Cycling in Waterloo Region - Printable Version +- Waterloo Region Connected (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com) +-- Forum: Waterloo Region Works (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=14) +--- Forum: Transportation and Infrastructure (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=25) +--- Thread: Cycling in Waterloo Region (/showthread.php?tid=186) Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
|
RE: Cycling in Waterloo Region - danbrotherston - 11-02-2020 (11-02-2020, 05:42 PM)Coke6pk Wrote:(11-02-2020, 04:16 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: I realize you are a former MLEO, but I really must disagree with this. Some, I feel is completely false, some, I think is just biased by the image. You're basically arguing that the law is just "whatever man". The reason the law says 15 cm, is because 15 cm is too much. The law is there so that we all have, as much as is possible, an unambiguous statement about what is right and wrong. When it says 15 cm...it's because we all agree that it should be 15 cm, not 15.1 and not 14.9. Since that kind of thing can be measured unambigously, why should we not ticket 16 cm (lets be fair and use a reasonable measurement error)? I am sick and tired of people believing themselves above the law. The only thing worse than people believing themselves above the law is LEOs telling them that they are right. As for why I believe this is okay, you're right, I don't measure the distance to the curb, but I know that farther than 15 cm (about half a foot) is not okay, which means when I park, I ensure that I'm closer than that...it isn't hard...I don't need a measuring tape, if I'm at all close to half a foot, I'm not close enough. This is why I like automated enforcement. If there is a speed camera, if you are traveling over the set point for speeding (which *SHOULD* be the limit, but in practice will not be, but should at least be public), you get a ticket, no discussion, no "well, he's a white guy", "she's a cute girl", "he looks like me", "well he has kids at my school", they just get a ticket. And people who get angry about this do so because they are used to using their privilege to get away with breaking the law. Like I said, I call your 50% of the sidewalk, as bullshit...sidewalks are of different width, and my stroller takes up more than 50% of the sidewalk, 50% is well beyond obstructing the sidewalk, most sidewalks are only 1.5 meters wide, that leaves .8 meters with no ticket issued? I can't get a stroller past that. When I call in a vehicle because I was forced to go off the edge of the sidewalk when walking, I expect a ticket to be issued, and I would be quite angry to find out that wasn't happening. We already bend over backwards to excuse driver behaviour at every turn...I expect bylaw to do their job and enforce the bylaws. My friend got ticketed for being a few inches over, but you're telling me a driver forcing me into mud won't be unless they are blocking more than half the sidewalk fuck that. Now you may be right and they don't issue tickets. But you say this policy exists for a reason? This isn't a good reason, it's a very bad reason, they exist because we refuse to enforce our laws against people who break them, who fit a certain description (is driving a car), and that is very wrong. It's also a terrible implementation. The law is written down so that we can all see it, but if the law isn't being enforced, but some other secret policy is, that's not how a fair society works. Look I'm basically just ranting at this point, but I'm sick and tired of this bullshit. I'm sick and tired of blocked sidewalks and I'm so fucking sick and tired of council telling me enforcement is the solution, then refusing to even enforce the bylaws...GAH!!! As for whether bylaw would write a ticket, I don't know, I agree the sign is wrong, and whoever put it up is at fault for any failure to write a ticket. While I'm in a ranting mood, I would like to point out the insanity that it took us YEARS, like 4-5 YEARS to get the city to properly sign the MUT along Weber St. as a MUT. I'm aware that people were harrassed BY POLICE who mistakenly believed it was a sidewalk, as a result of the incorrect signage. Yet I'm aware of two cases in a season we have signage put up by the city or region that is fundamentally flawed, first, the dismount signs at the IHT crossing, and now this sign. How come this is so hard. RE: Cycling in Waterloo Region - plam - 11-02-2020 (11-02-2020, 11:50 AM)taylortbb Wrote: I really think the core problem isn't the sign, but the roll curbs. The vast majority of drivers believe that the point of roll curbs is to allow them to drive to the other side of the curb. I can't even really say I blame them, as I have yet to figure out what other purpose they serve. I asked once about the roll curbs on King in Waterloo and was told "accessibility". I'm not convinced, but that was the answer. RE: Cycling in Waterloo Region - danbrotherston - 11-02-2020 (11-02-2020, 07:26 PM)plam Wrote:(11-02-2020, 11:50 AM)taylortbb Wrote: I really think the core problem isn't the sign, but the roll curbs. The vast majority of drivers