News   Mar 05, 2021
 4.5K     9 
News   Mar 05, 2021
 582     0 
News   Mar 05, 2021
 2.1K     3 

Road Safety & Vision Zero Plan

Towered

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
5,881
Reaction score
4,250
Coming to City Council next, a motion to improve safety on Dufferin Street on an expedited basis.

As the motion is seconded by the Mayor, I think we can assume it will pass.


Key points:

1. City Council direct the General Manager, Transportation Services, in consultation with the Toronto Transit Commission and any relevant City Divisions, to coordinate and expedite all studies and traffic reviews along Dufferin Street, including but not limited to the bus priority transit route being considered for implementation by the Toronto Transit Commission and that these ensure ongoing and future safety considerations for cyclists and pedestrians.

2. City Council direct the General Manager, Transportation Services, as part of the review in Part 1 above, to further consider potential expedited phasing of areas where early implementation could occur and that an update report be provided to the Toronto and East York Community Council by the second quarter of 2021.

3. City Council direct the General Manager, Transportation Services, as part of the report in Part 2 above, to include assessment of the current connectivity of existing cycling infrastructure such as Lappin Avenue/Hallam Avenue and Lindsey Avenue.

4. City Council direct the General Manager, Transportation Services to include coordination and implementation on an expedited basis, including with consideration to warrant standards that have been updated under the City's Vision Zero program, of the following actions being proposed, reviewed or that are already approved and are underway including:

a. traffic signal light at LindseyAvenue/Sylvan Avenue and Dufferin Street;
b. traffic signal light at Geary Avenue (expedited installation);
c. traffic signal light at Goodwood Avenue and Cloverlawn Avenue;
d. guard rail at Davenport Road and Dufferin Street;
e. proposed or recommended Red Light Signal Cameras along Dufferin Street for expedited review and implementation;
f. proposed or recommended Speed Enforcement Cameras along Dufferin Street for expedited review and implementation; and
g. street light assessment (Toronto Hydro).

Not a single mention of protected bike lanes.
 

W. K. Lis

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
18,651
Reaction score
7,510
Location
Toronto, ON, CAN, Terra, Sol, Milky Way
This city acts idiotic when it comes to these issues. There are so many problems the plague Dufferin, but the city is living in their own delusional world.

For one, they should start raising the damn sidewalks along Dufferin. So you know, it doesnt seem as if pedestrians are almost at walking with cars. Secondly they need to force any new developments that take place on Dufferin to have a setback, regardless of how small the development is to allow for a larger sidewalk width. The sidewalks are so narrow on vast stretches along this street, that one can feel the gust of wind as cars blaze past them on the road. Unfortunately Dufferin is not the only road that suffers from the same horrid streetscaping, Dupont is vastly similar and that's another disaster waiting to happen.

You mean the powers-that-be made a mistake in the 1950's by widening Dufferin Street? OMG!!!







From link.
 

W. K. Lis

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
18,651
Reaction score
7,510
Location
Toronto, ON, CAN, Terra, Sol, Milky Way
If people were able to walk to a store instead of driving, we would be safer. However, city zoning is preventing that. Without the neighbourhood corner store within walking distance, people have to drive to get that bag of milk or whatever.

Spotting (and reviving?) the neighbourhood corner commercial building

From link.

Like so many people during the current pandemic lockdown, I’ve started to get to know my neighbourhood much more closely on daily walks for exercise from my home. One of the elements of Toronto’s everyday vernacular architecture I’ve always found interesting is the former corner shops embedded within residential neighbourhoods in the older parts of Toronto. Once upon a time these were the first stop for regular goods and sometimes services, not to mention local news and gossip, for nearby residents who could walk to them daily. But with the advent of widespread car ownership and supermarkets, many of them declined and were converted to become purely housing.

The need to address climate change and congestion, and more recently the sudden reorientation towards working from and shopping near home caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, have stimulated talk about reorienting our lives more closely around the neighbourhood we live in. Even before the pandemic, Paris mayor Anne Hidalgo had begun talking about the “15-minute city” where we can live, work, play, study, and shop all within a 15-minute walk. With the added experience of the pandemic forcing us to stick to our neighbourhoods, the idea of having more of our shopping, services, and workplaces near where we live has become all the more front-of-mind.

