HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Hamilton > Transportation & Infrastructure


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted Oct 24, 2008, 3:55 AM
ryan_mcgreal's Avatar
ryan_mcgreal ryan_mcgreal is offline
Raising the Hammer
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 527
Quote:
Originally Posted by go_leafs_go02 View Post
let the police do the investigating. They know what they're doing.
The police are not going to come back from an investigation and say, "the street is at fault." They're absolutely not trained to be urban planners or traffic engineers; only to establish who hit whom, what speed they were going, whether alcohol was involved, and whether either or both parties were violating traffic rules.

My point is that it's actually a distraction, from a policy perspective, to focus exclusively on who is nominally "at fault" in a given collision. The road system itself is a major contributing factor to pedestrian fatalities when it encourages vehicles to travel at a speed that has a 95 percent fatality rate for vehicle/pedestrian collisions.

However, it is not in the jurisdiction of the investigating officer to consider the problem at this level. As I said, they're not urban planners or traffic engineers.

To wait for the police report and then assume that it somehow settles the matter is dangerous, since the report doesn't even consider larger questions about the role of the traffic system.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted Oct 24, 2008, 5:36 PM
SteelTown's Avatar
SteelTown SteelTown is offline
It's Hammer Time
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 20,304
Charges forthcoming in downtown fatal

Jay McQueen
10/24/2008

Police now say they expect to lay charges in connection with the city's most recent traffic fatality.

A 50-year-old woman was killed on Wednesday afternoon after being struck while crossing Main at James Street downtown.

Police say the driver was heading south and making a turn from James onto Main at the time.

No word yet on the nature of charges but speed and alcohol were not factors.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted Oct 24, 2008, 5:38 PM
SteelTown's Avatar
SteelTown SteelTown is offline
It's Hammer Time
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 20,304
^ It’s unlikely speed was a factor if the driver was turning from James to Main.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted Oct 24, 2008, 5:55 PM
markbarbera markbarbera is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 3,050
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryan_mcgreal View Post
The road system itself is a major contributing factor to pedestrian fatalities when it encourages vehicles to travel at a speed that has a 95 percent fatality rate for vehicle/pedestrian collisions.
I don't think this is factually accurate for the intersection in question. The speed limit on Main Street is 50 km/h, and the lights along Main West are synchronized to maintain this speed. According to the statistics you quoted earlier, the fatality rate at this speed is more like 50%.

The fatality in this case has more to do with the type of vehicle involved and the driver's operation of the vehicle rather than the speed at which it was travelling. Most recent accounts indicate the truck was making a right turn from the northbound lane of James onto Main Street when it struck the pedestrian. So this definitely was not a case of a runaway truck speeding along Main at breakneck speeds. It does look like a possible illegal right hand turn may have been a contributing factor.

I find it disturbing how quickly some participants rushed to use this poor woman's tragic death (who has now been identified as 50-year-old Debbie Devins) as some sort of morbid example promoting the cause to convert Main to two-way traffic. Perhaps we can give pause and show some respect for the deceased before jumping to incorrect conclusions. That would also allow for all the facts in the case to be established before determining a proper conclusion.

Last edited by markbarbera; Oct 24, 2008 at 6:07 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted Oct 24, 2008, 6:03 PM
ryan_mcgreal's Avatar
ryan_mcgreal ryan_mcgreal is offline
Raising the Hammer
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 527
Quote:
Originally Posted by markbarbera View Post
I don't think this is factually accurate for the intersection in question.
As more information about the incident comes out, I'm inclined to agree with you. It now looks as though the driver was turning right from James (northbound) onto Main (eastbound).

