Photo radar urged for County Road 507 in wake of latest fatality | GTAMotorcycle.com

Photo radar urged for County Road 507 in wake of latest fatality

R

ReSTored

Well-known member
Forum Sponsor
Looks like local councillors are beating the drum on 507 speed issues. Poorly written article, below, outlines some of the issues.

www.thepeterboroughexaminer.com

Photo radar urged for County Road 507 in wake of latest fatality

It’s ‘an absolute speedway,’ Trent Lakes mayor says.
www.thepeterboroughexaminer.com www.thepeterboroughexaminer.com

In the general area local councils have responded to this type of issue by reducing speed limits from 80 kph to 60 kph, which is a glacial pace. This would kill the 507 for everyone and make riding (or driving) it an agony.

As a community we're shooting ourselves in the foot here in that can we enjoy the 507 at reasonable speeds vs. those which place riders at risk and causes run wide accidents on corners. Locals are very unhappy with excessive speeding, aggressive passing and the numbers of accident in general, in particular those where a rider runs wide on a turn and smashes head on into a vehicle coming the other way. Very tramatic for sure seeing a rider lying in the road dead after he smashes into your SUV because he lost control doing 40 - 50 kph over ++.
 
With photo radar allowed and available to municipalities, I give it 5 years until every fun driving road will have its speed limit reduced and photo radar installed. It's just too big of a revenue opportunity to pass up. "Community safety zones" here we come.

It's a lazy approach too. If aggressive driving is an issue then police should set up and enforce the law.
 
Resident complain to their councilors about yahoos speeding on their road and councilors have to react, so they lower the speed limits.
Selwyn Rd, just around the corner from 507, was repaved this year and the speed limit was lowered to 50 from 80. Guess why.

d4rktrooper788 said:
I give it 5 years until every fun driving road will have its speed limit reduced
Click to expand...
It is not the province's purview to provide roads that are "fun", actually the opposite.
Kawartha Lakes doesn't have enough cops to go around as it is and they don't want to be tied to patrolling a road in the corner of the county, out in the middle of no where.
The solution? We get photo radar on every straight section of the 507

It's not about "revenue stream".
It's about the councilor wanting to look like he/she is doing something for their constituents so they get re-elected and the local cops acting like they care.
To the vast majority of the population; the folks in the wrong here are the yahoos speeding on a country road. The 0.05% of the population of Ontario that are these yahoos are already out voted.
 
bitzz said:
The solution? We get photo radar on every straight section of the 507
Click to expand...

Not really a big problem. In general, I've never seen a speed camera or traffic cop in a corner, only on straights, and then, very seldom.

I've done the 507, Glamorgan and other roads in the area 150 - 200 times over the 16 years I've had a cottage in the area. Even on my old ST you'd have to be way way over the 80 kph speed limit to be experiencing cornering like you find on back roads in the US. That said, you can make the 507 and similar roads fun by keeping speeds reasonable on the straights and when approaching a corner accelerate to and through the corner and then roll off the throttle again on the next straight. If you have to brake before any corner on the 507 you are at least 30 kph over the limit or maybe riding a cruiser type bike with very limited ground clearance, so slow down on the boring straights and avoid a ticket.
 
Bikes can easily beat the photo radar, it is only really effective with cars (or generally law abiding bikers who will get tagged at 10 over, but those that are willing to push the limits of handling will just run flip plates).
 
Shhh, don't tip off the masses.

Photo radar is also really easy to deal with if you know what the installations look like and/or where they are. That's where you need to slow down.

The recent trend towards absurdly low speed limits (River Road is another recent example) is likely to result in backlash from local residents, too. It's almost certain that on roads like that, most of the speeding vehicles will be driven by local residents.

Be responsible. Slow down on straightaways. Don't attract attention.
 
Reducing speed limits has to be the stupidest kneejerk reaction to these issues. Honestly, do they think that people who couldn't be bothered to follow the speed limits before will suddenly follow them (or even slow down a tiny bit?) after they (gasp!) change the numbers on a sign?

Honestly?

They did this on Highway 2 between Oshawa and Bowmanville. It's a raceway on that stretch with cars regularly doing 100-120+ in what was an 80 zone. What did they do? They lowered the speed limit to 70. And you know what? Cars still use it as a raceway at 100-120+.
 
PrivatePilot said:
Reducing speed limits has to be the stupidest kneejerk reaction to these issues. Honestly, do they think that people who couldn't be bothered to follow the speed limits before will suddenly follow them (or even slow down a tiny bit?) after they (gasp!) change the numbers on a sign?

