Calgary Speed limits to be standard 30km/hr?

[GGG]

Although we know 30 km/h saves lives in playground zones

This isn't actually true. There is no evidence that school zones save any lives.

The only evidence that I have seen shows a reduction in speed as a result of school zones and that a reduction in the speed of a collision reduces the risk. However I do not believe any study exists to show that a reduced school zone speed reduces harm.

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by GGG

This isn't actually true. There is no evidence that school zones save any lives.

The only evidence that I have seen shows a reduction in speed as a result of school zones and that a reduction in the speed of a collision reduces the risk. However I do not believe any study exists to show that a reduced school zone speed reduces harm.

But they make people feel good about themselves, and as we learned when Calgary changed the zones and extended their hours, that's all that actually matters

[#-3]

Originally Posted by btimbit

Here's a reply from their councilor ( ward 2) someone posted on Beyond. Mine hasn't replied yet sadly

Fairly happy with the response from my councilor.


focus on cross walks and singling. Much better chance of doing something positive.

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by #-3

Fairly happy with the response from my councilor.


focus on cross walks and singling. Much better chance of doing something positive.

I agree.

Plus there's another thing I thought of today. My cruise control only goes down to 40. Booooo 30

[Erick Estrada]

I was thinking about this thread yesterday while going through a playground zone. 30 km/hr is really, really, really slow. It's tolerable through a few blocks of a playground zone but it would be painful maintaining this speed for long roads.

[The Yen Man]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I was thinking about this thread yesterday while going through a playground zone. 30 km/hr is really, really, really slow. It's tolerable through a few blocks of a playground zone but it would be painful maintaining this speed for long roads.

That and consciously trying to maintain 30km/h takes away from concentration needed to pay attention to the road, which is counter productive to keeping an eye out for pedestrians.

[btimbit]

Watching the council meeting live stream. Nenshi just said they won't get to discussing the speed limit stuff today, not enough time.

In case anyone was curious

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by btimbit

Watching the council meeting live stream. Nenshi just said they won't get to discussing the speed limit stuff today, not enough time.

In case anyone was curious

Yep, they have to debate half a dozen 4plex rezonings for a couple hours each. They're the new secondary suites.

[T-Dog]

This is the response I received from Ward Sutherland, councillor for Ward 1. Kind of a confusing response and lots of stats that don’t mean much, but sounds like he is not in favour of it:

Hello everyone, I’d like to share my thoughts on the captioned Notice of Motion. I can appreciate the desire to make our streets safer for pedestrians; however, I do have concerns regarding the approach and recommendations of action in the Notice of Motion itself.

In determining an outcome, it’s important to address both the core issues and the details of the current outcomes. The current number of accidents that occur in non-intersections is extremely low and tends to be consistently distributed throughout the entire day. The data reveals some interesting outcomes, such as 67% of pedestrians injured were impaired while crossing the street without the right of way, compared to 28% for all collisions. 51% of pedestrians who were impaired were struck at non-intersection locations. Drivers under the influence who struck pedestrians was 3.1%. When looking at pedestrians accidents, 24% of them were distracted in some manner. 66% of pedestrian casualty collisions in intersections occurred at locations with traffic signals.

When you take the actual data into consideration, I am not sure how a 30KPH mandated speed limit would resolve the core issues. Secondly, why would we not have public consultation? I cannot dispute that at 30KPH an injury is less traumatic; however, according to the data, this is not the core issue.

Additionally, the criteria for determining which roads should have what speed limit and which should not, is complicated, and I am not sure how we are going to make it simple for Calgarians to know “what road is what speed”?

Lastly, the recommendation of moving forward for traffic calming and infrastructure costs is currently estimated between $200M-$500M. This is an unrealistic fix. Even a temporary infrastructure fix may run $25M-$50M for major locations ($16M is a 1% tax increase).

Personally, I think that 50KPH is too fast in residential areas (not including boulevards, etc.). Whether the speed limit should be 30KPH or 40 KPH is debatable. What I think is more appropriate is to have extensive public consultations that address the core issues and determine long term recommendations that can be phased in over time.


Ward Sutherland
Councillor, Ward 1

[Flamenspiel]

Originally Posted by T-Dog

Personally, I think that 50KPH is too fast in residential areas (not including boulevards, etc.). Whether the speed limit should be 30KPH or 40 KPH is debatable. What I think is more appropriate is to have extensive public consultations that address the core issues and determine long term recommendations that can be phased in over time.


Ward Sutherland
Councillor, Ward 1

I agree with this viewpoint, fundamentally as driver i feel that 50 is ok, but it seems awfully fast as a pedestrian, particularly because commuters are really going 60 and not 50. Either it needs to be lowered to 40(so people actually drive 50) or you have to enforce 50.

