Councillors green light public engagement on lowering city speed limits

[I-Hate-Hulse]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

Funny, my garage security camera keeps picking up someone absolutely flying down our back lane because the vehicle breaches the motion detection area I set of 2 ft within our property. And it's her. Every. Single. Time.

That brings up a good question - what is the official speed limit in an alley?

Our alley is paved - and frankly it only encourages speed. Luckily, strategic placement of blue / green / black carts can serve as rudimentary expendable traffic calming measures...

[timun]

Speed limit in an alley is 15!

[Slava]

Originally Posted by FacePaint

Maybe I'm missing something but after reading the report:
- commute impact 90 seconds on average
- money saved due to costs associated with collisions
- people feel safer in their communities

Why are people so outraged about this proposal?

I don’t think this is accurate now though. I think that originally there was an impact, but that impact now is essentially zero and I don’t think anyone cares. A limit on the purely residential roads as they’ve set it changes virtually nothing for people, because no one exceeds that except in very rare cases.

It’s annoying that this was entirely pointless and basically a lot of posturing and money spent for zero outcome. But aside from that irritation I don’t think people are up in arms at all.

[Reggie28]

The distance to get out of my community is just over one kilometre, the speed limits will be 40km/hr, then 50km/hr then 30km/hr then 40km/hr then 50 km/hr.

I’ll probably just keep driving the way I have been.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by accord1999

Slowing down the collectors would be detrimental to bus service.







https://www.scribd.com/document/4774...rt-TT2020-1036

Haven't jumped through the hoops to download that report, but I'm skeptical of the methodology they used to arrive at those conclusions.

Did they actually account for acceleration and braking with every stop? How much time do busses actually spend cruising at 50kph on collector roads?

Do bus routes not already have buffer times/stops built in? We aren't exactly talking about Swiss trains here.

No doubt there would be some impact to bus routes, but they would fall within normal operational tweaks.

1 km at 50kph = 72 seconds
1 km at 40kph = 90 seconds

But the actual time loss for a bus would be far less considering they stop/start a few times each kilometer, eating up time/distance in the acceleration/braking phases that are identical regardless of the cruise speed.

[Ozy_Flame]

Bit of a news bump from across the pond:

https://twitter.com/user/status/1321185407833460736

[burn_this_city]

Should never have liberated those people.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Should never have liberated those people.

We can unliberate...

[Flamenspiel]

Nm.

[chemgear]

https://calgaryherald.com/news/local...-to-plebiscite

Council pushes speed limit decision to 2021, opens door to plebiscite

The changes wouldn’t impact roads that already have posted speed limits of 50 km/h or above. Putting up new signs on the collector roads would cost $2.3 million.

City officials said the lower speed limits should be considered with an eye to eventually making the residential speed limit 30 km/h and lowering collector speeds to 40 km/h.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by chemgear

City officials said the lower speed limits should be considered with an eye to eventually making the residential speed limit 30 km/h and lowering collector speeds to 40 km/h.[/I]

Or you know...maybe we just do that right away because it is the most sensible option. Each ward might have a half dozen sections of collector roads where 50 or 60 makes more sense - identify them and be done with it.

[lazypucker]

They should ban all motorized vehicles everywhere, as it poses danger to pedestrians...

[GGG]

The dumbest of all the options is a plebicite

[Locke]

Originally Posted by GGG

The dumbest of all the options is a plebicite

"We are elected by you to represent your interests! Now...we're going to ask you what to do. Also...you have to pay for the process. And us. And everything else."

If you can't make an obvious decision then WTF are you doing there?

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Locke

"We are elected by you to represent your interests! Now...we're going to ask you what to do. Also...you have to pay for the process. And us. And everything else."

If you can't make an obvious decision then WTF are you doing there?

It’s obviously going this way because council really wants it but knows the population doesn’t.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Weitz

It’s obviously going this way because council really wants it but knows the population doesn’t.

So...what were they elected for again? Wasnt it to represent...you know...the Public?

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by Locke

So...what were they elected for again? Wasnt it to represent...you know...the Public?

Plebiscites have their place. If they feel they are unable to accurately represent the public’s opinion then a plebiscite is the way to go.

Remember fluoride in the water supply? We put it in with a plebiscite once upon a time, and council voted to remove it without one. That was an instance where it absolutely should have gone to a plebiscite.

I would prefer to have more input over things in our city rather than less, particularly when it is directly impacting citizens.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

Plebiscites have their place. If they feel they are unable to accurately represent the public’s opinion then a plebiscite is the way to go.

Remember fluoride in the water supply? We put it in with a plebiscite once upon a time, and council voted to remove it without one. That was an instance where it absolutely should have gone to a plebiscite.

I would prefer to have more input over things in our city rather than less, particularly when it is directly impacting citizens.

I am completely the opposite, the further away from people the better. Let experts do their job.

Floruide should not have gone to a plebiscite. Flouride should not have been a city council decision. It should be a provincial requirement under the Safey Codes act for water treatment systems of a certain size. It what world to city councillors or citizens have the expertise to make that decision.

Same with speed limits, the traffic engineers at the city should be making this decision based on site lines and risk.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by GGG

I am completely the opposite, the further away from people the better. Let experts do their job.

That sounds reasonable. They are the experts, after all.

But when experts routinely make decisions that run contrary to the public will, those experts and the institutions they run lose legitimacy in the eyes of the public. Which is a bad for civil society, and only grows support for populists and demagogues.

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by GGG

I am completely the opposite, the further away from people the better. Let experts do their job.

Floruide should not have gone to a plebiscite. Flouride should not have been a city council decision. It should be a provincial requirement under the Safey Codes act for water treatment systems of a certain size. It what world to city councillors or citizens have the expertise to make that decision.

Same with speed limits, the traffic engineers at the city should be making this decision based on site lines and risk.

I 100% agree with you there, but that's a view based on how things *should* be done.

The way things are done today provides for either council or citizen plebiscite to enact changes, and when something is voted in by the people, it should be the will of the people that votes it out.