Honestly?

They did this on Highway 2 between Oshawa and Bowmanville. It's a raceway on that stretch with cars regularly doing 100-120+ in what was an 80 zone. What did they do? They lowered the speed limit to 70. And you know what? Cars still use it as a raceway at 100-120+.
Click to expand...
except now they fall into HTA ( potentially) ...

.. Once that HTA worm enters your head, you instinctively slow down... or atleast it nags you in your head eneough to be a distraction that you have no choice but to slow down... even if it's just a bit..

not sure this is the intended reaction, but this is just IMHO
 
I thought the prerequisite for photo radar was either a School Zone or Community Safety Zone. I was also under the impression that Municipalities would be allowed to install them, but Provincial highways were not included under the changes made by the former Provincial Liberal government. I don't see the PC's allowing cameras on highways again after what happened the last time.
 
Malks said:
I thought the prerequisite for photo radar was either a School Zone or Community Safety Zone. I was also under the impression that Municipalities would be allowed to install them, but Provincial highways were not included under the changes made by the former Provincial Liberal government. I don't see the PC's allowing cameras on highways again after what happened the last time.
Click to expand...
There is no definition of community safety zone. A municipality can designate any (or all) roads as community safety zones.

507 is a county road. Small highways were downloaded decades ago but most people still refer to them as highways.
 
Malks said:
. I don't see the PC's allowing cameras on highways again after what happened the last time.
Click to expand...

- The majority of the population approved of it back in the 90’s

- It was proven to be working and making the highways safer.

It was also used a political football to buy votes by the Harris government. And as with many terrible governmental decisions made simply to buy votes in an election, here we are.
 
PrivatePilot said:
- The majority of the population approved of it back in the 90’s

- It was proven to be working and making the highways safer.

It was also used a political football to buy votes by the Harris government. And as with many terrible governmental decisions made simply to buy votes in an election, here we are.
Click to expand...
I personally hate photo radar and don't agree that a majority of Ontarians approved of it back in the 90's. That's one of the main reasons the PC's won by a landslide on the next election.

It was the cause of many accidents as motorists would slam on the brakes as they approached a stopped white van on the side of the road. Not the safest idea on a 400 Series highway.

I loved the fact that this was part of the reason used to boot Bob Rae and his NDP out of office! This is why Wynne never proposed photo radar on a Provincial highway when she was floating the idea of bringing it back. Even she was smarter than that.

The idea of of being ticketed for going 4 km/h over the speed limit is more than a little infuriating. Thank god I don't have to drive anywhere near TO anymore because the politicians down there have completely lost their minds!
 
Malks said:
I personally hate photo radar and don't agree that a majority of Ontarians approved of it back in the 90's. That's one of the main reasons the PC's won by a landslide on the next election.

It was the cause of many accidents as motorists would slam on the brakes as they approached a stopped white van on the side of the road. Not the safest idea on a 400 Series highway.

I loved the fact that this was part of the reason used to boot Bob Rae and his NDP out of office! This is why Wynne never proposed photo radar on a Provincial highway when she was floating the idea of bringing it back. Even she was smarter than that.

The idea of of being ticketed for going 4 km/h over the speed limit is more than a little infuriating. Thank god I don't have to drive anywhere near TO anymore because the politicians down there have completely lost their minds!
Click to expand...
All true^
I know someone that got nailed doing 5km/h over on the 401. Nothing but a cash grab that did nothing to make roads safer.
 
Allistonfjr said:
All true^
I know someone that got nailed doing 5km/h over on the 401. Nothing but a cash grab that did nothing to make roads safer.
Click to expand...
I agree with your example.

One of the frustrating things is that speed limits are too low and that 85% - 95% of the people run a minimum of 10 - 15 kph over routinely. On CR 507 the average is about 90 - 95 kph and those that run 80 kph almost always have people stacked up behind them. On the 401, assuming its not crawling, people are running at anywhere between 110 - 130 kph. On the 407, it's not uncommon to have traffic flowing above 130. Drivers who insist on running at 100 are a pain and if not in the right side lane, cause issues with people passing on the right.

If speed limits are increased, for example, say 90 kph on county roads, 120 kph on 401 highways, then use photo radar and set the trip speed at 100 kph and 130 kph respectively. Then we have traffic flowing along as it always has and you're not enforcing a speed limit that virtually no one has ever observed. Obviously these numbers would need to be tweaked.