believe that the point of roll curbs is to allow them to drive to the other side of the curb. I can't even really say I blame them, as I have yet to figure out what other purpose they serve. Yes, I've heard multiple answers, accessibility was an excuse given on King St. which doesn't hold much weight given that the other section of King where cars park have barrier curbs. Same with the LRT, why does it have roll curbs, when every other road has barrier curbs. And I've also heard for snow clearing, but that doesn't make sense in DTK where the sidewalks are plowed separately...nor for the LRT. RE: Cycling in Waterloo Region - dtkvictim - 11-02-2020 You guys just don't understand, the roll curbs are clearly there for the accessibility of those with the end-game mobility device: motor vehicles. RE: Cycling in Waterloo Region - ijmorlan - 11-02-2020 (11-02-2020, 07:26 PM)plam Wrote:(11-02-2020, 11:50 AM)taylortbb Wrote: I really think the core problem isn't the sign, but the roll curbs. The vast majority of drivers believe that the point of roll curbs is to allow them to drive to the other side of the curb. I can't even really say I blame them, as I have yet to figure out what other purpose they serve. You were inadvertently misled by the person telling you that. Please note the use of Parliamentary language As somebody else pointed out, if the accessibility explanation were true, then roll curbs would be universal, not just something used where there are bicycle lanes. RE: Cycling in Waterloo Region - ijmorlan - 11-02-2020 (11-02-2020, 06:12 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: As for why I believe this is okay, you're right, I don't measure the distance to the curb, but I know that farther than 15 cm (about half a foot) is not okay, which means when I park, I ensure that I'm closer than that...it isn't hard...I don't need a measuring tape, if I'm at all close to half a foot, I'm not close enough. This is actually an example with some complexity, because the rule should not be distance of the nearest part of the vehicle from the curb but distance of the furthest part of the vehicle from the curb. If I’m parking a Smart car, 50cm from the curb is fine — I’ll still be taking up less of the road than an ordinary vehicle parked more closely. And if I’m parking a Hummer, maybe there isn’t room for me to park even if my tires are rubbing the side of the curb; if so, that’s just tough for me; I can find a larger parking space or a smaller vehicle. Quote:Look I'm basically just ranting at this point, but I'm sick and tired of this bullshit. I'm sick and tired of blocked sidewalks and I'm so fucking sick and tired of council telling me enforcement is the solution, then refusing to even enforce the bylaws...GAH!!! So right. If the City can’t enforce, then we should all hear about it as a problem they have, rather than just silently letting scofflaws get away with blocking the sidewalk year after year. If the officer needs to observe somebody being obstructed in order to write that, then there is a simple solution: enforcement teams should consist of an officer and somebody in a wheelchair. If the wheelchair person can’t easily get by the car, then the officer observes this and uses it as evidence. Until the JP’s get it through their thick skulls that the sidewalk is obstructed if enough width for such a person is not available, even if they don’t happen to show up at that particular moment. How are these people hired, anyway? If a JP is really demanding an actual victim, then they are wrong; unless the law is really written that way, in which case it clearly needs to be changed; except that the court system should be capable of changing it all by itself by applying the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which forbids discrimination against people on the basis of disability. And requiring an actual victim before prosecuting a violation constitutes discrimination; people in wheelchairs (or whatever) shouldn’t have to show up and subject themselves to discrimination in order to achieve systemic justice. Overall, lots of good points. Fundamentally, you have passion about this issue; but too often justice is viewed as just another administrative matter. RE: Cycling in Waterloo Region - danbrotherston - 11-02-2020 (11-02-2020, 05:58 PM)Coke6pk Wrote:(11-02-2020, 04:53 PM)tomh009 Wrote: Here is a map confirming that there is no private property. The sign is clearly incorrect. I stand by my rejection of that assertion. Again, even if you think there is a tiny slice of leased land there, the sign is positioned such that there is not enough space for a car to park between the sign and the sidewalk. There are minimum standards for the width of a parking space which this does not meet. And unlike sidewalks and bike lanes, there are no exceptions for undersized vehicle infrastructure. RE: Cycling in Waterloo Region - Acitta - 11-03-2020 King St. North, Waterloo. Go Logistics delivering for Amazon. He was there for at least 10 minutes. RE: Cycling in Waterloo Region - Chris - 11-04-2020 (11-03-2020, 07:26 PM)Acitta Wrote: King St. North, Waterloo. Go Logistics delivering for Amazon. He was there for at