Waterloo Region Connected

Full Version: Walking in Waterloo Region
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
(07-14-2015, 11:01 AM)Markster Wrote: [ -> ]At the very least, a crosswalk should be installed at Paulander Dr if they don't want people crossing the road elsewhere.  There is also a bus stop at Paulander.

I do believe there have been pedestrians killed at the non-crossing at Paulander Drive.
Yeah, and the Highway Traffic Act does not provide any protections for crossing the street at any point that is not a "pedestrian crossover", defined as:
Quote:any portion of a roadway, designated by by-law of a municipality, at an intersection or elsewhere, distinctly indicated for pedestrian crossing by signs on the highway and lines or other markings on the surface of the roadway as prescribed by the regulations

It also doesn't strictly outlaw 'jaywalking' either, but by the omission, the province basically says that you're on your own.
(07-14-2015, 11:08 AM)Viewfromthe42 Wrote: [ -> ]Bus stops and crosswalks make no sense, at times, in Waterloo... Yet, there it is, the "Waterloo Inn" stop, implying deliberately in its name that we are intended to jaywalk at this point. I am not sure of the liabilities involved, but this stop, as many others, can only be used as a jaywalking point.

The city of Toronto's lawyers seem to think there is because in situations like this they put up signs that read:

[Image: No-Pedestrian-Crossing-Sign-X-R9-3.gif]

For example where I used to live the closest bus stop to the subway was on a major arterial road. Depending on which side of that road you lived near you either had to cross that road in order to get on the bus to the subway or to get home off the bus. The only concession to pedestrians for crossing the road were those signs. There was not even a concrete island to give people a place to pause as they tried to cross four lanes of heavy traffic going 70 to 80 k/hr (despite a speed limit of 50km/hr.)

But hey, at least the lawyers were happy.
 
(07-14-2015, 11:01 AM)Markster Wrote: [ -> ]There isn't a crosswalk there.  Street View.
Likely, she was coming from Weichel St, and her destination is to the east ("north"), on the south ("east") side of Victoria.  The next crosswalk to the east is 480m to the east at Lawrence, a distance of 600m between official crossings.  

At the very least, a crosswalk should be installed at Paulander Dr if they don't want people crossing the road elsewhere.  There is also a bus stop at Paulander.

Maybe when they say "not crossing at the crosswalk," they're referring to Westmount. How far must you be from a crosswalk in order for it to be jaywalking? Less than ~100 meters as she was, I would guess. I also assumed she was intending to travel east, or otherwise she would have proceeded to Westmount (though I do see a lot of people crossing very near to Westmount outside of the crosswalk).

Good point about Paulander. It's equidistant (more or less) from both Westmount and Lawrence. If there's a bus stop there, it's important that it be safe to cross- for people to use transit, they have to be able to use it for a round trip. Though, the cost of actual infrastructure isn't warranted anywhere. Unfortunately, there's generally poor education about the requirement for motorists to yield to people on foot mid-block, so it really is needed.
(07-14-2015, 11:49 AM)MidTowner Wrote: [ -> ]
(07-14-2015, 11:01 AM)Markster Wrote: [ -> ]There isn't a crosswalk there.  Street View.
Likely, she was coming from Weichel St, and her destination is to the east ("north"), on the south ("east") side of Victoria.  The next crosswalk to the east is 480m to the east at Lawrence, a distance of 600m between official crossings.  

At the very least, a crosswalk should be installed at Paulander Dr if they don't want people crossing the road elsewhere.  There is also a bus stop at Paulander.

Maybe when they say "not crossing at the crosswalk," they're referring to Westmount. How far must you be from a crosswalk in order for it to be jaywalking? Less than ~100 meters as she was, I would guess. I also assumed she was intending to travel east, or otherwise she would have proceeded to Westmount (though I do see a lot of people crossing very near to Westmount outside of the crosswalk).

Good point about Paulander. It's equidistant (more or less) from both Westmount and Lawrence. If there's a bus stop there, it's important that it be safe to cross- for people to use transit, they have to be able to use it for a round trip. Though, the cost of actual infrastructure isn't warranted anywhere. Unfortunately, there's generally poor education about the requirement for motorists to yield to people on foot mid-block, so it really is needed.

Yes, the crosswalk being referred to is Westmount.
(07-14-2015, 11:49 AM)MidTowner Wrote: [ -> ]Good point about Paulander. It's equidistant (more or less) from both Westmount and Lawrence. If there's a bus stop there, it's important that it be safe to cross- for people to use transit, they have to be able to use it for a round trip. Though, the cost of actual infrastructure isn't warranted anywhere. Unfortunately, there's generally poor education about the requirement for motorists to yield to people on foot mid-block, so it really is needed.

1) Paulander has extremely poor visibility in addition to the high roadway speed, distance to crosswalks, bus stop location, and adjacent dense lower-income housing.

2) There is no requirement in Ontario for motorists to yield to pedestrians mid-block.
(07-14-2015, 11:49 AM)MidTowner Wrote: [ -> ]Unfortunately, there's generally poor education about the requirement for motorists to yield to people on foot mid-block, so it really is needed.

What I was saying, is that there sadly isn't such a requirement, outside of officially marked crossings. Crossing mid-block is not illegal, but it isn't protected either.
Sorry, I think I just proved my own point about miseducation. If a person on foot gives sufficient time/space for a car obeying the speed limit to slow to avoid hitting him or her, I thought that was kosher.

