Why 30 km/h speed limits are important in the context of Jake's Legacy vigil

DrMike · 17-02-2015 1:30pm #1

Press release issued 17th February for immediate use to coincide with Jake’s Legacy vigil at Leinster House gate from Sun 15th to Wed 18th Feb.

Day 3 of the Vigil. Cyclist.ie – The Irish Cycling Advocacy Network- and Dublin Cycling Campaign strongly endorse the ‘Jake’s Legacy’ campaign to introduce lower speed limits in residential areas and housing estates. We have been campaigning for 30 km/h to become the default urban speed limit here in Ireland, similar to many UK and European cities.

We believe there is a need for a fundamental change in how road authorities view the interaction of traffic with people, to enable pedestrians and cyclists of all ages to use our roads and streets safely. In line with government policy as outlined in the Design Manual for Urban Roads & Streets (DMURS,2013), this will lead to increased safety - and will encourage more active travel on foot and on bikes. Much road traffic planning and provision (free-flow concept) has tended to be for the benefit of the private motorist to the detriment of other road users such as public transport, pedestrians and cyclists.

Cyclist.ie wants to see a realisation of government targets, which aim to increase the use of the bike for everyday activity, and more general active travel. Besides improving the general health of our population this will also lead to safer roads and streets and help to transform residential estates into more vibrant and safer living spaces, with consequential benefits for the quality of life. 30 km/h speed limits will help to realise these targets.

Throughout Europe, 30 km/h is now generally accepted as the default urban speed limit. In some cities, speed limits as low as 10 km/h are in place in ‘home zones’. Even in the United States, where the car is king, 25 mph (40 km/h) limits are common in urban areas and 15 mph (24 km/h) limits at schools. In the UK the “20’s Plenty” Campaign has been successful in securing reduced speed limits in many urban locations - see its web-site. Ireland is lagging behind other countries in how we manage traffic to make our owns and cities more liveable.

Lower speeds also result in less noise and pollution and greater fuel efficiency (high fuel consumption is associated with stop-start traffic, not slow traffic). On residential roads and shopping streets, people simply don't want to be exposed to the noise, fumes and dangers from higher speed traffic.

[DMURS: on Department of Environment web-site]

FURTHER INFORMATION

Full press release with links on Cyclist.ie web-site. Fact-sheet on 30 km/h speed limits also on web-site

Mike McKillen (Chair of Cyclist.ie)

Aard · 17-02-2015 2:15pm

Huge exposure for the debate on safer residential steets. I'm glad to see they've dropped the pro-speedbumps stance. That really wasn't doing the campaign any favours. Hopefully local authorities will begin taking dmurs seriously.

serfboard · 17-02-2015 2:48pm

DrMike wrote: »

the ‘Jake’s Legacy’ campaign to introduce lower speed limits in residential areas and housing estates. We have been campaigning for 30 km/h to become the default urban speed limit here in Ireland

Heard Jake's mother on the radio recently and agree with her 100% in relation to 30km/h speed limits for housing estates (I'm not sure about the "residential areas" bit - in the sense of how this is defined).

Listening to her talk I couldn't understand why it's not brought in for housing estates nationwide straight away - is it becuase they'd then have to do something about it (in terms of enforcement), or is it financial (can't think why, unless for extra signage), or what?

Spook_ie · 17-02-2015 3:00pm

Not convinced by the whole 30kph limit argument, if you drive at any kind of speed around children you're too fast, however, perhaps the real culprit is actually parental supervision
http://www.irishhealth.com/article.html?id=24317

Extract: Emphasis is mine

The study noted that while injuries from road traffic accidents are a leading cause of death among children worldwide, the number of children dying on Irish roads has fallen in recent years.

The researchers identified 45 child pedestrian deaths and found that 62% of the children involved were male.

Almost half (49%) of these deaths took place at the weekend, with 44% occurring in the summer months and 35% occurring in the evening time.

Over half (53%) of these deaths occurred in children aged between one and four years, and almost 30% were as a result of ‘low speed vehicle rollovers, mainly in residential driveways'.

In relation to low speed vehicle rollovers, the average age of the child involved was just over 21 months. In all of these cases, the cause of death was head injuries.

