Road design, safety and Vision Zero

[WLU]

Ford banning speed cameras next month, thank you Doug!

I got a ticket in August as I was passing through a school zone doing 42 in a 30 - had no idea a camera was there as I'm rarely in that area - to say I was livid is an understatement, total cash grab

Great news.  100% total cash grab

[Kodra24]

Ford banning speed cameras next month, thank you Doug!

I got a ticket in August as I was passing through a school zone doing 42 in a 30 - had no idea a camera was there as I'm rarely in that area - to say I was livid is an understatement, total cash grab

We live in a time where people can openly admit to breaking the law and being anti-social and expect to be viewed as the victim.

Stop putting others at risk - and for a forum that complains about crime so much, also consider following the law in the future. (But I get it: the only crimes that matters are ones done by people outside of your group)

You should be ashamed of yourself.

Not a single one of you entitled babies will be at the next public meeting advocating for physical speed reduction programs in our streets - you just want to offload the costs of your risk-taking onto innocent people and keep the benefits.

Ashamed of myself for getting a ticket, are you mad?

It's a ticket, I paid it and moved on with my life - but I'm glad I won't be "getting caught" again as I firmly believe it wasn't warranted given the circumstances and I'm glad they're taking the speed cameras down

Lots of negative nannies in the comments haha

[neonjoe]

I dunno, it seems negligent that someone can get a ticket. I've been driving since I was 16 so thats 28 years with my license and I haven't ever received a ticket nor have I got into an accident. I'm attentive and drive smart, probably because when I want to drive fast I drive my car at the track. If I want to get somewhere I leave early.
The cameras aren't a cash grab if you are paying attention, hell there's signs posted in advance of all of them to make you aware that they are coming up, if you can't see those you probably don't have the skill to drive.

[danbrotherston]

We live in a time where people can openly admit to breaking the law and being anti-social and expect to be viewed as the victim.

Stop putting others at risk - and for a forum that complains about crime so much, also consider following the law in the future. (But I get it: the only crimes that matters are ones done by people outside of your group)

You should be ashamed of yourself.

Not a single one of you entitled babies will be at the next public meeting advocating for physical speed reduction programs in our streets - you just want to offload the costs of your risk-taking onto innocent people and keep the benefits.

Ashamed of myself for getting a ticket, are you mad?

It's a ticket, I paid it and moved on with my life - but I'm glad I won't be "getting caught" again as I firmly believe it wasn't warranted given the circumstances and I'm glad they're taking the speed cameras down

Lots of negative nannies in the comments haha

Just so we are clear, you “won’t be getting caught” not because you are choosing to drive safely and according to the laws but instead because you feel the rules won’t be applied to you?

What ever happened to moving your 30 employee business to the US to escape this “socialist hellhole” anyway?

[neonjoe]

I’d rather the speeded be fined via automated speed enforcement than..
-Hiring additional police officers to do speed enforcement
-Paying property taxes to enforce “victimless laws”
-Having officers enforce speed laws rather than catching “real criminals”
-Having traffic impeded by a blocked lane because a speeding motorist has been pulled over.

I’d assume the same people complaining about automatic enforcement also have the above issues with traditional enforcement. In reality they want NO enforcement and do not care about the safety of others that we share the road with.

[danbrotherston]

I’d rather the speeded be fined via automated speed enforcement than..
-Hiring additional police officers to do speed enforcement
-Paying property taxes to enforce “victimless laws”
-Having officers enforce speed laws rather than catching “real criminals”
-Having traffic impeded by a blocked lane because a speeding motorist has been pulled over.

I’d assume the same people complaining about automatic enforcement also have the above issues with traditional enforcement. In reality they want NO enforcement and do not care about the safety of others that we share the road with.

I mean, Kodra is pretty explicit in that they expect to be able to drive whatever speed they please past schools and not be subject to any enforcement.

My suspicion is that the majority of people who think they want traffic enforcement but don't want automated enforcement are basically just going on vibes and not thinking deeply about the issue.

