omission of yellow lines between crossing studs at signal-controlled juncti</title>
<link>https://members.theihe.org/forums/posts.aspx?group=214541&amp;topic=1781702</link>
<guid>https://members.theihe.org/forums/posts.aspx?group=214541&amp;topic=1781702</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Yellow lines have to be omitted within crossing controlled areas, as TSRGD doesn't exempt them from the general prohibition of other signs and lines but it is very noticeable that there are countless locations around the country where they have also been omitted between the rows of diag 1055.1 crossing studs where ped facilities have been provided at signal-controlled junctions. Para 15.7.2. in TSM Ch 6 says "Signal‑controlled facilities of any type provided as part of a junction must not be provided with controlled areas" and they usually aren't but still there's frequently a gap left in the yellow lines at the crossing point. 

It may be considered to make sense to omit the lines; peds can trip over repeatedly refurbished road markings and their omission may help alert drivers to the risk of peds being in the road. However, unlike at crossings that have controlled areas, there doesn't appear to be any legal provision for the waiting prohibition to still apply where the lines have been omitted. Or can anyone tell me where TSRGD does allows the lines to be curtailed? 



]]></description>
<pubDate>Tue, 4 Jun 2024 12:18:30 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title></title>
<link>https://members.theihe.org/forums/posts.aspx?group=214541&amp;topic=1781703</link>
<guid>https://members.theihe.org/forums/posts.aspx?group=214541&amp;topic=1781703</guid>
<description><![CDATA[You're right that there is no statutory provision in TSRGD or elsewhere to omit the yellow lines between crossing studs. It has just always been custom and practice to do so.]]></description>
<pubDate>Tue, 4 Jun 2024 12:46:34 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title></title>
<link>https://members.theihe.org/forums/posts.aspx?group=214541&amp;topic=1781708</link>
<guid>https://members.theihe.org/forums/posts.aspx?group=214541&amp;topic=1781708</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Thanks for your prompt response, Simon. I think it may have become a regular practice, though often applied inconsistently. It's not how I was taught to do it (almost 40 years ago!) and seems to have become much more prevalent since TSRGD 2016 - though that's most likely just coincidence. Perhaps it's time map-based TROS showed the gaps... ]]></description>
<pubDate>Tue, 4 Jun 2024 13:26:53 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title></title>
<link>https://members.theihe.org/forums/posts.aspx?group=214541&amp;topic=1781878</link>
<guid>https://members.theihe.org/forums/posts.aspx?group=214541&amp;topic=1781878</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Interesting. We've always omitted the yellow lines between studs. A habit that no-one has questioned.<br /><br />Anyone know of enforcement difficulties with this approach?]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 5 Jun 2024 09:11:44 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title></title>
<link>https://members.theihe.org/forums/posts.aspx?group=214541&amp;topic=1785543</link>
<guid>https://members.theihe.org/forums/posts.aspx?group=214541&amp;topic=1785543</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Many thanks for your comments gentlemen and apologies for not responding sooner.  
I'm not aware of any enforcement difficulties caused by the omission of yellow lines between studs. Hopefully, most drivers wouldn't park at such locations but it would be tiresome to have to fall back on proving obstruction if any awkward ones did. 
I have recently noted that Chapter 5 is very clear about the need to retain yellow lines between studs at locations where "LOOK LEFT" or LOOK RIGHT" markings have also been used. Para 11.5.3. says those markings "should not replace or be superimposed upon any yellow line marking indicating waiting restrictions." I would suggest that gives a pretty clear indication of a DfT expectation that yellow line markings should be retained between studs (outside ped crossing controlled areas, of course) or there'd be no need to explain that. 
Para 11.5.3 also points out that the "arrow is an integral part of the marking and must not be omitted", so attached is a photo taken in Crawley showing exactly how not to do it.]]></description>
<pubDate>Tue, 9 Jul 2024 18:16:12 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title></title>
<link>https://members.theihe.org/forums/posts.aspx?group=214541&amp;topic=1807237</link>
<guid>https://members.theihe.org/forums/posts.aspx?group=214541&amp;topic=1807237</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Interesting question! Is it not an offence to park on zig zags? Does that not mean it is an offence to park in between two sets of zig zags?]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 29 Jan 2025 21:53:31 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title></title>
<link>https://members.theihe.org/forums/posts.aspx?group=214541&amp;topic=1810754</link>
<guid>https://members.theihe.org/forums/posts.aspx?group=214541&amp;topic=1810754</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Yes, it is an offence to park on the carriageway where there are zigzags defining a controlled area but this topic relates specifically to signal‑controlled pedestrian facilities provided as part of a junction, where controlled areas must not be provided, so there aren't any zigzags. However,  it appears to have become commonplace that, on roads subject to a waiting prohibition, a gap in the yellow lines is created between the rows of diag 1055.1 crossing studs, even though the TRO shows the prohibition to be continuous. <br />Although the definition of a controlled area in TSRGD is a length of carriageway 'adjacent to a signal-controlled crossing facility and [that] has a zig-zag line marked along each of its edges', TSRGD Chapter 3 of the Traffic Signs Manual makes it clear that yellow lines must be omitted at the crossing point as well as through the zigzags and that it remains possible to enforce a prohibition, as long as the relevant traffic order provides for it to apply throughout this interruption. My question was, where is there a provision that allows such enforcement to take place if the yellow lines have been omitted at a crossing point where zigzags are not allowed to be used, thereby leaving no visible indication to drivers that parking is not allowed?<br />]]></description>
<pubDate>Mon, 3 Mar 2025 16:30:37 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title></title>
<link>https://members.theihe.org/forums/posts.aspx?group=214541&amp;topic=1810783</link>
<guid>https://members.theihe.org/forums/posts.aspx?group=214541&amp;topic=1810783</guid>
<description><![CDATA["Where is there a provision that allows such enforcement to take place if the yellow lines have been omitted at a crossing point where zigzags are not allowed to be used?"<br /><br />The answer seems to be that there isn't. The lines must be continuous through the crossing, as Simon Morgan pointed out.<br /><br />However, the question about parking in between zigzags (on the actual crossing itself) was interesting because the crossing isn't included within the "controlled area". So, where do we find this nugget of information? Looks like it's TSRGD Sch 14, Pt 5 "Movement at Section 25 crossings" (a Section 25 crossing is a Zebra or Puffin crossing). Parallel crossings are covered by Sch 14, Pt 1, S 21 "Significance of stripes and other road markings at Parallel crossings and in Parallel controlled areas".<br /><br />Phew! Glad that's sorted.]]></description>
<pubDate>Mon, 3 Mar 2025 17:49:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title></title>
<link>https://members.theihe.org/forums/posts.aspx?group=214541&amp;topic=1810788</link>
<guid>https://members.theihe.org/forums/posts.aspx?group=214541&amp;topic=1810788</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Well done Stuart! <br /><br />Yes, I skirted around the issue of parking on the crossing itself, relying on TSM but you're quite right, paragraph 1 in S14-5 refers to the whole of the Section 25 crossing, even though by paragraph 3 we're back to just not being allowed to stop on the zigzags.]]></description>
<pubDate>Mon, 3 Mar 2025 18:08:11 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
