Highways in Canada

[Dwils01]

Some sections of the 400 series highways even have design speeds up to 130-140km/h.

[RyLucky]

Originally Posted by Klazu

What I hate about speed cameras is that one cannot know where they have set the threshold for getting caught. Is driving 0-10km/h over the limit acceptable or not?

In my home country they do occasionally have zero tolerance cameras, which means that 81km/h on a 80km/h road will get you a ticket. That is ridiculous as such small changes in speed are impossible to keep under control and these systems mail the tickets automatically, without no human intervention.

Relying on your cruise control is also no help, as those vary greatly. My experience is that even in brand new American cars the cruise can be off by over 5km/h, however my German car does keep it very exact. Even then you would have to drive a bit under the limit, just to be on the safe side.

This is why I don't prefer automated traffic cameras, although speed enforcement itself is much needed. There just needs to be some flexibility and rationality behind it.

In Alberta, the first fine category begins for speeds exceeding the limit by at least 10km/hr. Mounted cameras are very exact and eliminate human error that an officer may make. I'll admit that sometimes when I'm not thinking about it, my speed can get away from me a bit, but I would catch myself before I was 10 km/hr over. I think it's fair.

However, the police cannot tell you that you are allowed to speed 0-10 over. You're not. But, you won't be fined either.

[eternallyme]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

If we increase to 120, we should do the following:
1) Start aggressively enforcing people who exceed the new limit by going 130-140 to create a new mentality that the speed limit is the MAXIMUM, not the "drive at this or 20 over" point
2) A PR campaign letting people know that if they want to keep driving at 100, they should feel free to do so

My speed limit proposal for Ottawa's Highway 417:
1) Quebec border to Highway 174: 120km/h
2) Highway 174 to Vanier Parkway: 110km/h
3) Vanier Parkway to Bronson Avenue: 90km/h, downgraded due to tight turns and very closely spaced ramps
4) Bronson Avenue to Highway 416: 110km/h
5) Highway 416 to Arnprior: 120km/h

I think that is reasonable. For another example in the Ottawa region, Highway 416 would be 120 km/h throughout. Some other things:

* The rule for 50 over and you get a street racing charge should be concurrently changed to EITHER 50 over or 150 km/h or higher, and points should start at just 6 over instead of 16 over if the speed limit is higher than 100.

* A minimum speed of 70 or 80 km/h should be enforced on highways with a speed limit higher than 100, except when traffic or road conditions make such unsafe or not practical.

* Municipalities should be permitted - ONLY on freeway routes, after a safety analysis - to permit a speed limit higher than 100.

As for other routes in Ontario, one of the trickiest to set IMO would be Highway 11 between Barrie and North Bay due to conflicting factors and consistency issues on a roadway that changes character. In general, as a compromise, between Gravenhurst and North Bay should be 110 km/h (increased to 120 when all accesses are closed). South of Gravenhurst - despite its traffic volumes and importance - should NOT be increased beyond 90 km/h due to the high number of entrances.

AFAIK, 2-lane highways have never been posted at 100 km/h in Ontario. My thought is to limit such to Northern Ontario and on major highways, since they have the longest distances and fewest entrances. However, that would mean the Trans-Canada would be at least 100 except in towns and a few busy sections. I would increase to 100 km/h on most sections (that are 2 lanes) of Highways 11, 17, 61, 66, 69, 71, 72, 101, 144 and 655. Exceptions would apply in areas heavily developed or extended sections of lower design speeds (curves would be advisory posted).

[haljackey]

Posted this in the skyline thread, but I think it also belongs here.

Skyline of North York, Toronto, from Ontario Highway 401 (by me)

Full size: https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3877/15161272196_0afceeab56_o.jpg

[ssiguy]

Just because the speed limit increases to, for example, 120 does not mean people will drive that fast.

The German Autobahn's don't have speed limits outside of the cities but that doesn't mean everyone is going 150 and everyone with a Porsche is doing 180. People will not drive faster than what they feel is safe or comfortable with.

In the classic Canadian winter storms, the speed limit is the same as on a sunny day but people don't drive 100km/hr in the snow. It's the same principle on speed limits. Also in Germany the police regularly give out tickets on the Autobahn for unsafe driving and the fines are VERY heavy.

If the speed limit was 120km/hr and firmly enforced then you wouldn't find many people driving faster than that. If they greatly increased the fines and introduced strict policies for example anyone over 130km/hr loses their license for 6 months, you would find that travelling speeds would probably decrease.

As it stands now, the speed limits are not enforced so people drive any speed they like knowing that there is no one out there to give them a ticket whether they are going 105 or 155.

They should definitely increase speeds to 120kmk/hr but then make it very clear thru much stronger fines and/or demerit points that 120 is the maximum and not minimum speed which is what 100km/hr is today.

[Dmajackson]

I've never been pulled over for speeding in Nova Scotia (only once in Alberta for being the largest vehicle going with the flow). Speed fines here are expensive however cops never start pulling people over until they reach the second category which is 11km/h over. Photo radar is illegal in NS so you have to be seen by a cop and for the most part they do not try to hide very well. If you're doing 120km/h on a freeway here some cars will pass you but for the most part people set their cruise controls at 115-119km/h and that is normal speed for police cars and ambulances without their sirens on.

