Dublin @30km

danmanw8

The Pheasant2 wrote: »

How do they plan on monitoring cyclists going over 30km/h?

This is what I was wondering, speed vans are usually only at areas with a higher speed limit

I love Sean nos

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

But yes, motorists are just as "entitled" to use the roadspace as any other pedestrian, cyclist, or public transport.

Actually that's not true. People can walk, ride a bicycle or take public transport any time they like. Driving a car is by licence only.

magicbastarder

danmanw8 wrote: »

This is what I was wondering, speed vans are usually only at areas with a higher speed limit

why would speed vans monitor cyclists? speed limits don't apply to them.

Victor

Map has updated http://product.itoworld.com/map/124?lon=-6.30860&lat=53.30699&zoom=12&fullscreen=true I haven't added interchanges or some parts of Tallaght yet.

Dublin City and DLR will add a large number of street over the summer.

thebaz

is there any logical reason why these limits are not enfaced around schools opening and closing times ??

I cycle, but believe slow driving enforcement can be a danger , through driver frustration, leading to risks.

I believe the real problem on Irish roads are a few motorists who basically don't care and drive reckless, many uninsured , target these boy racers types and the roads will become safer , rather than implementing ridiculously low speed limits (at all times).

Victor

thebaz wrote: »

is there any logical reason why these limits are not enfaced around schools opening and closing times ??

If you mean "enforced", there is only so much enforcement that can be done.

I believe the real problem on Irish roads are a few motorists who basically don't care and drive reckless, many uninsured , target these boy racers types and the roads will become safer

Having insurance or not does not prevent a collision, although it may mitigate the costs.

rather than implementing ridiculously low speed limits (at all times).

Most of the low speed limits are in residential areas.

Dravokivich

thebaz wrote: »

is there any logical reason why these limits are not enfaced around schools opening and closing times ??

I cycle, but believe slow driving enforcement can be a danger , through driver frustration, leading to risks.

I believe the real problem on Irish roads are a few motorists who basically don't care and drive reckless, many uninsured , target these boy racers types and the roads will become safer , rather than implementing ridiculously low speed limits (at all times).

"Low" limits can be justified. There was a road I went through in Kildare over the weekend rated at 60, but had obscure entrances on both sides every 15 metres. Road was only about 1.5 lanes wide too. I felt there was way too much to be observing for that speed. But it's not boy racers that'll be a problem on that road. It's people who are complacent with what they usually expect on such a road.

thebaz

Victor wrote: »

If you mean "enforced", there is only so much enforcement that can be done.
Having insurance or not does not prevent a collision, although it may mitigate the costs.
Most of the low speed limits are in residential areas.

sorry typo - dyslexic

of course insurance does not prevent collisions, I said that there is a minority of road users, many uninsured who drive recklessly way over any speed limits (boy racer style) - these I see as the problem - as a cyclist and sometimes motorist.

Do not see why they could not just enforce thee very low limits at particular times , why enforce these limits at night time ?

Atlantic Dawn

I'd expect pedestrian deaths and injuries to rise, far more people will gamble crossing the roads with cars going slower. Cycle deaths should fall.

I love Sean nos

thebaz wrote: »

target these boy racers types

In my experience as a pedestrian, "boy racers" as you put them are never a problem.

Victor

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

I'd expect pedestrian deaths and injuries to rise, far more people will gamble crossing the roads with cars going slower. Cycle deaths should fall.

The experience is that lower speed limits result in fewer casualties - one has longer to react to a potential incident and incidents that happen are less severe.

magicbastarder

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

I'd expect pedestrian deaths and injuries to rise, far more people will gamble crossing the roads with cars going slower. Cycle deaths should fall.

from what i understand of the statistics (and assuming the collisions happen at the speed limits), we'd need to see an increase of somewhere between 2.5x and 4x, in the number of collisions for the death rate to remain steady.

even if you take your expectation at face value that the number of collisions will increase*, it'd have to be a quite significant increase.

