Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on [email protected] for help. Thanks :)
Private profiles - please note that profiles marked as private will soon be public. This will facilitate moderation so mods can view users' warning histories. All of your posts across the site will appear on your profile page (including PI, RI). Groups posts will remain private except to users who have access to the same Groups as you. Thread here
Some important site news, please read here. Thanks!

30km/h planned for main roads in Dublin City Council area (not all main roads)

  • 09-04-2021 5:19pm
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 934 ✭✭✭ Roadhawk


    I thought it would be a great time to rekindle this gem...

    The introduction of the 30km "Special Speed Limit" looks to become the "Normal" speed limit...around Dublin at least. It is so annoying that the media pitch on this is to save lives and provide better living spaces for residents. There has been no improvement in fatalities on our roads since its introduction of the 30km limits despite the spread of the limit to other roads across Dublin. The limit itself does not save lives. It is more a nuisance to other road users. It has been a clear case of driving a wedge...starting with a few small residential areas that would of course benefit from a 30km limit to then rolling it out to primary routes. Limits have been reduced on roads that clearly do not need or warrant it. The latest discussions being a reduction form 100km to 40km on the M50 during certain times... the "during certain times" piece is the tip of the wedge again here. Give it a year or two and we are sure to see further "progress" on this.


«1345678

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 78,316 ✭✭✭✭ Victor




  • Registered Users Posts: 5,818 ✭✭✭ donvito99


    Roadhawk wrote: »
    The latest discussions being a reduction form 100km to 40km on the M50 during certain times... the "during certain times" piece is the tip of the wedge again here. Give it a year or two and we are sure to see further "progress" on this.

    Are you seriously suggesting that the M50 will have a 40kph limit in place permanently?


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,707 ✭✭✭ PeadarCo


    Roadhawk wrote: »
    I thought it would be a great time to rekindle this gem...

    The introduction of the 30km "Special Speed Limit" looks to become the "Normal" speed limit...around Dublin at least. It is so annoying that the media pitch on this is to save lives and provide better living spaces for residents. There has been no improvement in fatalities on our roads since its introduction of the 30km limits despite the spread of the limit to other roads across Dublin. The limit itself does not save lives. It is more a nuisance to other road users. It has been a clear case of driving a wedge...starting with a few small residential areas that would of course benefit from a 30km limit to then rolling it out to primary routes. Limits have been reduced on roads that clearly do not need or warrant it. The latest discussions being a reduction form 100km to 40km on the M50 during certain times... the "during certain times" piece is the tip of the wedge again here. Give it a year or two and we are sure to see further "progress" on this.

    To be fair at certain times the 40km/hr speed limit might actually speed the M50 up such as at rush hour. And even if it didn't there were times on the M50 Pre Covid where you'd average half that at the busiest times. A lower speed limit at busier/times the M50 is near capacity might reduce crashes(assuming the limit was actually obeyed/enforced) and actually increase average speeds on the road at busier times.


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 43,442 Mod ✭✭✭✭ magicbastarder


    Roadhawk wrote: »
    the "during certain times" piece is the tip of the wedge again here.
    do you *honestly* believe anyone has any interest in imposing 40km/h limits on the M50 outside times of heavy congestion?


  • Registered Users Posts: 596 ✭✭✭ bigar


    Roadhawk wrote: »
    There has been no improvement in fatalities on our roads since its introduction of the 30km limits despite the spread of the limit to other roads across Dublin.

    Clear proof that no-one is keeping to this speed limit or the reduction would be very clear.

    Time has come to stop expecting drivers to respect the speed limit. This will never happen with the current mentality.

    There is therefore need to start narrowing the roads so that it is impossible to go faster. Fixed Speed cameras, perhaps doubling as red light jumper detection, need to be introduced on as many junctions as possible.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 43,442 Mod ✭✭✭✭ magicbastarder


    i really, really wish people would stop using fatalities as the only metric of road safety too.
    there are no pedestrian fatalities in the last year on the M50, but this is not because the M50 is safe for pedestrians.


