[Article] If I’m at a crosswalk, do drivers have to stop even if the lights aren’t flashing? : canada

[–] [email protected] 30 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It doesn't matter how legal it is or not. If a driver is expected to stop because I'm crossing but doesn't and I'm crippled or dead, that law means very little to me.

We should instead design crosswalks that are inherently safer. Ones that force drivers to slow down and look for pedestrains regardless of some flashing lights that may or may not work with a beg button.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yup. Crosswalks and pedestrian bridges may not seem like it, but they are actually car infrastructure. They are designed to allow cars to be as unimpeded as possible.

Real pedestrian infrastructure looks like streets that make drivers uncomfortable to be driving on. Cars and people should not be mixing.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Quiet, peasant! This is a car-centric society! Not driving is a choice to not be a real person!

Politicians, Developers, police

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's worse our cities are so sprawled out its pathetic. Everyone always says look at Europe sure but look at their cities smaller area wise but with more people.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

That's because their zoning laws are different.

They allow building walkable neighborhoods with mixed-use buildings that have retail businesses on the ground floor and residential units on the 3-5 floors above. Their daily errands can easily be done by foot, so there is less traffic.

You can't achieve that in a car-dependent suburb where you need to drive to get to the nearest grocery store, school or cafe.

[+] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

[removed by mod]

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Edmonton has a ton of crosswalks across 60kph roads, with flashing lights that indicate drivers must slow down to 35kph (and obviously stop if there's a pedestrian in the cross walk).

The problem is a lot of cyclists don't bother to hit the button, then just keep barreling straight on through.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The problem is a lot of cyclists don’t bother to hit the button, then just keep barreling straight on through.

So they should be expected to stop the bike, get off of it, go push a button, then go back to the bike at every single intersection? Maybe the "problem" is this horrible, cyclist-unfriendly crosswalk design.

[+] [email protected] -9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

When I was a kid, we were taught to get off our bike and walk it across the street. Jesus Christ you sound like an entitled twat.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You know, you are right. Since pressing beg buttons is not such an inconvenience, why don't we make car drivers press them instead and let pedestrians continue unimpeded like cars do today?

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I'll take a shot at de-escalating this thread...

What you're remembering is reasonable because you were a kid and probably biking on a sidewalk, which is generally not what commuting cyclists use. I (and perhaps @frostbiker) are thinking of a crossover at a multi-use trail which are designed for cyclists to commute along.

Surely if you want people to drive less (which is a good thing for all commuters, especially those who drive!) then wouldn't it behoove municipalities to design infrastructure that's conducive to efficiently cycling, right? To me, having to stop at every single road crossing is incredibly discouraging. Can you imagine if every light on your commute was red?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Surely if you want people to drive less (which is a good thing for all commuters, especially those who drive!) then wouldn’t it behoove municipalities to design infrastructure that’s conducive to efficiently cycling, right?

And there is, except in cases where it isn't. In cases where it isn't, it's in your best interests to stop and push the button (you don't need to get off your bike, it's on a pole).

To me, having to stop at every single road crossing is incredibly discouraging.

The alternative is expecting a vehicle doing 60km/s to stop on a dime. I don't want to hit a cyclist, but jesus it's like some of them go out of their way to avoid safety measures.

Can you imagine if every light on your commute was red?

Can you imagine if cars treated every red light like it was a yield?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

And there is, except in cases where it isn’t.

In my experience as a driver, pedestrian, and cyclist, is that good cycling infrastructure is the exception, not the rule. Do you really think we generally have good cycling infrastructure in Canada?

The alternative is expecting a vehicle doing 60km/s to stop on a dime.

That's a false dichotomy. What if drivers were simply required to slow to a crawl (yield) at certain intersections, rather than cyclists having to completely stop to press a button, and then wait for the light to change?

Can you imagine if cars treated every red light like it was a yield?

Yes, I can, because that's how most drivers treat stop signs. I don't like generalizing drivers or cyclists, but "jesus it's like some of them go out of their way to avoid safety measures" could apply to all types of road users. Heck, just ten minutes ago on the drive home from the gym, some idiot in a car pulled out in front of me from a drive, into a busy, snow-covered street at the bottom of an overpass and I had to brake heavily to avoid turning his passenger side door into a modern art sculpture.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don’t like generalizing drivers or cyclists, but “jesus it’s like some of them go out of their way to avoid safety measures” could apply to all types of road users.

Neither do I, but I'm not advocating for treating red lights/stop signs as yields, nor am I complaining about how stopping at them is a major inconvenience for me.

For reference, this is the crosswalk I'm talking about: https://maps.app.goo.gl/BfiysRy4uVC511zFA

That's a 60kph zone with a bend and a tree line that can make cyclists hard to see when they don't feel like stopping. You're perfectly entitled to feel that stopping to push the button is inconvenient, but you can't turn around and complain about the number of cyclists hit by cars each year when they willingly avoid safety precautions.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Why do you present a false dichotomy again, this time between cyclists crossing a dangerous road without stopping, or coming to a complete stop? I can think of at least two or three other solutions off the top of my head:

Lower the speed limit of the road and improve visibility so that commuters can see one another.
Place a yield sign so that drivers are legally required to slow to a speed at which they could safely stop if necessary.
Build an overpass or an underpass so that the lanes don't cross on the same plane.

