Admiral Beez
Superstar
I live on a narrow street in Cabbagetown with on-street parking making the roadspace narrower. The city's contemporary fire trucks can fit no problem.
|
|
|
Road Safety & Vision Zero Plan
- Thread starter salsa
- Start date
W. K. Lis
Superstar
Could the fire engines use the sidewalk or cycling lane or the "breakdown" lanes of expressways or drive across grassy parks in an emergency? Could the city make a better job of clearing snow windrows at sides of streets, so emergency vehicles can use the snow covered sidewalks or not?
lenaitch
Senior Member
About half (53.1% per their 2018 annual report). It would require a significant increase in paramedic services, yet probably not result in a significant reduction in fire services infrastructure (operating costs - yes). The average fire service response time is about 7 minutes; for paramedics it's about 12. Paramedics get tied up at hospitals due to a delay in hospital staff 'accepting' the patient and there have been occasions where no ambulance was available.
Like many jurisdictions, Toronto has 'Emergency Response Units' (name varies by jurisdiction) which are fully equipped ambulances - except they can't transport, just like a fire truck.
I suggest that it wouldn't result in a reduction of fire trucks/crews, because they still have to be available, they'd probably just sit around more.
turini2
Active Member
Brampton has just ordered some smaller sized ones, apparently - same as these ones in DC. Such an easy win for urban streets and road safety - it doesn't need to be done all at once, just through gradual fleet renewal.
Unfortunately I suspect the "bigger must mean better, right?" and the "well, we've always ordered these big fire trucks" brigades will win...
Unfortunately I suspect the "bigger must mean better, right?" and the "well, we've always ordered these big fire trucks" brigades will win...
W. K. Lis
Superstar
The bigger fire equipment would also mean a higher fuel consumption. If they can do the very same work with smaller equipment, and save costs, why not?
lenaitch
Senior Member
Ignoring the fact that most sidewalks aren't wide enough and, in many commercial areas, bump right up against storefronts, doorways, etc., driving on sidewalks would require some changes to both the HTA and municipal bylaws, not to mentioned a very long and in-depth chat with the city's legal department, insurance carrier and the employees' unions. Sidewalks aren't really well defined in the HTA.
Emergency vehicles really only have specific legal flexibility in regards to speed and intersections; all the rest is governed by practice or, in some cases, case law. So-called 'breakdown lanes' are considered shoulders. I'd have to look up the legal status of bike lanes and whether they are HTA and/or bylaw matters. Obviously, if they are separated from the vehicular part of the roadway by physical barriers, that would be a problem.
In any case, the safety and liability implications of emergency vehicles, particularly large fire apparatus, using either of them is not insignificant. I'm actually quite surprised you'd be advocating for vehicles entering into pedestrian and bicycle spaces.
lenaitch
Senior Member
The vehicle in your attachment doesn't appear to be the one that Brampton is buying. This was brought up in a thread on this forum a while back.
The thing that isn't mentioned either in the news item or the company's website is its operational performance; i.e after getting to a scene, how long can it pump, which I would think is relatively important for a, um, pumper, and then get back to barracks. Perhaps it would be suitable for many calls, but if it gets involved in a protracted or complex scene, then will have to be relieved, somehow recharged onsite, etc. At long, complex scenes, all apparatus and crews have to be relieved at some point, but the more niche a vehicle is, it can impact on the rest of the fleet, and their crews.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
Fire engines already use the sidewalk and cycling lanes, in an emergency.
Dual direction cycling lanes could be used, if the cyclists are kind enough to allow emergency vehicles to use them.
Dual direction cycling lanes could be used, if the cyclists are kind enough to allow emergency vehicles to use them.
lenaitch
Senior Member
Cyclists have the same obligation towards emergency vehicles as motor vehicles do.
Admiral Beez
Superstar
I agree. But how do we fix this?
We need a provincially mandated retroactive fix to these extra wide residential streets. Some ideas:
1) Increase the frontage of the houses through wider sidewalks (or adding sidewalks where they’re omitted), solidly-separated bike lanes, and add more green space in front of each house. We’re not giving the land away so the city will need to mow this new grass.
2) Plant trees and boulders at the curbside, especially on corners. That’s one way how they slow cars in Europe.
3) Install green spaces up the middle of these roads, of varying width so to keep drivers on their toes.
4) And the usual speed bumps and humps.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
The cities already "own" part of the property in front of houses. They can plant trees (prune them or dig it up or replace it) or put in sidewalks, up to the property lines. They should also be able to put sidewalks or cycling lanes in the roadway, to narrow it down and slow the traffic.
Admiral Beez
Superstar
But they won't unless the Province dictates new retroactive regs for residential streets.
afransen
Senior Member
I don't think cities want to have wide streets. They are just following the design guidelines. Wouldn't the most effective thing for the province to do would be to create a new 'auto low' design standard for narrower streets. Perhaps coordinate with more NA jurisdictions so that design vehicles are consistent which helps to create a NA market for smaller service and emergency vehicles.
The existence of large trucks is not a reason to have wide streets. Shippers use the biggest trucks they can get away with. If a destination is too tight for large trucks they use smaller ones. We have plenty of these in North America and much of Toronto already requires smaller trucks than the 53' tractor trailer you might see used in the suburbs.
The existence of large trucks is not a reason to have wide streets. Shippers use the biggest trucks they can get away with. If a destination is too tight for large trucks they use smaller ones. We have plenty of these in North America and much of Toronto already requires smaller trucks than the 53' tractor trailer you might see used in the suburbs.
crs1026
Superstar
A generic GtA wide standard for new streets for new subdivisions makes sense, and ties to a reduced-sprawl mandate. I can’t see the current provincial government showing an interest in this, but hey maybe the next one. Developers might see economic incentive to design differently, but the market reality is that people buying in the burbs likely want wider streets so the developers may be happy to provide them.
The bigger problem is what to do about existing streets that may be good for another 50 years. It makes no sense to waste money tearing them out, so only gradual replacement is practical. The street grid won’t change, so people get the benefit of added lawn space…..hopefully not leading to a loosening of setbacks and houses built out towards the street!
But mid-block and at-corner constrictions might be a stopgap, and these might make a world of difference. Perhaps there has to be a prohibition on large vehicles, maybe implemented gradually by district, so that fleet operators don’t have to buy a new fleet cold turkey.
- Paul
The bigger problem is what to do about existing streets that may be good for another 50 years. It makes no sense to waste money tearing them out, so only gradual replacement is practical. The street grid won’t change, so people get the benefit of added lawn space…..hopefully not leading to a loosening of setbacks and houses built out towards the street!
But mid-block and at-corner constrictions might be a stopgap, and these might make a world of difference. Perhaps there has to be a prohibition on large vehicles, maybe implemented gradually by district, so that fleet operators don’t have to buy a new fleet cold turkey.
- Paul
W. K. Lis
Superstar
Wide streets are more expensive for the city. Asphalt will be getting more expensive. The sewers have to be longer, along with the water and natural gas pipes, underground. Clearing the snow off wide streets means more in the AMOUNT of snow to be cleared.