Road Traffic Code 2000

Commentary Paper No. 5

Regulation 113 (Restrictions on use of right lane) - implantation and signage.

Synopsis

In Western Australia we do not have a keep left rule on multi-laned roads as is common in other countries and we also allow overtaking on the left, a practice which is banned in some other countries. However, Regulation 113 restricts the use of the right hand lane on roads where the speed limit is 90 km/hr or greater.

Unfortunately, this is one of Western’s Australia’s better kept secrets. Paper 2 makes the point that this important Regulation is not even mentioned in the literature with which learner driver’s are presented. The relevant government authorities that deal with signage permit outdated advisory signs to remain which communicates to motorists that keeping left is courteous but optional. “Keep Left Unless Overtaking Signs” which also trigger the rule are erected in places without any further signs after major intersections on the road. In one instance the law in the Northbridge tunnel is changed by a single sign in the Darling Range 20 kilometres away.

Prepared by Ted Leech LLB (Hons.), B. Comm

41 Woodbine Road

Pickering Brook WA 6076

Telephone: 9293 8170

Email eleech@perthlaw.biz

23 August 2004

Road Traffic Code 2000

Commentary Paper No. 5

Regulation 113 (Restrictions on use of right lane) - implantation and signage

Introduction

The Relevant laws (Diagrams Omitted)

113 . Restriction on use of right lane

(1) In this regulation —

"marked lane" does not include —

(a) a lane set aside exclusively for vehicles making a left or right turn;

(b) a special purpose lane; or

"right lane" , in relation to 2 or more marked lanes that are available exclusively for vehicles travelling in the same direction, means the marked lane that is further or furthest to the right side of the carriageway.

(2) This regulation applies to a driver driving on a carriageway that has 2 or more marked lanes available exclusively for vehicles travelling in the same direction where —

(a) the speed limit is 90 km/h or more; or

(b) a "keep left unless overtaking" sign applies to that part of the carriageway,

or both.

(3) A driver shall not drive the vehicle in the right lane unless —

(a) the driver is turning right, or making a U turn from the centre of the road, and is giving a right turn signal;

(b) the driver is overtaking;

(c) a "left lane must turn left" sign or left traffic arrows apply to any other lane, and the driver is not turning left,

(d) the driver is required to drive in the right lane under regulation 137;

(e) the driver is avoiding an obstruction; or

(f) the traffic in each other lane travelling in the same direction is congested.

Points: 2 Modified penalty: 1 PU

(4) A "keep left unless overtaking" sign applies to a length of carriageway beginning at the sign and ending at the nearest of the following:

(a) an "end keep left unless overtaking" sign;

(b) a road sign or road marking that indicates the carriageway is no longer a multi-lane carriageway;

(5) The Director General, by notice published in the Gazette —

(a) may declare that this regulation does not apply to the driving of a vehicle on a carriageway described in the notice; and

(b) may vary or revoke a previous notice under this subregulation.

Commentary Paper No 1 considered this regulation but that paper was mainly concerned with its application to pedal cyclists. This paper is concerned with its application to motor vehicles and its treatment by police and other government departments.

The following passage setting out the history of the regulation is taken verbatim from Commentary Paper No 1.

“If I recall correctly, sometime prior to 1997 there was no restriction on which lane a driver could drive in at any speed. This was patently annoying when drivers would stay in the right hand lane at relatively slow speeds where the speed limit was, say 100 km/hr.

There was then a debate in Western Australia about changing this rule. There was a strong school of thought that there ought to be a keep left rule in areas where the speed limit was 80 km/hr or greater. Some, including the then Police Commissioner, Mr Falconer, thought that the keep left unless overtaking rule ought to be applied whatever the area speed limit. The latter was the rule that was eventually enacted.

The issues here are quintessentially practical. In an area where the speed limit is 50, 60 or 70 km/hr, the roads are generally in residential or built up areas with limited visibility to the left of the road and there are generally houses on the left, trees and signs at the edge of the road obstructing vision of a footpath and events just off the road such as children playing, and abutting driveways. To my way of thinking, in such areas, it makes sense to travel in the right hand lane most of the time (depending on local considerations) so that the driver has maximum vision of events to the left of the carriageway and hence maximum time to react to any hazard.

However, where the speed limit is 80 km/hr or greater, there are usually no or very few houses or driveways to the left of the carriageway and so traffic should generally travel in the left hand lane allowing faster traffic to overtake in the right hand lane.

In 2000 after the reign of Mr Falconer was over and possibly because of Australian road traffic regulations uniformity, the rule was changed so that drivers only had to keep left where the speed limit was 90 km/hr or greater. I think that 80 km/hr is the better rule but the argument is only one of degree and I do not intend to cavil with the 90 km/hr rule. That is the way the law stands at present and is set out above.”

