cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/35871824
Mayor Patrick Brown said he’s talked with the premier. Brampton has 185 photo radar cameras deployed.
The City of Brampton has spent millions of dollars going all-in on automated speed enforcement (ASE) technology and now Premier Doug Ford says his government might ban it.
On Tuesday (Sep. 9), Ford told reporters that he wants municipalities to voluntarily remove their ASE cameras — otherwise known as photo radar — or the province might ban them.
“It’s just a tax grab. They should take out those cameras — all of them,” Ford said. “Hopefully, the cities will get rid of them … or I’m going to help them get rid of them very shortly.”
Kralt told council that the cameras had reduced average driving speeds in six study areas by between 13 and 26 km/h, while increasing speed limit compliance by up to 85 per cent.
There are two petitions currently active for and against.
Link to petition posted on change.org, urging the city to keep the cameras. https://www.change.org/p/keep-the-speed-cameras-in-brampton
Link to petition posted on change.org, urging the city to remove the cameras. https://www.change.org/p/ditch-the-speed-cameras-petition-for-immediate-removal-in-brampton-ontario
Go car lobby go. Mad Max Fury Road on Ontario streets. As Dougie says, we’re going in full throttle! There’s no slowing this fucker down. Everything from broken down jalopies, impossible to read worn out license plates, overly tinted windows, fake out of jurisdiction plates, and optional stop signs. Stay off the sidewalk ya stupid pedestrians. "What did the driver look like that ran you down? " “I don’t know, he needed his tints.”
Tbh I kind of want to see this convoy going down a 400/series hwy!
Aw, is their passive rent-seeking machine getting shut down?
If there’s one place that needs those, it’s Brampton
Doesn’t Doug hate Patrick too? I forget now
Efficiencies, folks.
Ah yes, the “safety studies” where they pick a 200 m stretch of road and then conclude that because speed has reduced in that area because of the camera, that it means safety now.
Ignoring what happens when vehicles are outside of the capture range… Also ignoring the heavy increase in collisions at those intersections.
Found Ford’s alt account.
Where did you see that they increase collisions?
I’ve been following traffic science for decades. Look into it, there’s a heavy increase in collisions where cameras are present. And furthermore, credible analysis shows that to decrease speeding and increase safety (particularly at intersections) the main improvements are found by synchronizing lights and extending yellow times. But instead what happens is those underlying issues are ignored so the tax can be gathered and “cherry” jobs can be created for former policy-makers as happened in Winnipeg. It’s not about safety. It has a safety component, but as with most things, when you scratch and look below the surface, it’s a much more complex issue.
I personally feel, and you’re free to disagree, that the installation of a camera is an admission that real safety measures are being actively ignored. Shrink the number of lanes? Narrow them? Traffic-calming measures? More roundabouts and fewer timed lights? Nah, just slap a camera there.
Can you link some studies to start with? I am curious because I haven’t heard of any increase of collisions in my area and the speed has definitely dropped
As someone who has studied traffic engineering in school and works in road design, I’d be very curious what studies these were.
Look into it, there’s a heavy increase in collisions where cameras are present.
Only place I’ve seen this data was as an example in school of what not to do - several states had low yellow times (1-2s shorter than Ontario’s), and added red light cameras at large, wide intersections that took longer to cross than the yellow timer, meaning if you entered on a green you could theoretically get hit with a red light violation. But those studies were late 90s, early 00s.
Every piece of data I’ve seen shows either a reduction in speed (even post camera removal), or minimal change after removal.
Note that studies need to reflect current state cameras in Ontario - only allowed to be used in school zones, and need to have signage present indicating their use. They’re not used specifically at intersections.
Additionally, the fees for traffic cameras go back to road redesign budget, which is used (on the projects I’ve worked on) to provide traffic calming measures like narrower lanes, AT facilities, etc. Cameras should be a stop gap measure, and are vastly preferable to an increase in the polices budget to have increased traffic enforcement presence.
While I do agree with your sentiment that street safety is a more complex issue that the small subset of enforcement that cameras provide, you seems to making perfect the enemy of the good.
“the installation of a camera is an admission that real safety measures are being actively ignored.”
While this statement may hold true for many different examples, security cameras in a store or in a public space do provide a level of “security”, similar to how a officer or a on-duty security guard may provide a level of “security” when on premise. But, crime prevention starts at the social level of a society with access to education, healthcare, housing, and meaningful fulfilling work.
North America has IMO some of the worst roadway classifications, or lack thereof. We have residential and city streets designed like throughways with six lanes of traffic. At the same time we have roads designed like streets with multiple driveways and points of conflict between pedestrians, cyclists, and cars.
Traffic calming measures are ideally the end goals with complete street redesigns to actually match the streets intended use and posted limits.
Now cycling Infrastructure such as dedicated cycling lanes and intersection’s with dedicated saftey curbs ie. “bike bananas” are a traffic claiming measure. They shrink car lanes to prevent speeding, and actively promoting safer streets within cities and towns. But somehow Dougie seems to be both against traffic cameras and any type of city street redesign that negates the need for said cameras.
Now ideal the small “revenue” that a traffic camera may produce is intended to go back into the roadway its self. Where traditional tickets from a officer may go into the funding of the police department. Similarly like how NYC’s congestion pricing for example, where all revenue goes back into the cities transit and infrastructure.
They don’t put speed cameras at intersections.
