Let's talk about one-way streets

[FairHamilton]

Originally Posted by Millstone

It's not like any of them actually look at the light anyway, why would it affect them?

That's an over generalization. It will affect me.

I know exactly how it will impact cyclists. There were 2 really bad ones on my nightly ride when I lived in Toronto, Don Mills & Chipping Rd and Leslie and Talwood Dr. Talk about feeling like second class on the roadway.......

[ryan_mcgreal]

Originally Posted by Millstone

It's not like any of them actually look at the light, why would it affect them?

Are you here to make a real point, or are you just trolling?

[hmagazine]

Originally Posted by Millstone

It's not like any of them actually look at the light, why would it affect them?

Hey Mods - this is getting REALLY old...

[FairHamilton]

Originally Posted by ryan_mcgreal

Are you here to make a real point, or are you just trolling?

I think there's a point, and I think it's valid though I think labelling all cyclists as running reds is an over generalization.

This past summer a woman crossing King William at Ferguson, actually thanked me for stopping at the stop sign, and commented that I was the first cyclist she'd seen obey a stop sign in Hamilton.

You can take that for whatever it's worth.

[flar]

Originally Posted by ryan_mcgreal

Are you here to make a real point, or are you just trolling?

Originally Posted by hmagazine

Hey Mods - this is getting REALLY old...

I saw it, but Millstone makes a valid point. Every day, I see cyclists, motorists and pedestrians alike that show little regard for the rules of the road.

[Millstone]

Originally Posted by ryan_mcgreal

Are you here to make a real point, or are you just trolling?

I should ask the same of you? Why are you being such a dick? You're usually better than this. You can lead the 'pedestrians rule' brigade alright, but let's call a spade a spade.

[ryan_mcgreal]

Originally Posted by flar

I saw it, but Millstone makes a valid point. Every day, I see cyclists, motorists and pedestrians alike that show little regard for the rules of the road.

It's absolutely not a valid point to dismiss concerns that an actuated signal ignores cyclists by claiming that some cyclists ride through red lights - no more than it would be a valid point to dismiss concerns that a street has no pedestrian crossings by claiming that some pedestrians jaywalk!

I'm a daily commuting cyclist, and I obey the Highway Traffic Act to the best of my ability. The only way I could proceed through an actuated signal is to get off my bike, walk over to the pedestrian signal button and press it, then get back on my bike in time to ride through.

That's simply unreasonable for law-abiding cyclists, and it hardly encourages cyclists who flout the law to consider changing their ways.

[Millstone]

Originally Posted by ryan_mcgreal

It's absolutely not a valid point to dismiss concerns that an actuated signal ignores cyclists by claiming that some cyclists ride through red lights - no more than it would be a valid point to dismiss concerns that a street has no pedestrian crossings by claiming that some pedestrians jaywalk!

I'm a daily commuting cyclist, and I obey the Highway Traffic Act to the best of my ability. The only way I could proceed through an actuated signal is to get off my bike, walk over to the pedestrian signal button and press it, then get back on my bike in time to ride through.

That's simply unreasonable for law-abiding cyclists, and it hardly encourages cyclists who flout the law to consider changing their ways.

Nonsense, all the cyclists I've seen that need to hit the button just ride up to it and wait, much like a pedestrian would do. You make it sound so difficult, yet your claims are unfounded while mine are based in fact. Go to King (William) and Hughson and watch all the law abiding citizens cross the street there.

[SteelTown]

I often see cyclist switching to the sidewalk to skip the red light, especially at Longwood and Main St.

[Millstone]

Originally Posted by SteelTown

I often see cyclist switching to the sidewalk to skip the red light, especially at Longwood and Main St.

I wonder why they would think that makes it OK. Fortunately not everyone does this. Bikes on sidewalks should be a last resort.

[crhayes]

It's absolutely not a valid point to dismiss concerns that an actuated signal ignores cyclists by claiming that some cyclists ride through red lights - no more than it would be a valid point to dismiss concerns that a street has no pedestrian crossings by claiming that some pedestrians jaywalk!

I'm a daily commuting cyclist, and I obey the Highway Traffic Act to the best of my ability. The only way I could proceed through an actuated signal is to get off my bike, walk over to the pedestrian signal button and press it, then get back on my bike in time to ride through.