[ijmorlan]

I’d rather the speeded be fined via automated speed enforcement than..
-Hiring additional police officers to do speed enforcement
-Paying property taxes to enforce “victimless laws”
-Having officers enforce speed laws rather than catching “real criminals”
-Having traffic impeded by a blocked lane because a speeding motorist has been pulled over.

I’d assume the same people complaining about automatic enforcement also have the above issues with traditional enforcement. In reality they want NO enforcement and do not care about the safety of others that we share the road with.

Yes, it’s weird to be as clear as some people seem to be about being upset they were caught breaking the law.

I do think there are some issues that need to be seriously considered with automatic enforcement, but the mere fact of enforcement shouldn’t be the problem. I think with automatic enforcement we need to be better at making the rules actually appropriate and aligned with the goals of the enforcement. For example, you should not have a road clearly designed for 60km/h or higher signed for 40km/h; but realistically unless the police are doing a blitz they won’t be ticketing people for going the design speed of the road anyway. On a related note, there needs to be clarity on what the trigger condition actually is. Conventionally, it is accepted that one is pretty much never ticketed for going 10km/h over the limit, 20km/h over on the highway. So if I get to a speed camera, do I need to go at the usual speed (10km/h over), or exactly at the limit?

These are all issues that can be worked out however. Complaints about “cash grabs” do not help.

[danbrotherston]

I’d rather the speeded be fined via automated speed enforcement than..
-Hiring additional police officers to do speed enforcement
-Paying property taxes to enforce “victimless laws”
-Having officers enforce speed laws rather than catching “real criminals”
-Having traffic impeded by a blocked lane because a speeding motorist has been pulled over.

I’d assume the same people complaining about automatic enforcement also have the above issues with traditional enforcement. In reality they want NO enforcement and do not care about the safety of others that we share the road with.

Yes, it’s weird to be as clear as some people seem to be about being upset they were caught breaking the law.

I do think there are some issues that need to be seriously considered with automatic enforcement, but the mere fact of enforcement shouldn’t be the problem. I think with automatic enforcement we need to be better at making the rules actually appropriate and aligned with the goals of the enforcement. For example, you should not have a road clearly designed for 60km/h or higher signed for 40km/h; but realistically unless the police are doing a blitz they won’t be ticketing people for going the design speed of the road anyway. On a related note, there needs to be clarity on what the trigger condition actually is. Conventionally, it is accepted that one is pretty much never ticketed for going 10km/h over the limit, 20km/h over on the highway. So if I get to a speed camera, do I need to go at the usual speed (10km/h over), or exactly at the limit?

These are all issues that can be worked out however. Complaints about “cash grabs” do not help.

The "trigger" is clearly defined by the law. The speed limit is x if you do >x you are breaking the speed limit and are subject to a ticket. This is how it operates in (parts of) Europe.

Of course, I realise that while most Americans seem content to have a fascist dictator take over their country if you actually enforced this, you would have a civil war on your hands in about 2-3 days. I suspect Canada is similar in that regard.

But realistically, that's what the law says, there is no need for a "unwritten" "written" rule that says the limit isn't the limit.

I also however, think there is realism to be had on the other side. If we started today (which we are most definitely not) it would take 50 years to rebuild every street properly. This is what the Netherlands has seen...they started about 50 years ago.

So, in the interim...there will be a disconnect between the road design and the rules that are applied and people who think the rules should not apply to them should have their license removed until they are willing to actually follow the rules (and I do believe most people don't actually act this way).

[dtkvictim]

I wonder if the cameras would have seen less push back if they hadn't been introduced alongside reduced speed limits (often along arterial roads). I think it's easy for people to get the impression they are cash grabs when they ask 1) why were the speed limits not lower here before the cameras, and 2) why are the cameras only used on segments of road surrounded by higher speed limits?

