It is probably safe to assume most of us do not generally employanalogies referring to military campaigns when discussing local urban development policy. Yet, over the past few years, editorialists in Canada's largest city have done exactly that, charging the Toronto municipal government with waging a 'war on cars'.
While they clearly use this description in a metaphorical context at the policy level, perhaps this is not the only area where it is appropriateto conjure up images of warfare in relation toour transportation system, for there is indeed a tragic trait shared by Canadian roadways and far-off battlefields: casualties.
In Toronto, an average of six pedestrians are injuredevery day, and over the last 10 years about 34 pedestrians and cyclists have lost their lives per year in traffic accidents. In Canada as a whole, an average of over one pedestrian is killeddaily in motor collisions. Certainly, compared to most countries this pedestrian mortality rate is not high. Nevertheless, each one of these hundreds of annual deaths deals an unexpected and devastating blow to a Canadian family, so we should take all reasonable steps to ensure the number of fatal incidents remains as low as possible.
To accomplishthis goal requires a multi-pronged approach. On the policy front, campaigns can belaunched to educate the public about the need to stay alert when either behind the wheel or walking across the street. At-risk groups, notably seniors and youths, should be particularly targeted.
At the planning level, city engineers can lengthen the crossing times at intersections to discourage jaywalking; include a countdown along with pedestrian crossing signals to informwalkers of how much time they have to get across the street; and even put in advance pedestrian signals, where walk signs are illuminated a few seconds before the traffic lights turn green, to decrease the risk of drivers not noticing pedestrians in their rush to turn left.
More ambitiously, streets can bedesigned as much as possible with walkers' safety in mind. Traditional square corners should replace the round speedway-style ones that traffic planners have begun to install at intersections. The new broad, curved design is favourable to cars but dangerous to people on foot, discouraging motorists from slowing down when making right turns and creating larger intersections that pedestrians must cross. Taking this further, curb extensions can beinstalled at intersections, which reducethe distance pedestrians must go to cross the street and allow drivers to see people about to cross when vehicles in the parking lane might otherwise block their view. Alternatively, islands can beput down the centre of the street, to provide refuge for slower pedestrians unable to get across the road all at once.
Finally, any attempt at designing safer streets must consider speed limits. Slower driving speeds provideboth pedestrians and motorists with more time to react to avoid an accident, while also dramatically reducing the risk of fatal injury should a collision occur. A 1994 study done in the United Kingdom revealed that when a vehicle traveling around 60 km/h hits someone, the likelihood the victim will die is 85 per cent. Because of the exponential relationship between momentum and force of impact, however, when the speed of the car is reducedby 10 km/h, the risk of death drops to 45 per cent. When the vehicle's speed is cutto 30 km/h, the chance the accident will be fatal is just five per cent. Establishing and enforcing urban speeds closer to 30 km/h is therefore one of, if not the most, effective way of avoiding deadly collisions.
These days, we tend to dismiss traffic deaths as the result of 'accidents', a decidedly passive and gentle term. Taking a page out of the editorialists' book, maybe we should employa more colourful phrase - like 'collateral damage' - to better convey how tragic the results of these incidents can beand to incite debate on how to reducethe number of pedestrian fatalities. Perhaps then pedestrians and motorists alike would remain more vigilant and cautious when on the road, and civic leaders would be spurred to adequately incorporate pedestrian wellbeing into urban design.
No matter what metaphorical claims are madeabout a supposed war on cars at the policy level, in an encounter between any individualvehicle and a human being, we all know the human loses every time. Let's do what we can to ensure there are no more casualties to prove it.
Benjamin Gillies is a political economy graduate from the University of Manitoba, where he focused on urban development and energy policy. He works as a downtown development consultant in Winnipeg.
Editor's Note: As one who considers walking anywhere on the streets in the Battlefords an extreme sport, I thought readers might be interested in Gillies point of view. B.D.
