Changes to the HTA

[Brian P]

Here is what it looks like when coming out of that driveway turning left ... you can even see the well-worn path where the kids come out onto the street from.

https://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&l...oid=uP7zRXi0KWhgq0n1PMOhgw&cbp=12,208.18,,0,0

In what way is it NOT illegal to cross the street there?

What happens is that when cross traffic clears, I start moving out of that driveway and the kids walk/run off that sidewalk simultaneously.

 

[fastar1]

Here is what it looks like when coming out of that driveway turning left ... you can even see the well-worn path where the kids come out onto the street from.

https://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&l...oid=uP7zRXi0KWhgq0n1PMOhgw&cbp=12,208.18,,0,0

In what way is it NOT illegal to cross the street there?

What happens is that when cross traffic clears, I start moving out of that driveway and the kids walk/run off that sidewalk simultaneously.

There's only so much you can do to go against human nature and make people behave the way you want. From speed limits to prohibition to jaywalking, people are gonna do what they're gonna do.

 

[iFly55]

http://news.ontario.ca/mto/en/2014/10/improving-road-safety.html

 

[Brian P]

There's only so much you can do to go against human nature and make people behave the way you want. From speed limits to prohibition to jaywalking, people are gonna do what they're gonna do.

Right, and that's why the best solution is some sort of engineering change that discourages people from crossing there, and instead encourages them to cross a little further down the street where there is not conflicting traffic - be it handrail, or landscaping, or whatever, in front of where those steps come down. I can understand people being lazy and not wanting to go all the way to the official crosswalk, but directly opposite that driveway is bad news.

I deal with human nature all the time with industrial equipment ... people do things the easy/lazy way, you have to make sure the easy/lazy way to do something coincides with the safe way to do it. If the lazy way doesn't make the robot stop ... if the lazy way involves reaching into an opening and you can get to moving parts in there ... someone's gonna get hurt.

 

[fastar1]

Right, and that's why the best solution is some sort of engineering change that discourages people from crossing there, and instead encourages them to cross a little further down the street where there is not conflicting traffic - be it handrail, or landscaping, or whatever, in front of where those steps come down. I can understand people being lazy and not wanting to go all the way to the official crosswalk, but directly opposite that driveway is bad news.

I deal with human nature all the time with industrial equipment ... people do things the easy/lazy way, you have to make sure the easy/lazy way to do something coincides with the safe way to do it. If the lazy way doesn't make the robot stop ... if the lazy way involves reaching into an opening and you can get to moving parts in there ... someone's gonna get hurt.

Absolutely! So the fact that it's illegal isn't particularly relevant. The issue is poor design, and your ideas or Rob's are great suggestions because they're design solutions, instead of another layer of legislation.

The thing is any fix will be a band-aid fix now. The place was poorly designed from the start. That's absolutely typical of suburban planning policies that have created massive human-incompatible neighbourhoods like this for decades all across North America. Lately, planning guides have been updated to improve the consideration given to pedestrians and cyclists so mistakes like this should become far less common and everybody can use the mode of transportation they wish (including cars). In the meantime the solution is to ensure everyone is paying attention, and to be patient with pedestrians who have a poor situational awareness.

 

[fastar1]

http://news.ontario.ca/mto/en/2014/10/improving-road-safety.html

I can't say I disagree with most of those at first glance, but I'm aware of the one about giving cyclists a minimum gap to cars and I think it's a bad idea.

I cycle as often as I drive, and I find drivers are already scared enough to pass me in the same lane it's ridiculous, there doesn't need to be a new rule. Instead of passing me they pace me even when there's tons of room, and block a lane traffic. Then as the cars eventually go by they honk or give me the finger as if it's my fault the first driver was clueless!

Obviously my experience is unique because cycling groups generally support this proposal. But then, cycling groups that I've ridden with think they can use the whole lane for themselves or ride side-by-side on a whim. They also think that e-bikes should be banned from cycling lanes. It's a very sick mentality that is probably carried over from the driving mentality of "it's my road, all mine, I own this space and nobody can share it". That's never really been the idea behind the way roads are designed (except for restricted-access highways), but in practice people have always driven like they own the road.

 

[Rob MacLennan]

Here is what it looks like when coming out of that driveway turning left ... you can even see the well-worn path where the kids come out onto the street from.

https://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&l...oid=uP7zRXi0KWhgq0n1PMOhgw&cbp=12,208.18,,0,0

In what way is it NOT illegal to cross the street there?

What happens is that when cross traffic clears, I start moving out of that driveway and the kids walk/run off that sidewalk simultaneously.

Unfortunately it's an intersection, of sorts, which means it would be difficult to show that it's an illegal crossing. As I said it's just a monumentally stupid one. When I can find a way to keep people from crossing Yonge Street less than 50 feet north of Front, against the light, I'll get back to you.