Downtown councillors to debate lowering residential speed limits

[Rob MacLennan]

Re: Stats from City of Toronto report on reducing residential speed limits

Regularly. Saying that 99.9% of pedestrians are completely oblivious to what's going on around them, especially when they set foot to cross a street, is gross exaggeration. Flipping that number around would be a lot more accurate.

Oblivious to what's going on? No, I wouldn't say that. What I would say is that fully 4 out of 5 downtown pedestrians are ignoring the law *OR* oblivious to their surroundings. I just walked about a Km in the core, as I do right through the day, and I seemed to be the only one who didn't cross when the countdown on the walk signal began, didn't start crossing before the light had actually changed, or wasn't staring at my phone while in the middle of the street. Saying that the numbers should be flipped is a gross exaggeration.

 

[griff2]

Re: Stats from City of Toronto report on reducing residential speed limits

Oblivious to what's going on? No, I wouldn't say that. What I would say is that fully 4 out of 5 downtown pedestrians are ignoring the law *OR* oblivious to their surroundings. I just walked about a Km in the core, as I do right through the day, and I seemed to be the only one who didn't cross when the countdown on the walk signal began, didn't start crossing before the light had actually changed, or wasn't staring at my phone while in the middle of the street. Saying that the numbers should be flipped is a gross exaggeration.

There is no requirement to stop crossing when the countdown starts. That is just a timing aid and most able-bodied people can easily cross well within the countdown sequence even if they start late.

If you're focusing on those doing what you perceive to be wrong, you won't notice the majority doing what is right. There are a lot of pedestrians in the core. If 4 out of 5 of those pedestrians were to actually be constantly ignoring the law or being oblivious, there would be no traffic movement at all in the core.

 

[happycrappy]

Re: Stats from City of Toronto report on reducing residential speed limits

IMHO..I drive a rather large commercial vehicle throughout Toronto regularly, and just in my own experience, bicycles far and away are the most hazardous scenario I come across. Speed is not much of an issue for me as the truck can only muster so much of it in most of these areas, but that in of itself is why cycles are such a danger; the randomness of their actions, filtering, inability to que with the rest of traffic, and in particular their presence at night on congested arterial roads is especially alarming. The cold reality of the city life is that the "complete streets" mentality cannot work with so many different modes packed together. People would use residential streets much less if they could actually turn without being blocked by a St clair transit lane, parallel park without squishing an impatient, filtering bike courier, or not park 8 miles from their intended destination. Toronto, no matter what the opinions say, is not meant for any degree of commuting distance. People on any mode of transportation (including walking) are like water, and will always filter to the path of least resistance.

 

[kiwi]

I would agree BUT, the VAST majority of pedestrians and cyclist bieng hit and injured or killed are NOT happening on the streets that the limits are being reduced. A councillor on the 6 pm news last night said this change was as a DIRECT result of the collision involving the little girl, "georgia" (whose parents are WELL connected). Well Georgia wasn't killed as a result of SPEED she was hit when a driver did a rolling stop. SOOOOO if the councillors wanted to do something to make things more safe for other children like Georgia they would have erected a stop sign every 10 FEET. Then NO child would ever be in danger again.

Enacting a law to solve a problem that NEVER existed is ludicrous. If people are speeding at the current 40 km/h then that should be enforced. BUT it isn't. Does anyone actually believe that because a bunch of LEFT WING do gooder councillors pronounce that it is now 30 km that the police are going to enforce it any more strictly??

Consider this as a traffic officer your main objective when doing traffic speed enforcement is to ensure you effect as many people as possible with your presence, (Either by tickets or simply being present and causing drivers to slow down). So are you going to sit on an arterial road where you may have 3,000 vehicles pass per day or a 30 km/h residential street with a traffic flow of 100 vehicles a day??? DING DING DING arterial road wins EVERYTIME.

:headbang: Great summary of the issue Hedo, and better put than my previous attempt. Thanks.

 

[Rob MacLennan]

Re: Stats from City of Toronto report on reducing residential speed limits

There is no requirement to stop crossing when the countdown starts. That is just a timing aid and most able-bodied people can easily cross well within the countdown sequence even if they start late.

