Laval - 40 km/h dans les zones résidentielles: un projet à l’étude

[Cyrus]

Oh my god I'm going to go nuts, traffic calming? DO I LOOK CALM? AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

 

 

They cause all kinds of problems, especially you often end up with people slamming the brakes for the bump, hitting the gas after, etc. And if you go faster the bump isn't so bad if you have a vehicle with good suspension, on my truck it is less trouble to just slam the bump at 50 km/h than to slow...

 

I think there is also a big problem with them as how they are just as much an impediment to fire trucks, police and especially ambulances because the bump can send all the equipment moving around, etc. And if you are an old person it can be very painful to drive on. Of course in Montreal we have natural speed bumps everywhere that can break your wheels too

 

I think it is a big issue that you end up making the road so dangerous, that people slow down, so they don't go flying into someone's house... but the point should be safety and not speed per se... stop signs also are generally highly overused. There should never be a all-direction stop sign except for very few, poor sightline situations, it was never designed for this, yet they have become the norm now! I think probably the best thing for residential streets is to adopt the "naked streets" concept from that Dutch guy...

 

I totally agree with you on that one. Frankly, speed limits alone are an insufficient deterrent to excess speed.

 

If you designate a 30km/h zone, then you ought to automatically install speed bumps to go with it. I'm talking speed bumps. The kind where you'll lose your entire suspension at the speed bump if you don't slow down to cross it.

 

When you have a 30km/h or 40km/h zone with a lot of little children playing around, there's no excuse for going 60km/h or more. None whatsoever... but some dipshits will still ignore the limit and fly down the street unless you put some killer speed bumps that force them to slow down.

 

Additionally, if you want everyone to come to a full stop when they reach a stop sign, stick some speed bumps there too.

 

In Portugal, my parent's home town has speed bumps at every stop sign and it's a wonderful thing. If you don't come to a stop, your car is going to suffer the consequences.

 

I also have to agree with you that average streets ought to be 50km/h. It's the standard for a reason. It's a compromise between safety and practicality. However... if you're in a quiet residential zone on a street that does not accommodate through-traffic, 30km/h with killer speed bumps and that's that.

 

I'm not in favor of a universal 40km/h speed limit, because it encourages complacent behavior. People won't distinguish the difference between an important artery and a quiet residential street with a school nearby.

 

Leave the big roads 50km/h and even 60km/h or 70km/h in some cases, and make the local-only streets 30km/h with speed bumps.

 

Roads are different, neighborhoods are different. There's no reason to apply one speed limit when you ought to have different ones to meet the differing needs.

 

There are all kinds of stupid things with these limits, for example in downtown Montreal, St. Marc street is 50 km/h (now with signs), and St.Mathieu is now signed at 40 km/h. St. Marc is a lot narrower and trickier than is St.Mathieu... between Ste.Catherine and Rene-Levesque you can even go 70 on the wide boulevard, whereas if you did that on the other side on St.Marc, you'd wreck your car and/or kill someone... and of course the narrow streets north, like Lincoln Ave. and such, are now 40, but most people go 20 or 30 or slower when looking for a place to park...

Modifié 8 août 2010 par Cyrus

[Cataclaw]

They cause all kinds of problems, especially you often end up with people slamming the brakes for the bump, hitting the gas after, etc.

 

Then just put them every 50 meters like they already do in many places. Problem solved.

 

And if you go faster the bump isn't so bad if you have a vehicle with good suspension, on my truck it is less trouble to just slam the bump at 50 km/h than to slow...

 

It depends on the speed bump. Obviously a truck can just go through some of the softer ones, but believe me, some of the harder speed bumps can be damaging even to trucks. (Unless you slow down, which is what you're supposed to do.)

 

I think there is also a big problem with them as how they are just as much an impediment to fire trucks, police and especially ambulances because the bump can send all the equipment moving around, etc.

 

They have dynamic speed bumps now that can retract when an emergency vehicle comes by. Also, speed bumps are often arranged in such a way as to permit vehicles to pass without "hitting them" if you drive in the middle of the road, between the going on oncoming lanes. An ambluance with lights and horn blazing will signal other vehicles to move aside, and the ambulance can go on its way unimpeded. Naturally, speed bumps are in low-traffic roads to begin with, so it's not like there would be tons of traffic there anyway. In fact, in your average speed-bump area, the ambulance would most likely not cross a single other car on its path.

