MPI releases list of intersections with most collisions in Winnipeg

ctvwinnipeg.ca

Manitoba Public Insurance released a list Tuesday of Winnipeg intersections with the most collisions.

At the top of the list was the intersection of Kenaston Boulevard and McGillivrary Boulevard, said officials.

That intersection had a total of 1,052 collisions reported between 2005 and 2009.

Second on the list was the intersection of Leila Avenue and McPhillips Street, followed by Kenaston Boulevard and Grant Avenue, which ranked third on the list.

"Many of these collisions were rear-end collisions," said Ted Hlynsky, vice-president, claims control & safety operations with MPI.

"The message to motorists is to anticipate when the light will change and leave enough space in front of you if you are required to stop suddenly," he said.
_______________________________

Winnipeg's Top 10 Collision Intersections (2005-09)

1.) Kenaston Blvd & McGillivray Blvd 1,052

2.) Leila Avenue & McPhillips Street 1,003

3.) Grant Avenue & Kenaston Blvd 784

4.) Lagimodiere Blvd & Regent Ave W 778

5.) Bishop Grandin Blvd & St Mary's Rd 672

6.) Bishop Grandin Blvd & St Anne's Rd 634

7.) Archibald Street & Marion Street 615

8.) Moray Street & Portage Avenue 560

9.) Logan Avenue & McPhillips Street 528

10.) McGillivray Blvd & Pembina Hwy 527

- Source - MPI

http://www.mpi.mb.ca/english/newsroom/articles/2011/Feb8.html

The message to motorists is to anticipate when the light will change and leave enough space in front of you if you are required to stop suddenly," he said.

The message, you arrogant icewhole, is design safer traffic management systems and manage traffic such that these things are minimized.

countdown clocks at all Major/Heavy traffic flow average intersections

problem fixed.

What you want me to fix next?

grumpy old man wrote:

The message to motorists is to anticipate when the light will change and leave enough space in front of you if you are required to stop suddenly," he said.

The message, you arrogant icewhole, is design safer traffic management systems and manage traffic such that these things are minimized.

Some drivers panic when a light turns amber and jam on their brakes and the car following rear ends them.

They seem to think that it's illegal to go through an amber light. Imo, a hellava lot of drivers should be taking a bus.

I wonder if the red light cameras are conditioning drivers to jamb on their brakes at all intersections now?

But yeah, a countdown clock would work wonders to minimize those problems.

JTF wrote:

grumpy old man wrote:

The message to motorists is to anticipate when the light will change and leave enough space in front of you if you are required to stop suddenly," he said.

The message, you arrogant icewhole, is design safer traffic management systems and manage traffic such that these things are minimized.

Some drivers panic when a light turns amber and jam on their brakes and the car following rear ends them.

They seem to think that it's illegal to go through an amber light..

Bang on.

The problem is that even MPI tells people a yellow means stop. Very very wrong.

Something my grandfather taught me when I was learning how to drive, always follow at a minimum of a "4 steamboat" count behind the car in front. This will allow for adequate stopping time and distance. Something both my husband and I have figured out in the past few years is where there are the pedestrian walk/don't walk signs, once the don't walk sign has stopped flashing, you have about 2-5 seconds before the light turns yellow and then red. The don't walk sign will flash for a minimum of 5 seconds and a maximum of 15 seconds, depending on the intersection it is located at. So if you are paying attention while driving and happen to notice the don't walk signal start to flash, you should be able to count and approximate if you will make the light or not. If you see the don't walk signal go to a solid yellow, you should be prepared to stop.

one slight problem Holy. I use that most of the time too, however way too many of our intersections are messed up and dont follow that rule, for the most part its the ones at the higher speed intersections

For instance.. Check that out the next time you are going southbound route 90 at those new lights on saskatchewan ave.

Goes from flashing no walk...to solid no walk to instant yellow followed by a real quick red.

So I have provided an example of what is a common situation and you choose to give me a rebuttal on an intersection that is out of the ordinary. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to know that there are always going to be the exceptions to every instance so take the concept and apply it to each situation individually. 90% of the time it will work, use your better judgement for the other 10%. But if you take the 4 second rule, there wouldn't be a problem of close encounters or rear end accidents, even on route 90 at 70 km's.

no holy.. the problem is MOST of the high speed intersections in the city abandon the rule.

