Quote:
Originally Posted by Drybrain
I saw the footage of the aftermath, and that car must have been going WAY over the speed limit to roll over like it did. It's hard to blame the bike-lane design when the driver was probably driving very illegally.
Though yes, I'd be perfectly happy to see much higher/heftier and more imposing barriers.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by fatscat
Yup. It's called lower speed limits and improved driver training. There's no justification for Wyse Road, with its short length, to be a 50km/h zone. The car was likely going faster than that to cause a flip. This is not a fault of a bike lane, it's a fault of poor driving!
|
I'm going into this comment blind, as I don't know the actual design or specification of the barriers in question, or the actual information on what led to the crash (or speeds involved). I've always thought it would be good if the police would issue detailed incident reports of traffic accidents so that drivers could learn from them, but that's another topic. FWIW, though, I don't think that speeds have to be that high to flip a vehicle over - 50 km/h should more than do it, especially considering that the SUV (with its high centre of gravity) seems to be the vehicle of choice for many people today.
With that said, it should be understood that people make mistakes, even when driving, and barrier design should be such that the barrier doesn't contribute to injury or death of the parties involved if possible. For example, rather than install a tapered barrier that will act like a ramp and flip a vehicle over, install a collapsible barrier that will absorb the impact while providing protection for cyclists or pedestrians.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fatscat
Wyse Road is just under 1.5km in length. The amount of time spent to go down such a stretch at 50km/h is roughly 1m30s. Going at 30km/h that is bumped to 2m30s. However, that assumes no stopping for the entire stretch which in reality will never occur.
In the majority of cases within the city, driving at a reasonable 30-40km/h pace will get you to your destination at the same time as any higher speed. People just can't rationalize this.
|
Might be time to rethink speed limits in critical areas, especially when there are lane reductions to allow for cycle traffic, etc.
30 km/h seems a little extreme, though. While I agree it's a good speed for approaching school zones, it is painfully slow for a driver - especially when you consider that modern vehicles have very effective braking systems. The problem really is driver training (as you said) but even more importantly: attitude. For example, I always slow down to exactly 30 km/h where signage for school zones indicate that speed (also construction zones, i.e. 80 km/h on the highway), and 100% of the time I will have somebody driving right up my ass because they obviously think I'm driving too slow. I usually think that this person either doesn't understand (or care) that somebody's life could be taken by their carelessness. So, I'm doubting that anybody would adhere to 30 km/h anyhow.
40 km/h in zones where there are known traffic hazards would be reasonable, IMHO. Vehicle momentum would be reduced substantially, reaction time would be increased, and the driver would still perceive it as slow, but not painfully slow (IMHO). But there would have to be enforcement (or perception of police presence - those speed radar signs seem to work, I've noticed), or people would just disregard and drive their usual 70 km/h.
Prev
Linear Mode
