30km/h Speed Limit to be scrapped in Dublin City Centre

billyboy01

I heard today on the radio, that the DCC has at last woke up and plans to revoke the 30km/h speed limit this month on most of the affected streets.

The one exception mentioned was the 30km/h Temple Bar section of the Quays!

theneed2rock

about time

Eric Cartman

F*CK YEAH

coolbeans

People who speed in city centres need their arses kicked. It's one of the most irresponsible things you can do in a car. 40km/h an hour is plenty.

Technoprisoner

ill believe it when i see it

jaffa20

How much money was spent on this again

http://www.herald.ie/national-news/city-news/30kph-speed-limit-in-city-centre-will-cost-euro1m-says-td-2050336.html

Wasted

coolbeans

LIGHTNING wrote: »

---> exit is that way, pick up your high horse on the way out.

As if people are doing 120km/h on the quays.

Ah the old high horse rubbish, truly the instrument of a poster without a leg to stand on. Cities are for people not cars and the dangers of excessive speed in such an environment should be obvious even to you. I'm a motorhead like most on here but only dicks speed in town.

coolbeans

LIGHTNING wrote: »

And people who dont live on the Dart/Luas line are supposed to magically transport to the city centre?

Business in the city centre are dying for customers and people in power are doing their best to push people out of the city centre.

All I'm saying is drive slowly in the city, not 'don't drive in the city'. Asking people to be responsible is not pushing people out now is it? I said originally that 40km/h was plenty and I can't see why you have a problem with that.

billyboy01

coolbeans wrote: »

All I'm saying is drive slowly in the city, not 'don't drive in the city'. Asking people to be responsible is not pushing people out now is it? I said originally that 40km/h was plenty and I can't see why you have a problem with that.

Well you can rarely get out of second gear around Dawson St., College green etc..., But I dont see how 50km/h is a more dangerous speed then 40km/h on the lower quays or other straight sections of road around the city! I agree with a 30km/h limit on O'Connell St. and other high pedesterian areas, But the use of frequent changing traffic lights and traffic congestion(taxi's, buses) tends to offset fast moving traffic. But nothing can control or stop JayWalkers or other risk takers

Eric Cartman

coolbeans wrote: »

Ah the old high horse rubbish, truly the instrument of a poster without a leg to stand on. Cities are for people not cars and the dangers of excessive speed in such an environment should be obvious even to you. I'm a motorhead like most on here but only dicks speed in town.

if cities werent for cars they wouldnt have roads, Its not like somebodys goign to do 100km/h up oconnel street like, I would even support staged limits of 40km/h at peak times leading right up to 80km/h on some stretches of the quays between 4 and 6am

BostonB

Its all a bit daft nonsense.

I don't think the limit has any effect on people coming into the city. Why?, because its almost completely ignored by the marority of drivers, and almost completely non enforced.

mickoneill30

coolbeans wrote: »

People who speed in city centres need their arses kicked. It's one of the most irresponsible things you can do in a car. 40km/h an hour is plenty.

The first person in the thread to condemn speeding was you.

Then in your second sentence you suggest a speed that would be speeding with the current rules.

stealthyspeeder

coolbeans wrote: »

Ah the old high horse rubbish, truly the instrument of a poster without a leg to stand on. Cities are for people not cars and the dangers of excessive speed in such an environment should be obvious even to you. I'm a motorhead like most on here but only dicks speed in town.

Rubbish.

Pavements are for people on foot (commonly called pedestrians). Roads are for people in cars (commonly called motorists). The city centre is a mixture of both roads and pavements, I would actually reckon there is more road than pavement in the city centre.

30kph is a joke, bikes go faster FFS. Pedestrians have to follow rules too, penalise the jaywalkers rather than the motorist.

BostonB

The problem is Dublin City Center is a major route, with few alternatives for many people.

You not going to get cars out of the center, until that fundamental is addressed.

alias no.9

More pedestrian crossings, more frequent pedestrian sequences at these lights, and zero tolerance on jay walking would be a much more effective way of improving safety.
Yes an impact in slower traffic is less likely to be fatal but slower moving traffic (or just the perception of it moving slower) is more inviting for jaywalkers to take a chance.
It's about occurrence as well as severity.

BostonB

Enforcement of existing rules is all that's needed. Not more rules that they won't enforce either.

Without enforcement, there won't be a change in mindset.

Anan1

LIGHTNING wrote: »

Business in the city centre are dying for customers and people in power are doing their best to push people out of the city centre.

