On May 18, 8:20pm I was driving on Kerns Road from Dundas Street (Hwy 5), Burlington. I saw the first temporary road closure sign (photo2) but I saw the traffic on opposite direction so I slowly drove down to the second temporary road closure sign (photo1). The officer came to me and without any explanation, issued a ticket "Disobey sign" (this is the exact wording on the ticket), HTA 182(2). Im living this area closed to this road sign but I thought the road was widening for both directions but I found out now the city is making one-way traffic conversion on "kinked area" (circle on photo1). There are few arguments that Im thinking of: - Im not sure this temporary road closure sign was valid? - There wasnt any advanced temporary road closure sign from Dundas Street (Hwy 5) until I met the first temporary sign (photo2). Few days later I saw one temporary road closure sign on Dundas Street (Hwy5). - There are five properties on the end of Kerns Road before the road conversion area (photo1) so I believe the people living that area used this road even during construction period. - I drove yesterday again the area, only affected area is the circle on the photo1, which was converting from two-way traffic to one-way traffic. The rest area is two-way traffic. Anyone can give me an advice whether or not going to court? And any reasons for arguments? Thanks in advance.
On May 18, 8:20pm I was driving on Kerns Road from Dundas Street (Hwy 5), Burlington. I saw the first temporary road closure sign (photo2) but I saw the traffic on opposite direction so I slowly drove down to the second temporary road closure sign (photo1).
The officer came to me and without any explanation, issued a ticket "Disobey sign" (this is the exact wording on the ticket), HTA 182(2).
Im living this area closed to this road sign but I thought the road was widening for both directions but I found out now the city is making one-way traffic conversion on "kinked area" (circle on photo1). There are few arguments that Im thinking of:
- Im not sure this temporary road closure sign was valid?
- There wasnt any advanced temporary road closure sign from Dundas Street (Hwy 5) until I met the first temporary sign (photo2). Few days later I saw one temporary road closure sign on Dundas Street (Hwy5).
- There are five properties on the end of Kerns Road before the road conversion area (photo1) so I believe the people living that area used this road even during construction period.
- I drove yesterday again the area, only affected area is the circle on the photo1, which was converting from two-way traffic to one-way traffic. The rest area is two-way traffic.
Anyone can give me an advice whether or not going to court? And any reasons for arguments?
Thanks in advance.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post. Register to view.
You failed to disobey sign because of the 2 "DO NOT ENTER" signs facing you (white signs, red circle with white horizontal line). Oncoming traffic is irrelevant. They are also posted on the left and right side of the road, indicating zero access is permitted from either side of the road you're approaching from. Whether you try to fight it or not, be aware that you are guilty of the charge based on the evidence you've provided. For reference, you may only use a road with a sign that states, "Road Closed" with the exception, "Local Traffic Only". Any time you approach a Do Not Enter sign, you may not enter under any circumstances.
You failed to disobey sign because of the 2 "DO NOT ENTER" signs facing you (white signs, red circle with white horizontal line). Oncoming traffic is irrelevant. They are also posted on the left and right side of the road, indicating zero access is permitted from either side of the road you're approaching from. Whether you try to fight it or not, be aware that you are guilty of the charge based on the evidence you've provided.
For reference, you may only use a road with a sign that states, "Road Closed" with the exception, "Local Traffic Only". Any time you approach a Do Not Enter sign, you may not enter under any circumstances.
nerd, Thanks for your comment. You may or not see from the photo, the road closure sign is for "through traffic". if I didn't plan to drive through the actual construction area or one-way road conversion area, then I shouldn't be not guilty? The area I got the ticket is popular hiking area so many people have parked their cars both sides of the road and enjoying their time. I believe that area is not affected any construction activity. There are five houses just off from Kerns Road before the road conversion area. I'm wondering how those people get to their houses. I guess these people can pass these sign? because the road closure is for through traffic? I'm not arguing with you but I want to get some good points to avoid the ticket. Thanks in advance for any feedback.
nerd,
Thanks for your comment.
You may or not see from the photo, the road closure sign is for "through traffic". if I didn't plan to drive through the actual construction area or one-way road conversion area, then I shouldn't be not guilty?
The area I got the ticket is popular hiking area so many people have parked their cars both sides of the road and enjoying their time. I believe that area is not affected any construction activity.
There are five houses just off from Kerns Road before the road conversion area. I'm wondering how those people get to their houses. I guess these people can pass these sign? because the road closure is for through traffic?
I'm not arguing with you but I want to get some good points to avoid the ticket.
The legal signs in the photo are the 2 "DO NOT ENTER" signs facing you (white signs, red circle with white horizontal line). And top it off the signs are actually blocking the lane that you approach on, so other than putting a fence across the whole road( which probably blocks the contruction vehicles from exiting), don't know how much more obvious that one is to simply "DO NOT ENTER"
bhuh wrote:
You may or not see from the photo, the road closure sign is for "through traffic". if I didn't plan to drive through the actual construction area or one-way road conversion area, then I shouldn't be not guilty? .
The legal signs in the photo are the 2 "DO NOT ENTER" signs facing you (white signs, red circle with white horizontal line).
