General Road and Highway Discussion

[PhilippAchtel]

"The survey found that the most frequently witnessed dangerous behaviours are adult pedestrians using their cellphones while crossing the street or crossing unsafely at an uncontrolled place midblock. Other dangerous behaviours included drivers double parking, speeding and stopping in undesignated areas."

:-/

[danbrotherston]

"The survey found that the most frequently witnessed dangerous behaviours are adult pedestrians using their cellphones while crossing the street or crossing unsafely at an uncontrolled place midblock. Other dangerous behaviours included drivers double parking, speeding and stopping in undesignated areas."

This kind of statement bugs me so much.  Someone crossing while looking at their phone is not creating a danger for anyone but possibly themselves.

They aren't even equally risky behaviours, given that a driver will travel an order of magnitude farther during the three seconds they're looking at their phone, and generally, drivers have fewer alternate senses available to them for identifying dangers.

This false equivalence is so prevalent.....

[embe]

re: Victoria street bridge, lot's of signs up stating it will be CLOSED. Interestingly enough, some of the signs state Jan 23rd instead of on or about Jan 29th for 1 year. And there are a bunch of new detour signs along Frederick st. as well (thought the detour was supposed to be Wellington?) *sigh*

For these construction projects that span such a long time I really hope that the traffic light sequencing is adjusted accordingly.

[Chris]

re: Victoria street bridge, lot's of signs up stating it will be CLOSED.  Interestingly enough, some of the signs state Jan 23rd instead of on or about Jan 29th for 1 year.  And there are a bunch of new detour signs along Frederick st. as well (thought the detour was supposed to be Wellington?) *sigh*

For these construction projects that span such a long time I really hope that the traffic light sequencing is adjusted accordingly.

Both Frederick and Wellington are being used for the detour. From The Record article posted back a page.

Traffic will be detoured to the Wellington Street North overpass and to the Frederick Street overpass. Here's what the government wants you to do:


Through traffic (to or from Guelph) detours to the Wellington Street North overpass via Lancaster Street West, Shirley Avenue and Bingemans Centre Drive.

Local traffic detours to the Frederick Street overpass via Edna and Bruce streets and then back onto Victoria Street North.

[embe]

Thanks Chris, you're right.  Should be interesting to see if the (majority) 4-lane Wellington or the (majority) 2-lane Frederick detour moves along best during this period.  Whether through traffic or local traffic.

[Canard]

Based on the 50% closures a little while back of the Victoria St. Bridge, and what it did to Frederick... this is going to be hell.

[GtwoK]

Woah woah woah, the closure is for a YEAR? They finished all the (much larger) bridges over the 401 in 6 months a piece, and I am POSITIVE I remember reading that they planned on 24/7 construction on Victoria St to try and get it done even faster than that. But now it's going to take TWICE as long? What the hell is that?

[Viewfromthe42]

Probably something to do with the fact that all the other bridges were ones going straight over a highway in an existing configuration with nothing nearby. Here we have many businesses much closer to hwy85, and this is a bridge that needs to be set up within a massive new interchange system.

[DHLawrence]

Add in the railway bridge and it's boxed in on three sides. That has to make for tight maneuvers.

[MidTowner]

In a similar vein the other day to the motorist who struck a bylaw officer with her car trying while he was ticketing it her for stopping in a no-stopping zone by a school: Crossing guard hit by vehicle at Adam Beck School

"Don Shantz says he is sore but recovering after being struck by a vehicle exiting the school parking lot"

I don't understand this- I keep reading that high viz prevents things like this?

Mr. Shantz' description of the events are pretty disturbing.

[plam]

I don't understand this- I keep reading that high viz prevents things like this?

Mr. Shantz' description of the events are pretty disturbing.

The Internet is not great at tone of voice. That was sarcastic, right?

[DHLawrence]

High vis only works when the driver is paying attention.

[MidTowner]

I don't understand this- I keep reading that high viz prevents things like this?

Mr. Shantz' description of the events are pretty disturbing.

The Internet is not great at tone of voice. That was sarcastic, right?

haha The first line was sarcasm; the second line really was not.

[ijmorlan]

High vis only works when the driver is paying attention.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ue61c6MZNQw

[danbrotherston]

The Internet is not great at tone of voice. That was sarcastic, right?

haha The first line was sarcasm; the second line really was not.

It frustrates me to no end, the police aren't filling a collision report. 

The driver intentionally broke the law, ever after being warned it was dangerous, then he hit a crossing guard (who are highly visible) and fled the scene.

If this doesn't deserve dangerous driving charges, what do you have to do to prove you're a danger to the public?!