  • Registered Users Posts: 690 ✭✭✭ jams100


    https://consultation.dublincity.ie/traffic-and-transport/30km-h-survey/

    Another one of these blanket 30km/h proposals from Dcc.

    Check out the map below, basically 90% of areas within DCC they want to become a 30km/h zone!

    https://consultation.dublincity.ie/traffic-and-transport/30km-h-survey/supporting_documents/3369_%20021%2030KP%20Speed%20Limit%20ReviewConcept%20Design%20202101.04.2021.pdf

    An example of why these sort of proposals are ridiculous is Conyngham or even Merrion road which are both proposed to become 30km/h zones.

    Conyngham road is a straight wide road with a segregated cycle track for example, how the f**k is that deemed to be in need of a 30km/h limit? Where is the proportionality between road safety and common sense?

    Most of the segregated cycles lanes built in Dublin city have been a good idea, both for motorists and cyclists and the current 30km/h limits in the likes of Dame street, Capel street, O'Connell Street, sections of quays, around schools etc. all make sense but applying these measures broadly to areas they aren't appropriate for just makes a mockery of the entire 30km/h limit areas that have been introduced to date.

    Without evidence of why these limits are proposed on each road then these proposals are just anti-car.
    Its about time that public officials stop using the "protecting lives" argument to force through their agendas, if there is good rational as to why 30km/h should be introduced for certain roads then by all means put it out there, I'd be likely to agree with it then but this current proposal is a joke.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,808 ✭✭✭ Duckjob


    jams100 wrote: »
    https://consultation.dublincity.ie/traffic-and-transport/30km-h-survey/

    Another one of these blanket 30km/h proposals from Dcc.

    Check out the map below, basically 90% of areas within DCC they want to become a 30km/h zone!

    https://consultation.dublincity.ie/traffic-and-transport/30km-h-survey/supporting_documents/3369_%20021%2030KP%20Speed%20Limit%20ReviewConcept%20Design%20202101.04.2021.pdf

    An example of why these sort of proposals are ridiculous is Conyngham or even Merrion road which are both proposed to become 30km/h zones.

    Conyngham road is a straight wide road with a segregated cycle track for example, how the f**k is that deemed to be in need of a 30km/h limit? Where is the proportionality between road safety and common sense?

    Conyngham Road doesnt have any segregated facilities, as far as I can see. No segregration + (in your words) straight wide road is more dangerous because "straight wide road" makes people want to put the foot down.

    Not sure if you mean Chapelizod Road which has partial segregated cycle track and partial useless paint line (As of Sept 2019 in Google Maps anyway, open to correction if things have been updated)

    Merrion Rd AFAIK has nothing other than useless paint lines, which when done that narrowly have been shown to make things more dangerous for people on bikes.


  • Registered Users Posts: 662 ✭✭✭ Citrus_8


    Duckjob wrote: »
    Conyngham Road doesnt have any segregated facilities, as far as I can see. No segregration + (in your words) straight wide road is more dangerous because "straight wide road" makes people want to put the foot down.

    Not sure if you mean Chapelizod Road which has partial segregated cycle track and partial useless paint line (As of Sept 2019 in Google Maps anyway, open to correction if things have been updated)

    Merrion Rd AFAIK has nothing other than useless paint lines, which when done that narrowly have been shown to make things more dangerous for people on bikes.
    Currently on a wide big road within city there's zero to none 50 km/h seed enforcement. Do you think it will be enforcement for 30 km/h. Anyone, who was driving somewhere between 50-60 km/h will continue to do so. 30 km/h is too slow - 40 km/h could be ok in some streets, but not blindly everywhere 30 km/h. I personally think it's dumb because there's no better alternatives - public transport could have more priorities to up the average speed and shorten the journey time, also no coins, less bus stops (remove the ones every 150-200 metres). Pedestrians are often crossing the streets where there's a safe crossing close by but they're too lazy to walk a bit. And if they get hit - it's not the speed, but pedestrians stupidity and laziness. Why should I bother to driver slower for some lazy ass stupid pedestrians?
    Just to add the context: I drive, use public transport and walk. I only cross at the crosswalks.