Discussion

In the appendix to Commentary Paper No. 2, I touched on my frustration at the level of ignorance concerning the rule restricting the use of the right hand lane. There appears to be no effort made by the police to enforce the rule and it may be unfair to do so since ‘Drive Safe’, the Bible for learner drivers, does not even mention it.

The situation is exacerbated by the continued existence of the advisory signs erected by the RAC, Lions or other groups years ago when keeping left was a matter of courtesy and not a matter of law. These signs should have been removed when restrictions on the use of the right hand lane became law. Their continued exposure suggests to motorists that keeping left is not legally compulsory.

I note in passing that a large proportion of vehicles displaying ‘P’ plates are offenders against this law which firms my suspicion that the rule is not considered worthy of teaching to learner drivers.

On Welshpool Road, Wattle Grove, less than a kilometre East of Tonkin Highway the pictured road signs are erected on the East bound carriageway:

The speed limit at that location is 80 km/hr and therefore, absent the signs, there would be no restrictions on the use of the right hand lane. The signs invoke the rule.

About 500 metres past the signs is an intersection with Lewis Road. Lewis Road, although it could not be called a major road, is quite busy and carries traffic from Forrestfield to the Darling Range. As traffic turns left 500 metres after the signs, the drivers have no way of knowing that the rule which normally applies on roads with an 80 km/hr speed limit has been altered by the signs.

Similarly, drivers turning right into Welshpool Road from Crystal Brook Road at the top of the escarpment have no way of knowing that the use of the right hand lane is restricted. There are no other signs other than the ones pictured. I suggest that it would be grossly unfair to prosecute any driver for non compliance with a sign that he could not possibly have seen. What, therefore, is the point of these signs if the rule cannot be enforced?

But the situation that really stretches the limits of absurdity occurs on the West bound carriageway of Welshpool Road. The picture below was taken West of Gladys Road and West of Crystal Brook Road at Lesmurdie.

These signs comply with the Road Traffic Code and create restrictions on the use of the right hand lane. I would add that these signs and the signs previously mentioned are very sensibly placed in that the rule ought to be applied at least as far as Tonkin Highway.

However, just to the east of these signs is the intersection with Crystal Brook Road. Traffic turning left onto Welshpool Road from Crystal Brook Road has no opportunity to know that the restrictive rule applies to traffic descending the escarpment. But the situation gets worse.

Regulation 113 (4) provides that the signs apply to a length of carriageway beginning at the sign and ending when any one of three events occurs. The first is an ‘end keep left unless overtaking sign’. There is no sign like this erected on Welshpool Road and I do not recall having seen one anywhere in the state. The second is a road sign or road marking that indicates the carriageway is no longer a multi-laned carriageway. The third is if the carriageway ends in a T-intersection or a dead end. Welshpool Road does not end in a T-intersection or a dead end and in fact becomes Orrong Road at the intersection with Roe Highway. Orrong Road in turn becomes the Graham Farmer Freeway.

None of the three terminating events occurs until the road ceases to be a multi-laned carriageway more than 20 kilometres away on the other side of the Northbridge Tunnel where the carriageway narrows to one lane to feed into the North bound carriageway of the Mitchell Freeway. The restrictive rule therefore applies to this entire stretch but the only signs informing motorists of the fact are the ones erected in Lesmurdie.

It is disconcerting to realise that, until anyone reads this paper, I am probably the only person in the world who knows there is a restriction on the use of the right hand lane through the Northbridge Tunnel in the westbound carriageway pursuant to Regulation 113 (4) of the Road Traffic Code.

This situation has existed since the later of: (1) the erection of the signs; or (2) the re-configuration of the Welshpool Road/Roe Highway intersection, a period I suspect of 3 or 4 years. Every day police officers and Main Roads Department employees must pass those signs but the meaning of them has apparently not occurred to any of those persons.

Conclusion

The rule restricting the use of the right hand lane is a good rule. It is sensible, reasonable and calculated to facilitate the free flow of traffic and minimisation of frustration caused by obstructive vehicles. However, the Department for Planning and Infrastructure have seen fit not to bother including the rule in the only publications available to learner drivers. The police apparently have not seen fit to enforce the rule and the Department for Main Roads has erected sensible signs in sensible places but entirely failed to ensure that motorists joining the carriageway after the signs know of the rule. The situation of one two signs at Lesmurdie governing 20 kilometres of arterial road through metropolitan Perth is just ludicrous.

Sources:

This paper was compiled using information from any or all of the following sources and no others (unless explicitly stated);

The Road Traffic Code 2000 and amendments current until 10 November, 2003.

The Road Traffic Code 1975 reprinted as at 23 September 1997.

“Drive Safe: A Handbook for Western Australian Road Users” Department for Planning and Infrastructure, published by the Road Safety Council of Western Australia, Revised Edition 1 December 2001.

“How to Pass Your Driving Assessment: A Candidate’s Guide to the Practical Driving Assessment” Transport, published by The Road Safety Council of Western Australia 1 September 2001.