Sometime people suck | Page 3 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Sometime people suck

Brian P said:
I've always thought that the proper engineering solution is a physical barrier between roadways and sidewalks (and bicycle paths) to stop people from crossing where they're not s'posed to. Doesn't have to be a railing or concrete wall ... dense vegetation (bushes etc) can do it, too. Obviously that doesn't work on dense residential streets with lots of driveways, but along major roads that tend to have more traffic and higher speed limits, it should. A central reservation with trees and bushes up the middle of the road - instead of a simple painted line - works, too, and also puts something between traffic in opposing directions (and stops idiots from making U-turns where they shouldn't).
Click to expand...

Reminds me of Vegas.
 
Brian P said:
I've always thought that the proper engineering solution is a physical barrier between roadways and sidewalks (and bicycle paths) to stop people from crossing where they're not s'posed to. Doesn't have to be a railing or concrete wall ... dense vegetation (bushes etc) can do it, too. Obviously that doesn't work on dense residential streets with lots of driveways, but along major roads that tend to have more traffic and higher speed limits, it should. A central reservation with trees and bushes up the middle of the road - instead of a simple painted line - works, too, and also puts something between traffic in opposing directions (and stops idiots from making U-turns where they shouldn't).
Click to expand...
If you want to stop pedestrians, foliage doesn't work. They will quickly establish a path through. Hell, even a fence is only a marginal barrier to stupidity.

I was laughing at a subdivision in brampton that used a fence along a single loaded road to try to keep the subdivision inhabitants from crossing the adjacent busy road mid-block. Not only did the residents not walk to the intersection, they had broken the fence down in three locations within 100m as they all wanted to walk directly across with no lateral deviation. The City repaired the fence at least once but it was quickly broken again and then the City gave up and let the people play frogger.

Rail companies put up chain link fences to try to prevent dangerous trespassing, but even those are perforated every 100m or so by stupid people who want a direct route to their destination.

I like the idea of a physical barrier and I think it works quite well to stop cars as they don't want to get scratched up, but a functional pedestrian barrier is almost impossible to maintain.
 
GreyGhost said:
I like the idea of a physical barrier and I think it works quite well to stop cars as they don't want to get scratched up, but a functional pedestrian barrier is almost impossible to maintain.
Click to expand...

Moats. People may not care about shuffling across the middle of Bloor, but they will actually line up single file to pass around visible standing water
 
Another thing. If the statement earlier in this thread is true (that the people involved were crossing mid-block, not at a designated crossing), and the motorcyclist was charged with careless driving ... unless there's something seriously amiss that we don't know about what the rider was doing, it's the legal system that's broken.
 
beverage said:
Or even easier, install a railing between the sidewalk and roadway so people, at least those with walkers, have to go around. Essentially push them towards using the crossing.
Click to expand...

I think it was Beaverton some decades ago where a kid drowned when he snuck out of bed at night to go tobogganing and ended up in the river. His parents wanted the city to fence the river.

We've fenced part of the sidewalk along Lakeshore Road because a kid lost control of his bike, ending up dead when he was hit by a car.

We've rerouted Canal Road because a driver lost control and ended up in the canal with someone dying.

We've redesigned Spadina Avenue to keep the locals from crashing into the street cars.

I should look at investing in a fencing company shares.
 
At a certain point, we (collectively, society) have to realize that a certain amount of stupidity has to be allowed to happen and be paid for in order to discourage future similar stupidity ... including, occasionally, with someone's life. It is an inevitable result of "if you make it idiot-proof, they'll make better idiots."
 
If there's a nursing home, and a mall entrance right across the street, with a light/crosswalk 100m away, then pedestrians, some with walkers are going to beeline across the road. Putting in a fence, or multiple fences, to try and fix a poor design, is an inefficient way of doing things. If it was a cyclist doing something stupid, like driving the wrong way, crossing the street, or riding in a crosswalk, then I agree, and they should charge the cyclist instead of the driver. Another, example would be someone on a scooter, depending on the situation. But, it's not, it's a pedestrian, worse still, a handicapped pedestrian. Motorcyclists are "known" for going too quick, and someone not having time to avoid a crash with multiple walkers, makes the situation look careless. Whether or not it actually is, is up to the courts to decide now.
 
MONORAIL!
 
Brian P said:
... or maybe just a properly located, marked, and signed crosswalk.
Click to expand...
Properly located is the hard point. That works if you have a single high density building across from a single point of interest. With typical sprawl, you have an infinite number of starting and ending points and very few are willing to walk even 100' out of the direct path.
 
no need to spend any more public money on this
we have all the infrastruture and laws required
 
Let Darwin solve the problem.
 
It may be a simple as charging the driver with careless so his insuarnce carrier will pick up the tab on duffus crossing a street, at dusk, in the drizzle, on a high performance walker.
The system is that messed up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom