Roads/Bridges projects/issues

[Tesladom]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Just because the majority break traffic laws, doesn't make it ok.

Just because its a "Law" it doesn't make it right, if that were the case we would still not let women vote, ban gays, and lately cannabis... it take people to overwhelmingly OBJECT to laws in a democracy, some even facing jail to do what is right (think civil rights fight).
Don't use the term "just follow the law" BS, that's what you tell a 6 year old

[caveat.doctor]

Originally Posted by rocketphish

Photo radar in Ottawa's core possible after changes to provincial regulations

Jon Willing, Ottawa Citizen
Publishing date: Mar 03, 2021 • 1 hour ago • 2 minute read

...

The central communities haven’t been considered for photo radar because of the number and width of bilingual signs the province has required in the community safety zones.

City staff on Wednesday told councillors on the transportation committee that changes to the provincial rules will make it easier for the city to make room for the required signs.

Phil Landry, director of traffic services, said the province made the change last fall allowing the city to stack the signs on a single post, rather than mounting them side-by-side using two posts.

In urban areas, there isn’t enough room to install two posts on a strip of city property, Landry said.

The city launched the photo radar pilot project last July. There are currently eight community safety zones with speed cameras, but none in the central communities because of the sign dilemma.

...

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local...al-regulations

Good to see some progress on this. I don't think the signage is actually needed at all, there's already speed limit signs, and signs indicating a speed limit change ahead. Better to just have everyone assume that enforcement happens anywhere, it's no different from having police doing monitoring without notice - but at least it's one less barrier to getting these installed.

[khabibulin]

Originally Posted by Tesladom

Just because its a "Law" it doesn't make it right, if that were the case we would still not let women vote, ban gays, and lately cannabis... it take people to overwhelmingly OBJECT to laws in a democracy, some even facing jail to do what is right (think civil rights fight).
Don't use the term "just follow the law" BS, that's what you tell a 6 year old

Having the speed being regulated while travelling in a 2,000 pound hunk of steel on a public roadway is not an infringement on anyone's civil rights.

[HighwayStar]

Originally Posted by caveat.doctor

Good to see some progress on this. I don't think the signage is actually needed at all, there's already speed limit signs, and signs indicating a speed limit change ahead. Better to just have everyone assume that enforcement happens anywhere, it's no different from having police doing monitoring without notice - but at least it's one less barrier to getting these installed.

Strongly disagree if the point is safety... lets use the school zone example again.

Would the point not be to slow ALL traffic down?? In which case, the sensible thing to do would be to put up a big, "ACTIVE PHOTO RADAR AHEAD - slow to 25km/h" sign... would probably go a long, long way to ensuring the drivers obeyed.

Lets say Joe Tourist is driving through the city and was distracted, whatever, and missed the small sign to slow down in the school zone... try explaining to the student he runs over that he was caught on camera, and lesson learned.. he won't do it again.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Tesladom

Just because its a "Law" it doesn't make it right, if that were the case we would still not let women vote, ban gays, and lately cannabis... it take people to overwhelmingly OBJECT to laws in a democracy, some even facing jail to do what is right (think civil rights fight).
Don't use the term "just follow the law" BS, that's what you tell a 6 year old

Big difference between equal rights and road safety.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Back to the speed cameras, it doesn't sound to me like they are going to place them on wide open stretches of road like Carling or Ogilvie. Sounds like they will place them in urban areas with high pedestrian traffic. Gatineau, now they place them along wide open stretches of road like St-Raymond through the Gatineau Park stretch, with a ridiculously low speed limit (40 km/h if I remember correctly). That one is a rotating camera (moved to different spots in the city).

I am pretty sure the speed limit on St-Raymond on the stretch through Gatineau Park is 70. Though the average speed there is between 90 and 100. Sometimes higher.

Gatineau does place its movable cameras in "dick" spots, though. For example there is often one on this fairly long four-lane industrial stretch of Boul. de la Carrière, just north of the Casino. There are never any pedestrians here. The limit is only 50 so they catch a lot of people. Another reason they put cameras here I think is that the police station is just off this road, and someone is just too lazy to go any further to set it up.

https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4580...7i13312!8i6656

I got a camera ticket here a few years ago. I think I was doing 69 in the 50 zone.

[J.OT13]

I could for sure be wrong about the St-Raymond speed limit. Haven't been in a few years.

But ya, Gatineau's approach seems more tax-grabby than Ottawa, which seems a bit more focused on pedestrian safety. I'll admit though that the one on Innes at Beatrice Desloges is questionable. Very wide street, very few cyclists or pedestrians.

[ars]

Originally Posted by HighwayStar

Strongly disagree if the point is safety... lets use the school zone example again.

