Road Safety & Vision Zero Plan

[W. K. Lis]

Happens to the best of us

Needed at 52 Division, where police vehicles have been known to park on the plaza. See link.

 

[crs1026]

There is absolutely no question that pedestrian safety and comfort and cycling safety and comfort have not been the priorities they should be over the years. Some decisions are baffling and others damning.
But there is progress being made. We must hold the faith that more can be made, more quickly in the years ahead.

In due course, the dinosaurs can and will be removed, from Council and Staff; and that can't happen soon enough; but its already happening, so let's just give it a push.

Thank you for providing a little perspective.

I get a bit annoyed when there is a pedestrian fatality and the emotional knee jerk response is "The City is doing nothing". As if we can throw a switch and go from X fatalities per year to zero in one month. And as if we know the root cause when the police haven't even finished their investigation.

A more appropriate response would be "That's the xth fatality associated with (root cause) this year, maybe what we're doing isn't enough". Which it isn't in many cases.... but we need to get back to facts and data and not rhetoric.

I'm sure that if one had the data, it would show that, for instance, the person-hours spent by TPS traffic enforcement on radar traps is overwhelmingly focused on the automobile and the amount spend on bicycles is a small fraction. And frankly some cyclists do misbehave, so some fraction of bicycle speed enforcement is deserved and appropriate. Which is not to say that the police can't do better, or the current balance is optimal.....but the solution lies in finding the right balance and not the extreme.

Advocacy that overreaches or runs on emotion can be as harmful as doing nothing.

- Paul

 

[ADRM]

I get a bit annoyed when there is a pedestrian fatality and the emotional knee jerk response is "The City is doing nothing"

Spoken like someone who’s never been directly affected by road violence in this city.

You know why I get “a bit annoyed by”? The fact that the City, in the overwhelming majority — actually, in reality, nearly ALL — of the cases of death or injury from motor vehicle collisions does literally NOTHING in response, despite there being clear evidence of the impact of various infrastructural responses it could take.

Actually, you know what, no, I’m not “a bit annoyed” by that, I find it positively despicable.

You can try to take the seemingly cautious, level headed, middle of the road perspective all you want, but it is in reality completely meaningless dribble.

You want data? You want cold, hard facts instead of rhetoric? Well, the incontrovertible reality is that 1) hundreds of people die or are maimed like clockwork literally every single year in this city, and 2) there is a wide array of actions that we know both from elsewhere and in this stupid city that are statistically proven to reduce the likelihood that the lives of hundreds of families will be forever negatively altered every single year. That’s reality, and if the recognition of that offends you, then no one here or elsewhere is going to really be able to help you.

I just genuinely hope that it won’t take a personal experience with road violence for you to come around to see the crisis for what it really is.

 

[ProjectEnd]

You “get a bit annoyed” when someone is killed by a car and there’s a “knee jerk response”?

What is wrong with you? This post sucks so hard you should really think about deleting it.

I get a bit annoyed when there is a pedestrian fatality and the emotional knee jerk response is "The City is doing nothing". As if we can throw a switch and go from X fatalities per year to zero in one month. And as if we know the root cause when the police haven't even finished their investigation.

A more appropriate response would be "That's the xth fatality associated with (root cause) this year, maybe what we're doing isn't enough". Which it isn't in many cases.... but we need to get back to facts and data and not rhetoric.

I'm sure that if one had the data, it would show that, for instance, the person-hours spent by TPS traffic enforcement on radar traps is overwhelmingly focused on the automobile and the amount spend on bicycles is a small fraction. And frankly some cyclists do misbehave, so some fraction of bicycle speed enforcement is deserved and appropriate. Which is not to say that the police can't do better, or the current balance is optimal.....but the solution lies in finding the right balance and not the extreme.

Advocacy that overreaches or runs on emotion can be as harmful as doing nothing.

- Paul

 

[interchange42]

Thank you for providing a little perspective.

I get a bit annoyed when there is a pedestrian fatality and the emotional knee jerk response is "The City is doing nothing". As if we can throw a switch and go from X fatalities per year to zero in one month.

- Paul

You’re painting the #VisionZero crowd with a rather black brush. No one thinks that zero can happen instantly. People are calling on the authorities to start remaking our streets in a way that puts a higher premium on life and a lower one on speed, and to start enforcing traffic laws in the meantime because the physical changes we need to make take time. Death or major injury due to cyclist behaviour is a statistical blip compared to motor vehicle manslaughter and major injury. The studies are conclusive. Let’s get on with this.

42

 

[W. K. Lis]

From https://visionzero.ca/vision-zero-a-toolkit-for-road-safety-in-the-modern-era/

The dominant safety strategy in road design has been to increase (and, when possible, to straighten) the physical space for drivers and cars, through the use of wider lanes and wider, straighter roads. The logic behind this is that if a driver runs off the road, a wider or straighter road allows for the driver to have more room to maneuver the vehicle back into the lane.

Under Vision Zero, these moves are viewed as undesirable because more space in the road contributes to higher speeds and, therefore, a driving environment in which injuries or fatalities are more likely (Johansson 2009).

The two main ways Vision Zero tries to manage kinetic energy are by integrating compatible traffic components and by physically separating incompatible ones. Some examples include:

1. Vulnerable road users, such as pedestrians or cyclists, should not be exposed to vehicles at speeds over 30 km/h (18.6 mph). If separation is not possible, then reduce the vehicle speed to 30 km/h. Cyclists can reach these speeds, particularly on descents, and should also be separated from pedestrians or slowed.
2. Car occupants should not be exposed to other vehicles at speeds over 50 km/h (31.07 mph) in 90° crossings. If this is not possible, separate, reduce the angle (thereby altering the vector of force of the collision such that it reduces severe injury or death), or reduce the speed to 50 km/h.
3. Car occupants should not be exposed to oncoming traffic at speeds over 70 km/h (43.5 mph) if vehicles are about the same weight. If vehicles are of different weight, speeds should not exceed 50 km/h. If this is not possible, then separate traffic, balance automobile weights, or reduce speeds according to the maximum differential in vehicle weight.
4. Car occupants should not be exposed to the side of the road at speeds over 70 km/h, or 50 km/h if there are trees or other potentially dangerous objects. If this is not possible, separate cars from the side of the road or reduce speeds to 70 km/h or 50 km/h (according to road side conditions) (Johansson 2009).

 

[ADRM]

You’re painting the #VisionZero crowd with a rather black brush. No one thinks that zero can happen instantly. People are calling on the authorities to start remaking our streets in a way that puts a higher premium on life and a lower one on speed, and to start enforcing traffic laws in the meantime because the physical changes we need to make take time. Death or major injury due to cyclist behaviour is a statistical blip compared to motor vehicle manslaughter and major injury. The studies are conclusive. Let’s get on with this.

42

Exactly this. Take for instance, the two closest arterials to my house. Take the case of a young woman was struck and killed by a driver while she was walking on the sidewalk around the corner from me. Her body was crushed between the front bumper and the west exterior wall of a Starbucks.

The local councillor motioned to have Transportation Staff “study the intersection and report back on any potential safety improvements.” That was a year ago next week.

No road narrowing. No reduction in vehicle lanes. No reduction in speed limits. No enhanced enforcement traps. No photo radar. No red light camera. No speed humps. No bollards or guard rails — which, like the ones literally across the intersection from the corner on which she was killed, may have saved her life. Not even a bit of bloody paint. Nothing.

At an intersection that neighbours have been complaining to the City about for *years.* At an intersection that is about 40 metres from a ghost bike marking the death of another human being, which itself is literally across the street from a lamp standard that a driver rammed into not two months ago. None of those incidents prompted the City to do *anything.*

People are literally dying and being permanently maimed. Regularly. We know the answers that will make it less likely that these incidents occur. That combination of facts is scandalous, shocking, and damning.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

You’re painting the #VisionZero crowd with a rather black brush. No one thinks that zero can happen instantly. People are calling on the authorities to start remaking our streets in a way that puts a higher premium on life and a lower one on speed, and to start enforcing traffic laws in the meantime because the physical changes we need to make take time. Death or major injury due to cyclist behaviour is a statistical blip compared to motor vehicle manslaughter and major injury. The studies are conclusive. Let’s get on with this.

