Downtown councillors to debate lowering residential speed limits

[Brian P]

Re: Stats from City of Toronto report on reducing residential speed limits

On truly dense, narrow, residential streets, I actually don't have a problem with the limit being 30 km/h. These are streets that are so narrow and congested that you really don't want to be doing much more than that anyway.

The problem I have with this whole thing, is the inevitable mission creep.

As hedo2002 has posted, the reality is that the number of fatalities that actually happen on these small streets (currently 40 km/h) is small. Therefore, changing the speed limit on those streets to 30 km/h will have little or no effect - either on actual travel speeds (which are low on those streets anyhow), or on fatalities (which are generally occurring elsewhere).

Eventually this will turn up in real numbers, and then the bureaucrats will ask "why", and there will be a push to apply the 30 km/h limit to other streets (It's already happening in Europe) and then we have a problem.

 

[Brian P]

I have over 100 forklifts and EPJs being used at my workplace. I am the lead trainer. I also conduct the new hire safety orientation. I inform everyone that pedestrians ALWAYS have the right of way. If there is an accident, the operator is at fault. I also tell them that knowing that they had the right of way will comfort them or their family when they are in the hospital or 6 feet under.
Drivers have to look out, but so do pedestrians. Remind me not to drive on side streets in the city. Also, I should have been a city councilor when I grew up...next life.

I'm a pedestrian in many workplaces like that. If there is a forklift driver maneuvering, I stop and wait until I have eye contact with the driver and they wave me across.

Some places have taken the opposite approach ... The forklifts have the right of way. Your method is more common ... The pedestrians have the right of way, but if a forklift hits you, you're dead, so do what needs to be done to not get hit.

I know some places that have designated locations for people to walk across a high-traffic forklift aisle ... you have to push a button and that brings up a "stop" signal for the forklifts. If you don't push that button, you lose. At one place, the main pedestrian entrance into the plant crosses a main forklift aisle, and it is done in this manner. There's a camera monitoring what's happening there, too, just in case something happens.

 

[hedo2002]

Well I heard this morning they are not done, apparently they are going to press at the next meeting that "some" streets in East York and Old Toronto, should now be dropped form current 50 to 30.. If these idiots get their way pretty soon roads like the Allen will also become 30 km and then the 401 will go to 50..lol

Lets just stop the hand wringing and get on with it NO vehicles south of Steeles, North of the Lake, West of Morningside or East of Oakville... simple this incudes EVERYTHiNG, cars, trucks, motorcycles scooters, mopeds.. Only pedestrains and buses, (which MUST travel no faster than 10 km AND be bubble wrapped)....lol

 

[Rob MacLennan]

Well I heard this morning they are not done, apparently they are going to press at the next meeting that "some" streets in East York and Old Toronto, should now be dropped form current 50 to 30.. If these idiots get their way pretty soon roads like the Allen will also become 30 km and then the 401 will go to 50..lol

Lets just stop the hand wringing and get on with it NO vehicles south of Steeles, North of the Lake, West of Morningside or East of Oakville... simple this incudes EVERYTHiNG, cars, trucks, motorcycles scooters, mopeds.. Only pedestrains and buses, (which MUST travel no faster than 10 km AND be bubble wrapped)....lol

From the sound of it these would be the streets that were 50 when the limit got changed to 40, but that didn't have their limits reset at that time.

I'm a pedestrian in many workplaces like that. If there is a forklift driver maneuvering, I stop and wait until I have eye contact with the driver and they wave me across.

Some places have taken the opposite approach ... The forklifts have the right of way. Your method is more common ... The pedestrians have the right of way, but if a forklift hits you, you're dead, so do what needs to be done to not get hit.

I know some places that have designated locations for people to walk across a high-traffic forklift aisle ... you have to push a button and that brings up a "stop" signal for the forklifts. If you don't push that button, you lose. At one place, the main pedestrian entrance into the plant crosses a main forklift aisle, and it is done in this manner. There's a camera monitoring what's happening there, too, just in case something happens.

I've been in many places that have 'designated pedestrian areas' that are marked with yellow paint or tape on the floor, beyond which foot traffic is not supposed to venture. Never seen the 'crossing signal' thing though.

 

[conundrum]

Re: Stats from City of Toronto report on reducing residential speed limits

You can easily foil their nefarious plot by driving at whatever number they put on the sign, and there will be nothing they can do about it. What do ya say? Let's all do that and put the screws to the City!