    I think lowering speed everywhere within the Greater Dublin area is stupid. Pedestrians should take care after themselves better. Don't need to punish drivers slowing them down so drastically. Need to enforce pedestrians for inappropriate crossing anywhere they want.


  • Registered Users Posts: 690 ✭✭✭ jams100


    Duckjob wrote: »
    Conyngham Road doesnt have any segregated facilities, as far as I can see. No segregration + (in your words) straight wide road is more dangerous because "straight wide road" makes people want to put the foot down.

    Not sure if you mean Chapelizod Road which has partial segregated cycle track and partial useless paint line (As of Sept 2019 in Google Maps anyway, open to correction if things have been updated)

    Merrion Rd AFAIK has nothing other than useless paint lines, which when done that narrowly have been shown to make things more dangerous for people on bikes.

    Yes I meant chapelizod Road, It has a shared cycle track with pedestrians, separated from the road via a curve, generally not many pedestrians so its not a problem with it being shared. Even at that the road is massive so there's more than enough space to pass cyclists even if they don't use the track itself.
    straight wide road is more dangerous because "straight wide road" makes people want to put the foot down.

    No, I don't agree. Straight wide road means your less likely to see a pedestrian jumping out from behind a car or a cyclist enter the road from a blind entrance. In terms of enforcement of current speed limits, well, that's an issue in itself, So in light of what I've said you still believe that 30km/h is warranted on that road?


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 43,442 Mod ✭✭✭✭ magicbastarder


    sure, you disagree with conyngham road being 30km/h. why not engage with the consultation process then?
    to be fair, i can see your point, it doesn't carry much pedestrian traffic at all.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,808 ✭✭✭ Duckjob


    sure, you disagree with conyngham road being 30km/h. why not engage with the consultation process then?
    to be fair, i can see your point, it doesn't carry much pedestrian traffic at all.

    If you're implementing Vision Zero then you should be starting off from the standpoint that anywhere you have any mixing of vehicular and non-vehicular traffic you need to limit vehicle speeds to max 30kph.

    I would love to see that being set EU wide as a legal requirement and implemented nationwide tomorrow. Would be funny to see the serial objectors to any change doing a complete 180 and be scrabbling to support the councils to put in segregated facilities so that higher vehicle speed limits could be re-introduced.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,808 ✭✭✭ Duckjob


    It’s all only another step toward removing vehicles altogether.

    Dramatic much ? They've been improving the streets in Netherlands for over 45 years now, and they haven't removed vehicles altogether there.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,818 ✭✭✭ donvito99


    Forgive me, but they seem to be a somewhat forward thinking country whereas the people running this one just seem to be desperate to get their belly rubbed by the EU and go way too far with it.

    Netherlands - forward thinking for putting in cycle lanes and 30kph speed limits.

    Ireland - desperate, EU lackeys for thinking about putting in cycle lanes and 30kph limits.

    That being said, 30kph on trunk routes is not appropriate. What local politicians need to do is get behind Bus Connects and its decent infrastructure. They're not prepared to do this though. Its easier for them to say that they're working towards "Vision Zero" when its just a few thousand speed limit signs and poles and not the removal of parking spaces and stretches of front gardens to build safe road infrastructure for all users.

    Getting Re-Elected > Vision Zero


  • Registered Users Posts: 26,406 ✭✭✭✭ Eric Cartman


    Duckjob wrote: »
    If you're implementing Vision Zero then you should be starting off from the standpoint that anywhere you have any mixing of vehicular and non-vehicular traffic you need to limit vehicle speeds to max 30kph.

    I would love to see that being set EU wide as a legal requirement and implemented nationwide tomorrow. Would be funny to see the serial objectors to any change doing a complete 180 and be scrabbling to support the councils to put in segregated facilities so that higher vehicle speed limits could be re-introduced.