least 10 minutes. Did you share it with Go Logistics? That is a nasty bike lane design if you want to go left to get around that van. Obviously you shouldn't have to make that move but if you do you need to be a pretty confident bike handler. RE: Cycling in Waterloo Region - ac3r - 11-04-2020 Bike lanes evidently have two purposes here: a) bicycle lane b) specialized delivery driver lane. I always see things like UPS, Uber Eats, or general freight trucks stopped in the bike lanes around the city. RE: Cycling in Waterloo Region - KevinL - 11-04-2020 (11-02-2020, 11:50 AM)taylortbb Wrote: We need to stop putting roll curbs along pedestrian spaces. Barrier curbs are the standard signal for "this is not a driveable area". Either that, or we follow the King Street precedent and bollard the whole length. RE: Cycling in Waterloo Region - Acitta - 11-04-2020 (11-04-2020, 09:37 AM)Chris Wrote:I shared it with Amazon. It is their reputation that is at stake.(11-03-2020, 07:26 PM)Acitta Wrote: King St. North, Waterloo. Go Logistics delivering for Amazon. He was there for at least 10 minutes. RE: Cycling in Waterloo Region - Acitta - 11-04-2020 Speaking of obstructions on bike lanes . . . RE: Cycling in Waterloo Region - Coke6pk - 11-04-2020 (11-02-2020, 09:18 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: I stand by my rejection of that assertion. (11-02-2020, 09:18 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: Third, as I already said, the use of "private property" on the signage is incorrect, that is not private property, there is no private property. Your original comment (Quoted second) was what I was referencing. You said the sign was wrong as it is not private property. You are now discounting the signage based on your belief it should not be a parking spot public or private. I can't answer that. Coke RE: Cycling in Waterloo Region - Coke6pk - 11-04-2020 (11-02-2020, 06:12 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: You're basically arguing that the law is just "whatever man". The reason the law says 15 cm, is because 15 cm is too much. The law is there so that we all have, as much as is possible, an unambiguous statement about what is right and wrong. When it says 15 cm...it's because we all agree that it should be 15 cm, not 15.1 and not 14.9. Since that kind of thing can be measured unambigously, why should we not ticket 16 cm (lets be fair and use a reasonable measurement error)? I am sick and tired of people believing themselves above the law. The only thing worse than people believing themselves above the law is LEOs telling them that they are right. Two words: Officer Discretion. Its written in legal precedent, and you can like it or not. I don't care. When a parking meter expired, I didn't write a ticket, even though it would of been legal to do so. [When a meter expired, there would be a 10 min Violation countdown (flashing red, or in the old days a pop up VIOLATION sign). Once the meter was expired more than 10 min the meter would be solid red (or pop up expired sign) and that's when a ticket would get written. The 10 min isn't written into the by-law, but I can assure you every MLEO followed that. We don't like having JP's ream our ass for being dickish in issuing tickets. These policies also protect your councillors who receive the complaints when we issue tickets. THEY are the driving force behind things like the 50% rule, as they are trying to placate the driving public. CoK recently pushed for cat tags, similar to dog tags. I have to pay a fee for my dog, even though he is in the house, my fenced backyard or if elsewhere, on a leash. My neighbours cat roams the neighbourhood. When the city had discussions, every "Crazy Cat Lady" showed up against, and that was shut down immediately. The cat tags would of 100% funded the humane society, but instead we will continue with additional grants... all because those councillors are afraid of not getting voted in next election. Your comment about automated enforcement is valid. I agree with you. But if you think for a second the Region will let you know where they have placed the limit, you are fooling yourself. I wouldn't be surprised if it fluxuated over time (both up and down)to ensure you never know... and if they set it at 41 km/h, those close to the limit would be tossed by a JP. [Who most have no legal background and are appointed by the ruling political party, which is why we have a hairdresser on the bench, but that's a different argument] Quote:The law is written down so that we can all see it, but if the law isn't being enforced, but some other secret policy is, that's not how a fair society works. CCC s. 265 (1) A person commits an assault when (a) without the consent of another person, he applies force intentionally to that other person, directly or indirectly; (Pre COVID )You are working your way through a crowded room to get to the bathroom. On your way, you brush against more than a dozen people before thankfully making it in time. When you alight, police are there to charge you with 14 counts of assault. The law was there for you to see, and there is no secret policy. That is how a fair society works. /end sarcasm Coke |