Guessing you won't be happy until the legal limit is 0km/h. I'd say then you could cross the roads with your eyes closed, but you might run into another pedestrian and get injured. Maybe we can give pedestrians speeding tickets too when that happens, for walking too quickly?? Someone better get on that...

In all honesty, if they want to make residential neighbourhoods 30km/h where kids might be playing I'm fine with that. Where I start shaking my head is when there is any talk of making major roads in the city 30km/h. Honestly if they do that, they might as well just ban cars in the city as well.

 

[Brian P]

Re: Stats from City of Toronto report on reducing residential speed limits

In all honesty, if they want to make residential neighbourhoods 30km/h where kids might be playing I'm fine with that. Where I start shaking my head is when there is any talk of making major roads in the city 30km/h. Honestly if they do that, they might as well just ban cars in the city as well.

Don't forget that in order to completely address the hazard, they must also ban buses and delivery trucks.

Hmmm ... Why are the store shelves so empty and why is no one there? Oh ... Why is the front door locked and what's that bankruptcy notice all about???

 

[conundrum]

Re: Stats from City of Toronto report on reducing residential speed limits

Don't forget that in order to completely address the hazard, they must also ban buses and delivery trucks.

Hmmm ... Why are the store shelves so empty and why is no one there? Oh ... Why is the front door locked and what's that bankruptcy notice all about???

Yeah but if you listen to some of the people who live downtown these days...they'd argue that all food and items should be made locally, so they actually might not have a problem with that. Sort of like how i laugh at people who consider going or living anywhere 'above bloor' as 'up north'. lol

 

[Brian P]

Re: Stats from City of Toronto report on reducing residential speed limits

Love to see those people set an example for the rest of us, and try growing ALL of their own food on their 10th floor north facing balcony

 

[Baggsy]

Re: Stats from City of Toronto report on reducing residential speed limits

Yeah but if you listen to some of the people who live downtown these days...they'd argue that all food and items should be made locally, so they actually might not have a problem with that. Sort of like how i laugh at people who consider going or living anywhere 'above bloor' as 'up north'. lol

Sorry, but anything above College is up north.

Might as well live in Aurora, Barrie or Orillia wherever they are.

The "newest" trend seems to be to cut major two lane roads down to one lane.

Think Royal York, Dundas, Danforth etc.

Thank goodness that so many of the Councillors own downtown condos and have free transit passes.

 

[Aranate]

Re: Stats from City of Toronto report on reducing residential speed limits

I actually wouldn't have a problem with this if the money that was collected for speeding didn't go directly to the police station of the officer that does the stop. Talk about a conflict of interest. If the money went to something else that made sense, you really think they would have quota's for speeding tickets? or other types of tickets? do you really think cops would give you a break on your ticket so you won't fight it? you really think there isn't a whole lot going on behind the scenes here that we don't know about?

I think speed limits should absolutely be raised in non-residential area's... but I'm ok with speed limits being lowered in some residential area's if it's legitimately going to reduce accidents, but only if there isn't a conflict of interest with where the money goes. I know it doesn't go directly into their pockets but it absolutely does provide a benefit to them that goes beyond just being able to do their jobs better, way beyond.

Also police stations get to keep whatever they confiscate, to use themselves or sell on for money... you don't think thats a conflict of interest? especially when you have an organisation that is known by anyone with any sense to have a large amount of individuals who have the type of personalities to always be seeking power trips and adrenaline rushes... I know not all cops are like that but I don't think you necessarily have to be a terrible person/cop to still abuse a system and/or take advantage of a conflict of interest... it starts off with small simple perks/things that get overlooked and when people realize nothing is going to happen to them for taking advantage of it they start to believe its because they deserve it and it will just continue to grow.

Thats the end of my rant.

 

[Brian P]

Re: Stats from City of Toronto report on reducing residential speed limits

Money for speeding tickets DOES NOT go "directly to the police station ...". It goes into the collective provincial revenue stream.

 

[Rob MacLennan]

Re: Stats from City of Toronto report on reducing residential speed limits

Money for speeding tickets DOES NOT go "directly to the police station ...". It goes into the collective provincial revenue stream.

Though it does have an indirect link to support for police by demonstrating their earning capacity, which tends to make civic governments want to give them more funding.

 

[unL33T]

Re: Stats from City of Toronto report on reducing residential speed limits

Just ban all vehicles. Make everyone wear football gear while they walk. No more injuries.

