Road Safety & Vision Zero Plan

[Northern Light]

In Toronto today we need to ask the question.......when is a crosswalk more dangerous, than safe?

A friend took this photo while out walking today: (posted w/permission)

Yes, that's what used to be a crosswalk shattered in pieces, poles down in an intersection.

 

[DSC]

In Toronto today we need to ask the question.......when is a crosswalk more dangerous, than safe?

A friend took this photo while out walking today: (posted w/permission)

View attachment 404179


Yes, that's what used to be a crosswalk shattered in pieces, poles down in an intersection.

Not quite sure what point you are making. If it's Danforth and St Clair the driver died. No others involved.

 

[Northern Light]

Not quite sure what point you are making. If it's Danforth and St Clair the driver died. No others involved.

Its Lumsden and Barrington.

I don't have any details on what happened, as I wasn't there and my friend only came upon the aftermath.

I simply thought the photo was worth looking at; one doesn't see an entire crosswalk set up bowled over on the ground every day; actually I think that might be a first for me.

 

[DSC]

Its Lumsden and Barrington.

I don't have any details on what happened, as I wasn't there and my friend only came upon the aftermath.

I simply thought the photo was worth looking at; one doesn't see an entire crosswalk set up bowled over on the ground every day; actually I think that might be a first for me.

Clearly, we are in an epidemic!

This is the Danforth & St Clair one, yesterday. From Global

 

[Towered]

I'm not a fan of crosswalks. They're deceptively dangerous.

 

[crs1026]

^Having crosswalks is unavoidable, but as we've discussed before, some form of shielding or jerseybarrierish structure to protect pedestrians ought to be more common.

The other disturbing aspect of that photo for me is the damage to the bus shelter. Had there been people standing there....

- Paul

 

[crs1026]

While walking home from the subway today, I discovered that someone has meticulously laid out a plan for changing the design of a local crosssing (in front of the local public school) to a more contemporary standard.
I haven’t heard of a consultation or city proposal to redo the intersection, so this may just be some concerned individual(s) pointing out how it can be done better.
Let’s hope the City notices.

- Paul

 

[PL1]

While walking home from the subway today, I discovered that someone has meticulously laid out a plan for changing the design of a local crosssing (in front of the local public school) to a more contemporary standard.
I haven’t heard of a consultation or city proposal to redo the intersection, so this may just be some concerned individual(s) pointing out how it can be done better.
Let’s hope the City notices.

- PaulView attachment 406404View attachment 406405View attachment 406406View attachment 406407

The city did something similar at Craig Crescent and Bayview (just north of Eglinton) last summer. First came markings, then they installed flexible posts to (impermanently) change the geometry of the intersections. Cars have to go slower to turn right from Bayview.

I was hoping they would bump out the curbs. Maybe that's a future plan, and this is a cheaper temporary solution?

 

[DSC]

While walking home from the subway today, I discovered that someone has meticulously laid out a plan for changing the design of a local crosssing (in front of the local public school) to a more contemporary standard.
I haven’t heard of a consultation or city proposal to redo the intersection, so this may just be some concerned individual(s) pointing out how it can be done better.
Let’s hope the City notices.

- PaulView attachment 406404View attachment 406405View attachment 406406View attachment 406407

This looks like the "guide lines" for painting new lines on the road.. We have seen quite a lot of this in St Lawrence and is a good way to start and observe before the FAR more expensive curb-moving.

 

[tiffer24]

There's absolutely nothing we can do.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1543098124398252032

 

[Northern Light]

There's absolutely nothing we can do.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1543098124398252032

Of course there is:

1) Lower the permissible amount of alcohol in the Criminal Code (while driving) from .08 to .05

2) Allow non-criminal fines for alcohol exceeding .02 (this is the number Sweden allows.)

3) Introduce income-contingent fines, like Sweden, expressed as days of net income so upper-middle income and wealthy drivers feel the sting of the law equally.

4)For a first offense over .05, impound car 30 days. Driving suspension same period.

5)For a second offense within 5 years of the previous, license is suspended and car impounded for at least six months and only released when you complete a course on driving while intoxicated.
The course is required in Denmark, and the course is 12 hours in-class and you're billed for it.

6) Enforce the law, random ride checks every day of the year and at every time of day.

7) Provide good alternatives, everywhere, including in rural areas; in Toronto, ramp up 24-hour transit.

8) Do not subsidize the car insurance of bad drivers. We all do this in Ontario by the way under a program called 'facility'. It means no matter how bad a driver you are, you can always obtain
insurance, it may cost 8k per year; but for the most terrible drivers 80k is too low, never mind 8.

