+- Waterloo Region Connected (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com)
+-- Forum: Waterloo Region Works (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=14)
+--- Forum: Transportation and Infrastructure (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=25)
+--- Thread: Road design, safety and Vision Zero (/showthread.php?tid=1409)
RE: Road design, safety and Vision Zero - ijmorlan - 01-06-2021
(01-06-2021, 01:19 PM)tomh009 Wrote: People's behaviour tends to be better on four-lane highways (such as highway 6 going toward Hamilton) and worse on six-lane ones (401, where slower people gravitate to the centre lane).
In Germany, where people follow this rule religiously, it's really good because you won't get surprised by people passing on the wrong side or weaving. But on the autobahn you do need to keep your eyes on your mirrors if you do pull into the left lane to make a pass!
Anyway, back to the 401, you might be OK from a ticket point of view driving 100 in the left lane. But you'll aggravate people who want to drive faster, who will then drive even worse than usual and potentially increase accident risks. Not worth it for me.
Just for the record, given that the normal and de facto legal speed is at least 120km/h, I consider it completely inappropriate to sit in the left lane doing less then approximately 120km/h (the exact number is debatable but the fact that it is significantly more than 100 is not). The question is up to what speed this still applies. My vague recollection is that the police seemed to be indicating they could ticket somebody for doing 100 in the left lane; but since this is well under the speed of traffic this actually does make sense under the HTA section quoted above. Maybe this answers the question — if I’m keeping up with traffic, then I won’t be ticketed for not accommodating speed demons who want to go even faster.
I tend to go a medium speed on the 401, so I tend to use the middle or left lane in 6 lane segments; if I’m in the left lane, somebody comes up behind me, and the lane is clear ahead then I will move over to let them pass. I don’t take on traffic enforcement by blocking traffic as a job when I’m driving; but on the other hand I won’t move over if the only result would be to put the vehicle behind me in my former spot.
So for me the question I posed is academic. But still interesting. If I regularly set my cruise control at 140 then it would no longer be academic — would I move over for the guy coming up behind at 160 or just let him tailgate me?
RE: Road design, safety and Vision Zero - dtkvictim - 01-06-2021
(01-06-2021, 01:35 PM)ijmorlan Wrote:(01-06-2021, 01:19 PM)tomh009 Wrote: People's behaviour tends to be better on four-lane highways (such as highway 6 going toward Hamilton) and worse on six-lane ones (401, where slower people gravitate to the centre lane).
In Germany, where people follow this rule religiously, it's really good because you won't get surprised by people passing on the wrong side or weaving. But on the autobahn you do need to keep your eyes on your mirrors if you do pull into the left lane to make a pass!
Anyway, back to the 401, you might be OK from a ticket point of view driving 100 in the left lane. But you'll aggravate people who want to drive faster, who will then drive even worse than usual and potentially increase accident risks. Not worth it for me.
Just for the record, given that the normal and de facto legal speed is at least 120km/h, I consider it completely inappropriate to sit in the left lane doing less then approximately 120km/h (the exact number is debatable but the fact that it is significantly more than 100 is not). The question is up to what speed this still applies. My vague recollection is that the police seemed to be indicating they could ticket somebody for doing 100 in the left lane; but since this is well under the speed of traffic this actually does make sense under the HTA section quoted above. Maybe this answers the question — if I’m keeping up with traffic, then I won’t be ticketed for not accommodating speed demons who want to go even faster.
I tend to go a medium speed on the 401, so I tend to use the middle or left lane in 6 lane segments; if I’m in the left lane, somebody comes up behind me, and the lane is clear ahead then I will move over to let them pass. I don’t take on traffic enforcement by blocking traffic as a job when I’m driving; but on the other hand I won’t move over if the only result would be to put the vehicle behind me in my former spot.
So for me the question I posed is academic. But still interesting. If I regularly set my cruise control at 140 then it would no longer be academic — would I move over for the guy coming up behind at 160 or just let him tailgate me?
As Dan said, it shouldn't have anything to do with speed. You should keep as right as possible, unless actively overtaking. I don't think this is in the laws here though, unlike most of the rest of the civilized world. Having extremely wide highways on top just means people will do whatever they want.
RE: Road design, safety and Vision Zero - danbrotherston - 01-06-2021
(01-06-2021, 01:19 PM)tomh009 Wrote: People's behaviour tends to be better on four-lane highways (such as highway 6 going toward Hamilton) and worse on six-lane ones (401, where slower people gravitate to the centre lane).
In Germany, where people follow this rule religiously, it's really good because you won't get surprised by people passing on the wrong side or weaving. But on the autobahn you do need to keep your eyes on your mirrors if you do pull into the left lane to make a pass!