If you're focusing on those doing what you perceive to be wrong, you won't notice the majority doing what is right. There are a lot of pedestrians in the core. If 4 out of 5 of those pedestrians were to actually be constantly ignoring the law or being oblivious, there would be no traffic movement at all in the core.

The countdown carries the same weight as the flashing "no crossing" signal. Start at HTA Section 144 (22) and read on from there.

*EDIT* To continue, if 4/5 pedestrians were doing things right, I wouldn't have bothered to make the comment. I see more who are disobeying the law (for example see above for the law you didn't seem to know existed), than I do obeying it.

 

[griff2]

Re: Stats from City of Toronto report on reducing residential speed limits

The countdown carries the same weight as the flashing "no crossing" signal. Start at HTA Section 144 (22) and read on from there.

*EDIT* To continue, if 4/5 pedestrians were doing things right, I wouldn't have bothered to make the comment. I see more who are disobeying the law (for example see above for the law you didn't seem to know existed), than I do obeying it.

Well how about that. Point still remains, the countdown timers are timed so that even slow walkers have time to cross, and as the City says on their own web site:

"It's also worth noting that the countdown timers are still relatively new and provincial law changes slowly. In the US there is a substantial move towards changing their similar legislation to make it legal to begin crossing on the countdown/"flashing don't walk" as long as you complete the crossing before it goes past zero/"solid don't walk". I'm certain Ontario will consider following this lead but that is a decision for the Ontario Minister of Transportation.It is our practice across the entire City of Toronto to provide a minimum of 7 seconds of walk, it can be much longer and it can vary from crosswalk to crosswalk and by time of day (it's affected by emergency vehicle pre-emption, transit vehicle priority, total intersection demands, etc.)" http://www.toronto.ca/311/knowledgebase/68/101000049368.html

The point also remains that even entering on the countdown is not an impediment to vehicle traffic as long as you clear the intersection before the light goes red. Even if the pedestrian is not clear of the road by that time, that should be readily apparent to drivers and vehicles should still not be moving until the pedestrian is clear of their path.

If pedestrian misdeeds falling into the actual dangerous category were as prevalent as you say, downtown traffic would not move, either because pedestrians would be walking in the way of every vehicle, or because their limp and broken bodies laying on the pavement would be surrounded by a phalanx of emergency services vehicles block the road. That is simply not the case.

The pedestrian death report is quite clear. Of those pedestrians who died, their own actions caused or contributed to their death in only a third of cases. Explain the rest for us now.

 

[conundrum]

Re: Stats from City of Toronto report on reducing residential speed limits

Blind hubris in that post.

Largely pedestrians who can't look and see a car coming because whatever reason? Think again.

"33% of fatally injured pedestrians acted in a mannerwhich caused or contributed to the crash;" http://www.mcscs.jus.gov.on.ca/stel...scs/@www/@com/documents/webasset/ec161058.pdf

Do the math. The "largely" you speak of is on the other foot, or rather, wheel.

The 'real' problem is people these days who are too focused on some trivial matter in their own life to notice the world around them...be that crossing the screen in front of a 1 ton object coming directly at them, or staring down into their phone in their car while the world moves past them. Same problem applies to both sides of the same coin here.

In terms of the 30km/h law/change...that's taking a problem and putting it solely on the drivers. The whole reason for the 30km/h law is so people are 'less injured' or still alive after the car hits them. Best solution really, is don't step in front of the car coming at you, regardless of its speed, be that 30, 40, or 50. Also, it's already proven most limits are so low here in Ontario most are ignored, so end of day lowering them only increase ticketing revenue. Take the 401 for example -- 100 posted, but everyone drives 120-140. You could lower it to 80 or 90 and leave the road the exact same, and people would still drive 120-140.

Again, I'm not saying 'bad pedestrians, good drivers' here...I'm saying society and this generation need to pay attention and put the device down no matter what they are doing...and sadly, the younger they are, the worse they seem to be these days.

 

[LePhillou]

Re: Stats from City of Toronto report on reducing residential speed limits

To continue on conundrum's point, i think the conundrum (see what i did that) is that the authorities that be look for knee jerk reactions to a problem, not really SOLVING a problem.

