Road Safety & Vision Zero Plan

[Towered]

I used to live near there and used this route to bike home before it became a signed bike route. They might have saved her - Dufferin is very difficult to cross at an unsignalized intersection, no matter what mode of transport you're using. Traffic signals at the designated cycle route crossing will definitely help.

Apparently another traffic light is going to be added just a block north of the new one at Sylvan, where Dufferin Grove park starts. Every bit helps, but the street really needs a redesign. It still sucks, even with more lights.

 

[Ward8]

Apparently another traffic light is going to be added just a block north of the new one at Sylvan, where Dufferin Grove park starts. Every bit helps, but the street really needs a redesign. It still sucks, even with more lights.

Yeah, another light is better, but you're right, this stretch is miserable to be on. They should start by making it a 3 lane road. When they develop the mall they need major changes.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Yeah, another light is better, but you're right, this stretch is miserable to be on. They should start by making it a 3 lane road. When they develop the mall they need major changes.

No to three lane road around Dufferin Mall. Left turn lanes into the mall is a "maybe", but with priority to the buses and pedestrians. (Raised crossings to force drivers to slow down.)

 

[W. K. Lis]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1514620676262440967

 

[Ward8]

No to three lane road around Dufferin Mall. Left turn lanes into the mall is a "maybe", but with priority to the buses and pedestrians. (Raised crossings to force drivers to slow down.)

It's far from what's necessary, but I was thinking 3 lanes as an interim solution. A way to narrow roads and slow traffic with the minimum budget before a comprehensive rebuild with hard infrastructure.

 

[Admiral Beez]

We can always make the lines curvy.

What’s up with the curvy lines along Shell Beach Road? City says it’s intentional

Some people in Shell Beach were a little confused Thursday as they drove along Shell Beach Rd.

www.ksby.com

 

[TossYourJacket]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1514620676262440967

It's truly terrifying the number of drivers who's response to road safety is to actively wish for the death of cyclists/pedestrians.

 

[Northern Light]

Report to next week's Infrastructure and Environment Ctte on this year's program for new sidewalks (filling in the gaps)

https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2022/ie/bgrd/backgroundfile-224369.pdf

From the above:

 

[W. K. Lis]

Report to next week's Infrastructure and Environment Ctte on this year's program for new sidewalks (filling in the gaps)

https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2022/ie/bgrd/backgroundfile-224369.pdf

From the above:

View attachment 393889
View attachment 393890
View attachment 393891

View attachment 393892

View attachment 393893

Wonder when the local ward Councillors will come around to veto them, somehow.

 

[lenaitch]

Not specific to Toronto, Ontario moving to amber+red warning lights on school buses which, best as I can tell, brings us in line with every other jurisdiction in North America. They make it sound like some grand innovation.

Ontario providing $4M to retrofit school buses with upgraded lighting system

According to the province, an estimated 20,000 vehicles will require retrofitting to operate this system.

torontosun.com

 

[DSC]

Not specific to Toronto, Ontario moving to amber+red warning lights on school buses which, best as I can tell, brings us in line with every other jurisdiction in North America. They make it sound like some grand innovation.

Ontario providing $4M to retrofit school buses with upgraded lighting system

According to the province, an estimated 20,000 vehicles will require retrofitting to operate this system.

torontosun.com

It's an election season, every day a new announcement (or a recycled one) and most will not happen until someone does something (like actually allocating the $$) AFTER the election.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Not specific to Toronto, Ontario moving to amber+red warning lights on school buses which, best as I can tell, brings us in line with every other jurisdiction in North America. They make it sound like some grand innovation.

Ontario providing $4M to retrofit school buses with upgraded lighting system

According to the province, an estimated 20,000 vehicles will require retrofitting to operate this system.

torontosun.com

"pass legislation allowing school bus operators the choice of installing cameras on buses to record the licence plates of vehicles that fail to obey flashing red lights."

They should also be able to install rear-backing cameras on the school buses. So the driver can "see" behind the bus, instead of just the sides.

 

[lenaitch]

It's an election season, every day a new announcement (or a recycled one) and most will not happen until someone does something (like actually allocating the $$) AFTER the election.

While no doubt the announcement was held in the can until an opportune pre-election opportunity, changes have been in the pipe for a while. I'm not aware that there is a hard cut-off for the age of a school bus in Ontario, but there are standards that must be met, either at manufacture or by modification and some modifications are either not feasible or cost effective. The last 'standards cut-off' was 2013, so effectively, school buses are under ten years old. There are about 20,000 buses/school purpose vehicles in the province, most privately owned, so the industry can't turn on a dime.
If you look at older buses, many only had 4 red lamps (one in each corner) and if you watch newer ones with eight lamps (2 in each corner), the lamp that flashes changes when the stop arm goes out. Older buses will no doubt be cycled out by next year (I don't know if there are other standards they will no longer meet) and newer buses will simply need a change of lamp lenses.

The government will also have to update the legislation.

Backup cameras are different than so-called 'infraction cameras'. Vehicle standards are federal and I don't think either are mandatory for school buses - yet. I did see a press release that Blue Bird (one of the largest manufacturers) is proactively installing b/u cameras on new builds.

I supposed they can't hurt from a fleet safety perspective, but I can't say I've ever seen a school bus being reversed when 'on duty'; i.e. kids on board, positioning at school etc.

 

[crs1026]

I don't know if this NY Times article is behind a paywall, but if you can get to it, it's an interesting case study. Now insert Toronto City Council, in its current or post-next-election form.....

