News   Dec 20, 2024
UrbanToronto Year-End Poll: Vote on the Best Buildings of 2024, presented by Sapphire Balconies
 3.4K     11 
News   Dec 20, 2024
UrbanToronto's Social Media Presence Skyrocketed in 2024
 1.2K     3 
News   Dec 20, 2024
Mattamy Homes Records A Year of Accomplishments
 2K     0 

Roads: Increase Ontario 400-series Highway Speed Limit

sixrings said:
maybe they can increase the limits when they introduce tolling.. That way people can feel theyre getting something for their tolls immediately.
Click to expand...

hmm...I dont think that can work well since people are always changing lanes. That is unless theres an express lane like the 401. Itd be more logical to just toll everyone who uses it
Interesting thought though.... I know that in Italy they have normal highways and parallel express freeways that are tolled with the latter having 130 limits
 
Many toll roads in big US cities now have variable-rate express lane toll roads, so as it gets more congested, the cost to use the express lanes rises, to keep them moving (ie, to keep the same amount of people on them).
 
cplchanb said:
well its all relative, the point I wanted to bring across is that slow drivers are equally a hazard on the freeways as unreasonably excessive (30+) speeders
Click to expand...

Perhaps than with an increase in the maximum speed limit, a minimum speed limit may also be introduced as exists in some jurisdictions. Say a maximum of 120, minimum of 100, then have 'zero tolerance' on either end: 10k over the limit ticket; 10k under the limit, ticket. This should hopefully eliminate the large deltas in speeds between vehicles.

I'm also in favour of percentage of speed limits fines vs hard x over the limit. For example 120 in a 100 zone is 20k over the limit or 20% over; while 60 in a 40 still is 20k over the limit but is 50% above the limit. Using percentage based fines it is obvious the driver doing 60 in a 40 is more dangerous than the one doing 120 in a 100
 
TOareaFan said:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...ays-with-raised-speed-limits/article30670313/
Click to expand...

Rolling back limits is a pretty knee jerk reaction especially if theres insufficient data to prove that increase in speeds is the chief cause. Besides, how does this
compare to the rest of the world especially in Europe where speeds are even greater? I think this is more due to unskilled drivers mixing in with fast drivers. Overseas
the general consensus is that if youre not going fast you drive on the right lane only. Here and esp in Ont, we have granny speed drivers in the left lane which obviously
poses a danger when faster cars need to weave around those rolling chicanes. I think its better to improve driver education with 21st century speeds than to stay fixed on 1960s limits. Not to mention we need to train drivers to be more proficient at driving on highways period.
 
"He said B.C. highways where speed limits were not raised also saw an increase in the collision rate, a climb of 9 per cent. He said distracted driving, changing weather conditions, driver error, alcohol and wild animals are among the elements that can also factor into highway crashes."

Distracted driving is a way, way, way bigger problem than speeding.
 
To expand on my Simpsons reference, the headline in the Globe article is misleading at best. "Nearly half" means that the majority of the zones had no increase in accidents. 14 of 33 zones saw an increase in accidents, or 42%.

"Of the 14 segments that saw crash rates go up between Nov. 1, 2014, and Oct. 31, 2015, Mr. Stone said seven had an increase in the rate of speed. The other seven segments, he said, saw a reduction in the rate of speed, but the collision rate increased nonetheless."

So to summarize, most highway sections with higher speed limits had no increase in accidents, accident rates also increased on sections where speed limits were unchanged, and of the sections with higher accident rates, lower speeds were just as common as higher speeds. Based on that, it seems that raising the speed limits had very little effect on how fast people actually drive.

"The B.C. government increased speed limits along the stretches of highway in 2014 – generally by 10 kilometres per hour, and against the recommendations of some health officials and police."

Some health officials and police? Which ones? How many? Does that mean that some (or most) health officials and police were in favour of higher speed limits? What do health officials know about highway design?

What shoddy journalism.
 
Ah driver training. The great sphinx riddle in GTA and Ontario driving (maybe less so in rural ONT). When I see drivers at 11 pm with out turning on their tail lights (even see the occasional driver without their head lights on) how can we expect to grasp the "keep right except to pass" notion when even this minuscule thing such as turning on your vehicles full lighting system is missed by some.

Some might argue that there is an attitude in ONT of having a "right" to drive rather than a privilege, that driver training and testing is too easy here. Then point to underground industries in which people effectively pay for their license rather than earn them, thus putting incapable people behind the wheel of vehicles. In Europe they say it is much more difficult to earn your license, and this IMHO
 
Can we at leas t start with catching up to the rest of Canada and the US with 110kph limits? After that we can discuss going up from there.

Another issue to consider is the ridiculous requirement for uniformity. 100 in urban areas is fine. 100 in rural areas is ridiculously low. There's no reason it can't be 110 in the GTA and GOA and through Kingston. And 130 in the rural areas. With full speed camera enforcement.

Likewise. No need for uniform limits for all vehicles. Limit trucks to 110. Everywhere.
 
...and speaking of liquor and freeway speeds, impaired driving causing death is just a slap on the wrist in the grand scheme of things! Ask Marco Muzzo.

Yes, impaired driving causing death is technically manslaughter, but has a much more lenient punishment.
 
Last edited:
Johnny Au said:
...and speaking of liquor and freeway speeds, impaired driving causing death is just a slap on the wrist in the grand scheme of things! Ask Marco Muzzo.

Yes, impaired driving causing death is technically manslaughter, but has a much more lenient punishment.
Click to expand...

is that true?

Muzzo got drunk and killed with a car.....10 years less time served plus a lifelong driving ban........Andrew Murray got drunk and killed with a gun.....9 years less time served.

I agree sentences should be tougher but those seem pretty similar to me.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top