Or maybe we need a speed limit on how fast you walk or ride your bike. There are apparently so many walking and biking deaths so we should make them travel slower.

 

[nobbie48]

Lower speeds bring higher congestion. Higher congestion brings higher accident rates. Great plan.

Mathematically not so if one uses a safe space formula related to speed. Speed and congestion are not directly related. The differences are minimal.

The biggest cause of congestion IMO are the people that think they are getting ahead in traffic by squeezing through on an amber. That delays the ones trying to use an advanced green and that blocks the regular traffic. All this to get a few car lengths ahead in a traffic jam that wouldn't exist if people didn't try to squeeze one more car (Or pedestrian) through.

Speed bumps also slow down ambulances and fire trucks.

Wouldn't driving at unrealistically slow speeds burn more gas and contribute to greenhouse gases that also kill? Oh sorry, they will primarily kill off coastal peoples. Toronto will be OK, just muggier.

 

[Shaman]

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhh the amount of time a car spends on the road is directly related to the speed it travels. That means that speed is directly related to congestion. The only time where that formula falls down is when demand for the road outstrips the flow rate, but the higher the flow rate, the effect in reality is to clear that section of road quicker since the demand is not static. Thereby, lowering the instance of congestion on that road.

Anyone else reading this, please call bull#@$^ on this whenever someone states that speed does not affect congestion. A 30% increase in a road's speed will decrease its congestion by a similar amount given the same number of vehicles on it and they are likely to be spaced further apart at that speed than at a lower one. These studies were done and are directly related to the U.S. moving to 65mph or even 85mph on some highways that were previously 55mph just a decade ago. Accident rates went DOWN.

 

[Baggsy]

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhh the amount of time a car spends on the road is directly related to the speed it travels. That means that speed is directly related to congestion. The only time where that formula falls down is when demand for the road outstrips the flow rate, but the higher the flow rate, the effect in reality is to clear that section of road quicker since the demand is not static. Thereby, lowering the instance of congestion on that road.

Anyone else reading this, please call bull#@$^ on this whenever someone states that speed does not affect congestion. A 30% increase in a road's speed will decrease its congestion by a similar amount given the same number of vehicles on it and they are likely to be spaced further apart at that speed than at a lower one. These studies were done and are directly related to the U.S. moving to 65mph or even 85mph on some highways that were previously 55mph just a decade ago. Accident rates went DOWN.

Right up until you hit the bottleneck. Then everyone has to wait.

Oh and you also have to keep the road very well maintained.
Vehicles with broken axles don't travel too fast at all.

 

[Shaman]

The point is that the bottleneck is usually CONGESTION. A higher speed limit not only lowers the instance of congestion, it *should* clear it faster. Don't judge everything by Toronto roads, where the demand often outstrips the physical space available. But higher speeds would still help because congestion would take longer to build and should clear faster.

 

[nobbie48]

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhh the amount of time a car spends on the road is directly related to the speed it travels. That means that speed is directly related to congestion. The only time where that formula falls down is when demand for the road outstrips the flow rate, but the higher the flow rate, the effect in reality is to clear that section of road quicker since the demand is not static. Thereby, lowering the instance of congestion on that road.

Anyone else reading this, please call bull#@$^ on this whenever someone states that speed does not affect congestion. A 30% increase in a road's speed will decrease its congestion by a similar amount given the same number of vehicles on it and they are likely to be spaced further apart at that speed than at a lower one. These studies were done and are directly related to the U.S. moving to 65mph or even 85mph on some highways that were previously 55mph just a decade ago. Accident rates went DOWN.

Correct if you travel bumper to bumper.

 

[nobbie48]

In order to make cars safer for the driver (Roll over protection) roof pillars have been made bigger creating visibility issues. Head rests also block visibility while fighting whiplash.

Trade offs.

 

[Baggsy]

The point is that the bottleneck is usually CONGESTION. A higher speed limit not only lowers the instance of congestion, it *should* clear it faster. Don't judge everything by Toronto roads, where the demand often outstrips the physical space available. But higher speeds would still help because congestion would take longer to build and should clear faster.

The bottleneck could be a turn in the road, a bump, a hill, a distracting landmark, a spot where the sun glares at the wrong angle, an onramp too close to an offramp, girls, the beach, an accident going the other way . . .

Let's not confuse cause and effect.

Unless you also remove the bottlenecks, raising speed limits won't do squat.

Why do you think that most of the roads in the GTA are so straight?