Playground zones

[peter12]

Trains don't scale to the level of cars. The entire EU-28 passenger-km carried by rail in 2016 is less than the passenger-km carried by cars (in 2009) in Canada.

This is about changing behaviour and resubsidizing transportation away from the personal motor vehicle.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by nik-

Cool, now get North American taxpayers to pay for it. We probably won't even be able to tunnel a subway for 20 blocks on a train running straight up the middle of our city and you're talking about replacing our entire transportation system.

And no, Vancouver isn't any better. It's a traffic ridden ####hole too.

Vancouver's Transport 2050 plan is far more ambitious than really anything in North America.

As well, with climate change becoming an urgent issue, changes will come regardless of voter preferences.

[nik-]

I mean a council can plan anything they want for 2050, none of them will be around.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by nik-

I mean a council can plan anything they want for 2050, none of them will be around.

It is a cooperative venture between all levels of government. Funding is already secured for the second phase, which will go well beyond 2030.

This kind of project is managed by staff. Politicians have very little to do with it.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by peter12

It is a cooperative venture between all levels of government. Funding is already secured for the second phase, which will go well beyond 2030.

This kind of project is managed by staff. Politicians have very little to do with it.

Until the new government cuts it all. Maybe not in BC because BC.

Mind you I could see B.C. becoming so expensive to live in even it could change. But they do seem happy to have foreigners thrive and locals suffer so who knows.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by peter12

It is a cooperative venture between all levels of government. Funding is already secured for the second phase, which will go well beyond 2030.

This kind of project is managed by staff. Politicians have very little to do with it.

Cool, and what is it? Because all I see is a bunch of vague buzzwords and no concrete plan. How is something that has no tenable structure "more ambitious than really anything in North America"?



revolutionary. currently meaningingless. 2050

Don't blow smoke here.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by nik-

Cool, and what is it? Because all I see is a bunch of vague buzzwords and no concrete plan. How is something that has no tenable structure "more ambitious than really anything in North America"?



revolutionary. currently meaningingless. 2050

Don't blow smoke here.

What's your agenda here? Obstructionism?

Seems like you are saying that nothing should be done or that it cannot be done ever so just keep sinking money into motor vehicle infrastructure? That kind of status quo thinking is what got us into this current mess.

At the very least, admit that driving is a choice and drivers should be paying the full cost of that choice - increased fuel taxes and congestion pricing would be a good start.

Start pushing those levies into more environmentally and pedestrian friendly infrastructure - like trains, buses, and street cars.

This is really simple stuff, and it is where a lot of jurisdictions around the world are headed.

[GGG]

I think that on playground zones like elbow they should be eliminated.

Fence the parks and put pedestrian crossing lights at intersections. That should be sufficient.

Design out speed. Year to year Police traffic enforcement and the city traffic department should have a goal of reducing incidents and infractions at key intersections. This needs to be measured and publicly reported.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by peter12

What's your agenda here? Obstructionism?

Seems like you are saying that nothing should be done or that it cannot be done ever so just keep sinking money into motor vehicle infrastructure? That kind of status quo thinking is what got us into this current mess.

At the very least, admit that driving is a choice and drivers should be paying the full cost of that choice - increased fuel taxes and congestion pricing would be a good start.

Start pushing those levies into more environmentally and pedestrian friendly infrastructure - like trains, buses, and street cars.

This is really simple stuff, and it is where a lot of jurisdictions around the world are headed.

My agenda is hoping for some honesty that the place you live in isn't some revolutionary pangaea when it comes to transit. No one who's been to Vancouver is floored by its transit system. This Transport2050 currently exists of nothing, and therefore shouldn't be trotted out like some beat stick against other municipalities like we're some sort of troglodytes.

Most cities in North America are trying to improve public transit. Unfortunately most cities in North America were also built at peak car idealism and therefore built around it and people don't want to be taxed for things because we're short sighted.

