New proposed 30km/h speed limits-"Consultation"?

_Kaiser_

Roadhawk wrote: »

Wow, I'm truly shocked. I'm still to be convinced of its benefits though (other than financial). Great site though.

Nah.. all the stuff about "pioneers" and "trendsetters" just sounds like the usual waffle these sort of groups come out with to push their "progressive" agenda.

We're not Amsterdam or Berlin. We don't have the public transport infrastructure or the "European" mindset to it. We have a disjointed unreliable mess of buses and rail that certainly isn't cheap and effective like the models it's being unrealistically compared against.

The reality is that most will ignore these limits where it's completely inappropriate for such a low limit (and it will therefore ultimately cause more issues), pedestrians will take greater risks when traffic is moving more slowly (the city centre area is a nightmare in terms of jaywalking idiots as it is), business will be effected (as people decide to stop bothering going into town in the first place), and it certainly will do nothing to address tragic cases of people being hurt or killed in accidents with buses or trucks, or idiots with their head down into their phone walking into traffic.

It's more about shifting responsibility for your own safety to someone else - in this case the passing motorist - rather than being aware of your surroundings, being mindful of your actions, and having some basic cop on really.

But in our "it's not MY fault" culture, these concepts are dirty words I guess.

_Kaiser_

Deedsie wrote: »

Just because it won't directly benefit you doesn't mean it is a wholly bad idea.

We all share the road and we all commute and travel through resedential areas. How irritating must it be living somewhere with constant traffic passing through all day every day. At least if the max speed is reduced to 30km/h it could reduce the chance of collisions, red light jumping, noise pollution etc etc

Answer: move!

It's the same attitude you get from those living in the middle of nowhere bemoaning the lack of fibre broadband or public transport available to them - if you choose to live in such an area (or as in your example, along a busy road) then you have to accept the limitations/compromises.

Tombo2001

The 'between the canals' piece gets to me.

Any speeding I see in Dublin is outside the Canals.

Drumcondra Road, Alfie Byrne Road, Clontarf Road......heavy pedestrian roads where drivers seem completely unchecked as to their speed.

LeChienMefiant

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Answer: move!

It's the same attitude you get from those living in the middle of nowhere bemoaning the lack of fibre broadband or public transport available to them - if you choose to live in such an area (or as in your example, along a busy road) then you have to accept the limitations/compromises.

That is completely contrary to government policy of encouraging city living...
http://www.dublincity.ie/main-menu-services-planning-planning-news/living-city
The whole point of living in a city is to have the services and infrastructure afforded thereby. Walk, cycle or use public transport unless you have special circumstances which preclude.

_Kaiser_

You're missing the point..

Ireland is not Germany or any of the other places often cited as how it "should" be. People in Ireland don't want to live in apartments (which is the norm in European cities) - they want to live in a Semi-D with a garden or a McMansion in the country with a "bit of land" and this is reflected in our planning laws, our public transport funding and setup, and is why Dublin has sprawled outwards over the years rather than upwards.

People don't (by and large) drive into Dublin because they WANT to.. they do it because it's the only viable way to get around from where they are living (which as I said above is now further and further out - eg: the Census results this week showed that populations in the surrounding counties is on the rise again, just like in the "Good Times" because it's all people can afford) to where they need to be (because their employers haven't moved with them). You don't really think people sit in traffic for hours per day for fun surely?

galwaycyclist

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

You're missing the point..

Ireland is not Germany or any of the other places often cited as how it "should" be. People in Ireland don't want to live in apartments (which is the norm in European cities) - they want to live in a Semi-D with a garden or a McMansion in the country with a "bit of land" and this is reflected in our planning laws, our public transport funding and setup, and is why Dublin has sprawled outwards over the years rather than upwards.

People don't (by and large) drive into Dublin because they WANT to.. they do it because it's the only viable way to get around from where they are living (which as I said above is now further and further out - eg: the Census results this week showed that populations in the surrounding counties is on the rise again, just like in the "Good Times" because it's all people can afford) to where they need to be (because their employers haven't moved with them). You don't really think people sit in traffic for hours per day for fun surely?

Let me see if I have this right?

Some people live in a commuter belt so all people in established city communities must put up with inappropriate and unsuitable traffic speeds regardless of the function of the street?

LeChienMefiant

Truly an Irish solution to an Irish problem.

Hopefully sense will prevail!

_Kaiser_

galwaycyclist wrote: »

Let me see if I have this right?

Some people live in a commuter belt so all people in established city communities must put up with inappropriate and unsuitable traffic speeds regardless of the function of the street?

I'm saying that you need to accept the reality of the situation and recognize that the fantasy of everyone walking or cycling into the city centre is neither realistic nor practical.

The notion that 50 km/h is "inappropriate and unsuitable" is a fallacy as well in terms of many of the streets targeted, but I suppose it does have a nice ring of hysteria which is generally what accompanies these ideas. This proposal also (as I outlined above) won't do anything to address cases where people are falling under buses/trucks, or jaywalking in front of traffic etc.. but I suspect that's not really the point in the race to be seen to be doing something.