 

And if you are an old person it can be very painful to drive on. Of course in Montreal we have natural speed bumps everywhere that can break your wheels too

 

A lot of things can be painful for seniors. In my opinion this is a ridiculous argument.

 

Why are you so against speed bumps? It sounds like you're exactly the kind of speeder i was describing above, that does 60km/h in 30km/h zones. If you are in fact a speeder, then i have no sympathy for you. There's no excuse for endangering others.

Modifié 8 août 2010 par Cataclaw

[Cyrus]

No I hate traffic calming, it is anything except calming...

 

I haven't seen situations where speed bumps are necessary. There is one subdivision near my house whose collector road is the only way to access a nearby supermarket, so they put stop signs and speed bumps all over, like ten bumps in less than 1 km. Ridiculous...

 

Near my house there is also one they put in during the summer and remove for the winter for the plow to pass, at a stop sign. I never see people really running the sign in winter nor summer, and the traffic is very low there.

 

If there is a problem with stop sign running, I think it is important to first note if the stop sign is warranted to be there. If it is needed for an access thing, then, instead of the bump, remove everything and make a roundabout! Less fuel burned and less aggravated drivers = safer drivers and community.

 

If there is a speeding problem, then just call the local police and have them park a guy there, after all, they love to give tickets and at least in a residential area with people doing 90 km in the zone of 30, they should be doing so...

[Cataclaw]

No I hate traffic calming, it is anything except calming...

 

Not to sound nasty or anything, but quite franky... too bad if you don't like them. They get the job done.

 

90% of the population respecting the speed limit means that 10% will still speed. Speed bumps ensure that 100% of the population respects the speed limit.

 

It only takes one car going too fast to hit a little kid.

 

 

The other thing i like in Europe is dynamic lights. Coupled with dynamic speed bumps, you have an excellent deterrent to speeding.

 

50km/h zone. If you go too fast, a speed bump will pop out of the ground 500m away and a green light will turn red for you. If you respect the speed limit, no such measures will come up. If you speed up to try and beat the red light, the speed bump will rape your car. If you blow through the red light anyway, a camera will ticket you.

Modifié 8 août 2010 par Cataclaw

[Cyrus]

This is the problem though that is clouding the debate. People are equating raw speed with dead children, but the bump itself is very dangerous, which is why reasonable people come almost to a stop for the bump... what if someone goes too quick through the bump and goes flying off into a house or something? What is the actual statistical effects of these measures on road safety?

 

Some data:

http://www.digitalthreads.com/rada/engr.html

 

"... actual tests of various experimental designs have demonstrated the physical inability of a speed bump to control all types of light weight and heavy weight vehicles successfully. In fact, a softsprung sedan is encouraged to increase speed for a better ride, while some vehicles may lose control."

 

"The State of Texas does not recognize speed humps an official traffic control device. This decision is based on various studies which have all raised concern about the potential dangers of speed humps. State and Local Governments can be held liable for injuries caused by speed humps. For these reasons, the City of Missouri City does not use speed humps on public streets."

 

"... the accident rate per month has increased from .65 to a 1.0."

 

That is one thing that we need to do better in Montreal, synchronization of the traffic lights. There are some that almost seem purposely set to stop all the traffic and be green on the other side for nobody...

 

Why are you so against speed bumps? It sounds like you're exactly the kind of speeder i was describing above, that does 60km/h in 30km/h zones. If you are in fact a speeder, then i have no sympathy for you. There's no excuse for endangering others.

 

Come on, don't try a Mtlskyline on me, I drive very slowly in residential areas...

Modifié 8 août 2010 par Cyrus

[OursNoir]

Un dos d'âne n'est pas une bonne mesure à instaurer, peu importe la rue et le type de trafic qui l'arpente. Il existe bien d'autres mesures qui affectent la psychologie du conducteur plutôt que la physique du véhicule.

 

Et surtout, le genre de personne qui roule 90 dans un quartier résidentiel, c'est le même genre qui va faire crier ses pneus après chaque dos d'âne et accélérer en con, et qui possède probablement une voiture avec un échappement illégal et très bruyant en accélération.

 

La meilleure chose, c'est un vieux vélo rouillé, un bon élan et le timing idéal pour que ce vélo arrive tout juste devant l'idiot qui roule 3 fois la limite de vitesse

[Cataclaw]

If you're in a 30km/h zone and you go so fast that you actually lose control of your vehicle on a straight-line road over a speed bump, then you were driving recklessly to begin with.

 

It's all about implementation.

 

If you have a stop sign, and then a street, and then 50m later a speed bump, and another, and so on until the end of the street, it isn't possible to be going fas, unless you burned through the stop sign to begin with.

 

Un dos d'âne n'est pas une bonne mesure à instaurer, peu importe la rue et le type de trafic qui l'arpente. Il existe bien d'autres mesures qui affectent la psychologie du conducteur plutôt que la physique du véhicule.

 

Certains conducteurs dangereux ne sont pas affectés par des mesures psychologiques.

 

Ton idée de vélo... j'aime ça!

 

 

And another thing -- we have a serious problem of people not respecting pedestrian crosswalks. Pedestrians have priority at crosswalks and drivers are obligated to come to a complete stop in order to let pedestrians cross. But here in Quebec, it seems that nobody ever stops for pedestrians. As a pedestrian, i'm very weary of crossing at a crosswalk because all too often, the oncoming driver has no intention of stopping. Will i risk my life because some idiot doesn't feel like respecting the law?

 

I wonder what measures we could implement to start changing this...

Modifié 8 août 2010 par Cataclaw

[Cyrus]

If you're in a 30km/h zone and you go so fast that you actually lose control of your vehicle on a straight-line road over a speed bump, then you were driving recklessly to begin with.

 

Certainly, but now there is an accident where before, there wasn't... not having accidents is the point of the whole excercise.

[Cataclaw]

Certainly, but now there is an accident where before, there wasn't... not having accidents is the point of the whole excercise.

 

That's debatable. If you're going so fast that you lose control over a speed bump, then odds are you would probably hit somebody and/or lose control of your vehicle even without a speed bump. I mean, come on. Now we're taking this discussion into crazy hypotheticals.

 

And another thing -- we have a serious problem of people not respecting pedestrian crosswalks. Pedestrians have priority at crosswalks and drivers are obligated to come to a complete stop in order to let pedestrians cross. But here in Quebec, it seems that nobody ever stops for pedestrians. As a pedestrian, i'm very weary of crossing at a crosswalk because all too often, the oncoming driver has no intention of stopping. Will i risk my life because some idiot doesn't feel like respecting the law?

 

I wonder what measures we could implement to start changing this...

[Cyrus]

I agree that pedestrian crosswalks are not widely respected in Quebec. If you go to Alberta the fine for not yielding to pedestrians is extremely high (something like 500$) and everyone is stopping for the pedestrians every time.

 

However, the pedestrian crosswalk is a rare thing to have in Quebec, typically they are not used, and perhaps consequently it means drivers are not familiar with this design.

 

I can't say that I like the concept, since it really doesn't provide much for the pedestrian, better to instead cross at an intersection where drivers will be looking for the pedestrians. I like the typical Quebec approach of minimizing their number as much as possible (you see more though in small towns, since the intersections are fewer).

 

Another factor is common sense, there is usually a kind of moment where the driver and pedestrian decide who gets to go, if the ped runs out into the crosswalk the driver will stop, if the pedestrian waits the driver continues, etc. There is an aspect of self-preservation / not being an asshole about who gets to go first though also. If I'm waiting at a crosswalk and there is one car coming I'd let him go, but if there is a line of cars I would want to go first because I don't have the time to wait around standing there.

 

Of course in Montreal, people dart out between parked cars and walk leisurely across the street regardless of crosswalk or not, not looking anywhere except at the Blackberry typing a text, listening to ipod, so maybe we don't need it...

 

Measures that can be implemented I would say you can put a crosswalk sign (many I've seen have no sign, only the zebra lines), and perhaps a sign with flashing lights (like the one on St.Marc). Of course a third option, is if practical, remove the crosswalk Of course other things that are obvious is to make sure the lines are painted well as the paint wears off over time, and etc.

Modifié 8 août 2010 par Cyrus