Ontario Government Considers Lowering Speed Limits

"thebigbossyboss" (thebigbossyboss) 01/29/2015 at 08:36 • Filed to: None

1

32

This and imposing a carbon tax and the stupid, idiotic imposed road narrowing on my street (from 4 lanes to two) make Ontario a not so fun place to live.

Also not sure why cities just can't set their own limits in areas that need lower limits, which isn't everywhere.

Queen's Park is looking at ways to curb speed limits in Ontario cities and towns, including lowering the standard from 50 km/h.

In a bid to improve safety for pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists, Transportation Minister Steven Del Duca will begin "comprehensive consultations" with municipalities across the province to discuss changes.

That's a policy !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! from the Liberals' position last September when the government said there were "no plans to change the default speed."

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

Premier Kathleen Wynne's government is looking at four options:

Maintaining the current 50 km/h default speed limit.

Changing the law to reduce that limit to 40 km/h.

Allowing municipalities to set a default speed limit either of 50 km/h or 40 km/h within their boundaries and requiring the posting of signs at each entry point of the municipality.

Permitting municipalities to set different default speed limits inside their boundaries or specific neighbourhoods and forcing them to the post signs at each entry point of the city or neighbourhood.

Follow up: The comments section of the article is hilarious.

davedave1111 > thebigbossyboss 01/29/2015 at 08:46

1

I don't know any details of the proposals, but I'm all in favour of lower speed limits on residential-only streets, done sensibly. Those last two words are where the problem seems to lie. It would be entirely reasonable to lower the blanket limit at the same time as establishing lots of exceptions, but it isn't likely to happen that way.

It would be much better just to resurface all residential side-streets with a loose surface of some kind. That would slow people down and make hooning fun at safe speeds.

Funktheduck > thebigbossyboss 01/29/2015 at 08:49

3

They've been raising speed limits around Atlanta if that makes you feel better

Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer > thebigbossyboss 01/29/2015 at 09:05

3

NSFW RANT:

This really fucking pisses me off. I thought we would be better off after we ditched Charelli, but it looks like we're still stuck in the same hole. Point by point:

-Narrowing the roads doesn't fix congestion. More congestion means more pollution. Do they really think that by narrowing the roads less people are going to use them? To quote James May, "there seems to be this assumption on the part of the government that we're all driving around at 9:00 am just to be really annoying".

-Exactly.

-50 km/h is already too low. Trying to lump eveything into two groups, rural at 80 and urban at 50, is idiotic. First, every city should decide what limits prevail, after all they have to have signs up saying what they are at the city limits anyways. Rural should at least be 90. Suburbia streets should be anywhere 60-80. I would say 80 as the "unmarked limit" speed for 6 lanes, 70 for 4, 60 for 2. residential streets 50, school zones 40.

-Improve safety for pedestrians? Put fucking land mines and razor wire on the boulevards so jaywalking is impossible, heavy fines for both jaywalking and running crosswalks. Make like Ireland and screw "pedestrians have the right of way". Make it something along the lines of "pedestrians have the right of way when the walk symbol is up, and on dedicated crosswalks", so they actually have to think first. Improve safety for bikes? Dedicate 1 sidewalk for bikes, the other for pedestrians. Speed differences are dangerous. Bikes are slow. Separate them (and this is coming from someone who likes biking). Improve safety for motorists? Roundabouts. ENFORCED get out of the left lane laws. The basics are there, they need to be used.

-Oh really, flip-flopping from the Ontario Libs. Surprise!

-At least break it into 3. 90 for rural, 70 for main-drag urban, 50 for residential.

-Fuck you, Wynne.

-50-70.

-This last point is the same thing. Does she have any idea what she's talking about?

spanfucker retire bitch > thebigbossyboss 01/29/2015 at 09:07

2

Allowing municipalities to set a default speed limit either of 50 km/h or 40 km/h within their boundaries and requiring the posting of signs at each entry point of the municipality.

SPEED TRAPS. SPEED TRAPS EVERYWHERE!

Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer > davedave1111 01/29/2015 at 09:08

0

On residential streets. This blanket "speed kills" bullshit needs to be shoved up the proposer's ass sideways with a 15lb sledge. NEWS FLASH PEOPLE- a residential street is not the same as an urban main street!

thebigbossyboss > Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer 01/29/2015 at 09:09

0

You have made my day.

Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer > davedave1111 01/29/2015 at 09:10

1

Sorry, It looks like I'm still well steamed from my comment—I only read your first sentence. It looks like we are on roughly the same page.

Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer > spanfucker retire bitch 01/29/2015 at 09:12

0

This. A thousand times this.

thebigbossyboss > Funktheduck 01/29/2015 at 09:12

2

I am renting your basement. BRB getting cheque.

jariten1781 > thebigbossyboss 01/29/2015 at 09:39

1

How about having an engineer look at road condition, visibility, volume, etc. and set an appropriate limit.

Our neighborhood is constantly trying to put in more and more speed bumps. I'm always the only person filing counter comments with the county whenever they do. All of the through roads already have them like every 50 feet. Luckily no one ever counter-counters me so the county always defers (which leads to hillarious op-eds about how the county isn't listening in the neighborhood newsletter).

Not my actual neighborhood, but last year they proposed a speed bump in a cul-de-sac that was about this long...WHY? I never even drive down that street but I wrote a comment out of principle.

thebigbossyboss > jariten1781 01/29/2015 at 09:59

0

This is a political move, not an engineering one. I salute you and your quest to rid your town of speed bumps. I have written my newly elected councillor and asked "when we will get a chance to state our opposition to this project" (the road narrowing). Keep up the good fight.

44444444444 > thebigbossyboss 01/29/2015 at 10:02

1

25 mph is fucking ridiculous. Although I don't agree with the razor wire and landmines. Open up the sewer pipes just for pedestrians! It's the only way to be 100% sure of pedestrian safety. No more jaywalking if they're underground!

thebigbossyboss > 44444444444 01/29/2015 at 10:09

0

I believe that was another commenter talking about the land mines. Hey here it was a balmy 0 F this morning, I'd walk in a tunnel if I could.

Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer > 44444444444 01/29/2015 at 10:15

0

That was me. It's called hyperbole. My point is find some way to stop jaywalking=less pedestrian injuries/deaths.

Also agree on the tunnels.

davedave1111 > Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer 01/29/2015 at 10:15

1

Looks like it. My view is basically that we should differentiate between roads we use to get places, and roads which should be just for access (that is, the last hundred yards or so). A lot of residential housing developments fall into the latter category for most of their roads - not counting the main access roads or whatever. The roads that are just there to let people get to their houses ought to be semi-pedestrianised - they're perfect for woonerfing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woonerf

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_st…

davedave1111 > Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer 01/29/2015 at 10:19

1

"This blanket "speed kills" bullshit"

Just to be clear, while we can argue about the safety impacts on any given street of the speed limit, this shouldn't be about speed. It ought to be about creating a better living environment. It would be really nice to live on a street where the road and pavement (sidewalk) were replaced with grass and gravel/stone paths for cars and pedestrians, and where everyone drove like they were on their own driveway already.

Obviously, that makes no sense for roads with through traffic - but then in many cases having through-traffic on residential roads makes no sense either.

Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer > davedave1111 01/29/2015 at 10:29

0

I was refering to the fact that politians seem unable to differentiate between residential and main roads. just because you shouldn't be hammering down a residential road doesn't mean the main roads should have a limit of 2. And vice versa.

Like I said, I only read the first sentence. :)

44444444444 > Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer 01/29/2015 at 10:31

1

I know, I was being sarcastic.

davedave1111 > Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer 01/29/2015 at 10:48

1

I quite agree. The problem with all speed limits is that they were never assessed and set properly, just a series of blanket approximations. It would be a major project to go and assess every road in a country and set the correct limit, but then people might actually trust speed limits and be willing to work with them.

