Welcome Guest! In order to take advantage of all the great features that Waterloo Region Connected has to offer, including participating in the lively discussions below, you're going to have to register. The good news is that it'll take less than a minute and you can get started enjoying Waterloo Region's best online community right away. Click here to get started.


Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Winter Walking and Cycling
#16
The specific number predicted was 1150, so almost two percent.

There's a table showing 1150 next to 88, which sure seems like quite a jump. But it's not a proper comparison.
Reply
#17
(01-04-2018, 01:36 PM)Ace Wrote:
(01-04-2018, 11:11 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: Worth reviving this thread now that we're into winter again.  Aside from useful phone numbers, TriTAG has also released their sidewalk survey results.

http://www.tritag.ca/blog/2018/01/04/win...alk-study/

It will come to nobody's surprise that the results are not positive for mobility in the winter months, walking anything more than a trivial distance gives a very high probability of finding a blocked sidewalk.

I walk to work many days in the winter, and I doubt there is a day in the white part of winter, when there isn't a blocked sidewalk.  I have a coworker who is in a wheelchair and he is unable to reliably get to work in the winter, and as far as I understand, doesn't even bother to try to wheel his way there as he does all spring summer and fall.

City of Waterloo staff have acknowledged to me that the policy for curb ramps is that nobody clears them, essentially meaning the official policy is that sidewalks are closed for the season in winter.

This is especially timely as this article just came out: https://www.therecord.com/news-story/803...-the-road/

Where a pedestrian is charged with walking on the road, and police remind us to use sidewalks.

Few people willingly choose to walk on the road, but how many times have I seen people in mobility scooters, elderly people, even people with walkers, in the terrifying position of walking down a lane on a busy road, getting honked at by motorists wizzing past.

CTV clip with video of the street/sidewalk:
https://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=1296593

"Use sidewalks and wear reflective clothing"...just a little extra victim blaming for good measure.

Sidewalks appear plowed, but pretty poorly.  There was also a buggy of some type in the video, which would be a challenge to drag through the snow.  

Yeah....*sigh*.
Reply
#18
(01-04-2018, 02:16 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: [quote pid='46861' dateline='1515090982']

"Use sidewalks and wear reflective clothing"...just a little extra victim blaming for good measure.

Sidewalks appear plowed, but pretty poorly.  There was also a buggy of some type in the video, which would be a challenge to drag through the snow.  

Yeah....*sigh*.

[/quote]

Victim blaming, and unclear. Walking in the road is against the law, and you can be fined for it. Walking with a grey jacket on your way to the office is not against the law. They shouldn't be in the same sentence.
Reply
#19
(01-04-2018, 02:41 PM)MidTowner Wrote:
(01-04-2018, 02:16 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: [quote pid='46861' dateline='1515090982']

"Use sidewalks and wear reflective clothing"...just a little extra victim blaming for good measure.

Sidewalks appear plowed, but pretty poorly.  There was also a buggy of some type in the video, which would be a challenge to drag through the snow.  

Yeah....*sigh*.

Victim blaming, and unclear. Walking in the road is against the law, and you can be fined for it. Walking with a grey jacket on your way to the office is not against the law. They shouldn't be in the same sentence.
[/quote]

Walking in the road is perfectly legal if there is no passable sidewalk.
Reply
#20
The only section of the HTA I can find that says anything about sidewalks and pedestrians is

Quote:Duties of pedestrian when walking along highway

179 (1) Where sidewalks are not provided on a highway, a pedestrian walking along the highway shall walk on the left side thereof facing oncoming traffic and, when walking along the roadway, shall walk as close to the left edge thereof as possible.  R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 179 (1).
Idem

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply to a pedestrian walking a bicycle in circumstances where crossing to the left side of the highway would be unsafe.  R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 179 (2).

Does anyone have a citation for not being permitted to walk in a highway if there are sidewalks present?
Reply
#21
(01-04-2018, 02:05 PM)MidTowner Wrote: The specific number predicted was 1150, so almost two percent.

There's a table showing 1150 next to 88, which sure seems like quite a jump. But it's not a proper comparison.

If it was 1%, I’d be OK with that. But at 2%, the idea is clearly a non-starter.
Reply
#22
(01-04-2018, 03:20 PM)chutten Wrote: The only section of the HTA I can find that says anything about sidewalks and pedestrians is

Quote:Duties of pedestrian when walking along highway

179 (1) Where sidewalks are not provided on a highway, a pedestrian walking along the highway shall walk on the left side thereof facing oncoming traffic and, when walking along the roadway, shall walk as close to the left edge thereof as possible.  R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 179 (1).
Idem

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply to a pedestrian walking a bicycle in circumstances where crossing to the left side of the highway would be unsafe.  R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 179 (2).

Does anyone have a citation for not being permitted to walk in a highway if there are sidewalks present?

It says “provided”, not “present”. My argument would be that the sidewalk is not “provided” if it is unusable.
Reply
#23
(01-04-2018, 11:45 AM)Canard Wrote: What I have an issue with: I risk getting charged if I don’t scrape my sidewalk down to the bare dry concrete... but the Region leaves more than half of the MUT’s completely unmaintained.

