General Road and Highway Discussion

[danbrotherston]

At the Imperial/Kehl intersections they change to an asphalt MUT, which continues past Homer Watson.

Thanks, I just looked at the GIS cycling map, I understand now. I didn't realize the MUT continued along Ottawa. I've only gone to that area once or twice since the roundabouts went in and vowed never to go back outside of a car...

I've also asked this question before about the MUT along Weber (from Water to the Spur Line) but didn't get a definitive answer: Are cyclists expected to dismount when crossing intersections and roundabouts on a MUT? I don't know if this spot even fits the criteria since it's slightly different than Ottawa St, but I was a passenger in a vehicle going through the roundabout at Ira Needles and Erb when a cyclist rode through the path in my attached picture below. The driver gave a comment along the lines of "I should've hit him for not dismounting", but I don't know if the cyclist was even wrong because it's unclear to both drivers and cyclists what is expected. Does the cyclist dismount for the Green and Blue sections? Just the Blue section? None at all?

For dismounting, never in the green section, it's officially a MUT.

For the blue section, legally yes, practically no. Under the law, you are required to dismount, but every engineer in the region, and province, fully know that cyclists do not ever dismount, and they design these crossings knowing AND expecting that behaviour.

The result of this, it's basically legal entrapment...if you are hit, you will be at fault every time, police will not charge the driver for failure to yield.

Engineers continue to do this (to be fair, at a regional level at roundabouts, regional engineers feel they are required to do this by the HTA, but not at signalized intersections). As a result this is nothing more than a shift of liabiliity, the crossing is designed to protect drivers from the responsibility to look for cyclists. The same occurs at highway on/off ramps where peds do not have the right of way. It isn't about safety, or design, it's about protecting drivers from liability.

As for your driver who gave the comment "I should've hit him for not dismounting", I would never speak to such a person again let alone allow them to drive me...anyone who feels they *SHOULD* hit someone with their car on purpose is no person I have any interest in ever interacting with...that is a despicable thing to say. Sorry if this is someone who you care about.