Just like most people will say "oh roads are dangerous, lets get an SUV and let that cage shelter my incompetence" instead of saying something like "oh roads are dangerous, let me become a better driver to AVOID accidents"
It's like we have an accident mindset, not an avoidance mindset.

Of course in a community like ours, we're ALL ABOUT avoidance since moto vs car = car wins 98.89% of the time.

At least once the roads are filled with self driving cars, we'll stand a better chance of surviving this car jungle.

 

[Rob MacLennan]

Re: Stats from City of Toronto report on reducing residential speed limits

Well how about that. Point still remains, the countdown timers are timed so that even slow walkers have time to cross, and as the City says on their own web site:

"It's also worth noting that the countdown timers are still relatively new and provincial law changes slowly. In the US there is a substantial move towards changing their similar legislation to make it legal to begin crossing on the countdown/"flashing don't walk" as long as you complete the crossing before it goes past zero/"solid don't walk". I'm certain Ontario will consider following this lead but that is a decision for the Ontario Minister of Transportation.It is our practice across the entire City of Toronto to provide a minimum of 7 seconds of walk, it can be much longer and it can vary from crosswalk to crosswalk and by time of day (it's affected by emergency vehicle pre-emption, transit vehicle priority, total intersection demands, etc.)" http://www.toronto.ca/311/knowledgebase/68/101000049368.html

The point also remains that even entering on the countdown is not an impediment to vehicle traffic as long as you clear the intersection before the light goes red. Even if the pedestrian is not clear of the road by that time, that should be readily apparent to drivers and vehicles should still not be moving until the pedestrian is clear of their path.

If pedestrian misdeeds falling into the actual dangerous category were as prevalent as you say, downtown traffic would not move, either because pedestrians would be walking in the way of every vehicle, or because their limp and broken bodies laying on the pavement would be surrounded by a phalanx of emergency services vehicles block the road. That is simply not the case.

The pedestrian death report is quite clear. Of those pedestrians who died, their own actions caused or contributed to their death in only a third of cases. Explain the rest for us now.

Stand at Yonge and Dundas for a while, then talk about "not impeding the flow of traffic." *EDIT* Oh, yes, and there's also the fact that people who do this stop vehicles from completing their turns, thereby contributing to the horrible state of gridlock that we have in this city */EDIT* Also, during a recent pedestrian safety blitz Toronto Police were enforcing the law with respect to it being illegal for a pedestrian to enter the crossing, while the countdown was flashing, regardless of what the City site says. It's clearly illegal and the flashing countdown simply takes the place of the flashing hand, while providing additional information to pedestrians.

I can't speak to the numbers without knowing the definitions. For example does the data, like you, ignore the fact that entering the intersection when the walk signal is flashing amber is illegal? Does it consider that the pedestrian crossed 30 feet down from a crossing or in the middle of a block, contrary to HTA 144(22)? Data is completely meaningless, without context.

 

[iFly55]

Re: Stats from City of Toronto report on reducing residential speed limits

City Council approve the proposed warrants for establishing a 30 km/h speed limit in the absence of traffic calming.

@griff2 why are you ignoring the #1 problem with lower speed limits to 30km/h?

It wasn't that long ago the provincial government required traffic calming devices when speed limits set to below 40km/h.

Transportation Statute Law Amendment Act, 2005, S.O. 2005, c. 26 - Bill 169

"To help municipalities better manage the speed limits on their roads, the Act includes a provision that gives all municipalities the authority to set the speed limit at 30 km/h where traffic calming measures are in place"​

http://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/s05026

Rate in traffic calming areas
(3.1) Where the roadway of a highway, or of a portion of a highway, has physical impediments for the purpose of reducing traffic speeds to less than 40 kilometres per hour, the council of a municipality may by by-law prescribe a rate of speed of 30 kilometres per hour for motor vehicles driven on the highway or portion of the highway.​

It's since been repealed, for reasons I don't know why.

 

[griff2]

Re: Stats from City of Toronto report on reducing residential speed limits

Stand at Yonge and Dundas for a while, then talk about "not impeding the flow of traffic." *EDIT* Oh, yes, and there's also the fact that people who do this stop vehicles from completing their turns, thereby contributing to the horrible state of gridlock that we have in this city */EDIT*

Since when are turns allowed at Dundas and Yonge?

