Road Safety & Vision Zero Plan

[jje1000]

For the record, I’m a frequent car driver, and yet I strongly advocate for the rapid dismantling of auto-focused infrastructure in order to be replaced with pedestrian, cyclist and transit oriented projects.

I think this needs to be broken down into more gradual and tangible goals, as it's difficult to fix bad urban planning- and anything with a cul-de-sac will be very hard to fix. On top of that, there will need to be a consideration of the GTA's continued sprawl (even harder to stop) and the impact of those cars piling onto the roads.

That being said, I think that there's a lot that can be done within Toronto's boundaries- the first steps should involve getting the lowest-hanging, and fastest-implemented goals that involve rearranging what's already in place without significant changes to hard infrastructure- bus priority lanes in the suburbs, pedestrianization of some downtown streets, signal optimization of the current surface networks, and a push towards a majority of the downtown neighborhoods (possibly bounded by Dupont to the North, the Don River to the east, and the rail corridor to the West) utilizing biking (via better infrastructure & eliminating parking spaces) as their primary methods of commuting and travel.

Later steps must involve a loosening and reorganization of the current planning regime, in order to promote ground-up urban use patterns, and small-scale developer-owner intensification which has been stigmied over the last 50 years. IMO, if you loosen the regulations governing the older Yellow Zone suburbs, many areas will naturally densify into missing-middle development, and we might even see the reemergence of local retail.

Finally, large-scale transit-oriented development planning and transit expansion will take time, as is fixing the post-war suburban developments- possibly decades - and will probably still involve a mixture of car-and-transit infrastructures. I don't think the car will ever disappear from a significant portion of the GTA's commute, but there's a lot that can be done to reduce its share.

 

[W. K. Lis]

A six-lane Avenue Road is not needed anymore. There is Line 1 to the east, there is LINE 1 to the west, there is LINE 2 to the south, there is 512 ST. CLAIR in the middle, and coming soon there will be a LINE 5 also in the middle. Time to reduce the number of lanes on Avenue Road and put in wider and safer sidewalks and a raised bicycle lane.

 

[crs1026]

utilizing biking (via better infrastructure & eliminating parking spaces) as their primary methods of commuting and travel.

I’m just a little reluctant to declare biking the “primary” mode, unless you are using the term generically to imply some combination of pedalling devices, ebikes, escooters, or even golf cart like vehicles with more cargo capacity than a bike but far less lethal or space consuming (or privilege seeking) than automobiles.

The case for better biking infrastructure is unquestionable, because the existing format is life-endangering, even at current levels of bike usage. This has to be fixed. But that does not imply biking is the “winner” or that its use will trump walking or other means.

We need to anticipate what may be coming, or we will be rearranging streets yet again as these technological changes happen. We need to design streets that accomodate multiple means, not design streets for bicycles to the exclusion of others.

- Paul

 

[jje1000]

I’m just a little reluctant to declare biking the “primary” mode, unless you are using the term generically to imply some combination of pedalling devices, ebikes, escooters, or even golf cart like vehicles with more cargo capacity than a bike but far less lethal or space consuming (or privilege seeking) than automobiles.

The case for better biking infrastructure is unquestionable, because the existing format is life-endangering, even at current levels of bike usage. This has to be fixed. But that does not imply biking is the “winner” or that its use will trump walking or other means.

We need to anticipate what may be coming, or we will be rearranging streets yet again as these technological changes happen. We need to design streets that accomodate multiple means, not design streets for bicycles to the exclusion of others.

- Paul

My opinion is that cycling of all kinds offer a remarkably low-hanging fruit that doesn't require significant amounts of costly and time-consuming redesign of urban infrastructures. It conveniently occupies a spot that allows it to cover more distance than walking, and also requires relatively little in the way of storage and infrastructure compared to other vehicular forms of transport. It's uniquely suited for many older, originally pre-car city neighbourhoods, even in Toronto.

