30Kmh speed limit in housing estates

homer911

DLRCoCo is inviting submissions in relation to the possible introduction of a 30Kmh speed limit in housing estates.

There is an online form available here to let you have your say, on or before Monday 2nd March

https://dlrcoco.citizenspace.com/transportation/consultation-on-the-introduction-of-30km-hr-speed/consult_view

Mort5000

Our estate doesn't need a limit that everyone will just ignore, we need speed bumps..

ted1

Mort5000 wrote: »

Our estate doesn't need a limit that everyone will just ignore, we need speed bumps..

Speed bumps aren't the answer.

Mort5000

ted1 wrote: »

Speed bumps aren't the answer.

It is for us.

ted1

Mort5000 wrote: »

It is for us.

So have you looked into speed bumps and seen studies of their effectiveness ?

Mort5000

ted1 wrote: »

So have you looked into speed bumps and seen studies of their effectiveness ?

So you have looked into speed limits and seen studies on their effectiveness?
If you're going to make a blanket statement like "Speed bumps aren't the answer" without any backing or evidence, don't expect sensible replies.

Speed limits mean nothing without policing IN OUR ESTATE.

Only thing to slow people down is a physical deterrent.
Traffic circles can't be added without changing road layout.
4 way stop can't be added without changing road layout.

beauf

ted1 wrote: »

So have you looked into speed bumps and seen studies of their effectiveness ?

Maybe you could link to something you think is useful.

Maybe they should put in speed camera's who's fines go to the local authority, for works in the local area.

Victor

Mort5000 wrote: »

So you have looked into speed limits and seen studies on their effectiveness?
If you're going to make a blanket statement like "Speed bumps aren't the answer" without any backing or evidence, don't expect sensible replies.

Speed limits mean nothing without policing IN OUR ESTATE.

Only thing to slow people down is a physical deterrent.
Traffic circles can't be added without changing road layout.
4 way stop can't be added without changing road layout.

Then change the road layout?

Take a look at DMURS

Larbre34

Mort5000 wrote: »

Our estate doesn't need a limit that everyone will just ignore, we need speed bumps..

No you dont. Have people any idea how low the accident rates actually are in Dublin, they are among the lowest in Europe.

Ask a mechanic how useful speed bumps are. Ask an ambulance driver how useful speed bumps are. Ask a person with chronic back pain or any other joint problem how much they love driving on them.

They are a bloody nuisance.

Mort5000

Larbre34 wrote: »

No you dont. Have people any idea how low the accident rates actually are in Dublin, they are among the lowest in Europe.

Ask a mechanic how useful speed bumps are. Ask an ambulance driver how useful speed bumps are. Ask a person with chronic back pain or any other joint problem how much they love driving on them.

They are a bloody nuisance.

You're going to supply the garda to stand around and stop the speeding?
Excellent. Looking forward to that.

beauf

The point is that is may reduce speed but has other negative consequences.

If your road is plagued by speeding you might be happy to live with the disadvantages.

I hate them. But I'm happy to have them on our nearest main road. It was a race track before.

Aard

There's other ways to slow cars down. Read DMURS, as suggested above. Anyone coming aling suggesting speed bumps clearly hasn't done their homework. Highly reactionary "solution" that shows little engagement with the problem and how to remedy it.

Tragedy

Speedbumps are harmful to the environment, to vehicles and from what research I read back when I cared, more dangerous than a road without speedbumps in general. Speedbumps that slow people to below the road limit significantly change driver behaviour that leads to a higher prevalence of accidents.

If one person is the issue, report to the Guards. Repeatedly. Get anyone else who is affected to do the same. A gardai doesn't need to witness the speeding in order to progress to a prosecution.

My car weighs 1600kg and from factory has a sports suspension which is very stiff and keeps the car relatively low - speed bumps do serious damage to it, both cosmetic and mechanical. Is anyone familiar with Rockfield Grove/Shelton Avenue in Perrystown?

Stillorgan Park Road has speedramps that will let you do 50km/h without anything more than a pleasant lifting sensation.

beauf

Considering the abysmal standard of cycling facilities that are being built. Do you realistically think DMURS has a hope of being implemented to any useful standard by the same authorities.

Skatedude

speed ramps slow down traffic, but also distract drivers so not a proper solution. drivers now focus on the ramps instead of the road and surroundings. the ones like 3 or 4 humps across the roads are particularly dangerous as drivers on both sides usually swerve to drive over the center of them to reduce the "bump" and since they place one of the humps near the center line leads to head on crashes.
at the very least, ramps need to be standardized, instead we have mole hills to mountains

beauf

It's a sad reflection on driving standards when people choose driving head on at oncoming traffic rather than slowing down for a ramp.

