A 30 KPH limit for Dublin

Seth Brundle

Seth Brundle wrote: »

If you don't want to have to drive under a 30km/h limit within the areas proposed by Dublin CC, then don't drive there and use alternative routes.

Yeah see that’s a total pain the arse.
It’s either go somewhere at an annoying snail’s pace or go fecking around taking roundabout routes that ought be straightforward.

It’s just wasting people’s time for no good reason - the safety argument isn’t significant enough, we’ve already some of the safest roads in Europe.

Alias G

Alias G wrote: »

I live beside Deansgrange (which is well served by Dublin Buses flagship route BTW). I can assure you that I manage the full shop, the two young kids, the dog and whatever else your having on a daily basis. Maybe cycling is not for you but it has great utility for a lot of people. But the behavior of a minority of motorists towards cyclists safety is really poor and part of the reason why more people don't take advantage of the benefits of cycling.

You do a full family weekly shop on the bike? Even when it’s pissing rain (which it is half the time here)?

Fair play, you’re a better man than I.

Alias G

Batrachotox wrote: »

Yeah see that’s a total pain the arse.
It’s either go somewhere at an annoying snail’s pace or go fecking around taking roundabout routes that ought be straightforward.

It’s just wasting people’s time for no good reason - the safety argument isn’t significant enough, we’ve already some of the safest roads in Europe.

The difference between 30 and 50k/ph limits are insignificant in an urban environment considerably waiting time at traffic lights will be the biggest equaliser of journey time.

Alias G

Batrachotox wrote: »

You do a full family weekly shop on the bike? Even when it’s pissing rain (which it is half the time here)?

Fair play, you’re a better man than I.

That's what panniers are for.

It doesn't rain that often. You are simply full of excuses.

Alias G

Alias G wrote: »

That's what panniers are for.

It doesn't rain that often. You are simply full of excuses.

It doesn’t rain that often in Ireland, right okay so, I’m sorry for interjecting with my excuses.

We’ll all be cycling around in the Irish Mediterranean sun holding hands like a United Colours of Benetton ad in no time, you’re right, I look forward to it.

Alias G

Batrachotox wrote: »

It doesn’t rain that often in Ireland, right okay so, I’m sorry for interjecting with my excuses.

We’ll all be cycling around in the Irish Mediterranean sun holding hands like a United Colours of Benetton ad in no time, you’re right, I look forward to it.

We receive less rainfall than Amsterdam where something in the region of 40% of urban journeys are made by bicycle. So yes, you can keep your excuses.
Unlike yourself, I am well aware what it is like to commute by bike year round. I do get caught in the rain occasionally but it is far less than what you seem to perceive.
I also carry this mad stuff called waterproof clothing for when it is needed.

Alias G

Alias G wrote: »

We receive less rainfall than Amsterdam where something in the region of 40% of urban journeys are made by bicycle. So yes, you can keep your excuses.
Unlike yourself, I am well aware what it is like to commute by bike year round. I do get caught in the rain occasionally but it is far less than what you seem to perceive.
I also carry this mad stuff called waterproof clothing for when it is needed.

Would’ve thought it’d be higher than 40% tbh - it’s so flat over there cycling’s a lot less difficult.
You’re lucky your hobby happens to coincide with your choice of commute, cycling half an hour in the pissing rain on a miserable day doesn’t necessarily appeal to everyone after a long day at work. Some people just want to get home reasonably quickly and see their families.

CramCycle

I don't care whether people drive or not but anyone who thinks you get home quicker than a bus or bike at rush hour in Dublin city Centre is cracked. If I was far enough away that driving was a necessity, I would be driving to a few km from my final destination if in the city limits and either walking, cycling or using PT for the final leg of the trip during the school and third level semesters. I drive and cycle, often a mix, depending on the time of year, after Cabinteely or Stillorgan, driving is a crazy option. Not all year round but at that point you see a lot of people pull in take out their bikes out of the boot.

yascaoimhin

Batrachotox wrote: »

Some people just want to get home reasonably quickly and see their families.

Every one does. But some people recognise that driving makes that journey take longer not just for themselves but for the people they delay.

A sense of self-importance doesn't fly in a crowded city.
For the good of all the people who live here, you can't have your own way all the time.

yascaoimhin

I travel from the Northside to Leopardstown for work (or I did pre covid).
Should be simple as the Green goes the whole way there. But the ability of the Luas to quickly get through town is hampered by the fact that it doesn't have priority at junctions.

Here's the sitch lads, drivers object to everything that means their priority is removed or chipped away and they look for every conceivable excuse available to them to hide their selfishness. I'm not falling for it anymore.

