Hi Everyone,

I just got back from a few days in Vancouver at the Olympics and like everyone else in Vancouver I had a great time. Checked out a couple hockey games, some of the sights, and helped keep various Vancouver establishments in business a little while longer. That's about all I'm going to talk about the Olympics on this post, largely because it has been talked about to death.

Recently, I had a letter to the editor published in the Saskatoon StarPhoenix, the local Saskatoon newspaper. The issue was regarding a crackdown on speeding due to an ever increasing amount of traffic collisions over the last five years in Saskatoon. The last few years has seen Saskatoon's crime rate fall overall, but traffic collisions has stubbornly increased year after year. One of the solutions was to crackdown on speeding across the city. The story in the newspaper featured a crackdown close to a local high school.

This is a topic that most people have an opinion on, since it affects everyone. Opinions range from the argument that tickets are a hidden tax and officers' time is better spend elsewhere to those welcoming a crackdown to hopefully correct some dangerous driving habits. I don't discount either of those opinions, since money is always a factor in any decision and there are plenty of reckless drivers on the roads. However, if the idea is to reduce traffic collisions on Saskatoon streets focusing on speeding is somewhat of a red herring. My opinion is the reason the city is focusing on speeding is that it is the easiest to enforce.

One of my interests, outside what actually puts food on my table, is urban planning and design. Saskatoon has gone though a lot of growth and transformation in the last 5 years, and my opinion is the design decisions coupled with city growth is the primary reason for collision increases. Cities that are growing rapidly are always behind on infrastructure to support the growth (see: Calgary). Increased cars on the road combined with infrastructure has not expanded to meet those needs will result in more collisions. However, in Saskatoon collisions have risen in greater proportion to increased traffic volume. Therefore, there is an additional issue that is contributing to that.

From 2003 to now, Saskatoon has begun implementing a development model common in many U.S. cities. Big box retail "power centers" that are located in areas that are either on the outskirts of the city or not integrated well with residential areas. The addition of Preston Crossing, Stonegate shopping center, University Heights shopping and the upcoming Wal-Mart anchored power center on the western outskirts of the city have happened in this timeframe.

A large part of what has driven this is the moving of two Wal-Marts out of the shopping malls into these large power centers as a main anchor, along with the addition of a new Wal-Mart in the Southeast of the city. This has greatly reduced the shopping desirability of two shopping malls that not only are more integrated with residental areas but also have transit terminals located right at the mall. The effect of this is that in order to get to these power centers, people have to drive longer distances and on main arteries to run errands.

City planners and developers often tout these power centers as more convenient as they are a one stop shop for everything. The latter is true, but I question whether they are convenient. I am of the opinion that people should be able to run 75% of their errands within their own neighborhoods. The common errands I'm thinking of? Food, household consumables like toilet paper, and prescriptions. Older neighborhoods in Saskatoon typically have a smaller grocer and pharmacy available that is a short walk, bike, or drive away. What is more important, is that even if people drive to these spots they are on local roads and can avoid the major arteries. I do acknowledge that it is not feasible to get everything within one's own neighborhood such as larger consumer goods as home electronics and furniture. However, people generally do not buy household electronics or furniture on a weekly or even a monthly basis. For these higher ticket purchases, people do travel and are willing to travel farther. But, this is the minority of errands people have to run.

If this is indeed the case, then the city will have a much more difficult and expensive reducing traffic collisions and they would have to rethink the city development plan for new neighborhoods and look at what could be done in established neighborhoods that have lost local amenities to the power centers (Sutherland, Downtown, Lakeview for example).

Something to think about...

Cheers.