While I don't think it's the case in WR yet, from what I understand some other cities have speed cameras on stretches of road with an "arbitrary" drop in speed limit and no school zone

I also wish we could move away from framing this as a "think of the children" problem. That argument is almost always paired with poor intentions, and surely casts some doubt on the program. Yes, children are stupid (relatively speaking, at least) and should have the freedom to play, grow, and learn without being injured. But I don't see why all citizens shouldn't deserve that same freedom. Maybe this is just the most effective political approach for convincing mindsets I don't understand.

Lastly, the questions I posed at the start got me thinking: Wouldn't automated speed enforcement be far more effective at saving lives if we used them in places with higher (design) speed limits, rather than lower, given the non-linear relationship between velocity and kinetic energy?

[danbrotherston]

I wonder if the cameras would have seen less push back if they hadn't been introduced alongside reduced speed limits (often along arterial roads). I think it's easy for people to get the impression they are cash grabs when they ask 1) why were the speed limits not lower here before the cameras, and 2) why are the cameras only used on segments of road surrounded by higher speed limits?

While I don't think it's the case in WR yet, from what I understand some other cities have speed cameras on stretches of road with an "arbitrary" drop in speed limit and no school zone

I also wish we could move away from framing this as a "think of the children" problem. That argument is almost always paired with poor intentions, and surely casts some doubt on the program. Yes, children are stupid (relatively speaking, at least) and should have the freedom to play, grow, and learn without being injured. But I don't see why all citizens shouldn't deserve that same freedom. Maybe this is just the most effective political approach for convincing mindsets I don't understand.

Lastly, the questions I posed at the start got me thinking: Wouldn't automated speed enforcement be far more effective at saving lives if we used them in places with higher (design) speed limits, rather than lower, given the non-linear relationship between velocity and kinetic energy?

Which other cities? I am sure this has happened somewhere. And I'm sure it's happened in the US. But I hear this kind of narrative all the time, but I never hear any specific examples relevant to Ontario.

As for the introduction coinciding with lowering limits? I don't think this was the case? IIRC the speed limit reduction was years after the introduction of cameras (albeit it might have coincided with actually installing the cameras given that if I recall there was a single camera in the region that was moved between all the school zones after a while).

I also don't think these were used just "anywhere" but were ONLY in school zones and community safety zones. Pretty much the most gentle possible introduction of the cameras, and yet we still have people like Kodra asserting their belief they should be allowed to speed past schools.

I do completely agree that we should have safe roads (however we achieve that) everywhere, but given that we aren't even willing to do it outside schools at this point, that basically seems a moot point. I mean, I agree people who invoke "think of the children" are almost always full of shit...but they do it for a reason...it's effective. But if you want to know how full of shit they are...I suspect there's a lot of overlap between "think of the children" and "I deserve to speed past schools without fear of a ticket".

Would automated enforcement be more effective if it was used in higher speed areas. Maybe...but possibly not. Places with higher speed limits don't need speeding drivers in order to reach lethal speeds. If you're on the 401 it doesn't matter too much if you're going 105 or 115...if you hit an immovable object, you're quite likely to die. Where as in a school zone, at 30km/h most collisions are survivable even for pedestrians (although maybe not for children vs. a 2 tonne pickup truck), so it takes someone who is...for example going over 40km/h to make that collision lethal in the majority of cases.

So on the 401 if everyone is doing the speed limit, we still have deaths, but in a school zone...only people who choose to drive an unnecessarily large vehicle kill people.

But they're coming out now, so I guess to some people that convenience of not worrying about a ticket is worth a few splattered children.

[tomh009]

Would automated enforcement be more effective if it was used in higher speed areas. Maybe...but possibly not. Places with higher speed limits don't need speeding drivers in order to reach lethal speeds. If you're on the 401 it doesn't matter too much if you're going 105 or 115...if you hit an immovable object, you're quite likely to die. Where as in a school zone, at 30km/h most collisions are survivable even for pedestrians (although maybe not for children vs. a 2 tonne pickup truck), so it takes someone who is...for example going over 40km/h to make that collision lethal in the majority of cases.

