Bayview Extension Speed Warning
10-19-2017, 01:36 PM
#32
Captain Obvious
Super User
Super User
Time to go back at them again and ask Why 60? What standards/warrant/theory was the 60 speed limited based on? Ask them to conduct a Northwestern Methodology Study on this section of the road and reply with the results.
The following users liked this post:
MKC91 (04-07-2020)
10-20-2017, 09:09 AM
#36
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Latest update from my ward office:
"This motion was successful at committee. It will considered at council and then implemented (I do not foresee any impediment to it being successful at council). From that point it is just a matter of having the signs replaced. It is unfortunate that staff did not predict this issue when the speed limit reduction was initially introduced, but we look forward to this being resolved."
"This motion was successful at committee. It will considered at council and then implemented (I do not foresee any impediment to it being successful at council). From that point it is just a matter of having the signs replaced. It is unfortunate that staff did not predict this issue when the speed limit reduction was initially introduced, but we look forward to this being resolved."
10-20-2017, 11:48 AM
#37
Captain Obvious
Super User
Super User
Latest update from my ward office:
"This motion was successful at committee. It will considered at council and then implemented (I do not foresee any impediment to it being successful at council). From that point it is just a matter of having the signs replaced. It is unfortunate that staff did not predict this issue when the speed limit reduction was initially introduced, but we look forward to this being resolved."
"This motion was successful at committee. It will considered at council and then implemented (I do not foresee any impediment to it being successful at council). From that point it is just a matter of having the signs replaced. It is unfortunate that staff did not predict this issue when the speed limit reduction was initially introduced, but we look forward to this being resolved."
10-23-2017, 05:46 PM
#39
Rennlist Member
make it a toll road and raise speed to 140 and everybody will be happy...revenues for city, no traffic, and people get to have fun on a controlled safe road
12-12-2017, 01:45 PM
#42
Rennlist Member
For your reading enjoyment, the Toronto Road Safety Plan 2017-2021
https://www1.toronto.ca/City%20Of%20...ety%20Plan.pdf
https://www1.toronto.ca/City%20Of%20...ety%20Plan.pdf
12-12-2017, 03:59 PM
#43
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Toronto, north of the lake.
Posts: 1,555
Received 202 Likes
on
131 Posts
I hate to break it to everyone, but it is (almost always) faster to take the DVP downtown. Plus Johnny Law won't think about taking your car until you are over 135.
With the extra traffic to the Brickworks and the Canary District, there is too much traffic on Bayview for this to ever be high speed again.
Go ahead, start flaming me.
With the extra traffic to the Brickworks and the Canary District, there is too much traffic on Bayview for this to ever be high speed again.
Go ahead, start flaming me.
12-12-2017, 06:43 PM
#44
Rennlist Member
you think the don valley parking lot is better in rush hour...forget about it.
talking to a friend we have come up with the texting pedestrians...if you can prove it with a dash cam and see a pedestrian looking at his phone, you should be allowed to hit him and than put a kill mark (star) on your fender
that will stop pedestrians from using their phones.
talking to a friend we have come up with the texting pedestrians...if you can prove it with a dash cam and see a pedestrian looking at his phone, you should be allowed to hit him and than put a kill mark (star) on your fender
that will stop pedestrians from using their phones.
12-12-2017, 10:35 PM
#45