Furthermore, over 80% of these accidents took place outside the child's residence and in 54% of cases, the driver was a family member who was attempting to reverse their vehicle.

The researchers emphasised that young children do not have the attention, perception or cognitive skills to interact safely with road vehicles. For example, they are unable to assess the importance of speed and distance when it comes to moving vehicles.

They may also end up playing in potentially unsafe locations, such as driveways, and are heavily reliant on adult supervision.

odyssey06 · 17-02-2015 8:16pm

There's a 30 kmh speed limits in some Dublin areas already e.g. Marino.
It is not enforced. It is not observed, except where road conditions (ramps, parked cars) make going faster than that impossible. I don't believe it's the answer, and I think this is a campaign where the heart is ruling the head.

Greenmachine · 17-02-2015 8:27pm

DrMike wrote: »

Press release issued 17th February for immediate use to coincide with Jake’s Legacy vigil at Leinster House gate from Sun 15th to Wed 18th Feb.

Day 3 of the Vigil. Cyclist.ie – The Irish Cycling Advocacy Network- and Dublin Cycling Campaign strongly endorse the ‘Jake’s Legacy’ campaign to introduce lower speed limits in residential areas and housing estates. We have been campaigning for 30 km/h to become the default urban speed limit here in Ireland, similar to many UK and European cities.

We believe there is a need for a fundamental change in how road authorities view the interaction of traffic with people, to enable pedestrians and cyclists of all ages to use our roads and streets safely. In line with government policy as outlined in the Design Manual for Urban Roads & Streets (DMURS,2013), this will lead to increased safety - and will encourage more active travel on foot and on bikes. Much road traffic planning and provision (free-flow concept) has tended to be for the benefit of the private motorist to the detriment of other road users such as public transport, pedestrians and cyclists.

Cyclist.ie wants to see a realisation of government targets, which aim to increase the use of the bike for everyday activity, and more general active travel. Besides improving the general health of our population this will also lead to safer roads and streets and help to transform residential estates into more vibrant and safer living spaces, with consequential benefits for the quality of life. 30 km/h speed limits will help to realise these targets.

Throughout Europe, 30 km/h is now generally accepted as the default urban speed limit. In some cities, speed limits as low as 10 km/h are in place in ‘home zones’. Even in the United States, where the car is king, 25 mph (40 km/h) limits are common in urban areas and 15 mph (24 km/h) limits at schools. In the UK the “20’s Plenty” Campaign has been successful in securing reduced speed limits in many urban locations - see its web-site. Ireland is lagging behind other countries in how we manage traffic to make our owns and cities more liveable.

Lower speeds also result in less noise and pollution and greater fuel efficiency (high fuel consumption is associated with stop-start traffic, not slow traffic). On residential roads and shopping streets, people simply don't want to be exposed to the noise, fumes and dangers from higher speed traffic.

[DMURS: on Department of Environment web-site]

FURTHER INFORMATION

Full press release with links on Cyclist.ie web-site. Fact-sheet on 30 km/h speed limits also on web-site

Mike McKillen (Chair of Cyclist.ie)

Firstly aren't they campaigning for a speed of a measly 20kph. (My sympathies for the loss of their child, in case I leave any doubts)
Baffled by cyclists.ie being in favour of a 30kph speed limit, considering that plenty of cyclist far exceed this in built up areas.

Hilly Bill · 17-02-2015 8:30pm

I drove into my estate today and checked the speed i was doing and it was 20kph. Its the speed i normally drive as im coming in and out . Im not one for going slow but drive to the conditions of the road and 20kph seemed about right for that road.
The point is that regardless of the limit that if you were driving at 50kph in an estate then you wont drive at the lower speed just because its the new limit. Joyriders wont slow down just because of a new limit and those that take care will still take care.
Why not a campaign to make parents teach their kids not to run between park cars and not to play on the road?

AlekSmart · 17-02-2015 8:37pm

Spook_ie wrote: »

Not convinced by the whole 30kph limit argument, if you drive at any kind of speed around children you're too fast, however, perhaps the real culprit is actually parental supervision
http://www.irishhealth.com/article.html?id=24317

Extract: Emphasis is mine

I'd be in general agreement with Spook_ie here.

