Pedestrians Safety Blitz Needs More Targets

I agree. Focusing on jaywalkers takes away from the fact that the majority of pedestrian accidents happen at marked crossings and intersections. As someone who gets around downtown almost entirely on foot I can attest that distracted and rush drivers can make it very dangerous, even when you're following the law to the letter.

Crack down on dangerous jaywalkers, certainly, but they are endangering only themselves. So also crack down on drivers who do rolling stops, cars that stop halfway into the crosswalk, cars that run yellow lights, cars that get stuck in intersections and force pedestrians to weave around them, cars with deep tinted windows that prevent pedestrian eye contact, cars doing illegal u-turns and three-point-turns in crosswalks, etc, etc. I could go on!

And yes, if hundreds of people are constantly crossing at an unmarked spot, perhaps the infrastructure should be changed. Why is it acceptable to inconvenience pedestrians by making them walk long distances to crossings, but not acceptable to inconvenience cars by adding more lights or crosswalks? It's a valid argument.

Honestly, I think it's time Toronto considers having a pedestrian only zone in the downtown core. At peak times there is as much of a traffic jam on the road as there is on the sidewalk. Tear up some of the asphalt and plant some trees for a nice promenade.

Lets draw an imaginary box bordered by yonge in the east, spadina or university in the west, from dundas to front. Keep the streetcar tracks in place, or on dedicated lanes.

First of all, a reminder that crossing mid-block (the common definition of jaywalking) is in fact, NOT illegal in Toronto. As long as you yield to traffic and do not put yourself or auto traffic in danger, you are not breaking the law. It's one of those few times when common sense dictates whether or not you are breaking the law. If it's safe, you can cross. Spacing did an article on this a couple years ago:
http://spacing.ca/wire/2007/11/20/pedestrians-crossing-mid-block-in-toronto-the-definitive-guide/

Before we get all crosswalk happy and put them in everywhere, note that in my experience, I've found that cities that bow to pressure to place crosswalks and pedestrian lights everywhere it's requested are the ones that have the highest levels of pedestrian accidents and collisions. Edmonton is a very good example, of a very high per capita pedestrian collision rate, despite a high number of pedestrian crosswalks. Why? Because when you put in more traffic controls, the greater false sense of security both pedestrians and motorists will have. You'll have idiots who think just because they're at a crosswalk that cars will stop and they can cross as they please. Likewise, you'll have motorists who will drive and only look for pedestrians at crosswalks, and not pay attention otherwise.

I almost get hit at Queen and Dufferin at least once a week by people who don't think they have to stop at a red light before turning right when I am crossing with a walk light. It is honestly scary.

I agree that the emphasis should be put on ticketing cars with a bigger goal of making the downtown core mor pedestrian friendly.

But how many times have you seen an elderly person, a mom with a baby carriage or some idiot with their eyes on their PDA jaywalking oblivious to oncoming traffic?

Ticket the hell out of those fools.

There need to be pedestrian safety blitzes.
I know a lot of downtown Torontonians hate cars, but the fact of the matter is that pedestrians need to take a little responsibility for their own safety as well...even if they have the right of way.
That mother with the stroller and preschooler in hand shouldn't be standing on the yellow line in the middle of the road waiting for a clear break. EVER....but, especially when they're doing it 200 feet from a light or crosswalk.

People who step out onto the road without even looking....please...it isn't just about the car. Since we all pay taxes for the roads (and people with cars pay more) we all need to be more cognizant when using them, when driving and walking, because there are just as many assholes on foot and on bikes as there are behind the wheel.

PS..it would really be helpful too if cyclists would mind the rules of the road; not ride through reds and in the middle of lanes.

@lala
I just like to remind people that the MTO states the following: "Bicycles that cannot keep up with traffic should drive as close to the right edge of the road as possible and safe to do so."

So if I can keep up with traffic, which I often can, I can take the lane. Often, the safest place to ride is in the middle of the lane, that way drivers aren't squeezing you against parked cars which could mean a swift dooring and a nice broken collarbone or neck for the cyclist. If we stay to the right, give us at least three feet of space between ourselves and your car.