 

[griff2]

Re: Stats from City of Toronto report on reducing residential speed limits

@griff2 why are you ignoring the #1 problem with lower speed limits to 30km/h?

It wasn't that long ago the provincial government required traffic calming devices when speed limits set to below 40km/h.

Transportation Statute Law Amendment Act, 2005, S.O. 2005, c. 26 - Bill 169

"To help municipalities better manage the speed limits on their roads, the Act includes a provision that gives all municipalities the authority to set the speed limit at 30 km/h where traffic calming measures are in place"​

http://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/s05026

Rate in traffic calming areas
(3.1) Where the roadway of a highway, or of a portion of a highway, has physical impediments for the purpose of reducing traffic speeds to less than 40 kilometres per hour, the council of a municipality may by by-law prescribe a rate of speed of 30 kilometres per hour for motor vehicles driven on the highway or portion of the highway.​

It's since been repealed, for reasons I don't know why.

I'm thinking of narrow streets like Mortimer or Quebec where parked cars on the side of the road constitute the same kind of effect as traffic calming measures would. What's the difference between a chicane or planter narrowing the road and a parked car when the presence of parked cars constricting traffic flow is constant? Adding specific traffic calming measures would only reduce already limited on-street parking where parking is at a premium as it is.

That sort of practical consideration may have been why it was repealed. Look at Toronto conditions to impose a 30 km limit on a residential street. As written it sure doesn't sound like they would have much chance of imposing a 30 km zone on a wide boulevard type of street.

 

[Snobike Mike]

We could just ban pedestrians no?

 

[conundrum]

We could just ban pedestrians no?

I like this guy! lol j/k

 

[Rob MacLennan]

Re: Stats from City of Toronto report on reducing residential speed limits

Since when are turns allowed at Dundas and Yonge?

Don't be wilfully obtuse. That was obviously a general comment.

I'm thinking of narrow streets like Mortimer or Quebec where parked cars on the side of the road constitute the same kind of effect as traffic calming measures would. What's the difference between a chicane or planter narrowing the road and a parked car when the presence of parked cars constricting traffic flow is constant? Adding specific traffic calming measures would only reduce already limited on-street parking where parking is at a premium as it is.

That sort of practical consideration may have been why it was repealed. Look at Toronto conditions to impose a 30 km limit on a residential street. As written it sure doesn't sound like they would have much chance of imposing a 30 km zone on a wide boulevard type of street.

If they were looking at "practical considerations", then they wouldn't have passed this garbage.

 

[conundrum]

Re: Stats from City of Toronto report on reducing residential speed limits

In reality they don't want us to drive slower...they want to hit us with more tickets. Actually altering the road so people would drive slower would defeat that purpose.

 

[griff2]

Re: Stats from City of Toronto report on reducing residential speed limits

Don't be wilfully obtuse. That was obviously a general comment.

Obviously? Sure thing. Look at your sentence juxtaposition in your post.

 

[griff2]

Re: Stats from City of Toronto report on reducing residential speed limits

In reality they don't want us to drive slower...they want to hit us with more tickets. Actually altering the road so people would drive slower would defeat that purpose.

You can easily foil their nefarious plot by driving at whatever number they put on the sign, and there will be nothing they can do about it. What do ya say? Let's all do that and put the screws to the City!

 

[Rob MacLennan]

Re: Stats from City of Toronto report on reducing residential speed limits

Obviously? Sure thing. Look at your sentence juxtaposition in your post.

Proximity does not create association.

Now let's go back to discussing that those pedestrians are breaking the law, that you didn't know existed

 

[Joe Bass]

I have over 100 forklifts and EPJs being used at my workplace. I am the lead trainer. I also conduct the new hire safety orientation. I inform everyone that pedestrians ALWAYS have the right of way. If there is an accident, the operator is at fault. I also tell them that knowing that they had the right of way will comfort them or their family when they are in the hospital or 6 feet under.
Drivers have to look out, but so do pedestrians. Remind me not to drive on side streets in the city. Also, I should have been a city councilor when I grew up...next life.