Depending on the level of cyclist comfort accepted, improving cycling infrastructure can be as simple as providing enough space and making it psychologically safe via cheap bolted-in raised buffers and improved intersections, like on Bloor West. Sometimes change can be effected by even just a simple re-appropriation though paint and official policy- Paris was transformed into a cycling city in the span of just a few years from 2018-2020.

Fast, cheap, efficient reprioritization of space, sometimes literally overnight:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1261269107095359488

https://twitter.com/x/status/1260526947605544960

As a result, pent-up demand is released:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1280446547067535360

https://twitter.com/x/status/1279291042995400704

https://twitter.com/x/status/1270454821552885761

How Paris became a cycling success story—and built a roadmap for other cities

The City of Light became the City of Bike, and U.S. cities should take notice.

www.curbed.com

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

From CTV:

City of Vaughan cracks down on modified vehicles, lays more than 70 charges over weekend

Dozens of charges have been laid following a blitz on modified vehicles in Vaughan last weekend, according to police.

toronto.ctvnews.ca

Long overdue - they should impound the vehicles instead.

AoD

 

[Northern Light]

From CTV:

City of Vaughan cracks down on modified vehicles, lays more than 70 charges over weekend

Dozens of charges have been laid following a blitz on modified vehicles in Vaughan last weekend, according to police.

toronto.ctvnews.ca

Long overdue - they should impound the vehicles instead.

AoD

Then they should un-modify them; and bill the owner if they want to get the car back (plus fine, plus storage); if the owner doesn't want it back, auction it off!

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Then they should un-modify them; and bill the owner if they want to get the car back (plus fine, plus storage); if the owner doesn't want it back, auction it off!

Straight up destruction will please me to no end. Nothing more disheartening to the offender than seeing it totally, utterly and irreversibly wrecked.

FWIW - I can literally hear it almost every night in my neighbourhood - and I know that a local Tim Horton/parking lot (which is near a highway interchange) is a hot spot.

AoD

 

[W. K. Lis]

 

[JasonParis]

Not mentioned, but parking in a more urban environment can also have the effect of slowing down vehicles and protecting pedestrians. Not really applicable to the ones shown in this video though.

 

[crs1026]

Interesting news story from London, Ont. City approved what I will call a “Fake Walkable” subdivision, with superficial walkability features eg narrowed streets and sidewalks. However, because the development is on the edge of the city, is non dense, and has no central amenities, it is autocentric at heart. It is proving unworkable.... because residents are retaining their vehicles, and there is nowhere for them to park.Residents are asking the City to remove the walkability features to address the problem.

The moral of the story for me - which is relevant to road safety in Toronto - is that one cannot retrofit “walkability” to a neighbourhood that is fundamentally autocentric.... one has to actually reposition the core infrastructure and potential destinations so that the autocentricity is exorcised and people can abandon auto ownership without penalizing their mobility. You can’t just put lipstick on a pig.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/london/silverleaf-streets-1.5660311

- Paul

 

[jje1000]

Interesting news story from London, Ont. City approved what I will call a “Fake Walkable” subdivision, with superficial walkability features eg narrowed streets and sidewalks. However, because the development is on the edge of the city, is non dense, and has no central amenities, it is autocentric at heart. It is proving unworkable.... because residents are retaining their vehicles, and there is nowhere for them to park.Residents are asking the City to remove the walkability features to address the problem.

The moral of the story for me - which is relevant to road safety in Toronto - is that one cannot retrofit “walkability” to a neighbourhood that is fundamentally autocentric.... one has to actually reposition the core infrastructure and potential destinations so that the autocentricity is exorcised and people can abandon auto ownership without penalizing their mobility. You can’t just put lipstick on a pig.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/london/silverleaf-streets-1.5660311

- Paul

IMO I did not find any marketing regarding walkability, but I think the issue is with the planning- even with the narrower roads (possibly to cram in more houses?), it's still very autocentric in its road hierarchy and design.

Silverleaf Community — Marquis Developments - London Ontario Custom Home Builder

www.marquisdevelopments.com

There are only three egress points into the subdivision- both Silver Creek Crescent and Silver Creek Circle should have opened up onto Pack Road, as they currently funnel all their traffic onto two streets. Furthermore, another road should have been created to connect the subdivision to Colonel Talbot Road to the East. IMO- the current way to fix this design would be to open up Silver Creek Circle to Pack Road, and to selectively eliminate street parking in problem spots to keep a wide ROW on the existing roads as well. Another alternative could be to widen the three roads, as there is enough of a set back where so that it wouldn't affect the houses, or to turn some of the roads into one-way roads.

Like what you said, I also agree that there needs to be some local retail serving the community- i.e. with Hollywoodland, a small cluster of retail/food uses at the entryway to the development.

Overall, this is an issue of parcelized, discontinuous development and poor city planning that fails to anticipate connecting them together.

Also, check out the awful, awful planning for the developments on the opposite side of the creek.

 

[Northern Light]

Interesting news story from London, Ont. City approved what I will call a “Fake Walkable” subdivision, with superficial walkability features eg narrowed streets and sidewalks. However, because the development is on the edge of the city, is non dense, and has no central amenities, it is autocentric at heart. It is proving unworkable.... because residents are retaining their vehicles, and there is nowhere for them to park.Residents are asking the City to remove the walkability features to address the problem.

The moral of the story for me - which is relevant to road safety in Toronto - is that one cannot retrofit “walkability” to a neighbourhood that is fundamentally autocentric.... one has to actually reposition the core infrastructure and potential destinations so that the autocentricity is exorcised and people can abandon auto ownership without penalizing their mobility. You can’t just put lipstick on a pig.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/london/silverleaf-streets-1.5660311

- Paul

Hold on, Paul.

What's this about nowhere to park? Most of these homes have not one, but TWO garages!

That's on-site parking for every adult in most of these homes.

There is also sufficient room on a 6M curb to curb road to have on-street parking on one-side of the road.

The issue here seems to be that people are parking on BOTH sides of a 6M road, which is clearly absurd.

The problem is not the road width, nor the parking supply, both of these are ample.

There is no wide spread issue of congestion; there is a select issue that due to utterly inappropriate parking choices and permissions, sections of road have been entirely blocked off to garbage pickup, and might be inaccessible to emergency services.

Solution: Outlaw parking on one side of the road, and enforce with towing.

Done.

 

[crs1026]

^Well, agreed that I’m taking the story at face value when it quotes residents saying that they lack space to park. (As opposed to, say, being too lazy to park in their own driveway)
Strikes me as credible, given that the average family may have three cars, and will occasionally have visitors that end up parking on the street. Yeah, that’s a ridiculous amount of money tied up in cars....but that is typical in a family with two working adults and one or more younger drivers. Especially if one or more family members has a work vehicle as well as a personal vehicle (lots of tradespeople etc have both, and won’t be driving their panel van full of tools and materiel on weekends)

I’m not in favour of building that kind of suburb at all, but it seems London has done so. My point is that one can’t build a suburb around the automobile and then build in attributes which punish the auto user. One has to build in viable alternatives.

- Paul

 

[W. K. Lis]

What good is building such residential streets if the convenience stores, dry cleaners, fruit market, grocery store, is NOT within walking distance. If one needs to use an automobile to fetch some milk, it is not a good area. I remember as a kid my mother sending me to the grocery store, one block away, for errands. Not possible in some 905 neighbourhoods.

 

[crs1026]

What good is building such residential streets if the convenience stores, dry cleaners, fruit market, grocery store, is NOT within walking distance. If one needs to use an automobile to fetch some milk, it is not a good area. I remember as a kid my mother sending me to the grocery store, one block away, for errands. Not possible in some 905 neighbourhoods.

This.

Fixating on road design, bike lanes, sidewalks, and such is well intentioned but it is fundamentally low-hanging fruit and the yield is limited. Redesigning communities to shorten and/or eliminate trips, and put more destinations within walking/cycling range, is where the big gains are possible.

- Paul