*stopping distance for a car doing 30km/h is roughly half what it is for a car doing 50. even if more pedestrians did step out in front of them, the driver has more time to react, and a shorter distance to stop.

Roadhawk

Victor wrote: »

The experience is that lower speed limits result in fewer casualties - one has longer to react to a potential incident and incidents that happen are less severe.

Yes and not moving at all will cause no casualties but then nothing will ever get done!

@30km the whole pace of the city will reduce because people in vehicles cant get in or out quick enough, deliveries will slow, etc. Cities are supposed to be fast paced.

I often come through the city sticking to the limits and its a joke. Cars, buses, taxis, motorbikes and cyclists all flying past me as I take in the sights. I think i said this before but if Usain Bolt was running beside you while doing 30km you would notice a huge difference because he would be averaging 37.58km.

Being realistic, the special speed limit should apply to residential estates and certain zones such as schools.

magicbastarder

Roadhawk wrote: »

Being realistic, the special speed limit should apply to residential estates and certain zones such as schools.

that's pretty much the state of play, no?

i've done this before - according to google maps, based on current traffic, it would take 32 minutes to drive the 11km from the main entrance of DCU to the main entrance of UCD. that's 20.6km/h. there's no way that reducing top speeds is going to have a significant effect on that.

magicbastarder

btw, it's worth pointing out that a tiny minority of that drive is on roads with a 30km/h limit, and only a small section is due to be reviewed for a drop from 60km/h (i assume to 50km/h?); the vast majority of the drive is done on roads without the 30km/h limit, and no plans to change.

Slunk

Its ridiculous. I'll be spending more time checking if I'm going over 30 than watching the road. In some places its hard enough to keep to 50. No doubt the speed vans and garda traffic corps be out in force claiming all the easy money.
Example is brunswick st in Smithfield. I accept 30kph there during the day when school is open. Hard to do more with all the double parked cars anyway. What about if I'm coming home at 10pm and the streets empty. Still 30kph. Absolute joke. And that's when the traffic corp will step out behind the old courts and wave you in.

magicbastarder

which street is richmond street?

Roadhawk

magicbastarder wrote: »

btw, it's worth pointing out that a tiny minority of that drive is on roads with a 30km/h limit, and only a small section is due to be reviewed for a drop from 60km/h (i assume to 50km/h?); the vast majority of the drive is done on roads without the 30km/h limit, and no plans to change.

http://product.itoworld.com/map/124?lon=-6.26338&lat=53.34525&zoom=14

The map in the link shows the streets that have a 30km speed limit. All the green is 30km...just from looking at the map i would estimate that roughly 85-90% of the roads have a 30km limit. So its not just residential estates or school zones.

And dont forget that's a limit so you are sure to get some motorists who will potter along at 20-25km/ph so they are sure not to break any laws. Imagine the chaos and rage that this will cause if enforced.

Slunk

magicbastarder wrote: »

which street is richmond street?

Sorry, Brunswick street.

Slunk

Rage is an understatement. Once people clear these zones they will undoubtedly put the foot down

magicbastarder

if you're driving from DCU to UCD using the suggested route from google maps, the vast majority of roads have a 50km/h or 60km/h limit, unless you're choosing rat runs through housing estates.
the only section with 30km/h limits is from city quay to grand canal street lower.

magicbastarder

Slunk wrote: »

Rage is an understatement. Once people clear these zones they will undoubtedly put the foot down

from blackhall place to constitution hill on brunswick street is 500m.
at 50km/h - assuming you can go full speed for the full length, that will take 36s.
at 30km/h, that will take 60s.
so the maximum theoretical difference is 24s, and likely to be measurably less than that. and that's a fairly narrow largely residential street. 30km/h max is perfectly sensible there.

CramCycle

Slunk wrote: »

Its ridiculous. I'll be spending more time checking if I'm going over 30 than watching the road.

