Crosswalk/Traffic Law Trivia

[JonDuke]

Random crosswalk rules question that I can't find the answer to online.

Let's assume that this is the street view from my car and I am driving straight ahead.

True or false:
As soon as a pedestrian enters "A" to proceed to "B" I must stop, even with the median there.

Alternatively, if the pedestrian was walking from "B" to "A", and I was in this same lane, I am still required to stay at a stop until they have reached "A" and not just until they reach the median (and off of my part of the road/direction of travel)

I believe that I have to wait until the pedestrian has completely cleared the crosswalk, whereas a friend believes that you are clear to go as soon as they are out of your lane, because of the median.

[GoinAllTheWay]

I tend to agree with your friend. See many people approach it this way. If there is a meridian, you only have to wait till they reach it (going from b to center) If there is no meridian, you must wait till they reach all the way across regardless of what side you are on. Although I think this only applies when the crosswalk passes through the meridian.

At least that's my understanding. Looking forward to others chiming in.

[jar_e]

By the letter of the law, you'd be expected until the pedestrian is fully out of the crosswalk...according to the use of highway and rules of the road in alberta.

Yielding to pedestrians 41

(1) A person driving a vehicle shall yield the right of way to a pedestrian crossing the roadway within a crosswalk.

(2) Where a vehicle is stopped at a crosswalk to permit a pedestrian to cross the roadway, a person driving any other vehicle that is approaching the stopped vehicle from the rear shall not overtake and pass the stopped vehicle.

(3) At any place on a roadway other than at a crosswalk, a person driving a vehicle has the right of way over pedestrians unless otherwise directed by a peace officer or a traffic control device.

(d) “crosswalk” means

(i) that part of a roadway at an intersection included within the connection of the lateral line of the sidewalks on opposite sides of the highway measured from the curbs or, in the absence of curbs, from the edges of the roadway, or

(ii) any part of a roadway at an intersection or elsewhere distinctly indicated for pedestrian crossing by signs or by lines or by other markings on the road surface;

http://www.canlii.org/en/ab/laws/reg...-304-2002.html

[4X4]

It depends on how they're walking. If it's an adult or a kid or a granny that's walking to the best of their abilities, then you patiently wait until they're on the curb. If it's some punk teenager that's walking extra slow while texting, then you do a brake stand until they're clear of your hood, and then you take off and hopefully clip them with your mirror.

[iggypop]

A-B stop the moment they're in the intersection.
B-A proceed once they've crossed the median.

Both ensures that if the car behind you follows your action the pedestrian is still safe.

[bc-chris]

i always thought you had to stay put until the pedestrian was all the way across, regardless of a median (but that might just be in bc?)

i'm more interested in knowing what's going on in the house. check out the house window just left of the pedestrian sign.... what did you see google... why did you blur that part of the image?!?!?

[CaptainYooh]

Crosswalk laws are terribly outdated and in need of revision. It would be practically impossible to turn right or left in the Downtown during lunch hour if you just sit there and wait for everyone to finish crossing.

[Kybosh]

Originally Posted by CaptainYooh

Crosswalk laws are terribly outdated and in need of revision. It would be practically impossible to turn right or left in the Downtown during lunch hour if you just sit there and wait for everyone to finish crossing.

You mean like some sort of above or below ground pedestrian passage infrastructure? Might be crazy enough to work.

[chemgear]

Originally Posted by CaptainYooh

It would be practically impossible to turn right or left in the Downtown during lunch hour if you just sit there and wait for everyone to finish crossing.

Finish crossing?! I don't even wait for them start.

[CaptainYooh]

Originally Posted by Kybosh

You mean like some sort of above or below ground pedestrian passage infrastructure? Might be crazy enough to work.

Of course, it would. But it's too expensive and impractical. Should be based on common sense approach- drive, when it is safe to drive. I've driven cars in Panama City, Moscow, Rome, New York and other cities, where driving courtesy just doesn't exist in the same sense we think about it in Canada. It is all about quick decision making and being alert by both drivers and pedestrians over there. Although their laws could be as tough or even tougher than ours, people seem to disregard them openly, when compliance becomes next to impossible.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by CaptainYooh

Crosswalk laws are terribly outdated and in need of revision. It would be practically impossible to turn right or left in the Downtown during lunch hour if you just sit there and wait for everyone to finish crossing.