Just to be clear, the people complaining about excessive speeds on CR 507 are not talking about riders running at 100 - 110 kph in an 80 zone. It's not uncommon to have a sport bike pass me very very quickly doing well over seizure speed. How fast was the recently killed rider moving when he lost control and drifted into the other lane? I'm sure it was well over 130 as that is a pretty tame corner. A few years ago a rider crossed the line on the 507 and hit another bike, killing himself and several other people. As I recall, police estimated he was doing 180 kph at the time.
 
PrivatePilot said:
- The majority of the population approved of it back in the 90’s

- It was proven to be working and making the highways safer.

It was also used a political football to buy votes by the Harris government. And as with many terrible governmental decisions made simply to buy votes in an election, here we are.
Click to expand...

Safer? Not in my books.
The day it was introduced I was driving to Hamilton via the QEW and I had to admit everything was orderly.

Day 2 was chaos. The transport drivers figured out they were exempt because the photo was from the back and only got the trailer plate. You can't ticket a trailer so they wanted to make up time.

Car drivers all had their cruise set at 100 KPH and the semis were tailgating them trying to get them to go faster.

Cagers are in a different financial picture than a truck driver. If a truck driver arrives a few minutes after receiving closes he's lost the run and the next day starts off screwed up.
 
ReSTored said:
I agree with your example.

One of the frustrating things is that speed limits are too low and that 85% - 95% of the people run a minimum of 10 - 15 kph over routinely. On CR 507 the average is about 90 - 95 kph and those that run 80 kph almost always have people stacked up behind them. On the 401, assuming its not crawling, people are running at anywhere between 110 - 130 kph. On the 407, it's not uncommon to have traffic flowing above 130. Drivers who insist on running at 100 are a pain and if not in the right side lane, cause issues with people passing on the right.

If speed limits are increased, for example, say 90 kph on county roads, 120 kph on 401 highways, then use photo radar and set the trip speed at 100 kph and 130 kph respectively. Then we have traffic flowing along as it always has and you're not enforcing a speed limit that virtually no one has ever observed. Obviously these numbers would need to be tweaked.

Just to be clear, the people complaining about excessive speeds on CR 507 are not talking about riders running at 100 - 110 kph in an 80 zone. It's not uncommon to have a sport bike pass me very very quickly doing well over seizure speed. How fast was the recently killed rider moving when he lost control and drifted into the other lane? I'm sure it was well over 130 as that is a pretty tame corner. A few years ago a rider crossed the line on the 507 and hit another bike, killing himself and several other people. As I recall, police estimated he was doing 180 kph at the time.
Click to expand...

I understand your point but raising the speed limit to 90 from 80 on many county roads will only give drivers/riders a false sense of security. Most of these curving and undulating roads have residential driveways, slow or oversized farm machinery travelling from dawn to dusk, groups of bicycle riders and now ATV's in many municipalities.

I live on Hwy. 2 just west of Port Hope. When they (too) frequently close the 401 Hwy. 2 can become a raceway, with transports and cars travelling at 110 and sometimes higher. I've experienced a couple close calls and witnessed many more. Of course on sunny and warm weekend days there's plenty of bikes and other traffic but most are at or near the limit.

There's likely plenty of roads where an increased speed limit wouldn't increase risk for anybody but it wouldn't have changed anything about the fatal accidents on 507.
 
Brian P said:
Shhh, don't tip off the masses.

Photo radar is also really easy to deal with if you know what the installations look like and/or where they are. That's where you need to slow down.

The recent trend towards absurdly low speed limits (River Road is another recent example) is likely to result in backlash from local residents, too. It's almost certain that on roads like that, most of the speeding vehicles will be driven by local residents.

Be responsible. Slow down on straightaways. Don't attract attention.
Click to expand...

I have no stats but would assume River Road and similar are used well over 90% of the time by locals. Bikes are not an issue in winter, the rain and marginally during the week.

So to punish the occasional biker the locals get hammered all the time. What would be the legalities of different speed limits for locals and visitors?

Of course one would have to define a local. If you didn't live in the area but had to drive through it to get to a destination for a practical purpose you would have to get a special license to let you use the higher limits.

If you were a service contractor you might need several of these licenses for various roads. This will not fly.

I can see another Fantino saying drop the HTA 172 limit to 30 over, then 20 and eventually zero tolerance.

We are trying to legislate behavior. It has never worked.

Maybe we need higher age limits for motorcycle licenses but the person killed in the incident above was 54 years old. Where do you draw the line?

Also, it wasn't clear who crossed the line, causing the crash.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom