News   May 02, 2024
Cranes Are… Dropping? UrbanToronto Reports the Crane Count for Q1 2024
 679     0 
News   May 02, 2024
Minto Communities Celebrates Top-off Milestone for The Saint
 372     0 
News   May 02, 2024
News Roundup for May 2, 2024
 309     0 

Road Safety & Vision Zero Plan

How Driving is Encouraged and Subsidized — By Law

See link.

Driving is so hard-wired into American culture, life and institutions, that it’s hard to account for all the ways it is subsidized, preferenced or otherwise favored. But Greg Shill, a law professor at University of Iowa, attempted it anyway.

In a new paper, he lists all the ways the legal system puts its thumb on the scale for drivers to the detriment of everyone else: transit users, cyclists and pedestrians.

“Rules from virtually every field of law that codify subsidies for driving, including dangerous driving, should be repealed,” Shill writes. “These laws are not the root cause of automobile supremacy, but they armor it in law and give it agency of its own.”

How many areas of law? Let Shill count the ways:
Click to expand...


#1. Traffic Laws Soft-Peddle Very Dangerous Behavior
Speeding kills 10,000 Americans annually. But while it’s technically illegal, the offense enforced arbitrarily and half-heartedly.

For example, in practice, speeding rules are not enforced unless the violation is in excess of 10 mph over the limit. This is an example of what’s called in legal terms “an insincere rule,” he says, a rule that practically mandates something other than what it states. That approach to speeding “fosters a creeping normalization” of what is in fact a very dangerous activity, he writes.

In addition, other dangerous behavior, like failing to yield to pedestrians is almost never enforced. Shill cites a Wisconsin study showing drivers only yielded to pedestrians 16 percent of the time, indicating that if cops wanted to, they could spend their time doing nothing else but writing failure-to-yield tickets.
Click to expand...

#2. Land Use Laws Favor Sprawl

#3. Legal Parking Requirements Subsidize Driving

#4. Emissions Laws Exempt ‘Light Trucks’

#5. Emissions Laws Ignore the Environmental Costs of Roadbuilding

#6. Vehicle Safety Regulations Ignore Pedestrians

#7. Vehicle Safety Regulations Allow Unsafe Aftermarket Vehicle Modifications

#8. Insurance Law Limits Payouts to Pedestrians

#9. Tax Law Subsidizes Sprawl

#10. Tort Law Protects Dangerous Drivers

#11. Contract Law Freezes Out Pedestrians

#12. Criminal Law Rarely Punishes Dangerous Drivers
 
Simcoe and Richmond stoplight went live this morning:

176520
 
^Have to agree with Keenan. Those countdown lights are not implemented consistently. Some lights count down from 25, some from as little as 8 or 9. Some count down to 0 but then recycle back to 'cross'. Their meaning is far from clear.
As a motorist, I appreciate seeing how stale a green light is. Rather than encouraging people to boot it, it helps to anticipate the yellow light, and to make controlled slowdowns instead of facing a snap decision whether to proceed thru the intersection when surprised by a last-second yellow. (Some European jurisdictions have the yellow start flashing thru the final few seconds of a green, which accomplishes the same thing.)
As a pedestrian, telling me I have 19 seconds to cross but I'm not allowed to do so..... piss off. If I have packages or weather conditions are bad, I may choose to wait, but if I feel fit and decide I still have time, so be it. Don't need anyone second guessing me. (If I do end up still in the intersection when the light turns, then sure, ticket me....I deserve that).

- Paul
 
the shorter the crossing, the shorter the countdown.

They are designed to stop pedestrians from entering the intersection and not being able to exit it in time before the signal changes.

The problem is that the timer assumes a very slow walker - significantly slower than the average pedestrian, and way, way slower than what someone can do if they need to clear the intersection.

Fines should go for people who fail to clear the intersection in time, let people be their own judge of whether or not they have the time.
 
There are "intelligent" pedestrian signals (outside of Ontario and North America), where just the presence of a pedestrian at an intersection corner will trigger the countdown to give them the "walk" (just like the presence of an automobile before the stop line will trigger the automobile to get a "green" light). If the automobile turns right, the countdown restarts. With "intelligent" pedestrian signals, if they walk away, the countdown is cancelled. Also with "intelligent" pedestrian signals, if the pedestrian takes f-o-r-e-v-e-r to cross on their "walk", the pedestrian signals also l-e-n-g-t-h-s their "walk" time. If the pedestrian runs across, the "walk" time shortens, if there is no one else crossing.

Many of us remember when there were no "pedestrian" signals. People crossed on the "green", just like the automobiles. That is why, when we see no "pedestrian" signal but the traffic light is "green", we assume the "pedestrian" signal is "broken" and cross the road.
 
innsertnamehere said:
the shorter the crossing, the shorter the countdown.

They are designed to stop pedestrians from entering the intersection and not being able to exit it in time before the signal changes.

