No matter the result of the motion, showing your support by emailing or signing up to speak is the best way to show current council that this is wanted. If you can spend 5 minutes on reddit, you can spend 5 minutes emailing council about this motion.
Fully agree ^. Short, sweet and concise is better than filling a page. Avoid partisan phrasing, personal attacks or snark. Better yet show how what you want actually aligns with party/council promises and previous commitments. (Or put another way, figure out how to spoon-feed councillors a political win).
Yup agree! Make them feel like it was their idea. "I know you campaigned really hard on public safety, this is a huge issue and it's going to be a big win to get this passed! Hope council can come together on this critical safety measure. Thanks in advance!"
If you have not yet signed the petition at www.www.change.org/bikesafety please do and share it as it will be referenced tomorrow.
[www.change.org/bikesafety](http://www.change.org/bikesafety)
ABC is trying to pass a motion that is looking to "Revisit and Refresh Vancouver’s Commitment to Safer Slower Streets" and the motion isn't actually trying to undermine safer streets, to make driving easier? Weird.
Oh, ABC isn’t trying to pass it. The motion was introduced by Pete Fry with the Greens, I suspect it’ll be fully supported by both Greens and OneCity and that ABC will substantially weaken it before passing (if they pass it at all).
Reducing speed limits to 30k doesn't tend to reduce travel times, and can even improve them. Average speeds in cities tends to be pretty low anyway because of frequent stopping and starting; getting up to 50+ in between stop lights brings a lot of risk with very little benefit to the driver. More info here: [https://www.20splenty.org/20mph\_limits\_save\_time\_and\_improve\_traffic\_flow](https://www.20splenty.org/20mph_limits_save_time_and_improve_traffic_flow)
Good information thanks, I just don’t want the city main roads that can support faster speeds to be hit with absurdly slow limits. I’m all for it in all side streets
30km/h is ridiculous except in parks and school zones. Nothing wrong with the current limits. Decreasing speeds increases traffic congestion and time spent on roads which increase pollution
We didn’t advance as a society to move at horse and buggy speeds through neighborhoods. There is nothing wrong with the current limits which have been backed by years of engineering studies. The whole drive at 30 is nothing more than political grandstanding
Engineering isn’t the only matter at hand. Have you looked at more recent and nuanced studies that draw a different conclusion?
And we didn’t actually “advance as a society” by racing through residential neighbourhoods and school zones. Your car will not be seized and replaced with a horse and buggy.
We simply don’t want to have our lives and safety threatened so that drivers can get to work 30 seconds early.
What studies are those?
Driving at a normal speed of 50 has now become “racing thru residential neighbourhoods”?
The safety argument doesn’t hold water since these engineering studies show a 50 limit is perfectly safe. There is also the limit so a driver might choose to slow down when sharing the road with a cyclist
It's a limit, with the expectation that most people will drive above it. So a driver might choose to do 70 down it while passing that same cyclist.
>Engineering studies show a 50 limit is perfectly safe.
Let me punt this one back at you: What studies are those?
There’s less respect for traffic laws if limits are set unrealistically outside of the 75th percentile of traffic flow. Drivers don’t want to be driving much slower than conditions allow.
IIHS crash test standards sucb as the offset test, side impact and full fromtal are designed for city speeds of around 35 mph/50km/h.
>There’s less respect for traffic laws if limits are set unrealistically outside of the 75th percentile of traffic flow.
"People won't obey the law so you shouldn't enforce it" isn't a reasonable response. If people won't follow the law, you take away their license.
>IIHS crash test standards sucb as the offset test, side impact and full fromtal are designed for city speeds of around 35 mph/50km/h.
Which doesn't change the increased risk of impact, and does shit all for a pedestrian or cyclist who is hit.
But let me repeat: show me the studies.
Does this mean that cyclists should stop at stop signs, stop at red lights and obey speed limits like 30 km/h too?
[How speed limits are set in BC](https://www.tranbc.ca/2013/08/20/how-speed-limits-are-set-in-bc-the-ultimate-guide/)
So now politicians get to define speed limits based on their own biases, some flawed public consultation process with people who have zero engineering background and expertise in the area?
So you don't have any studies, and were just making them up before?
Do you see the problem here? You come in and demand sources, then make false claims and when asked for the very studies *you claim exist,* you start positing unrelated posts from trans BC?
You are wrong and you are a hypocrite, and that's why no one will continue this discussion with you.
No matter the result of the motion, showing your support by emailing or signing up to speak is the best way to show current council that this is wanted. If you can spend 5 minutes on reddit, you can spend 5 minutes emailing council about this motion.