Not people, cars.

fletch

I cycle in and out of the city centre every weekday and I'll be happy if they lift the 30km/h speed limit. It's a stupid speed limit and any time I've driven into the city I find myself concentrating more on the rear view mirror as people nearly ram you off the road for doing 30km/h, rather than watching the road ahead.

Anan1

LIGHTNING wrote: »

I know lots of people who dont bother going into town as its too much hassle to drive in, so they go to Dundrum instead.

I suppose it depends where you're coming from. How would lifting the 30km/h limit change this, though?

Anan1

LIGHTNING wrote: »

Its just another thing on top of the hassle getting parking and the unability to turn left anywhere in town! The last thing you want is to get a ticket for doing 40km/h.

Sure if traffic's free enough to do 30km/h then you're doing ok!

BostonB

LIGHTNING wrote: »

I know lots of people who dont bother going into town as its too much hassle to drive in, so they go to Dundrum instead.

LIGHTNING wrote: »

Its just another thing on top of the hassle getting parking and the unability to turn left anywhere in town! The last thing you want is to get a ticket for doing 40km/h.

Considering the vast majority of that journey isn't in the 30 km/h zone at all. Its very doubtful that the zone is the reason they can't be bothered. Also the odds of getting a speeding ticket are slim to none. I pass through the zone a couple of times a day, going to/from work. I don't think I've seen a speed check in 12 months, maybe more. Almost no one does that limit unless its grid lock.

Dravokivich

Anan1 wrote: »

Sure if traffic's free enough to do 30km/h then you're doing ok!

there are alot of times in the day with minimal traffic and the 30km limit is crippling then.

Victor

So, how many of you made a submission on this?

Iwannahurl

30 kph zones have proven road safety benefits.

If it is true that the Dublin City Centre 30 kph zone is to be eliminated or drastically reduced, then that is a retrograde step.

I'd be interested knowing more about the politics of this.




Edit: seems to be a partial reduction: http://www.independent.ie/national-news/parts-of-capital-to-scrap-30kmh-limit-2529411.html

In any case, not a welcome development IMO.

Iwannahurl

Eric Cartman wrote: »

if cities werent for cars they wouldnt have roads, Its not like somebodys goign to do 100km/h up oconnel street like, I would even support staged limits of 40km/h at peak times leading right up to 80km/h on some stretches of the quays between 4 and 6am

Nice one!

Two-part question for you, Mr Cartman:

1. When was O'Connell Street (originally known as Sackville Street) planned and constructed?

2. When was the automobile invented?

NuMarvel

This topic is also being discussed in the Commuting & Transport forum, and one of the posters there posted a map of the new 30kph zone:


(With thanks to dynamick)

Full thread here.

BostonB

Iwannahurl wrote: »

30 kph zones have proven road safety benefits....

I assume thats only when its enforced.

If this made any difference it would be reflected in stats. Of course if there so few accidents/deaths that there's no enough data for such a short period time. You'd have to ask how much of a problem it is.

snickerpuss

When this was enforced I actually found that people were more likely to run out across the road in front of cars because they were now going slow enough. More bloody dangerous if you ask me. Not to mention that it is physically painful to drive at 30km when the quays are empty at 4am.

Iwannahurl

snickerpuss wrote: »

When this was enforced I actually found that people were more likely to run out across the road in front of cars because they were now going slow enough. More bloody dangerous if you ask me. Not to mention that it is physically painful to drive at 30km when the quays are empty at 4am.

Do tell. I'm always interested in unusual ailments.

BostonB

snickerpuss wrote: »

W....Not to mention that it is physically painful to drive at 30km when the quays are empty at 4am....

How do you avoid this pain when at 30km/h at other times and locations?

BostonB

Maybe the passengers hit him with the map or something.

muckwarrior

Eric Cartman wrote: »

leading right up to 80km/h on some stretches of the quays between 4 and 6am

Let me get this straight. Just as thousands of drunk people stagger out of pubs and nightclubs you want to raise the speed limit on the quays to 80kph? A speed faster than the limit on a lot of dual carriageways outside the city.

Iwannahurl

BostonB wrote: »

I assume thats only when its enforced.

If this made any difference it would be reflected in stats. Of course if there so few accidents/deaths that there's no enough data for such a short period time. You'd have to ask how much of a problem it is.

Please see attached map of Dublin City Centre collisions 1996-2007 (including several seriously injured or killed within the area now designated as 30 kph).