Again though, it's easier to blame/target the motorist than accept the notion that cyclists and pedestrians have a responsibility for their own behaviour and safety on the shared roadspace as well.

magicbastarder

maybe worth mentioning that even though the speed drops by 40% (from 50km/h to 30km/h), the kinetic energy of the car drops by 64%.

stopping distances also appear to drop by more than half:


i wonder was 40km/h considered?

magicbastarder

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

This proposal also (as I outlined above) won't do anything to address cases where people are falling under buses/trucks, or jaywalking in front of traffic etc..

cf. the stopping distances above.
and the fact that a car travelling more slowly will clearly do less damage anyway, even if the collision is unavoidable.

Stealthfins

Some diesel cars will go over 30 when you lift the clutch

magicbastarder

Which ones?

gctest50

very very vaguely related experrymenting on humanz :

One family had no recorded speed infringements after the installation of the personalised speed dial.

One family reduced their top speed by 19kmh from a max of 123km to a max of 104km.

Half of the drivers’ maximum speeds reduced after fitting their personalised speed dial.

Three out of the four drivers reduced their incidence of speeding in 100km zones by 50%.

BuffyBot

Less of snark and hair pulling, folks

ted1

Mary63 wrote: »

no,its a big car and its really hard work keeping the speed to 30 kms,you would be quicker walking to wherever you are going.

Cars are not designed to move at thirty km per hour,if you want to go at that speed get yourself a tricycle.

These speed limits will be put in place regardless of the time you are driving so if you are on an empty road from midnight on you will still have to drive at 30 kms per hour.If you get points its three at a time and twelve points will put you off the road.

Who are these numptys.They are making it more and more difficult to bring your car into the city centre and this will make life even for difficult for people with disabilities who need their cars to be independent,has anyone thought about this while we try and force everyone onto bikes.The city centre will become dead while everyone is queueing up to get into Dundrum.

Its proposed to bring the new speed limits up to the county borders,this means you will be driving at thirty kms per hour in places as far from the city centre as Raheny.

Sorry you shouldn't be driving the car, if it's to big for you to control. End of

endagibson

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

jaywalking

There's no such thing in this country. :rolleyes:

galwaycyclist

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

I'm saying that you need to accept the reality of the situation and recognize that the fantasy of everyone walking or cycling into the city centre is neither realistic nor practical.

So because "everyone" can't walk or cycle we should not do anything to allow "some" to cycle. But because "some" must drive "everyone" else must suck it up and use cars for their own protection?

Again though, it's easier to blame/target the motorist than accept the notion that cyclists and pedestrians have a responsibility for their own behaviour and safety on the shared roadspace as well.

One of the arguments for 30kph limits is to create safer conditions for young children such as primary schoolchildren. Are you arguing that when it comes to deadly risk, there is an "equality" of responsibility between adult drivers and primary schoolchildren?

NiallBoo

endagibson wrote: »

There's no such thing [as jaywalking] in this country. :rolleyes:

There sort of is, but in a much more limited way.

It's illegal to cross a road within 15 metres (or is it 25?) of a light-controlled pedestrian crossing when it's red or to walk on a motorway.

LeChienMefiant

Pedestrian light sequences are ridiculously short in some instances in my area. God forbid a pensioner might want to cross the road. Much shorter than the motor traffic sequences at those junctions even though they're in an area with high pedestrian traffic. There's no choice but to "Jaywalk" as it's not possible to cross in the time allowed.

Grolschevik

endagibson wrote:

There's no such thing in this country.

Not sure that you're not just being facetious, but just for other casual observers...

There is no such thing as the US misdemeanor of 'jaywalking' in Ireland, but everyone knows what the term means in everyday discourse. To pretend otherwise is, well, tendentious argument.

NiallBoo

Grolschevik wrote: »

Not sure that you're not just being facetious, but just for other casual observers...

There is no such thing as the US misdemeanor of 'jaywalking' in Ireland, but everyone knows what the term means in everyday discourse. To pretend otherwise is, well, tendentious argument.

It's actually a meaningful difference.

By not having that law we acknowledge that roads aren't just for cars.

The only roads that are for cars in Ireland are motorways.

Grolschevik

NiallBoo wrote:

It's actually a meaningful difference.

I'm not sure it is, but I take your point.

However, the zombie-like strolling of pedestrians into moving traffic without regard to their own safety, regardless of the surrounding circumstances, is what the term is generally taken to mean. At least to me.

LeChienMefiant

The behaviour of a lot of road users leaves a lot to be desired, but pedestrians are only going to hurt themselves. We need to invert the pyramid when it comes to responsibilities on the road. The pecking order should be pedestrian at the top, then cyclist then motor vehicle by order of size.

