Roads/Bridges projects/issues

[caveat.doctor]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Statistics can tell you anything. How were these cameras implemented? As I said, I would expect a difference between totally randomized and hidden cameras and those that are known to be present.

The specifics of the implementation vary by location. This is actually a strength of the research (the Cochrane review I linked above is the most methodologically sound summary), that across the different ways a community might use them (with or without signs, advance warning, fines of varying values, random vs permanent, etc), the safety effect is there.

There is room to debate what the fines should be, whether or not signage is necessary, etc, but having cameras have proven safety benefit. In the Ottawa regional context, the data from Gatineau (2015-2017) is supportive:

Originally Posted by https://www.transports.gouv.qc.ca/fr/securite-signalisation/securite/radars-photo-surveillance-feux-rouges/Documents/bilan-projet-pilote-cooperation-municipale.pdf

Pour une même période de 614 jours, il y aurait eu 391 accidents corporels « Avant ». Pour la période « Après », 290 accidents corporels ont été répertoriés sur les sites surveillés par un ACA mobile vitesse. Il s’agirait donc d’une réduction de 25,8 %. Pour ce qui est des accidents corporels, comme le niveau de certitude découlant du test est très élevé, on peut conclure que l’utilisation des ACA mobiles vitesse a contribué à la réduction du nombre d’accidents.

For simplicity, the best approach at least to start (this is a pilot here in Ottawa) would seem to be no signage, and fines the same as the usual provincial standard. We could collect the data, and decide from there if signage or other things would be of benefit.

[lrt's friend]

For simplicity, the best approach at least to start (this is a pilot here in Ottawa) would seem to be no signage, and fines the same as the usual provincial standard. We could collect the data, and decide from there if signage or other things would be of benefit.

If we are going to do a trial, wouldn't it be better to try it both ways and then compare the outcomes?

[caveat.doctor]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

If we are going to do a trial, wouldn't it be better to try it both ways and then compare the outcomes?

Looking at the legislation it seems to be a moot point in the end - signage is required.

Originally Posted by https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/s17009

No by-law passed under this section or regulation made under clause (7) (c) becomes effective until the highway, portion of the highway or designated area affected by the by-law or regulation, as the case may be, is signed in accordance with this Act and the regulations.

The extra consideration for doing the trial is the additional requirement for signage 90 days before the trial starts. To do a comparison, we now have to start collecting data in potential areas for the radar (before any notice) to establish the baseline, then post the signs, then the radars, then more data collection.

All that said, the evidence for photo radars in injury reduction is already good (as per the data cited earlier). The benefit of before/after comparisons is really to see how to optimise control measures - e.g., in places where radars don't make as much of a difference as expected, more intensive and expensive intervention like road redesign might be required. (Of course, not mutually exclusive - it's all about optimising the resources we have.)

[zzptichka]

So you can't install cameras without signs but can you install signs without cameras? That should be a good and cheap deterrent.
Install signs on all suspect roads and then move cameras around.
It's not even misleading. I drive past this "Speed limit strictly enforced" sign all the time. It doesn't mean there is a cop there 24/7.

[Horus]

Originally Posted by zzptichka

So you can't install cameras without signs but can you install signs without cameras? That should be a good and cheap deterrent.
Install signs on all suspect roads and then move cameras around.
It's not even misleading. I drive past this "Speed limit strictly enforced" sign all the time. It doesn't mean there is a cop there 24/7.

But without cameras (or enforcement) those signs will become meaningless to a proportion of drivers over time, particularly those who drive those routes regularly.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by HighwayStar

Red light cameras are one thing, I would suspect the vast majority of us on here adhere to the Red Light rules without issue.. so camera or no camera is actually fine with me.

But lets talk about the more specific example in the above article.. they are putting speeding cameras in "Community Safety Zones". Presumably this means near schools, playgrounds, etc.

These zones can be fairly easy to miss if one is not paying 100% attention. I have been borderline guilty of this.

Would you rather have a car scream through a school zone at 70km/h and go, "rats I got a ticket".. or would you rather that car actually slowed down to 30km/h before entering the busy school zone? The child may be killed, but at least the driver is caught on camera.

Red Light Camera <> Speeding Camera.

Speeding cameras (as a revenue tool) are a slippery slope, as I would suspect the vast majority of us on here DO drive faster than the limit.. and probably on a daily basis.

P.S. - I would have zero faith whatsoever in the ability of the government to allocate fines into "other safety initiatives"... I'm sure it all goes into general revenues.

If the zone signs are easy to miss, how would installing a sign (likely at the same location) that warns you of photo radar be easier to see?

I would rather see a media blitz (both on road and through other media) informing people that photo radar will be installed in "Community Safety Zones" throughout the city.

[HighwayStar]

Originally Posted by roger1818

If the zone signs are easy to miss, how would installing a sign (likely at the same location) that warns you of photo radar be easier to see?

I would rather see a media blitz (both on road and through other media) informing people that photo radar will be installed in "Community Safety Zones" throughout the city.