Why Even Portland, Famous for Being Green, Can't Quit Cars

- Paul

 

[W. K. Lis]

Basically, it’s a buffer zone on the edge of the road to allow for out-of-control stray cars. Of course, the Manual says you want to keep this zone clear of any fixed objects, things like signs, trees, light standards, etc., because vehicles slamming into immovable objects at high speeds is really dangerous for the occupants of those vehicles.


So how big does this buffer need to be? The answer is it depends on the speed of traffic. The faster the vehicles are travelling, the larger the clear zone you need. And lucky for us, traffic engineers have gone through the trouble of doing those calculations.


On page 77 of Winnipeg’s Transportation Standards Manual are the guidelines for our own city’s “clear zones”. City engineers say that at traffic speeds of 60 km/h, the clear zone should be a minimum of 3.5m from the face of the curb, but that 5.0m is desirable.


Now, it’s important to pause here to recognize that these concepts were developed for highways. And they saved a lot of lives in that context. But, when you don’t acknowledge that urban areas are fundamentally different places than highways, you get some pretty messed up results.


For example, here’s what the required clear zone looks like on a typical block of Henderson Hwy in my neighborhood:
Why are roads designed for the "safety" of the people inside a motor vehicles and not for the "safety" of pedestrians?

Why You Should Never Sit Next to a Breakaway Post​

From link.

It seems like every time there’s a news piece about a traffic collision involving a pedestrian, it’s followed by a flurry of discussion over the words used to describe the incident.


Take for instance a crash on Portage Avenue in Winnipeg, Canada that took place just over a week ago. This was the original headline:

Understandably, people reading were upset that the broken bus shelter and hydro pole got higher billing than the actual human being that had to be taken to hospital. CBC quickly corrected the headline:

Much better. Yet, still not good enough. Because some people will point out, rightly, that vehicles have drivers. And for the same reason we don’t ever see headlines such as “Man shot by gun”, or “Chris Rock slapped by hand”, the headline here should have read “Driver crashes into pedestrian, bus shelter, hydro pole on Portage Avenue in Winnipeg”.

It makes sense. Using “vehicle” or “car” is very neutral language, and it tends to remove personal responsibility from the situation. Using “driver” reminds us of the human behind the crash, and subconsciously makes it easier to attribute blame for it.

And I completely understand that urge. Except I don’t think it’s that helpful, because in the overwhelming majority of cases, the driver is not to blame for the carnage. The traffic engineers who designed the street are, because drivers can only do what the design lets them.

Let me be clear: this was no accident. Massive property damage and pedestrians being injured (or killed) is our transportation system functioning precisely as designed. This is how it was designed to work. To understand that, we’ll need to explain a few traffic engineering concepts. So let’s get into it!

The traffic engineering profession understood a long time ago that humans are imperfect and will always make mistakes. It’s inevitable, and if you can’t change the users, change the system. So traffic engineers came up with the concept of “forgiving design” which was a way of designing the transportation system to “forgive” errors by drivers, so that when they made the most common mistakes, whether unintentional or through carelessness, the results didn’t end up being catastrophic.

One of those elements is the development of the “clear zone”. Now, I’ve talked about clear zones before, but this is worth repeating, so bear with me if you know all this already.

What is a Clear Zone? The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices gives us a pretty straightforward definition:

The total roadside border area, starting at the edge of the traveled way, that is available for an errant driver to stop or regain control of a vehicle.
Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), Section 1A. 13

Basically, it’s a buffer zone on the edge of the road to allow for out-of-control stray cars. Of course, the Manual says you want to keep this zone clear of any fixed objects, things like signs, trees, light standards, etc., because vehicles slamming into immovable objects at high speeds is really dangerous for the occupants of those vehicles.

So how big does this buffer need to be? The answer is it depends on the speed of traffic. The faster the vehicles are travelling, the larger the clear zone you need. And lucky for us, traffic engineers have gone through the trouble of doing those calculations.

On page 77 of Winnipeg’s Transportation Standards Manual are the guidelines for our own city’s “clear zones”. City engineers say that at traffic speeds of 60 km/h, the clear zone should be a minimum of 3.5m from the face of the curb, but that 5.0m is desirable.

Now, it’s important to pause here to recognize that these concepts were developed for highways. And they saved a lot of lives in that context. But, when you don’t acknowledge that urban areas are fundamentally different places than highways, you get some pretty messed up results.

For example, here’s what the required clear zone looks like on a typical block of Henderson Hwy in my neighborhood:

The red zones, which are the “minimum” clear zones, cover the entire sidewalk. And the yellow zones, which extend to the “desirable” clear zones, go well into the storefronts.

If you want to see an example in 3-D, here’s what the site of that aforementioned crash on Portage Avenue looks like with the clear zone delineated:

These are the “zones” that are supposed to stay “clear” of any immovable objects because of the very real possibility of cars leaving the roadway. And yet, this is where we tell people to walk, wait for the bus, and access local businesses. You can see the inherent conflict.

But surely cars leave the roadway so infrequently as for this to be insignificant, right?

My friend, surely you jest.

This is an occurrence so common that traffic engineers had to invent a whole new technology in order to keep “forgiving” the mistakes of drivers. Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you: the breakaway base!

The breakaway base was devised as a way to still be able to put objects in the clear zone without endangering the lives of vehicle occupants. Instead of a vehicle leaving the road, smashing into a stationary, immovable street light and killing everyone on board, the bases are equipped with shear pins that are designed to break when hit with any real force. The result is the pole snaps off its base at the moment of collision, and most of the kinetic energy of the collision is dissipated away from the occupants of the vehicle.

Pretty genius, actually.

But that leads to an obvious question regarding the placement of this bus bench: