OT: Sens Lounge -The four seasons edition

[BigRig4]

I was hoping more people would vent about getting dinged on King Edward, didn't know it would evolve.. I'm so sorry. Speeding is bad, but 5kph over for a ticket in a 40 is a little much. What if I just sneezed and touched the throttle?

What's the threshold for actually being considering speeding? I was always under the impression it was 10 over before they'd actually pull you over/ticket you.

 

[Beech]

I was hoping more people would vent about getting dinged on King Edward, didn't know it would evolve.. I'm so sorry. Speeding is bad, but 5kph over for a ticket in a 40 is a little much. What if I just sneezed and touched the throttle?

An un-named Councilor in this city was happy that the provincial government sent us $50 million for road maintenance in his riding/town.

he was forthright in telling me, $800,000 a KM is the cost. I must confess that that was less than I had been previously aware of. I was always told $1 Million a KM. luckily, we are more efficient here!!!!!

So, $50 M gets you 62 km of paved road. WOOOOHHOOOOO.

The region that is in question, is about 20 km x 20 km and like most is about 1% road and a road is some 15 M wide. Means about 267 KM of road... He was tickled pink that he can pave 62 kM.

Now if Santa Clause Ford would send him $50 M a year. it would be beautiful. 62 Km a year in paved road is 1550 km of total road in the 25 year life of a road. And so his area would be world class. In fact, he would repave once every 4 years. The roads would be smoother than a pool table top.

But Old Santa Ford is sending a one time payment. The remaining 205 KM of road will no be touched and will deteriorate.

Now, Old Santa, he seems to like this Councilor, but does not like the 25 others. No $50 Million for them.

the greater Ottawa area is 60 k x 60 K,,, resulting in about 2400 KM of roads.. at 800 K a KM. That is 1.92 BILLION dollars. And if you even that out for 25 years. that is 77 Million a year.

Where do you think that money will come from?

Since Santa Ford is not giving it. YOU PAY. The word tax is nasty. It leads to politicians being booted out... But fines, tickets, other "dings", well no problems.

Sutcliff need 77 M a year, or this city's roads will look like the Donbas region. Where I live is now 26 years old. Not one repaving. The un-named Councilor. His area is even older. His roads are practically gravel. I know, I cycle them. The rural areas in Ottawa, un-touched. And roads that are finished.

77 million. That is a hole lot of coin. And it has to be collected, or you won't worry about driving. The roads will be gravel.

 

[Micklebot]

I was hoping more people would vent about getting dinged on King Edward, didn't know it would evolve.. I'm so sorry. Speeding is bad, but 5kph over for a ticket in a 40 is a little much. What if I just sneezed and touched the throttle?

What's the threshold for actually being considering speeding? I was always under the impression it was 10 over before they'd actually pull you over/ticket you.

Technically, you can be fined for anything over, whether it's 1 or 5.

Typically, an officer won't bother under 10, and they'll often knock it down to 10 to lessen the likelihood that you'll challenge it.

With the automated ones, most cities include a grace zone, but they don't advertise that since it would just result in everyone going up to that grace point.

Personally, I find I'm less forgiving of people who speed in residential zones, so I don't have any sympathy for someone getting a 5km/h ticket in a 40 zone, though I haven't heard or seen anyone get a ticket for 5km/h outside of anecdotally here. .

 

[FunkySeeFunkyDoo]

Light snow days are usually the worst for driving so having a year round speed reduction seems a little excessive.

Well I’d be more than happy if the speed limit was 40 or 45 kph and people actually obeyed it.

 

[AchtzehnBaby]

gosh darnit all!

just got my first speeding ticket in 500 years

photo radar

49 in a 30.... Effing gov't

 

[maclean]

I'm a minute man, I got places to be

As much as I get that you're joking, it does seem to be an unpleasant characteristic of some drivers that they think they should be able to practically teleport when driving, as if owning a car was a ticket to not have to plan your time

 

[Tnuoc Alucard]

Automated Speed Enforcement Camera Locations

Provides longitude and latitude coordinates for City operated Automated Speed Enforcement cameras.

open.ottawa.ca

 

[Beech]

As much as I get that you're joking, it does seem to be an unpleasant characteristic of some drivers that they think they should be able to practically teleport when driving, as if owning a car was a ticket to not have to plan your time

Mac,

Vimy Bridge has a Bus lane. That lane extends 500 M before it, 500 M of bridge and 500 M after it. So 1.5 Km of bus lane, and a bike lane outside of that to provide even more space.

It is a drag strip. It is for people who race down it to bypass traffic. And then do the suicide cut-in. or turn off.

If you installed a giant zapper to knock off every unauthorized vehicle. The population of River Side South and Barrehaven would reduce to near zero within a week.

if that zapper was loosened and set to zap idiots who do a 100 kmh. You would still knock off 2-3 DOZEN morons a day. It would do more to keep the population in check than any pandemic.

It is what we have become. And no one wants to stop anything. Because, we cannot. And when you cannot stop something, you just let it be and live with the damage.

 

[Masked]

They artificially lower the speed limits on the streets where they put those camera's knowing that people will likely travel faster because it feels normal to do so. This is such a money grab/ hidden tax on people. All in the name of making streets safer yet there is no evidence that there was ever a problem that needed solving.

I'd argue that the speed cameras make streets less safe. Watching out for speed cameras is one more distraction that can prevent you from staying aware of the vehicles on the road. Roads like King Edward, Woodroffe and Hunt Club can be so busy and hectic that additional signage for the speed cameras can be a dangerous distraction.

 

[Micklebot]

I'd argue that the speed cameras make streets less safe. Watching out for speed cameras is one more distraction that can prevent you from staying aware of the vehicles on the road. Roads like King Edward, Woodroffe and Hunt Club can be so busy and hectic that additional signage for the speed cameras can be a dangerous distraction.

Fortunately we don't have to rely on your intuition because there have been numerous studies and meta studies on the efficacy of speed cameras which show the opposite.

https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD004607.pub3/abstract

"Thirty five studies met the inclusion criteria. Compared with controls, the relative reduction in average speed ranged from 1% to 15% and the reduction in proportion of vehicles speeding ranged from 14% to 65%. In the vicinity of camera sites, the pre/post reductions ranged from 8% to 49% for all crashes and 11% to 44% for fatal and serious injury crashes. Compared with controls, the relative improvement in pre/post injury crash proportions ranged from 8% to 50%."

 

[Stylizer1]

I can't understand why Walkley being a major east - west road and having a speed limit of 50kmh. As it transitions into Baseline road it goes up to 60kmh then as Baseline passes greenbank it goes to 70kmh.

 

[Masked]

Fortunately we don't have to rely on your intuition because there have been numerous studies and meta studies on the efficacy of speed cameras which show the opposite.

https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD004607.pub3/abstract

"Thirty five studies met the inclusion criteria. Compared with controls, the relative reduction in average speed ranged from 1% to 15% and the reduction in proportion of vehicles speeding ranged from 14% to 65%. In the vicinity of camera sites, the pre/post reductions ranged from 8% to 49% for all crashes and 11% to 44% for fatal and serious injury crashes. Compared with controls, the relative improvement in pre/post injury crash proportions ranged from 8% to 50%."

You missed this part:

To affirm this finding, higher quality studies, using well designed controlled trials where possible, and studies conducted over adequate length of time (including lengthy follow‐up periods) with sufficient data collection points, both before and after the implementation of speed cameras, are needed.

It's hard to assess this when the relevant parts of it are behind a paywall.

 

[Stylizer1]

In Orleans on Jeanne D'arc Blvd where there is a speed trap there is about 1 km stretch where the speed limit changes 4 times from 60 to 40 to 60 to 50. How is that not a trap between Voyageur and Bilberry? That speed camera drops it from 60 to 40 but only when the lights are flashing.

 

[Micklebot]

You missed this part:

To affirm this finding, higher quality studies, using well designed controlled trials where possible, and studies conducted over adequate length of time (including lengthy follow‐up periods) with sufficient data collection points, both before and after the implementation of speed cameras, are needed.

It's hard to assess this when the relevant parts of it are behind a paywall.

Oh sure, a recommendation to do more in depth studies completely invalidates the studies, and thus makes your intuition far more reliable.

Here's the authors conclusion in full,
"Despite the methodological limitations and the variability in degree of signal to noise effect, the consistency of reported reductions in speed and crash outcomes across all studies show that speed cameras are a worthwhile intervention for reducing the number of road traffic injuries and deaths. However, whilst the the evidence base clearly demonstrates a positive direction in the effect, an overall magnitude of this effect is currently not deducible due to heterogeneity and lack of methodological rigour. More studies of a scientifically rigorous and homogenous nature are necessary, to provide the answer to the magnitude of effect."

So, yeah, it says they should do more studies to determine the magnitude, the direction of the effect is clear.

The point is the evidence currently suggest the exact opposite of what your intuition suggested. The data may not be of a high enough quality to assume the trend shown there would apply writ large, but they are still enough to suggest that you are likely wrong about speed cameras increasing risk.

You made a stupid, unsubstantiated claim, not a hill you should be willing to die on, but you do you.