How do you manage on other roads with speed limits? I don't need to look at my speedo to know I am at 30 or less every few seconds. Once again, if you need to do this, then you may need to reassess your judgements on the road. On a clear stretch of motorway I can hold the limit without issue and the few times I glance down for a second, it is usually bang on.

In some places its hard enough to keep to 50.

How is this possible? You are unable to drive at 50 or below in some areas? All that says is a severe lack of focus and attention.

No doubt the speed vans and garda traffic corps be out in force claiming all the easy money.

As is well documented, speed vans never make money and is a loss to the state every year.

Example is Richmond st in Smithfield. I accept 30kph there during the day when school is open. Hard to do more with all the double parked cars anyway. What about if I'm coming home at 10pm and the streets empty. Still 30kph. Absolute joke. And that's when the traffic corp will step out behind the old courts and wave you in.

It should be even easier at night as you should have a fairly constant speed. The funny thing about your post is that all it really says is that you need more time practicing driving before being let out on your own. How do you deal with other speed limits?

Roadhawk

magicbastarder wrote: »

if you're driving from DCU to UCD using the suggested route from google maps, the vast majority of roads have a 50km/h or 60km/h limit, unless you're choosing rat runs through housing estates.
the only section with 30km/h limits is from city quay to grand canal street lower.

But who goes from DCU to UCD?

Baggot st, Camden st, Stephens Green, kevins st, angier st, Georges st, Dame st, Fenian St, Merron Square, Nassau St, Hanover st, Townsend st....all main roads that should be 60km... and that was only a select few from the south side.

Roadhawk

CramCycle wrote: »

As is well documented, speed vans never make money and is a loss to the state every year.

I find that hard to believe. The 2016 speeding stats show that 134,060 violations were recorded. If you presume each occurrence was fined the initial rate of €80 and not the higher rate of €120 then the state earned €10,724,800 in 2016 from this offense. Would that not cover their costs?

http://www.garda.ie/Controller.aspx?Page=16418&Lang=1

magicbastarder

Roadhawk wrote: »

Baggot st, Camden st, Stephens Green, kevins st, angier st, Georges st, Dame st, Fenian St, Merron Square, Nassau St, Hanover st, Townsend st....all main roads that should be 60km... and that was only a select few from the south side.

are you serious?
60km/h on george's street? aungier street? most of the others you've mentioned? good god.

Slunk

On other roads its no problem. On an empty two lane road at 10pm at night crawling at 30. Chance of been mugged.
I'm all for it in housing estates and school hours but some areas where it has been implemented is ridiculous.
I'm glad you had the time to work out Brunswick St to constitution hill. Well done. My point still stands. Regardless of the 36s you'll save it will bring more rage and aggressive acceleration once clear of these areas regardless of logic. People don't use logic when they have been inconvenienced by a ridiculous speed limit in places. They will want to make up that 36s. Sad but true

magicbastarder

you do realise that you seem to be arguing that we should design roads and laws to pander to peoples' sense of rage?

Slunk

There's no point arguing with you. I'm just pointing out the realities of it. Some zones are ridiculous. Brunswick street is one I can think of as I use it nearly everyday. Im all for it in school hours as you do have to be very cautious navigating it when school closes. After that its a two lane road.
I'm sure there are many many more around Dublin that's just my example.
Also. We seem to be designing roads to pander for peoples stupidity and lack of responsibility. When I grew up I was told don't go near busy roads and always look left and right. These days muppets on their phones step out and expect you to stop for them. They also seem to think just because you see them they can step out and raise their hand in thanks will save them from been knocked down

magicbastarder

Slunk wrote: »

These days muppets on their phones step out and expect you to stop for them.

so on one hand, we should allow people to drive at 50km/h because they get unreasonably angry - and then you cite a perfect counter example of the benefit of those same laws mitigating for someone *else's* stupidity.

magicbastarder

Slunk wrote: »

There's no point arguing with you.

because i am giving counter-arguments? is that not what arguing actually involves? because if i agreed with you, it wouldn't be 'arguing'.