This is why I’ll never call anyone in for not shoveling: I almost feel like everyone should just stop shoveling for a week to force the Region to make sidewalk clearing by them a thing.

Do you?  What is the actual requirement as to "how shovelled" a sidewalk is required to be?  I always figured that a snow-packed surface, of the sort left by a snowblower, would pass muster, at least until it became icy.
Reply
#24
I seem to remember reading somewhere that it must be absolutely down to the concrete. This came up last year. I’m so paranoid about it now and being “called in” that if even 0.2 mm of snow comes down in out there scraping away to get it down.
For daily ion construction updates, photos and general urban rail news, follow me on twitter! @Canardiain
Reply
#25
(01-04-2018, 06:02 PM)panamaniac Wrote:
(01-04-2018, 11:45 AM)Canard Wrote: What I have an issue with: I risk getting charged if I don’t scrape my sidewalk down to the bare dry concrete... but the Region leaves more than half of the MUT’s completely unmaintained.

This is why I’ll never call anyone in for not shoveling: I almost feel like everyone should just stop shoveling for a week to force the Region to make sidewalk clearing by them a thing.

Do you?  What is the actual requirement as to "how shovelled" a sidewalk is required to be?  I always figured that a snow-packed surface, of the sort left by a snowblower, would pass muster, at least until it became icy.

CoK at least and others are perhaps similar require "bare pavement"...which is an unnecessary and stupid standard...stupid because it's a) impossible in some situations without the use of exorbitant amounts of salt (although, not if you shovel early and often and don't drive over the snow) and b) unnecessary to the free travel of everyone including disabled people.  

What is necessary is a smooth hard surface with good traction, which means, either bare pavement, or a hard snowpack surface with no ice that's immediately cleaned up upon partial thawing.

Which one is easier to enforce or evaluate.  This is why they choose "bare pavement" as a standard, because it's clear one way or another, there's no judgement.

That being said, I wouldn't worry about have bylaw call you on it, frankly, I doubt they actually enforce the bare pavement requirement and also, it requires someone to call you in, so unless your neighbours have it out for you, it's unlikely to even get called about.

That being said, my sidewalk has been bare pavement all year.
Reply
#26
My stretch gets too much foot traffic to keep it bare concrete at all times. In a cold snap like this, I'm not too worried as what's there has good traction; I'll be sure to attack it with a spade once we get a bit of a thaw, before it gets slippery.
My Twitter: @KevinLMaps
Reply
#27
(01-04-2018, 06:20 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: That being said, I wouldn't worry about have bylaw call you on it, frankly, I doubt they actually enforce the bare pavement requirement and also, it requires someone to call you in, so unless your neighbours have it out for you, it's unlikely to even get called about.

It's not my neighbors I'm worried about - we all shovel each other's sidewalks (whoever's out in the morning first). It's that I seem to recall reading posts last winter about people here specifically going out of their way to go on walks to "find" "offenders" and then call them in simply on principle....
For daily ion construction updates, photos and general urban rail news, follow me on twitter! @Canardiain
Reply
#28
Consider that for some of us, this isn't so much about going out of our way. I commute by half hour walk, and take one of a number of routes each time. Some of the routes, to this day, have not been shoveled even once this season. But, because of how cold it is, I don't often whip out my phone to report the locations. And you should never fear being reported: you get a warning, not a fine. It's a very long process to actually get someone fined/billed for professional removal.
Reply
#29
(01-04-2018, 07:09 PM)Viewfromthe42 Wrote: Consider that for some of us, this isn't so much about going out of our way. I commute by half hour walk, and take one of a number of routes each time. Some of the routes, to this day, have not been shoveled even once this season. But, because of how cold it is, I don't often whip out my phone to report the locations. And you should never fear being reported: you get a warning, not a fine. It's a very long process to actually get someone fined/billed for professional removal.

This is exactly the case, Bylaw first gives you a warning and instructs you to clear the sidewalk.  That's if you're even reported.

I too am diligent in reporting, but I only report sidewalks on my occasional (hour long) walk to work, and on my recreational walks.  My rule is, I report sidewalks which I had to walk on, but which I don't think my coworker in would be able to navigate in his wheelchair, or which pose a substantially greater slip hazard than nearby sidewalks (i.e., I don't call in all the sidewalks if it's freezing rain out).  I find it very unlikely that I'd report a sidewalk where a homeowner is making a legitimate effort to keep it safely clear.

Even at that generous standard, I usually report 10-20 sidewalks a day.
Reply
#30
(01-04-2018, 02:16 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: "Use sidewalks and wear reflective clothing"...just a little extra victim blaming for good measure.

The specific article aside, walking on sidewalks (or trails) and wearing bright or reflective clothing are good defensive measures, making it less likely that you get hit by a car. Because whether the car is obeying the law or not, it weighs roughly 20x as much as you do, and there is rarely a good outcome for the pedestrian when the two meet at speed.

We try to teach defensive driving, too: even if the person in the other car is in the wrong, it's still a good idea to avoid an accident. I don't see why it has to automatically be "victim blaming".
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)