42

Can things be done instantly? No. However I don't believe things are being improved as quickly as they could.

Queen's Park really oughta just mandate Vision Zero compliance across all urban areas in the province. Any time a road is repainted or resurfaced, the lanes should be painted to conform to Vision Zero standards. Whenever the roadway is reconstructed, the physical infrastructure (eg, curbs, speed bumps, etc...) should also be built to Vision Zero standards. No roadway should be rebuilt or redesigned without conforming to Vision Zero standards.

 

[ShonTron]

I wouldn’t hold my breath expecting any action from Perks here. He obviously feels embattled, hence releasing a statement in response to much of the above, but it was pretty much nothing more than defensive bullshit (which is more or less standard fare from Perks anytime his record on vulnerable road user safety is rightly called into question).

Just as there is no progressive coalition for housing affordability in this city, sadly there is also no progressive coalition for real, impactful road safety reforms — just a bunch of mealy mouthed defences from sensitive so-called progressives and an undying deference to a harmfully status quo Transportation Staff.

Gord Perks is well past his best before date on council. He’s not a pleasant person, especially if you try to hold him to account on anything.

There are only three – maybe four, if I’m in a generous mood – incumbent councillors who deserve re-election. I’d dump the rest, and that includes downtown lefties Perks, Fletcher, and Cressy.

 

[Northern Light]

Gord Perks is well past his best before date on council. He’s not a pleasant person, especially if you try to hold him to account on anything.

There are only three – maybe four, if I’m in a generous mood – incumbent councillors who deserve re-election. I’d dump the rest, and that includes downtown lefties Perks, Fletcher, and Cressy.

Fletcher deserved to go before she finished her first term.............sadly, that has not stopped her perpetual re-election.

I've had to abide her at any number of public meetings, in which she clearly has no grasp of the issues at play at all.

It needn't be a point of disagreement.

She just has no clue.

Though, to the extent that she does, no issue motivates her like the need for parking!

 

[Northern Light]

Exactly this. Take for instance, the two closest arterials to my house. Take the case of a young woman was struck and killed by a driver while she was walking on the sidewalk around the corner from me. Her body was crushed between the front bumper and the west exterior wall of a Starbucks.

The local councillor motioned to have Transportation Staff “study the intersection and report back on any potential safety improvements.” That was a year ago next week.

No road narrowing. No reduction in vehicle lanes. No reduction in speed limits. No enhanced enforcement traps. No photo radar. No red light camera. No speed humps. No bollards or guard rails — which, like the ones literally across the intersection from the corner on which she was killed, may have saved her life. Not even a bit of bloody paint. Nothing.

At an intersection that neighbours have been complaining to the City about for *years.* At an intersection that is about 40 metres from a ghost bike marking the death of another human being, which itself is literally across the street from a lamp standard that a driver rammed into not two months ago. None of those incidents prompted the City to do *anything.*

People are literally dying and being permanently maimed. Regularly. We know the answers that will make it less likely that these incidents occur. That combination of facts is scandalous, shocking, and damning.

While I may be less pessimistic in some regards than @ADRM ; I'm no less disgusted by the above.

At the very least, I do expect staff to produce a report, in a timely fashion, and if it defends the status quo, I may well disagree; but at least show up, and bring the evidence.

I'm open to the idea that some changes may take time, and others involve challenging compromises.

I'm not open to appearing (or genuinely) not caring about the loss of life, and/or serious injury.

What's happening isn't nothing..........but it is not enough.

