News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 8.5K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 39K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 4.8K     0 

Sure, but politicians and staff are both guilty of either:

a) Accepting that position and just installing the light

b) Staff oppose the installation of the light w/standard language around 'warrants' without actually identifying a preferable way to improve safety/perception of same.

****

To flip the above. Staff need to say 'No', but then also provide alternatives to address any real or perceived issue.

Even I find that I can identify a useful project to staff of this type (road diet/bump out etc.) and get a private nod of approval, and, then something to the effect of......it probably has to wait until road reconstruction (in 2036) .......

That doesn't work, traffic lights can by--pass the 'it must wait for major road work' rule; but road diets cannot.

Where lights cost upwards of $250,000 per set to install (sometimes more); I think that's a sum that should automatically be available for alternative works in the same location.

Once staff provide a good solution; Council needs to back them up; not thwart them to win two dozen votes.
Do road diets or bumpouts really require road reconstruction? Can't we do the same as has been done with bike lanes and use bolt-down concrete curbs, if not just some paint?
 
Downtown or city centres at first. Not the whole city...


Right Walter.

So that link leads you to an as yet not implemented plan, that would restrict (not ban) traffic, largely from the 1st arrondissement in Paris.

The plan, if implemented, would only cut current traffic by 1/2, as it doesn't ban cars, it restricts, non-essential, through traffic.

In other words it does not conform to the statement you made at all.
 
Last edited:
Do road diets or bumpouts really require road reconstruction? Can't we do the same as has been done with bike lanes and use bolt-down concrete curbs, if not just some paint?

You're quite correct, this can be done in the manner you're describing, which I advocate for; I reported on just such an example here on UT at Danforth and Kelvin, in the Vision Zero thread.

The problem is that such thinking remains 'out of the box' for most Councillors and City staff.
 
Sure, but politicians and staff are both guilty of either:

a) Accepting that position and just installing the light

b) Staff oppose the installation of the light w/standard language around 'warrants' without actually identifying a preferable way to improve safety/perception of same.

****

To flip the above. Staff need to say 'No', but then also provide alternatives to address any real or perceived issue.

Even I find that I can identify a useful project to staff of this type (road diet/bump out etc.) and get a private nod of approval, and, then something to the effect of......it probably has to wait until road reconstruction (in 2036) .......

That doesn't work, traffic lights can by--pass the 'it must wait for major road work' rule; but road diets cannot.

Where lights cost upwards of $250,000 per set to install (sometimes more); I think that's a sum that should automatically be available for alternative works in the same location.

Once staff provide a good solution; Council needs to back them up; not thwart them to win two dozen votes.
This is exactly it. While staff is technically correct in their recommendation to not install signals, their methodology is based on antiquated warrants and they do not propose alternative solutions to actually address the genuine issue which caused Council to propose a signal in the first place.

Although Staff are the ones with the expertise, I suspect that this change will need to come from Council itself, or at least upper management at the City, because the current engineers and technicians are required to follow the procedures which are currently part of their job process, even though they know that their current process is awfully ineffective at guiding decisions to produce an efficient and safe road network.
 
I think this is a role that could be played by advocacy organizations like Strong Towns. I hear there is some effort to organize a local chapter in Toronto but it is just getting off the ground. We need organizations like this to meet with councillors and advocate for these alternative approaches.
 
I think this is a role that could be played by advocacy organizations like Strong Towns. I hear there is some effort to organize a local chapter in Toronto but it is just getting off the ground. We need organizations like this to meet with councillors and advocate for these alternative approaches.

1691086158244.png


1691086179126.png

strongtownstoronto@gmail.com


 
Alternatively, there are a host of other groups that advocate in similar ways.

Walk Toronto
Cycle Toronto
Vision Zero Canada
The Centre of Active Transportation (TCAT)

And one can also, of course, join one's assorted neighbourhood association.

I think the last one can be among the most effective, when people say they are concerned about their child crossing the street, its often though their NA that they lobby a Councillor for a stop sign or a traffic light.

Those types of groups rarely have an awareness of other options, having someone join who says; what if we could make it safer for your child, by shortening the crossing distance, or by slowing and smoothing the traffic rather than stopping it, might make very material difference.
 
Last edited:
Why is a traffic light being installed literally 50 meters south of Spadina and Bloor?? *rolls eyes*
Just to go back to this one for a second, I took the picture below right from Bloor and Spadina, looking south. The new lights are literally 8 car lengths in distance, and it’s not even a road:
IMG_4907.jpeg
 
So I just visited halifax and saw how little traffics lights there are. Pedestrian crossing are used very often and allow safe mid block crossing. Traffic moves effectively and is only stopped when required. I am convinced a sizable amount of congestion in Toronto is due to city council and their traffic light spamming. Halifax also is implementing vision zero principles using flexy posts and concrete curbs. Oh and these are not the Toronto ones that are tossed around by a vehicle hitting them. They are bolted to the pavement and have standard height signage attached to the top. Gottingen street halifax is good example.Screenshot_20230810-085328_Maps.jpgScreenshot_20230810-085649_Maps.jpg
 
Winnipeg has similar, but they also seem to have better adherence to speed limits, probably in part due to speed cameras.
 
So I just visited halifax and saw how little traffics lights there are. Pedestrian crossing are used very often and allow safe mid block crossing. Traffic moves effectively and is only stopped when required. I am convinced a sizable amount of congestion in Toronto is due to city council and their traffic light spamming. Halifax also is implementing vision zero principles using flexy posts and concrete curbs. Oh and these are not the Toronto ones that are tossed around by a vehicle hitting them. They are bolted to the pavement and have standard height signage attached to the top. Gottingen street halifax is good example.View attachment 498935View attachment 498942
I wouldn't say 'safe mid-block crossing' for Toronto. I use the pedestrian crossings with the (many times correct) assumption that cars are not going to stop.
 
I wouldn't say 'safe mid-block crossing' for Toronto. I use the pedestrian crossings with the (many times correct) assumption that cars are not going to stop.
Just because Toronto's unsignalized crosswalks are poorly designed does not mean that unsignalized crosswalks are inherently unsafe.
 
  • Like
Reactions: T3G

Back
Top