9) Zero tolerance for driving w/o insurance. You're caught, car is impounded for 30 days minimum; and you can't have it back without proof of valid insurance.

***

Outcomes being everything..............currently 34% of traffic fatalities in Canada (as at 2015) involve alcohol. The number in Sweden is 24%. That suggests a reasonable benchmark would see us reduce
alcohol-related traffic fatalities by about 30% from today's levels. This would also be roughly in line w/stats in Italy and France.

 

[crs1026]

^I don’t have a problem with any of your suggestions…. The biggest one for me is that a second offense ought to bring into question whether the individual deserves to be on the road over the long term. Thirty days impoundment is merely a clever inconvenience, but maybe some people just don’t deserve to be on the roads if the consequence for the first offense didn’t have enough impact.
Having said rhat, The tweet merely advises that a driver was found to be impaired, not that they were found to have caused the crash. There are two parallel issues here that may or may not intersect. While I try not to be pedantic, and I’m certainly connecting dots in my own mind, the whole problem with Twitter is that it encourages knee jerk reactions, and I am a bit obsessive about not allowing that to be normalised.

- Paul

 

[11th]

Of course there is:

1) Lower the permissible amount of alcohol in the Criminal Code (while driving) from .08 to .05

2) Allow non-criminal fines for alcohol exceeding .02 (this is the number Sweden allows.)

3) Introduce income-contingent fines, like Sweden, expressed as days of net income so upper-middle income and wealthy drivers feel the sting of the law equally.

4)For a first offense over .05, impound car 30 days. Driving suspension same period.

5)For a second offense within 5 years of the previous, license is suspended and car impounded for at least six months and only released when you complete a course on driving while intoxicated.
The course is required in Denmark, and the course is 12 hours in-class and you're billed for it.

6) Enforce the law, random ride checks every day of the year and at every time of day.

7) Provide good alternatives, everywhere, including in rural areas; in Toronto, ramp up 24-hour transit.

8) Do not subsidize the car insurance of bad drivers. We all do this in Ontario by the way under a program called 'facility'. It means no matter how bad a driver you are, you can always obtain
insurance, it may cost 8k per year; but the most terrible drivers 80k is too low, never mind 8.

9) Zero tolerance for driving w/o insurance. You're caught, car is impounded for 30 days minimum; and you can't have it back without proof of valid insurance.

***

Outcomes being everything..............currently 34% of traffic fatalities in Canada (as at 2015) involve alcohol. The number in Sweden is 24%. That suggests a reasonable benchmark would see us reduce
alcohol-related traffic fatalities by about 30% from today's levels. This would also be roughly in line w/stats in Italy and France.

Without knowing the details, points 1 - 4 might not have prevented this regardless.
How was driver impaired? If it's alcohol, what was the reading?

 

[Admiral Beez]

Yield signs require additional cues to make drivers pay attention - roundabouts are demonstrably safer than normal intersections despite using yield signs, because in addition to reducing conflict points the geometry of a roundabout forces lower speeds, so drivers have more time to respond, and requires drivers to turn a lot, forcing them to pay attention.

In the UK I have never seen a stop sign. Every non-signaled intersection is a give way or yield. I'm a big fan of roundabouts for safety, especially as a motorcyclist, plus they also discourage roadside begging as the traffic doesn't regularly stop.

Panhandling debate goes round and round

Sometimes, the newspaper covers a problem and then provides a solution in the same edition. It’s like magic. On Tuesday, …

www.thegazette.com

"You really can't panhandle at roundabouts, unless you're especially quick and agile. Unlike a regular old intersection, the cars don't stop, at least not for long. There's barely even time to read a tale of woe scribbled on cardboard. So, basically, if we want to end panhandling, we need more roundabouts."

But can we figure out how to use them?

 

[DirectionNorth]

In the UK I have never seen a stop sign. Every non-signaled intersection is a give way or yield. I'm a big fan of roundabouts for safety, especially as a motorcyclist, plus they also discourage roadside begging as the traffic doesn't regularly stop.

Panhandling debate goes round and round

Sometimes, the newspaper covers a problem and then provides a solution in the same edition. It’s like magic. On Tuesday, …

www.thegazette.com

"You really can't panhandle at roundabouts, unless you're especially quick and agile. Unlike a regular old intersection, the cars don't stop, at least not for long. There's barely even time to read a tale of woe scribbled on cardboard. So, basically, if we want to end panhandling, we need more roundabouts."

But can we figure out how to use them?

I hate roundabouts as a cyclist and pedestrian. You have to watch for traffic that, coming out of the roundabout, isn't watching for you.