Driving over ramps too fast will certain damage your car. Especially if its a daily route. Too fast might be very slowly depending on the ramp. But you have to consider that it's not the occasional speeder that caused them to be installed. It's a lot of speeding constantly over a long period of time.

I hate ramps. But they are the cheapest option. If you want something that works better it's going to cost more. Even if its more court effective over a longer period.

beauf

At some point we'll have some sort of transponder/black box that reports back a record of a cars speed.

dr.fuzzenstein

A lot of people approach speed bumps like I do. Without: steady speed in 3rd or 4th gear.
With: never use 4th gear, approach ramp in 3rd, brake, switch to 2nd, accelerate away and if next bump is too close (as they usually are) stay in 2nd. Nice and loud. And yes, you have to pay more attention to the bumps than to playing children.
Speed bumps cause people to slow and accelerate, brake, switch gears and rev the engine much higher. If you like more noise and erratic driving, speed bumps are the solution for you.

ted1

beauf wrote: »

It's a sad reflection on driving standards when people choose driving head on at oncoming traffic rather than slowing down for a ramp.

Driving over ramps too fast will certain damage your car. Especially if its a daily route. Too fast might be very slowly depending on the ramp. But you have to consider that it's not the occasional speeder that caused them to be installed. It's a lot of speeding constantly over a long period of time.

I hate ramps. But they are the cheapest option. If you want something that works better it's going to cost more. Even if its more court effective over a longer period.

Gob****es often accelerate between and break hard. There no the answer

ted1

beauf wrote: »

At some point we'll have some sort of transponder/black box that reports back a record of a cars speed.

TBH 30km is to fast for housing estates. I'm lucky in our estate there is a green when you come in and people know that there are always kids about so nearly all drivers slow right down.

dr.fuzzenstein

ted1 wrote: »

Gob****es often accelerate between and break hard. There no the answer

Has to be done, the speed for going over a ramp sometimes has to be near walking pace, so of course you have to speed up coming off the ramp. That's what they do, force people to brake, switch gear and accelerate coming off them. One simply cannot advocate speed ramps and then complain when they FOD.(function as designed)

beauf

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Has to be done, the speed for going over a ramp sometimes has to be near walking pace, so of course you have to speed up coming off the ramp. That's what they do, force people to brake, switch gear and accelerate coming off them. One simply cannot advocate speed ramps and then complain when they FOD.(function as designed)

So you agree they are telling you to slow down, and getting you to actually slow down. Repeatedly. But you're going to ignore all those messages and drive at the speed you want.

The only solution to that is enforcement that's harsh enough to change your behaviour. Would points and a ban work?.

For me it was making my journey so time consuming that I looked for alternatives.

dr.fuzzenstein

So what you want me to do? Drive walking pace? Of course not! You slow down for the ramp, stick it in 2nd and get back up to speed again. As long as its within the posted limit, I'm doing nothing wrong. Unless I'm braking the changing gear and accelerating law. Oh wait, there is no such law!

beauf

The inference is that the ramps change your driving so that its dangerous. There is a law against dangerous driving.

The implication is that your average speed will be slower, if you have to to keep slowing down. Thats the aim of the bumps to lower the average speed.

padser

Novel solution.

We keep our cars on the roads and allow them to drive at a reasonable speed facilitating people getting from A to B.

We keep our children off the roads and allow them a much safer environment than roads regardless of what the speed limit is.

Into The Blue

padser wrote: »

Novel solution.

We keep our cars on the roads and allow them to drive at a reasonable speed facilitating people getting from A to B.

We keep our children off the roads and allow them a much safer environment than roads regardless of what the speed limit is.

Supervise our own children? It might just work!

dr.fuzzenstein

beauf wrote: »

The inference is that the ramps change your driving so that its dangerous. There is a law against dangerous driving.

The implication is that your average speed will be slower, if you have to to keep slowing down. Thats the aim of the bumps to lower the average speed.

So why do we install Ramps that change driver behaviour so that it is dangerous?
Also, I said I approach ramp at speed limit, slow down to cross ramp and speed up again. Sorry, can't see the dangerous in that. Or I could slow to walking pace for the first ramp and maintain that throughout. Errm, no. Not gonne happen. How do you complain that ramps do what they are designed to do? Either we're agreeing and I'm not seeing it (no worries in that case) or you're trying to defend ramps by complaining that they cause "dangerous" behaviour by drivers. Er, what?

Oyva bigwan

ted1 wrote: »

Speed bumps aren't the answer.