Quote:
Originally Posted by markbarbera View Post
The speed limit on Main Street is 50 km/h, and the lights along Main West are synchronized to maintain this speed.
If you go through an intersection before it turns red, you can easily drive at 65 or 70 km/h for several blocks right through the downtown core before you start to approach the front of the "green wave".
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted Oct 24, 2008, 6:08 PM
FairHamilton FairHamilton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,768
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryan_mcgreal View Post
If you go through an intersection before it turns red, you can easily drive at 65 or 70 km/h for several blocks right through the downtown core before you start to approach the front of the "green wave".
And if you start on a green at Dundurn you can make it pretty much all the way through downtown at 47 - 52 km/h. Interesting difference isn't it.
__________________
The jobs, stupid!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #67  
Old Posted Oct 24, 2008, 11:02 PM
Millstone Millstone is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Port Colborne, ON
Posts: 889
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelTown View Post
Charges forthcoming in downtown fatal

Jay McQueen
10/24/2008

Police now say they expect to lay charges in connection with the city's most recent traffic fatality.

A 50-year-old woman was killed on Wednesday afternoon after being struck while crossing Main at James Street downtown.

Police say the driver was heading south and making a turn from James onto Main at the time.

No word yet on the nature of charges but speed and alcohol were not factors.
Probably means the pedestrian was facing a 'walk' signal and the guy didn't check his right side. That's absolutely vital in urban centres, there are people walking everywhere.

edit: or check his left side, whatever the case is

Last edited by Millstone; Oct 25, 2008 at 5:06 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #68  
Old Posted Oct 24, 2008, 11:28 PM
raisethehammer raisethehammer is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,054
if the Spec is right, the driver was turning left, not right.
But as usual, I don't think the spec is right. I saw the scene and it seems an odd place for the truck to end up if it was heading south. Seems more likely that it was heading north and tried to turn right.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #69  
Old Posted Oct 25, 2008, 4:12 AM
adam adam is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Downtown Hamilton
Posts: 1,231
I was cut off by a minivan on my bike today going down Queen St. His van door almost shaved my handlebar as he raced towards the red light.
He had to stop at the stop light ahead, and I caught up to his idling vehicle a few seconds later. We both waited at the light for 30 seconds..

Mr. Minivan, if you are out there, I'd like to know what your blatant rage accomplished except endangering my life. You didn't get to your destination any faster. The only thing I can think of is you believe that bikes should not be on the road. Why is that?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #70  
Old Posted Oct 25, 2008, 4:46 AM
BCTed BCTed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,299
Quote:
Originally Posted by raisethehammer View Post
if the Spec is right, the driver was turning left, not right.
But as usual, I don't think the spec is right. I saw the scene and it seems an odd place for the truck to end up if it was heading south. Seems more likely that it was heading north and tried to turn right.
Either case blows a hole in your exploitative suggestion that the "highway" was at fault in this instance.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #71  
Old Posted Oct 25, 2008, 4:48 AM
BCTed BCTed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,299
Quote:
Originally Posted by adam View Post
I was cut off by a minivan on my bike today going down Queen St. His van door almost shaved my handlebar as he raced towards the red light.
He had to stop at the stop light ahead, and I caught up to his idling vehicle a few seconds later. We both waited at the light for 30 seconds..

Mr. Minivan, if you are out there, I'd like to know what your blatant rage accomplished except endangering my life. You didn't get to your destination any faster. The only thing I can think of is you believe that bikes should not be on the road. Why is that?
This thread's topic deals with a woman who lost her life in accident. Why are you using it to air your petty rant about some random person's driving habits?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #72  
Old Posted Oct 25, 2008, 4:52 AM
BCTed BCTed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,299
Quote:
Originally Posted by markbarbera View Post

I find it disturbing how quickly some participants rushed to use this poor woman's tragic death (who has now been identified as 50-year-old Debbie Devins) as some sort of morbid example promoting the cause to convert Main to two-way traffic. Perhaps we can give pause and show some respect for the deceased before jumping to incorrect conclusions. That would also allow for all the facts in the case to be established before determining a proper conclusion.