DrJohannVegas > Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer 01/29/2015 at 11:01

2

I'll set aside your comments on intermodal traffic (peds/cars/bikes/hovercraft/jetpacks) for a second, because I am totally with you on the ridiculous practice of lowering speed limits as a panacea. It reeks of unthinking. (How this belief translates to other areas of law, I'll let you decide.)

As far as ways of handling the speed limits on suburban/exurban streets goes, I think Michigan has a good general plan. (There are exceptions where the rule works in odd ways, but they can be adjusted, and have been.)

The short version of the rule is this: The speed limit on a given stretch of road is determined by a formula which includes number of lanes, the number of entrances to the road, the shape of the road (curves, cambers) and road surface, and other more minor considerations. So, limits rise and fall in areas as the road scores higher or lower in some areas.

For instance, one of the main roads I take to get out of town goes from 25 to 35 to 45 (all in Olde Englishe), then drops back to 35 right before it makes the interstate highway. Why? Because it changes from a very crowded frontage to a more open one, gains a lane, loses a lane, then runs into all the business huddled around the exits. I think that makes sense to me.

It might be the case that some densely-developed municipalities have a reason to stay under the minimum limit within their entire border, but that's not everywhere. The MHP have even posted up a great little pamphlet to explain why lower limits are rarely a solution: http://www.michigan.gov/documents/msp/…

Anyway, sorry for your possibly-impending loss of velocity. When going at a reasonable pace is outlawed, outlaws will go at a reasonable pace.

Funktheduck > thebigbossyboss 01/29/2015 at 11:03

1

I don't have a basement. I do have a spare room but you'll have to share it with Leonidas.

thebigbossyboss > davedave1111 01/29/2015 at 11:39

0

I live on a major 4 lane thorough fare. Discuss.

thebigbossyboss > DrJohannVegas 01/29/2015 at 11:40

0

Indeed good sir. Bravo! Bravo!

davedave1111 > thebigbossyboss 01/29/2015 at 11:49

0

Nothing to discuss. That's plainly not a residential street with no through traffic, so it's entirely unsuitable for woonerfing.

thebigbossyboss > davedave1111 01/29/2015 at 11:54

0

Agreed! Tell this to the idiots in my neighbour hood who suggest speed bumps. They are very dumb.

DasWauto > thebigbossyboss 01/29/2015 at 12:28

0

Fuck. This is one of the rare times I wish I was able to vote.

davedave1111 > thebigbossyboss 01/29/2015 at 12:30

0

Yes. If the answer is to put speedbumps on a road like that, you're asking the wrong question.

Personally, I think speed bumps are a particularly stupid idea. I've been in enough places where they use potholes to achieve the same effect much more cheaply.

thebigbossyboss > davedave1111 01/29/2015 at 13:33

1

Exactly.

The Compromiser > Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer 01/29/2015 at 21:03

0

where I live we have a point where a combined highway cum 4 lane undivided street separates down two streets. One continues and the other one heads off to the right at a traffic light. There is also a smaller street opposite of the one that heads off. As well the street that goes to our city core is about 20 feet ahead of that and also has a traffic light. Think crossing the T and then making an X right after it. Thouroughly confused? Good.

In the area between the downtownstreet and the highway turn off street, they erected signage saying do not cross. there is limited visibility for the drivers and pedestrians that makes it unsafe and needlessly complicated. After a few tourists got clipped, the but up a wrought iron waist high fence to prevent them crossing. They pput signs on it and at eye level saying do not cross. They placed a bylaw number on it to fine people. Now the poor tourists have to walk onto the street where they are hard to see to go around the fence. And they do. In droves. I'm for a little Darwinian action. The correct term is too stupid to live.

Axial > thebigbossyboss 01/30/2015 at 00:19

1

Carbon tax?

thebigbossyboss > DasWauto 01/30/2015 at 07:00

0

...Ontario just voted. It's too late.

DasWauto > thebigbossyboss 01/30/2015 at 09:50

0

Yeah, that's why I'm peeved.