Walking in Waterloo Region

[ookpik]

http://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=563641

The clip ends, "...both cities are encouraging their citizens to submit their suggestions."

Has anyone informed Jaworksy of this progressive initiative?

[nms]

@ nms, was your comment directed at me? If so, what conclusions did I make?

It sounds to me like the mayor hasn't even looked into this matter, given the inaccuracy of his comments.

My comments were directed at this thread in general.  Sidewalk clearing is one of dozens if not hundreds of issues that a Mayor has to deal with over the course of a four-year term.  Vrbanic has been around the Council ring long enough to know how to deal with reporters intent on a good story and citizens who have determined that their issue is the top issue that must be dealt with NOW.  Jaworsky is a first time politician and I'm willing to give him an opportunity to learn some lessons as he goes along.  Will people remember the Great Sidewalk Debate of 2015 when the next election rolls around?  Probably not as much as what else will happen between now and then.

[mpd618]

Sidewalk clearing is one of dozens if not hundreds of issues that a Mayor has to deal with over the course of a four-year term.  Vrbanic has been around the Council ring long enough to know how to deal with reporters intent on a good story and citizens who have determined that their issue is the top issue that must be dealt with NOW.  Jaworsky is a first time politician and I'm willing to give him an opportunity to learn some lessons as he goes along.

I have to agree with this.

[BuildingScout]

Vrbanic has been around the Council ring long enough to know how to deal with reporters intent on a good story and citizens who have determined that their issue is the top issue that must be dealt with NOW. 

None of the people asking for sidewalk plowing are demanding that it must be dealt now. This is a strawman. At no time did Mayor Jaworsky said "we'll deal with it in due time". That would have been fine. He said no before looking at the facts.

If this is his only gaffe, he will recover from it. If, on the other hand this is a pattern of dealing with people using strawmen and preconceptions instead of engaging the citizenry it will be a long four years for Dave.
 

[ookpik]

None of the people asking for sidewalk plowing are demanding that it must be dealt now. This is a strawman. At no time did Mayor Jaworsky said "we'll deal with it in due time". That would have been fine. He said no before looking at the facts.

I'm one of the 12 letter writers to whom he referred. I have no affiliation with TriTag. I simply used their form as linked to on this forum. And I'm cerrtainly under no delusion that the city will start clearing sidewalks any time soon.

If this is his only gaffe, he will recover from it. If, on the other hand this is a pattern of dealing with people using strawmen and preconceptions instead of engaging the citizenry it will be a long four years for Dave.

Early indications are that it's not an isolated gaffe. Consider his handling of Bob Maven's objections to closed-door budget discussions. IMO that was an even more serious gaffe, especially for a politician who campaigned for more open and transparent government.

Still, I'm receptive to giving Jaworksy some slack--if he starts to show signs that he's worthy.

[MidTowner]

"Pedestrian struck by car, suffers head injury" http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/kitchener-...-1.2986555

King Street and Cedar Street. 1:50pm on a sunny Sunday afternoon. The fellow was walking in the crosswalk and a driver turned right and struck him with the car.

[panamaniac]

I have said it before but I really don't get why that intersection seems so problematic.

[Canard]

"Pedestrian struck by car, suffers head injury" http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/kitchener-...-1.2986555

King Street and Cedar Street. 1:50pm on a sunny Sunday afternoon. The fellow was walking in the crosswalk and a driver turned right and struck him with the car.

The article says the driver of the car was turning left. I wonder if the light turned amber and the pedestrian was crossing on a flashing orange hand. I see that a lot.

[plam]

"Pedestrian struck by car, suffers head injury" http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/kitchener-...-1.2986555

King Street and Cedar Street. 1:50pm on a sunny Sunday afternoon. The fellow was walking in the crosswalk and a driver turned right and struck him with the car.

The article says the driver of the car was turning left.  I wonder if the light turned amber and the pedestrian was crossing on a flashing orange hand.  I see that a lot.

It seems pretty simple to me. The person driving the car has the responsibility to yield to the person who is unprotected by the metal box.

(Hmm. The panamaniac issue of the post not showing up just happened to me.)

[Canard]

It does, and I get the yielding thing, but I'm just saying there are a hundred other factors to consider that we don't know. While the driver will be charged, it doesn't make the pedestrian automatically innocent.

[jamincan]

The light only turns amber once the hand is no longer flashing though.

[MidTowner]

There aren't a lot of details there. It's possible that the fellow was crossing while the hand was flashing- as jamincan points out, the amber doesn't appear until after it's stopped flashing. There is nothing improper about being in a crosswalk when the hand is flashing- you may well be in the process of crossing when it starts to.

The fact that the motorist is being charged probably means it is not a case of the light turning amber and her deciding to try proceed through the human being. Police in Ontario are not exactly aggressive about charging motorists who endanger people.

By the way, the set fine for "failing to yield to a pedestrian" is $150. It might be the case that blame should be shared in this case, but the person operating a vehicle has a higher duty of care. $150 is a drop in the bucket compared to the cost of the police time, ambulance time, health care system time, and other costs of the fellow's injuries.

[ookpik]

There aren't a lot of details there.

<caution>Even if there were they wouldn't necessarily qualify as reliable evidence that can withstand scrutiny in court. So all discussion here is necessarily speculative.</caution>

The fact that the motorist is being charged probably means it is not a case of the light turning amber... the person operating a vehicle has a higher duty of care.

Even if the light had turned to red while the pedestrian was still crossing "the driver of the vehicle or street car shall yield the right of way to the pedestrian or a person in a wheelchair by slowing down or stopping if necessary." [ON HTA 140(1)(a)]

Although many car drivers disobey that law I've never seen the police stop them for it unless someone is hit

[Viewfromthe42]

There is something of a new normal in the area. If you are at a busier intersection, say King and Columbia, drivers who have arrived to turn left believe that they are always entitled to the last movement before right of way shifts to the other street. If the first car has pulled over the crosswalk, and the traffic going straight subsides as the light goes yellow, to me that's one thing. But I am used to seeing the light turn green for me, and still seeing two to three cars pull through from the left and the right to make no-right-of-way left turns.

I accept that sometimes, traffic will run reds, and it doesn't give me the right to do so. I also accept that pedestrians can be slow, or crossing illegally, but I do not get to punish them with 2500lbs of steel.

[Canard]

Re: Ploughing of Sidewalks...