40km/h residential speed limits being proposed

[snoop101]

Originally posted by msommers


Wow that's nuts. But to be fair, I don't know if there is any design differential between these two comparisons.

I think the infrastructure surrounding a lot of major crosswalks is lacking. The blinking overhead lights I don't believe are as effective as the quickly flashing signs that are placed lower down.

Example of what we have now:


Vs. what I think is more effective:
In Banff:
https://www.google.ca/maps/@51.18556...7i13312!8i6656

And...

There is a crosswalk in Shawnessy on Shawville Blvd by the second cup that no one seems to know about. There is one sign there, but the paint keeps fading and they never repaint. When I lived in that area I thought man someone is going to die here one day.

On a side note. The police really need to crack down on J walkers and get them to pay instead of drivers. I'm not sure if it's still the case because I moved away, but the somerset C train station used to have groups of J walkers everyday. People complained, but the police did nothing.

[firebane]

Originally posted by snoop101


There is a crosswalk in Shawnessy on Shawville Blvd by the second cup that no one seems to know about. There is one sign there, but the paint keeps fading and they never repaint. When I lived in that area I thought man someone is going to die here one day.

On a side note. The police really need to crack down on J walkers and get them to pay instead of drivers. I'm not sure if it's still the case because I moved away, but the somerset C train station used to have groups of J walkers everyday. People complained, but the police did nothing.

Chinook Station is fucking BRUTAL for J walkers.

[Mibz]

Originally posted by snoop101
the somerset C train station used to have groups of J walkers everyday. People complained, but the police did nothing.

The City did everything they could there. They put up signs, they put up a fence and they even installed lights halfway down the block just for pedestrians. Enforcing it won't help unless there's a Cop there constantly, which just isn't viable.

Maybe once the MacLeod and 162nd/22X construction gong show is completed there'll be less traffic on that street and it won't matter as much.

[HiTempguy1]

Originally posted by Mibz
which just isn't viable.

Why not? They can pay to have cops sit and radar people all day. Can you imagine the revenue generated from j-walking tickets?!

[kertejud2]

[OTown]

Originally posted by Mibz
I somehow missed that Toronto post altogether. To be frank, it's a garbage study to be using as justification. It doesn't account for anything and they admit multiple times throughout that lowering the speed limit probably isn't the best idea. There could be a dozen factors contributing to the numbers but none of them have been mentioned in there. They (the supporters of lower limits) are just looking at raw numbers and saying "There are less deaths on these roads so let's pick ONE aspect of them and make other roads do the same". By the same logic they should be upping the speed limit of those roads to 70km/h because there were even fewer collisions/injuries/deaths. You can't point to such a narrow study as evidence of anything and the study itself acknowledges that.

"But how are they supposed to get proper data without changing the speed limit?"

Great question. The answer is that they experiment. They make the change, they gather the data and they make a decision based on it. Now if they ran the numbers afterward and found that there was little/no change in casualties and reverted the speed limit then I'd be fine. But there's rarely, if ever, experimentation in these situations. Whether it's because of cost or pride or what, I don't know, but good luck getting local Government to admit they've made a mistake and reverse a decision. I am vehemently opposed to poorly thought out solutions to poorly explored problems. Even more so when they're permanent.

"Aren't you going to feel like a tool when the data ends up agreeing with them?"

No. I just want the City to make educated decisions based on sound research. Holding up that Toronto study and saying "This is why" is embarrassing. That London study kertejud posted is the best piece of evidence I've ever seen in this debate. If it could be expanded a bit to ensure that it's the right fit for Calgary then I'd have no arguments with it. Hell, even without that expansion it's changed my view on the issue.

EDIT: Separately, I'm SUPER curious to know what happened in 2013 to cause the significant drop in casualties in Toronto across the board. Seems way too big to be coincidence.

Fair points.

But without even looking at all the nuances and details from study after study after study...

Its pretty easy to understand that simply slowing down a 2 ton rolling mass will no doubt lead to lower injuries and better braking distance.

Its simple physics.

[schocker]

Originally posted by OTown
Fair points.

But without even looking at all the nuances and details from study after study after study...

Its pretty easy to understand that simply slowing down a 2 ton rolling mass will no doubt lead to lower injuries and better braking distance.

Its simple physics.

I think the issue is, you need to prevent the accidents instead of just trying to mitigate the severity of the injuries. Say you get hit walking by a car doing 40 instead of 50 (even though these never account for braking of any kind). You are still going to be hurt severely either way. Now, if you create an education program that gets people to actually pay attention around roads and while crossing, you would have a better chance of preventing the accident altogether.

[jwslam]

Originally posted by schocker
I think the issue is, you need to prevent the accidents instead of just trying to mitigate the severity of the injuries. Say you get hit walking by a car doing 40 instead of 50 (even though these never account for braking of any kind). You are still going to be hurt severely either way. Now, if you create an education program that gets people to actually pay attention around roads and while crossing, you would have a better chance of preventing the accident altogether.

Instigate the 3 o's of no driving!

[speedog]

Originally posted by schocker

I think the issue is, you need to prevent the accidents instead of just trying to mitigate the severity of the injuries. Say you get hit walking by a car doing 40 instead of 50 (even though these never account for braking of any kind). You are still going to be hurt severely either way. Now, if you create an education program that gets people to actually pay attention around roads and while crossing, you would have a better chance of preventing the accident altogether.

The problem with any public education program is that they just don't work for a certain percentage of the population. How many years has it been that we've had it drilled into our heads to not litter or to wear a bicycle helmet, both of which if done will be to the betterment of us. But still I see people litter and plenty of people not wearing bicycle helmets.