Its scary since so many of us were trained to follow the rule. I still follow it, but I am very wary on the high speed/complicated intersections that I have not been at before. Its truly baffling why the city would change such a tried and true method of safety.

And.. yeah.. 4 second rule. I try to follow it, you know what happens? Some asshat pulls in front of me from the other lane. God that is frustrating.

grumpy old man wrote:

ctvwinnipeg.ca

Manitoba Public Insurance released a list Tuesday of Winnipeg intersections with the most collisions.

At the top of the list was the intersection of Kenaston Boulevard and McGillivrary Boulevard, said officials.

That intersection had a total of 1,052 collisions reported between 2005 and 2009.

Second on the list was the intersection of Leila Avenue and McPhillips Street, followed by Kenaston Boulevard and Grant Avenue, which ranked third on the list.

"Many of these collisions were rear-end collisions," said Ted Hlynsky, vice-president, claims control & safety operations with MPI.

"The message to motorists is to anticipate when the light will change and leave enough space in front of you if you are required to stop suddenly," he said.
_______________________________

Winnipeg's Top 10 Collision Intersections (2005-09)

1.) Kenaston Blvd & McGillivray Blvd 1,052

2.) Leila Avenue & McPhillips Street 1,003

3.) Grant Avenue & Kenaston Blvd 784

4.) Lagimodiere Blvd & Regent Ave W 778

5.) Bishop Grandin Blvd & St Mary's Rd 672

6.) Bishop Grandin Blvd & St Anne's Rd 634

7.) Archibald Street & Marion Street 615

8.) Moray Street & Portage Avenue 560

9.) Logan Avenue & McPhillips Street 528

10.) McGillivray Blvd & Pembina Hwy 527

- Source - MPI

http://www.mpi.mb.ca/english/newsroom/articles/2011/Feb8.html

At least five of these intersections should have interchanges as traffic volumes would warrant them. This is one area where Winnipeg is truly a$$-backwards with regards to proper traffic planning and management.

holly golightly wrote:So I have provided an example of what is a common situation and you choose to give me a rebuttal on an intersection that is out of the ordinary. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to know that there are always going to be the exceptions to every instance so take the concept and apply it to each situation individually. 90% of the time it will work, use your better judgement for the other 10%. But if you take the 4 second rule, there wouldn't be a problem of close encounters or rear end accidents, even on route 90 at 70 km's.

I travel 5 of the top 10 intersections listed below, and have never had a problem almost stopping, not stopping, or being interfered with. Probably because I apply Holly's wisdom above.

Deank wrote:And.. yeah.. 4 second rule. I try to follow it, you know what happens? Some asshat pulls in front of me from the other lane. God that is frustrating.

I hear ya!!! And when this happens I just tend to back off to the 4 seconds again. As long as I get to my final destination safely, within the required speed limit (or just over) and don't get into an accident that I could have prevented, I am happy. But then I grew up in an era when things weren't so rushed and I have been conditioned to always leave a few minutes early for appointments/meetings/work so that I don't have to rush. I am of the opinion that it is better to be early than to be late. And if I am late for work, so be it, at least I arrived alive and in one piece. I am fortunate that my place of employment is flexible enough to allow for flex hours.
When it comes to tailgater's, if I am approaching an intersection that I feel the light will turn red, I make the decision to either go through it or not based on the road conditions, speed that I am travelling and if the tailgater behind me is paying attention (if I can see them in my mirror). The other factor I put into play is the age of the tailgater (teenager/20 something or senior). I would rather "run" a yellow/red than be hit from behind but again it is a judgement call I make based on numerous factors like the ones mentioned above as well as what the cars in the cross intersection are doing.
A lot of these things I learned while my grandfather was still alive as well as from taking Defensive Driving in school (much better course than Driver's Ed).

heh... all taught in my drivers ed class up in the pas.

us and our 3 light controlled intersections.
hehehh

Holly - Deank is correct - MOST intersections do not display the solid hand-signal anymore. I wonder why that is? Not that drivers should be expected to find ways to determine the sudden amber/red anyway. Start looking for this - they have altered the functional purpose of MOST of the walk/hand signals to leave approaching drivers clueless. The simple fact is - amber-times are inadequate at 4.0 seconds. When those are made adequate/lengthened - you will see a dramatic decrease in the number of sudden stops leading to collisions. You will also see a dramatic decrease in "red-light running violations". That will occur after a period of time of Wpg drivers getting used to the longer/proper amber times. They will now have to adjust/get familiar with the longer amber time - and shake off the learned behaviour that was caused by the crisis created by the former. The EPC report on longer ambers is due to be tabled next week. Stay tuned because this scheme will be exposed soon after implementation.

