Rank: Guest
|
Posted By notsothicko
Are there any legal restrictions on having authorised crossing points, within the workplace on private roadways arounds the site, black and white (like a Zebra crossing) or can this type only be used on the highway.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Alan Hoskins
So far as possible we try to replicate the highway signs and road markings on a smaller scale. This avoids much cofusion.
Remember though that these are not enforcable as they would be on the highway. You need a company policy for enforcement.
We use zebra crossing markings complete with zig zags, but no beacons.
Alan
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By J Knight
Hi,
Just to add to Alan's post; HSE's guidance on workplace transport actually states that signs and markings in workplaces should be to the same design as those on the public highway, as this helps avoid confusion. This is guidance, and not a requirement, but we for example follow it in all our grounds,
John
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Frank Newman
On a private site road markings and signs have no legal significance. They are simply indicative of site management's preferences. However, in the event of an accident they could be accepted as partial mitigation.
Merv
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By CFT
Agree with the above points; on our own few hundred acres of managed site we try to follow shapes patterns styles etc but like Alan states we have left the beacons out on ZC's but included additional lighting on adjacent lighting columns to assist during poor visibility and night use.
We try also SFARP to have a similar temporary signs system when required.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Jim Walker
Any recipes for zebra, merv??
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Tabs
"On a private site road markings and signs have no legal significance."
Really Merv?
I would suggest to m'lord that:
They do if the person driving is an employee. As part of the arrangements to ensure safety (74 Act; Management Regs; and Welfare Regs) they become a safe system of work and Reg 7(b) & 8 of the 74 Act requires an employee to co-operate and not to misuse.
The legal significance is not under a Road Traffic Act, or regulation, but under those quoted, I would argue.
(politely nods, and leaves for a three week holiday before waiting for a response *grin*).
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By J Knight
Hi tabs,
Hate to say this but HASAWA and MHSW Regs don't apply to MOPs, and I'm not entirely sure they would (in this context) apply to people not in your employment,
John
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.