Calgary Speed limits to be standard 30km/hr?

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by pepper24

NDP can go ahead and bring in this wimp liberal law but UCP will just abolish next spring after election. Waste of taxpayers money from bloated government waste and the reddest of tape.

Doesn't understand the issue.
Doesn't read anything about the issue.
Blames issue on NDP.
Claims UCP will fix it...because reasons....

It makes me sad that you're a voter.

[Locke]

I propose that to perpetuate the Calgary Police Service's unabashed cash grab that the CPS should offer the opportunity to purchase special licenses that offer exemptions.

"Hey! You just ran into a schoolbus full of toddlers! Oh! You have an Indulgence Permit.....sorry about that sir, carry on and have a great day!"

[you&me]

Originally Posted by username

I'm literally laughing out loud at people complaining that their commute time might go up by one minute.

I'm not sure how I feel about this. In my experience, the vast majority of drivers in residential areas naturally drive to the conditions of the road without strict observation of the posted limits, which tends to fall far below 50km/h anyways. Those that don't and currently speed will likely continue to speed regardless of a blanket 30km/h limit. And I don't expect every crescent and boulevard to be patrolled, so I think this whole thing will amount to almost zero difference.

That said, if it really does add one minute to the average commute, and assuming someone's only leaving their house to go to and from work -

1 minute each way.

2 minutes each day.

10 minutes each week.

520 minutes each year (8 hours and 40 mins).

Over 10 years, that's nearly 4 days of your life!

In no way am I advocating that people speed or anything like that... I just find it interesting that people underestimate the cumulative affect of seemingly minor actions.

[Lubicon]

Originally Posted by Locke

I propose that to perpetuate the Calgary Police Service's unabashed cash grab that the CPS should offer the opportunity to purchase special licenses that offer exemptions.

"Hey! You just ran into a schoolbus full of toddlers! Oh! You have an Indulgence Permit.....sorry about that sir, carry on and have a great day!"

I'm pretty sure many Calgarians (and I can probably extrapolate this to Albertans in general) are under the impression they already have special licence .

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

I actually suspect there will be delays that aren't accounted for - the obvious one being that residential streets that were previously used as part of a commuting route at 50-60km/h will no longer be used that way, thereby driving more traffic onto the main roads and increasing congestion. I guess decide for yourself if you consider that a bug or a feature of the plan; maybe some people want fewer cars on non-major roads.

[Minnie]

Originally Posted by Swayze11

We have had this in Airdrie since I have been here and my commute to downtown Calgary is still only 10 mins.

Aside from the wonderfully quick commute to downtown, I'm not sure that the 30 km/hr thing works here anyway. People still do 50 km/hr down the street, CoA vehicles included ( ) and once in a blue moon, the RCMP wanders by to enforce it, generally the end of the month. No one really slows down so I don't know how effective it is. There are a couple of places where it's still 50 km/hr (Old Town, mainly), not sure why, if the rest of the city is 30 km/hr.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Weitz

Well with Farrell being behind this we can certainly suspect what the actual end goal is.. the attack on cars!

Thanks to her attack on fluoridated water my kids both have to use high fluoride toothpaste. Its clear her vision for Calgary is a metropolis of toothless people riding bicycles.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Thanks to her attack on fluoridated water my kids both have to use high fluoride toothpaste. Its clear her vision for Calgary is a metropolis of toothless people riding bicycles.

And she says she wants to help the homeless! Theres only so many bottles and cans to go around you know!

[Bunk]

As others have pointed out - just a speed limit reduction will have limited utility, but worth talking about. The key is to redesign streets where excessive speed and safety are a big issue. Collectors are dangerous because they are designed to feel like you should be driving 60 or 70. People respond to the environment presented to them - and narrowing of collectors, more traffic calming measures will have a more lasting impact on public safety.