Regarding your PS, often we cyclists that are riding in the middle of the lane (which isn't illegal, as per MTO) do it for a few different reasons. First, the edge of the road is covered with basins and holes in the pavement, therefore making it incredibly dangerous to ride on (take a gander along Dundas from Dufferin to Spadina; add in all the garbage on our streets, broken bottles that are thrown along the curbs, etc. Second, on a regular basis, I am almost hit riding at the edge of the road when a car decides they want to swerve around another car to speed by at 70km/hr-my option is then to ride on the sidewalk (illegal) or make it so that won't happen by riding a couple feet out from the curb. These cars, on a daily basis, come within inches of my pedals and, on occasion, have hit my handlebars, thus throwing me off my bike.
All this said, I grew up taking yearly bicycle safety courses, as my parents were avid cyclists, and will not get onto my bike without my helmet. I check my shoulder, I signal and I have the LEGALLY required bell and use it regularly (unlike the kind man who overtook me on his bike the other day and called me a whore when I was surprised and had to swerve off the road to avoid crashing).

I can appreciate what you're saying Liz, especially with the situation that garbage is creating right now. When I'm driving, I always change lanes when I see a cyclist..on some streets though, I think that many riders are taking their lives into their hands just because of the posted speed and lack of space.

Fair enough, Lala. I agree there are some idiot cyclists out there just as often as there are idiot drivers (point in case the fella who kindly called me a whore when I was biking safely and he was being a hooligan).

Laurence's reply above is correct and insightful - jaywalking isn't even illegal in Ontario unless you are at an intersection or disrupt traffic in some manner.

Many things about traffic are counter-intuitive. Ironically, removing ALL traffic controls and signage reduces accidents as discussed here: http://www.amazon.ca/Traffic-Drive-What-Says-About/dp/0307397726/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&;s=books&qid=1247672983&sr=8-2

"But how many times have you seen an elderly person, a mom with a baby carriage or some idiot with their eyes on their PDA jaywalking oblivious to oncoming traffic?"

In the instances of old folks and moms w/ babies, very rarely. In fact, I rarely see someone jaywalking with their eyes on a PDA either, although I want to punch them when they walk into me on a sidewalk.

A lot of pedestrians just don't know how to WALK in Toronto. Casually strolling three abreast, exiting from a shop without pausing to look for oncoming pedestrian traffic on the sidewalk, standing in the middle of the corner while waiting for a red light and blocking the oncoming pedestrians from passing by them... Oy. I commute via Yonge Street every day on my feet and pedestrians are not the smartest or most aware folks out there.

Having said that, my motto for many many years has been (only very slightly ironic) "All cars are a-holes". I don't think pedestrians should be ticketed. Maybe just let natural selection weed out the stupider ones who step into traffic without looking.

I find the drivers downtown to be pretty good. Because of the heavy pedestrian traffic levels, it would seem that there is an increased awareness that you need to pay attention because there is always someone about to cross the street.

What really scares me is when I leave the downtown core and get into the suburbs. I work in Burlington and walk to my office from the GO Train. Because the pedestrian traffic in the area is extremely minimal, the disregard that drivers have for pedestrians is astounding. The number of close calls, and there have been some very close ones, that I have had in the suburbs far outnumbers those that have occurred for me downtown.

In a very scary experience, I literally had to jump out of the way of a car turning right. It was my right of way, I had the walk symbol. He had the red light but looked left as he approached, saw no cars coming immediately and gassed it through the intersection just as I had entered the intersection, assuming (silly me) that the car would at the very least slow down to check for cars. I can only hope the encounter was as scary for him as it was for me.

Most drivers waiting to turn right just sit there at the intersection and stare to their left until its clear, then go, rarely bothering to make a quick check for pedestrians to the right. Since my incident, I won't enter an intersection until I can make eye contact with the driver. This seems to be working well for me so far.