Potholes are

beauf

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

So why do we install Ramps that change driver behaviour so that it is dangerous?
Also, I said I approach ramp at speed limit, slow down to cross ramp and speed up again. Sorry, can't see the dangerous in that. Or I could slow to walking pace for the first ramp and maintain that throughout. Errm, no. Not gonne happen. How do you complain that ramps do what they are designed to do? Either we're agreeing and I'm not seeing it (no worries in that case) or you're trying to defend ramps by complaining that they cause "dangerous" behaviour by drivers. Er, what?

One of someone else points was that it's not possible to drive safely over a ramp or drive at a constant speed. People have to drive head on to other cars and lose all situational awareness.

So which is it?

Ramps only exist because people are unable to drive at a reasonable speed.

On my cycle commute the roads I dislike the most are the ones in the suburbs and estates. Far more speeding and dangerous aggressive driving than the city center. Much higher speeds too. There's something wrong with that mindset.

beauf

padser wrote: »

Novel solution.

We keep our cars on the roads and allow them to drive at a reasonable speed facilitating people getting from A to B.

We keep our children off the roads and allow them a much safer environment than roads regardless of what the speed limit is.

I didn't think kids were allowed to drive on the roads. Where do you live exactly??/

dr.fuzzenstein

beauf wrote: »

One of someone else points was that it's not possible to drive safely over a ramp or drive at a constant speed. People have to drive head on to other cars and lose all situational awareness.

So which is it?

Ramps only exist because people are unable to drive at a reasonable speed.

On my cycle commute the roads I dislike the most are the ones in the suburbs and estates. Far more speeding and dangerous aggressive driving than the city center. Much higher speeds too. There's something wrong with that mindset.

Driving onto the other side of the road over a speedbump is certainly silly behaviour. That is not something I would do. There are bumps with very sharp edges that will warp your alloys if you drive over them anywhere near the speed limit, so you have to slow down to a crawl, hence the speeding up bit. I don't understand the logic of them, they are along the lines of "Take that you evil motorist!". If people want them, fine, but if they then come back whining and saying "people slow down and speed up going over speedbumps, I don't like that!", well congratulations, you wanted it, you paid for it (via you taxes) and now you have it. Enjoy!

zagmund

Like beauf, I have noticed that drivers in the city centre (or at least the D4/D2 bit that I cycle through) are *generally* slower and more cautious than the ones I encounter out in the suburbs.

I grew up in a cul-de-sac in one of the many 1960s housing estates in DLR. When I were a lad you could play on the road and nothing more than someone shouting "CAR" was required to keep everyone safe and off the road. These days I see cars driving so fast on the same road (a cul-de-sac, where there's no rush to get to the end of the road) that it's just not safe for kids to be playing on the road.

As an old fogey, I wonder what it is about people these days that makes them feel the need to drive at 30, 40, 50km/h up a dead end road.

z

beauf

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Driving onto the other side of the road over a speedbump is certainly silly behaviour. That is not something I would do. There are bumps with very sharp edges that will warp your alloys if you drive over them anywhere near the speed limit, so you have to slow down to a crawl, hence the speeding up bit. I don't understand the logic of them, they are along the lines of "Take that you evil motorist!". If people want them, fine, but if they then come back whining and saying "people slow down and speed up going over speedbumps, I don't like that!", well congratulations, you wanted it, you paid for it (via you taxes) and now you have it. Enjoy!

There's one outside Garda HQ you need oxygen for.

. It's just cheap and dirty flawed solution. But its driver behaviour that creates a desire for them. In the UK they used to have loads of them but seem to have speed cameras a lot more now.

Surprised cameras aren't more widespread here.

Tragedy

beauf wrote: »

Driving over ramps too fast will certain damage your car. Especially if its a daily route. Too fast might be very slowly depending on the ramp. But you have to consider that it's not the occasional speeder that caused them to be installed. It's a lot of speeding constantly over a long period of time.

Can you show examples of where speed bumps were installed in response to prolonged, persistent and common speeding? Because I can show many examples in SDCC where speedbumps were quite literally plonked on a road because a beancounter decided they should be there, with zero investigation or even anecdotal reasons to install them.

Your entire 'argument' is predicated on an assumption that is largely untrue.

dr.fuzzenstein

beauf wrote: »

There's one outside Garda HQ you need oxygen for.

. It's just cheap and dirty flawed solution. But its driver behaviour that creates a desire for them. In the UK they used to have loads of them but seem to have speed cameras a lot more now.

Surprised cameras aren't more widespread here.