Roadhawk

magicbastarder wrote: »

are you serious?
60km/h on george's street? aungier street? most of the others you've mentioned? good god.

Sorry, meant 50km

magicbastarder

i don't know what you mean by 'main roads' - lots of those are not arterial and there is quite a difference between driving on baggot street at 50 and george's street at 50; the latter especially is within the main shopping district of the southside.

Roadhawk

magicbastarder wrote: »

i don't know what you mean by 'main roads' - lots of those are not arterial and there is quite a difference between driving on baggot street at 50 and george's street at 50; the latter especially is within the main shopping district of the southside.

A main road doesn't have to be an arterial road. If you have a fair understanding of the traffic in Dublin City you will know that the roads i have mentioned carry most of the traffic in those areas...this is why i have labelled them as main roads.

The fact that shoppers are on a street shouldnt make a difference...in my view DCC should either keep the speed limit at 50km or pedestrianise it. If its not fit to be an efficient road with the ability to carry people to/from a place in a timely manor then it should be pedestrianised. there should be no in between compromise.

monument

Roadhawk wrote: »

http://product.itoworld.com/map/124?lon=-6.26338&lat=53.34525&zoom=14

The map in the link shows the streets that have a 30km speed limit. All the green is 30km...just from looking at the map i would estimate that roughly 85-90% of the roads have a 30km limit. So its not just residential estates or school zones.

And dont forget that's a limit so you are sure to get some motorists who will potter along at 20-25km/ph so they are sure not to break any laws. Imagine the chaos and rage that this will cause if enforced.

Is this a joke? You know "main road" only amount to a small percentage of roads?

City council has always said 30km/h is also for areas of high pedestrian activity-- thus some of the central "main roads" or streets are include.

Roadhawk wrote: »

Baggot st, Camden st, Stephens Green, kevins st, angier st, Georges st, Dame st, Fenian St, Merron Square, Nassau St, Hanover st, Townsend st....all main roads that should be 60km... and that was only a select few from the south side.

Baggot St -- narrow footpaths along most of it.

Dame St -- don't worry, it won't be a Main Street for long!

Camden st, kevins st, angier st, Georges st -- if you get to 50km/h you should be arrested for dangerous driving, these connected streets are a mess with taxis, vans and buses etc pulling over, heavy traffic nearly all the time, large volume of pedestrians and cycling.

Nassau St -- 50km/h? To where? For a second before you hit the next light or bus pulling out or cyclist crossing lanes?

Townsend Street -- maybe the wider bits, but otherwise it's narrow, has parking etc.

Hanover st in the Docklands? -- main road?!?

Merron Square -- main road part of it is not 30km/h

Slunk wrote: »

Brunswick street is one I can think of as I use it nearly everyday. Im all for it in school hours as you do have to be very cautious navigating it when school closes. After that its a two lane road.

North Brunswick Street has narrow footpaths, parking on part of it, and very high density housing... but the main reason it's fine at 30km/h is that the vast bulk of people doing much above that are just rushing to nowhere -- the back of a line of cars waiting at the traffic lights. Pointless allowing more than 30km/h just so people can rush to wait at traffic lights for a bit longer.

Slunk wrote: »

I'm sure there are many many more around Dublin that's just my example.

There are some which I think are more valid than your example -- St Stephen's Green south and east.

Slunk wrote: »

We seem to be designing roads to pander for peoples stupidity and lack of responsibility. When I grew up I was told don't go near busy roads and always look left and right. These days muppets on their phones step out and expect you to stop for them. They also seem to think just because you see them they can step out and raise their hand in thanks will save them from been knocked down

Around when did you grow up? What was the yearly road death toll back then?

