News   Dec 10, 2019
 60     0 
News   Dec 10, 2019
 459     0 
News   Dec 10, 2019
 1K     6 

Why you should jaywalk

B

bizorky

Guest
How many drivers actually follow the speed limit to an exact degree? A quick experience on the 401 illustrates that standard practice diifers considerably from the legal limit.

How many drivers are clueless on the rules for turning right on a red? As a pedestrian, I get the impression that too many drivers view this allowance as an absolute right.

Driving within a city core is (or at least should be) different than driving on a multi-lane boulevard or a highway. The fact that many vehicle operators can't distinguish different roads and different rules for them is a serious issue in my opinion. Not all roads are created equally, so to speak. I agree with the idea that neighbourhoods with pedestrian traffic need a different approach with respect to street design and pedestrian use.
 
G

green22

Guest
"I find that jaywalking is more dangerous downtown, especially because of taxis and cyclists (both of which are more aggressive than regular cars),"

You might have a better chance of getting a nick but chance of serious injury or death increases with weight and speed. Your chances of getting seriously injured or killed from a bike rider are pretty small, despite some of the racers on the street.

As said before, it is legal to jaywalk all though it is not legal to block traffic (vehicles).

Our arterials are designed with few signalled crossings for pedestrians. If they really want to make pedestrians extinct they would make it illegal and enforce it.
Crossing at traffic lights in the suburbs is also made worse since traffic engineers have widened the roads at the intersections from 2 to 4 lanes, or from 4 to 6 etc, with multiple turning lanes. Toronto also does not have no turn on red rules so the traffic may not be stopped as you are attempting to cross. When crossing multiple lane arterials at intersections there are many directions to watch out for. Between intersections, the roadway is thinner and there are only 1 or 2 directions to look out for (depending on boulevard/median).
The corner bulb-out on the other hand gives the advantage to the pedestrian in crossing at intersections. Most suburban intersections are designed in the opposite manner however.
 
S

scarberiankhatru

Guest
"You might have a better chance of getting a nick but chance of serious injury or death increases with weight and speed. Your chances of getting seriously injured or killed from a bike rider are pretty small, despite some of the racers on the street."

Obviously, but I'd prefer to not be hit at all. It's the taxis I worry about most, although you could easily be hit be a car after getting hit by a cyclist.
 
S

Suicidal Gingerbread Man

Guest
Bullshit gobbeldygook. What is it about traffic signals that you don't understand? Jesus, grow the **** up.
Christ, that was very mature of you.
 
M

Mislav

Guest
Wow! Fiendish - You've convinced me! I'll never jaywalk again. :)
 
S

SD2

Guest
In Ontario it is legal to (jay)walk in the middle of a street -- that is, cross the street at places other than interesections or crosswalks. It is jaywalking, and technically illegal, to cross against the light, when at an intersection.
That's what I thought! Thanks for the confirmation.
 
C

Chuck100

Guest
Traffic engineers want streets to act as traffic funnels; to them, pedestrians are mere nuisances
Whoever said that really has no clue what they're talking about. I have designed several intersections in the GTA, and while intersections are sized to carry the projected vehicular traffic volume, every effort is taken to ensure the safety of pedestrians.

Why is there always enough time to cross the street? It has nothing to do with traffic volumes. Rather, a signal timing plan can only be validated if it provides people of all physical conditions ample time to cross. Why is the walk/don't walk light clearly visible from the sidewalk? Because a traffic engineer placed a pole in that exact spot so that the walk/don't walk light could be mounted in an acceptable location.

Why are catch basins always placed upstream of an intersection? So that pedestrians don't have to walk across a river of runoff as they cross. Why are you never hit by a turning 18 wheeler when it's making a right turn? Because we ran extensive simulations to ensure that trucks could complete the turn without the rear wheels hitting the sidewalk. Why do drop curbs align? Because they were drawn in that location during the design stage.

Intersections aren't randomly designed. They are carefully thought out, and can take days to complete. Whoever said the comment, I'd like to see you design an intersection.
 
S

scarberiankhatru

Guest
"every effort is taken to ensure the safety of pedestrians."

Don't know if this is true for all traffic/engineering consulting companies, but some will keep a planner on staff specifically so there will always be someone there to "think of the children." Unless you're designing a 400-series highway, you'd have to be pretty far removed from reality to only consider the movement of vehicular traffic. All drivers are pedestrians at the beginning and the end of their trip, anyway.
 