    Jaysus thats barbaric. Dublin City still needs vehicular access for tradespeople, delivery drivers, some essential workers etc.. We should never get to those insane levels.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,818 ✭✭✭ donvito99


    Jaysus thats barbaric. Dublin City still needs vehicular access for tradespeople, delivery drivers, some essential workers etc.. We should never get to those insane levels.

    Lower speed limits does not = no access to cars, vans and lorries.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,808 ✭✭✭ Duckjob


    Forgive me, but they seem to be a somewhat forward thinking country whereas the people running this one just seem to be desperate to get their belly rubbed by the EU and go way too far with it.

    NL are as you say, a very forward thinking country, and they've spent 45 years perfecting the designs of their streets to make then safe and accessible for everyone. (incidentlally drivers are included in this, since Dutch drivers are reported to be the happiest in the world)

    It occurs to me that when you see somebody who has spent a long time perfecting something and is now doing it extremely well, and there is no reason why it cannot be replicated elsewhere, then the smart thing to do is copy what they are doing now as closely as possible.

    It seems somewhat disingenuous and deflectory to start assuming negative motives in authorities trying to do something similar here.

    Besides, given we are still deeply in the throes of car dominance here (on average on roads are probably designed 95% to cater to vehicular traffic, and hugh swathes of our country roads are still designed 100% for cars and nothing else, like this one: https://www.google.com/maps/@53.4800414,-6.1931036,3a,75y,235.77h,85t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sO9eck-Z5n-rQUaY-ahSfhQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

    I think its safe to say the needle has a long way to move in the other direction before we get to the stage where we need to question whether things are being taken too far.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,808 ✭✭✭ Duckjob


    Jaysus thats barbaric. Dublin City still needs vehicular access for tradespeople, delivery drivers, some essential workers etc.. We should never get to those insane levels.

    Quit the strawmanning, please.


    That’s something that’s never thought about though. In this ‘idyllic’ future, most people are out of work but at least you can cycle everywhere.

    Your thesis that economic activity dies when cars can't drive everywhere is not born out by facts.

    In fact, most NL cities, with all their people friendly (and so called "anti-car" by people on here) measures, look a sh*t-tonne more economically vibrant and capable of supporting local businesses than ours do.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,818 ✭✭✭ donvito99


    I had said that the endgame here is zero vehicles, and there’s no way economy can work then.

    In what plan or jurisdiction is it proposed to remove all "vehicles" and eviscerate a city's economy - is this the one we're talking about here or the one you've concocted in your head?


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,808 ✭✭✭ Duckjob


    You’re assuming the same as the Netherlands. I had said that the endgame here is zero vehicles, and there’s no way economy can work then.

    That's a pretty wacky assertion that the authorities here are trying to eliminate vehicles completely. What evidence do you have to support that ?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 690 ✭✭✭ jams100


    Duckjob wrote: »
    That's a pretty wacky assertion that the authorities here are trying to eliminate vehicles completely. What evidence do you have to support that ?

    This current proposal is at best a lazy attempt at trying to do some good but more likely in my opinion just anti-car and to an extent, even anti public transport.

    I wouldn't mind but this same proposal was rejected by the public a number of months ago, all they've done since then is change about 7-10 roads to 40km/h. So it's more or less the same thing going back to public consultation, which was rejected 56 to 44% despite cycling lobby groups campaigning as hard as they could to get this to pass.

    Also the idea that DCC said they have to make the entire city 30km/h just so they can make all areas around schools 30km/h is pure and utter bulls**t. If that is a problem then they should be working with the NTA on how to address that particular anomaly not try to ram through one of their fairy projects.

    Anyway the upshot of all this is even if it does pass all it will do is deteriorate compliance in areas where 30km/h limits currently exist, which are areas where the 30km/h is actually needed and makes sense.


