Councillors green light public engagement on lowering city speed limits

[CliffFletcher]

The problem is the speed limits are barely enforced on residential roads as it is. I live on a non-boulevarded curved feeder road lined with cars. Dudes are always ripping down the road at 11:30 pm doing 70. How is lowering the limits going to change that?

It's the same as impaired driving. It's really hard to catch the ######bags who egregiously break the law and pose the greatest threat to the community, because that requires resources to catch them. It's cheaper just to pass a law that law-abiding citizens will voluntarily follow. Never mind that it won't have much impact - it's cheap and easy.

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by shogged

i love this idea. safety is great, but i'm more excited about how much quieter the road noise will be with everyone going 30.

Probably the most absurd take I've heard on the issue. How does this make any sense at all? Vehicle speed and vehicle noise are not directly correlated except as it pertains to tire noise, and you're not going to get an appreciable drop going from 50 KM/H to 30 KM/H.

In fact, one could make the case you're going to get more noise because vehicles will be within earshot for longer.

[MarchHare]

Regardless if you are for or against this proposal, I think we can all agree that Sean Chu is SO RIDICULOUSLY STUPID. This is one of 15 people who votes on The City's multi-billion dollar budget, folks.

@seanchucalgary
Keep this in mind. 50 to 30km/h is a 40% decrease, which means a min 40% INCREASE in time. Would you like to spend +40% more time on the roads? And 40% more emissions increase too! To the Green & anti-car advocates, you can’t “suck & blow at the same time”. #yyc #yyccc #calgary

https://twitter.com/seanchucalgary/s...91803707305984

[getbak]

I didn't think it was physically possible, but Sean Chu both sucks and blows.

[TorqueDog]

I'm happy he arrived at the right conclusion (a "no" vote), but it is hilariously stupid how he got himself there.

[Ironhorse]

Just emailed my Councillor about this pathetic “initiative”. Suggest you all do as well if you haven’t already.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

Probably the most absurd take I've heard on the issue. How does this make any sense at all? Vehicle speed and vehicle noise are not directly correlated except as it pertains to tire noise, and you're not going to get an appreciable drop going from 50 KM/H to 30 KM/H.

In fact, one could make the case you're going to get more noise because vehicles will be within earshot for longer.

This is so far from true. For the majority of passenger cars, you're hearing more air and tire noise than engine/exhaust.

Go hang out at a park near Deerfoot and notice how bloody loud cars cruising along at 1500 rpm are. Speed is absolutely a huge factor.

https://www.nonoise.org/resource/tra...ay/spnoise.htm

[bomber317]

Originally Posted by Ironhorse

Just emailed my Councillor about this pathetic “initiative”. Suggest you all do as well if you haven’t already.

Is it ok if I e-mail them to praise them about the initiative?

[Royle9]

The narrative this has become is getting old, when do we start putting more time and effort into teaching people to drive properly and holding those who wish to ignore that accountable?

Distracted driving continues to be left alone, untouched and unenforced to the extent it should be. Going from 50 to 40 to 30 doesn't matter when the person behind the wheel is distracted, sure it may lessen the severity a bit depending on the situation but that's besides the point.

Sink money into enforcing proper driving habits, make taking driving courses mandatory (City/Province owned and regulated driving schools) not the private joke driving schools that exist today.

Until they treat distracted driving with the same severity they do drunk driving this is all for nothing. I watch people run lights/signs, change lanes unknowingly and go 20 over/under the limit every day because they're on a phone or eating with 2 hands. I'm sure we all do, lets get more cops on the road to watch for this specifically and eliminate it with harsh fines and suspensions.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by Locke

I've said it before, if you want to reduce or eliminate pedestrian accidents then you need to breed better pedestrians.

Ah, another victim of the ancient propaganda of Big Auto.

https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-26073797

Another ruse was to provide local newspapers with a free service. Reporters would submit a few facts about local traffic accidents to Detroit, and the auto industry's safety committee would send back a full report on the situation in their city.

"The newspaper coverage quite suddenly changes, so that in 1923 they're all blaming the drivers, and by late 1924 they're all blaming jaywalking," Norton says.

Soon, he adds, car lobby groups also started taking over school safety education, stressing that "streets are for cars and children need to stay out of them". Anti-jaywalking laws were adopted in many cities in the late 1920s, and became the norm by the 1930s.

[shogged]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

Probably the most absurd take I've heard on the issue. How does this make any sense at all? Vehicle speed and vehicle noise are not directly correlated except as it pertains to tire noise, and you're not going to get an appreciable drop going from 50 KM/H to 30 KM/H.

In fact, one could make the case you're going to get more noise because vehicles will be within earshot for longer.

Huh? Have you not been near a highway before? Speed and noise are absolutely directly correlated. Why do you think they build sound barriers near highways, because they look pretty? I mean, you basically answered you own question as to why it makes sense. Tires going fast make more noise than tires going slow. It's pretty simple.



