Crosswalks

[Alice in Vernon]

Just want to remind people to be more aware of crosswalks; especially those that do not have a warning light. I watched two men trying to cross 27th St near Shoppers Drug Mart and many cars just ignored them. Need you be reminded that if you hit someone on a crosswalk, you could be sued. And, think about how bad you would feel if you killed someone.

[DarkMagna]

Not just marked crosswalks. Technically, every end of a city block is a crosswalk whether marked or not.

[lightspeed]

Not just marked crosswalks. Technically, every end of a city block is a crosswalk whether marked or not.

You are the knowledgeable 1% of the driving population.

[kgcayenne]

Pedestrians: Be aware of whether your clothing screws you over or not. Last night was dark and rainy, so I didn't see a guy until he lifted up his head and looked at me and his face reflected my headlights; everything he was wearing was dark. Too late, buddy, no one would've seen you.

Carry a small flashlight, turn your phone's flashlight on, do SOMETHING. Stop being invisible!

[alanjh595]

Pedestrians: Be aware of whether your clothing screws you over or not. Last night was dark and rainy, so I didn't see a guy until he lifted up his head and looked at me and his face reflected my headlights; everything he was wearing was dark. Too late, buddy, no one would've seen you.

Carry a small flashlight, turn your phone's flashlight on, do SOMETHING. Stop being invisible!

.
I so agree with the above! Whether walking or riding a bike. I usually travel in the early hours of the day 3AM - 5AM and have several close calls with people being out in the middle of Hwy 33, just because I couldn't see them. If it wasn't for background lighting, I could have nailed many of them over the years. And those guys on bikes can dart right in front of you like a deer on a country road.

[my5cents]

It's great to hear so many reminding us that a crosswalk is located at every intersection AND a driver has the exact same responsibility to stop for a pedestrian at an unmarked crosswalk as they do a marked one. THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE.

Actually I think the media does everyone a disservice when they tout "a pedestrian was struck in a marked crosswalk at ...."

Yes marked crosswalks, perhaps remind and highlight that drivers should yield to pedestrians BUT they aren't any more important than unmarked crosswalks.

I do have to say I am continually dismayed by pedestrians of all ages crossing steets not even looking at the cars they are assuming are stopping for them, much less making eye contact with the stopping driver as is strongly recommended.

[LTD]

you couldn't be more incorrect pedestrians are required to yield at intersections and unmarked crosswalks not motorists

[alanjh595]

Just like cyclists riding their bikes on crosswalks.

Cyclists in crosswalk
Because cyclists are not supposed to ride in a crosswalk unless directed to do so by a sign (Motor Vehicle Act, RSBC 1996, c. 318, s. 183(2)(b)) cyclists are often found partly responsible for accidents that occur when they are riding in a crosswalk.

[oneh2obabe]

Whether it's a marked crosswalk or an intersection, I wait for drivers to stop then acknowledge them with a smile and a wave to let them know I appreciate it.

"crosswalk" means
(a) a portion of the roadway at an intersection or elsewhere distinctly indicated for pedestrian crossing by signs or by lines or other markings on the surface, or
(b) the portion of a highway at an intersection that is included within the connection of the lateral lines of the sidewalks on the opposite sides of the highway, or within the extension of the lateral lines of the sidewalk on one side of the highway, measured from the curbs, or in the absence of curbs, from the edges of the roadway;

http://www.bclaws.ca/Recon/document/ID/ ... e/96318_05

[Bsuds]

There are too many drivers and pedestrians who have incorrect ideas as to how this is all supposed to work.
It's too bad that it is the pedestrian who will pay the ultimate price when things go wrong.

Wait until any traffic stops and it's safe to cross! (both directions)

[spooker]

There are too many drivers and pedestrians who have incorrect ideas as to how this is all supposed to work.
It's too bad that it is the pedestrian who will pay the ultimate price when things go wrong.

Wait until any traffic stops and it's safe to cross! (both directions)

Exactly, too many who use the roadways are not paying attention or thinking things through ... pedestrians need to be aware of traffic just as much as drivers do (and cyclists too) ... but how many drivers are just focused on the backend of the car ahead and not paying attention to the sidewalks and corners? everyone is making assumptions that don't take into account the safety of everyone ...

There was a column that addressed things last year ... https://www.castanet.net/news/Achieving-Justice/172060/Pedestrian-obligations

And from the month before ...

Paraphrasing section 179 (1) of the Motor Vehicle Act, a vehicle must yield the right of way to a pedestrian when the pedestrian is crossing the street in a crosswalk.

But the crosswalk was a block away. Yes, the “marked” crosswalk was a block away.

I had not realized that the word “crosswalk” is defined in section 119 of the Act as including not only marked, but also unmarked crosswalks.

What is an unmarked crosswalk?

Roughly put, it is the area of an intersection extending from one corner to another (not diagonal).

Yes, every corner is a crosswalk. Every one.

[my5cents]

you couldn't be more incorrect pedestrians are required to yield at intersections and unmarked crosswalks not motorists

Thank you LTD for proving my point.

It's drivers who don't know the law, like, apparently you, that cause a big piece of the problem.

Pedestrians DO have the right at an intersection. That doesn't mean they can just walk out but a driver must yield, period.

179 (1) Subject to section 180, the driver of a vehicle must yield the right of way to a pedestrian where traffic control signals are not in place or not in operation when the pedestrian is crossing the highway in a crosswalk and the pedestrian is on the half of the highway on which the vehicle is travelling, or is approaching so closely from the other half of the highway that he or she is in

[LTD]

its you who clearly doesn't know I suggest you read that again mainly the part where it says the pedestrian is on the highway as in already crossing as a pedestrian at an uncontrolled crosswalk you are required to cross when safe to do so traffic is not required to stop for you unless of course youre already on the road read it again its not rocket science people like you are the problem and cause accidents by not understanding the rules of the road

[Fancy]

Here's part 2:

(2) A pedestrian must not leave a curb or other place of safety and walk or run into the path of a vehicle that is so close it is impracticable for the driver to yield the right of way.

http://www.bclaws.ca/civix/document/id/ ... section179

[spooker]

its you who clearly doesn't know I suggest you read that again mainly the part where it says the pedestrian is on the highway as in already crossing as a pedestrian at an uncontrolled crosswalk you are required to cross when safe to do so traffic is not required to stop for you unless of course youre already on the road read it again its not rocket science people like you are the problem and cause accidents by not understanding the rules of the road

As Fancy pointed out:

(2) A pedestrian must not leave a curb or other place of safety and walk or run into the path of a vehicle that is so close it is impracticable for the driver to yield the right of way.

"impracticable" as we know from other laws is quite subjective ... and cars driving over the speed limit make it harder ... based on what LTD just said then as soon as the pedestrian places a foot onto the roadway the driver is required to yield if the pedestrian has judged there is enough time for the vehicle to come to a stop ... and from that distance you can't claim that a pedestrian must make eye contact ...

As seen in court decisions, the driver better being paying attention ... as mentioned in an earlier linked article, when the judge felt the pedestrian didn't do everything they could/should have done the blame was still 75% on the driver ... and 75% of the medical bills for damaged humans can get pretty pricey

I feel that LTD is trying to assert a "might makes right" rule where the vehicle, being the larger, gets the right of way since they'd kill the pedestrian in any collision ... how should that be applied between a car and a loaded semi?

What I feel this comes back to is that we need better designed roads ... I'll bring up Vision Zero again ... helping everyone make better decisions to keep everyone safe ...