Current zoning, however, prohibits any use other than residential on streets within residential neighbourhoods, pushing all retail, service, and office uses to main streets. Corner stores that have maintained commercial use all along are grandfathered, but I’m told that once they are converted to residential use, they can’t go back. And, as we will see below, there are a fair number of these former commercial properties hidden within neighbourhoods in the older parts of the city.

Maybe one small nudge towards Toronto as a “15-minute city” could be to designate all of these former corner shops inside neighbourhoods as automatically, as-of-right, eligible to be reconverted to commercial uses. They probably would not become corner shops again — those still wouldn’t be viable in most cases. But they could be any other kind of commercial use too, whether retail, services, or offices – a barbershop, a lawyer’s office, a coffee shop or specialty store (or a coffee shop and specialty store), a co-working space, maybe even a startup. They also have the advantage of potentially being convenient live-work spaces, with living space on the upper floor; alternatively, the upper floor could supply a much-needed residential rental unit. It’s a change that would be relatively subtle, since it would only affect a tiny fraction of the buildings in a neighbourhood.

Ideally most employees and customers would be local and be able to walk or bike to these locations. But these buildings are generally also not far from transit. Once the pandemic ends, if driving is necessary, there will usually be parking spaces available on nearby streets during the day when some locals drive to their own work. Meanwhile, keeping people in or bringing people to the neighbourhood would provide additional business for local shops and restaurants, and bring additional “eyes on the street” to the area during the day.

Any reconversions would be a slow process, especially given how desirable housing is in the older parts of the city, so this would just be a very small step. But it might give a little nudge towards better integrating mixed uses into some older neighbourhoods without too much disruption.

In the meantime, my local walks have given me the opportunity to look for and observe these former corner stores more closely. Here are some of the indicators I’ve noticed for spotting former corner stores in residential areas. I’ve stuck to those inside neighbourhoods rather than ones on minor arterials like Pape Avenue, where they are less unexpected. These examples are all within a few kilometres radius of where I live, off the Danforth.

A few corner commercial buildings are still in use, of course. Some are still corner shops.





But there are many more that have been converted to residential over the years. Some have not changed much yet; others have long been absorbed into residential use and their former commercial identity is quite disguised.

One of the dead giveaways of a former corner store is the angled corner door.





Some streets that are apparently residential but designated by the City as collectors (PDF), such as Logan Avenue and Sammon Avenue, have these former stores on practically every block. On these streets, former corner shops often appear on two of the four corners of an intersection — perhaps they once offered different services.

But there are others hidden here and there on purely local streets, too. In these cases, they usually seem to be the only one on the intersection.

If anyone has further knowledge about or experience of these in-neighbourhood former and current commercial spaces, please share it in the comments.
 

W. K. Lis

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
18,651
Reaction score
7,510
Location
Toronto, ON, CAN, Terra, Sol, Milky Way

A Reminder that Protected Bike Lanes Can Make Streets Safer for Everyone


From link.

As it moves forward with plans to build its first protected bike lane, Pasadena got a reminder from the Pasadena Complete Streets Coalition to hold a steady course. In the past, the city has watered down plans for robust bike infrastructure in response to complaints about traffic being slowed down.

Why is slowing traffic a bad thing? What a lot of street designers and engineers seem to ignore is that if they are not willing to design a street that slows traffic, they are essentially encouraging vehicles to go faster. It’s probably not their intended outcome, however, especially on residential streets.

Nevertheless, according to its website, “Pasadena is dedicated to creating a city where people can safely and comfortably get around by biking, walking, and riding transit.” It is currently “embarking upon the final design” for its first protected bike lane, on Union Street.

John Lloyd, writing for the Pasadena Complete Streets Coalition, has an important reminder for city leaders about why good design should be prioritized over concerns about slower car traffic: Protected bike lanes are safer for everyone using them, not just pedestrians and bicyclists.

A 2019 study spanning thirteen years in twelve cities found that protected bike lanes dramatically reduced fatalities for all road users on the streets that added them.