The old hockey term "keep your head up in the neutral zone" really applies here.

All the business owners would riot. I think your idea is wonderful and it works well in many other cities (don't even have to go outside of N.A. for this one). But business owners stupidly protest, even though it has been shown that pedestrians and cyclists are far more likely to stop and shop than a person in a car.

I point it out because if you want equal rights as a cyclist, I think you should pay for a license as well...and tags.
I think cyclists should have mandatory training on how to ride the city roads.
I think it would be safer for those riding as well as those driving.

I really hate how self-righteous some cyclists are. It makes some of them stupidly arrogant on the road, and that is very dangerous.

I've been both a driver and cyclist..and there are jackasses on both sides...but, holy smokes some cyclists take some very big chances because they feel that they have more of a right to the road because they're environmentally superior to drivers.

While I agree with the argument, I do think <b>lala</b> makes a good point about licensing cyclists by having them pass a road safety course.

Of course, I also think pedestrians should have to prove their basic grasp of walking skills before being turned loose on the streets of Toronto.

Even if you swerve to miss a car your only going to crash into piled up garbage anyways.
Cars 1
Bikers 0

Licensing does not pay for roads. Licensing covers the administrative costs.
Some provincial gas tax goes to road work, not all. Also, you are conveniently omiiting the side effects of car use that is subsidized by the entire population such as health care costs (from injuries, sickness due to fossil fuel use, waste from car products and the cars themselves, etc.)
Parking tickets and fees go directly to city coffers and are used in a myriad of ways, partially to pay for the administration and enforcement.
And I have no idea what this brain fart means - "and who also uses and not only doesn't pay for, but doesn't even learn to use it safely?"
Seems you are the one living with "myths".

Read all of my comments to see what led me to the last.
I don't think that we shouldn't share the road...I do think that cyclists should have mandatory road safety training and should be ticketed for infractions as well.
No doubt that there are jackass drivers that run red lights and don't follow the rules of the road. But, I will tell you that I've run across more than one self-righteous cyclist who at times has defiantly cut in front of me, or come dangerously close to me while driving.
I can't be convinced that they're not bigger jackasses because it's not going to be me who is injured badly if I accidentally hit them....but, my insurance will cover them, if they survive.

Good point Debbie!

Any dinosaur left in this city stupid enough to drive their own car will tell you that the police let them do whatever they want. Never have they tried something as novel as road-safety blitzes. Never have they handed out costly tickets. Never have there been speed-traps set up to encourage safer driving. Why do the police hate pedestrians as much as they love drivers? Why?

How totally visionary you are. Please telephone Chief Blair and inform him of your revolutionary idea.

Try getting off a street care on King or Queen and see how safe that is, seems drives don't stop at stop signs any more. As I was almost run down this morning getting off the streetcar at Queen and DVP, the driver in her minivan and yaking away on her cell phone didn't even slow down. Betcha she lives in the 905!

The problem I see with requiring licensing is where do you draw the line? Do little kids riding a bike around the park require a license? How about riding down a residential street to school? Or just riding around? Does a teenager biking to work require a license? A university student riding through the Annex? How are you going to deal with people claiming they're just heading down the street to the park or a bike path? Ruling that absolutely everyone on a bike anywhere needs a license is absurd, and applying discretion in determining whether a license is necessary in a given situation or not is not something I can see everyone agreeing on.

Now, since this is already a bike discussion: I bike south of Bloor. Largely, the drivers are fine. Some have a bit of a problem with starting their turn first and seeing me later, but they do stop and luckily so far nothing happened that a swerve didn't fix. Taxis like to get a bit close, and I get a bit close back at them with my ghetto unfinished handlebar edges; all part of the game I suppose. I tend to take the lane on narrower lanes because I care more about being seen and crushed against the curb than about the car behind me going 10 km/h faster, not to mention it all evens out at the next red light.

