got excessive speeding ticket

[G-spec]

Originally Posted by TheNewGirl

As G-Spot pointed out....

it's actually G-Spec.... but please do tell me what's really on your mind New Girl

anyway thats my 1 and only lame joke, I'll let the resident RS hounds have at it

[TheNewGirl]

LOL. Ah well there that made a dreary miserable monday a little funnier.

[RevRav]

X10000
OP: I hope you get suspended soon.

[Acura604]

I believe that section of the bridge is 50km/hr. At 6am it wouldn't be difficult to do near 80-100km/hr. I'm sure many speed along there. Just bad luck for the op.

[gars]

Who cares if other people speed there. Nobody is pointing a gun to your head and telling you to speed. I'm sure the OP knew full well the consequences if he were to be caught driving 40 over the limit.

I personally don't drive slow by any means, but I know that I don't drive 40 over the limit because my pockets aren't deep enough if/when I get caught. *knock on wood* never received a ticket in the 11 years I've been driving.

[sebberry]

Originally Posted by gars

Who cares if other people speed there. Nobody is pointing a gun to your head and telling you to speed. I'm sure the OP knew full well the consequences if he were to be caught driving 40 over the limit.

I personally don't drive slow by any means, but I know that I don't drive 40 over the limit because my pockets aren't deep enough if/when I get caught. *knock on wood* never received a ticket in the 11 years I've been driving.

If the road design and conditions are conducive to driving at 90km/hr then perhaps the speed limit needs to be reviewed.

I'm not familiar with the OP's ticket location, but it sounds like if the road design encourages people to drive at 90km/hr then the limit at 50km/hr seems too low.


Heading North on the Malahat is another big one. It's posted at 80km/hr as it widens out to a long stretch of 4 lanes. 120km/hr is safe there and most drivers are routinely travel at 110-120, yet the provincial government doesn't believe anyone can handle that speed.

Contrary to what some members here believe, you don't have to be flying wildly out of control like a WWE wrestler on PCP to be charged as an aggressive, excessive speeder who needs to be removed from the road.

[gars]

Knight Street Bridge has right next the city - and quickly turns into a residential zone. During the day - it is one of the busiest bridges - especially during rush hour. A lot of trucks going on and off the bridge going to the local factories and warehouses.

Personally, I see no reason to change the speed limit there during the day (Correct me if I'm wrong - but going southbound - it's a 60 zone, that turns into a 70 zone) - but if you want to petition for a speed limit change at night - you go right ahead.

[sebberry]

Originally Posted by gars

Knight Street Bridge has right next the city - and quickly turns into a residential zone. During the day - it is one of the busiest bridges - especially during rush hour. A lot of trucks going on and off the bridge going to the local factories and warehouses.

Personally, I see no reason to change the speed limit there during the day (Correct me if I'm wrong - but going southbound - it's a 60 zone, that turns into a 70 zone) - but if you want to petition for a speed limit change at night - you go right ahead.

Then slow the drivers down as they approach the residential zone. No sense in having people drive 50 where it is safe to drive 70.

[Blinky]

Originally Posted by sebberry

Then slow the drivers down as they approach the residential zone. No sense in having people drive 50 where it is safe to drive 70.

There is never any reason, at any time, why the speed limit should be beyond 50 where the OP sped. The residential area starts pretty much at the foot of the bridge:

http://maps.google.ca/maps?f=q&sourc...09238&t=h&z=17

IIRC there's a 50 sign just north of where the cloverleaf ends.

[Culverin]

My church is right near there. And it's a total hazard trying to make left turns from the side street heading north bound.

I think everybody speeds there, I'm surprised they don't just park a traffic enforcement officer there and just rake in the money.

[snowball]

Originally Posted by Blinky

There is never any reason, at any time, why the speed limit should be beyond 50 where the OP sped. The residential area starts pretty much at the foot of the bridge:

http://maps.google.ca/maps?f=q&sourc...09238&t=h&z=17

IIRC there's a 50 sign just north of where the cloverleaf ends.

One upped your map, this is the street view, and this is where it officially turns 50, I don't think it's unreasonable for it to be 50 when you have houses and residential areas within 50 meters from this spot, before this zone is a 60 zone for the Mitchell island bridge, so the OP was either going at least 100 just before this sign or 90 after this sign.

http://maps.google.ca/maps?f=q&sourc...16.76,,0,-0.86

[taylor192]

Originally Posted by sebberry

If the road design and conditions are conducive to driving at 90km/hr then perhaps the speed limit needs to be reviewed.

I wish we could fail people in this forum.

Speed limits were reviewed when the limits were first posted. If anything the limits need to reviewed on Knight st and brought down, not up. People rarely slow to 50 kmph after the bridge northbound, myself included. The limit needs to change earlier to get people to slow down sooner.

[s300ae]

Originally Posted by Culverin

My church is right near there. And it's a total hazard trying to make left turns from the side street heading north bound.

I think everybody speeds there, I'm surprised they don't just park a traffic enforcement officer there and just rake in the money.

They have bikes set up there all the time. Its one of the biggest hotspots. Almost as busy as the approach onto stevenson hill right after the putallo bridge. I've been smart enough to slow down and towards the end of the bridge, but still get some asshole tailgating me for slowing down. Looking forward to one day when they pass me and get pulled.
Posted via RS Mobile

[sebberry]

Originally Posted by taylor192

I wish we could fail people in this forum.