Jondo wrote:They will now have to adjust/get familiar with the longer amber time - and shake off the learned behaviour that was caused by the crisis created by the former.

Have you ever met a human being? All that's going to happen is people will learn that they've got even less reason to consider coming to a stop at an amber. The same behaviour will go on.

I like the idea of having ALL lights stay red for a second or two longer before giving the other traffic a green. Anyone running a red when the other traffic stream gets a green can be our new cash cow.

And if drivers were to take the 4 second approach, there wouldn't be the accidents at intersections either. As for most of these intersections listed I would be curious to know what types of accidents are the most common. Most of the listed intersections have the separate left turning light and there are the idiots who like to run these left turning lights even after the arrow is no longer lit. Or you will get the yellow/red light runners who are trying to go straight and collide with the left turner who is clearing the intersection. I would think that these are the more common accidents as opposed to the rear end accidents but we can speculate all we want, until MPI actually releases those stats. I travel through 6 of the 10 listed intersections at least once a week, at various times of the day or evening (or I should say try to avoid travelling through them if possible) and have witnessed more of the left turn accidents than the rear end accidents in my travels.

Holly.....

Don't make me use the "Good Posting" smiley twice in one day....

Holly...

HOLLY!

Oh, what the hell.

Mantha wrote:I like the idea of having ALL lights stay red for a second or two longer before giving the other traffic a green.

Winnipeg is the only city that I have been in where once a red light is activated for two lanes, the green is activated at that exact same time for the other lanes. This is dangerous. Most cities have their lights timed where once a red light is activated, the other green light does not come on for two or three seconds. I don't know why Winnipeg doesn't do this, but it's likely associated with the poor planning of the city in general.

Understand that between 80-90% of "redi light runners" are trapped one or two tenths of a second into a red that shouldn't be red yet. That produces the dlemma zone that creates the crisis. They need to be made adequate (for proven safety purposes). Anybody goingg through after that implementation is then a red-light runner. Fact is - they are few and far between (actual runners). The fruit is in the known, short and dnagerous short amber. Watch how quicly that is exposed once it's corrected.

I actually had a collision at one of the intersections listed.


Granted, it was 23 years ago! I was headed north on Pembina
approaching McGillvary. I was in the left most lane that goes straight ( two
turning lanes to my left). The light for the turning lanes turns red and the
car in front of me HAMMERS her brakes ( as in we could have both made it
through the intersection before the light went red). She skids to a stop and I
plow her from behind, she gets out and says “didn’t you see the light turn
yellow”. Her reaction after I pointed out ever so subtlety that the light was
for the turning lanes beside us – a simple ‘oh.’, no apology , nothing.


Shortly thereafter the city started installing blinders and
shades on lights for turning lanes.

Interesting read: http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/blogs/lett/MPI-is-swimming-against-the-grain-of-the-most-progressive-auto-insurers-115646699.html

Pretty much what I said here: https://kwdc.forumotion.com/t6893-mpi-releases-list-of-intersections-with-most-collisions-in-winnipeg#132897

So, MPI tells people that amber means stop? In what world?

I've also noticed that few people actually pull into the intersection while making a left hand turn on green, and just sit behind the white line until either a flashing arrow appears (which is backwards on Waverly @ Grant for some reason) or all traffic in the oncoming lane has cleared. Which leads to some people sitting behind a light for multiple sequences, because the traffic is heavy, and they either don't know to pull up, are afraid to pull up, or are idiots.

Right from the Driver's Handbook:
Amber — An amber light is a warning that the light is going to
turn red. Slow down and stop — never accelerate to “make the light.”
If you are already in the intersection when the light turns amber,
continue through.