Comment 107176

By AnjoMan (registered) | Posted December 17, 2014 at 09:00:13 in reply to Comment 107155

The phrasing is the problem, because it allows a situation like the one on King where immediately after the crosswalk drivers can expect to drive at freeway speeds, and they are able to start speeding up before they get to the onramp. The rules defining onramps and offramps should be designed to eliminate these conflicts, or they are inadequate. Both the city and the MTO should be explicitly responsible for ensuring that this transition is navigable by pedestrians and cyclists, and the phrasing of this regulation doesn't require any consideration for this. It should. It is insane to leave it up to the preference of traffic engineers, because in a city like Hamilton this has led to a needlessly dangerous solution. Yes, the implementation is a big problem but the fact that this rule allows it means that there is no process by which we can expect safe interchanges to be the default design approach.

Comment edited by AnjoMan on 2014-12-17 09:07:14

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds