Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Alan Langford's avatar

I refer you to an excellent discussion of road speed limits by "Not Just Bikes" at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bglWCuCMSWc

I'll ask the question proposed in the video. "Why is the speed limit 40 there?" I can see setting the limit to 30 km/h near Island Park, not only because there are seniors who cross the road at that point, but because people navigating over the dam and canal should be going slow and using caution anyway. For the rest of the road, a limit of 40 km/h seems out of place, which is *why* drivers are speeding.

The "logical next step" would be to set the speed limit to 60 km/h (which is clearly what the road was designed for), or if there's an actual reason for the limit beyond entitlement, to install traffic calming devices that will force drivers to lower their speed. Speed cameras introduce ongoing costs for maintaining the equipment, processing the data, sending out fines, collecting fines. As we've seen with more remote radar-based "slow down" signs, local yahoos might even damage the cameras, leading to more expense. Modifying the road would incur a larger initial capital cost, but lower costs for ongoing operation.

Expand full comment
Objective Stomach's avatar

Since most only read the "trusted" MSN and their mockingbird narratives, here is a read regarding camera speed enforcement.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/drive/mobility/article-why-are-we-so-obsessed-with-photo-radar-when-there-are-better-anti/

In short - its a cash grab. There are better ways.

Expand full comment
7 more comments...

No posts