C

Chuck100

Guest
There are almost always planners in the office, but transportation planning is still dominated by those with an engineering background. The forecasting of future volumes and designing a trasnportation system that meets current and future travel patterns is done mostly by engineers.

Wylie is much better suited than I am to discuss the role of planners, so I won't even try. I'd be curious to hear what he has to say.
 
W

wyliepoon

Guest
Wylie is much better suited than I am to discuss the role of planners, so I won't even try. I'd be curious to hear what he has to say.
Who me? But I'm in architecture, not planning!
 
C

Chuck100

Guest
No way! I thought you were in planning. I know that someone here is doing planning, possibly at Ryerson?
 
S

shawnmicallef

Guest
Chuck> I don't think his article was about the placement of signals and the like, and i'm sure you and your people do a fine job on stuff like this, and that i mostly don't have to think about finding the signal (meaning, your work is cognatively invisable) means you're doing fine.

The article was about higher level placements and arrangements of crossings and etc, which i think is open for talking about.
 
C

Chuck100

Guest
I'm not commenting on the overall point of the article, I'm commenting on the author's ignorance and finger pointing at my profession.
Traffic engineers and transportation planners often see cities in profoundly different ways, so getting them to agree on pedestrian-oriented street design can be quite a feat.
The term "transportation planner" is the official name for a traffic engineer. In other words, they are the same thing. In the context that "transportation planner" was used in this article, the author really meant urban planner. Urban planners are responsible for how cities grow. If you like the redevelopment of the Distillery District, thank urban planners. Similarly, if you don't like what's being built in Vaughan, thank urban planners!

Where do transportation planners (engineers) fit in? We simply design a transportation system that fits best in, and accomodates the travel patters of, the environment that urban planners have created. Please remember that the exact same traffic engineers who designed Highway 7 and the 400 series highway system also designed the modern day Queen St.

Urban planners dictated that St. Clair for example will be turned into an urban avenues. Therefore transportation engineers designed a streetscape conducive to transit use and pedestrian activity. Other planners dictated that Highway 7 would be a major auto oriented travel corridor. Therefore transportatoin engineers designed a high capacity thoroughfare. See the chain of command yet?
 
A

AlvinofDiaspar

Guest
The term "transportation planner" is the official name for a traffic engineer. In other words, they are the same thing. In the context that "transportation planner" was used in this article, the author really meant urban planner. Urban planners are responsible for how cities grow. If you like the redevelopment of the Distillery District, thank urban planners. Similarly, if you don't like what's being built in Vaughan, thank urban planners!
It isn't as simple as such - because while planners (an overly narrowly defined term) provide the framework of urban form, they recieve input on what that framework should be from a variety of sources, including transporation planners/engineers. It's not necessarily a linear process. Think of planners as linkages between different sets of information and knowledge on a variety of fields, and being the "processor" of the forementioned into a plan.

Where do transportation planners (engineers) fit in? We simply design a transportation system that fits best in, and accomodates the travel patters of, the environment that urban planners have created. Please remember that the exact same traffic engineers who designed Highway 7 and the 400 series highway system also designed the modern day Queen St.
Again, that's a simpification by turning it into a linear, one way process. Planners designated the 400 series corridors with input from other specialists (civil engineers, demographers, etc), whose actions in turn influence the plans that come forth later on with regards to development in the surrounding areas.

Urban planners dictated that St. Clair for example will be turned into an urban avenues. Therefore transportation engineers designed a streetscape conducive to transit use and pedestrian activity. Other planners dictated that Highway 7 would be a major auto oriented travel corridor. Therefore transportatoin engineers designed a high capacity thoroughfare. See the chain of command yet?
Not quite a "chain of command" - more like competing interests, of which urban planners, urban designers, transportation engineers (at Transportation Services instead of Planning Dept) act and react to input from the community, political leadership, which ultimately controls what is to be (and not to be) built within (and sometimes without) parameters set forth by the formentioned groups. It isn't like transportation engineers are necessarily subordinate to planners at all.

However, when Transportation Services (often allied with traffic engineers) decided their priorities are the utmost, against the concerns/scrutiny of planners, it comes a problem because the former is trained to deal with a set of problems in a narrowly defined field, which isn't necessarily how reality functions.

AoD
 

Top