I agree. Even if the accident had been caused by someone barrelling down Main Street at 150 km/hr, this type of opportunitistic agenda promotion would still have been extremely misplaced and inappropriate.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #73  
Old Posted Oct 25, 2008, 2:10 PM
highwater highwater is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 1,555
Quote:
Originally Posted by BCTed View Post
This thread's topic deals with a woman who lost her life in accident. Why are you using it to air your petty rant about some random person's driving habits?
Why are you using it to defend the status quo?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #74  
Old Posted Oct 25, 2008, 2:34 PM
adam adam is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Downtown Hamilton
Posts: 1,231
Quote:
Originally Posted by BCTed View Post
This thread's topic deals with a woman who lost her life in accident. Why are you using it to air your petty rant about some random person's driving habits?
"Some random person's driving habits" is the underlying issue. As the minivan was cutting me off, this fatality was all I could think about.

The reason why I ride a bike (while my brand new car is parked) and try to walk places is to help encourage a shift from driving cars that cause many fatalities every year, belch toxic fumes into our air, and have a monopoly on our public space (think about that one carefully) to walking, cycling and taking public transportation.

You contradict yourself in your response when you call a person's driving habits a petty rant. This is cold and callous given the recent fatality.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #75  
Old Posted Oct 25, 2008, 3:41 PM
coalminecanary coalminecanary is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,421
Quote:
Originally Posted by markbarbera View Post
I find it disturbing how quickly some participants rushed to use this poor woman's tragic death (who has now been identified as 50-year-old Debbie Devins) as some sort of morbid example promoting the cause to convert Main to two-way traffic. Perhaps we can give pause and show some respect for the deceased before jumping to incorrect conclusions. That would also allow for all the facts in the case to be established before determining a proper conclusion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BCTed View Post
I agree. Even if the accident had been caused by someone barrelling down Main Street at 150 km/hr, this type of opportunitistic agenda promotion would still have been extremely misplaced and inappropriate.
Are you guys joking? What "agenda"? Safer streets? You consider safety for all road users some sort of underhanded agenda? To further our own gain? The only personal gain I'll get from fighting for speed reduction will be not dying when I try to use the road. And not having to suffer the loss of a loved one on our streets. And not having to read about a stranger dying every 6 weeks or so. This isn't some dark ploy. Man, I can't believe posts like this. This is exactly the time to be discussing how we can reduce fatalities on our streets. Actually, the time was years ago. So when would you like to address the issue? Shall we wait another week? A month? A year? How many more pedestrians need to die before it's "safe" to talk about reducing deaths? Or is it that you think that the current level of safety is statistically acceptable?

Also, I'd like to point out that I, personally, am not talking about two-ways alone - this isn't tunnel vision. I'd like to see de-timed lights as a first step, and exploration of other measures - street parking, wider sidewalks, better enforecment (even photo radar), and yes, two way conversions.

This isn't about two way conversions - it's about questioning the safety of the major through streets of our core - wondering if they are needlessly dangerous - and exploring possible solutions if so. It's about making our downtown a comfortable and safe place for everyone, not just through traffic.
__________________
no clever signoff.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #76  
Old Posted Oct 25, 2008, 4:07 PM
Millstone Millstone is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Port Colborne, ON
Posts: 889
Quote:
Originally Posted by adam View Post
"Some random person's driving habits" is the underlying issue. As the minivan was cutting me off, this fatality was all I could think about.

The reason why I ride a bike (while my brand new car is parked) and try to walk places is to help encourage a shift from driving cars that cause many fatalities every year, belch toxic fumes into our air, and have a monopoly on our public space (think about that one carefully) to walking, cycling and taking public transportation.

You contradict yourself in your response when you call a person's driving habits a petty rant. This is cold and callous given the recent fatality.
Besides the fact that buying a depreciating asset that you're not even going to use is a bad idea, new vehicles do not release as much badness into the air as in years past. You rarely see a smoking vehicle on the road anymore. Cars don't have a monopoly on public space, as evidenced by our ability to walk, cycle and take public transportation.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #77  
Old Posted Oct 25, 2008, 4:33 PM
rousseau's Avatar
rousseau rousseau is offline
Registered Drug User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Southern Ontario
Posts: 8,235
I agree, coalminecanary. There is a fundamental mindset about the perceived superiority and preeminence of motorized vehicular traffic that predominates here (and, let's face it, everywhere in the world outside of Amsterdam) that really needs to change. Grassroots activists are working to raise awareness towards making streets more pedestrian and bicycle friendly, but ultimately what needs to happen is a combination of legislation and public education, similary to what has happened with smoking over the past twenty or so years.