The problem is that the timer assumes a very slow walker - significantly slower than the average pedestrian, and way, way slower than what someone can do if they need to clear the intersection.

Fines should go for people who fail to clear the intersection in time, let people be their own judge of whether or not they have the time.
Click to expand...

There's about 3-7 seconds or so (depending on the street width) between when the countdown starts and most able-bodied pedestrians are able to cross. The city had changed the timing as well to give more countdown for older pedestrians or anyone with an injury or disability - so there's often less walk signal time.

I'd like to see a flashing walk signal when the countdown starts that indicates this period, before going to a red flashing hand to indicate the time in which no pedestrian should start crossing (which would be a few seconds later than when the countdown normally starts). Then warn or fine pedestrians who intentionally block traffic by crossing when they wouldn't be able to finish in time.
 
crs1026 said:
^Have to agree with Keenan. Those countdown lights are not implemented consistently. Some lights count down from 25, some from as little as 8 or 9. Some count down to 0 but then recycle back to 'cross'. Their meaning is far from clear.
As a motorist, I appreciate seeing how stale a green light is. Rather than encouraging people to boot it, it helps to anticipate the yellow light, and to make controlled slowdowns instead of facing a snap decision whether to proceed thru the intersection when surprised by a last-second yellow. (Some European jurisdictions have the yellow start flashing thru the final few seconds of a green, which accomplishes the same thing.)
As a pedestrian, telling me I have 19 seconds to cross but I'm not allowed to do so..... piss off. If I have packages or weather conditions are bad, I may choose to wait, but if I feel fit and decide I still have time, so be it. Don't need anyone second guessing me. (If I do end up still in the intersection when the light turns, then sure, ticket me....I deserve that).

- Paul
Click to expand...
Here's my suggestion.
The countdown should be disassociated from the flashing phase.
The countdown will now be shown through the walk and flashing phases.
The flashing phases lasts as long as it "normally" takes for able-bodied individuals to dash across the crossing - if it takes 5sec to dash across, then the phase lasts for 5 sec. This will be determined similar to how the countdown time is set currently.
Pedestrian may not begin crossing when the hand starts flashing.
 
11th said:
Here's my suggestion.
The countdown should be disassociated from the flashing phase.
The countdown will now be shown through the walk and flashing phases.
The flashing phases lasts as long as it "normally" takes for able-bodied individuals to dash across the crossing - if it takes 5sec to dash across, then the phase lasts for 5 sec. This will be determined similar to how the countdown time is set currently.
Pedestrian may not begin crossing when the hand starts flashing.
Click to expand...

There should be a "flashing walk" phase as well, so that the less-bodied individuals will not start to walk, but the sprinters or racewalkers in us can still start.
 
I noticed today at various crosswalks, nobody waited for the next light when the count down started. When it count down hit 5 seconds or so, people just sprinted across.
 
At what speed are the countdown timers set at? According to link:

The MUTCD specifies use of a walking speed of 3.5 feet/second to calculate pedestrian crossing time. The MUTCD also states that a slower walking speed can be used if people who walk more slowly or use wheelchairs “routinely use the crosswalk”. This involves engineering judgment. Current research suggests that if there are more than 20% elderly people in the pedestrian stream, a slower walking speed of 3.0 feet/second should be used to calculate pedestrian crossing time.
Click to expand...

Then there are obstacles that may slow pedestrians down. Potholes, sewer grates, streetcar tracks, ice and snow, motor vehicles that crossed the stop lines, and football players walking into you as you cross.

 
Last edited:
W. K. Lis said:
There should be a "flashing walk" phase as well, so that the less-bodied individuals will not start to walk, but the sprinters or racewalkers in us can still start.
Click to expand...
The countdown can continue to serve as the reference for less-bodied individuals, same as todays. If the countdown begins at 20sec, then it takes 20sec for less-bodied individuals to cross, from start to finish. Using the 20sec as an example.
Walk - plenty of time to cross.
Walk+countdown(20 to 4) - limited time to cross; can still begin a crossing
Flashing hand+countdown(4 to 0) - must not begin to cross; complete crossing if started
Steady hand - no crossing
 
Some updates: https://www.thestar.com/news/city_h...icism-over-pedestrian-and-cyclist-deaths.html

Also this:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1108416082375831552

My first reaction: 120kph on Queen Street??? This is nuts, even worse than the 200 kph on Rexdale.

But reducing speed limits won't do anything if street design remains unchanged. Personally, I'm a big fan of curb extensions to make pedestrian crossings safer. Driving this winter I noticed the snow and ice mounds at street corners acted as fairly effective curb extensions, slowing down turning drivers.

That being said, I don't think we need to lower speeds on arterials. Unless we reduce the actual width of the road (lines of paint don't count), speeds won't come down. I would focus instead on residential streets, including speed bumps, curb extensions and much better illuminated pedestrian crossings. Oh and get rid of channelized right turns. As both driver and pedestrian, I shudder at pedestrian crossings going past these turns.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top