They have those scramble crossings at Eau Claire where the pedestrians all go at the same time, and then the green lights are reserved for only cars. I wonder if the city's still considering expanding the use of scramble crossings.

[normtwofinger]

Cars should have right-of-way. IMO, it is safer and more efficient. It's easier as a pedestrian to look out for the car. Also it only takes a few seconds and the car is clear and out of the way of the pedestrian's path, whereas it could take minute(s) for a pedestrian to clear the road. Jay walking would have to be fully legal and encouraged.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by normtwofinger

Cars should have right-of-way. IMO, it is safer and more efficient. It's easier as a pedestrian to look out for the car. Also it only takes a few seconds and the car is clear and out of the way of the pedestrian's path, whereas it could take minute(s) for a pedestrian to clear the road. Jay walking would have to be fully legal and encouraged.

Not sure if serious..........

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by SebC

They have those scramble crossings at Eau Claire where the pedestrians all go at the same time, and then the green lights are reserved for only cars. I wonder if the city's still considering expanding the use of scramble crossings.

Is that the only one like it in Calgary?

I love that intersection. Whenver you use it there is always atleast two people who don't understand what is happening and just go when the green goes for cars.

[bc-chris]

Originally Posted by normtwofinger

Cars should have right-of-way. IMO, it is safer and more efficient. It's easier as a pedestrian to look out for the car. Also it only takes a few seconds and the car is clear and out of the way of the pedestrian's path, whereas it could take minute(s) for a pedestrian to clear the road. Jay walking would have to be fully legal and encouraged.

just move to kelowna.... you can jay walk all you want here - seriously

http://www.castanet.net/news/Kelowna...ore-jaywalking

[Bean]

I've posed this question to a CAA driving trainer and he confirms what jar_e states.

The trainer gave the example that if a pedestrian was to walk across and suddenly decide at the 85% mark that they wanted to go back; that any vehicle in motion while the pedestrian is still in the crosswalk would be charged with an infraction.

Highly unlikely but the additional 3 seconds is not a big deal. Although again, 4x4 has it right.

[jar_e]

Originally Posted by Bean

I've posed this question to a CAA driving trainer and he confirms what jar_e states.

The trainer gave the example that if a pedestrian was to walk across and suddenly decide at the 85% mark that they wanted to go back; that any vehicle in motion while the pedestrian is still in the crosswalk would be charged with an infraction.

Highly unlikely but the additional 3 seconds is not a big deal. Although again, 4x4 has it right.

And further to that, fail to yield for a pedestrian in a crosswalk is one of the biggest fines you can receive for a moving violation, $575 and 4 demerits.

[JBR]

Originally Posted by jar_e

By the letter of the law, you'd be expected until the pedestrian is fully out of the crosswalk...according to the use of highway and rules of the road in alberta.

Yielding to pedestrians 41
(1) A person driving a vehicle shall yield the right of way to a pedestrian crossing the roadway within a crosswalk.
(2) Where a vehicle is stopped at a crosswalk to permit a pedestrian to cross the roadway, a person driving any other vehicle that is approaching the stopped vehicle from the rear shall not overtake and pass the stopped vehicle.
(3) At any place on a roadway other than at a crosswalk, a person driving a vehicle has the right of way over pedestrians unless otherwise directed by a peace officer or a traffic control device.

(4) Refer to rule 'delta-bravo'. If driving a BMW or are employed as a bike courier, anarchy applies and you are deemed to own the roadway. You will have the right-away as you choose, and (cyclists only) be free to act as a pedestrian, vehicle, bicycle etc. Riding between cars stopped for a pedestrian is encouraged.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by JBR

(4) Refer to rule 'delta-bravo'. If driving a BMW, jacked up pick-up or are employed as a bike courier, anarchy applies and you are deemed to own the roadway. You will have the right-away as you choose, and (cyclists only) be free to act as a pedestrian, vehicle, bicycle etc. Riding between cars stopped for a pedestrian is encouraged.

that's better

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by normtwofinger

Cars should have right-of-way. IMO, it is safer and more efficient. It's easier as a pedestrian to look out for the car. Also it only takes a few seconds and the car is clear and out of the way of the pedestrian's path, whereas it could take minute(s) for a pedestrian to clear the road. Jay walking would have to be fully legal and encouraged.

Is there a points system involved in this scenario, because if there is,I'm totally on board.