The uproar over Nova Scotia’s new $697.50 jaywalking fine is sure to follow the law into 2016, when it will be officially proclaimed. But with any luck, the discussion will evolve. If we really want safer roads, it will have to.
Currently the arguments are in two camps. The main one is pedestrians vs cars, with walkers and drivers blaming each other for our streets that are unusually dangerous to find yourself walking across. (Here’s a good example, especially the comments.) The other argument is common sense against government, which is a predictable plot line in pretty much any discussion of any legislation anywhere.
But now we want to advocate for a third talking point. Let’s take it as a given that we want less pedestrian trauma on the roads, and that statistically our roads are indeed oddly traumatic. However, instead of blaming the cars or the pedestrians, we want to blame design. And rather than fixing the problem with harsh penalties, we want to use design. Weird, right? You’ll see what we mean in the video.
Related Stories
How this city almost killed me
This article appears in Dec 17-23, 2015.
To speak to the points made:
1. Yes, the light at Quinpool and Beech is long; no, you cannot press the button and have the cars stop. If you assume you press the button without waiting, you live in another world.
2. Yes, the intersection of Quinpool and Robie is indeed frustrating to manage through; both as a driver and a pedestrian. A proposed roundabout will do nothing to make it simpler or safer. Five roads collide; maybe close three down?
3. Yes, there is a crosswalk in front of the School of Planning and Architecture which crosses Spring Garden to Brunswick. In Nova Scotia – marked or unmarked – there is a crosswalk at every intersection.
4. People CHOOSE to break the law to get around they are not forced to do so. People break laws because they don’t like them, find them inconvenient, etc.
Is a $700 fine fair? No. Was the law concerning cyberbullying fair? No. The two have one thing in common: they were made in a time of heightened incidents and without the foresight of practice or common sense. They are reactive, not proactive.
I disagree about crosswalks not working at large roundabout. They work just fine at the Armdale roundabout. If a pedestrian stands at a crosswalk anywhere on a roundabout, the motorist is obliged to stop to yield to them under the present law. I have walked through the Armdale roundabout numerous times and have had almost zero incidents. There are always a few drivers who either do not know the law or are distracted. All the more reason for the pedestrian to be extra cautious.
I do not believe for one second that a motorist would intentionally try to hit someone within a crosswalk.
I think a roundabout at the Willow Tree would be great. It carries about the same amount of traffic as the Armdale roundabout does. The major problem at the Willow Tree is frustration, by both the motorist and the pedestrian, having to wait long periods. With a roundaboutand by obeying the law, everyone would get a turn to cross or navigate the intersection reasonably quickly.