So on the 401 if everyone is doing the speed limit, we still have deaths, but in a school zone...only people who choose to drive an unnecessarily large vehicle kill people.

I think on the 401 the issue isn't so much the absolute speed but the speed differentials, people who drive 130-140 and weave past people driving 20-30 km/h slower. There the design speed (and modern car safety) would certainly allow a higher speed: maybe people would accept an increased speed limit, maybe 110 or 120 km/h, but with effective camera enforcement?

[plam]

From Guelph's mayor on X:

"Mayor Cam Guthrie
@CamGuthrie
Want to stop a program?
Fine.
Want to disparage cities like Guelph while you do it?
Not fine.
In a follow up to my comments regarding the decision of Premier
@fordnation to ban speed enforcement cameras across the province, I wanted to add the following:
.
If the Ford government wants to end their own street and pedestrian safety program that is proven to work, so be it. That’s on them. It was their regulations that allowed it to happen in the first place. It was them who promoted the use of these cameras and it was them who encouraged municipalities to adopt these safety measures. We took their lead.
It’s with this backdrop that I can’t let go of the total inaccurate statements made by the provincial government yesterday and today. Because Guelph residents need the truth.
.
It’s not a cash grab. If it was, then it was the provinces cash grab because they’re the ones who started the program and set the regulations for what fines could be imposed for people breaking the law. Breaking the law and getting a fine isn’t a cash grab.
It’s not a tax grab. Cities aren’t taxing every household or business for this speed enforcement program. It’s funded by, you guessed it, those that break the law by speeding. If you don’t speed, you don’t pay. But since the government is now taking this program away, guess what? Every household and business will now pay through property taxes for the road safety initiatives we’re implementing.
People weren’t getting tickets for going 2 or 4kms over. That is 100% not true. The thresholds are set much higher targeting excessive speeding that poses real risks.
.
Enforcement hours were generally scheduled during periods when one could reasonably expect activities around the school.
The money didn’t go into a slush fund. It went directly (by policy) into a transportation reserve that has funded new pedestrian crosswalks, road safety measures and improvements. Guelph earmarked future revenue for additional traffic calming and more…
We placed these cameras in school zones. This is where there are the most vulnerable pedestrians and cyclists or other road users. More specifically it’s about our children. Parents have told me they now feel these areas are safer and they’re letting their kids walk or ride to school more independently which is a good thing.
I can’t speak to other communities that have implemented this program. But Guelph has not done large-scale programs city-wide.
.
We have the data. This program worked. When we started it, about 40% of drivers were exceeding the speed limit by a minimum of 10kms. As of July this year that number has dropped to 15%. Even after cameras are removed drivers are going at least 15% slower in the same school zones.
Guelph exceeded the provincial signage regulations to make sure people were aware.
.
All locations were transparently stated prior to operating and available on our website.
Guelph is willing to work with the Province and other municipalities on a review of the program and would welcome discussions on changes if necessary.
In the meantime, I hope the province will reimburse any investments or resources that have gone into the start up of this program that the province originally initiated. And, that any new funding for infrastructure would include both capital and ongoing operating expenses incurred by our city."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
https:/
/x.com/CamGuthrie/status/1971664878697173460

[ac3r]

How on earth did that person get elected? Wow.

[danbrotherston]

Interesting.

https://globalnews.ca/news/11469657/oliv...-vehicles/

Apparently Ford's cabinet ministers are serial speeders. No wonder they oppose camera enforcement.

I think speeding is not unusual, as we've seen even here...that said, TWELVE instances of >50km/h over the limit is beyond the "I'm a normal suburban driver" level of bad driving and has come fully into the "I'm a dangerous psychopath" level of driving. And this...honestly....does not surprise me.

[ac3r]

Ontario if Liberals/Greens/NDP were in charge and Conservatives weren't abnormal suburban psychopathic killers driving people trying to run over people:

Wait...that isn't a policy of theirs? It's not just political and a symptom of individualism and bad society/bad people? Darn!