I tweeted this comparison of two Calgary residential streets a while back. One promotes speed, one promotes slowing down and proceeding with caution - automatically.

https://twitter.com/joshyyc/status/994973828341100545

[SebC]

There's definitely some irony in making streets safer by making them less safe to force people to slow down.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Bunk

As others have pointed out - just a speed limit reduction will have limited utility, but worth talking about. The key is to redesign streets where excessive speed and safety are a big issue. Collectors are dangerous because they are designed to feel like you should be driving 60 or 70. People respond to the environment presented to them - and narrowing of collectors, more traffic calming measures will have a more lasting impact on public safety.

I tweeted this comparison of two Calgary residential streets a while back. One promotes speed, one promotes slowing down and proceeding with caution - automatically.

https://twitter.com/joshyyc/status/994973828341100545

And yet I bet the road on the right is more likely to see an accident.

[username]

Originally Posted by you&me

Over 10 years, that's nearly 4 days of your life!

I just find it interesting that people underestimate the cumulative affect of seemingly minor actions.

If I have to sacrifice 4 days a decade (0.01%) of my time to increase the safely of our neighbourhoods thus saving lives then I will.

Hardly seems like this should even be debated....

[GoinAllTheWay]

Originally Posted by Weitz

And yet I bet the road on the right is more likely to see an accident.

Almost certainly. That strikes me as dangerously narrow. For both cars and pedestrians getting in to/out of their car. Add a slight curve to that road and it gets even worse.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by SebC

There's definitely some irony in making streets safer by making them less safe to force people to slow down.

Yes, counterintuitive perhaps, but true and supported by a lot of data.

[Slava]

Have we determined how many pedestrians were hit in residential areas though? Looking at my commute, I would almost guarantee that no one has ever been hit on a road that this would impact. The collector roads seem to be the issue, and they would remain the same issue.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by username

If I have to sacrifice 4 days a decade (0.01%) of my time to increase the safely of our neighbourhoods thus saving lives then I will.

Hardly seems like this should even be debated....

Calgarians will lose about 700 years of life per year as a result of this change so you need to save about 10 lives. The average Of deaths per year is 9 and since at most this affects 50% of the deaths and you only improve survival rate by half this in the best case scenario will save 1 to 2 lives per year at the expense of 10.

So from a utilitarian standpoint this law doesn’t pay

The logic of its only x is a poor way to make decisions because by that logic highway speeds should be 50 or 80. People die because we drive speed limits can’t be set with a goal of zero

[Flames0910]

Originally Posted by GGG

However you need to know the brake down between collector and residential as collector roads are not affected by this motion. So if we are down to 180 possible accidents that could be prevented each year. If you cut that in half again you are down to 90. Then factor in that 20% are hit and run and you aren't changing those peoples behaviour by change the law and you are down to 75.

So you want to waste 700 years of Calgarians lives to prevent 75 accidents which we know that the majority occur at below 30km/hr already.

700 years? It was calculated as +1 minute on the average commute. You need that time so badly you're willing to risk hitting and potentially killing someone?

And sure you can argue that a single minute every day adds up, but you have to consider the other side of that argument as well — because at one pedestrian collision per day, the city says the total cost is upwards of $120 million a year (Source).

As you argued, this change won't prevent every collision, so let's use your calculation of ~40% effectiveness (75 accidents prevented / 180 preventable accidents)... that's almost $50M a year. Not bad for two minutes a day.

[username]

Define loss of life per year - being in your car listening to music actually being alive?

You're hardly comparing apples to apples here.......from a strictly utilitarian stand point. Not changing the goal posts but biggest impact is going to be on companies in Calgary. It's not as though everyone is going to leave one minute earlier to get to work, they will just leave at the same time as they always do and likely show up one minute later.

[DownInFlames]

We're not all commuters. What about delivery drivers and service people? I'm sure it'll add a lot more than a minute to their day if their routes are primarily residential.

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by username

Define loss of life per year - being in your car listening to music actually being alive?

You're hardly comparing apples to apples here.......from a strictly utilitarian stand point. Not changing the goal posts but biggest impact is going to be on companies in Calgary. It's not as though everyone is going to leave one minute earlier to get to work, they will just leave at the same time as they always do and likely show up one minute later.

Indeed. All those people that have lost their life in a pedestrian/vehicle collision would have traded for an entire life driving a commute listening to music.