I'm not gonna sit here and be gaslighted to by people who say things like "less road space means more congestion and so more pollution" and "Slower speeds means More congestion means more traffic so that means more accidents, so 30kmph is more dangerous"

Nope. You're chatting unfiltered bull**** that's so thinly veiled you should be embarrassed.

seamus

Batrachotox wrote: »

Would’ve thought it’d be higher than 40% tbh - it’s so flat over there cycling’s a lot less difficult.

The other 60% is mostly walking and public transport.

You’re lucky your hobby happens to coincide with your choice of commute, cycling half an hour in the pissing rain on a miserable day doesn’t necessarily appeal to everyone after a long day at work. Some people just want to get home reasonably quickly and see their families.

Every mode of transport has its pros and cons. If you choose to drive, then you'll be dry on a miserable day, but it will be slow. That's your choice.

The priority of those who build the infrastructure is to facilitate the movement of the largest volume of people people at the lowest social, economic and environmental cost.

Your mild inconvenience that driving is slow in urban settings, is of no concern.

cnocbui

Alias G wrote: »

We receive less rainfall than Amsterdam where something in the region of 40% of urban journeys are made by bicycle. So yes, you can keep your excuses.
Unlike yourself, I am well aware what it is like to commute by bike year round. I do get caught in the rain occasionally but it is far less than what you seem to perceive.
I also carry this mad stuff called waterproof clothing for when it is needed.

Less rainfall?



https://weatherspark.com/compare/y/33845~51381/Comparison-of-the-Average-Weather-in-Dublin-and-Amsterdam

Cienciano

Batrachotox wrote: »

Would’ve thought it’d be higher than 40% tbh - it’s so flat over there cycling’s a lot less difficult.
You’re lucky your hobby happens to coincide with your choice of commute, cycling half an hour in the pissing rain on a miserable day doesn’t necessarily appeal to everyone after a long day at work. Some people just want to get home reasonably quickly and see their families.

Read that bit again. Appeal to everyone. Ever try and organise a night out, choosing a pub or restaurant for more than 8 people? Guaranteed 1 will complain, probably 2. You can't please everyone, so imagine trying to organise transport for a city of 1m people? A spread out city? Cycling doesn't appeal to you, but think of the bigger picture, the other million people. The whole point of making public transport and cycling appealing is so more people will want to do it.
I'm not a "cycle everywhere" guy, I commute by car to work, both are inside the M50. I have no intention of ever cycling to work. But 30kph speed limits won't make much of a difference on 90% of the roads in Dublin and it wouldn't bother me in the slightest if they did it. In fact, if I go out on a bike with my 7 and 8 year old kids, not a hope I'd use a cycle lane on a narrow enough road with them with cars whizzing past at 60kph and just a white strip of paint separating them from a car or truck.

Thelonious Monk

The rain thing isn't an excuse, this year it has hardly rained at all in Dublin.

yascaoimhin

cnocbui wrote: »

Less rainfall?



https://weatherspark.com/compare/y/33845~51381/Comparison-of-the-Average-Weather-in-Dublin-and-Amsterdam

OP should have said we have fewer days of rainfall. meaning when it rains in Dublin its more likely to rain hard than in Amsterdam, but on average there are more days worth of rain in Amsterdam than Dublin

Pinch Flat

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

The rain thing isn't an excuse, this year it has hardly rained at all in Dublin.

Been doing the 100 days of walking since Jan 1. Loved it so much I'm now in day 103 . 5km plus at 7am before I sit at my desk for a days work.

Anyway my own anecdotal evidence that in 100 days of walking at 7am, only one day did I need full rain gear on i.e. leggings. Other days it rained a little.

Dublin is amazingly dry an a perfect city for walking and cycling. The bad weather thing is a pure myth.

Dick Turnip

Batrachotox wrote: »

Yeah see that’s a total pain the arse.
It’s either go somewhere at an annoying snail’s pace or go fecking around taking roundabout routes that ought be straightforward.

We should be tailoring our roads & streets to to be safest for most vunerable users and also to be most efficient for allowing the greatest number of people. This should mean keeping solo motorists bottom of the list of priorities, with pedestrians top, and Public Transport prioritised over general traffic.

Batrachotox wrote: »

It’s just wasting people’s time for no good reason - the safety argument isn’t significant enough, we’ve already some of the safest roads in Europe.

Your only metric for a safe road is how many deaths there are. But if huge cohorts of people won't cycle out of fear for their safety, are the roads really that safe? Would you let your kids cycle through Dublin city centre? On the quays?