I don't know how long it would take to produce statistically significant data in this case, but my gut feeling is that it is too early to tell. The pressure being exerted to have the zone reduced is not coming from people whose primary motivation or justification is road safety.

snickerpuss

BostonB wrote: »

How do you avoid this pain when at 30km/h at other times and locations?

I avoid it by going faster than that when there is no other traffic. (And the speed limit is above 30km)
Driving extremely slowly when you are the only car around is hugely annoying.
PS: Am a girl!

Del2005

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Nice one!

Two-part question for you, Mr Cartman:

1. When was O'Connell Street (originally known as Sackville Street) planned and constructed?

2. When was the automobile invented?

The road was designed for horses and carts

muckwarrior wrote: »

Let me get this straight. Just as thousands of drunk people stagger out of pubs and nightclubs you want to raise the speed limit on the quays to 80kph?

There doesn't be thousands of drunks walking down around Guinness's at 4am in the morning.

muckwarrior wrote: »

A speed faster than the limit on a lot of dual carriageways outside the city.

The limits on the urban DCs are too low, but this thread isn't about them.

Atomic Pineapple

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Please see attached map of Dublin City Centre collisions 1996-2007 (including several seriously injured or killed within the area now designated as 30 kph).

I don't know how long it would take to produce statistically significant data in this case, but my gut feeling is that it is too early to tell. The pressure being exerted to have the zone reduced is not coming from people whose primary motivation or justification is road safety.

Wheres the info on what happened in each serious and fatal case?
Where's the info on what exactly a minor collision is compared to a serious one?
Who was at fault for each case?
For each case that a driver was at fault what role did speed play in the cause of the accident?
For each case that the pedestrian was at fault what was the manner of the accident?

Without proper data that at the bare minimum answers the above questions you might as well have posted a picture with a load of smarties scattered over a map of the city centre

BostonB

snickerpuss wrote: »

I avoid it by going faster than that when there is no other traffic. (And the speed limit is above 30km)
Driving extremely slowly when you are the only car around is hugely annoying.
PS: Am a girl!

The question was how do you avoid this pain when you are driving at 30km/h. Unless of course you can get from 0-60 (or 60-0) without passing through 30km/h. Its traditional to pass through all the speeds in between. You raise another question though. Do you only drive when there's no traffic?

PS: The cookie monster is not a girl.

BostonB

muckwarrior wrote: »

Let me get this straight. Just as thousands of drunk people stagger out of pubs and nightclubs you want to raise the speed limit on the quays to 80kph? A speed faster than the limit on a lot of dual carriageways outside the city.

Plenty of cars do those speeds now. Especially on those sections.

-Chris-

Del2005 wrote: »

There doesn't be thousands of drunks walking down around Guinness's at 4am in the morning.

That's convenient, because the 30kmph speed limit doesn't apply there...

BostonB

I have a mental image of pints of Guinness on the ground and people wandering around them. Wait...thats temple bar.

billyboy01

I heard about this on Newstalk and 98FM yesterday!

As some of you PM me about where I heard it!

Iwannahurl

draffodx wrote: »

Wheres the info on what happened in each serious and fatal case?
Where's the info on what exactly a minor collision is compared to a serious one?
Who was at fault for each case?
For each case that a driver was at fault what role did speed play in the cause of the accident?
For each case that the pedestrian was at fault what was the manner of the accident?

Without proper data that at the bare minimum answers the above questions you might as well have posted a picture with a load of smarties scattered over a map of the city centre

If you're interested in such data, and if you think such information will add anything constructive to discussion on 30 kph zones, then go and look for it.

I uploaded the map showing the distribution of collisions and KSIs in response to this post.

There are plenty of good data, published in peer-reviewed scientific journals, demonstrating the benefits of 30 kph zones. Such benefits are hardly surprising given the inherent safety of lower vehicle speeds. Studies in various jurisdictions have shown that when the average speed of traffic in a given area is lowered, casualties are reduced. Central Dublin is not likely to be anomalous in that regard, and if the 30 kph limit is observed over time it would be expected that road safety overall would be improved. That is what lower speed does, that is why 30 kph zones are implemented in many cities throughout Europe, and that is why community groups and various authorities recommend that there be more of them.

Below are links to a small selection of references for the proven safety benefits of 30 kph zones as well as policy papers recommending their implementation. While you ruminate on them you can chew on some of these.

Commission for Integrated Transport: Study of European best practice in the delivery of integrated transport
Department for Transport: Review of 20 mph Zone and Limit Implementation in England.
European Commission: Reclaiming city streets for people -- chaos or quality of life?
European Transport Safety Council: Fact Sheet #6 -- Motor vehicle speed in the EU.
European Transport Safety Council: Lower speeds, win-win for road safety and the environment.
British Medical Journal: Effect of 20 mph traffic speed zones on road injuries in London, 1986-2006.
Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents: 20 mph Zones and Speed Limits.

