IE10 and below are not supported.

Contact us for any help on browser support

You need to be signed in to add your comment.

Q3 – Please provide general comments on the report and its contents

about 2 years ago

*Note: The views and opinions expressed in this discussion forum are those of the participants and do not express the views or opinions of the Steering Committee or any specific members

Consultation has concluded

  • arnoS almost 2 years ago
    The issue of blind spots has been mentioned, but trucks with blind spots should simply not be allowed on the road. Drivers should have full vision of the road around them and should not be allowed to drive blind. This is totally unacceptable. A recent death in Victoria was due to a blind spot which was aggravated by an improper turn: https://letstalktransportation.ca/VRU/forum_topics/q4-do-you-have-general-comments-regarding-the-report-and-the-contents#comments . This was not an accident but was probably caused by unsafe truck design.
  • arnoS almost 2 years ago
    Should have more intensive requirements for obtaining a drivers licence. Also, more consequences when injuring or killing vulnerable road users. Also more intensive crash investigations with requirements to fix any causes of a crash.
  • arnoS almost 2 years ago
    Government should move forward on a National Cycling Strategy. This would look at all aspects of cyclng and would (hopefully) lead to more people cycling. This would lead to a "Safety in Numbers" which will result in reduced crash levels.
  • arnoS almost 2 years ago
    Truck drivers should not be allowed to access internet or cell service while driving. Distracted driving is a leading cause of crashes.
  • alanahna almost 2 years ago
    As part of law enforcement fostering a safer cycling environment, officers regularly travelling on bicycles monitoring unsafe driving is an important factor in curbing dangerous motor vehicle behaviour experienced regularly by cyclists.
  • Sustainable Calgary almost 2 years ago
    To the Vulnerable Road Users Steering Committee,We are writing on behalf of Sustainable Calgary and Active Neighbourhoods Canada (ANC) program in response to your call for participation on the Vulnerable Road Users and Heavy Vehicles Countermeasures Project. We extend our thanks for your effort to include Canadian citizens in this important conversation and as an organization, we are grateful for the opportunity to participate. We recognize the immediate importance of addressing the challenge of vulnerable road user safety, as it is not only an issue of transportation, but also of population health and environmental sustainability.ANC, a pan-Canadian initiative funded by the Public Health Agency of Canada, is represented by three organizations across the country from Quebec, Ontario, and Alberta: the Montreal Urban Ecology Centre, the Toronto Centre for Active Transportation, and Sustainable Calgary. Together, we have developed a “co-design” approach to creating healthy cities. Our work is guided by the belief that bringing together local and expert knowledge can create strong outcomes and healthier communities. ANC recognizes the connection between the quality and availability of active transportation infrastructure, population health outcomes, and environmental sustainability. Canada’s Chief Public Health Officer, in her report on the State of Public Health in Canada 2017: Designing Healthy Living, focused on this complex relationship between the built environment, physical and mental wellness, and “air pollution, safety (e.g., injuries), housing, heat, UV exposure, climate change and natural disasters.” (p.6). We believe the best countermeasures will not only address this complex intersectionality of issues, but will create value: value in safer neighbourhoods, value in greater health outcomes, and value in a better quality of life for all Canadians. To accomplish this, we argue the need to rethink our budgets. We have a clear choice to spend differently: to create not just safer communities, but healthier, more sustainable, age-friendly, equitable, economically productive communities, that generate more tax revenue per square foot. We can do this by encouraging more compact development, and by prioritizing our investment towards pedestrians, cyclists, and public transit, as cities across Canada and the world now aim to do. By ensuring that our budgets reflect our desired end goals, we can fund interventions that diminish the need for band-aid solutions in traffic safety. In this spirit, we encourage you to consider: -Do budgets reflect stated priorities? Here we include the priorities of municipal, provincial and federal priorities. Cities across Canada and abroad increasingly prioritize walking, cycling and public transit to provide choice, affordability and inclusivity for Canadians, and to work towards greenhouse gas reduction targets. Many also target fewer collisions, fewer fatalities, and incorporating a Vision Zero approach. Health agencies at all levels of government have stated the value of investing in healthy, walkable built environments, but lack jurisdiction over infrastructure and transportation decisions. Transportation Canada aims for inclusive communities and a low carbon green economy, while Transportation Alberta strives towards innovative, accessible and active transportation systems. The largest shares of Calgary and Canada’s environmental footprints are transportation and housing; and we know that the built form of our cities has more impact on our overall fossil fuel consumption than green building technologies alone. To honour our priorities, we need to structure our policies and budgets accordingly: towards more compact development, and the prioritization of walking, cycling and transit. -How do solutions to increase safety for vulnerable road users address priorities, goals and strategies in other ministries, agencies, and levels of government? Research shows that more walkable communities can have positive outcomes when it comes to public health, mental health, quality of life, aging, fossil fuel consumption, tourism, affordability, low-income and vulnerable Canadians, economic productivity, economic development, and tax revenue. Aligning priorities with these areas of government intervention may allow for larger budgets moving forward, as shared goals and outcomes across departments are identified. Questions we encourage you to continue asking include: • Is there collaboration between different levels of government and across ministries? • What organizational infrastructure exists to facilitate such communication and collaboration? • Do federal and provincial transportation budgets reflect the stated values of safe, accessible, inclusive, innovative, and environmentally-friendly transportation?• Do federal and provincial transportation budgets reflect the stated values of the municipalities they work with?• How can federal and provincial priorities and budgets reflect the recommendations of health agencies at all levels of government?Let’s work towards long-term, root cause solutions; towards solutions that take advantage of cross-departmental synergies; and towards solutions that don’t simply make roads *less bad*, but create great communities for all Canadians - while making effective and synergistic use of our budgets.We are at your disposal to participate in any such conversations, and to contribute background information – research and best practices that we have used or created - as needed. Thank you for your time and attention, and for reaching out to hear the perspectives of Canadians on such an important issue. Sincerely, Celia Lee, Program Lead, Active Neighbourhoods Canada (Alberta)Noel Keough, President, Sustainable Calgary The Active Neighbourhoods / Sustainable Calgary Team
  • Anwarmedhs almost 2 years ago
    A steeper fine and/or legislation for Drivers who fail to stop (where he/she can see the white line at red light), before turning ‘right’ could be a decent start.
  • Brian Denton almost 2 years ago
    Little is being done to educate the public of the hazards inherent to the design, construction, operation and maintenance of our roads. There is far more to road safety than the risks associated with exceeding the speed limit, driving while impaired and inattentive driving. Although these are inappropriate behaviours resulting in a large percentage of collisions, the other hazards are of equal importance to our understanding of road safety. I strongly encourage those on the Steering Committee to thoroughly review the book "Staying Safe on our Roads: The Small Margin for Error", which is available through Amazon. The primary conclusion reached in this book is a well-designed road safety educational program should form a part of all school curriculums.
  • Marcel J Huculak almost 2 years ago
    I like that this issue is being studied, but I think we need to recognize that it is in the context of a system that is killing or seriously injuring thousands of people in Canada every year, and the heavy vehicle versus VRU is in the decided minority. There are many countermeasures suggested in the report that would be effective against other crash types, and I would encourage strategies that also benefit other collision types.
  • pakamac almost 2 years ago
    Of course many of the views and opinions expressed in these comments are shared by one or more committee members. This statement should be revised.
  • Jbutterworth almost 2 years ago
    Ultimately large trucks simply aren't compatible with safety in urban centres. Their turn radii are too big, their visibility is too poor, and the drivers often think their size gives them right of way in all situations. In many countries the physical constraints of the city centers make them impossible for large trucks to traverse, so they use smaller and much safer delivery trucks. Yes this is less efficient for the bottom line of transport companies but it's very profitable for society via the increased safety for everyone else.Narrowing streets, tightening curves, and banning trucks over a certain length in urban cores is the only long term solution to the carnage trucks are causing. We can victim blame and talk about education and training until the cows come home, but ultimately most traffic fatalities are a result of poor infrastructure that places the physical needs of fast moving vehicle traffic above the needs and basic safety of all others.
  • C almost 2 years ago
    Section 144 (27) of the highway traffic act states: "No pedestrian approaching pedestrian control signals and facing a solid or flashing "don't walk" indication shall enter the roadway".The majority of pedestrians have never heard of this law!Transport Canada could do a better job at communicating and enforcing the LAWS - that using the roadway is a shared responsibility between drivers, cyclists and pedestrians with each group required to obey the traffic laws. No exceptions.We have a gridlock and safety problem. Trucks are clogging up the 401, 403, 427, DVP, and the Gardiner. Large vehicle time restrictions should exist.In addition, a dedicated lane for large vehicles should exist.Any vehicle over a certain weight and/or with more than two axles will not be allowed to travel on the 401, 403, 427, Gardiner and DVP between 6 and 9 in the morning and 4 and 7 in the afternoon.
    • Coho almost 2 years ago
      I believe that is a provincial law rather than a federal law, but the signal timings in many cities still don't prioritize pedestrian safety and as such put them in the awkward situation of having to run across the road to complete a crossing and take unnecessary risks because they aren't accounted for properly in the urban road setting. This is particularly true at level highway crossings or multi-lane roads in urban areas that have beg buttons which often don't work and require waiting multiple cycles to partially cross at best. It is an exercise in extreme patience to cross a multi-lane road. What needs to change is that pedestrians need to be the first priority when planning, designing or re-designing the urban road setting. Then people on bicycles, then transit, then taxis/commercial vehicles, then single occupancy vehicles. It may also be that the single occupancy vehicles contribute more to the Ontario highway road congestion described rather than the trucks. Perhaps if there were better transit options rather than truck travel time restrictions that could do more to alleviate the congestion? I'm all for a dedicated lane for trucks if that isn't to be shared by transit, rapid transit is only possible with dedicated infrastructure that makes it much faster than driving a car. Maybe instead HOV lanes on highways should be shared with commercial trucks? And all highways should have dedicated/connected bus lanes that can only be used by buses to ensure they are faster than all other modes of travel.
  • lightfootatlarge almost 2 years ago
    Why are there no public health representatives on the Steering Committee? It seems that only bodies that represent the interests of motor vehicles are on the Steering Committee while pedestrian and cycling advocates are relegated to the Advisory panel.
    • Coho almost 2 years ago
      I agree, there needs to be public health representatives as well as academics who study related bicycling safety topics (I know UBC and SFU definitely have such specialists) and more advocates for pedestrian and bicycling in the steering committee to guide governance that prioritizes vulnerable road users.
  • jfmezei almost 2 years ago
    With regards to right turns, there needs to be better education. No driver intending to turn right at next interersection should overtake a bicycle within X metres of intersection (where X is sufficient for driver to complete the overtake and allow the cyclist to see the rear "turn right" signal flash.On the other side, cyclists must be educated to never overtake a car with its right turn signals flashing at an interesection since that vehicle's driver has not seen the cyclist and has no situational awareness of the cyclist on the side of his vehicle (especially if long truck).