[Admiral Beez]

There would always be people who insist that streets are for cars, only...

To be fair, except for this driver there doesn’t appear to be a soul, pedestrian, cyclists or otherwise using these streets.

 

[crs1026]

Report going to the Infrastructure and Environment Committee and then City Council proposing a modest increase in the number of speed radar cameras.

Many topics are said to be under study…. I wonder how many of these studies will lead to reports that reach the public domain, especially those documenting what are found to be high-priority locations for intervention.

Not much said about mid-block crossings on arterials, yet this is a high frequency location for pedestrians struck. I wonder whether there is enough attention being paid here.

- Paul

 

[allengeorge]

Related article:

Photo radar cameras have slowed traffic on Toronto streets. Will adding another 25 be enough to reduce dozens of annual pedestrian deaths? - thestar.com
https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/20...educe-dozens-of-annual-pedestrian-deaths.html

I’m incredibly disappointed that the province is against speed enforcement (aka photo radar) cameras on as many streets as Toronto wants. This seems like one of those decisions that should be left up to the city, and if the city wants to have egg on its face or face the vitriol of its residents - so be it.

 

[Northern Light]

I’m incredibly disappointed that the province is against speed enforcement (aka photo radar) cameras on as many streets as Toronto wants. This seems like one of those decisions that should be left up to the city, and if the city wants to have egg on its face or face the vitriol of its residents - so be it.

While I agree w/you; I do think speed cameras, by and large, are a cop-out solution, so to speak.

At best, they tend to show a temporary effect; and they often create the perverse effect that many drivers speed up after slowing down for a known camera point.

Clearly some measure of enforcement is a necessary part of any plan to manage excess speed; but I think road design is much more critical overall.

Not only for managing speed, but for facilitating safer turning movements, and safer pedestrian crossings (shorter distances, fewer lanes to cross, better sightlines).

****

To be fair, the report noted by @crs1026 does given mention to and praise of the effectiveness of 'road geometry' improvements.

However, it also in the same breath suggests they largely need to wait for road reconstruction, which would see some improvements wait 50 years.

Not, to my mind, a reasonable position.

 

[allengeorge]

While I agree w/you; I do think speed cameras, by and large, are cop-out solution, so to speak.

At best, they tend to show a temporary effect; and they often create the perverse effect that many drivers speed up after slowing down for a known camera point.

Clearly some measure of enforcement is a necessary part of any plan to manage excess speed; but I think road design is much more critical overall.

I agree. If you look back at my posts you’ll see me advocating pretty strongly for road redesigns, and pointing out that enforcement - even automated enforcement - is a half-measure.

Also, I’m absolutely not on board with the choice that the city is making (and it’s absolutely a choice) to defer any road-safety improvements for a location until it’s up for reconstruction. It’s inaction behind the fig-leaf of being ‘money-conscious’.

To be very clear, my comment here was simply jurisdictional. It’s unclear what political risk the province holds by allowing Toronto to install as many speed cameras as it wants.

 

[tiffer24]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1480212870298279944

 

[11th]

Related article:

Photo radar cameras have slowed traffic on Toronto streets. Will adding another 25 be enough to reduce dozens of annual pedestrian deaths? - thestar.com
https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/20...educe-dozens-of-annual-pedestrian-deaths.html

I’m incredibly disappointed that the province is against speed enforcement (aka photo radar) cameras on as many streets as Toronto wants. This seems like one of those decisions that should be left up to the city, and if the city wants to have egg on its face or face the vitriol of its residents - so be it.

Out of curiosity, are most of the pedestrian deaths caused by drivers going 50 in a 40 zone or maybe 60 in a 50 zone?

 

[crs1026]

However, it also in the same breath suggests they largely need to wait for road reconstruction, which would see some improvements wait 50 years.

Not, to my mind, a reasonable position.

This, to me, is the weakest link in the Vision Zero strategy. It applies to more than one aspect of the program.

I would want to see staff identifying, and seeking funding, to address the highest priority locations and streets - the ones that their assessment of the data based on past incidents and widely accepted risk factors suggest are most in need of change. Then, it becomes a political challenge for Councillors to find the courage to spend the necessary dollars.... hopefully it's harder for them to hide when a "Top 25 risk locations" list is presented to them.

Leaving priority needs until the roadwork comes due means it may be 2-3 decades.... or more.... before a high risk location sees any change.

At some point I hope staff come back and present more recent data to the graphic that appeared in the original Vision Zero documents that went to Council. I wonder if we have seen any change in the locations and types of roads where fatalities and serious injuries are happening since VZ was first approved. If nothing has changed, it really argues for where the focus is needed.