It grinds my gears to see cyclists go through reds, but I have to say I've done it a couple of times myself (after slowing down a lot and checking every way...). Hello, boring intersections along Church! Crossing anything except a snoozy neighbourhood street on red is asking for bad things to happen. I also don't like people riding up along the curb at a red light: you wouldn't be comfortable with the distance if the cars were moving, so why do it now? Will they magically disappear as soon as the light goes green? Most of all, I will never ride up along the right side of a car signaling a right turn. Not only do I have better things to do with my life, it also strikes me as a pretty jerk move.

I am in line with sentiments voiced in a couple of comments above - assume they are all death monsters out to kill you. Good habit for safety and you can only be pleasantly surprised.

I think they should put red LED lights on the streetcar doors. Those STOP sign stickers don't seem to work all that well.

It's not unreasonable to ask that cyclists and pedestrians exercise the same caution and compliance when using Toronto's roads as motorists do.

It's also not unreasonable to say that 416 and 905 drivers have paid for Toronto's roads several times over. (Despite Alogon's protests to the contrary.)

According to the CAA South Central Ontario website, in 2008 motorists across Canada paid $7,000,000,000 more in federal and provincial taxes than non-motorists. This is up from $5,000,000,000 just two years earlier.

A large chunk of that is handed back to the municipalities for their road infrastructure, but how much depends on whether you're asking Harper, McGuinty or Miller. The rest is supposed to go to interurban highway infrastructure and developing regional and municipal public transit. (But somehow the money never seems to get there, according to the Auditor General. Federal and provincial governments have been "looking into it" since 1993.)

That $7 billion doesn't include license fees, plate fees, driver ed training fees, mandatory safety inspection fees, mandatory pollution inspection fees, environmental fees for tire service and for air conditioning service, and on and on. Nor does it include Toronto's added licensing tax, charges for "public" parking, taxi and tow truck licensing fees, and arbitrary ticketing whenever revenue quotas need to be met.

As long as motorists are viewed by governments as a bottomless well of easy tax revenue, we'll never get the transit we need to replace cars - it simply isn't in the governments' best interests.

Safe to say we can just blame women drivers for most accidents.

Interesting figures Diane, especially considering three things - 1. the source is hardly unbiased, 2. the Canadian Taxpayer Federation says Canadians, not just Ontario citizens, have paid $5.9 billion in federal gas taxes this year. How can Ontario pay about $7 billion in combined provincial and federal gas taxes when the rest of Canada as a whole paid $5.9 billion in federal gas tax? The numbers don't make sense. 3. You said the $7 billion doesn't include all the other registration and licensing fees, well, I can read the same report and, in fact that number does include those things. Some of the other cost you mention such as enviro and A/C, well, come on, don't you think those who use polluting substances should pay or do you think everyone should shoulder the burden imposed by one group?
Also, you still don't address the point I brought up, conveniently. Even if drivers are "paying more" they do the most damage to the road and environment, so why shouldn't they pay more? Also, given that the taxes from gas are not being used entirely to fund the roads is still avoiding the original objection I made - the argument can't be that drivers are paying "more" for the road (especially because more needs to be qualified who are they paying more than and in relation to what? i.e. A non-motorist may pay more in sales tax than a motorist)and therefore have greater entitlement to it. Where is your evidence that a "large chunk" of the money is handed to municipalities for road work? From my eyes I can see millions of dollars in road repiars that have been piling up over the years - surely $7 billion in one year could repair a great deal of that. The money is being provided for "infrastructure" which involves a lot more than just roads. Gas taxes remind motorists that driving is not free and should not be subsidized by those who don't use it to the same extent.
You also neglect the amount of land gobbled up for cars, the many deaths and that impact on society economically, the subsidies given to car manufacturers and other subsideis that reduce the cost of driving, materials used and lost, costs of congestion, sprawl, the list goes on. Drivers are not even close to paying the full cost of our activity.
If you want to play the "paying more" game, smokers pay billions more in taxes a year, should they also be given special rights to the air around them?

Diane...Marry me.

You should read about Enrique Penalosa and Bogota and see how the car culture affects people and what happens when you change that and start putting people first.