As for speed limits in NS they seem pretty fair though a few could be raised IMO.

70km/h is normal for secondary and tertiary highways in rural areas with increased hazards (turns, no shoulder, high traffic).

80km/h is standard for trunk and secondary highways in rural areas. This is also used for arterial roads with limited intersections, the Circ in Dartmouth, and the C portion of the C/E system on the 118.

90km/h is mainly used on twinned urban freeways with high traffic volume.

100km/h is standard on 2-lane expressways in the 100-series. NS's high casualty rate almost exclusively happens on these roads especially on Highways 101 and 103. Upgrading is ongoing but limited funding is making it hard.

110km/h is our maximum speed limit and is reserved for freeways with wide depressed medians.

120km/h could work on very select sections of highway. They would have to be rural freeways with limited interchanges and low traffic counts. I would also suggest using variable speed limit signs to adapt to NS's unpredictable weather. 104 b/w Amherst & Truro, 101 b/w Mt. Uniacke & St. Croix, and 102 b/w YHZ & Millbrook could be candidate spots. For Highway 102 I would do individual lane speeds on the three lane section near YHZ with 120 in the left lane, and 110 in the other two with commercial vehicles in the right lane only.

[SignalHillHiker]

I was pulled over doing 145 km/hr with Ayreonaut coming back from Cape St. Mary's Ecological Reserve.

It's a rural area, so it's Mounties instead of Royal Newfoundland Constabulary. Mounties are typically not from here, so there's little leeway, generally by the book, etc.

I thought I was finished because I was driving higher than the average flow of traffic. There were a couple of other cars going our speed, including one we were basically following, but most were doing 120 or so, I estimate.

But I only got a warning. I think it was because I had only recently moved home (so hadn't built up my merit points) and already had a ticket for an illegal left turn in St. John's. I would've lost my license, I suspect, and that's why he gave me the warning.

Lesson learned, though. I haven't been above 130 km/hr except downhill since then.

[Klazu]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

The German Autobahn's don't have speed limits outside of the cities but that doesn't mean everyone is going 150 and everyone with a Porsche is doing 180. People will not drive faster than what they feel is safe or comfortable with.

There are lots of speed limits outside of cities on Autobahn and unlimited sections are getting quite scarce in reality. I lived over five years in Germany and my experience was that most of the time the traffic flow on Autobahn is going really fast. 150km/h seemed like the comfortable consensus most people stuck on, even on the sections that have speed limits! I also found this to be the speed sweet spot.

Speeds of over 180km/h are common sight on the leftmost lane, however you can only do these speeds for a brief moment due to traffic constantly merging on the lane. Most of the Autobahn is only 2+2 lanes, so there is only two lanes for cars to utilize. If the section has 3+3 lanes, then normally truck traffic takes the rightmost lane, leaving the same 2+2 lanes for passenger cars.

I loved driving on Autobahn and in Germany. People really know the local traffic culture and leftmost lane is kept as clear as possible. People try fast, but responsibly. Tailgating is a constant problem, but that is more due to the huge traffic volumes and lack of more lanes. My personal speed record was 278km/h maxing a BMW M3 - twice.

[eternallyme]

Originally Posted by Dmajackson

I've never been pulled over for speeding in Nova Scotia (only once in Alberta for being the largest vehicle going with the flow). Speed fines here are expensive however cops never start pulling people over until they reach the second category which is 11km/h over. Photo radar is illegal in NS so you have to be seen by a cop and for the most part they do not try to hide very well. If you're doing 120km/h on a freeway here some cars will pass you but for the most part people set their cruise controls at 115-119km/h and that is normal speed for police cars and ambulances without their sirens on.

As for speed limits in NS they seem pretty fair though a few could be raised IMO.

70km/h is normal for secondary and tertiary highways in rural areas with increased hazards (turns, no shoulder, high traffic).

80km/h is standard for trunk and secondary highways in rural areas. This is also used for arterial roads with limited intersections, the Circ in Dartmouth, and the C portion of the C/E system on the 118.

90km/h is mainly used on twinned urban freeways with high traffic volume.

100km/h is standard on 2-lane expressways in the 100-series. NS's high casualty rate almost exclusively happens on these roads especially on Highways 101 and 103. Upgrading is ongoing but limited funding is making it hard.

110km/h is our maximum speed limit and is reserved for freeways with wide depressed medians.

120km/h could work on very select sections of highway. They would have to be rural freeways with limited interchanges and low traffic counts. I would also suggest using variable speed limit signs to adapt to NS's unpredictable weather. 104 b/w Amherst & Truro, 101 b/w Mt. Uniacke & St. Croix, and 102 b/w YHZ & Millbrook could be candidate spots. For Highway 102 I would do individual lane speeds on the three lane section near YHZ with 120 in the left lane, and 110 in the other two with commercial vehicles in the right lane only.

I see no reason why rural freeways in NS can't support 120 km/h. Those would be 102 and 104 mainly. Likewise in NB, the TCH for nearly its entire length (for example) should be 120 km/h except around Moncton (until the train crossings are dealt with) and in Edmundston (due to tighter design).

[MolsonExport]

So what is the tradeoff between saving time and saving lives? How many minutes of time saved is worth how many extra lives lost at accidents at higher speeds, and due to stupid yahoos pushing the limit despite the weather? The speed demons are often those with the least to lose (single, aggressive young men without children) but they impose the costs of their selfish disposition to society.
Not to mention, higher energy costs and extra pollution? Doesn't anybody care?

[Innsertnamehere]

apparently the 404 extension is finally opening on Tuesday.

[ssiguy]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

So what is the tradeoff between saving time and saving lives? How many minutes of time saved is worth how many extra lives lost at accidents at higher speeds, and due to stupid yahoos pushing the limit despite the weather? The speed demons are often those with the least to lose (single, aggressive young men without children) but they impose the costs of their selfish disposition to society.
Not to mention, higher energy costs and extra pollution? Doesn't anybody care?

That's a myth.

The reality is that relative to the amount of traffic that freeways carry, the number of accidents and deaths are VERY low. On freeways deaths are very uncommon as it is usually head-on collisions that cause fatalities. Point of fact is that freeways are the safest form of motor vehicle transport we have. We should be encouraging people to get off the regular roads and take the freeways when ever possible.

You also don't get pedestrians and bicyclists on freeways nor people pulling out of their driveways or drive-thru. I do not agree with any speed increase on non-freeway or freeway type roads........,they the maximums of 80 or 90 are fine.

The speeds should be increased because they simply do not reflect the reality of the speed people are driving. Today's freeway speeds are analogous to our marijuana laws....technically illegal but never enforced. Our freeway speed limits have become nothing more than suggestions and even on the VERY rare chance you get pulled over, if you appeal it you almost always win because the police officer has to show up at the hearing and will only do that if it wasn't so much speeding as much as dangerous driving.

As far as gas consumption....who cares? If someone wants to get lower mileage and spend more on gas that's no ones business but their own. Cars driving faster may cause a small amount increase in emissions but next to nothing compared to the much higher pollution caused by stop and go traffic on regular roads.

My point is that if they are not going to enforce the laws then they shouldn't bother having them. If they increased the speed to 120 or 130 then they could legitimately say that the speed limit is a true reflection of the speed people usually travel but then make the fines for anyone going over 5km/hr over the speed limit MUCH, MUCH tougher.

Today's speed limits have no more impact on people driving than your grandma telling you to "drive carefully Johnny". They have become so completely irrelevant to freeway drivers they have become little more than old little numbers someone stuck on the side of the road.

[MolsonExport]

I am spreading...a myth? come on. Your rebuttal is rife with non-sequiturs.

[eemy]

The data on the Autobahn wiki actually states that collisions tend to be four times more fatal on Autobahns than on urban roadways (but comparable to rural roads) due to the greater speeds involved.

That said, there are significantly fewer injury-causing collisions overall, meaning that the fatality rate is quite a bit lower than for other rural or urban roadways.

[middeljohn]

Originally Posted by jeremy_haak

The data on the Autobahn wiki actually states that collisions tend to be four times more fatal on Autobahns than on urban roadways (but comparable to rural roads) due to the greater speeds involved.

That said, there are significantly fewer injury-causing collisions overall, meaning that the fatality rate is quite a bit lower than for other rural or urban roadways.

How much of that has to do with the highway vs skill level of driver on that highway? I'd imagine the less aware drivers are probably a little scared to go on them?

[Horus]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

apparently the 404 extension is finally opening on Tuesday.

Good news! That's been a long time coming. Not to jump the gun or anything, but is there any firm timeline for the next extension phase (past Sutton, on towards Pefferlaw/Beaverton)?

[Innsertnamehere]

Probably never. It's dropped from MTOs sightlines, apparently.

[1overcosc]

It would also make very little sense from a growth-planning perspective as Brock Township is not planned for urban growth and is projected to remain rural for the foreseeable future.

Beaverton is very distant from Toronto. The very fact that Brock Township is part of Durham is odd to begin with; it would make more sense for them to be part of Kawartha Lakes.

[Innsertnamehere]

Northern Durham (Brock, Uxbridge, Scugog) would probably be better paired up with northern York region (Georgina, Sutton, etc).

The Bradford bypass should happen though IMO, but the 404 extension isn't required. Highway 12 widening where it through runs with (old) 48 is needed as well.

IIRC the plan for the 404 is to have it go to Sutton and then have a small section of 4 lane highway 48 from Sutton to beaverton, so the 404 will ultimately only reach Sutton, even if the expansion happens.

[Horus]

I seem to recall there being a proposal to run the 404 initially to Highway 12, but then also extending it northward to meet Hwy 11 near Orillia. The intent was to divert southbound traffic around the eastern side of Lake Simcoe and reduce congestion in the Barrie area and the Hwy 400 & 11 merge. I can't seem to find any reference to it though, and that would seem to be pointless unless it actually ran through Orillia - something which would probably be very difficult to do, getting across the Narrows and through the city.