Police involvement, EMS involvement, hospital stay, lost wages, insurance payouts, plus whatever court proceedings come about. I don't think that's an unrealistic number for a car accident with injuries
You're saying 250K above the fixed costs to run these various departments.
Nobody wants this so why is Druh trying to push this through? We don't elect these people to push their own agendas. She's so full of crap about the money savings. This isn't about money savings for her. She's been anti-car forever.
Nobody wants this so why is Druh trying to push this through? We don't elect these people to push their own agendas. She's so full of crap about the money savings. This isn't about money savings for her. She's been anti-car forever.
I love driving. I'm a gear head.
I'll be the contrarian. Cliff Bungalow, and Mission, NEED their Avenues ALL restricted below 50. Optimally 40.
We have many freeways/highways, that are too low though. TC, should be 120. #2 AB, should be 120.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to cam_wmh For This Useful Post:
It has been noted that a child hit at 30 kph will have significantly less injuries than one hit at 50 kph.
This would be positive. I can understand why people would be grumpy about this. If it changes so be it. It is not the end of the world
Then lets make all roads including Deerfoot max 30km/h. For safety, right!
Wait.... if we drop the max 30km/h to 20km/h then even less kids will get injured. Lets do that too. For safety, right?
WTF is wrong with this council. So god damn stupid. You know this is being pushed through regardless, should have just saved the tax payers the $200k and made the damn change without 'asking' residence their opinion.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to rohara66 For This Useful Post:
It has been noted that a child hit at 30 kph will have significantly less injuries than one hit at 50 kph.
This would be positive. I can understand why people would be grumpy about this. If it changes so be it. It is not the end of the world
Is there some epidemic of kids getting hit on residential roads at 31+kph? Or is this going to be a "if it saves just one life" argument?
If I recall, they tried to claim that they were doing this to drop pedestrian fatalities at first, until it was shown that that it wouldn't have prevented a single one.
If there is some epidemic of pedestrians being hit on residential roads where the vehicle was travelling between 31 and 50kph, then they can show the stats that show it. It's the same thing as the year round, extended duration playground zones. There wasn't a bunch of kids getting hit, yet they still ignored that and pushed it through.
Last edited by llwhiteoutll; 10-23-2019 at 02:50 PM.
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to llwhiteoutll For This Useful Post:
It has been noted that a child hit at 30 kph will have significantly less injuries than one hit at 50 kph.
This would be positive. I can understand why people would be grumpy about this. If it changes so be it. It is not the end of the world
While I agree, is there evidence that more children are hit when the speed limit is 50 rather than 30? If this is only dealing in hypothetical accidents then I am not on board. Any of the drive/blvd type roads should already have playground/school zones around areas where kids are typically located so they are already 30 from 7:30AM-9PM.
I'd hope she is not blatantly lying or is that naive of me.
I don't believe she drives herself. So, she doesn't really care about drivers.
__________________
"An idea is always a generalization, and generalization is a property of thinking. To generalize means to think." Georg Hegel
“To generalize is to be an idiot.” William Blake
I want to know what the real motive behind this is. Is there some kids getting hit by cars epidemic that I’m unaware of? Or is this just another boneheaded pet project spearheaded by Druh and her war against all things good?
The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to flamingred89 For This Useful Post:
I want to know what the real motive behind this is. Is there some kids getting hit by cars epidemic that I’m unaware of? Or is this just another boneheaded pet project spearheaded by Druh and her war against all things good?
Since they are planning to allow bylaw officers and transit cops to hand out tickets, I guarantee that revenue plays a part.
Which is idiotic because bylaw is already incredibly slow to respond to current complaints, so taking them off that to run a laser gun is going to further hamper that. And there are only something like 70 transit cops for the entire city, so if you have them running speed traps, enforcement on the transit system suffers.
With so much variance in road type, street parking, width, pedestrian traffic, snow clearance, visibility etc this really is almost impossible to do properly. Some should be lowered, many should stay as is.
I think the city should target some inner city streets that would benefit from this and lower the speed limits in those zones only, with possible expansion to more streets with public input. And for a lot less than $200k.
I’d also be in favour of more of the larger rounded speed bumps.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Cecil Terwilliger For This Useful Post:
...Or is this just another boneheaded pet project spearheaded by Druh and her war against all things good?
No against all things good. Only against suburban things good.
__________________
"An idea is always a generalization, and generalization is a property of thinking. To generalize means to think." Georg Hegel
“To generalize is to be an idiot.” William Blake
Vehicles are way more efficient at 50Km/Hr than 30K, there is a chart posted earlier in the thread in MPH, 30KM/hr is ~ 18 Miles/hour, which is below the efficiency band.