I think with that take, you've already stolen back my "absurd take" crown for this thread.


Anyone living in a playground/school zone can attest to the appreciable difference in road noise that 20km/h makes, as can the numerous studies available on the issue. It will be great when this luxury is extended to the rest of us.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Bill Bumface

Ah, another victim of the ancient propaganda of Big Auto.

https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-26073797

So...pedestrians are exempt from personal responsibility and can just wander onto the roads at will?

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by shogged

Huh? Have you not been near a highway before? Speed and noise are absolutely directly correlated. Why do you think they build sound barriers near highways, because they look pretty? I mean, you basically answered you own question as to why it makes sense. Tires going fast make more noise than tires going slow. It's pretty simple.

You're comparing a highway to a residential area.

Thank you for confirming that people such as yourself are being absolutely ridiculous about this.

Originally Posted by shogged

Anyone living in a playground/school zone can attest to the appreciable difference in road noise that 20km/h makes, as can the numerous studies available on the issue. It will be great when this luxury is extended to the rest of us.

My whole neighbourhood is effectively a playground zone (with full playground zones within) and I will happily attest to the fact that 30 KM/H only means the vehicles are within earshot for longer, and the noise difference between 30 KM/H and 50 KM/H isn't appreciable.

Originally Posted by Bill Bumface

Ah, another victim of the ancient propaganda of Big Auto.

https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-26073797

Coming from Winnipeg, I was shocked how cavalier people were in just wandering in front of traffic before it was safe to do so in Calgary, and doing so with indignance and self-righteousness.

[shogged]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

You're comparing a highway to a residential area.

Thank you for confirming that people such as yourself are being absolutely ridiculous about this.

No I used a highway as an example to show you that speed matters to noise. If you're just going to be pedantic why are you here for the debate?

[The Yen Man]

When was the last time someone in a residential road got hurt due to excessive speeding? Lets call a spade a spade. This is to give cops more opportunities to hand out tickets. Guess the city is hurting for more money, so why not. Just another sin tax.

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by shogged

No I used a highway as an example to show you that speed matters to noise. If you're just going to be pedantic why are you here for the debate?

Speed does matter to noise, but you're using noise generated at highway speeds to argue that 50 KM/H is too loud for residential areas and claiming the problem will be greatly mitigated by 30 KM/H and that is absurd. At those speeds, you are more likely to hear exhaust/engine noise than tire noise, and at that speed, you're just subjecting yourself to MORE noise by lowering speeds because it takes longer for the vehicle to pass.

I have a link that claims light traffic is about 50dB, but let's take the 'NoNoise.org' link posted above as gospel, and assume that 30 MPH (~50 KMH) produces sound levels about 62dB @ 50 ft. Now that's an unobstructed, standing in a field on a calm day sort of thing. You might be in a house, fenced backyard, and that is all going to reduce the noise you hear. But let's go with standing in the open.

Let's say a car is passing by. You're standing about 35 feet away from the roadway, and the car passes by at 50 KM/H. Sound levels are 62dB at 50 ft means you'll hear the vehicle at 62dB or greater for 71 feet of vehicle travel. At 50 KM/H it takes a vehicle approximately 2 seconds to travel 71 feet.

62dB, by the way, is roughly the sound level of a casual conversation. Are you seriously that bothered by 62dB for 2 seconds?

By the way, that 30 KM/H means that vehicle is going to be within earshot for 3 seconds versus two, and I'd do the math on that but even the 'NoNoise.org' people didn't bother to post the noise levels generated at ~20 MPH because even THEY aren't that anal it would seem.

[PepsiFree]

I am furious. I emailed my councillor repeatedly about this issue. I even handwrote a letter (yeah, I am old school like that, it hits different than some digital email).

I just couldn't believe the ignorance here. 30km? Really? I wanted 20km, and they're JUST reducing to 30km? Garbage take, silly hall!

[Locke]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I am furious. I emailed my councillor repeatedly about this issue. I even handwrote a letter (yeah, I am old school like that, it hits different than some digital email).

I just couldn't believe the ignorance here. 30km? Really? I wanted 20km, and they're JUST reducing to 30km? Garbage take, silly hall!

People should have to push their cars through residential zones!

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by Locke

People should have to push their cars through residential zones!

I would settle on being limited to being pulled around residential zones on those rollers like they have in car washes, provided they were throttled down a bit.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Roughneck

I would settle on being limited to being pulled around residential zones on those rollers like they have in car washes, provided they were throttled down a bit.

I think we should just call it a day. 'The Car' was clearly a mistake and we should revert back to the Horse-Drawn Carriage. Those never hurt anyone.

Even better! Because then Teachers can get their Students to shovel horse-crap during recess in order to fertilize their school fields! Maybe even just stable the horses there to eat the grass so we can do away with those trucks that pull the industrial lawnmowers behind them!

And on weekends we can get the kids to mine for coal! Many small hands make for light work!

So many economic benefits that are un-tapped here!