Comment 80905

By kevlahan (registered) | Posted September 13, 2012 at 11:02:52 in reply to Comment 80904

The argument is over what constitutes a "legal" crossover, i.e. a "signalized" pedestrian crosswalk.

The City's current position (which is not shared by other municipalities) is that the only type of signed crossover they will install is a pedestrian operated traffic light (which is very expensive).

They claim that the only other acceptable crossover is the Toronto type (signs and a flashing amber light), which they argue is not as safe and almost as expensive to implement.

Many other municipalities highlight crosswalks with signs and pavement markings (either lines or zebra stripes), but Hamilton argues this is not consistent with the regulations.

However, this solution does not provide for any inexpensive way of providing safe crossovers, which means most crosswalks are "invisible" to motorists. I think most motorists understand what zebra stripes and pedestrian crossings mean, but Hamilton feels they could be liable and so put the onus entirely on the pedestrians to dodge traffic when crossing.

The strange thing is that pedestrians actually do have the right of way when crossing lawfully at intersections, but we refuse to remind motorists of this right of way, and as a result pedestrians are not able to exercise their rights to cross safely and conveniently!

Comment edited by kevlahan on 2012-09-13 11:05:45

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds