A pedestrian’s view of Vision Zero
Safety plan sounds good, but city must walk the walk, Robert N. Wilkins says.
Forgive me if I’m skeptical about the Coderre Administration’s adoption of the “Vision Zero” plan to reduce the number of people killed in traffic accidents. The reason for my uncertainty is that time and again City Hall has proved itself as liking to talk the talk, without really walking the walk.
In other jurisdictions where the Vision Zero philosophy has been implemented, tangible measures have been adopted to slow down the movement of motorized vehicles, if not curtail their access to certain parts of the urban landscape altogether.
There are several areas where Montreal could proceed tomorrow with substantial changes that would reduce the chaos that reigns more often than not in the city centre. The only thing that is lacking is the political will.
Since the police force, for whatever reason, does not sufficiently enforce speeding, more speed bumps should be installed in strategic places to force vehicles to travel at a more acceptable rate. Passing a bylaw that reduces the speed limit may look good on paper, but it changes little if, like the old statute, it is not rigidly imposed. Indeed, the internationally acclaimed Vision Zero approach is predicated on the absolute enforcement of the regulations affecting the movement of motor vehicles through densely populated areas.
The current municipal administration seems conflicted about how to cope with day-to-day life on the streets and sidewalks of the city. For instance, after years of prompting by various lobby groups, a four-way red light has finally been placed at the intersection of RobertBourassa and Ste-Catherine Sts.
Unfortunately, though, it allows pedestrians only a very short time to cross the road before opening up the thoroughfare once again to traffic. Too bad for the elderly and handicapped.
Virtually everywhere we look, we see evidence of the Coderre administration’s partiality toward motor vehicles. Rather than actively discouraging individuals from bring their automobiles to the city centre, the municipal authorities pay big money in overtime for police officers to direct rush hour traffic at various challenging intersections. For whose benefit is this being done? Certainly not those on foot.
One day recently, I stood at the intersection of RobertBourassa and René-Lévesque, along with hundreds of others. We spent a full 10 minutes waiting our turn to cross the road. The police officers, whose instructions are clearly to keep commuter traffic moving at all costs, were totally indifferent to the number of pedestrians amassing on all four corners. What signal does this send to those on foot, to those who opted not to bring a personal automobile into the downtown area?
Yet another annoyance that would require next to little effort to correct is the problem of drivers who find themselves stranded in intersections — or in the middle of crosswalks — after the light has changed. This problem was pointed out by Rick Leckner in his recent op-ed (“Some practical ways to mitigate Montreal’s traffic chaos,” Sept. 14); he called for more rigorous “don’t block the box” enforcement. How many times are those on foot forced to deviate dangerously from the pedestrian crossing path because there is an impatient and inconsiderate driver stuck in the congestion bedlam right over the crosswalk? An analysis is not necessary to correct this aggravation, just the political will to address it.
Sadly, though, ignoring city statues seems to be in our municipal DNA. As the Montreal Star editorialized on the same subject in September 1910: “One of the beautiful things in connection with municipal bylaws for the protection of citizens is the advantages we would derive from them if they were enforced.”
If the Coderre Administration is serious about its Vision Zero approach to reducing the number of deaths on city roads, it is going to have to move from immeasurable talk to concrete action. Trying to have it both ways will no longer cut it.