(09-12-2016, 12:16 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: Easy.
I beg to differ.
Quote:Promote multi-use trails to be streets that happen to have no motorized vehicles permitted. Then where they meet motorized vehicle streets, have a regular intersection. With, obviously, no turns permitted by motorized vehicles.
This requires major (provincial level) changes, because right now multi-use trails intersect with streets at crosswalks-- as in, according to the HTA, a person should dismount from their bike and walk across. So the region can't promote this.
Quote:Also, what is this “can’t be combined with crossrides” stuff? Ok, so don’t combine them, put a crossride next to a crosswalk. If the rules provide for a minimum separation between the two, put the crossride straight in line with the path. So theoretically pedestrians should walk over to the crosswalk, but there is no actual need for them to do so. If necessary, put a secondary set of buttons at the crossride that activate the crosswalk 30m away or however far it needs to be. So then the crosswalk is stupid and pointless, but less stupid and pointless than bicyclists piously dismounting.
This is exactly what I meant when I said "can't be combined with crossrides". At least, in the region staff's interpretation. Can't have a crossride present if you're using level 2 PXO's. Can't be adjacent, can't be near. The new rules also state clearly that you can't use the L2 PXO if there's another crossing within 100m.
Quote:It just occurred to me, some religious communities are expert at working around rules passed down from on high. Why can’t secular communities do the same? Or better yet, give designers actual responsibility for good design rather than excessively detailed rules that are required to be followed exactly.
There's some latitude in the rules, and things like Ontario Traffic Manual Book 18 give engineers a number of different choices of how to provide bike infrastructure, as well as guidance on the context that different options should be applied. Some of the stuff in book 18 is good, and some is... well... less well regarded.
I do think that the new Level 2 pedestrian crossovers are over-specified. But they're also the first thing in Ontario that's putting in place an obligation for drivers to stop at something other than a stop sign or an activated light. Its use for people cycling as well as walking hasn't been covered at all. Unfortunately, it's not something that can just be waved away. Traffic engineers have to always use "good engineering judgement" and a large part of that is relying on accepted practices and rules, because if they don't, they'll shoulder a lot more of the blame if something goes wrong.
Which is why I view it as a looming problem. And why I don't think it's easy.