BostonB

In other countries the traffic laws are much more rigorously enforced.

Without stats before and after you can't put any metrics if the project met its objective.All the map shows is that in a city center, and on perhaps the busiest streets in Ireland for traffic and pedestrians. Theres lots of accidents. I think you could have guessed that. You might infer that a 30 limit makes it safer for cyclists. However the main cause of cycle deaths is left turning HGV. The limit does nothing for that. Slower traffic makes it nicer to cycle, and more people cycling makes it safer, as drivers are more aware as they see more cyclists.

However they didn't enforce the limits. So it makes zilch difference to cyclists.

Studies is one thing, Reality is another.

Iwannahurl

BostonB wrote: »

In other countries the traffic laws are much more rigorously enforced.

Without stats before and after you can't put any metrics if the project met its objective.All the map shows is that in a city center, and on perhaps the busiest streets in Ireland for traffic and pedestrians. Theres lots of accidents. I think you could have guessed that. You might infer that a 30 limit makes it safer for cyclists. However the main cause of cycle deaths is left turning HGV. The limit does nothing for that. Slower traffic makes it nicer to cycle, and more people cycling makes it safer, as drivers are more aware as they see more cyclists.

However they didn't enforce the limits. So it makes zilch difference to cyclists.

Studies is one thing, Reality is another.

1. Agreed re enforcement. Irish authorities don't really do enforcement, or accountability. I allowed for that in my earlier post. Without the bye-law in place, however, there is nothing to enforce.

2. There are statistics available. See pdf attached earlier.

3. Lower speed is inherently safer, and a lower average speed of traffic in any given area is safer on average.

4. Any studies showing a road safety benefit of 30 kph / 20 mph zones are studies of reality. There is no reason to believe that if the average speed in the Dublin City zone is sufficiently reduced it won't be safer. It would be nice, and a welcome change, if AGS got their finger out and started to enforce the limit visibly and effectively. Or use cameras. Whatever it takes.

BostonB

I think you are missing my point. A study that involved enforcement is not representative of the same limit with out enforcement. Its just not the same.

Iwannahurl

BostonB wrote: »

I think you are missing my point. A study that involved enforcement is not representative of the same limit with out enforcement. Its just not the same.

I absolutely agree with you that enforcement (in one form or another) is essential. I also agree that enforcement is inadequate in this country.

The evidence for road safety benefits from reduced speed is sound. Studies where the average speed was reduced -- whether or not some form of enforcement was part of the intervention -- showed a reduction in casualties. Therefore there are no arguments against setting a lower speed limit on safety grounds.

Once the safety argument has been put to bed, as it should be for anyone who cares the review the evidence (and I'm addressing the anti-30kph lobby here) then the real world issue becomes one of how to achieve the necessary average speed reduction in the designated zone.

Speed can be monitored in various ways, before and after the implementation of a 30 kph zone. That can be used as an indicator of whether the policy is working.

If average speed (plus 85th percentiles and all that) does not reach the desired target after the limit is lowered then further intervention is necessary, IMO. The research and policy literature regularly mentions "self-enforcing" speed limits, for example, where engineering measures of various kinds are used to increase compliance. BTW, here's a Dun Laoghaire County Council webpage that mentions it. Although police presence cannot be constant, AGS ought to be more proactive and visible, IMO. Public policy ought to be conducive as well, and key opinion leaders and other people in positions of authority and influence ought to be promoting a culture of compliance and respect for such speed zones. Social attitudes are also important, enforcement perhaps even more so.








EDIT: Here's an interesting EU Commission paper addressing various aspects of best practice in road safety.

BostonB

You are ignoring that these roads are major transport links.

Thats not the same as just any road with low volumes of traffic.

Iwannahurl

BostonB wrote: »

You are ignoring that these roads are major transport links.

Thats not the same as just any road with low volumes of traffic.

"These roads"?

It's a zone, and there are residential areas within it as well as streets with high levels of pedestrian and cycle traffic.

BostonB

"Some" of these "roads" . Zone. Thats my point. You can't treat some backstreet the same as a 3 or 4 lane major link road. Thats not logical.

Of course its a mute point, because even with the zone in place the limits aren't enforced. So the traffic isn't at 30km/h anyway. In reality there is no 30km/h zone.