As a result things move slow. It's pretty clear the direction municipalities are moving in, but clearly it's not going to happen overnight, or even in a decade and that's just reality.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by nik-

My agenda is hoping for some honesty that the place you live in isn't some revolutionary pangaea when it comes to transit. No one who's been to Vancouver is floored by its transit system. This Transport2050 currently exists of nothing, and therefore shouldn't be trotted out like some beat stick against other municipalities like we're some sort of troglodytes.

Most cities in North America are trying to improve public transit. Unfortunately most cities in North America were also built at peak car idealism and therefore built around it and people don't want to be taxed for things because we're short sighted.

As a result things move slow. It's pretty clear the direction municipalities are moving in, but clearly it's not going to happen overnight, or even in a decade and that's just reality.

Whoa buddy when did this become about Calgary vs Vancouver? That's all you, I'm afraid.

As for your other points, I completely AGREE.

[4X4]

Originally Posted by WhiteTiger

One tangent about speeding tickets I've been wondering about...how many speeding tickets are people getting that this is such a problem? I've been driving for 26 years, and have gotten 2 speeding tickets. One playground zone camera (it was a playground zone in an area I'd never been before, and missed the sign, totally my bad) and one red-light camera (pushed the light a little fast and hard in the new Mustang).

Two in 26 years is a non-issue item, as far as I'm concerned. I keep myself to 10 over usually, and have done with it.

How many tickets are people getting that they are getting so bent out of shape over this? And if you get many tickets...maybe the problem is you?

I can only remember 5-6, but I'm sure I've forgotten a couple. So if I've had ~10 in 25 years, considering that I do around 40,000km per year, that's not exactly worth raging about.

However, I'm sure that most drivers, like myself, are wise to the BS tactics of the CPS traffic division. Why can't we criticize that they're obviously not doing it for safety reasons? Especially when we see blatant problem areas that are not being addressed, while they continue to fish in areas that have no concerns, but do happen to have stupid low speed limits?

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by GGG

I think that on playground zones like elbow they should be eliminated.

Fence the parks and put pedestrian crossing lights at intersections. That should be sufficient.

Design out speed. Year to year Police traffic enforcement and the city traffic department should have a goal of reducing incidents and infractions at key intersections. This needs to be measured and publicly reported.

That one has nothing to do with the playground, and everything to do with the neighbourhood...

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by 4X4

I can only remember 5-6, but I'm sure I've forgotten a couple. So if I've had ~10 in 25 years, considering that I do around 40,000km per year, that's not exactly worth raging about.

However, I'm sure that most drivers, like myself, are wise to the BS tactics of the CPS traffic division. Why can't we criticize that they're obviously not doing it for safety reasons? Especially when we see blatant problem areas that are not being addressed, while they continue to fish in areas that have no concerns, but do happen to have stupid low speed limits?

Speed limits across most of the city are all about 10km/hr too slow and frustrate drivers, which leads to more speeding, impatience and dangerous driving than would happen otherwise. Of course since the point of speed limits is revenue generation and safety maybe kinda second (or third?) on the priority list, that won’t change.

[WhiteTiger]

Originally Posted by 4X4

I can only remember 5-6, but I'm sure I've forgotten a couple. So if I've had ~10 in 25 years, considering that I do around 40,000km per year, that's not exactly worth raging about.

However, I'm sure that most drivers, like myself, are wise to the BS tactics of the CPS traffic division. Why can't we criticize that they're obviously not doing it for safety reasons? Especially when we see blatant problem areas that are not being addressed, while they continue to fish in areas that have no concerns, but do happen to have stupid low speed limits?

Well, since the number of tickets given out seem to indicate that folks aren't wise to the speed limit, I'm not sure where this is going. No speeding (or staying to 10 over) means you'll almost never get a ticket, and it'll never be a problem. But apparently even keeping to around 10 over is a big problem for a majority of people?

As well, no matter where CPS sets up, folks will never agree that it's needed or not there. For everyone on here complaining about a certain location, I could probably produce two phone calls from people asking for enforcement there. The number of calls I get about folks speeding through and/or passing someone in a school zone are eye rollingly staggering.

