First of all, giving way means don’t get in the way.
There was this thread on the bicycles network forums called the ‘Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians Thread.’ At one point, someone claimed that turning vehicles must give way to pedestrians even on a red pedestrian signal, and furthermore claimed that turning vehicles must give way to pedestrians even on a green arrow.
That poster’s basis is that the actual law just states a requirement to give way to pedestrians, and not even saying anything about green arrows. Now I am quite good at taking written rules literally, and I did not think a rule worded like that would be relevant on a red pedestrian signal, nor does sounding the horn at a pedestrian when turning on a red pedestrian signal, especially on a green arrow, seem to go against the spirit of the rule.
Someone did claim that law needs to be changed but was told it could not be because vehicles need to not base decisions on pedestrian lights. Removing the requirement to give way to pedestrians on a green arrow is sure to make it clearer.
Now there is a requirement for bicycle to give way to pedestrians on shared paths, but if that does not apply on bike-only paths, why does the requirement for turning vehicles to give way to pedestrians apply even on a green arrow. There is not requirement to give way to pedestrian when going straight through on a green light.
Im not sure of the actual wording, but i believe the intent of the law is that a pedestrian that has begun to cross the road should be given way to continue crossing the road. It is to prevent a pedestrian from having to guess whether a car is going to turn into their crossing before they cross.
I’m probably wrong about this, but I thought the laws regarding ped crossing was just to help establish blame in an accident.
My minimal understanding was that if you hit a ped in a car or on a bike then you’re generally at fault. But if you hit a bike in a car then - as many of us likely know in AU - that can be a very different result.
(1) A driver turning at an intersection with traffic lights must give way to—
(a) any pedestrian at or near the intersection who is crossing the road the driver is entering,
Which seems clear enough. This is not marked as NSW only.
It doesn’t mention anything about anyone’s colour of arrow or light, just that you give way to a crossing pedestrian. The “at or near” means “keep your eyes open and if there’s a ped nearby then get your foot off the bloody pedal till you are sure they aren’t going to cross”
On the other hand, rule 231 says peds should not start to cross if the ped light is red.
But if they do, rule 61 as quoted above says the turning vehicle gives way to them.
Rule 239 says that peds should not be on bike paths except to cross them and keep out of the way of bicycles.
BUT… that’s actual marked bicycle paths with the sign and all. I don’t know how many of the ones with green paint have the sign that marks them as “no peds here” cos I’ve never really looked.
Rule 239(4):
bicycle path means a length of path beginning at a bicycle path sign or bicycle path road marking,
bicycle path road marking means a road marking on a path, consisting of a bicycle symbol, the words “bicycles only”, or both the bicycle symbol and the word “only”.
If they do not have the official seal of bicycleness they are shared path never mind the paint and rule 83 applies where everyone gives way (slows or stops to avoid a collision) to peds.
Surely this rule would be clearer if it explicitly did
Surely it would be clearer if it explicitly did not apply on a green arrow.
In the British Isles, there is not a green man at the same time as a green light is directed at vehicles turning over the crosswalk. In some mainland European countries (such as Austria and Switzerland), vehicles turning at the lights are only required to give way to pedestrians on a flashing yellow man, if there is not a flashing yellow man, then there would be a red ped signal.
If there is a green arrow there is a solid red ped light. The ped light will flash red for a portion of time before going solid which means “dont’ start crossing but keep crossing if you have started” but a lot of people believe it means “hurry up and cross”. The turning light for cars will not go green until the ped light is solid red.
A slow ped can be on the crossing after the turning light has gone green.
An intersection that does not have arrows can have a ped crossing at the same time a car might have a non-arrow green light. The car must give way if turning into the road the ped is crossing even if car has green light. [1]
The overarching is “give way to ped who is crossing the road you are turning into”. There shouldn’t be one if you have a green arrow but if there is you don’t get to hit them and claim hard done by. Because for you the green arrow is like any other light or sign: “You are required to avoid a crash if at all possible” and this crash is specifically marked as one you must avoid.[2]
So if there’s a ped in the road you swear and wait. If there’s a ped nearby you keep an eye out for them being spatially unaware because you getting to the next red light a couple of seconds faster is not to be paid for by even a bloody idiot’s life.
Zebee
[1] these days a lot of intersections without arrows have the green ped light start a few secs before the green car light and flash red when the car light goes green. Idea being peds are in the road before the cars are so cars see them to give way.
[2] in the real world if you hit someone who was crossing against the light you have both committed an offence as far as I can see. If you hurt them they have paid a worse penalty than you have. How much of a penalty in money and points you pay is going to depend on the exact circumstances presented to the magistrate. “Little old lady limping slowly on fine bright day” is going to be way different to “young idiot dressed in black late at night looking at phone and crossing against a red ped light”