Anyway, back to the 401, you might be OK from a ticket point of view driving 100 in the left lane. But you'll aggravate people who want to drive faster, who will then drive even worse than usual and potentially increase accident risks. Not worth it for me.
I don't know if I'd highlight highway 6 towards Hamilton, it has one of the worse safety records of any Ontario highway, largely because people speed extremely excessively there, 120 km/h is not uncommon on that 80 km/h road.
In terms of keeping right, yes, people do tend to do better on 4 lane expressways, a big reason why people go in the middle lane on a 6 lane highway is to avoid being in the merge lane, it's just laziness.
In Germany I believe there is actual enforcement of keep right except to pass.
As for my driving, I have zero interest in accomodating other's anger in my driving. I won't intentionally antagonize anyone, but if you want to be as safe as possible as cycling, you shouldn't let anyone bully you into an unsafe situation. I've brought that forward into all my driving. I will never let anyone's angry tailgating and weaving bully me into changing my behaviour.
That being said, I certainly wouldn't cruise at 100 in the left lane, because I keep right except to pass...which honestly is a challenge on the 401 because so many people cruise in the middle lane--you know, I don't know how anyone can ever enjoy driving on the 401, I'll drive highway 7 to Ottawa over the 401 most of the time, it's just a much more pleasant trip.
RE: Road design, safety and Vision Zero - plam - 01-06-2021
Per lane speed limits should be feasible by having signs over each lane, but that requires dynamic speed limits in the first place, which I don't believe are implemented anywhere in Ontario. They are in other places.
RE: Road design, safety and Vision Zero - danbrotherston - 01-06-2021
(01-06-2021, 04:10 PM)plam Wrote: Per lane speed limits should be feasible by having signs over each lane, but that requires dynamic speed limits in the first place, which I don't believe are implemented anywhere in Ontario. They are in other places.
They are implemented in Seattle WA, but only in response to weather.
I don't think dynamic limits are needed in order to do per lane limits.
That being said, I doubt they'd really be allowed in our legislative framework, and forget about convincing engineers to try something as crazy and out there as like...recognizing existing behaviour and updating signage to align with it rather than pretending like people behave differently than their observed behaviour.
RE: Road design, safety and Vision Zero - tomh009 - 01-06-2021
M25 in the UK has dynamic speed limits by lane, in response to not only weather but also congestion.
Then again, M25 is the world's largest car park, even bigger than the DVP.
RE: Road design, safety and Vision Zero - Coke6pk - 01-18-2021
(01-05-2021, 10:05 PM)tomh009 Wrote: I believe that our red-light cameras are near zero-tolerance. But, as you say, that is not the expected "limit" when the sign says "50".
Depends on what you consider "near zero-tolerance".
As mentioned already, they are RED LIGHT cameras, so entering the intersection on an amber will not signal the device. There are two photos taken, one at the stop bar showing the vehicle and the red light, as well as one with the vehicle in the intersection also showing the red light. There are many sensors and measurements stored in the numerical bar at the top of each photo, including length of time of the proceeding amber, the length of time the light was red (in each photo), temperature, vehicle speed, etc.
If a vehicle blew past the stop bar immediately before the light went green, you would have a photo of a car at the stop bar, but the second photo of the vehicle in the intersection would show a green light. I don't see the by-law officer signing those to proceed with that charge (even if the speed at the stop bar was such that they couldn't actually stop).
Lastly, there is a minimum speed before the system will initiate the process, and this is why when you are slowing to a stop the camera doesn't flash. Theoretically, you could proceed at 4 km/h (I have no idea what the threshold really is) right through the intersection, and the system would not take any pictures.
Coke
RE: Road design, safety and Vision Zero - danbrotherston - 01-18-2021
(01-18-2021, 03:51 PM)Coke6pk Wrote:(01-05-2021, 10:05 PM)tomh009 Wrote: I believe that our red-light cameras are near zero-tolerance. But, as you say, that is not the expected "limit" when the sign says "50".
Depends on what you consider "near zero-tolerance".
As mentioned already, they are RED LIGHT cameras, so entering the intersection on an amber will not signal the device. There are two photos taken, one at the stop bar showing the vehicle and the red light, as well as one with the vehicle in the intersection also showing the red light. There are many sensors and measurements stored in the numerical bar at the top of each photo, including length of time of the proceeding amber, the length of time the light was red (in each photo), temperature, vehicle speed, etc.
If a vehicle blew past the stop bar immediately before the light went green, you would have a photo of a car at the stop bar, but the second photo of the vehicle in the intersection would show a green light. I don't see the by-law officer signing those to proceed with that charge (even if the speed at the stop bar was such that they couldn't actually stop).
