Skip to content

LETTER: Confusion abounds around Midland courtesy, unsignalized crossings

'Mayor Gordon's defence of the 'courtesy' crossings fails to recognize the difference between these types of crossings and contributes to the problematic behaviour of drivers around unsignalized crossings,' reader says
20231121_073252
A 'courtesy' crossing in downtown Midland.

MidlandToday welcomes letters to the editor at [email protected] or via our website. Please include your daytime phone number and address (for verification of authorship, not publication). The following letter is in response to Midland resident feels downtown crossings lack courtesy, published Nov. 22.

I have noticed that the discussion of 'courtesy' crosswalks (such as on King Street) is being confused with the excessive tendency of drivers to treat all unsignalized crossings as 'courtesy' crosswalks.

The legalities of which Mayor Gordon speaks, and the permission for, 'courtesy' crosswalks apply only (as he mentions) in very limited circumstances such as the crossings on King Street. They do not apply to every unsignalized crossing.

In general, it is my understanding that an unsignalized crossing (but which is marked as a crossing, unlike jaywalking, and is not a specially marked 'courtesy' crossing) is legally the same as a signalized crossing in that the pedestrian does in fact have the right of way, and the onus is on the driver to stop for pedestrians at such crossings.

Unfortunately for unsignalized crossing (in part, I believe due to the confusion caused by the messaging around 'courtesy' crossings, which are a very different beast than a simple unsignalized crossing), many drivers are of the mistaken impression that the rules for them are the same as for 'courtesy' crossings; namely that the driver has the right of way, and it is up to the pedestrian to cross only when traffic lets them.

It may not be entirely safe to rely on the rules of the road that say drivers are supposed to stop at unsignalized, but marked (such as on Midland Ave, and the William Street crossing mentioned in the letter) crossings, should pedestrians wish to cross at them and clearly so indicate (or are in the process of crossing) because drivers has a tendency to believe they rule the road and ignore inconvenient rules for pedestrian safety.

Unfortunately, Mayor Gordon's defence of the 'courtesy' crossings fails to recognize the difference between these types of crossings and I believe contributes to the problematic behaviour of drivers around unsignalized (but marked) crossings, which are not the same as jaywalking and 'courtesy' crosswalks.

I believe it is incumbent on Mayor Gordon to clarify this, especially since he has spoken as an authority figure on the subject. (And I believe made matters less, rather than more, clear and safe).

Daniel Dickinson

Midland