Problem is, not everyone was hooked on tobacco back in the day, and the analogy grinds to a halt when you consider the utilitarian nature of motorized traffic. It's one thing to make smoking as prohibitive as possible, as even the die-hard smokers in their 60s and 70s will admit that it's a filthy, disgusting and unhealthy habit, but it's quite another to convince the "soccer mom" that she doesn't need a Ford Explorer.

Further to that are the obvious infrastructure issues. Ms. Soccer Mom probably does indeed need to drive her mammoth gas-guzzler everywhere because the closest grocery store is 10 kms away in the Meadowlands.

Still, we need to start with the obvious, like making streets and roads more pedestrian friendly, and slowing traffic down. Main Street in Hamilton is ridiculous. Synchronized lights affording you a 10-minute trip from the 403 to Gage Park are a travesty (hell, I'd sooner have seen James South and John South stay one way and have streetside parking on the length of both sides of both streets, but that's another issue).

I don't think it is disrespectful in the slightest to hold up this terrible accident as yet another example of how wrong-headed we are when it comes to traffic safety. If real legislation and changes to infrastructure resulted from this, or were inspired by or gained momentum due to what happened, then I would think it would result in a very small sense of consolation for those who are grieving.

Granted, obviously many traffic accidents are purely the fault of the drivers or are simply accidents, but it seems to me that in this case there is cause to point the finger partly at our general mindset, in that we indulge motor vehicles at the expense of flesh-and-blood pedestrians and cyclists far too much.

[Rant]
Further to biking: I'm in Stratford, so 5 minutes in any direction gets me to quiet country roads for my rides. Still, those 5 minutes are as urban as can be. The other evening I was actually hit by a minivan. I was right on the broken line separating the vehicular lane from the parking lane (where I'm supposed to be, though some people argue for "taking the lane"), and while going along a stretch where there were about four spaces with no vehicles parked in them I got a jolt on my elbow and felt a solid object moving along my leg and shoulder. A minivan buzzed me! It wasn't going much faster than me, and didn't knock me over or injure me at all. Still, I was furious. I caught up to the van, knocked on the window, and berated this middle-aged couple for hitting me. You know what they said? They said that I had so much room, so what was I doing in their lane?! I swore at them liberally and told them they had to give me room when passing. They shook they heads and took off, so I scampered over to the cop shop and reported them. The cops were sympathetic, and actually filed an accident report. They later called me and said they would have the driver call me to apologize. I was still angry when they called, so I let my answering machine take it. The driver said that they were motorcyclists (!), so were aware of the dangers of traffic, but they weren't sure of what had actually happened back there, and since I was still on my bike when she checked the mirror she figured that nothing had actually happened. Then, when I caught up to them, she said they would have been willing to talk about it, but my attitude was so aggressive that no further discussion was possible. Yeah, I tend to think people can get a little aggressive when they get hit by complacent people in cars! I like to think that my reaction and the fact that the police contacted them gave them pause for thought, and perhaps next time they won't be so quick to buzz by a cyclist in his or her rightful place in the lane. I hope so, anyway.
[/Rant]
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #78  
Old Posted Oct 25, 2008, 5:35 PM
raisethehammer raisethehammer is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,054
Quote:
Originally Posted by rousseau View Post
I agree, coalminecanary. There is a fundamental mindset about the perceived superiority and preeminence of motorized vehicular traffic that predominates here (and, let's face it, everywhere in the world outside of Amsterdam) that really needs to change. Grassroots activists are working to raise awareness towards making streets more pedestrian and bicycle friendly, but ultimately what needs to happen is a combination of legislation and public education, similary to what has happened with smoking over the past twenty or so years.

