Speed limit reforms have begun

mackerski · 02-02-2005 1:33am #1

It looks as though the promised speed limit reviews have begun. I've only seen its effect on one stretch, which was auto-converted from 40mph to 60, but has now been re-signed to 80. The road in question is a short stretch of low-quality dual-carriageway in Dublin 15, running from the junction of Ballycoolin Road/Blanchardstown Road North for a distance of some hundreds of metres along the side of Blanchardstown Corporate Park, where it terminates on a roundabout and feeds into the rural roads towards Dolly's pub and Kilshane Cross.

It's a fair limit for a stretch of road that's far superior to the derestricted (80)rural roads it feeds. The lack of a hard shoulder, the slight bend that restricts vision and the short length mean that a higher limit was probably inappropriate. Good one, Fingal.

We need more cool heads working on realistic limits for the other roads out there.

Dermot

BrianD · 02-02-2005 12:54pm

I wouldn't hold out for much in terms of speed limit reform. There are few places such as the N11 where a review would be needed (near the glen of the downs). You can forget about the Belfield stretch. I would also like to know if any of the Dublin councils put up any of the 23,000 new signs we were promised. The signage on the N11 is disgraceful.

Many of the extended 50 zones are set by councils to facilitate development that may occur in the future. These will be hard to change unless a "super authority" can over rule them.

Finally, I firmly believe that the main motive for speed limit reform is to cover up sloppy careless driving by the general driving population. We don't pay attention to signs and heed the limits and we don't like getting caught. Lower limits increase the likelihood of being caught and that's why we don't like 'em.

mackerski · 02-02-2005 12:59pm

BrianD wrote:

You can forget about the Belfield stretch.

Why? And as for Wyattville...

BrianD wrote:

Finally, I firmly believe that the main motive for speed limit reform is to cover up sloppy careless driving by the general driving population. We don't pay attention to signs and heed the limits and we don't like getting caught. Lower limits increase the likelihood of being caught and that's why we don't like 'em.

You're entitled to that opinion. I just can't work out whether you're suggesting, via this "logic" that arbitrarily low limits are a good thing. Because if they're not a good thing, they should be reviewed upwards, on purely objective grounds. I suggest to you that they are not a good thing.

Which is better? To have the public at large regard speeding tickets as an inevitable tax or as a social stigma? Assuming the latter, who do you think is going to feel ashamed for the recklessness of hurtling under Belfield flyover at 80km/h?

Dermot

loyatemu · 02-02-2005 1:23pm

wyattville is still technically a roadworks zone (even though the works have all finished)

DLR CoCo have said they will be reviewing the limit in the next couple of months but I don't hold out much hope for it going above 60. There are a lot of driveways and estates opening onto the road - this makes it similar to the stretch between Foxrock church and Whites cross which is currently 60. It then changes to 80 between The Magic Carpet and Cabinteely where there are no driveways opening onto the road.

mackerski · 02-02-2005 2:19pm

loyatemu wrote:

wyattville is still technically a roadworks zone (even though the works have all finished)

Madness. Not your fault, but madness nonetheless.

loyatemu wrote:

DLR CoCo have said they will be reviewing the limit in the next couple of months but I don't hold out much hope for it going above 60. There are a lot of driveways and estates opening onto the road - this makes it similar to the stretch between Foxrock church and Whites cross which is currently 60. It then changes to 80 between The Magic Carpet and Cabinteely where there are no driveways opening onto the road.

With all due respect to people with driveways opening onto busy roads - the country is full of houses whose driveways emerge onto 100 and 80-zone roads, many of which roads don't have hard shoulders. 60km/h is artificialy slow for the kind of road the N11 is. Maybe 70 would be alright, it would certainly be an improvement. I take the view that, once a road is too dangerous to risk allowing the kids to stray onto it (which at 60 it already is), letting the mainline traffic attain a realistic speed isn't going to disimprove matters. I can only assume that traffic joining the carriageway from driveways first joins the hard shoulder or bus lane and then accelerates. They can't join the main flow at an immediate 60km/h, so does it really matter if the limit is raised a tad?