Would the point not be to slow ALL traffic down?? In which case, the sensible thing to do would be to put up a big, "ACTIVE PHOTO RADAR AHEAD - slow to 25km/h" sign... would probably go a long, long way to ensuring the drivers obeyed.

Lets say Joe Tourist is driving through the city and was distracted, whatever, and missed the small sign to slow down in the school zone... try explaining to the student he runs over that he was caught on camera, and lesson learned.. he won't do it again.

I agree, safety should be the number one priority, not making a quick buck off of drivers. Signage is what would make these speed cameras effective. If someone is stupid enough to speed in a school zone/high pedestrian traffic area even while there is a sign there, fine the heck out of them.

[lrt's friend]

This is a cash cow. We engineer roads for certain speeds and then we set speed limits that are artificially low. For example, build a 4 lane divided boulevard, and expect people to travel at 50 kph.

If it is a safety issue, then address it properly with road design. Speed cameras are often the cheap solution that are more of a cash grab that perpetuates itself. Once you get it in the budget, it is easy to want more and more.

I am OK with speed cameras, if they are specifically to address safety. If safety is the issue, then provide large warning signs. If the city provides no or only tiny warning signs, then this is all about money.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

This is a cash cow. We engineer roads for certain speeds and then we set speed limits that are artificially low. For example, build a 4 lane divided boulevard, and expect people to travel at 50 kph.

If it is a safety issue, then address it properly with road design. Speed cameras are often the cheap solution that are more of a cash grab that perpetuates itself. Once you get it in the budget, it is easy to want more and more.

I am OK with speed cameras, if they are specifically to address safety. If safety is the issue, then provide large warning signs. If the city provides no or only tiny warning signs, then this is all about money.

I can get behind proper road design: If the city puts limits like 50 or 60 on divided boulevards or a 6-lane road, it’s simply easy to pretend that the speed limits are in mph.

[Aylmer]

Originally Posted by Tesladom

Just because its a "Law" it doesn't make it right, if that were the case we would still not let women vote, ban gays, and lately cannabis... it take people to overwhelmingly OBJECT to laws in a democracy, some even facing jail to do what is right (think civil rights fight).
Don't use the term "just follow the law" BS, that's what you tell a 6 year old

Asserting that your right to go 70 in a 50 is a human right is, um, a choice

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

This is a cash cow. We engineer roads for certain speeds and then we set speed limits that are artificially low. For example, build a 4 lane divided boulevard, and expect people to travel at 50 kph.

If it is a safety issue, then address it properly with road design. Speed cameras are often the cheap solution that are more of a cash grab that perpetuates itself. Once you get it in the budget, it is easy to want more and more.

I am OK with speed cameras, if they are specifically to address safety. If safety is the issue, then provide large warning signs. If the city provides no or only tiny warning signs, then this is all about money.

While I agree that we need to do a better job of designing our residential streets in a way that makes traveling over 30km/h feel dangerous, it will be a long time before all of our streets have been designed that way. In the meantime, we need to find other ways to discourage people from speeding where the consequences of speeding are highest.

Studies have shown (including this one) that when a vehicle collides with a pedestrian, the fatality risk at 50 km/h is more than five times higher than the risk at 30 km/h.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

This is a cash cow. We engineer roads for certain speeds and then we set speed limits that are artificially low. For example, build a 4 lane divided boulevard, and expect people to travel at 50 kph.

If it is a safety issue, then address it properly with road design. Speed cameras are often the cheap solution that are more of a cash grab that perpetuates itself. Once you get it in the budget, it is easy to want more and more.

I am OK with speed cameras, if they are specifically to address safety. If safety is the issue, then provide large warning signs. If the city provides no or only tiny warning signs, then this is all about money.

Yes, road design is the ultimate solution, but unfortunately we have about 70 years of road design to fix, so we need interim solutions as well. Speed cameras are undeniably effective in slowing people down, and there is pretty conclusive evidence that they improve safety.

The article explains the issue with signs - in urban areas there isn't always the space for large warning signs, or they contribute to sign overload. I have no problem with no signs on streets in the urban core. If the pedestrians and cyclists a couple of feet from your doors aren't enough to slow you down, I'm not sure a sign will have much effect.

[caveat.doctor]

Originally Posted by HighwayStar

Strongly disagree if the point is safety... lets use the school zone example again.

Would the point not be to slow ALL traffic down?? In which case, the sensible thing to do would be to put up a big, "ACTIVE PHOTO RADAR AHEAD - slow to 25km/h" sign... would probably go a long, long way to ensuring the drivers obeyed.

Lets say Joe Tourist is driving through the city and was distracted, whatever, and missed the small sign to slow down in the school zone... try explaining to the student he runs over that he was caught on camera, and lesson learned.. he won't do it again.

There are already school zone signs, so a photo radar sign doesn't add anything - the safety message is already clearly visible for those who respond to safety as a consideration to slow down. If anything, more signs adds to clutter and lowers the effectiveness of all signs generally. Enforcement is really for that subset of drivers who need the possibility of a fine to motivate adherence to the speed limit.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

This is a cash cow. We engineer roads for certain speeds and then we set speed limits that are artificially low. For example, build a 4 lane divided boulevard, and expect people to travel at 50 kph.

If it is a safety issue, then address it properly with road design. Speed cameras are often the cheap solution that are more of a cash grab that perpetuates itself. Once you get it in the budget, it is easy to want more and more.

I am OK with speed cameras, if they are specifically to address safety. If safety is the issue, then provide large warning signs. If the city provides no or only tiny warning signs, then this is all about money.

Agree that the gap between engineered speed and posted speed limits is a problem. I consider it a form of "entrapment" when the design speed of a road induces driving at a speed faster than the limit. Nonetheless, it's a basic responsibility for drivers to know and adhere to the speed limit. No warning signs are needed to advise about enforcement - we don't expect signs saying "police enforcing speed limit ahead", nor should we expect them for photo radar.

[rocketphish]

Speaking of automated ticketing systems... The number of surveillance cameras in Britain is downright Orwellian, but I would wholeheartedly get behind this use for them:

UK litter-cam watches you toss a coffee cup out the car window, sends you a fine
CCTV camera trial, with the help of artificial intelligence, set to cut down on British littering

Shari Kulha, Ottawa Citizen
Publishing date: Mar 04, 2021 • 10 hours ago • 1 minute read

Those of us who watch British police-procedural TV shows know that there are a lot of CCTV cameras in the U.K. They seem to be everywhere: shopfronts, back alleys, main streets, parking lots, homes and so forth. Most are private, but some are placed by government.

According to cctv.co.uk, London has one camera for every 13 people, catching the average person on camera 300 times a day. A study last year revealed the presence of more than five million cameras in the U.K. overall. Certainly that must leave Brits feeling they can’t get away with much.

Now, they can add littering to the list of behaviours CCTV will be monitoring. A trial operation will begin this month in Maidstone, some 60 kilometres southeast of London.

With the help of artificial intelligence, CCTV cameras will match a car’s licence plate and model to footage it happens to catch of the driver tossing out a fast-food container, coffee cup or cigarette butt. The cameras will record the activity and automatically send a fine — for example, a carelessly discarded butt can cost the offender £120, or $212.

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/world...0-6f3462acbde6


• Video Link

[J.OT13]

Yes to the litter cameras!

[JayBuoy]

Originally Posted by Tesladom

Speed limits are artificially low, heck even police cruisers routinely speed on roads... ever been followed by a cop and you slow to speed limit, they lose patience and pass you... because its too slow, even police recognize this

Road design problem. We should be designing speed out of roads.

We should generally be doing everything we can to make roads safer for non-cars so it would be a big plus!

[JayBuoy]

Originally Posted by Tesladom

Just because its a "Law" it doesn't make it right, if that were the case we would still not let women vote, ban gays, and lately cannabis... it take people to overwhelmingly OBJECT to laws in a democracy, some even facing jail to do what is right (think civil rights fight).
Don't use the term "just follow the law" BS, that's what you tell a 6 year old

Thank you for standing up for my god-given right to drive way over the speed limit, endangering myself and others.

[J.OT13]

I agree we should be designing roads based on the max speed limit we want to permit, and that can be done with new roads, but with existing infrastructure, it could take 20+ years to catch-up.

That doesn't excuse speeding on residential streets. People often drive 60 km/h on suburban residential streets when should all know the limit is 40 km/h regardless of the width of the street itself.

Stop signs are the same, we know what a stop sign means: STOP. Not slow down or continue at normal speeds. S.T.O.P. yet 97% + don't do this unless there's another car, and even then, many still don't. Wheels must stop rotating. Definition of stop.

Surprised we don't have stop sign cameras honestly.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by caveat.doctor

There are already school zone signs, so a photo radar sign doesn't add anything - the safety message is already clearly visible for those who respond to safety as a consideration to slow down. If anything, more signs adds to clutter and lowers the effectiveness of all signs generally. Enforcement is really for that subset of drivers who need the possibility of a fine to motivate adherence to the speed limit.

The problem with the existing signs is that a sign without any expectation that there will be a consequence for disobeying it, it is useless and mailing someone a ticket weeks after the infraction isn't very effective at reducing speed, which should be the real objective.

Having said that, rather than adding new signs, if they modified the existing signs to clearly state that it is enforced by photo radar, that could be the best of both worlds.

EDIT: I think I have said this before, but I feel that speeding fine tiers should be set as a percentage above the speed limit, not at fixed intervals above the speed limit. Going 60 in a 40 zone should have a significantly more serious consequence than going 120 in a 100 zone.