News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 9.6K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5.4K     0 

This is sobering, and I've only cycled in a fraction of the cities this author has, but enough to agree completely:
[...]
I run a company that supports hundreds of cyclists each year, taking them on some pretty incredible cycling rides. So one could say that when people ask me is it safe to cycle in such and such a country or place, they probably figure that I may just have some idea what I am talking about.

I have learned that when people ask me about safety, they really do not ask in an objective way. They are subconsciously asking about the things that they are afraid of, be it wild animals in Africa, getting sick in India, being robbed at gunpoint in South America or kidnapped by terrorists in Central Asia.

All of those things can happen to any cyclists or travellers anywhere in the world but when I answer that question of safety, I do not talk about any of those things as these possibilities are infinitesimally small. I tell them that the most dangerous thing in my life is commuting by bike in Toronto. This is not a flippant answer. It is the honest truth. I feel more threatened every time I have to cycle any of the main roads in the city of Toronto than cycling anywhere else in the world.

If the person asking the question is a cyclist they will quickly understand my answer. However if they are not, they look at me with disbelief. How can that be? In their mind they dismiss my answer as hyperbole. We Canadians have an image of ourselves as being benign, friendly people who would never do harm to anyone, at least not willingly. Except try cycling on Dufferin, Finch or any other busy street. Every few seconds a driver passes you, one that may believe that if a cyclist is hurt, it is, as our former Mayor Rob Ford said, “their own fault”.

After all, in the driver’s opinion, roads were created for cars and not for anyone else. This behaviour is not singular to Toronto. It also apply to countries such as the USA and others where car culture many years ago successfully appropriated the roads from children, the elderly, pedestrians and, yes, cyclists. Ironically, it was cyclists who, over a century ago, lobbied governments to build roads, well before there were any cars.

I do not live in those places. I live here in Toronto and have to face the streets here day after day. The tragedy is that it does not have to be this way. In most developing countries, as much as the drivers would love to own the roads, unfortunately for them, there are motorcycles, scooters, cyclists, pushcarts and even animals on the roads. This forces drivers to operate at speeds well below the ones I experience when I am forced to cycle on Bathurst, Sheppard or Bayview. Even the legal speed limits here in Toronto are such that if a pedestrian or a cyclist is hit, their chances of survival are close to zero.

Years ago Toronto’s Chief Medical Officer of Health, Dr. David McKeown, suggested that a 30km/h limit apply in the city. For that suggestion, he was just about run out of town by then Mayor Rob Ford and the car loving public. In the meantime, the toll of death and injuries of vulnerable road users continue to climb and I can honestly keep telling anyone who asks me, it is much, much safer to cycle in India, Sudan or Iran than it is for me to bike to my office in Toronto.
https://tdaglobalcycling.com/2018/0...g-in-toronto-than-anywhere-else-in-the-world/
 
This is sobering, and I've only cycled in a fraction of the cities this author has, but enough to agree completely:

https://tdaglobalcycling.com/2018/0...g-in-toronto-than-anywhere-else-in-the-world/

As I don't cycle enough in Toronto, and have never cycled elsewhere in the world I certainly don't speak w/expertise on this file.

That said, as I read the article, my thoughts concentrated on this passage:

Years ago Toronto’s Chief Medical Officer of Health, Dr. David McKeown, suggested that a 30km/h limit apply in the city. For that suggestion, he was just about run out of town by then Mayor Rob Ford and the car loving public.

As I read that, I think, there are too many accidents, average speed, but particularly speed on curves and when turning should be lower than it is, in order to promote safety.

BUT, as a driver, the notion of a 3okm'ph max offends not merely my desire, but common sense.

On a road w/3 lanes, that are wide at over 3.0M, that are straight, to expect a motorist to do less than 1/2 the speed the road is engineered for is preposterous.

That is not to in any way belittle the tragedy that is a loss of life, or how it is all too common.

Rather it is to say, this recommendation was offensive both for its political naivety and because you could achieve its objectives w/o ever being so offensive or politically naive.

Why does grossly excessive speed occur?

Road design.

You want slower traffic, fix it.

On larger roads, eliminate channelized right-hand turns which are mini-highway on ramps whose whole purpose is to promote a turn w/o losing too much speed.

Force each turn to involve a full stop.