We would do anything in order to avoid actual driver training and enforcement. Whatever solutions get implemented always seem to be whatever is popular with the table-banging brigade.

beauf

Tragedy wrote: »

Can you show examples of where speed bumps were installed in response to prolonged, persistent and common speeding? Because I can show many examples in SDCC where speedbumps were quite literally plonked on a road because a beancounter decided they should be there, with zero investigation or even anecdotal reasons to install them.

Your entire 'argument' is predicated on an assumption that is largely untrue.

Over the years I've seen a number of local campaigns for measures to curb speeding and ramps are often the result. I'm surprised you've never heard of any before.

For example

2004
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/residents-want-action-as-speeding-traffic-ploughs-up-strawberry-beds-26218379.html

http://www.askaboutmoney.com/threads/speed-limit-on-the-strawberry-beds.55953/

Finally got them 4 years later in 2008.
http://www.biker.ie/forum/showthread.php?t=33469

They had been complaining about speeding on that road for probably about 10yrs or more.

Another more recent one was Diswellstown road. That took a few years too. There been loads over the years. Perhaps people don't notice these campaigns unless they are right beside them, or on their route.

That not to say they get installed sometimes without any reason by local authorities. But its those same authorities who would have to implement the ideas that avoid the need for speed ramps.

Tragedy

beauf wrote: »

Over the years I've seen a number of local campaigns for measures to curb speeding and ramps are often the result. I'm surprised you've never heard of any before.

For example

2004
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/residents-want-action-as-speeding-traffic-ploughs-up-strawberry-beds-26218379.html

http://www.askaboutmoney.com/threads/speed-limit-on-the-strawberry-beds.55953/

Finally got them 4 years later in 2008.
http://www.biker.ie/forum/showthread.php?t=33469

They had been complaining about speeding on that road for probably about 10yrs or more.

Another more recent one was Diswellstown road. That took a few years too. There been loads over the years. Perhaps people don't notice these campaigns unless they are right beside them, or on their route.

That not to say they get installed sometimes without any reason by local authorities. But its those same authorities who would have to implement the ideas that avoid the need for speed ramps.

Could you please read my post before replying?

Local campaigns to have speed ramps installed are not based on even anecdotal evidence. Tests show that the average person finds it almost impossible to accurately judge speed without training (the most common method being to know the rough distance between two objects on/by the road and to time how long it takes a vehicle to move between both). Perceived speed is overly influenced by factors unrelated to speed e.g. exhaust noise or tyre roar.

In essence, you replied to a post explaining how your argument based on assumption is untrue, with another argument based on a different assumption which also isn't true.

That is to say, people like you are why many roads that never had any need of speed ramps are instead littered with them because instead of doing the intelligent thing of actually analyzing traffic speeds to determine the necessity for speed ramps, councils put them down just because enough dim people said so.

beauf

Tragedy wrote: »

... even anecdotal reasons to install them....

I took your inference to be were there was no local request for them. You're now asking for locations where the authority did studies to measure the speeding. Which is very different. You should be explicit if thats what you want in reply.

In my experience the council do run studies which is why they often refuse to install then.

http://www.independent.ie/regionals/fingalindependent/news/speed-reader-plan-for-oldtown-school-30769147.html

http://www.biker.ie/forum/showpost.php?p=493803&postcount=14

http://www.roseparkresidentsassociation.com/?p=932

http://www.roseparkresidentsassociation.com/?p=932

18/09/2012 – Report provided by F.C.C

We received the report from F.C.C (see attached document “Rosepark Park Balrothery Speed Survey) and were surprised to find that the average speed of 85% of the traffic was at an average speed of 53kph, in excess of the area speed limit; as was the previous speed survey which showed 85% of the traffic to be at 60kph but this was deemed acceptable by F.C.C.

So that shows they do studies/surveys over time to compare results, don't always install ramps at the request of locals.`

Amirani

I don't drive myself, I cycle, and I hate speed bumps. There's essentially no speed you can go over them at that isn't fecking painful.

ezra_pound

padser wrote: »

Novel solution.

We keep our cars on the roads and allow them to drive at a reasonable speed facilitating people getting from A to B.

We keep our children off the roads and allow them a much safer environment than roads regardless of what the speed limit is.

Why do I get the feeling you don't have any kids?

Tragedy

beauf wrote: »

I took your inference to be were there was no local request for them. You're now asking for locations where the authority did studies to measure the speeding. Which is very different. You should be explicit if thats what you want in reply.

I wouldn't need to be absurdly explicit if you could correctly read posts, which you show a repeated inability to do.

In my experience the council do run studies which is why they often refuse to install then.

Perhaps you could share this experience?

http://www.independent.ie/regionals/fingalindependent/news/speed-reader-plan-for-oldtown-school-30769147.html

F.C.C who informed us a Speed Survey was underway after original requests from us through Senator Darragh O’Brien.