Corca Baiscinn

Interesting that Magic Bastarder mentioned 40 km per hour. I practised driving at 30 the last few days when there wasn't anything behind me and it was difficult in so far as I found I had to concentrate on keeping to that speed whereas when I practise 40 it comes more naturally. And no need for anyone to jump down my neck, I know its doable, after all we do it in a traffic jam or a funeral, just saying doesn't come naturally. I think the 30 comes form the UK twenty's plenty campaign. Deedsie mentioned some of the advantages to residents of lower speeds on their streets and I agree. Another one for drivers is that if one is moving out onto a busy road from a side road which doesn't have traffic signals, it is a lot easier to turn right or left if oncoming traffic is doing 30 or 60 than if it is doing 80 or 100! A poster further back mentioned the speed of traffic at Amiens St, depressing to think it's a regular affair as i observed outrageous speeds there recently just outside Connolly but am not a regular there.

galwaycyclist

Corca Baiscinn wrote: »

Interesting that Magic Bastarder mentioned 40 km per hour. I practised driving at 30 the last few days when there wasn't anything behind me and it was difficult in so far as I found I had to concentrate on keeping to that speed whereas when I practise 40 it comes more naturally. And no need for anyone to jump down my neck, I know its doable, after all we do it in a traffic jam or a funeral, just saying doesn't come naturally. I think the 30 comes form the UK twenty's plenty campaign. Deedsie mentioned some of the advantages to residents of lower speeds on their streets and I agree. Another one for drivers is that if one is moving out onto a busy road from a side road which doesn't have traffic signals, it is a lot easier to turn right or left if oncoming traffic is doing 30 or 60 than if it is doing 80 or 100! A poster further back mentioned the speed of traffic at Amiens St, depressing to think it's a regular affair as i observed outrageous speeds there recently just outside Connolly but am not a regular there.

One of the reasons for campaigning for a 30 limit is that it might get people to actually drive at 50 instead of 70 or 80.

endagibson

Grolschevik wrote: »

Not sure that you're not just being facetious, but just for other casual observers...

There is no such thing as the US misdemeanor of 'jaywalking' in Ireland, but everyone knows what the term means in everyday discourse. To pretend otherwise is, well, tendentious argument.

My point is that the use of the term is in itself harmful. It's an attempt to deflect the blame for running over someone in a car onto the person who just got run over.

NiallBoo

galwaycyclist wrote: »

One of the reasons for campaigning for a 30 limit is that it might get people to actually drive at 50 instead of 70 or 80.

I think - aside from reducing the force of impact - it's to try and have cars and bikes going at a more similar speed.

If you're able too match a vehicle for speed then it's safer and you're less likely to get caught out, cut out or forced out of the road.

Grolschevik

endagibson wrote:

My point is that the use of the term is in itself harmful. It's an attempt to deflect the blame for running over someone in a car onto the person who just got run over.

I don't think I'd agree. I just see it as shorthand for a form of behaviour, and I do not think it in any way implies blame either way.

Also, as an aside, and as I see you've just done, on a semantic level it might actually make these debates less fractious to refer to "people on bikes", "people on foot", "people driving cars" etc rather than cyclists, pedestrians, and motorists...

monument

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Ok, let's try that ... here's the map:

http://www.dublincity.ie/sites/default/files/content/RoadsandTraffic/Documents/Appendix%20E%20-%20rt3369_10%20-%2030KP%20Speed%20Limit%20Review-01.06.2016.pdf

It's blatantly obvious that this is a first stage in imposing this new limit in all areas covered by DCC - notably by the intent to "review" the arterial routes in "Phase 3" as well as : all other roads and areas (see Legend)

• Don't reply to moderation again.
  
• Review doesn't exclude other limits -- higher (60km/h) or lower (ie 40km/h).
  
• There's no blanket limit planned -- something that may happen in the future isn't the same as saying there's a blanket limit planned.

-- Moderator

Zipppy

It is extremely difficult to drive a modern car at 30kph...regardless of people saying 'oh you've got a big car so you should be allowed to drive faster' the reality is it IS very difficult. Drivers will spend lots of their concentration watching the speedo trying to keep speed down and now paying attention to the road.
Driver frustration will grow..more drivers will run red lights to try make up some time..pedestrians and cyclists will become even more reckless thinking the roadway safer and will take even more chances with safety..
The economy of the city will suffer badly as people reduce coming to city for leisure shopping or work...why crawl along when you can pop to out of town centre..I know this option is there already but even more people will choose to stay away.
I could understand reduced limits on residential roads and at schools but a blanket reduction affecting main roads and bus routes is lunacy for the city.
People say that traffic in the city moves slower that this anyhow....yes perhaps peak hour journey times give you an average lower figure but the reality is that outside of peak times you can travel must faster..imagine late nite buses crawling along empty roads with no pedestrians or cyclists in sight...madness.
City management are obsessed with cycling and are anti car...these policies will destroy the city..
And just to add .. I live in the city..walk to work..wife cycles to work and we rarely drive much....mainly because we are lucky not to need to drive..i do however understand that many many many people do need to drive..and will always need to...and putting more barriers to them coming to the city will simply further destroy our city centre.
Want to improve cycle/pedestrian safety? Segregated cycle lanes..fines for cyclists breaking ROTR..fines for Jay walkers..educate parents and children that the roadway is for vehicles..build more park and play areas.
Before shouting 'Feck the cars think of the children' consider the bigger picture for the city.
I grew up in the city...I didn't get knocked down because I knew it was unsafe to be on the road with cars...