Likewise, the acceleration lane preceding highway on-ramps are dreadful for this, the whole point is to encourage you to add speed towards the highway norm, while still on the regular road.

These need to be stomped out such that the acceleration occurs AFTER any conflict w/pedestrians or cyclists is eliminated, meaning a simple right hand turn onto the ramp, and a longer ramp/runway to get up to speed.

On local roads, the answer is not speed humps, which just manage to annoy drivers and cause them to speed UP between humps to make up for the lost time of the hump itself.

Instead the correct call is to narrow he road, and build gentle curves in wherever practical; this causes an intuitive slowing, but one that features a constant speed.

This is not complicated.

Its been done before in multiple cities, including this one.

Why bureaucrats or politicians make it look difficult is beyond me.
 
Some retrospect to see how Toronto is living up to previous claims:
December 7, 2016 11:27 pm
Updated: December 8, 2016 2:35 am
Toronto to accelerate traffic calming measures after ‘alarming’ number of road deaths
By Nick WestollDigital Broadcast Journalist Global News

The City of Toronto says it will fast-track various road safety measures after an “emergency meeting” was convened on Wednesday to discuss the “alarming” number of fatalities on the city’s roads.

“Too many people are dying as a result of collisions and we must all do more to prevent these deaths, and protect our citizens across the city,” read a joint statement by Mayor John Tory and Public Works and Infrastructure Committee chair and Councillor Jaye Robinson Wednesday evening.

“Eighty-five percent of this year’s fatalities are Toronto residents 55 years and older, and these collisions are happening in every neighbourhood.”

News of the meeting comes one day after Toronto police saw a sharp increase in pedestrians being struck by vehicles. In a five-hour span on Tuesday, 22 pedestrians were hit.

Tory and Robinson said the following measures will be undertaken:

  • accelerate installation of senior safety zones, including additional mid-block crossings, reduced speed zones, increased lighting and signage in areas with high seniors populations
  • new coordinated public education campaign in 2017
  • increased advocacy of Ontario government to introduce use of traffic cameras for traffic enforcement and road safety
  • asking the City’s general manager of transportation to report back on other potential measures and to focus on road safety as a priority mandate
The statement said the measures follow various initiatives implemented since Toronto’s road safety plan was approved in July, such as the creation of 14 pedestrian safety corridors, the speed reductions and installation of 400 new speed signs and 37 signalized intersection pedestrian crossing.

WATCH: Toronto sees sharp spike in pedestrians struck in short time during Tuesday’s rain (Dec. 7)

GTNH12072016_PEDESTRIANSSTRUCK_848x480_827469891871.jpg
https://globalnews.ca/news/3113798/...easures-after-alarming-number-of-road-deaths/

And now:
Council votes to simplify traffic-calming … in a roundabout way
By BEN SPURRTransportation Reporter
Thu., May 24, 2018

In a controversial last-minute decision at the end of a three-day council meeting on Thursday, councillors voted to streamline the process for installing traffic calming measures on local streets.

Under a motion put forward by Councillor Paula Fletcher (Ward 30 Toronto-Danforth), community councils will now have the option of waiving a 2002 policy that requires local residents to first submit a petition, then vote in a poll conducted by the city clerk, before the city will agree to implement measures such as speed humps, pinch points and chicanes.

Road safety advocates have long argued the requirements are too onerous and discourage communities from taking steps to make their neighbourhoods safer.

“All Torontonians want to see Vision Zero move faster in their communities,” said Fletcher, referring to the city’s road-safety plan.

According to council rules, her proposal required two-thirds of members present in the chamber for it to pass, and it initially failed narrowly in a vote of 22 to 12.

But more than an hour later, as the meeting was about to wrap up, Fletcher moved to reopen the issue, which also requires a two-thirds majority. With some councillors already having left the chamber, the proposal was reopened and just passed on the second attempt, 23 to 10.

Councillor Jaye Robinson (Ward 25 Don Valley West), who voted against the measure both times, called the last-ditch manoeuvre to reopen the issue “completely inappropriate.

“I want to express my concern about what just happened here in the chamber,” said Robinson, who is chair of the public works committee and leads the city’s Vision Zero plan.

“I’m certainly going to use this strategy going forward on other motions and other items, that, when I don’t like the outcome I will simply … ask to reopen them a couple of hours later, with a different makeup in the chamber,” she warned.