Speed limits were reviewed when the limits were first posted. If anything the limits need to reviewed on Knight st and brought down, not up. People rarely slow to 50 kmph after the bridge northbound, myself included. The limit needs to change earlier to get people to slow down sooner.

That makes absolutely no sense.

You could drop the 80km/hr zones down to 60km/hr and people will still drive at their usual 90-100km/hr. People drive at a speed they see fit for the road design and conditions. Drop the 50km/hr zones down to 40km/hr and people will still enter them at 60-80.

Even you said you speed into the 50 zone. Why? Because you don't want to be the one putz to slam on his brakes in the middle of fast moving heavy traffic.

Study after study shows that the number of people who speed 10-20km/hr over the limit actually drops when the speed limit is set at a more reasonable level for the road design.

As for your comment that speed limits were reviewed when they were first posted - a recent speed review study was done and proved that many of the limits were in fact set too low. Not only that, but crashes DECLINED in sections where they temporarily increased the posted limits.

[gars]

The road has many lanes - but it's a residential area - and the speed limit must remain at 50. The reason why they put it at 60 before the residential area is to slow the traffic down.

Knight St is especially bad because there aren't many lights coming off the bridge. Oak St would probably have the same problem - but as soon as you get off the bridge, there is a light which slows down traffic.

That said - I still go over the limit, but there's a pretty big difference between going 60-70 in a 50 zone, compared to 90 - which is almost double the limit.

[taylor192]

Originally Posted by sebberry

That makes absolutely no sense.

You could drop the 80km/hr zones down to 60km/hr and people will still drive at their usual 90-100km/hr. People drive at a speed they see fit for the road design and conditions. Drop the 50km/hr zones down to 40km/hr and people will still enter them at 60-80.

It makes lots of sense, yet since you're admittedly unfamilar with the area let me explain:

Originally Posted by sebberry

Even you said you speed into the 50 zone. Why? Because you don't want to be the one putz to slam on his brakes in the middle of fast moving heavy traffic.

You couldn't be more wrong.

I don't slow down cause I am lazy. I know the big hill is coming up meters after the speed limit change and it will slow my car down for me. If the speed limit change were earlier, I would slow down sooner cause I don't want to be 40 over - like most other people who are watching their speed.

Plus it makes no sense to speed northbound, you just arrive at the log jam of cars sooner. If the limit were lower then traffic would be more spread out - several cities implement speed limits that change during rush hour to control the flow of traffic. If everyone just drove what they were comfortable with these would not work - yet they do - so your argument is BS.

Originally Posted by sebberry

As for your comment that speed limits were reviewed when they were first posted - a recent speed review study was done and proved that many of the limits were in fact set too low. Not only that, but crashes DECLINED in sections where they temporarily increased the posted limits.

Post the study.

[sebberry]

Originally Posted by taylor192

It makes lots of sense, yet since you're admittedly unfamilar with the area let me explain:


You couldn't be more wrong.

I don't slow down cause I am lazy. I know the big hill is coming up meters after the speed limit change and it will slow my car down for me. If the speed limit change were earlier, I would slow down sooner cause I don't want to be 40 over - like most other people who are watching their speed.

Plus it makes no sense to speed northbound, you just arrive at the log jam of cars sooner. If the limit were lower then traffic would be more spread out - several cities implement speed limits that change during rush hour to control the flow of traffic. If everyone just drove what they were comfortable with these would not work - yet they do - so your argument is BS.

Just because someone is speeding in the 80km/zone or the 60km/hr transition zone before the 50km/hr residential zone does NOT guarantee that they will be speeding through the residential zone.

I'm a "go with the flow" driver, but on the highways and freeways I always make sure I am at or close to the speed limit when approaching intersections and other busy areas.


Another example of this is southbound on the TCH heading towards the Malahat. Is it dangerous to drive at 120km/hr as traffic merges down to one lane and snakes through the S curves? You bet. Is it dangerous to do 120km/hr in the long, wide straight stretch before the merge? Probably not, yet the police really get their kicks towing cars from excessive speeders here.

Supposedly they set up there because speeding in that zone guarantees that you will be speeding through the more dangerous areas. Absolutely not true.

Originally Posted by taylor192

Post the study.

http://www.th.gov.bc.ca/publications...iew_Report.pdf

[gars]

Police usually pull people over at the entrance of the residential area - not on the bridge itself. You should be going at the proper speed there, as it is the RESIDENTIAL area - not slowing down as you go through it. Unfortunately - there are many people who are lazy, and are still going 80 - 90km/h as they enter this area.

I don't know if the OP was pulled over going Northbound into the residential area, or southbound away from Vancouver.

[Soundy]

Originally Posted by gars

I don't know if the OP was pulled over going Northbound into the residential area, or southbound away from Vancouver.

You weren't reading very well, then:

Originally Posted by jjiris

it was on after bridge northbound
around 6am

[InvisibleSoul]

I guess many people, myself included, don't want to slow all the way down, only to have to mash the gas again to get up the steep hill... would rather just maintain some speed and let gravity slow the car down.

Tough luck, OP... just unlucky you happened to get caught. I know I've done the same many times in the past.