[haljackey]

Ya putting an artificially low speed limit on roads makes things worse in my mind. You get a lot of difference in speed variance which increases risk.

The 400 series are mostly 130 design speed so that's why you feel comfortable doing 130 on it and 100 feels super slow. So when you have people doing 130 and others 100 that's unsafe as you have people weaving around the slow, but law-abiding drivers. It's best to go with the flow, not the speed limit, which is what the 85th percentile of drivers do- about 120 in most stretches.

Upping some of the 400 series to 110 helps this speed variance problem a bit, but getting it up to 120 or even 130 would fix things.

I can't really comment on country roads because you're not really going to spend a lot of money changing those since volumes are low and pedestrian use is even lower. What happened on Longwoods sucks but it could have happened in any rural area anywhere in Canada/US as that's what rural country roads look like.

In town we really need to fix up roads before lowering speed limits. Cheapside for instance went from 60 to a 40 with NO changes to the road design and the speed variance on it is wak and unsafe for drivers and pedestrians. Give that thing a road diet, narrow the lanes, etc if you actually want people do drive 40 on it because the road is comfortable to drive doing double that (80) east of Highbury, yet it's 40 all the way to Clarke.

At last Quebec got a redesign north of the CP overpass. It's all 40 now and doing 40 is ok here- but south of the overpass no changes were made and it's 40 now too.