Even some councillors who supported Fletcher’s proposal said they were uncomfortable with the process. Mike Layton (Ward 19 Trinity-Spadina) said there was “some unfortunateness” about how the decision came about.

According to a report from city transportation staff, it can take more than two years to install measures designed to slow drivers on local roads. Transportation staff received about 500 traffic calming requestsions in 2017, and typically only fulfil about 30 to 45 each year.

Dylan Reid, co-founder of pedestrian advocacy group Walk Toronto, said giving local councils the ability to skip the petition and polling requirements should speed up the process.

“It’s definitely been a major complaint from a lot of people, is they can’t get traffic calming on their street, and it’s a big complicated process,” he said.

“Anything that makes that simpler, and this should make it simpler, is great.”

Community councils will still have the option of submitting traffic-calming proposals to a petition and poll if they choose.

Under the traffic-calming policy, more than 50 per cent of affected households must cast a vote, and 60 per cent must be in favour, for a poll to be considered valid.

Prior to the controversial do-over, council approved a separate proposal from Councillor Fletcher that would lower the required response rate to more than 25 per cent, as long as the measure is proposed in a school safety zone or community safety zone.

Robinson also successfully put forward a proposal to lift the 18-year moratorium on designating new community safety zones, and allow the general manager of transportation to actively recommend measures in school and community safety zones without requirement of the petition.

The changes to the traffic-calming policy come as the city’s efforts to improve road safety are under scrutiny. Council has committed about $90 million to its road-safety plan, but two years after it was approved, the number of road deaths has not declined much.

Seventeen pedestrians and two cyclists have been killed so far this year, according to statistics compiled by the Star.
https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/20...lify-traffic-calming-in-a-roundabout-way.html

Almost four weeks ago, and the tally continues to climb geometrically.

As to speed humps/bumps, as a cyclist, I see them working much better than other ineffective interventions, and so do the stats:
Are Speed Humps Effective?
Understand how configuration and installation affect performance
Updated: Jan 04, 2018
[...]
Speed hump benefits
Speed humps are intended to reduce driver speeds down to 10–15 miles per hour over the hump, and 25–30 miles per hour between humps in a series. They should be arranged to avoid disruption of cycling lanes and on-street parking.

Several studies from the Iowa Department of Transportation have shown a 40 percent speed reduction for most vehicles. Excessive speeders are also deterred. These effects translate to fewer accidents—children are much less likely to be struck by cars in neighborhoods where speed humps are installed.

Most importantly, the results don’t revert over time. Other traffic calming measures such as “slow” signs lose efficacy with age. The reduction in speed and traffic volume from speed humps can remain long after local drivers become accustomed to their presence.
[...]
http://www.reliance-foundry.com/blog/speed-humps-effective
 
Last edited:
On local roads, the answer is not speed humps, which just manage to annoy drivers and cause them to speed UP between humps to make up for the lost time of the hump itself.

Instead the correct call is to narrow he road, and build gentle curves in wherever practical; this causes an intuitive slowing, but one that features a constant speed.
The easy fix IMO in my neighbourhood is to allow parking on both sides of the street. That’ll show down those cars trying to squeeze up the middle.
 
My street (and others) in Northeast Scarborough have a school and a speed limit of 40km/h, yet several males treat these street as their personal Formula One racetrack. Seems like Councillor Neethan Shan needs to get off his ass and do something!

I wouldn't just blame Mayor Tory for this. City Council and the Bureaucrats have all failed!
 
Last edited:
These Toronto residents have tried to make streets safer. It hasn’t worked

See link.

...“Everything from people using us as a cut-through to a guy with a sporty car who will boot it at 60 or 70 km/h at least,” Pilgrim says.

At the very least they wanted a speed limit sign, like the ones on most of the streets around Fairside Ave., which offers motorists a straight shot north from Michael Garron Hospital to Cosburn Ave...

...Without a sign, they learned, the default limit is 50 km/h — 20 km/h faster than similar side streets and even 10 km/h per hour faster than Cosburn and busy Coxwell Ave., just east of them.

They reached out to their city councillor’s office in December 2015 and have since circled back, and talked to city transportation staff, and 311, and the Toronto Police Service.

They have received assurances, target dates, a traffic study, and a lesson in city budget restraint. But no speed limit sign...

...“The city’s roll out (of new signs) has taken three years — a year longer than expected,” despite the “best efforts” of residents and her office, Davis wrote in an email.

Apparently it has been delayed because there was not enough budget. I was told the money was there. I am disappointed and surprised that they have not all been installed considering the recent events. We have once again requested that the sign be installed.”

City staff said 900 40 km/h signs have been replaced, while 50 km/h streets without signs are taking longer because there are “no posts” to put them on. Fairside, however, already has wooden poles with “No parking” signs on them...

...To improve the safety of her neighbourhood, Francis said she has pushed the city to install sidewalks in the area since 2013, speaking out at public meetings and sending letters to committees, councillors and Mayor John Tory.

Last year, council had the chance to make this change through the Lawrence Park road reconstruction plan. Instead, councillors, including ward Councillor Jaye Robinson, approved a version that will add sidewalks to only five streets, leaving about 20 without pedestrian infrastructure. Tory was absent for the vote...

Apparently, money is more important than safety.
 
My street (and others) in Northeast Scarborough have a school and a speed limit of 40km/h, yet several males treat these street as their personal Formula One racetrack. Seems like Councillor Neethan Shan needs to get of his ass and do something!

I wouldn't just blame Mayor Tory for this. City Council and the Bureaucrats have all failed!


Undoubtedly we need prompt action to better separate all pedestrians and commuter cyclists from motor vehicles but when it comes to younger children we need immediate action to better protect them and we can by better enforcing our current laws

Radar in addition to Police presence rotating thru school zones needs to be mandatory. Speed limits do nothing (even 40km is far too fast if not paying attention during rush hours) and speed bumps while they can help the do little for distracted drivers. Its insanity to watch people drive in these school zones some days.
 
Last edited:
Undoubtedly we need prompt action to better separate all pedestrians and commuter cyclists from motor vehicles but when it comes to younger children we need immediate action to better protect them and we can by better enforcing our current laws

Radar in addition to Police presence rotating thru school zones needs to be mandatory. Speed limits do nothing (even 40km is far too fast if not paying attention during rush hours) and speed bumps while they can help the do little for distracted drivers. Its insanity to watch people drive in these school zones some days.

It's insanity to watch how people are driving in general. The last thing you want is create a condition where some rules are expected to be enforced and others are not - you are not training drivers for better driving behaviour - just behaviour that will minimize penalties. For that you need random and frequent enforcement that bites.

Or require untamperable, mandatory front and back dashcams for evidence purposes coupled with the repeal of no-fault insurance.

AoD
 
Last edited:
My theory is that commuters of all forms have an ingrained frustration with the extreme inefficiency of getting around by pretty much any mode. Cyclists ride like maniacs/don’t respect the rules of the road that apply to them as well; transit riders are forced to commute with an ancient and insufficient network, and pedestrians are forced to interact with hostile drivers.

When it comes to vehicular traffic, the inefficiency is due to endless construction-related delays, gridlock/extreme traffic, road closures, etc etc. It just take so damn long to drive anywhere in this city. And so, drivers are always frustrated and this makes them prone to taking risks. Running that red, blocking that intersection, gunning it down empty roads, because it is just so damn hard to get around by car in this city. And then of course this risk-taking leads to serious accidents and the plague of deaths we are experiencing now.

By laying the blame on horrible infrastructure in this city I’m not absolving drivers of any blame for reckless driving. I’m saying that we need to be clear of what is the source of this now regular aggressive driving culture in this city, and then focus our efforts on fixing that source.

To me, we need a massive infrastructure investment campaign to improve all forms of our mobility infrastructure. Better roads. More and protected bike lanes. More transit lines. More sidewalks. Controlling the goddamn construction in this city.

We need to make it easier to get around so drivers don’t need to be so aggressive!
 
It's insanity to watch how people are driving in general. The last thing you want is create a condition where some rules are expected to be enforced and others are not - you are not training drivers for better driving behaviour - just behaviour that will minimize penalties. For that you need random, frequent and enforcement that bites.
AoD

Agreed, the general landscape should be improved as a priority in both infrastructure modifications and enforcement on all commuter types. But insanity has higher risks depending upon the time of day, the quantity if people and the age of the people in the vicinity. Many school zones see obviously large amounts of small children during rush hour and the need a heightened enforcement on drivers should be a greater priority during these hours. In my area there is almost no enforcement, even after recent deaths.
 

Back
Top