So the council only did a speed survey after pressure from a Senator, a politician who should not ever be making requests to a County Council.

http://www.biker.ie/forum/showpost.php?p=493803&postcount=14

So your experience is one post on a forum where someone says repeated traffic surveys were done before speed ramps were installed? That doesn't even make sense.

http://www.roseparkresidentsassociation.com/?p=932

See above.

http://www.roseparkresidentsassociation.com/?p=932

See above.

So that shows they do studies/surveys over time to compare results, don't always install ramps at the request of locals.`

No it doesn't, and no it doesn't.

Please try harder, and please, PLEASE read my post before replying this time.

beauf

Speeding is rife in Dublin Ireland. Anyone who drives will know that a lot of the traffic they are in isn't obeying the speed limits. http://www.completecar.ie/news/article/816/Less-than-one-in-ten-cars-obey-30kmh-Dublin-City-limit

I'm not defending speed ramps. I hate them. I'm not even arguing the limits are always appropriate. Or that speeding is automatically dangerous.

But they looking to impose a 30k limit in estates. Once they do that, if they do a study it will put a lot more people over the limit than if they do a study now. Perhaps that's they they want to lower the baseline. it will give them the data to impose traffic calming measures.

Tragedy

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=77262426

beauf

Perhaps it would be more productive to send DLRCoCo some information on studies where speed ramps had no effect on speeding, or reducing accidents and where their removal improved adherence to posted limits and reducing accidents. Certainly lots of places have removed speed ramps. You're falling over such articles on the web. If anyone could be bothered to look them up. Some residences association organise their own traffic/speed studies, to lobby for speed ramps. It most be possible to do the opposite, to lobby for their removal.

Aard

I think the point is tgat we actually have a Design Manual for Urban Roads and Streets, which suggests many different ways of calming traffic. Most people don't know about the different ways because all that they're familiar with is speed bumps (aka vertical deflections). Lack of awareness or proliferation of the other ways does not mean that speed bumps are the best solution.

Mort5000

Aard wrote: »

I think the point is tgat we actually have a Design Manual for Urban Roads and Streets, which suggests many different ways of calming traffic. Most people don't know about the different ways because all that they're familiar with is speed bumps (aka vertical deflections). Lack of awareness or proliferation of the other ways does not mean that speed bumps are the best solution.

Close the thread if no one else knows anything and shouldn't be allowed to discuss.

beauf

Aard wrote: »

I think the point is tgat we actually have a Design Manual for Urban Roads and Streets.

There seems to a considerable gap between the manual and practise though. Which perhaps is why many have not seen the alternatives.

Aard

DMURS has only been out a short while and it's questionnable whether most local authorities currently or will implement it fully on new road/street projects.

dr.fuzzenstein

Aard wrote: »

DMURS has only been out a short while and it's questionnable whether most local authorities currently or will implement it fully on new road/street projects.

Well, corruption might have been taken out of the planning process to a certain extend, so what we're left with is just the usual incompetence and unwillingness to communicate with other departments. If that will improve matters remains to be seen.

patrickbrophy18

zagmund wrote: »

As an old fogey, I wonder what it is about people these days that makes them feel the need to drive at 30, 40, 50km/h up a dead end road.

I strongly suspect they are showing off as there is no benefit to going at such speeds for the sake of cutting a millisecond off their journey.

As for the topic at hand. I think it's a great idea. Housing estates are generally family oriented (or supposed to be anyway) where children at play is very common. Having said that, I do think that anything lower than 30 KM/H is over the top. And then there are roads such as Harbour Road in Dun Laoghaire where 30 KM/H is inappropriately low where it should be 50.

As for the DMURS, it has it's ups and downs. The overall goal of it seems to promote safer urban and suburban streets and I do agree with many of the measures therein. However, it shouldn't apply to all non-motorway roads. Also, some of the sentiments in it are a tad over-dramatic with phrasing like "sense of place/enclosure" which screams to me high maintenance.

Aard

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Well, corruption might have been taken out of the planning process to a certain extend, so what we're left with is just the usual incompetence and unwillingness to communicate with other departments. If that will improve matters remains to be seen.

I never insinuated that there was anything corrupt about any lack of implementation of DMURS. There is a lot of "behind the scenes" work going on to educate council workers on DMURS, but because it is a new-ish document there are still teething problems. One of the main problems is that regular Joes often prefer the way things were done "before" (in this case -- bumps instead of any other way) and see any devation from that as a waste of money. It's unfortunate that the general public don't know anything about DMURS.