Search found 9 matches
- Thu Aug 02, 2018 9:26 am
- Forum: Failing to yield the right-of-way
- Topic: HTA vs. Bill 31 - Yielding to pedestrians crossover/crosswalks
- Replies: 4
- Views: 4005
Re: HTA vs. Bill 31 - Yielding to pedestrians crossover/crosswalks
I believe the fact that you were making a right turn a signalized intersection would negate the requirement to have to wait until all pedestrians have cleared the intersection. As noted in the information you provided - "This law does not apply to pedestrian crosswalks at intersections with stop signs or traffic signals, unless a school crossing guard is present." This is my understanding of the new law. If I'm incorrect, which I don't believe I am, Municipalities should start looking at banning right turns on red at signalized intersections with heavy pedestrian usage.
- Fri Jun 08, 2018 8:07 am
- Forum: Failing to obey signs
- Topic: Disobey Sign HTA 182(2) No Right Turn 7-9am
- Replies: 6
- Views: 6270
Re: Disobey Sign HTA 182(2) No Right Turn 7-9am
I meant adjacent approach, not adjacent lane.
- Fri Jun 08, 2018 8:06 am
- Forum: Failing to obey signs
- Topic: Disobey Sign HTA 182(2) No Right Turn 7-9am
- Replies: 6
- Views: 6270
Re: Disobey Sign HTA 182(2) No Right Turn 7-9am
Whether one sign supersedes the other is the part that I don't know. I suspect that the turn prohibition is a "traffic calming" measure as there is a through movement ban for the same time frame on the adjacent lane. I didn't look to see if there was a left turn ban the other way. This is really tough as it's contrary to what drivers would typically expect. I also wonder how often it's enforced. I know the rules are the rules, but if it's enforced very infrequently, it really undermines the intent of the prohibition. I don't know if any of what I wrote helps. Ultimately they violated...
- Thu Jun 07, 2018 2:57 pm
- Forum: Failing to obey signs
- Topic: Disobey Sign HTA 182(2) No Right Turn 7-9am
- Replies: 6
- Views: 6270
Re: Disobey Sign HTA 182(2) No Right Turn 7-9am
I took a look at it on Streetview and in my opinion there are some problems with how this is signed. The curb lane has a sign that says Right Lane Must Exit. This is an information sign. There are pavement markings that designate it as a right turn lane. Similar to the sign, they have no legal jurisdiction. What does have legal jurisdiction are the two regulatory right turn lane designation signs (white on black), which excludes buses from having to turn right. This means all vehicles except buses in this lane must turn right at the intersection. However, once you get to the intersection there...
- Tue Dec 19, 2017 12:03 pm
- Forum: General Talk
- Topic: Tricky Intersections
- Replies: 7
- Views: 3227
Re: Tricky Intersections
The way you are thinking about it is the correct. If these lights were located just to the left of the exit access, anyone could turn left even if the light was red (just don't hit the pedestrians). The fact that the lights are further removed from the access doesn't matter, since the stop bar is located before the access. If the stop bar was located between the access and the lights, you would be required to stop.
- Fri Dec 15, 2017 11:02 am
- Forum: General Talk
- Topic: Tricky Intersections
- Replies: 7
- Views: 3227
Re: Tricky Intersections
The pedestrian signal is in a poor location. They would have been better moving it towards the entrance driveway. This would have allowed the stop bars to be a lot closer to the signal. It would have also eliminated any potential conflicts when the light is red. Anyone turning left out of the school would do so before the stop bar. I get why the stop bars are where they are as there are minimum distance requirements and you don't want them within the accesses to the school. I'm really curious how long the amber light is given that there is a significant gap between the stop bar and the lights....
- Fri Dec 08, 2017 1:04 pm
- Forum: Parking Tickets
- Topic: Fire Route Ticket - Exemption/Route Not Designated
- Replies: 3
- Views: 4650
Re: Fire Route Ticket - Exemption/Route Not Designated
I can't speak to the medical piece, but assuming what you checked is current, I would challenge the legality of the Fire Route.
- Thu Apr 27, 2017 12:08 am
- Forum: Failing to obey signs
- Topic: Disobey Sign & Interfere with Traffic?
- Replies: 9
- Views: 4385
Re: Disobey Sign & Interfere with Traffic?
The HTA is the overarching document, bylaws are the details so to speak. I should have been more specific in my original post. What you want to see is the schedule from the Traffic Bylaw that lists all the prohibited turns in the municipality. This turn prohibition needs to be listed there, if not, I would question the legality of the prohibition and wether it's enforceable. If it were a prohibited turn from a street to another street, I wouldn't be suggesting this. However, it's to a private drive. My question isn't the fact it's not a road and whether the HTA applies, it's how it's described...
- Wed Apr 26, 2017 6:21 pm
- Forum: Failing to obey signs
- Topic: Disobey Sign & Interfere with Traffic?
- Replies: 9
- Views: 4385
Re: Disobey Sign & Interfere with Traffic?
The one other thing you may want to check out is whether this left turn prohibition is by-lawed. It appears that the turn prohibition is to a private drive and not another public road. If it is private, I'm curious as to how the prohibition is by-lawed. Street to street is easy, but I've questioned how to identify the "road" it's when it's private and technically doesn't have a name. If there is no by-law, one could argue that the prohibition isn't legal and, in turn, not enforceable. If it is a street, please disregard what I wrote. You could still check to make sure it is by-lawed,...