Never the less, this safety stuff is taught in schools and there are also public campaigns that I have seen or read so it's probably ending up the same way with that certain percentage who feel in some way that it doesn't apply to them or it will never happen to them.

Kind of like smoking, the campaigns with respect to smoking have been tremendous over the years and yet you still see people smoking even while they're being treated for lung cancer or afterwards.

You're always going to have people who cross a street as a pedestrian in an unsafe manner and you'll always have drivers who won't see them. I suppose the only thing reduced residential speed limits may provide is less severe injuries and the verdict is still out on that because if people are still doing 50 in that 30 or 40 zone, then nothing will change.

[killramos]

^ which is all the more reason as to why we should be more serious about taking licenses away from people to stupid to drive and follow reasonable laws. ie you kill a pedestrian and are found to have been at fault speeding/didn't brake etc. bye bye license.

Not to mention making sure these people don't get the licenses in the first place.

I vote for centralization of licensing ( ie no privates giving out licenses ) and put dash cams in the cars to keep the instructors honest.

[msommers]

^^Speedog, Which is a fair assessment but look at the overall trend of how things have improved.

I wish driver's ed was mandatory.

[rage2]

People too stupid to drive will continue to have their licenses because the core of the problem is that it's not very difficult to get a drivers license where you're piloting a 4000lb machine that can easily kill people. Our drivers licensing requirements are such a joke.

https://www.transportation.alberta.c...NewDrivers.pdf

25-30 minute test, where half of it doesn't even focus on driving, but how to use the car controls, how to park. It's nuts. You get lucky and ace the test, and you're good to go until you die.

I'd love it if we revamped the entire system and have mandatory re-testing every couple of years, along with real requirements on how to drive to actually get a license.

[killramos]

I would advocate for German style licensing and vehicle maintenance requirements any day of the week.

Problem is driving is something people far far far to entitled to. And its perpetuated the numbskull driving styles people have in this country. I don't think drivers testing reform is even possible as it would take to long to have an effect ( we would have to grandfather to many idiots )

[Swank]

Originally posted by rage2
25-30 minute test, where half of it doesn't even focus on driving, but how to use the car controls, how to park. It's nuts. You get lucky and ace the test, and you're good to go until you die.

Agreed! It's astonishing how few accidents/incidents there are given how easy it is to obtain and retain a license.

[HiTempguy1]

Originally posted by msommers

I wish driver's ed was mandatory.

Driver's ed is not only garbage (at least in this province), but teaches a LOT of incorrect ideas/skills about driving.

Of course, the whole way society treats driving is part of the problem. From speed limits to signage, time and again its been shown that transportation needs to be approached differently.

As killramos has suggested, one of those things is changing from driving back to a privilege, not a right.

[speedog]

Was it ever a privilege in Alberta? I believe that way back when I got my class 5 and 6 licences that the road tests were a bit more demanding than what's done today but I can't really be sure about that because that was a long time ago and I don't remember very much about my road tests.

I do remember having to do parallel (including on a hill) and angle parking in my class 5 and also residential and highway stuff and for my class 6, I do remember doing both slow speed stuff at the closed course in Parkdale (now long gone) as well as a road test. Not sure what of that is done any more.

[msommers]

Originally posted by HiTempguy1


Driver's ed is not only garbage (at least in this province), but teaches a LOT of incorrect ideas/skills about driving.

Of course, the whole way society treats driving is part of the problem. From speed limits to signage, time and again its been shown that transportation needs to be approached differently.

As killramos has suggested, one of those things is changing from driving back to a privilege, not a right.

Driver's Ed is not garbage from my experience. The instructor I had was excellent and taught me things I still recognize today as being incredibly useful. Maybe you, or people you know, were taught by idiots? I certainly was not.

All of us can argue all day long that driving isn't a right, it's a privilege, and around here for a long time everyone agrees with it. And while I too agree with that sentiment in theory, it's a step-back from reality.

In Calgary especially, options to get around are quite limited if you don't own a vehicle and so a lot of people are going to drive if they can afford a vehicle. A solution I think that could fit here is that applicants complete Driver's Ed before attempting to get their license, and making the license much more difficult to get by having the same standard applied to everyone. But if your cousin runs a registry, you probably don't even go into a vehicle for testing.

What's interesting is that my GF doesn't have her full license, just GDL, which she's had for 8 years I believe. Her driving is fairly decent but she's quite worried about the testing because many of her friends have failed on the first time, only to go another time and get it by performing the same way. To me it shows either there is a massive inconsistency among testers, the performance wasn't actually the same, or some seedy corruption bullshit is happening at that registry to get more testing in.

I don't have the urge to look but it could be interesting to evaluate Finland and per capita compare collisions involving vehicles to us in Alberta.

[Canmorite]

Originally posted by killramos
I would advocate for German style licensing and vehicle maintenance requirements any day of the week.

I've done this in Germany (mock course) and it is intense! Spent a day with an instructor on their skidpads, slalom courses, simulated ice environments, 100-0 ABS brake tests, etc etc. It's a real driver training course.

[OTown]

Originally posted by schocker

I think the issue is, you need to prevent the accidents instead of just trying to mitigate the severity of the injuries. Say you get hit walking by a car doing 40 instead of 50 (even though these never account for braking of any kind). You are still going to be hurt severely either way. Now, if you create an education program that gets people to actually pay attention around roads and while crossing, you would have a better chance of preventing the accident altogether.

I completely agree that education is a huge part of the problem. But we cant just ignore one and focus on the other.

IMO it should be a full program including traffic calming (signage, speed limits, etc) AND education.

[OTown]

Originally posted by HiTempguy1
As killramos has suggested, one of those things is changing from driving back to a privilege, not a right.

Amen.