Traffic laws bring civility

As Victoria streets become increasingly crowded, we all need to act more civilly towards each other – not less.

Here are some of my traffic peeves:

Dear Drivers – B.C. law states that crosswalks exist at the intersection of all roads whether T- or X-intersections and whether the crosswalk is painted or not. It is your responsibility to stop for anybody who wishes to cross.

And if you come to a vehicle stopped at a crosswalk, you are not supposed to zip by. You, too, must stop. You cannot assume they’re just turning left – even if their left-turn signal is on.

Dear Pedestrians – If you’re waiting to cross on a crosswalk and somebody on the lane closest to you stops, please get going – traffic coming the other way will then see you and will stop.

The first person who stopped for you isn’t going to run you over while you wait for the other traffic to stop.

Dear Drivers – Signal your intentions. If you arrive at an intersection and suddenly realize you need to turn left – be civil – you need to move on and take the next left turn.

Dear Bicyclists – You’re a “vehicle,” not a pedestrian – act like one and behave as you are expected to behave.

Dear Drivers – Cyclists are vehicles. Treat them like one. For example, when a pedestrian wishes to cross any road they have the right-of-way and so vehicles must stop for them.  

But when a bicyclist wishes to cross any road – neither do they have the right-of-way nor should cars stop for them and wait for them to cross. When you do you bugger up my timing and slow everyone down and bring all sorts of other people needlessly to a stop.

If you wish to turn left at a traffic light, pull into the intersection. You’re not supposed to wait on this side of the stop line.

And for pity sakes, if you are in the intersection and the light turns red you have right-of-way to go forward. Don’t back up Sheesh!

Dean Helm

Victoria

Lack of consultation alarms reader

Re: City council forges ahead with Johnson St. bridge plans, and Bridge funding affects many (News, July 15)

Victoria city council’s hasty decision to endorse the borrowing of a staggering $63 million to pay for the demolition and replacement of the historic Joseph Strauss-designed Johnson Street bridge seems to be a tacit acknowledgement that the $42 million expected from senior governments is not likely to happen.  

This is “Plan B.” They just haven’t admitted it yet.

The counter-petition process is an extremely difficult undertaking to make successful, and is usually used by citizens’ groups to try to stop a project, to trigger a proper referendum to gauge public support, or otherwise.

It is highly unusual for a municipal government to use the counter-petition process to borrow the full amount, as the mayor suggests.

If  prudent Victoria citizens vote wisely to reject the city’s plans, which would certainly be in the public interest, the next step in accountability would be to undertake a proper referendum on the issue, incorporated into the next scheduled election in 2011. 

Let’s not have a repeat of the last bogus referendum rammed through by the Lowe council outside of a scheduled election, with the loan to build a new arena only supported by a mere 19.8 per cent of eligible voters.

Fortin and his council are in an unseemly hurry to get this built: “We don’t have months for public consultation, we have months to build a bridge.”  

That haste, and apparent contempt for due public process and consultation is alarming.  

I am quite sure that is not the way to “maintain a high level of transparency in its financial dealings on the project through this process” to which your editorial refers. 

Gregory Hartnell

Victoria

Victoria must stop enabling drug addicts

Re: City backs plan to distribute crack-pipe gear (News, July 15)

Kudos to Victoria city councillor Geoff Young for being willing to stand up against the distribution of crack-pipe gear to addicts.

On the other side, the crack dealers are no doubt celebrating this move by the city. 

In June 2008, a city report indicated the average drug addict was committing annual crimes of about $350,000 in value in order to feed his drug habit. Multiply that by the number of addicts, and the figure is truly staggering in terms of costs to society.

Why is the city then enabling their drug habits, and so perpetuating the crime spree? Why give ammunition to defence lawyers who will try to get their drug-dealer clients off by showing that the city supports their activity?

Stop enabling the drug addicts.

So what if drug addicts have some finger and lip burns or cuts – it is a result of their choice of lifestyle.

As for “hepatitis C and other communicable diseases” maybe that is just natural selection taking place in this group of addicts.

Roel Hurkens

Victoria