JUMP TO IT!

Evening Post, Volume CXXIII, Issue 129, 2 June 1937, Page 10

JUMP TO IT!

THOSE CROSSINGS

FACT Y. REGULATION

NEEDS REWRITING

The brightening of city streets' by painting crossing places in bright white on the black background is continuing, but people are beginning to wonder whether the work is worth the trouble and the paint when half the pedestrians either don't see the lines—they are plain enough in all conscience—or won't recognise that they have been painted for their assistance; and when not one motorist in twenty has either not read the crossing-place regulation or deliberately ignores it. It may be that the regulation is out of accord with both ■ pedestrian and driver opinion on the subject of getting across roadways. It (Regulation 14, clause 7) says this: "Every driver of a motor vehicle shall yield the right of way to a pedestrian engaged in crossing the roadway within any authorised pedestrian crossing place upon the half of the roadway over Which such vehicle is lawfully entitled to travel, and when approaching such crossing the driver shall reduce speed so as to be able to stop before reaching the crossing if necessary." As there is no sort of similarity between what is intended and what happens the easiest way, to reconcile fact with fiction may be to rewrite the . fiction, something after this styled ' "Every pedestrian intending to cross : any roadway within 'any authorised ■ pedestrian crossing place over any road- , way over which such pedestrian is law- . fully entitled to travel, shall yield the right of way to any driver,of any ■ motor vehicle, and shall, when attempting to make, any such crossing, reduce speed so as to remain on the footpath or accelerate speed to reach the far '. footpath—as nlcessary." THEY ALL JUMPED TO IT. ; That needs touching up, but is ! generally in the form suggested after ' an hour's observation and checking of . the regulation at work this morning ! at the Central Library, the Cuba-Wake- [ field Street intersection, and the newest line across Jervois Quay. No count I was made when either pedestrian or ', driver had a free go, because then there \ was nothing to "shall yield" to, and the pedestrian simply went across, with or 1 without benefit of white lines, and the driver kept to his 30 or thereabouts. ■ The count concerned itself only with ' potential clashes between pedestrians '■ presumably aware of their rights under Regulation 14, clause 7 (that's the "shall '' yield" regulation) and the driver be- : hind the wheel—and'the front wheels, and the bumper, and the niascot, and 1 the bonnet and radiator (all heavy). ' The count went to 35, and in 35 in- ' stances the pedestrian was just a poor ' mutt ;■ / ../ ■■ He had all the rights; he could have kept on-walking, and if the driver had questioned or criticised or sworn at him, all he bad to do was to quote Regulation 14, clause 7, and the driver would have had to yield. That regulation would have floored him, knocked him back badly. Why hand the pedestrian rights when he backs down like that? The wording is as clear as a pikestaff. It means that if a driver— of a car, lorry, taxi, truck, or bus, whatever its weight—knocks ' him down within a crossing place (but not necessarily knocks him out of the crossing place, for in that event he would have to prove his own skid marks) then the driver was' Wrong and the pedestrian's heirs and dependants have a prima facie claim. Not one of the 35 had the courage to make a test case ° For years the pedestrian has been a menace on the road, but this possibility of his being knocked down within a crossing place makes him a downright, active danger, but, rather ridiculously, the more active the less dangerous. Unfortunately the pedestrian is not always built for action. In his youth he may have been, but in age, ignorance and stupidity (as at 65 ™d upwards. the average pedestrian, and the mother of seven in town with the three youngest) he lacks the sparkle, quick judgment, and gumption to get out of the way with real agility. WHAT AitE THE* ALL ABOUT? Just what are these white lines for? They open a further market for paint products; they keep a pavement artist and his assistants busy; and they justify the inclusion of Regulation 14, clause 7 (that's the "shall yield" one) in the book of words; but as far as road safety value is concerned they have not justified themselves, and tt^w not until (a) drivers recognise that they are supposed to mean something and are not street decorations, (b) pedestrians have sufficient sense to use them where they are laid down and to hope for more, (c) the pious hope expressed by the regulation and the lines is expressed effectively by traffic officials, police, and transport officers. It would not be so bad if these painted lines were just a simple city joke, but they cost a lot of money; they will run into hundreds each year if they are to be kept bright and shiny. '. . , _ More of these crossings are to be painted, one, for instance, across Whitmore Street, where fast traffic turns from Featherston Street to .reach Customhouse Quay. The new city speed limit is 30 miles an hour, and 30 is easy for some drivers round this bend All the more opportunity for pedestrians, then; to stick to their rights under Regulation 14, clause 7 for the driver must give way or he wiU be proceeded against after the inquest On the way back to the office the reporter made the 36th mutt pedestrian. He knew the regulation well enough, but there appeared to be a doubt whether the drivers of three cars one taxi, and a city council bus had read . their copies..

He jumped to it.