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 43,442 Mod ✭✭✭✭ magicbastarder


    at 8:30pm on a sunday evening, google maps is calculating it will take 24 minutes to drive from DCU to UCD. the vast majority of that is on roads currently with 50km/h limits (and there's probably as much on 60km/h limits as there is on 30km/h limits).
    it's 11.3km. so that's an average of 28.25km/h, on 50km/h roads in very light traffic.

    it's not how fast you go on the fast bits that matter. 30km/h limits wouldn't make an awful lot of difference.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,643 ✭✭✭ Phil.x


    Make sure everyone completes the survey and votes against DCC Owens Keegan cycling agenda.

    It will be a great day when salad box ryan and the crazy gang are no more.



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,850 ✭✭✭✭ odyssey06


    at 8:30pm on a sunday evening, google maps is calculating it will take 24 minutes to drive from DCU to UCD. the vast majority of that is on roads currently with 50km/h limits (and there's probably as much on 60km/h limits as there is on 30km/h limits).
    it's 11.3km. so that's an average of 28.25km/h, on 50km/h roads in very light traffic.
    it's not how fast you go on the fast bits that matter. 30km/h limits wouldn't make an awful lot of difference.

    How much longer will the journey take?
    The average time includes time spent stopped at lights.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,064 ✭✭✭✭ Thelonious Monk


    Phil.x wrote: »
    Make sure everyone completes the survey and votes against DCC Owens Keegan cycling agenda.

    Many of us support cycling agendas. No one would take heed of 30km limits anyway so I don't know why any of you care.


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,651 ✭✭✭✭ thebaz


    Many of us support cycling agendas. No one would take heed of 30km limits anyway so I don't know why any of you care.

    I'm a cyclist , rarely drive now , but with more speed cameras people will care once the points start adding up. As a cyclist I'm all against bad drivers, but many bad drivers are slow drivers. Enforce what we have not stupid undriavble limits. The Greens have really lost me.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,757 ✭✭✭ ianobrien


    Oh I'm all for 30kph in residential areas and areas of high pedestrian traffic but a blanket 30kph is just lazy. The existing 50kph should remain for routes that are used to bring traffic into and out.

    Why can't the City Council sit down with the NRA in front of Google Maps and just watch what roads are used to bring traffic into and out of town. Then, leave them roads at 50kph?

    Unless there are speed cameras every 50 meters, people will ignore it as it's a bad law that doesn't make sense


  • Registered Users Posts: 78,316 ✭✭✭✭ Victor


    ianobrien wrote: »
    Why can't the City Council sit down with the NRA in front of Google Maps and just watch what roads are used to bring traffic into and out of town.
    Th NRA / TII has no authority to do anything on roads that aren't national roads. Th only national roads in Dublin City are the Port Tunnel and associated roads.
    Then, leave them roads at 50kph?
    So you want a lower speed limit on the Chapelizod Bypass and Port Tunnel? :)


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 43,442 Mod ✭✭✭✭ magicbastarder


    odyssey06 wrote: »
    How much longer will the journey take?
    The average time includes time spent stopped at lights.
    hard to say, but it's key to point out that google's estimate is on a day and at a time where traffic would be extremely light.
    five minutes difference, i'd guess, but that's based on the fact that if you did the *entire* journey at 50km/h, it'd take nine minutes shorter than doing it at 30km/h. but you're not going to get near the theoretical max difference of nine minutes, because a rather significant proportion is going to be done at under 30 anyway.


    i know i can make it across town on a bike, faster than someone in a car. and 30-33km/h would be my typical max cruising speed on the flat.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 26,348 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Peregrine


    Phil.x wrote: »
    Make sure everyone completes the survey and votes against DCC Owens Keegan cycling agenda.

    Done. Fully support the default 30kph. It's the least we could do. Hopefully enforcement and design changes will follow. Thanks for the heads up.

    Yeah, his cycling agenda is just not good enough these days. I'm coming around to the idea that Owen Keegan, Brendan O'Brien et al. need to go. We need more ambitious people in charge committed to reshaping the city, making it liveable and undoing the decades of damage done to its fabric by motor car dominance. We need people like Robert Burns.


Advertisement