The insurance stats that people are posting are interesting, but they can be skewed either way. Fundamentally its very hard too justify higher speeds, you can always leave earlier or arrange your life so you do not have to drive fast.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by The Yen Man

That and consciously trying to maintain 30km/h takes away from concentration needed to pay attention to the road, which is counter productive to keeping an eye out for pedestrians.

This is true. I feel I almost need to be on cruise control so I can take my eyes off my speedometer. At 30 km/hr I'm doing 1700 RPM and it's hard to maintain a steady speed because the 2nd gear is not an ideal cruising gear on my car at least.

[81MC]

30 is too low for third, obnoxiously high in 2nd. Make it 40 so we can gently cruise along at a sustainable rpm please.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by 81MC

30 is too low for third, obnoxiously high in 2nd. Make it 40 so we can gently cruise along at a sustainable rpm please.

... Kind of depends on your car, doesn't it? I upshift into second at 30.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

... Kind of depends on your car, doesn't it? I upshift into second at 30.

I dont know what you drive but I think you're doing it wrong.

For me 1st is just to get moving.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Locke

I dont know what you drive but I think you're doing it wrong.

For me 1st is just to get moving.

Cayman S - redline in first is about 60kph. In my other car, which is an S4 Avant, first is a definitely shorter, but driving around in 2nd at 30 is pretty comfy (I want to say shy of 3000). Obviously different cars are different, but that was sort of the point. In the Cayman I actually find the current speed limits a bit awkward for settling on a gear - 60kph is about 4000 RPM in 2nd, right about where I'd want to shift. 90's about the same for third.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Cayman S - redline in first is about 60kph. In my other car, which is an S4 Avant, first is a definitely shorter, but driving around in 2nd at 30 is pretty comfy (I want to say shy of 3000). Obviously different cars are different, but that was sort of the point. In the Cayman I actually find the current speed limits a bit awkward for settling on a gear - 60kph is about 4000 RPM in 2nd, right about where I'd want to shift. 90's about the same for third.

Oh, I thought you were driving something fast.

In my Mustang 1st just gets you rolling otherwise you're burning rubber, but I guess in something as slow as a Porsche you could get away with it.

Carry on then.

[zamler]

lol

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Locke

Oh, I thought you were driving something fast.

Nope - deliberately went for something with less power and weight so that I can have more fun with it on road. I've had spent some time in cars like the Z06 and GT-R and I find myself kind of bored, given that to drive them the way they want to be driven you'd be arrested immediately. I think as someone who isn't spending a whole lot of time at the track (I might go a couple times a year once the ones under construction are built), the 2012 Cayman R or 2016 Cayman GT4 are probably the best driver's cars you could buy short of supercar territory. But I wasn't spending quite that much.

In my Mustang 1st just gets you rolling otherwise you're burning rubber, but I guess in something as slow as a Porsche you could get away with it.

Sure, that's faster, but how many crowds per gallon are you hitting?

Is yours the current model Shelby GT350? I did actually look pretty seriously at a couple of those with a few miles on them as an alternative before I bought the Cayman for the reasons above. It's a pretty great car in terms of sound and experience when you're accelerating in a straight line, and doesn't handle too badly at all for its weight and the power it makes. I just found that actually sitting in one it didn't feel like a great place to be, for a modern car and especially for the price, and wasn't a huge fan of the steering feel. Also talked to FLAME ENVY, and he got rid of his due to quality issues that continued to worsen over time, which didn't surprise me given what the materials were like. Still a pretty awesome car though on the whole.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Nope - deliberately went for something with less power and weight so that I can have more fun with it on road. I've had spent some time in cars like the Z06 and GT-R and I find myself kind of bored, given that to drive them the way they want to be driven you'd be arrested immediately. I think as someone who isn't spending a whole lot of time at the track (I might go a couple times a year once the ones under construction are built), the 2012 Cayman R or 2016 Cayman GT4 are probably the best driver's cars you could buy short of supercar territory. But I wasn't spending quite that much.

Sure, that's faster, but how many crowds per gallon are you hitting?

Is yours the current model Shelby GT350? I did actually look pretty seriously at a couple of those with a few miles on them as an alternative before I bought the Cayman for the reasons above. It's a pretty great car in terms of sound and experience when you're accelerating in a straight line, and doesn't handle too badly at all for its weight and the power it makes. I just found that actually sitting in one it didn't feel like a great place to be, for a modern car and especially for the price, and wasn't a huge fan of the steering feel. Also talked to FLAME ENVY, and he got rid of his due to quality issues that continued to worsen over time, which didn't surprise me given what the materials were like. Still a pretty awesome car though on the whole.

Nope. Mine is old and custom built.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Well that's cryptic. How old? What's the build? Please say it's a Mach 1.