If a swimming pool was filled with pirahnas and a shark, you might find it will record no swimming accidents or drownings. Does that mean it has an excellent safety record?

Batrachotox wrote: »

Even when it’s pissing rain (which it is half the time here)?

Fair play, you’re a better man than I.

Here's a study done to show how often it cycles during commuting times in Dublin vs other cities ~10%, less than Amsterdam. Unfortunately Copenhagen not listed, but I'd seen before that Copenhagen is comparable to Amsterdam in that regard.
https://www.shanelynn.ie/wet-rainy-cyling-commute-in-ireland-with-wunderground-and-python/

Also, to your last point, "fair play, you're a better man than I" - that's grand you don't want to cycle anywhere, but there are so many people that could and should be on bikes for their daily journeys that are currently in cars. In an ideal world, the % of secondary school kids being driven to school should be tiny in Dublin.

Another study showing the % for kids commuting habits and the change over 30 year period -
https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-cp6ci/p6cii/p6stp/

Tea drinker

yascaoimhin wrote: »

I travel from the Northside to Leopardstown for work (or I did pre covid).
Should be simple as the Green goes the whole way there. But the ability of the Luas to quickly get through town is hampered by the fact that it doesn't have priority at junctions.

Here's the sitch lads, drivers object to everything that means their priority is removed or chipped away and they look for every conceivable excuse available to them to hide their selfishness. I'm not falling for it anymore.

I'm not gonna sit here and be gaslighted to by people who say things like "less road space means more congestion and so more pollution" and "Slower speeds means More congestion means more traffic so that means more accidents, so 30kmph is more dangerous"

Nope. You're chatting unfiltered bull**** that's so thinly veiled you should be embarrassed.

Why wasn't the thing built correctly underground in the first place, then you have more space for all road users. There's many accidents between cyclists, pedestrians and the LUAS so it's not just a car issue. There wouldn't have even needed to be that many underground sections. The cost of consuming that road was never really subtracted from cost of putting it underground.
it sounds to me that you think your chosen transport is important to you, seems as everyone else.

ek motor

Why not start advocating for cyclist training ? As far more vulnerable road users this should be mandated. Presently there are no controls of people who cycle. Many cyclists are completely feckless, wearing headphones whilst cycling, not looking, not signalling, breaking red lights. I cycled to work for about 4 years before getting a car. The number of cyclist has increased a lot. Time for mandatory cyclist training . Even a theory test would a start.

Tea drinker

ek motor wrote: »

Why not start advocating for cyclist training ? As far more vulnerable road users this should be mandated. Presently there are no controls of people who cycle. Many cyclists are completely feckless, wearing headphones whilst cycling, not looking, not signalling, breaking red lights. I cycled to work for about 4 years before getting a car. The number of cyclist has increased a lot. Time for mandatory cyclist training . Even a theory test would a start.

I suggested here (and was laughed at for suggesting) all road users should get a days training together every 5 years. So pedestrian, cyclists bikers car and truck drivers etc. Learn from other perspectives.
Given the measly cost versus savings thru decreased accidents and suffering I really don't get why people were so against it.

Larbre34

My long hand response to the consultation is below.
In the body of the online responses I objected to any main routes in the City being reduced below 50 km/h.

"I supported the introduction of 30 km/h speed limits in side streets, residential estates, commercial and industrial estates and Dublin's older narrow and winding streets.

This proposal, to lower the speed limits on main traffic routes in the City, roads designated, in part or full as, 'National', 'Regional', Local Primary/Secondary, to 30 km/h is overzealous and without any credibility.

If enacted as proposed, Dublin's residents, as well as visitors and commercial drivers will be subjected to wholly unnecessary and unfair limits on main routes, which will relieve them both of their hard earned money and eventually of their driving licences, which in some cases will remove their livelihood.

Simply put, the accident statistics in this City do not warrant this draconian proposal. As we see every day along sections of the Liffey quays, the people have zero regard for the unnecessary 30 limit and if enacted, this proposal will just increase this lack of support. This in turn will lead to the City Council, executive and Members, being brought to Court to justify these measures if drivers feel they are being unfairly treated and seek to overturn the bye-laws.

Both the Council executive and Members who will ultimately vote on these proposals ought to bear in mind, this City belongs to the people and is not their private board game.

Seek to enact appropriate measures, not prohibitive ones and you will have widespread support. Do otherwise and you will fail, in Court, in front of the Oireachtas or ultimately at the ballot box."

yascaoimhin

Larbre34 wrote: »

My long hand response to the consultation is below.
In the body of the online responses I objected to any main routes in the City being reduced below 50 km/h.