A lot of folks here (on CP) feel that the speed limits are too low (I personally happen to agree), while the overwhelming majority of phone calls I deal with at work are that the speed limits are too HIGH and CPS doesn't do enough enforcement. So no matter where or when they set up, folks are both going to be glad for it, and angry about it.

I can tell you that a large portion of the locations for setup come from the Traffic Service Requests and phone calls we get. Not all, but a large portion of them do. I don't know the criteria for all site selection.

[4X4]

Originally Posted by WhiteTiger

Well, since the number of tickets given out seem to indicate that folks aren't wise to the speed limit, I'm not sure where this is going. No speeding (or staying to 10 over) means you'll almost never get a ticket, and it'll never be a problem. But apparently even keeping to around 10 over is a big problem for a majority of people?

As well, no matter where CPS sets up, folks will never agree that it's needed or not there. For everyone on here complaining about a certain location, I could probably produce two phone calls from people asking for enforcement there. The number of calls I get about folks speeding through and/or passing someone in a school zone are eye rollingly staggering.

A lot of folks here (on CP) feel that the speed limits are too low (I personally happen to agree), while the overwhelming majority of phone calls I deal with at work are that the speed limits are too HIGH and CPS doesn't do enough enforcement. So no matter where or when they set up, folks are both going to be glad for it, and angry about it.

I can tell you that a large portion of the locations for setup come from the Traffic Service Requests and phone calls we get. Not all, but a large portion of them do. I don't know the criteria for all site selection.

I dunno. I'm just a guy that happens to clock clicks and observe. But if I were a betting man, I'd bet that the vast majority of tickets come from people that are out of their regular neighbourhood, or out of town. Your own anecdote of only having a couple reinforces the idea that you pretty much drive the same route daily, and that's more or less it. For someone that drives all over the city, random, daily, seeing these fishing holes is hilarious and frustrating. I should have added McKnight at 14th to the list. Oooh, yeah. Tons of problems there. Or is it that it's a lowered road that's 2 blocks from a police station?

Anyway. If it's eye rollingly staggering that you get calls for patrolling certain playground zones, then one of two things are the case...

1) It's not as dangerous as people think, which begs the question of whether the stupid low speed limit is appropriate.

2) Should the police be tagging people on Stoney at Metis going 118 at 245pm, or should they be outside one of these playground zones at the same time of day, when kids are actually walking home?

The answer is not safety, it's which location makes more money. Go check out Stoney/Metis any time, any day, and it's like 50/50 that that royal blue Escape is there, collecting taxes, and not giving a F about pedestrian/child/other driver safety.

And please, for the next few weeks, maybe listen and tell me if there are some amounts of crashes at that interchange that never get reported on the news. I'd really love to know why they're so obsessed with that particular spot if it has nothing to do with revenue.

[Stillman16]

Another huge problem with playground zones is education! The drivers in Calgary (and probably in general) don’t know the proper rules, or have forgotten them!

Many continue to drive the accepted 10 over even when the roads are sheets of ice, when the posted limit is for ideal conditions! The signs around our playgrounds are taken out multiple times every winter by drivers not adjusting for the conditions.

You may not see children when you drive in them, but Schools use these zones for bus pickup locations, and children could be present throughout the day!

I walk with my kids to and from school, and witness drivers speeding into, through and out of the playground zones. I also witness drivers unable to understand what a stop sign held by a child at a school cross walk means, they roll through while starring at the kids!

Sadly, tickets are the only way some people learn, but CPS isn’t deploying their people in the locations that really need it!

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by WhiteTiger

Well, since the number of tickets given out seem to indicate that folks aren't wise to the speed limit, I'm not sure where this is going. No speeding (or staying to 10 over) means you'll almost never get a ticket, and it'll never be a problem. But apparently even keeping to around 10 over is a big problem for a majority of people?