Writes Lloyd:

Fatalities fell by over 38 percent in Chicago, 40 percent in Denver, nearly 50 percent in San Francisco, 60 percent in Seattle, and a whopping 75 percent in Portland, OR. What these cities had in common were protected bike lanes. The researchers concluded that:
“…building safe facilities for cyclists is one of the biggest factors in road safety for everyone. Bicycling infrastructure — specifically, separated and protected bike lanes — leads to fewer fatalities and better road-safety outcomes for all road users.”

How did protected bike lanes make a difference?

The study found the main reason for this was the traffic calming effect protected bike lanes have on all road users. With protected bike lane street designs, traffic speeds are lowered, so when collisions do occur, they are far less likely to be fatal, and this protects everyone. Let’s face it, people make mistakes, but designing streets for slower speeds means fewer of those mistakes result in people dying.

It might be a good idea for advocates everywhere to keep this study handy, and show it to planners when they face arguments that robust bicycle infrastructure is unnecessary because “nobody bikes.” That is a circular argument anyway–but what should matter more are the safety outcomes for everybody.
 

yrt+viva=1system

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 10, 2011
Messages
372
Reaction score
381
I’ve been meaning to ask this question for a while but it always slips my mind until I’m waiting at a pedestrian signal.

Is there a reason why pedestrian signals are not automatically triggered on green? For example at an intersection, the east-west pedestrian signals are automatically triggered whether a pedestrian is there or not. But the north-south signals required a pedestrian to trigger them otherwise it remains no-walk.

https://sf.streetsblog.org/2021/01/...JzWLyFsn7fK_Hpf1KXMBFx1jE4pj7Hoc-TC2TZVbmMxlA

It’s an honest question which I’m curious about. Especially nowadays one would expect pedestrian signals to be automatically triggered.
 

crs1026

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 16, 2014
Messages
6,725
Reaction score
8,879
^Lack of consistency in how beg buttons operate is a real problem.

Around here, what you describe is common where there is a stoplight where a less busy road crosses a main road. The green from the lesser road has minimal duration, only long enough to allow a couple cars to proceed, and without a Walk indication being provided - which is all that's needed most of the time. The green does not last long enough to allow a pedestrian to cross. The whole idea is to minimise delay to the busier street by not offering an opposing green for longer than absolutely necessary. The main street's green may not be interrupted until a car is actually detected waiting on the cross street.

Pressing the beg button triggers the yellow/red for the main street, and extends the duration of the side street's green for long enough to allow someone to cross the main street, with a Walk indication also appearing.

As a pedestrian, I like being able to push the button as (in theory) it guarantees one a safe crossing interval. But since no two beg buttons seem to work the same way, that assurance isn't always dependable.

- Paul
 

W. K. Lis

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
18,651
Reaction score
7,510
Location
Toronto, ON, CAN, Terra, Sol, Milky Way
Seeing how Ontario and Toronto fails to innovate almost nothing on Vision Zero, we tend to copy MOSTLY what happens in the USA on the matter of road safety. Even then, when there is something "new" in the States, we tend NOT to implement them until years or decades after.

Here's an article on

Fix Our National Traffic Control Standards

that we not even look at.

From link.

Cross the street in an American (or Canadian) city, and few things will have a bigger impact on your chances of making it to the other side alive than the presence of a simple crosswalk, traffic light, or stop sign. The manual that sets the standard for such things is getting its first revision of the Vision Zero era — which could mean safer streets for pedestrians or simply better markings for robocars.

Following an outpouring from advocates across the country, the Federal Highway Administration recently announced that it will extend the deadline for public comment to May 15 on the next edition of the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices, which sets federal standards for the signs, markings and signals that help instruct road users on how to safely move through our communities.

The MUTCD, as it is commonly known, is the document that professionals across the country look to when they make important decisions like how many seconds a crossing signal will give a pedestrian to cross the street (3.5 seconds for every foot of roadway, in the current edition), and exactly how the crosswalk she uses to do it should be painted.