Dermot

BrianD · 02-02-2005 3:32pm

Mackerski - apparently the Belfield section has been reviewed and the limit will remain the same. Personally, I believe it is entirely appropriate speed limit though it is signed very poorly. I am not that familiar with the Wyatville section other than there was road works there up to recently.

In regard to speed limit reform what I was trying to say is that much of the public pressure for reform - where the old chestnuts are trotted out - is purely because they are careless driver. If speed limits are raised then the liklihood of getting caught is reduced. Few actually think of the other environmental factors that have influenced the current limit. The N11 may be an N road and it can be fustrating to be driving at 50 on a wide dual carriageway during off peak. However, it is a busy urban route with multiple entry points and junctions. Perhaps there is a possibility to introduce variable speed limits using LED signage. During the 'drive time' the limit would drop and then during off-peak the limit would increase.

mackerski · 02-02-2005 4:04pm

BrianD wrote:

Mackerski - apparently the Belfield section has been reviewed and the limit will remain the same. Personally, I believe it is entirely appropriate speed limit though it is signed very poorly.

Care to elaborate on why it's appropriate? Perhaps with reference to the stretch of N11 through Donnybrook, which is clearly more dangerous, though apparently only 10km/h more dangerous.

BrianD wrote:

I am not that familiar with the Wyatville section other than there was road works there up to recently.

I'm only infrequently on that stretch, but, from my recollection, "recently" here means more than half a year (plus one resigning) ago.

Dermot

BrianD · 02-02-2005 4:53pm

mackerski wrote:

Care to elaborate on why it's appropriate? Perhaps with reference to the stretch of N11 through Donnybrook, which is clearly more dangerous, though apparently only 10km/h more dangerous.

What's your point?? I don't see the point of comparison. Each section of road has its own circumstances. Donnybrook is 50 as you would expect and is appropriate. What's dangerous about Donnybrook? It;s an urban steet environment where you expect traffic, pedestrians and cyclists. Belfield may on appearance look like a wide dual carriageway no different to a stretch on other carriageways. However, it has a high volume of traffic and two major interesctions - UCD (one of the largest uni's in the State) and the junction with Nutley Lane leading to Donnybrook and a number of other institutions. There is a propensity for weaving traffic on this section.

In Health & Safety procedures there are two ways of dealing with a potential hazard - engineer it so it no longer is a problem (rebuild the road) or impose a safety instruction or policy (impose a speed limit).

mackerski · 02-02-2005 7:25pm

BrianD wrote:

What's your point?? I don't see the point of comparison. Each section of road has its own circumstances. Donnybrook is 50 as you would expect and is appropriate.

Yes, this was my point. What I want you to explain is why a far safer stretch of road (Belfield) should have only a negligibly higher limit. You've given a rationale for it - which I don't buy, and I'm not the only one. 40mph on this stretch was madness, 60km/h is worse still. The Belfield intersection requires no special speed measures, Nutley Lane could readily be accommodated by a shorter 60 zone on either side of the traffic lights, if at all. The only excessive weaving I've seen on this road is due to less patient motorists overtaking the slower ones on all sides (and let's save time by agreeing that this isn't necessarily big or clever).

BrianD wrote:

In Health & Safety procedures there are two ways of dealing with a potential hazard - engineer it so it no longer is a problem (rebuild the road) or impose a safety instruction or policy (impose a speed limit).

What hazard? Do we even know if the stretch has been accident-prone? I can't think of a straighter, wider, easier-to-see-ahead-of-you urban road anywhere in Dublin (except, possibly, the N4 by Liffey Valley). If these roads merit a 60 zone, we'd better crack out the 30-zone signs for everywhere else.