If we can agree that the current infrastructure is suboptimal, let's focus on improving the infrastructure rather than assigning blame. Improving the infrastructure helps all road users.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

All of your suggestions inconvenience others for your own benefit. You're demanding the infrastructure change simply so that you don't have to come to a stop to push a button, and yet I am not the one asking for cities without red lights, stop signs, train crossings, and traffic slowdowns.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm sorry, I thought we agreed that better cycling infrastructure is better for all road users, including drivers. If we don't agree on that, then I understand that you won't agree with my subsequent points.

I also don't see how an overpass or an underpass would negatively impact drivers at all...

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Of course it would, that wasn't my initial point and I don't feeling like talking about how things should be. All I asked was that bikers who are using the existing infrastructure take the necessary safety precautions, and people got incredibly pissy because actually having to stop and push the button was a huge inconvenience for them, which is pretty standard for how many cyclists present themselves. Entitled twats.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If cyclists are entitled twats for not wanting to stop to push a beg button at every crossing, would drivers be entitled twats for expecting the same thing? Or do drivers deserve better? How much whining would there be if roles were reversed?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Drivers already have to stop at red lights, stop signs, crosswalks, train crossings. Point out where a driver is saying they shouldn't have to stop for those things? You think I don't get pissed when I see the guy in front of me turn right on a no-red right? Or roll through a stop sign? Do I enjoy driving after dusk and seeing idiots in cars who can't turn their headlights on? Or when it's raining? Do you see me saying "well if only taxpayers would pay for more streetlights I wouldn't have to remember to turn my lights on!"

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Point out where a driver is saying they shouldn’t have to stop for those things?

I'm referring to this specific multi-use trail crossing. I'm sorry for not making that clear enough for you to understand at first glance.

I'm suggesting that drivers should slow or stop each time they pass this crossing, and you're suggesting that cyclists should atop each time they pass this crossing.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

They might have different laws in Ontario but in BC that's also the way to do it.

If they're on the bike they're considered a vehicle and have to cross the road in the same way a car would*.

If they're walking the bike they're treated as a pedestrian and must walk across the crosswalk

*( There are exceptions, such as multi use trails, but they are either clearly marked to both the road and trail users or they have a stop sign for cyclists)

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (4 children)

In a lot of places you can legally cross the street at the corner regardless of whether there is a crosswalk and drivers are legally required to stop.

But yea if they don’t stop and you are dead you’re dying words can be, “I had the right of way, motherfuh- cough cough”

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

@burntbutterbiscuits @NarrativeBear I always told my kids, as they approached driving age, that the laws of physics trump the laws of man where cars are involved.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

My first girlfriend’s dad use to always say “two objects can not occupy the same space at the same time” he was a science teacher lol

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Bosons would like a word 🤼

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I feel like the safest driver on the road in my '69 Boson GT.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Yep here in BC any crossroads is also considered an unmarked crosswalk for pedestrians. My wife and I were crossing like this, no traffic even, and a cop coming up the sidestreet rolled down his window and yelled there is a crosswalk down there pointing 2 blocks down the street. He was getting irritated we weren't turning back to go use the marked walk. (Read your own lawbook dude.)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Yep here in BC any crossroads is also considered an unmarked crosswalk for pedestrians. My wife and I were crossing like this, no traffic even, and a cop coming up the sidestreet rolled down his window and yelled there is a crosswalk down there pointing 2 blocks down the street. He was getting irritated we weren't turning back to go use the marked walk. (Read your own lawbook dude.)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Yep here in BC any crossroads is also considered an unmarked crosswalk for pedestrians. My wife and I were crossing like this, no traffic even, and a cop coming up the sidestreet rolled down his window and yelled there is a crosswalk down there pointing 2 blocks down the street. He was getting irritated we weren't turning back to go use the marked walk. (Read your own lawbook dude.)

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:

“There’s no legal requirement for a pedestrian to activate that [flashing] light – they can cross in the crosswalk and still have the right of way,” said Acting Sergeant Dennis Vink with the Calgary Police Service collision reconstruction unit.

For instance, Section 41 of Alberta’s Use of Highway and Rules of the Road Regulation states that drivers “shall yield the right of way to a pedestrian crossing the roadway within a crosswalk.”

In Ontario, for instance, cars have to stop once a pedestrian has stepped into the crosswalk, Toronto police said in an email.

At crosswalks, drivers can go once the pedestrian is clear of the vehicle; otherwise, they may face a $300 fine (doubled in community safety zones) and three demerit points.

Still, once a pedestrian is in the crosswalk – even if they’ve got a solid red hand and they no longer have the legal right of way – cars should stop to allow them to cross safely, Vink said.

In any province, if someone is standing at any crosswalk, it’s a good idea to slow down and be prepared to stop, even if the lights aren’t flashing, said Angelo DiCicco, general manager with the Ontario Safety League, a Mississauga-based non-profit focusing on driver education.

The original article contains 989 words, the summary contains 207 words. Saved 79%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

If you’re in Surrey, red lights and stop signs are “suggestive”.

Canada

Communities

Rules