Problem is, not everyone was hooked on tobacco back in the day, and the analogy grinds to a halt when you consider the utilitarian nature of motorized traffic. It's one thing to make smoking as prohibitive as possible, as even the die-hard smokers in their 60s and 70s will admit that it's a filthy, disgusting and unhealthy habit, but it's quite another to convince the "soccer mom" that she doesn't need a Ford Explorer.

Further to that are the obvious infrastructure issues. Ms. Soccer Mom probably does indeed need to drive her mammoth gas-guzzler everywhere because the closest grocery store is 10 kms away in the Meadowlands.

Still, we need to start with the obvious, like making streets and roads more pedestrian friendly, and slowing traffic down. Main Street in Hamilton is ridiculous. Synchronized lights affording you a 10-minute trip from the 403 to Gage Park are a travesty (hell, I'd sooner have seen James South and John South stay one way and have streetside parking on the length of both sides of both streets, but that's another issue).

I don't think it is disrespectful in the slightest to hold up this terrible accident as yet another example of how wrong-headed we are when it comes to traffic safety. If real legislation and changes to infrastructure resulted from this, or were inspired by or gained momentum due to what happened, then I would think it would result in a very small sense of consolation for those who are grieving.

Granted, obviously many traffic accidents are purely the fault of the drivers or are simply accidents, but it seems to me that in this case there is cause to point the finger partly at our general mindset, in that we indulge motor vehicles at the expense of flesh-and-blood pedestrians and cyclists far too much.

[Rant]
Further to biking: I'm in Stratford, so 5 minutes in any direction gets me to quiet country roads for my rides. Still, those 5 minutes are as urban as can be. The other evening I was actually hit by a minivan. I was right on the broken line separating the vehicular lane from the parking lane (where I'm supposed to be, though some people argue for "taking the lane"), and while going along a stretch where there were about four spaces with no vehicles parked in them I got a jolt on my elbow and felt a solid object moving along my leg and shoulder. A minivan buzzed me! It wasn't going much faster than me, and didn't knock me over or injure me at all. Still, I was furious. I caught up to the van, knocked on the window, and berated this middle-aged couple for hitting me. You know what they said? They said that I had so much room, so what was I doing in their lane?! I swore at them liberally and told them they had to give me room when passing. They shook they heads and took off, so I scampered over to the cop shop and reported them. The cops were sympathetic, and actually filed an accident report. They later called me and said they would have the driver call me to apologize. I was still angry when they called, so I let my answering machine take it. The driver said that they were motorcyclists (!), so were aware of the dangers of traffic, but they weren't sure of what had actually happened back there, and since I was still on my bike when she checked the mirror she figured that nothing had actually happened. Then, when I caught up to them, she said they would have been willing to talk about it, but my attitude was so aggressive that no further discussion was possible. Yeah, I tend to think people can get a little aggressive when they get hit by complacent people in cars! I like to think that my reaction and the fact that the police contacted them gave them pause for thought, and perhaps next time they won't be so quick to buzz by a cyclist in his or her rightful place in the lane. I hope so, anyway.
[/Rant]


man, I hope you're ok. Good for you in filing a report and having the cops contact them. Hopefully you right, and this will get them to slow down and think next time.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #79  
Old Posted Oct 25, 2008, 6:12 PM
rousseau's Avatar
rousseau rousseau is offline
Registered Drug User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Southern Ontario
Posts: 8,235
Quote:
Originally Posted by raisethehammer View Post
man, I hope you're ok. Good for you in filing a report and having the cops contact them. Hopefully you right, and this will get them to slow down and think next time.
I'm fine. Even my elbow. They were going barely faster than me, so it was as if they were trying to "nudge" me over. Teach me a lesson, like.

Hopefully the lesson went the other way.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #80  
Old Posted Oct 25, 2008, 6:45 PM
FairHamilton FairHamilton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,768
To all,

We are getting further and further from the thread's purpose. There is a bike thread, http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...=151584&page=4
__________________
The jobs, stupid!
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Hamilton > Transportation & Infrastructure
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:07 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.