Lastly, there is a minimum speed before the system will initiate the process, and this is why when you are slowing to a stop the camera doesn't flash. Theoretically, you could proceed at 4 km/h (I have no idea what the threshold really is) right through the intersection, and the system would not take any pictures.
Coke
This is on point. Our traffic lights already have a tolerance built in, signaled with yellow lights. You are supposed to stop if able on an amber, people who choose not to risk running a red if they misjudge.
On flashing, I'm really surprised that this is necessary. We have high definition night vision cameras, we shouldn't need a flash to take a picture.
RE: Road design, safety and Vision Zero - plam - 01-18-2021
(01-18-2021, 04:29 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: This is on point. Our traffic lights already have a tolerance built in, signaled with yellow lights. You are supposed to stop if able on an amber, people who choose not to risk running a red if they misjudge.
On flashing, I'm really surprised that this is necessary. We have high definition night vision cameras, we shouldn't need a flash to take a picture.
And you could already be ticketed for running an amber.
The flash may have additional beneficial effects like letting people know that they're on notice.
RE: Road design, safety and Vision Zero - ijmorlan - 01-18-2021
(01-18-2021, 04:29 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: This is on point. Our traffic lights already have a tolerance built in, signaled with yellow lights. You are supposed to stop if able on an amber, people who choose not to risk running a red if they misjudge.
What does “if able” mean? I mean, do I need to stop if by jamming the brakes on at full application I can stop, or only if I can stop with a more reasonable brake application?
RE: Road design, safety and Vision Zero - plam - 01-18-2021
(01-18-2021, 05:48 PM)ijmorlan Wrote:(01-18-2021, 04:29 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: This is on point. Our traffic lights already have a tolerance built in, signaled with yellow lights. You are supposed to stop if able on an amber, people who choose not to risk running a red if they misjudge.
What does “if able” mean? I mean, do I need to stop if by jamming the brakes on at full application I can stop, or only if I can stop with a more reasonable brake application?
I think that's left to the discretion of a person writing a ticket and what "safe" means. The highway traffic act says:
Quote:Amber light
(15) Every driver approaching a traffic control signal showing a circular amber indication and facing the indication shall stop his or her vehicle if he or she can do so safely, otherwise he or she may proceed with caution. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 144 (15).
RE: Road design, safety and Vision Zero - danbrotherston - 01-18-2021
(01-18-2021, 04:59 PM)plam Wrote:(01-18-2021, 04:29 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: This is on point. Our traffic lights already have a tolerance built in, signaled with yellow lights. You are supposed to stop if able on an amber, people who choose not to risk running a red if they misjudge.
On flashing, I'm really surprised that this is necessary. We have high definition night vision cameras, we shouldn't need a flash to take a picture.
And you could already be ticketed for running an amber.
The flash may have additional beneficial effects like letting people know that they're on notice.
You can be ticketed for running an amber, but no red light camera issues tickets for that (it is considered a judgement call).
I would also bet some money that no amber ticket has been issued to a driver not involved in a collision in the history of our province. Now, that's a long time, so I wouldn't bet a lot of money, but I think it's not an unlikely reality.
RE: Road design, safety and Vision Zero - plam - 01-18-2021
(01-18-2021, 07:56 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: I would also bet some money that no amber ticket has been issued to a driver not involved in a collision in the history of our province. Now, that's a long time, so I wouldn't bet a lot of money, but I think it's not an unlikely reality.
Heard from a cop that they sometimes ask "was that a red or amber" and proceed to give a ticket for an amber.
RE: Road design, safety and Vision Zero - ijmorlan - 01-19-2021
(01-18-2021, 10:07 PM)plam Wrote:(01-18-2021, 07:56 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: I would also bet some money that no amber ticket has been issued to a driver not involved in a collision in the history of our province. Now, that's a long time, so I wouldn't bet a lot of money, but I think it's not an unlikely reality.
Heard from a cop that they sometimes ask "was that a red or amber" and proceed to give a ticket for an amber.
Why ask if they’re always going to write the ticket?
Or is the point that they observe somebody running a definitely-red and might give a warning if the person fesses up, but not if the person claims it was amber?
RE: Road design, safety and Vision Zero - plam - 01-19-2021
(01-19-2021, 12:03 AM)ijmorlan Wrote:(01-18-2021, 10:07 PM)plam Wrote: Heard from a cop that they sometimes ask "was that a red or amber" and proceed to give a ticket for an amber.
Why ask if they’re always going to write the ticket?
Or is the point that they observe somebody running a definitely-red and might give a warning if the person fesses up, but not if the person claims it was amber?
It's a confession, right. I think the cop will also note the confession on the back of the ticket in case it comes up in court. But they also have discretion to give a warning.