For all of it's well meaning intent,and the genuine sadness of the Jake's Legacy campaign,I'm left a tad uncomfortable at the thrust of this campaign.

Noting the involvement of Dr Mike's organization,I would pose the question as to whether Pedal Cyclists will consider themselves bound by the new blanket limit ?

The study of Cyclist/Pedestrian accidents is,as yet,not given nearly as much media attention as those involving Mechanically Propelled Vehicles,yet it appears that significantly serious injuries are inflicted by Pedal Cycle components,particularly on young children.

With the significant expansion of the various "City Bikes" schemes,the opportunities for such conflicts are increasing rapidly,so it is not inconcievable that Pedal Cycling will sooner than later become the focus of similar campaigns.

Meanwhile,painting Cycle Lane markings into ever busier Bus Lanes still manages to be accepted as normality in whatever World is inhabited by Inhabited by our native Transport Planning professionals....I wish them well in their endeavours :rolleyes:

Tenzor07 · 17-02-2015 8:59pm

Greenmachine wrote: »

Baffled by cyclists.ie being in favour of a 30kph speed limit, considering that plenty of cyclist far exceed this in built up areas.

Seriously?

:eek:

Cookie_Monster · 17-02-2015 9:05pm

Greenmachine wrote: »

Baffled by cyclists.ie being in favour of a 30kph speed limit, considering that plenty of cyclist far exceed this in built up areas.

Why? Speed limits don't apply to cyclists anyway so I'm guessing the rationale is that anything that slows cars down makes cycling more attractive to people.

Jamie2k9 · 18-02-2015 12:01am

20 km/h is not enforceable at all and ridiculous. Isn't Dublin cc 20 km/h? How is that one working out....

Such speeds will anger and distract them even more.

coylemj · 18-02-2015 12:11am

The mother's attitude is that she doesn't want her child to have 'died in vain' which is simply saying that there must be something wrong with the system so something must be changed.

What do we do when another child is killed? Drop the limit to 15 kph?

Hard cases make bad law.

Aard · 18-02-2015 1:26am

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

20 km/h is not enforceable at all and ridiculous. Isn't Dublin cc 20 km/h? How is that one working out....

Such speeds will anger and distract them even more.

You're right -- we should allow people who are quick to anger to drive faster(!)....

MGWR · 18-02-2015 5:03am

coylemj wrote: »

The mother's attitude is that she doesn't want her child to have 'died in vain' which is simply saying that there must be something wrong with the system so something must be changed.

What do we do when another child is killed? Drop the limit to 15 kph?

Hard cases make bad law.

It's nicknamed "lawfare", where the lawyers sue and sue some more to institute laws that make no sense, usually for the purpose of disrupting a society.

30 km/h (18.6 mph) and 20 km/h (12.4 mph) are speeds that are hard on autos and make car driving all that more stressful and pointless, not to mention the effect on bus transport. Looks like a Luddite's vision to Balkanise the capital city of Ireland.

Nekarsulm · 18-02-2015 5:28am

Gotta be a great result for GoSafe. Park a van and pick off motorists speeding at 21 or 16 KPH. Rich pickings.......

_Kaiser_ · 18-02-2015 11:07am

I'm sorry for this family's loss (and indeed anyone who's lost a loved one to the roads) but more nanny state-ism and motorist scapegoating is not the answer.

The calls to lower limits/put in more speed ramps and such is another example of the "can't someone else do it" approach to personal responsibility that has become the norm in our "modern" society.
Instead of parents teaching their kids to be careful around cars and on roads (as we were taught when we were kids and indeed as I'm already teaching my own little fella) and watching them as they're out playing, now the idea seems to be to shift that responsibility entirely to the passing motorist. It's a bit like how many parents nowadays plonk their kids in front of the TV/XBox and expect the schools to do the rest.

And before the pedantry starts, no I'm not excusing people speeding through estates, but this seems like another knee-jerk reaction that won't make a blind bit of difference to the actual root cause of the problem - namely parents having kids that they aren't ready/prepared to look after properly.

loyatemu · 18-02-2015 11:23am

putting aside the issue of very young children being allowed out to play unsupervised - children up to a surprisingly old age have poor perception of speed and distance and risk in general, they're also prone to being distracted and not paying attention to what they are doing. This is because they are kids.