- Paul

from here

 

[W. K. Lis]

The reason we build parks away from home theses days is because kids are no longer safe playing close by in the street in front of their homes.

From link.

The automobile expropriated the streets for their own use.

From link.

 

[afransen]

I agree. If you look back at my posts you’ll see me advocating pretty strongly for road redesigns, and pointing out that enforcement - even automated enforcement - is a half-measure.

Also, I’m absolutely not on board with the choice that the city is making (and it’s absolutely a choice) to defer any road-safety improvements for a location until it’s up for reconstruction. It’s inaction behind the fig-leaf of being ‘money-conscious’.

To be very clear, my comment here was simply jurisdictional. It’s unclear what political risk the province holds by allowing Toronto to install as many speed cameras as it wants.

As Lennart Nout from Mobycon says, traffic calming doesn't have to be expensive. Big boulders you drop in the roadway are cheap.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Report going to the Infrastructure and Environment Committee and then City Council proposing a modest increase in the number of speed radar cameras.

Speed isn't really the issue here, IMO. If I hit you at 50 kph or 70 kph, you're dead either way. I'm not saying skip the speed cameras, but what we ALSO need is enforcement of the non-speed related traffic offences, such as:

1. Running red lights (at every light, not just a few)
2. Turning right at red lights without first stopping to clear pedestrians, cyclists or traffic.
3. Running through flashing pedestrian and school guard crossings
4. Running pass open streetcars and flashing school buses
5. Slow rolling through stop signs (use camera to enforce)
6. Illegal and unsafe u-turns (much worse now with uber and lyft)
7. Going the wrong way on residential streets (I see this at least a half dozen times a month in Cabbagetown)
8. Parking on sidewalks (damn Amazon chumps and the like)
9. Parking or even driving in bike lanes
10. Illegal parking blocking rush hour lanes

I'm all for using police state technology to catch and fine people for any of the ten above, in addition to speeding and the ubiquitous dangerous driving and DUI.

 

[crs1026]

I'm all for using police state technology to catch and fine people for any of the ten above, in addition to speeding and the ubiquitous dangerous driving and DUI.

I have no quarrel with your list of no-no’s, except to point out that the HTA is remarkably permissive about U-turns. (I was taught to not make them, but it turns out that they are mostly legal unless signed otherwise)

The issue is how to enforce. In most of the offenses you cite, there will be many locations where a police officer will be unable to stop motorists safely… either they would have to stand on the curb to observe ( no place to safely park their cruiser…which they need for its technology, and to perform a moving stop…and often at the mercy of the elements.) and possibly have to step into the road to pull over the motorist, which is possibly unsafe for the officer. And the pulled-over motorist and cruiser then become a blocked lane and road hazard. Or, the driver doesn’t stop and the officer can’t pursue.

This is one reason why speed enforcement is so ragged…. the locations where the police do enforce are often chosen to offer safe parking, good sightlines, and ease of halting offenders. Many locations that cry for speed enforcement never see it because it simply isn’t a safe/practical location for police to position themselves. Others become notorious for police presence… which encourages drivers to slow down selectively but otherwise ignore speed limits.

In-person Enforcement will always be hit and miss….even if there happens to be a police officer who notices an offense, they must use discretion as to whether the traffic stop is safe and prudent. (I won’t comment on how much effort officers make… it does seem they gravitate to “easy” locations - but there are good reasons why they can only do so much.) Enforcement will always focus on the unlucky who happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Bad habits are the result of good luck.

I am personally very much in favour of using technology more, but I’m probably not calibrated to the general public mood around freedom/privacy.

It may sound Timid to fall back on “education”…. but ultimately people either care to drive safely, or they don’t. The only thing that is an effective override is road redesign, as this is a constant and is self enforcing.

- Paul

 

[TRONto]

I didn't know where to put this question.

Does anyone know what those huge red arms are along Bayview Avenue between Pottery and River? I saw them along the bike lane near the River exit. On the west side at Pottery. They look like they are for blocking traffic but why near the bike lanes? Are they for closing lanes when there is a flood?

 

[vic]

Speed isn't really the issue here, IMO. If I hit you at 50 kph or 70 kph, you're dead either way.

At 50 you'll have a somewhat better chance of seeing, reacting to, slowing down for, and possibly avoiding the person you're about to hit.

 

[evandyk]

I didn't know where to put this question.

Does anyone know what those huge red arms are along Bayview Avenue between Pottery and River? I saw them along the bike lane near the River exit. On the west side at Pottery. They look like they are for blocking traffic but why near the bike lanes? Are they for closing lanes when there is a flood?

Yeah. The city still expects the Don to overflow in that area every couple of years, even after the remediation of the river mouth is done.