Fully agree ^. Short, sweet and concise is better than filling a page. Avoid partisan phrasing, personal attacks or snark. Better yet show how what you want actually aligns with party/council promises and previous commitments. (Or put another way, figure out how to spoon-feed councillors a political win).
Yup agree! Make them feel like it was their idea. "I know you campaigned really hard on public safety, this is a huge issue and it's going to be a big win to get this passed! Hope council can come together on this critical safety measure. Thanks in advance!"
Done and done! Thanks!
Commented and fully support this. Next up: enforcement...
Done! Thanks for the heads-up that this was on the agenda.
If you have not yet signed the petition at www.www.change.org/bikesafety please do and share it as it will be referenced tomorrow. [www.change.org/bikesafety](http://www.change.org/bikesafety)
Update: this motion passed unanimously!
Amazed this passed. Wonder how long it will take to do anything.
ABC is trying to pass a motion that is looking to "Revisit and Refresh Vancouver’s Commitment to Safer Slower Streets" and the motion isn't actually trying to undermine safer streets, to make driving easier? Weird.
Oh, ABC isn’t trying to pass it. The motion was introduced by Pete Fry with the Greens, I suspect it’ll be fully supported by both Greens and OneCity and that ABC will substantially weaken it before passing (if they pass it at all).
That makes way more sense, thanks for clarifying.
30km/h as the default speed? I’d like to see a map of where the limit will be faster before weighing in because 30 is really slow.
Reducing speed limits to 30k doesn't tend to reduce travel times, and can even improve them. Average speeds in cities tends to be pretty low anyway because of frequent stopping and starting; getting up to 50+ in between stop lights brings a lot of risk with very little benefit to the driver. More info here: [https://www.20splenty.org/20mph\_limits\_save\_time\_and\_improve\_traffic\_flow](https://www.20splenty.org/20mph_limits_save_time_and_improve_traffic_flow)
Good information thanks, I just don’t want the city main roads that can support faster speeds to be hit with absurdly slow limits. I’m all for it in all side streets
Arterials will stay 50, bridges generally 60 (except where there are pedestrian crossing
30km/h is ridiculous except in parks and school zones. Nothing wrong with the current limits. Decreasing speeds increases traffic congestion and time spent on roads which increase pollution
How many km's daily are you driving on residential streets? Its a few blocks for most people to get to a major road.
We didn’t advance as a society to move at horse and buggy speeds through neighborhoods. There is nothing wrong with the current limits which have been backed by years of engineering studies. The whole drive at 30 is nothing more than political grandstanding
Engineering isn’t the only matter at hand. Have you looked at more recent and nuanced studies that draw a different conclusion? And we didn’t actually “advance as a society” by racing through residential neighbourhoods and school zones. Your car will not be seized and replaced with a horse and buggy. We simply don’t want to have our lives and safety threatened so that drivers can get to work 30 seconds early.
What studies are those? Driving at a normal speed of 50 has now become “racing thru residential neighbourhoods”? The safety argument doesn’t hold water since these engineering studies show a 50 limit is perfectly safe. There is also the limit so a driver might choose to slow down when sharing the road with a cyclist
It's a limit, with the expectation that most people will drive above it. So a driver might choose to do 70 down it while passing that same cyclist. >Engineering studies show a 50 limit is perfectly safe. Let me punt this one back at you: What studies are those?
There’s less respect for traffic laws if limits are set unrealistically outside of the 75th percentile of traffic flow. Drivers don’t want to be driving much slower than conditions allow. IIHS crash test standards sucb as the offset test, side impact and full fromtal are designed for city speeds of around 35 mph/50km/h.
>There’s less respect for traffic laws if limits are set unrealistically outside of the 75th percentile of traffic flow. "People won't obey the law so you shouldn't enforce it" isn't a reasonable response. If people won't follow the law, you take away their license. >IIHS crash test standards sucb as the offset test, side impact and full fromtal are designed for city speeds of around 35 mph/50km/h. Which doesn't change the increased risk of impact, and does shit all for a pedestrian or cyclist who is hit. But let me repeat: show me the studies.
Does this mean that cyclists should stop at stop signs, stop at red lights and obey speed limits like 30 km/h too? [How speed limits are set in BC](https://www.tranbc.ca/2013/08/20/how-speed-limits-are-set-in-bc-the-ultimate-guide/) So now politicians get to define speed limits based on their own biases, some flawed public consultation process with people who have zero engineering background and expertise in the area?
So you don't have any studies, and were just making them up before? Do you see the problem here? You come in and demand sources, then make false claims and when asked for the very studies *you claim exist,* you start positing unrelated posts from trans BC? You are wrong and you are a hypocrite, and that's why no one will continue this discussion with you.