CBBarnett
Senior Member
Here's the accident heat map from the city's data, from 2016 until now link. Some 41,000+ collisions (yikes). Zoomed in for the inner city:
A few highlights:
That's an unhelpful way to think about it in that it's totally inaccurate - everyone makes mistakes sometimes, even if they aren't being overtly reckless jerks. Most collisions have an element of human error or poor judgement, but the road design is what determines the severity of the failure state. The goal should be to discourage mistakes, but also make mistakes less dangerous to everyone involved. Proper car-proof bollards are a good example in this situation - had the sidewalks and buildings along 14th been protected with strong enough bollards, there would have been no other property damage or risk to pedestrians, just the drivers vehicles involved. Design reduces the risk and danger to people and property, in the event that mistakes happen.
Speed is the other big factor here. Regardless of whether a driver is speeding (i.e. exceeding the speed limit) or not, an 100km/h collision almost always leads to property damage and reporting regardless of the cause of the collision. A 30km/h and under collision often doesn't cause reportable damage - or doesn't occur at all as everyone had enough reaction time to avoid it in the first place.
Looking at the map that's a really big insight - where don't collisions occur? Low traffic, low speed areas. It's not just speed limits, it's design speed. Both 14th and 17th see a spike in collisions right where they become more free-flow and a higher design speed, even if the speed limit stays the same.
What did we learn? If you don't want any collisions, perhaps lower speeds and volumes. To do that you have to prioritize reducing collisions over speed and volumes, which is the opposite of what we do on most corridors.
If we can't stomach the horror of reducing the ability for people to be reckless speeding jerks in their vehicles everywhere, perhaps we can seek a better balance in the key areas where pedestrian volumes are the highest. The inner city, for example. The status quo "balance" is hardly that - it's a recipe to kill and injure people and cost our society billions every year in damage to cars and property in perpetuity.
A few highlights:
- The amount of collisions is notable. Nearly every intersection has seen more than one in the past 8 years in the city centre.
- The hotspots are also notable. Beyond the major arterials - a few of our favourite roads keep coming up - 14 Street, 8 Street SW, MacLeod Trail couplet, Memorial Drive etc.
That's an unhelpful way to think about it in that it's totally inaccurate - everyone makes mistakes sometimes, even if they aren't being overtly reckless jerks. Most collisions have an element of human error or poor judgement, but the road design is what determines the severity of the failure state. The goal should be to discourage mistakes, but also make mistakes less dangerous to everyone involved. Proper car-proof bollards are a good example in this situation - had the sidewalks and buildings along 14th been protected with strong enough bollards, there would have been no other property damage or risk to pedestrians, just the drivers vehicles involved. Design reduces the risk and danger to people and property, in the event that mistakes happen.
Speed is the other big factor here. Regardless of whether a driver is speeding (i.e. exceeding the speed limit) or not, an 100km/h collision almost always leads to property damage and reporting regardless of the cause of the collision. A 30km/h and under collision often doesn't cause reportable damage - or doesn't occur at all as everyone had enough reaction time to avoid it in the first place.
Looking at the map that's a really big insight - where don't collisions occur? Low traffic, low speed areas. It's not just speed limits, it's design speed. Both 14th and 17th see a spike in collisions right where they become more free-flow and a higher design speed, even if the speed limit stays the same.
What did we learn? If you don't want any collisions, perhaps lower speeds and volumes. To do that you have to prioritize reducing collisions over speed and volumes, which is the opposite of what we do on most corridors.
If we can't stomach the horror of reducing the ability for people to be reckless speeding jerks in their vehicles everywhere, perhaps we can seek a better balance in the key areas where pedestrian volumes are the highest. The inner city, for example. The status quo "balance" is hardly that - it's a recipe to kill and injure people and cost our society billions every year in damage to cars and property in perpetuity.