Dermot

DubTony · 04-02-2005 1:52am

mackerski wrote:

...(Belfield) ... 40mph on this stretch was madness, 60km/h is worse still. The Belfield intersection requires no special speed measures, Nutley Lane could readily be accommodated by a shorter 60 zone on either side of the traffic lights, if at all. The only excessive weaving I've seen on this road is due to less patient motorists overtaking the slower ones on all sides .....
What hazard? Do we even know if the stretch has been accident-prone? I can't think of a straighter, wider, easier-to-see-ahead-of-you urban road anywhere in Dublin
Dermot

Now lads, you see? That's the voice of common sense speaking. The 40 mph limit was ludicrous; to lower it shows that there isn't an ounce of smarts in the councils.
I've had to visit St. Vincents hospital a few times in the last few weeks and have been amazed at this crazy "speed" limit. I join the N11 at Brewery Road after coming from the M50 and trundle to the Nutley Lane junction. (The longest right-turn-only lane on the planet

)
I honestly thought a speed increase was on the cards. HA!

I travel the road at various times of the day and night and noticed the following. During the busiest times, and heading in the direction of most of the traffic, a speed of 60 km/h is probably ok. The fact is that the volume of traffic really doesn't allow travel at a faster speed.

However, when the roads not chocca, the average speed seems to increase to about 65 km/h. This speed is artificially low and on the N11 at non-busy times there is a lot of concentrating and dash watching to be done.

A more sensible speed limit on this road, and still very safe is, 70 km/h. It's a touch over the old limit but, on that road, is more comfortable to drive at. Or what about 75? (That's only 46.75 mph)

Problem is that the people in power decided to ignore the possiblilty of introducing "new" speeds to Irish roads.

..."ah sure, we can't be givin' dem all new speed limits... won't it all be confusin' enough as it is"... (What I like to call Dev thinking... that's DeValera, not the guy off Coronation St.)

BrianD wrote:

Belfield may on appearance look like a wide dual carriageway no different to a stretch on other carriageways. However, it has a high volume of traffic and two major interesctions - UCD (one of the largest uni's in the State) and the junction with Nutley Lane leading to Donnybrook and a number of other institutions.

ah, Brian. Come on, give us a break. The intersections are ramped; and heading North they are "supported" by a bus lane. The Nutley lane junction, as I already mentioned, is light years from the Belfield overpass. Even the bus Lane is gone at that point. A reduction from 75 to 65 - for that section - would be more appropriate, or take that stupid right turn lane out of the equation altogether and start it closer to where it's needed.

The speed limit on the N11 from Leopardstown Rd to Donnybrook is stupidly low and requires way too much concentration to keep a legal speed. That in itself is dangerous. As for speed limit reform, Mackerski, I think you experienced a fluke.

Tony

Victor · 04-02-2005 9:55pm

I'm wondering (a) what is the sight distance for a truck under the Belfied bridge? (b) what is the design speed for the road surface?

D'Peoples Voice · 19-07-2006 1:28pm

http://www.irishtrucker.com/news/2006/july/140706.asp

Cullen slams local authorities over speed limits

The Minister for Transport Martin Cullen has criticised local authorities for not changing appropriate speed limits as planned.

He said he was frustrated that he had given local authorities the power to regulate speed limits in their areas but that they were failing to do so.

Drivers have complained that some speed limits are too slow on certain roads. Residents in other areas have complained that speed limits are too high on bad roads.

Mr Cullen said he had written to a number of local authorities, to managers and the mayors and chairmen to ask them to address the issue. He wants this issue to be put on top of their agenda.

However Mr Cullen did praise the increased presence of gardai on the roads. A total of 46,000 drivers were found breaking the speed limit by gardai between April and June.

Just exactly how much notice did Local Authorities that kilometer signs were being introduced? could they have carried out a review BEFORE they replaced the old signs?

Speed limit reforms have begun

Comments