Anyone saying "it's the parents fault" for not supervising their kids - are you suggesting 10 year olds shouldn't be allowed play outside their houses without a parent standing around watching them, telling them what to do at all times. Is this really the kind of world you want to create?

A 30km/h limit may be difficult to enforce but enforcement of limits is pretty haphazard in Ireland in general - that's not a reason to get rid of them; what it does do is send out a message to motorists that they are responsible for driving carefully in residential areas, should be prepared for the unexpected and should generally treat such roads as a shared space. Virtually every town centre and residential street in France has a 30 limit and IME it's mostly well observed.

_Kaiser_ · 18-02-2015 11:39am

loyatemu wrote: »

putting aside the issue of very young children being allowed out to play unsupervised - children up to a surprisingly old age have poor perception of speed and distance and risk in general, they're also prone to being distracted and not paying attention to what they are doing. This is because they are kids.

Anyone saying "it's the parents fault" for not supervising their kids - are you suggesting 10 year olds shouldn't be allowed play outside their houses without a parent standing around watching them, telling them what to do at all times. Is this really the kind of world you want to create?

A 30km/h limit may be difficult to enforce but enforcement of limits is pretty haphazard in Ireland in general - that's not a reason to get rid of them; what it does do is send out a message to motorists that they are responsible for driving carefully in residential areas, should be prepared for the unexpected and should generally treat such roads as a shared space. Virtually every town centre and residential street in France has a 30 limit and IME it's mostly well observed.

OK here's how I see it...

I'm almost 40 so grew up in the 80s. When I was 9 we moved abroad for a few years and my mother worked shifts. I walked my younger sister to and from school every day and generally looked out for her until our mother got home.

When I was 12 I walked 45 minutes to school every day in all conditions, crossing several main roads at peak times and like every other kid I played on the street, cycled around the area and generally enjoyed being young!

I was never in an accident/near-miss or incident.. why? Because as soon as I started walking on the streets I was taught about being careful of cars, roads and to look both ways before crossing etc and my mother kept an eye on what we were at.

I don't believe that the roads have changed that much that suddenly we need to dramatically lower limits or take other drastic measures to protect little Johnny and Mary, but I do think that our culture and society has devolved into a responsibility-shirking, validation-seeking shadow of what we had before and it's because of this that many people think that things like personal safety, accountability and liability are all "someone else's" problem.

No-one said that we should remove all limits or that motorists shouldn't be mindful and drive appropriately to the conditions (whether it's an estate or a motorway) so let's not overreact here

but over-regulation - especially unenforced/unenforceable regulation - solves nothing and indeed makes things even worse as people do become desensitised to it and ignore it.

Maybe a tangent for a C&T thread but it applies equally here as to the wider issues we face

Hilly Bill · 18-02-2015 11:42am

They shouldn't be playing in the middle of the road That's for sure.

Laois_Man · 18-02-2015 12:50pm

serfboard wrote: »

Listening to her talk I couldn't understand why it's not brought in for housing estates nationwide straight away - is it becuase they'd then have to do something about it (in terms of enforcement), or is it financial (can't think why, unless for extra signage), or what?

Jake's mother was told it would cost quarter of a million to do the signage in Kilkenny alone! The Government have allocated only 2 million which is not gonna go very far given the Kilkenny quote

odyssey06 wrote: »

There's a 30 kmh speed limits in some Dublin areas already e.g. Marino.
It is not enforced. It is not observed, except where road conditions (ramps, parked cars) make going faster than that impossible. I don't believe it's the answer, and I think this is a campaign where the heart is ruling the head.

Enforceable or not, the fact is it has been hinted by Mrs. Brennan on Matt Cooper (or it could have been Sean O'Rourke) radio show that the DPP cannot bring a prosecution against the person who hit Jake Brennan because they were technically not breaking the law. Driving at a "sensible speed" (which is open to a whole range of personal interpretations). Someone driving at an irresponsible speed should be prosecutable and not get away with it because the speed limit itself wasn't set at a responsible level. Anyone who thinks that people driving through a housing estate at 50 KPH should remain untouchable is talking nonsense.