"I supported the introduction of 30 km/h speed limits in side streets, residential estates, commercial and industrial estates and Dublin's older narrow and winding streets.

This proposal, to lower the speed limits on main traffic routes in the City, roads designated, in part or full as, 'National', 'Regional', Local Primary/Secondary, to 30 km/h is overzealous and without any credibility.

If enacted as proposed, Dublin's residents, as well as visitors and commercial drivers will be subjected to wholly unnecessary and unfair limits on main routes, which will relieve them both of their hard earned money and eventually of their driving licences, which in some cases will remove their livelihood.

Simply put, the accident statistics in this City do not warrant this draconian proposal. As we see every day along sections of the Liffey quays, the people have zero regard for the unnecessary 30 limit and if enacted, this proposal will just increase this lack of support. This in turn will lead to the City Council, executive and Members, being brought to Court to justify these measures if drivers feel they are being unfairly treated and seek to overturn the bye-laws.

Both the Council executive and Members who will ultimately vote on these proposals ought to bear in mind, this City belongs to the people and is not their private board game.

Seek to enact appropriate measures, not prohibitive ones and you will have widespread support. Do otherwise and you will fail, in Court, in front of the Oireachtas or ultimately at the ballot box."

Draconian.

Good Grief.

yascaoimhin

Tea drinker wrote: »

Why wasn't the thing built correctly underground in the first place

Translation being why isn't public transport removed from the space that should be specifically for people driving cars that take up ten times the amount of space other modes do.

It's childish and naive to present transport modes as equally deserving of the same treatment because they do not equally negatively impact each other.

yascaoimhin

ek motor wrote: »

Why not start advocating for cyclist training?

What for? What would be the end goal?

Everyone who drives a car is licensed and has to pass a test to get behind a wheel but the overwhelming majority of them break the speed limit.

What difference would your mandatory test make other than to discourage new cyclists?

The overwhelming majority of the rules in the Rules of the Road were written specifically due to issues that have arisen because of motorised vehicles.

cnocbui

Tea drinker wrote: »

I suggested here (and was laughed at for suggesting) all road users should get a days training together every 5 years. So pedestrian, cyclists bikers car and truck drivers etc. Learn from other perspectives.
Given the measly cost versus savings thru decreased accidents and suffering I really don't get why people were so against it.

I have ridden a bicycle daily for 11 years, earned a living riding a bicycle, had a motorcycle licence since I was 18 and rode one for a living and have had a driving licence for several decades - I don't need your nanny-state nonsense.

Most drivers go their whole lives without injuring cyclists or bike riders. How about mandatory lessons on how to walk on icy footpaths without slipping or falling, or lessons on chewing food properly and avoiding choking - sheesh!.

Larbre34

yascaoimhin wrote: »

Draconian.

Good Grief.

"ADJECTIVE
Draconian laws or measures are extremely harsh and severe." - Collins dictionary.

Yes, draconian is exactly what these proposals are. 100% bloody draconian. In fact they could scarcely be more draconian if they called them -

The Draco Memorial Dublin City Special Speed Limits Byelaws 2021!

yascaoimhin

Larbre34 wrote: »

"ADJECTIVE
Draconian laws or measures are extremely harsh and severe." - Collins dictionary.

Yes, draconian is exactly what these proposals are. 100% bloody draconian. In fact they could scarcely be more draconian if they called them -

The Draco Memorial Dublin City Special Speed Limits Byelaws 2021!

The proposed bylaw is not harsh or severe, it's mildly inconvenient for the purpose of ensuring fewer people are seriously injured or killed in built-up areas.

Honest to God, you'd swear someone was going to whip you if you got 31...
Please chill out for the love of

AndrewJRenko

ek motor wrote: »

Why not start advocating for cyclist training ? As far more vulnerable road users this should be mandated. Presently there are no controls of people who cycle. Many cyclists are completely feckless, wearing headphones whilst cycling, not looking, not signalling, breaking red lights. I cycled to work for about 4 years before getting a car. The number of cyclist has increased a lot. Time for mandatory cyclist training . Even a theory test would a start.

So drivers are killing 2 or 3 people each week, with 98% of them breaking urban speed limits, the majority of them using their phones while driving, and you reckon that we need training for cyclists?

What problem are you trying to fix here?

Chips Lovell

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

So drivers are killing 2 or 3 people each week...

149 people were killed on the roads last year. For your assertion to be correct, drivers would need to be responsible for all road deaths.

Stark

Chips Lovell wrote: »

For your assertion to be correct, drivers would need to be responsible for all road deaths.

Well that couldn't be true now. Could it?