Vision Zero is easier said than implemented

The Vision Zero philosophy espouses the ideas that safety should be the primary consideration when it comes to traffic, and that all transportation-related deaths and injuries are preventable.

That certainly sounds like a desirable goal, and at such a low cost of $250,000 per year, it sounds like a bargain. How could anyone not embrace zero deaths and fatalities on Saskatoon roads at that price?

What’s not clear is whether that budget would cover cleaning up the mess when many Saskatoon residents’ heads explode after they find out what Vision Zero really means.

If Saskatoon genuinely follows through on Vision Zero — and there is already skepticism — it means 30-kilometre-per-hour speed limits on residential streets, and more protected bike lanes.

Lower speed limits and bike lanes are among the most contentious issues in Saskatoon, but they are obvious solutions if people truly want to reduce deaths and injuries. They’re part of the Vision Zero playbook.

A move to start spending money on Vision Zero seems likely to advance to city council’s budget talks in November after the idea was endorsed unanimously last week by council’s transportation committee.

The unanimous vote was not nearly as impressive as the ability of councillors and the mayor to raise their hands while sporting straight faces. Surely they must be aware of Vision Zero’s record.

Vision Zero in Canada has been a failure, despite cities enthusiastically adopting it in name, starting in 2015 with Edmonton. Ten pedestrians were killed there last year, the same as the year before.

Perhaps nowhere else in Canada has Vision Zero failed as spectacularly as in the country’s largest city. Toronto city council voted in June to more than double its $21.3-million budget for Vision Zero this year with an additional $22 million. The move came in response to public outrage over the high number of pedestrian and cyclist deaths on Toronto streets.

So Toronto was failing by spending more than $7 per person on Vision Zero, yet we’re to believe Saskatoon’s scheme to spend less than $1 per person amounts to something more than mere branding. Real Vision Zero is expensive and entails monumental change for a city where 69 people were killed and 12,666 injured on its roads between 2007 and 2016.

It will be interesting to watch city councillors try to reconcile supporting Vision Zero and then voting against protected bike lanes, which some are certain to do.

“Yes, we want fewer injuries and deaths on Saskatoon roads, but not if it means spending money — or, you know, inconvenience.”

Installing protected bike lanes on streets built for motor vehicles has proved a difficult transition in every city. The debate on lowering the speed limit for residential roads has also been tough. Some cities, like Toronto, Calgary and Edmonton, have started the speed limit conversation, though.

In Saskatoon, the debate over a couple of downtown bike lanes has seemed out of proportion. Former mayor Don Atchison made his opposition to the bike lanes pilot project a major plank in his losing 2016 re-election campaign.

Another former mayor, Henry Dayday, wrote to city council this month, urging a plebiscite on bike lanes.

Current Mayor Charlie Clark tried and failed to get the city to lower the speed limits on residential streets to 40 km/ h in 2011 when he was a city councillor. Clark revealed earlier this year that he had received threatening communications over his idea.

Vision Zero means implementing measures many Saskatoon residents have resisted, measures that seek to dethrone the automobile as the undisputed king of the road.

The idea comes as Saskatoon is making major changes in how it approaches traffic safety decisions. The traffic safety committee is being dissolved after 42 years.

Neighbourhood traffic reviews are being discontinued, as well, in favour of community traffic reviews for 12 larger zones in the city. It’s difficult not to see these moves as diminishing input from residents in favour of more emphasis on collision data. That’s good news if you really believe in Vision Zero and want to see it implemented, but bad news if you care more about traffic flow and convenience.