CramCycle

Roadhawk wrote: »

I find that hard to believe. The 2016 speeding stats show that 134,060 violations were recorded. If you presume each occurrence was fined the initial rate of ?80 and not the higher rate of ?120 then the state earned ?10,724,800 in 2016 from this offense. Would that not cover their costs?

http://www.garda.ie/Controller.aspx?Page=16418&Lang=1

I am referrign to the gosafe vans that are paid for by the hour and the head of GNTB claimed cost more than double to run what they generate in fines. The Garda commisioner was also hauled up in front of the Senate a year or two ago to ask why they are loss making.

This said, the benefits to the state in regards reduced cost on emergency services and health care due to lower accident and severity rates, probably means they are a revenue positive for the population but in regards cost vs. income from fines, they are a loss. Up until very recently anyway.

GM228

Roadhawk wrote: »

CramCycle wrote: »

As is well documented, speed vans never make money and is a loss to the state every year.

I find that hard to believe. The 2016 speeding stats show that 134,060 violations were recorded. If you presume each occurrence was fined the initial rate of €80 and not the higher rate of €120 then the state earned €10,724,800 in 2016 from this offense. Would that not cover their costs?

http://www.garda.ie/Controller.aspx?Page=16418&Lang=1

The speeding stats would be the overall from GoSafe vans, Garda vans, mobile checks and ANPR detections.

GoSafe itself costs the state €16.59m per year, it generates €6.9m per year in fines.

See the "Life Savers, not Revenue Raisers" study, a joint study by Derek Rafferty (of the DTTAS) and Trinity College.

blackwhite

CramCycle wrote: »

I am referrign to the gosafe vans that are paid for by the hour and the head of GNTB claimed cost more than double to run what they generate in fines. The Garda commisioner was also hauled up in front of the Senate a year or two ago to ask why they are loss making.

This said, the benefits to the state in regards reduced cost on emergency services and health care due to lower accident and severity rates, probably means they are a revenue positive for the population but in regards cost vs. income from fines, they are a loss. Up until very recently anyway.

TBH - how they really should be assessing them is looking at:

A) What is the gross cost of the vans (i.e. Costs paid to Van operators, ignoring the revenue gained)?
What would it cost to run the equivalent number of monitoring hours using Garda vans, staffed by Gardaí (again, ignoring the revenue generated)?

If A is the larger sum, then they need to re-evaluate the outsourcing of speed detection, and instead put the same sum into additional Garda vans and additional Gardaí to staff them.
If B is the larger sum (which I suspect is likely given higher rates of pay for Gardaí v the gents operating the private vans, costs of full Garda training for the additional Gardaí needed, Gardaí pensions, overtime,etc) then the contract is not truly loss-making - in that it's impact is cost-reducing compared to any alternatives.

I love Sean nos

Roadhawk wrote: »

@30km the whole pace of the city will reduce because people in vehicles cant get in or out quick enough, deliveries will slow, etc. Cities are supposed to be fast paced.

Any evidence to support that claim? There are cities with low speed limits and traffic restrictions already. How do they cope?

I remember reading a few years ago that the average speed for cars within the M50 was 18km/h. Not sure a 30km/h limit would negatively impact that.

magicbastarder

i'm really not sure what (s)he meant by 'cities are supposed to be fast paced'. because given the context, it can only seem to mean 'cars are meant to drive fast through cities'. i don't know where to start with that.

I love Sean nos

Slunk wrote: »

Its ridiculous. I'll be spending more time checking if I'm going over 30 than watching the road. In some places its hard enough to keep to 50.

A bit more practice driving and you should be able to estimate your speed by the gear you're in and the sound of the engine.

Slunk wrote: »

No doubt the speed vans and garda traffic corps be out in force claiming all the easy money.

Might as well give out about having to pay at the supermarket checkout. :rolleyes:

Slunk wrote: »

What about if I'm coming home at 10pm and the streets empty.

In the dark? More opportunity for you to miss something.