As well, no matter where CPS sets up, folks will never agree that it's needed or not there. For everyone on here complaining about a certain location, I could probably produce two phone calls from people asking for enforcement there. The number of calls I get about folks speeding through and/or passing someone in a school zone are eye rollingly staggering.

A lot of folks here (on CP) feel that the speed limits are too low (I personally happen to agree), while the overwhelming majority of phone calls I deal with at work are that the speed limits are too HIGH and CPS doesn't do enough enforcement. So no matter where or when they set up, folks are both going to be glad for it, and angry about it.

I can tell you that a large portion of the locations for setup come from the Traffic Service Requests and phone calls we get. Not all, but a large portion of them do. I don't know the criteria for all site selection.

I would think that those people complaining about speed limits too high are, for the most part, aged 65 or older in which case CPS reply should be “thanks ma’am, we’ll look into it” and then promptly do nothing about it. That’s the correct action on that one.

In fact old people should have their licenses taken away around 80 anyway so their opinions on driving shouldn’t matter. Retired people: a) are generally cranky b) have opinions and want them known c) have nothing better to do and all the time in the world and d) are almost always the strugglers I see on the road driving like miss daisies everywhere.

What’s the rush grandpa? Well, some of us have places to be #### to do and lives to live. Just because yours is almost over doesn’t mean traffic needs to come to a snails pace so that you can feel safer.

Also to answer your question earlier I think I’ve had like 2 or 3 in 15 years. Including multi nova maybe 6? Not many though. But, speed limits are annoyingly low. Stoney Trail is an absolute joke. That road looks like it was engineered like the Autobahn.

[WhiteTiger]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

I would think that those people complaining about speed limits too high are, for the most part, aged 65 or older in which case CPS reply should be “thanks ma’am, we’ll look into it” and then promptly do nothing about it.

You would be wrong. Most of them sound to be in their 30's-40's. Older folks tend to complain about noise in their general area. At least, in my experience.

[Mr.Coffee]

Really?! I was wondering if you’d say something like that but that does surprise me. Well then these 30-40 year olds need to get a life. Man our society has become such self-absorbed entitled candy asses. To think that a couple generations ago our grandparents and these blue hairs I think should be off the road were off fighting nazis risking life and limb and people can’t handle the innocuous speed limits of modern society. Disturbing.

[WhiteTiger]

Originally Posted by 4X4

1) It's not as dangerous as people think, which begs the question of whether the stupid low speed limit is appropriate.

I've always felt it was a bit slow in playground zones. 40 would be better in them.

2) Should the police be tagging people on Stoney at Metis going 118 at 245pm, or should they be outside one of these playground zones at the same time of day, when kids are actually walking home?

Our active police force isn't enough to cover every playground zone in the city, which is what some folks want. Especially around arriving and going home time, as they are a bloody gong show. I live on a feeder street just off a playground zone by a school, and I wont' venture out when kids are coming or going, as parents are nucking futs about dropping off or picking up Lil'Johnny. If you want my answer...I happen to think that the Commissionaires (since CPS members don't run the speed camera vehicles) should be in both, tagging them.

The answer is not safety, it's which location makes more money. Go check out Stoney/Metis any time, any day, and it's like 50/50 that that royal blue Escape is there, collecting taxes, and not giving a F about pedestrian/child/other driver safety.

And please, for the next few weeks, maybe listen and tell me if there are some amounts of crashes at that interchange that never get reported on the news. I'd really love to know why they're so obsessed with that particular spot if it has nothing to do with revenue.

If they are there, racking up the $$, then there is obviously a problem that needs to be looked at and addressed one way or another. The limit is too low (my preference) or a bad corner or some reason they are there. If the money is that easy at a spot, there's a bigger problem there.

And trust me, with the car I've got, I'd love to see Stoney and the highways have limits around 130/140 or more.

I'm off work currently, but will leave myself a note to check out Stoney/Metis and see what the accident rate there is. Check back this weekend.