Besides, it is enforceable with more speed vans - it would pay for itself. And technology is catching up - slowly mind you, but it will get there (The power of GPS tracking hasn't been fully exploited yet)

Hilly Bill wrote: »

Why not a campaign to make parents teach their kids not to run between park cars and not to play on the road?

They will still do it - They're kids - so it doesn't solve anything!

Nekarsulm wrote: »

Gotta be a great result for GoSafe. Park a van and pick off motorists speeding at 21 or 16 KPH. Rich pickings.......

Indeed, and there's not a thing wrong with that where exceeding 20KPH is deemed unsafe!

Grolschevik · 18-02-2015 12:56pm

This.

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

I'm sorry for this family's loss (and indeed anyone who's lost a loved one to the roads) but more nanny state-ism and motorist scapegoating is not the answer.

The calls to lower limits/put in more speed ramps and such is another example of the "can't someone else do it" approach to personal responsibility that has become the norm in our "modern" society.
Instead of parents teaching their kids to be careful around cars and on roads (as we were taught when we were kids and indeed as I'm already teaching my own little fella) and watching them as they're out playing, now the idea seems to be to shift that responsibility entirely to the passing motorist. It's a bit like how many parents nowadays plonk their kids in front of the TV/XBox and expect the schools to do the rest.

And before the pedantry starts, no I'm not excusing people speeding through estates, but this seems like another knee-jerk reaction that won't make a blind bit of difference to the actual root cause of the problem - namely parents having kids that they aren't ready/prepared to look after properly.

And this.

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

OK here's how I see it...

I'm almost 40 so grew up in the 80s. When I was 9 we moved abroad for a few years and my mother worked shifts. I walked my younger sister to and from school every day and generally looked out for her until our mother got home.

When I was 12 I walked 45 minutes to school every day in all conditions, crossing several main roads at peak times and like every other kid I played on the street, cycled around the area and generally enjoyed being young!

I was never in an accident/near-miss or incident.. why? Because as soon as I started walking on the streets I was taught about being careful of cars, roads and to look both ways before crossing etc and my mother kept an eye on what we were at.

I don't believe that the roads have changed that much that suddenly we need to dramatically lower limits or take other drastic measures to protect little Johnny and Mary, but I do think that our culture and society has devolved into a responsibility-shirking, validation-seeking shadow of what we had before and it's because of this that many people think that things like personal safety, accountability and liability are all "someone else's" problem.

No-one said that we should remove all limits or that motorists shouldn't be mindful and drive appropriately to the conditions (whether it's an estate or a motorway) so let's not overreact here but over-regulation - especially unenforced/unenforceable regulation - solves nothing and indeed makes things even worse as people do become desensitised to it and ignore it.

Maybe a tangent for a C&T thread but it applies equally here as to the wider issues we face

Hilly Bill · 18-02-2015 1:11pm

Laois_Man wrote: »

Jake's mother was told it would cost quarter of a million to do the signage in Kilkenny alone! The Government have allocated only 2 million which is not gonna go very far given the Kilkenny quote

Enforceable or not, the fact is it has been hinted by Mrs. Brennan on Matt Cooper (or it could have been Sean O'Rourke) radio show that the DPP cannot bring a prosecution against the person who hit Jake Brennan because they were technically not breaking the law. Driving at a "sensible speed" (which is open to a whole range of personal interpretations). Someone driving at an irresponsible speed should be prosecutable and not get away with it because the speed limit itself wasn't set at a responsible level. Anyone who thinks that people driving through a housing estate at 50 KPH should remain untouchable is talking nonsense.

Besides, it is enforceable with more speed vans - it would pay for itself. And technology is catching up - slowly mind you, but it will get there (The power of GPS tracking hasn't been fully exploited yet)

They will still do it - They're kids - so it doesn't solve anything!

Indeed, and there's not a thing wrong with that where exceeding 20KPH is deemed unsafe!

Same goes for those that speed in housing estates, they will still do it regardless of the limit.

Laois_Man · 18-02-2015 1:15pm

Hilly Bill wrote: »

Same goes for those that speed in housing estates, they will still do it regardless of the limit.

Yes they will

But presently, 50 KPH, although an insane speed to be doing in certain places, is in fact untouchable by the law, which is utterly ridiculous!