And top it off the signs are actually blocking the lane that you approach on, so other than putting a fence across the whole road( which probably blocks the contruction vehicles from exiting), don't know how much more obvious that one is to simply "DO NOT ENTER"
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
The issue here is not whether people use the area surrounding the road. It is likely that there is another "entrance" to the road from a different direction where local residents and the oncoming traffic you witness are accessing this road. It is possible the road narrows, or has material, equipment or contruction vehicles parked on one side of the road in the the construction zone. This would make it difficult for 2-way traffic to use the road while under construction, which is why they might have blocked traffic in one direction and not the other. Unfortunately, the reasons why it is blocked or whether it has traffic using the road from another direction does not give you the right to access the road from the direction you had. The evidence in the case are the do not enter signs, which override anything else. You never, ever proceed against do not enter signs because you may collide with an oncoming car that has the right-of-way. In some cases on some streets, the cars may be driving 50kph or faster, which would end badly for all involved. I think this one is best left up to living and learning. I don't believe you will be able to win a case by pleading not guilty and opting for trial. Though I believe option 2 on your ticket is for you to plead guilty with explanation - you may be able to ask for a reduced charge, explaining you were confused by other cars accessing the road. You might be able to have the charge amended to the by-law Disobey Sign: "Every driver or operator of a vehicle shall obey the instructions or directions indicated on any sign so designated by any city bylaw." That one will cost you about $75 with fines and fees, but is not a moving violation, does not go on your driving record and carries 0-demerit points. Best of luck. Perhaps another member could help verify your options.
bhuh wrote:
nerd,
Thanks for your comment.
You may or not see from the photo, the road closure sign is for "through traffic". if I didn't plan to drive through the actual construction area or one-way road conversion area, then I shouldn't be not guilty?
The area I got the ticket is popular hiking area so many people have parked their cars both sides of the road and enjoying their time. I believe that area is not affected any construction activity.
There are five houses just off from Kerns Road before the road conversion area. I'm wondering how those people get to their houses. I guess these people can pass these sign? because the road closure is for through traffic?
I'm not arguing with you but I want to get some good points to avoid the ticket.
Thanks in advance for any feedback.
The issue here is not whether people use the area surrounding the road. It is likely that there is another "entrance" to the road from a different direction where local residents and the oncoming traffic you witness are accessing this road. It is possible the road narrows, or has material, equipment or contruction vehicles parked on one side of the road in the the construction zone. This would make it difficult for 2-way traffic to use the road while under construction, which is why they might have blocked traffic in one direction and not the other. Unfortunately, the reasons why it is blocked or whether it has traffic using the road from another direction does not give you the right to access the road from the direction you had.
The evidence in the case are the do not enter signs, which override anything else. You never, ever proceed against do not enter signs because you may collide with an oncoming car that has the right-of-way. In some cases on some streets, the cars may be driving 50kph or faster, which would end badly for all involved. I think this one is best left up to living and learning. I don't believe you will be able to win a case by pleading not guilty and opting for trial. Though I believe option 2 on your ticket is for you to plead guilty with explanation - you may be able to ask for a reduced charge, explaining you were confused by other cars accessing the road. You might be able to have the charge amended to the by-law Disobey Sign: "Every driver or operator of a vehicle shall obey the instructions or directions indicated on any sign so designated by any city bylaw." That one will cost you about $75 with fines and fees, but is not a moving violation, does not go on your driving record and carries 0-demerit points.
Best of luck.
Perhaps another member could help verify your options.
Hi everyone. I'm asking for a friend who has a question of interpretation.
He was ticketed for using a hand-held device. He contends that he was acting within the exemption provided under Subsection 14 (1) of O. Reg. 366/09, which reads as follows (emphasis added):
Hey guys i just wanted to know what speeds you see others do on the roads on a regular basis. As we all know no body drives 100 km. It seems they only hit that speed twice once on the way up and once on the way down.
it seems the De Facto limit on the 401 is about 120-130. But lately i dont know if…
On June 10, 2017, I was pulled over by an OPP on the 403 heading WB and told I registered 136km/hr. I kept chit chat to a minimum and took my ticket and went on with my day. I later requested my disclosure and did not receive it until a week before my Oct. 27 court date, and so I had my date…
Anyone know any more information? Apparently kathleen wynne mentioned trying to introduce legislation after more than 20 years of no speed cameras. My guess is that it wont happen, since they've tried before many times to bring it back after it was abolished.
The other day I was given a ticket for speeding 119 in a 90, on highway 17 near Marathon, ON (Speeding ticket capital of the universe, BTW). The officer claims to have "clocked" me using the vehicle mounted radar at 121 KMH and dropped it (presumably to lower fine and demerits).
I posted this in the 3 Demerit Section and haven't received any
responses.
I received a failure to stop at an amber light ticket on April 17, 2009. At my First Attendance Meeting I asked to read the police officer's notes and remember thinking how ridiculous they were and the difficulty…
I was on the right side of the road going straight when a pedestrian waved down the taxi driver in the lane next to me. He pulled over to the right without any notice or signalling and hit me with the side of his car.
There were many witnesses but I immediately had a concussion and did not think of…
My mother was driving EB on a 4 lane street (2 lanes EB, 2 lanes WB).
She was in the left hand lane and started a left hand turn so as to enter a side street, crossing WB traffic. There was NO intersection. She hit a cyclist who was heading WB. Police where called but none showed up. My…
If the speed limit is 50, and you do 100+, not only do you get 6 points. Your car gets impounded for a week, and your license suspended for 7 days, along with a hefty fine of at least $2000. The penalty is actually the same as for racing. The law came in effect on October 1, 2007. Remember -…
I was driving westbound on Hwy. 8 earlier this month in North Dumfries Township, approaching the Cambridge city limits. The weather was clear and the roads were dry. I noticed a vehicle on the shoulder on my side of the road, pointing towards me. This didn't concern me right away, as it is a rural…