That's simply unreasonable for law-abiding cyclists, and it hardly encourages cyclists who flout the law to consider changing their ways.

Yeah the other day I was standing at the corner of Main and James and I saw a cyclist cross James along Main (going westward on the south sidewalk) as the light turned red. A motorist was about to make a right onto James but stopped after seeing the cyclist, and the cyclist for no reason got uber pissed and kicked the motorists car while riding by.

That rarely happens, though I thought I would share

You can argue that actuated crossings don't work for cyclists, but the argument that they are better for drivers is just as valid. In my mind, this means something has to change. A modified actuated crossing should be constructed where there is a metal plate protruding slightly from the road, placed close to the intersection (near to the pedestrian crossing markings) that cyclists could easily drive over in order to trigger the light to change.

Edit: I think it's obvious to point out that it would have to be constructed in a way that prevented vehicles turning right from triggering it.

[flar]

This all brings us back to the original article, and the fact that actuated signals are not really needed here. Motorists will save mere seconds at the expense of cyclists being inconvenienced and pedestrians having to deal with faster moving traffic.

[Millstone]

Does Toronto have a solution for this? Or are they all on timers.

[crhayes]

Originally Posted by flar

This all brings us back to the original article, and the fact that actuated signals are not really needed here. Motorists will save mere seconds at the expense of cyclists being inconvenienced and pedestrians having to deal with faster moving traffic.

Yeah I really don't see a huge benefit to the changes either; my suggestion was more for if they do decide to make the changes.

[adam]

Originally Posted by Millstone

It's not like any of them actually look at the light, why would it affect them?

The odds of hitting a red light on a timer or an induction loop to a cyclist are probably not much different anyway.

Don't try to hijack the thread. A cyclist that doesn't follow traffic signals is risking their life. Cars are EQUALLY guilty of treating stop signs as rolling stops, so your comment doesn't hold any water.

<EDIT: I jumped the gun and posted this before reading page 7 -Now that I've finished reading page 7 - I'd like to say the thread was hijacked and everybody got off topic .. lets try to refocus on how an actuated light .. pros and cons>

[crhayes]

Really I don't see how actuated lights are going to make a real difference. The light at St. Joeseph's drive is going to have to remain the same; people trying to head up the mountain via the Jolley Cut will always get stopped at some point or another to allow those coming down the mountain via West Fifth. This will always cause congestion along James.

[Millstone]

Originally Posted by adam

Don't try to hijack the thread. A cyclist that doesn't follow traffic signals is risking their life. Cars are EQUALLY guilty of treating stop signs as rolling stops, so your comment doesn't hold any water.

<EDIT: I jumped the gun and posted this before reading page 7 -Now that I've finished reading page 7 - I'd like to say the thread was hijacked and everybody got off topic .. lets try to refocus on how an actuated light .. pros and cons>

Don't try to hijack the thread. I'm not talking about stop signs, I'm talking about traffic signals, where red signals are seldom disobeyed by cars.

Next.

[FairHamilton]

For the relatively short length of the street and the minimal time savings, I think the $60K and efforts of all involved can be put to better use.

6 months after it's completed will anyone say; "Wow, I can't believe how much better driving on James and John has become." I doubt it, they'll still say it was better when they were one way.

[crhayes]

Originally Posted by FairHamilton

For the relatively short length of the street and the minimal time savings, I think the $60K and efforts of all involved can be put to better use.

6 months after it's completed will anyone say; "Wow, I can't believe how much better driving on James and John has become." I doubt it, they'll still say it was better when they were one way.

Maybe they can spend the 60K to study the benefits of converting King and Main to two-way

[adam]

Originally Posted by Millstone

Don't try to hijack the thread. I'm not talking about stop signs, I'm talking about traffic signals, where red signals are seldom disobeyed by cars.

Next.

No you are wrong.
Cars run amber lights 10-20km/h above the speed limit all the time. Cars also turn left on red lights all the time because they are "already in the intersection". Any turn on a red light is illegal. Going above the speed limit through an amber light is also illegal. Cars do illegal things at intersections all the time.