 

[Micklebot]

In Orleans on Jeanne D'arc Blvd where there is a speed trap there is about 1 km stretch where the speed limit changes 4 times from 60 to 40 to 60 to 50. How is that not a trap between Voyageur and Bilberry? That speed camera drops it from 60 to 40 but only when the lights are flashing.

The speed camera didn't change the limit there, the limit has been the same for over a decade due to it being a school zone. The speed camera was brought in because in spite of the flashing lights and signage, people continued to speed along a stretch where elementary school and middle school and kids were crossing the road.

It's not a trap, it's an attempt to change behaviour on a stretch of road where speed humps and other traffic calming options aren't available. The 40km limit only applies during school hours (7am-6pm I think).

 

[milkbag]

If they're gonna put speed cameras everywhere they should start putting them on eligible onramps (like the aircraft-runway-sized one Woodroffe E) and fine people merging onto the 417 going 60.
That's a much bigger problem than people going 40 in a 30 imo.

 

[Stylizer1]

The speed camera didn't change the limit there, the limit has been the same for over a decade due to it being a school zone. The speed camera was brought in because in spite of the flashing lights and signage, people continued to speed along a stretch where elementary school and middle school and kids were crossing the road.

It's not a trap, it's an attempt to change behaviour on a stretch of road where speed humps and other traffic calming options aren't available. The 40km limit only applies during school hours (7am-6pm I think).

so kids J walking must be the reason then because the middle school is not on an intersection and St. Matts is in the 50 km zone with no speed camera. So in 1 kmh it goes from 60 to 40 to 60 to 40 to 50.The school close to the 174 also has a red light camera. Seem like teaching kids to use the side walk makes more sense than fining people stupid speeding tickets again where there is no problem. Just set the speed camera at 60 and those who break the limit get a fine.

If they're gonna put speed cameras everywhere they should start putting them on eligible onramps (like the aircraft-runway-sized one Woodroffe E) and fine people merging onto the 417 going 60.
That's a much bigger problem than people going 40 in a 30 imo.

i agree.

 

[Micklebot]

so kids J walking must be the reason then because the middle school is not near an intersection and St. Matts is in the 50 km zone with no speed camera. So in 1 kmh it goes from 60 to 40 to 60 to 40 to 50.The school close to the 174 also has a red light camera. Seem like teaching kids to use the side walk makes more sense than fining people stupid speeding tickets again where there is no problem. Just set the speed camera at 60 and those who break the limit get a fine.

there are three schools in that stretch, St Matts, a catholic highschool, Terry fox, a Middle school (6-8) and Convent Glen Catholic, an elementary school (JK to 6). The speed camera is in between two sets of lights where most crossing occurs for the two schools closer to the highway, but there is a drop to 40 in front of both Terry Fox and convent Glen catholic.

The issue is people were speeding, quite a lot, in that area. Teaching kids to use the sidewalks (they already do, I rarely see kids J walk in that area as there isn't any incentive since the access to the main road from feeders comes at lights) doesn't change the fact that people are speeding. Don't want a fine, it's easy, don't speed. Been driving that stretch of road for about 30 years now and never got a speeding ticket, but I have seen loads of idiots driving way too fast along that stretch.

 

[Stylizer1]

there are three schools in that stretch, St Matts, a catholic highschool, Terry fox, a Middle school (6-8) and Convent Glen Catholic, an elementary school (JK to 6). The speed camera is in between two sets of lights where most crossing occurs for the two schools closer to the highway, but there is a drop to 40 in front of both Terry Fox and convent Glen catholic.

The issue is people were speeding, quite a lot, in that area. Teaching kids to use the sidewalks (they already do, I rarely see kids J walk in that area as there isn't any incentive since the access to the main road from feeders comes at lights) doesn't change the fact that people are speeding. Don't want a fine, it's easy, don't speed. Been driving that stretch of road for about 30 years now and never got a speeding ticket, but I have seen loads of idiots driving way too fast along that stretch.

So are people speeding going around corners at the intersections? Does speeding and kids walking on sidewalks have anything to do with one another in regards to these cameras? The excuse is that there are schools there but what does having cameras do to protect kids and where are the stats to back that up on that specific road?

 

[Micklebot]

So are people speeding going around corners at the intersections? Does speeding and kids walking on sidewalks have anything to do with one another in regards to these cameras? The excuse is that there are schools there but what does having cameras do to protect kids and where are the stats to back that up on that specific road?

School zones always have reduced speeds, that has nothing to do with the camera. The speed limits have predated the cameras by a decade +.

The excuse is you don't want to go slightly slower so you're complaining about a camera that catches you when you do and making unsubstantiated claims that none of this is needed. Speed limits are determined based on a set of industry best practices which are informed by empirical evidence which typically will look at historical data on accidents, injuries, road conditions, traffic volume, pedestrian volume, ect . The cameras are there purely for enforcement of the speed limits. If you don't like the speed limit, you can complain to your counselor to get them changed, but they'll likely just point to the guidelines they followed to arrive at that number and tell you to suck it up. If you don't like getting tickets, don't speed.

It's not hard to go the speed limit, it typically doesn't make a big difference in travel time either.

 

[Masked]

Oh sure, a recommendation to do more in depth studies completely invalidates the studies, and thus makes your intuition far more reliable.

Here's the authors conclusion in full,
"Despite the methodological limitations and the variability in degree of signal to noise effect, the consistency of reported reductions in speed and crash outcomes across all studies show that speed cameras are a worthwhile intervention for reducing the number of road traffic injuries and deaths. However, whilst the the evidence base clearly demonstrates a positive direction in the effect, an overall magnitude of this effect is currently not deducible due to heterogeneity and lack of methodological rigour. More studies of a scientifically rigorous and homogenous nature are necessary, to provide the answer to the magnitude of effect."

So, yeah, it says they should do more studies to determine the magnitude, the direction of the effect is clear.

The point is the evidence currently suggest the exact opposite of what your intuition suggested. The data may not be of a high enough quality to assume the trend shown there would apply writ large, but they are still enough to suggest that you are likely wrong about speed cameras increasing risk.

You made a stupid, unsubstantiated claim, not a hill you should be willing to die on, but you do you.

Yes, I should believe unnamed unsourced studies are valid without having the opportunity to look at them. Not knowing where they took place and when or the criteria involved in the study doesn't matter. Believe the studies.

 

[Stylizer1]

School zones always have reduced speeds, that has nothing to do with the camera. The speed limits have predated the cameras by a decade +.

The excuse is you don't want to go slightly slower so you're complaining about a camera that catches you when you do and making unsubstantiated claims that none of this is needed. Speed limits are determined based on a set of industry best practices which are informed by empirical evidence which typically will look at historical data on accidents, injuries, road conditions, traffic volume, pedestrian volume, ect . The cameras are there purely for enforcement of the speed limits. If you don't like the speed limit, you can complain to your counselor to get them changed, but they'll likely just point to the guidelines they followed to arrive at that number and tell you to suck it up. If you don't like getting tickets, don't speed.

It's not hard to go the speed limit, it typically doesn't make a big difference in travel time either.

I'm complaining about all cameras and how they are for safety when in reality their sole purpose is to generate profits for the city. Walkley road is a prime example. Jeanne D'Arc is ridiculous.

I would rather complain here thank you because no city official is in favour of losing their share of the pot.

 

[Loach]

so kids J walking must be the reason then because the middle school is not on an intersection and St. Matts is in the 50 km zone with no speed camera. So in 1 kmh it goes from 60 to 40 to 60 to 40 to 50.The school close to the 174 also has a red light camera. Seem like teaching kids to use the side walk makes more sense than fining people stupid speeding tickets again where there is no problem. Just set the speed camera at 60 and those who break the limit get a fine.


i agree.

Up and down speed limits. Prince of Wales is a good one for that. 1/2 Farrhaven use it everyday and they all go 65 to 75. No reason that bugger isn't 90 all the way.

 

[Micklebot]

Yes, I should believe unnamed unsourced studies are valid without having the opportunity to look at them. Not knowing where they took place and when or the criteria involved in the study doesn't matter. Believe the studies.

Wow, keep digging. Cochrane reviews are well regarded, certainly more reliable than your musings. But go ahead and ignore that studies have been done, and the results of them are very likely incorporated into decision making processes.

here's another study since you seem to want to delve into the peer review process

Effectiveness of speed cameras in preventing road traffic collisions and related casualties: systematic review

Objectives To assess whether speed cameras reduce road traffic collisions and related casualties.Design Systematic review.Data sources Cochrane Injuries Group Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline, Embase, Social ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Similar conclusions from this one but this is all just a distraction on your part. You made the dumb claim that speed cameras may make it less safe. I pointed out that the current research suggest the opposite is true. Could the evidence be improved on, absolutely. But what we know right now is the initial findings are contrary to your presumably non expert opinions on the matter.

When you present evidence that is more reliable than the links I provided, maybe we can revisit the conversation, until then, we know there are two meta studies that point towards you being wrong, even if the studies reviewed could improve their evidence.

 

[Stylizer1]

Up and down speed limits. Prince of Wales is a good one for that. 1/2 Farrhaven use it everyday and they all go 65 to 75. No reason that bugger isn't 90 all the way.

Walkley being a major east - west road and having a speed limit of 50kmh. As it transitions into Baseline road it goes up to 60kmh then as Baseline passes greenbank it goes to 70kmh and it has a speeed camera.