 

[allengeorge]

I think it’s part of Toronto’s implicit mandate to be a ‘low tax city’. That’s why improvements get dragged out forever. First, you may not have the staff to do the analysis. Next, even if you have the staff to produce a report, any recommendations will sit on a shelf until all the stars align, and the piece of infrastructure is so decrepit that it has to be replaced - which may be decades into the future. And, this on top of the key issue: despite a few glimmers here and there, Toronto is a low-rise, car-oriented city. It’s why CafeTO will die too, this year.

We have the tools to fix the problems. We’re just to chintzy to do it, and the Mayor is unwilling to use any political capital to champion it. Yes, he’s just one vote - but the fact that he won’t even spent an iota of airtime pushing councillors for change shows how little he or anyone cares about prioritizing pedestrians, cyclists or safety.

 

[Northern Light]

I think it’s part of Toronto’s implicit mandate to be a ‘low tax city’. That’s why improvements get dragged out forever. First, you may not have the staff to do the analysis.

Certainly an inclination to limit tax increases is problematic in many departments on many issues. However, I'm going to disagree about the issue of staff shortages when it comes to analysis.

The City pawn off tons of work on consultants, and has too many staff who aren't as expert in their disciplines as they ought to be; but it also has myriad experts.

With apologies for non-inclusive language........LOL, the City has too many 'yes men' (and women) who simply accept the status quo; it has too many managers at high and middle levels that prefer
checking boxes to getting things done.

More money would help, but using what's already available more wisely would do wonders.

...... It’s why CafeTO will die too, this year.

I rather hope not and sure as hell not, if I have anything to say about it.

We have the tools to fix the problems. We’re just to chintzy to do it, and the Mayor is unwilling to use any political capital to champion it. Yes, he’s just one vote - but the fact that he won’t even spent an iota of airtime pushing councillors for change shows how little he or anyone cares about prioritizing pedestrians, cyclists or safety.

I don't want to let the mayor off the hook here................but I will say, when he's had a local councillor who is enthusiastic about a proposal and prepared to stand up to any flak it generates, the Mayor has leaned in more than once.

The Danforth bike lane, CafeTO, Bikeshare 45-min pilot, Modular Housing, Planning experiments with intensification.......see Councillor Bradford. His voting record isn't perfect, but he gets a fair bit done in his part of town (mine).

The Mayor backed all of the above to my recollection.

Where, on the other hand is the proposal Councillor Perks is championing? Wong-Tam?

Cressy has some serious political capital with the Mayor, however they act publicly at times for their mutual bases.

But he expended his on new parks in Downtown West/Entertainment District, among other things. Still, if he found a single pedestrian/cycling project in his ward he wanted, I'm fairly sure it would get done.

That doesn't help many folks in the inner burbs..............but lots could be happening in the Old City/East York/York area; lots more than is happening. If the local councillors got on board.

 

[allengeorge]

Thanks @Northern Light for the detailed response/rebuttal. Lots to think about there.

I still think there’s an institutional and political bias in favor of cars and inaction (which - if I’m reading your response right) you alluded to as well.

 

[Northern Light]

I still think there’s an institutional and political bias in favor of cars and inaction (which - if I’m reading your response right) you alluded to as well.

There is a bias towards to the path of least resistance, lowest risk etc.
This is true across most {not all) agencies/depts.

Don't rock the boat, don't put your hand up to point out the obvious problem with an idea, don't add work to a colleague's plate; don't stay late to get something right.

****

Suppose I gave you an example.....

Imagine, hypothetically, that City Forestry was going to naturalize a large area.
Suppose, I told you they've spec'ed twice as many plants as they should ever need, wasting a ton of money.
Suppose they were doing that simply to meet a quota of trees planted, rather than ensuring their survival and using their budget optimally.
Suppose they were also planting many species which stand next to no chance surviving in those circumstances; because it helped meet a biodiversity goal, even though
most of that diversity will end up dead.

That couldn't be real could it....? It's just hypothetical....

Errr...........or is more than $20,000 in plants and labour going to circle the drain in one more project......