Road rule change: an unclear area

[Badjelly]

I'm 100% in favour of the forthcoming road rule change, but I'm not trying to start another argument about that, I'm just trying to clear up something.

Consider the intersection shown in the picture (Ruahine Rd and Wellington Road in Wellington).



There's an orange car coming from the north and turning right, and three cars waiting coming from the southwest and waiting at the Give Way sign. (A very common situation: the intersection's a real bugger.)

OK, so let's say there was a green car coming from the east and turning left. (You'll have to imagine it.) Under the current rules, the green car gives way to the orange car, no problem. Under the new rules the orange car would have to give way. But hang on, there's a traffic island, a small concrete one in a larger triangular painted area. Does this mean that the place where the orange and green cars would meet is a separate intersection? If it does then the orange car is travelling straight ahead at the point where they would meet, so the green car gives way.

To my mind it's all one intersection, but my experience in New Zealand pre-1979 and recently in Australia is that the orange car does invariably assume right of way.

And what if the island's bigger than this one? Or smaller? And do the dotted lines on the road (partially obscured by the tree at the bottom of the picture) make a difference in law? Or in practice? I drive through this intersection most days (on a blue bike, not a green car) and I'm going to be very careful until people have sorted this one out!

[riffer]

If it's marked GIVE WAY, you must give way. Otherwise, obey the road rules.

Why is it so hard?

[Badjelly]

If it's marked GIVE WAY, you must give way. Otherwise, obey the road rules. Why is it so hard?

Have you read the post you're replying to?

[riffer]

Have you read the post you're replying to?

Okay... firstly, the orange car is in front of where he should have stopped - the line's quite clear. As he's technically turning right, he will have to give way to all traffic approaching from his left under the new rules.

Traffic islands don't come in to it.

Look at the law in it's purest form. Give way to all traffic approaching from your left unless they are controlled by a give way sign in which case that takes precedence.

[Scuba_Steve]

If it helps they have plans to change that fuckup of an intersection

[Badjelly]

Okay... firstly, the orange car is in front of where he should have stopped - the line's quite clear. As he's technically turning right, he will have to give way to all traffic approaching from his left under the new rules.

Traffic islands don't come in to it.

Look at the law in it's purest form. Give way to all traffic approaching from your left unless they are controlled by a give way sign in which case that takes precedence.

I agree with your interpretation: an intersection is where two roads meet; traffic islands don't come into it; the orange car gives way. (But what if it were a really big traffic island?) But I think in practice it will turn out otherwise.

BTW, don't be too hard on the orange car, I think it was probably moving at the time Google Earth took the photo.

[Badjelly]

If it helps they have plans to change that fuckup of an intersection

That's great news! (For those who aren't familiar with it, there's often a continuous stream of traffic coming from the east and going round to the north towards Mt Vic Tunnel. Gaps are few and far between and have to be taken quickly. Going through with Mrs Jelly at the wheel is a life-changing experience.)

[oneofsix]

Okay... firstly, the orange car is in front of where he should have stopped - the line's quite clear.

The line is only a guide. Providing the orange car is clear of other traffic (which they are) and in a position they can if the way is clear then they are where they should be. I have experienced intersections where you can't see from behind or on the line in whihc case to have stopped there would have been wrong.

As he's technically turning right, he will have to give way to all traffic approaching from his left under the new rules.

Traffic islands don't come in to it.

Look at the law in it's purest form. Give way to all traffic approaching from your left unless they are controlled by a give way sign in which case that takes precedence.

Interesting concept. I follow your argument but can also see Badjelly's point, especially given the definition of an intersection. Can you buy shares in Law firms?

and Scuba_Steve, given we have councils that put give ways in the middle of round abouts, don't hold your breath.

[Scuba_Steve]

and Scuba_Steve, given we have councils that put give ways in the middle of round abouts, don't hold your breath.

Yea I submitted on it, can't remember the plan too well now but I think they plan those "wonderful" pretty coloured lights to tell everyone what to do

[MSTRS:Me]

Looking at that particular intersection, the red car is in a turn bay, NOT on a Give Way, but the line of 3 are (note the triangles painted on the road). As would be any car on their left, that was turning left. All other lanes are effectively through roads, free of encumbrance. So....
The cars coming from the north and going straight through - do so.
That grey car that came from the west would give way to anyone coming straight through from the east, but not to anyone else.
The red car turning right, gives way to any coming from the east, but not the line of 3. Nor should he need to give way to any car from the east that is turning left - they are each supposed to turn into the lane nearest to them. The tree does block a proper view, but if there is just the one lane then I think the 'merge like a zip' would apply? ie use courtesy.
The line of 3 give way to the red car AND to any car coming from the east. Further - once across the lane from the east, they should give way to anyone from the north going straight through.
At least that is how I understand it...now and after the rule change.
Just like now, it will really only be uncontrolled T intersections that are affected.

[Badjelly]

The red car turning right, gives way to any coming from the east, but not the line of 3. Nor should he need to give way to any car from the east that is turning left - they are each supposed to turn into the lane nearest to them. The tree does block a proper view, but if there is just the one lane then I think the 'merge like a zip' would apply? ie use courtesy.

There is just the one lane for cars coming from the east and turning left. The distances involved are quite short, so you don't really have room to line up your zip before merging.

I'm all for courtesy, really I am, but this intersection is dreadful, for the cars behind the Give Way signs, particularly. Regulars know that people who "courteously" wait for others when they don't need to are just wasting opportunities & holding up those behind them.

If I'm coming from the east and turning left, I expect I will continue to do what I do now: wait for the red/orange car until it's clear he's not going to move.

[Badjelly]

By the way, on the courtesy thing, my attitude to road rules changed completely through living in Fort Collins, Colorado, for four years (1984-1988). They have lots of intersections with four-way Stop signs there and the rules that apply in practice are: take turns; be nice. It worked a treat. You won't find those rules in their road code.

[MSTRS:Me]

There is just the one lane for cars coming from the east and turning left.
If I'm coming from the east and turning left, I expect I will continue to do what I do now: wait for the red/orange car until it's clear he's not going to move.

You would be wrong.
Now - you give way to your right.
But after the change, and because you say there's no room to do the zip-thing, left turning vehicles will have right of way over those turning right.
Essentially, this intersection is simply a T, but with some aspects controlled and some not.

[Badjelly]

If I'm coming from the east and turning left, I expect I will continue to do what I do now: wait for the red/orange car until it's clear he's not going to move.

You would be wrong.
Now - you give way to your right.
But after the change, left turning vehicles will have right of way over those turning right.
Essentially, this intersection is simply a T, but with some aspects controlled and some not.

I would be wrong, yes. But that is what I expect I will do.

[MSTRS:Me]

I would be wrong, yes. But that is what I expect I will do.

No one could fault you for that...

We have a similar intersection in HB. Where SH2 meets SH5. It too, has the same issues of short merge lanes etc. Exacerbated by 2 being 100kph.
Anyone veering left from 2 into 5 is prolly doing 80-oddkph, but they are supposed to give way to anyone who turned right from the north yet are doing maybe 15kph. At least the new rule will 'fix' that.