But the manual hasn’t been revised since 2009 — before the advent of bikeshare, scooters, Vision Zero policies in dozens of U.S. cities., and, lest we forget, the rise of the autonomous car.
The 862 page tome (which will likely be a bit slimmer in the proposed next edition) doesn’t govern everything about the dangerous way we design our roads; the “traffic control devices” in its pages are pretty much limited to paint, signs, and lights, rather than more concrete physical barriers, like bollards and curbs. And engineers aren’t even legally required to follow most of the “standards” set out in its pages, unless the authors specifically note that engineers “shall” follow a particular recommendations to the letter.

Some advocates say that flexibility could be part of the problem.

“The MUTCD is not a sacred text, but it does get misused and abused,” said Don Kostelec, an Idaho-based planner who wrote a guide to the MUTCD for street safety advocates who want to get involved. “About three-quarters of it is ‘guidelines,’ not actual, binding standards — which means in the right hands, it gives [traffic engineers] a lot of flexibility to build some good things for walkers and cyclists, and in the wrong hands, it gives them an easy out to stay, ‘No.'”

But the bigger problem with the manual, Kostelec says, is that when it comes to protecting vulnerable road users, its standards aren’t always high — and that helps create a transportation culture where vehicle throughput comes before safety. The document, for instance, defines a “basic” crosswalk as a set of two parallel lines of paint on the ground, when most safety experts agree that designs that include flashing signals or high-visibility paint are more likely to grab a driver’s attention.

“Why don’t we default to the highest standard for safety, and let basic crosswalks be the exception?” Kostelec wonders. “Why do you need a justification to build a special hi-viz crosswalk? Change that, and the next [version of the MUTCD] could have a huge impact.”

Why is a high-intensity activated crosswalk beacon (top) the exception, and two lines of paint on the ground (bottom) are the rule? Images: FHWA

Those low standards can be even more problematic when they get dragged into court. Even though the MUTCD isn’t legally binding, engineers can point to its standards to justify a dangerous road design — even though, as Kostelec aptly points out, “even an 800-plus page guide cannot account for every single roadway condition in the United States.”

“When we advocate for safer streets, the MUTCD may be cited by engineers as an obstacle for making the changes needed — sometimes correctly, sometimes incorrectly,” Eileen McCarthy, a retired attorney and member of Washington, DC’s Pedestrian Advisory Council, said in a recent article for Kostelec Planning’s blog. “As lay advocates we may not be able to understand every technical detail in the MUTCD, but we can develop a general working knowledge of it and use it for our own purposes and we can work with experts who are more adept with the technical details.”

Of course, the Federal Highway Administration probably isn’t revising the manual because it suddenly want bike and pedestrian advocates to have a say in how their roads are annotated. It’s more likely the FHWA is doing it in response to the rise of autonomous vehicles, which rely on regular road markings to navigate complex road environments — because paint on the ground is easier for a computer to recognize than something more complex, like a human on a bike.

Indeed, there’s an entire new chapter about AVs in the proposed revision of the MUTCD, and the possibility of robocars on our roads casts a shadow over much of the document. In its section about crosswalk guidelines, for instance, the FHWA specifically asks commenters to consider “the ability of machine vision of autonomous vehicles to detect accurately and react appropriately to the markings” when they make suggestions.

And in the section about bike lanes, it actually proposes “that bicycle facilities be segregated from other vehicle traffic using physical barriers where practicable and that road markings are needed to denote the end of a bike lane that is merged with traffic,” a recommendation it makes specifically “to accommodate machine vision better.”

For better or worse, AVs work best in environments with clear lane markings — and the MUTCD is being revised with robo-vision in mind. Image: CB Insights

That could be groundbreaking for cyclist safety nationwide — well, depending on your point of view. But whether it makes the final cut is up to the next FHWA administrator, and ultimately, DOT Secretary Pete Buttigieg himself.

In the meantime, advocates are urging their peers to roll up their sleeves, dive into the comments of the document, and make their voices heard.

“Most engineers are not going to stick their necks out for our ideals,” said Mike Wiltsie, program director for BikeUtah. “The best way we can bring about systemic change in our streets is to change manuals like the MUTCD to better reflect the world we want and provide the cover for engineers to make it reality. We have to show up and make our perspective known.”
 

Top