Laois_Man · 18-02-2015 1:25pm

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

OK here's how I see it...

I'm almost 40 so grew up in the 80s. When I was 9 we moved abroad for a few years and my mother worked shifts. I walked my younger sister to and from school every day and generally looked out for her until our mother got home.

When I was 12 I walked 45 minutes to school every day in all conditions, crossing several main roads at peak times and like every other kid I played on the street, cycled around the area and generally enjoyed being young!

I was never in an accident/near-miss or incident.. why? Because as soon as I started walking on the streets I was taught about being careful of cars, roads and to look both ways before crossing etc and my mother kept an eye on what we were at.

I don't believe that the roads have changed that much that suddenly we need to dramatically lower limits or take other drastic measures to protect little Johnny and Mary, but I do think that our culture and society has devolved into a responsibility-shirking, validation-seeking shadow of what we had before and it's because of this that many people think that things like personal safety, accountability and liability are all "someone else's" problem.

No-one said that we should remove all limits or that motorists shouldn't be mindful and drive appropriately to the conditions (whether it's an estate or a motorway) so let's not overreact here but over-regulation - especially unenforced/unenforceable regulation - solves nothing and indeed makes things even worse as people do become desensitised to it and ignore it.

Maybe a tangent for a C&T thread but it applies equally here as to the wider issues we face

The facts from the CSO don't back up any of this "our culture and society has devolved into a responsibility-shirking, validation-seeking shadow of what we had before" stuff.

The number of pedestrians killed on Irish roads was at its height in the 70's and 80's

http://www.cso.ie/en/media/csoie/releasespublications/documents/otherreleases/thatwasthenthisisnow.pdf

(Page 165)

Hilly Bill · 18-02-2015 1:31pm

Surely you wouldnt need limits in a housing estate as any decent person wouldnt be driving like an idiot anyway. How many people actually ignore the children at play sign and think this is great i can go 50kph/30mph and aim for it?

Do we know at what speed the person that knocked down the kid was travelling at? Would the kid still have died if it was 20Kph?

Aard · 18-02-2015 1:49pm

Hilly Bill wrote: »

Surely you wouldnt need limits in a housing estate as any decent person wouldnt be driving like an idiot anyway. How many people actually ignore the children at play sign and think this is great i can go 50kph/30mph and aim for it?

The two housing estates I'm most familiar with (1960s/70s, south Dublin, no through access) have people regularly driving at 60-70kmph. Not many kids around these days. The corner radii are wide, the carriageways are wide, the streets are long and straight. These estates are full of "decent" middleclass people who do often drive like "idiots".

mrbike · 18-02-2015 1:53pm

Hilly Bill wrote: »

Would the kid still have died if it was 20Kph?

probably not.

Odds of Pedestrian Deaths:
@20mph 5%
@30mph 45%
@40mph 85%

source http://humantransport.org/sidewalks/SpeedKills.htm

Hilly Bill · 18-02-2015 2:16pm

Basically according to the stats there was a possibility that it would have been the same result.

Hilly Bill · 18-02-2015 2:19pm

Aard wrote: »

The two housing estates I'm most familiar with (1960s/70s, south Dublin, no through access) have people regularly driving at 60-70kmph. Not many kids around these days. The corner radii are wide, the carriageways are wide, the streets are long and straight. These estates are full of "decent" middleclass people who do often drive like "idiots".

I was talking about their driving not their social status.

schemingbohemia · 18-02-2015 3:01pm

Hilly Bill wrote: »

Basically according to the stats there was a possibility that it would have been the same result.

How do you get that? There's always a possibility depending on where on the body the victim is hit but the likelihood of death increases dramatically with the increase in speed as shown in the stats you were quoting - which by the way are in mph not kmh.

Spook_ie · 18-02-2015 3:04pm

Laois_Man wrote: »

Yes they will

But presently, 50 KPH, although an insane speed to be doing in certain places, is in fact untouchable by the law, which is utterly ridiculous!

No they're not, people can still be prosecuted for careless driving, you don't have to be speeding to be careless or inattentive

Why 30 km/h speed limits are important in the context of Jake's Legacy vigil

Comments