Sure... I guess you're right. As I answered earlier.. it was my first time on an unfamiliar road, passing a not-so-school-looking-school, with a truck (illegally) parked/stopped directly in front of the "School Zone" sign.

I still managed to figure it out and slow down anyway. If the photo sign was in the same place... you're totally correct.

FWIW, I find those "here is your current speed" signs very, very helpful in operating at an appropriate speed... and it seems most others do too. Would be interesting to see how many people willfully ignore those signs in a school zone.

[caveat.doctor]

Originally Posted by zzptichka

So you can't install cameras without signs but can you install signs without cameras? That should be a good and cheap deterrent.
Install signs on all suspect roads and then move cameras around.
It's not even misleading. I drive past this "Speed limit strictly enforced" sign all the time. It doesn't mean there is a cop there 24/7.

And that is how most places (e.g. Gatineau) do it: signs at potential locations, with the few photo radar units the city has rotated from site to site.

Again (the legislation notwithstanding) I'm not convinced that signage at potential sites is necessary or beneficial. It should suffice to publicise that photo radars are in use anywhere in the city, at any time. Limiting it to "community safety zones" doesn't seem to have any benefit - for those inclined to overspeed beyond the photo radar threshold, it just says that it's possible to do so without potential of automated enforcement in the rest of the city.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by HighwayStar

FWIW, I find those "here is your current speed" signs very, very helpful in operating at an appropriate speed... and it seems most others do too. Would be interesting to see how many people willfully ignore those signs in a school zone.

I believe the evidence supports that. When we got those installed in our neighbourhood, City staff indicated that their data showed the speed boards to be effective in lowering speeds. I especially like the ones that show green, orange and red. Now if only they could have an additional setting that says “Stop driving like a dick!”.

[daud]

question regarding Elgin street.

I had thought they were going to bury the hydro lines? Is that going to happen because I note all the hydro poles and wires seem to be there. Is this something they will remove in the spring or am I mistaken about the lines?

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by daud

question regarding Elgin street.

I had thought they were going to bury the hydro lines? Is that going to happen because I note all the hydro poles and wires seem to be there. Is this something they will remove in the spring or am I mistaken about the lines?

New hydro lines have been buried. Old lines will be taken down this Spring.

https://ottawa.ca/en/news/buried-hyd...re-trees-oh-my

[Dengler Avenue]

I was gonna check out the single point interchange** between Airport Parkway and Hunt Club Road then saw the former all orange. What’s going on??

Oh wait never mind 416’s like that too. I guess it’s snowing hard right now?

** For context, I was discussing SPUI with SSPers in other threads and I mentioned that one.

[harls]

What is going on at route 105 near Old Chelsea Road? I drove past this morning and saw a bunch of transports quebec trucks out in the field near where the old Hull Chelsea Wakefield steam train used to cross. They were clearing the bushes and trees on the west side of the road. IIRC, it is the ROW for a proposed autoroute extension between the 5 and 50...

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by harls

What is going on at route 105 near Old Chelsea Road? I drove past this morning and saw a bunch of transports quebec trucks out in the field near where the old Hull Chelsea Wakefield steam train used to cross. They were clearing the bushes and trees on the west side of the road. IIRC, it is the ROW for a proposed autoroute extension between the 5 and 50...

Between 5 and 50? A550 revived? Or are you talking about A5 extension?

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Between 5 and 50? A550 revived? Or are you talking about A5 extension?

I strongly doubt it. That's not even in the top 10 on the regional transportation priorities list.

[harls]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Between 5 and 50? A550 revived? Or are you talking about A5 extension?

Yes, between the 5 and 50.

It would be surprising if that were revived, as Acajack said. They are just likely doing clean up on the ROW.. or maybe a housing development is expanding.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I strongly doubt it. That's not even in the top 10 on the regional transportation priorities list.

Originally Posted by harls

Yes, between the 5 and 50.
I’m confused. You highly doubt... which project?
It would be surprising if that were revived, as Acajack said. They are just likely doing clean up on the ROW.. or maybe a housing development is expanding.

I don’t expect A550 to be brought back, either. But if not even A5 extension makes it to the top 10, that’s sad.

[TransitZilla]

I don't care much about this road project, but I am heartened that Jeff Leiper is the new Acting Chair of the Transportation Committee.

https://ottawa.ca/en/news/campeau-dr...s-kanata-north

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

I don't care much about this road project, but I am heartened that Jeff Leiper is the new Acting Chair of the Transportation Committee.

https://ottawa.ca/en/news/campeau-dr...s-kanata-north

I'm shocked!!

[Richard Eade]

Shocked that Brad doesn’t care much about that project? Or that Councilor Leiper is the ‘Acting Chair” of the Transportation Committee?

If it is the second, then it should not have come as a surprise that Councilor Blais has put his municipal duties on the back-burner as he runs for a seat in the Provincial Government. And, that the Vice-Chair of a committee would assume the duties of the Chair if the Chair was not performing their duties. Since Councilor Blais was the Chair of the Transportation Committee; and Councilor Leiper is the Vice-Chair, Councilor Leiper has taken the role of ‘Acting Chair’.

(But, maybe, I am taking your comment too literally.)