Also, how does it work with a 'T' intersection like Weichel and Victoria? I know that there is a legal crosswalk in existence anywhere where a sidewalk intersects with a street (maybe don't try this at home, either), but what about if the street/sidewalk does not continue on the other side?
(07-14-2015, 01:05 PM)MidTowner Wrote: [ -> ]Sorry, I think I just proved my own point about miseducation. If a person on foot gives sufficient time/space for a car obeying the speed limit to slow to avoid hitting him or her, I thought that was kosher.

Also, how does it work with a 'T' intersection like Weichel and Victoria? I know that there is a legal crosswalk in existence anywhere where a sidewalk intersects with a street (maybe don't try this at home, either), but what about if the street/sidewalk does not continue on the other side?


Quote:crosswalk” means,
(a) that part of a highway at an intersection that is included within the connections of the lateral lines of the sidewalks on opposite sides of the highway measured from the curbs or, in the absence of curbs, from the edges of the roadway, or
(b) any portion of a roadway at an intersection or elsewhere distinctly indicated for pedestrian crossing by signs or by lines or other markings on the surface; (“passage protégé pour piétons”)

pedestrian crossover” means any portion of a roadway, designated by by-law of a municipality, at an intersection or elsewhere, distinctly indicated for pedestrian crossing by signs on the highway and lines or other markings on the surface of the roadway as prescribed by the regulations;

There are few regulations that speak directly to crosswalks.
Basically, you must stop your car before the crosswalk (whether marked or not), and:
Quote:When under this section a driver is permitted to proceed, the driver shall yield the right of way to pedestrians lawfully within a crosswalk
If you didn't have to stop your car, then there's no yielding for the pedestrians.

Contrary to common practice, you can enter a crossing while there's an approaching vehicle, as long as there's time for them to stop. Whether you trust them to stop is another matter. The "irritation point" for a driver usually seems to be not whether they have time to stop, but rather whether they have to slow down at all.
Quote:No pedestrian or person in a wheelchair shall leave the curb or other place of safety at a pedestrian crossover and walk, run or move the wheelchair into the path of a vehicle or street car that is so close that it is impracticable for the driver of the vehicle or street car to yield the right of way.

When a pedestrian is crossing on the roadway within a pedestrian crossover, the driver of a vehicle approaching the crossover,
(a) shall stop before entering the crossover;
(b) shall not overtake another vehicle already stopped at the crossover; and
© shall not proceed into the crossover until the pedestrian is no longer on the roadway.

Whoops, I found the part that makes mid-block crossing illegal...ish.
Quote:Where portions of a roadway are marked for pedestrian use, no pedestrian shall cross the roadway except within a portion so marked.
But how far that extends from a crosswalk is up for interpretation. This is what's often thrown around in these cases.
(07-14-2015, 02:07 PM)Markster Wrote: [ -> ]
(07-14-2015, 01:05 PM)MidTowner Wrote: [ -> ]Also, how does it work with a 'T' intersection like Weichel and Victoria? I know that there is a legal crosswalk in existence anywhere where a sidewalk intersects with a street (maybe don't try this at home, either), but what about if the street/sidewalk does not continue on the other side?


Quote:crosswalk” means,
(a) that part of a highway at an intersection that is included within the connections of the lateral lines of the sidewalks on opposite sides of the highway measured from the curbs or, in the absence of curbs, from the edges of the roadway, or
(b) any portion of a roadway at an intersection or elsewhere distinctly indicated for pedestrian crossing by signs or by lines or other markings on the surface; (“passage protégé pour piétons”)

pedestrian crossover” means any portion of a roadway, designated by by-law of a municipality, at an intersection or elsewhere, distinctly indicated for pedestrian crossing by signs on the highway and lines or other markings on the surface of the roadway as prescribed by the regulations;

Sounds to me like there has to be a sidewalk continuing from one side to the other to get a "default crosswalk" without markings, so that there wouldn't be a crosswalk at a T intersection.
The Atlantic's City Lab has an article which features the new intersection mural on Ahrens Street, and mentions the advocacy of the Mount Hope Breithaupt Park Neighbourhood Association. Very cool. 
Unless they are maintained, I fear they will look worse in a year or two.

I also don't think distracting motorists with stuff so low on the road surface is effective. When I drive, I'm looking 20 seconds ahead so I can react. If I'm distracted by a mural, will I see the kid running after a ball?

It's a very Portlandesque idea, and I think it's cute, but I'll reserve my praise until I see the data.
Why is a four-way stop not possible there? Or even speed bumps, if the situation is really dire there?
(07-23-2015, 11:49 AM)Canard Wrote: [ -> ]It's a very Portlandesque idea, and I think it's cute, but I'll reserve my praise until I see the data.

That's usually a good position to take.

I don't actually know why a four-way stop is not possible there, but I do know that the municipality insisted that it was not.
I am all for 4-way stops as a way of traffic calming - so long as it doesn't result in people frustratedly almost-stopping then flooring it because they were so annoyed. In a quiet neighbourhood this makes so much noise. Speed humps have the same problem - some people do slow down but then they just floor it again... or they just drive fast over them, because it's fun and you get some air!

A slower average speed is always better (especially from a fuel consumption standpoint - I'm admittedly a hypermiler), but I also don't like seeing people drive too fast through quiet neighbourhoods.

Chicanes and geometry-based traffic calming, perhaps, that naturally encourages people to drive slower and more carefully?

Sorry - I'm taking this way off topic, since this is supposed to be a walking thread.