Slunk

Out of interest yesterday when I turned from church street into Smithfield and around queen street. Tried sticking to to 30kph, que of traffic and angry people behind and even a garda car went around me. And no, they were not going anywhere. 30 is utterly ridiculous on some of these roads.50 is perfectly reasonable.

Fighting Tao

Slunk wrote: »

Out of interest yesterday when I turned from church street into Smithfield and around queen street. Tried sticking to to 30kph, que of traffic and angry people behind and even a garda car went around me. And no, they were not going anywhere. 30 is utterly ridiculous on some of these roads.50 is perfectly reasonable.

Well done for abiding with the law. As a driver it is your duty. Let others worry about their duty in keeping speed limits. Unless you are a guard you aren't in a position to police others. You alone are contributing to making roads safer. Thank you.

CramCycle

Slunk wrote: »

Out of interest yesterday when I turned from church street into Smithfield and around queen street. Tried sticking to to 30kph, que of traffic and angry people behind and even a garda car went around me. And no, they were not going anywhere. 30 is utterly ridiculous on some of these roads.50 is perfectly reasonable.

What do you mean tried? You either did or didn't. Either way, if you managed it, well done. If you caved to perceived peer pressure, well, says more about you than the law in this case.

Gardai are exempt from the RTA in pursuit of their duties, the others need to relax, possibly talk to a therapist or take a break if someone driving slower than them leads to such anger.

As a matter of interest, why is 50 reasonable and not 30. If you do 50, why not 55, why not 60. To hell with it, lets make everywhere unlimited.

Truth is, as we all know, the 30kmph zone will not be heavily enforced. It will get occasional bouts of enforcement. It will also be used in accidents to save alot of rubbish about who is to blame (if you were speeding, the blame lies more with you etc.). Some people will try and stay close to it, and this in turn will lead to others following suit (we are basically copycats for the most part). Overall, the speed will drop, accidents that do occur will reduce and most likely be less severe. In the long run people may move to PT or other transport modes which will also improve the transport experience for everyone, including locals.

markpb

Slunk wrote: »

Tried sticking to to 30kph, que of traffic and angry people behind

How do you know they were angry?

Victor

Dublin (green=40km/h or less) http://product.itoworld.com/map/124?lon=-6.28808&lat=53.33309&zoom=12&fullscreen=true

London (green=40km/h or less - at same scale) http://product.itoworld.com/map/124?lon=-0.12765&lat=51.50725&zoom=12&fullscreen=true

Berlin (green=40km/h or less - at same scale) http://product.itoworld.com/map/124?lon=13.38886&lat=52.51697&zoom=12&fullscreen=true

Stockholm (green=40km/h or less - at same scale) http://product.itoworld.com/map/124?lon=18.11290&lat=59.33473&zoom=12&fullscreen=true#

magicbastarder

i'd say a lot of motorists simply don't know about the new limit and didn't spot the signs.

magicbastarder

Victor wrote: »

Dublin (green=40km/h or less) http://product.itoworld.com/map/124?lon=-6.28808&lat=53.33309&zoom=12&fullscreen=true

London (green=40km/h or less - at same scale) http://product.itoworld.com/map/124?lon=-0.12765&lat=51.50725&zoom=12&fullscreen=true

Berlin (green=40km/h or less - at same scale) http://product.itoworld.com/map/124?lon=13.38886&lat=52.51697&zoom=12&fullscreen=true

Stockholm (green=40km/h or less - at same scale) http://product.itoworld.com/map/124?lon=18.11290&lat=59.33473&zoom=12&fullscreen=true#

i'm doing something wrong - all those links bring me to the same screen, which seems to be an intro screen. do i need to log in? or do i need to use a specific browser?

I love Sean nos

magicbastarder wrote: »

you do realise that you seem to be arguing that we should design roads and laws to pander to peoples' sense of rage?

I think this could be one of the test best ideas I've ever heard. Get the planners angry. Drunk too is possible and see what comes out.

magicbastarder

quite simple. retracting bollards at traffic lights. you want to run a red, you total your car.