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

magicbastarder

it probably makes some sense to focus on road deaths in relation to this, in terms of publicising it, because that's a simple message, but that unfortunately obscures all the other first and second order effects which are probably more important but more subtle.

i had a chap who lives near me, who bemoaned the introduction of the 30km/h limit on his road; despite the fact that if you tried to drive on that road at 50km/h you'd probably trash your suspension on the speed ramps on it which were installed after the people living on the road complained about fast rat running on the road.

vandriver

If DCC is running a dishonest campaign,am I not allowed to question it?
The vast majority of road deaths in Ireland occur on roads with a speed limit of 60 kmh or higher (73%),not on roads controlled by DCC.
The fact that they don't mention a fatality level would lead me to believe that it's in low single figures per year.

magicbastarder

is someone saying you're not allowed question it?

Zebra3

vandriver wrote: »

If DCC is running a dishonest campaign,am I not allowed to question it?
The vast majority of road deaths in Ireland occur on roads with a speed limit of 60 kmh or higher (73%),not on roads controlled by DCC.
The fact that they don't mention a fatality level would lead me to believe that it's in low single figures per year.

You should read markpb’s post. You don’t need to scroll back that far either.

frozenfrozen

if the idea is to have less cars though making it annoying / slower then say that up front, don't hold up dead kids as the reason for 150 posts

vandriver

frozenfrozen wrote: »

if the idea is to have less cars though making it annoying / slower then say that up front, don't hold up dead kids as the reason for 150 posts

As I said,a bit of honesty about why this agenda is being promoted.

beauf

vandriver wrote: »

If DCC is running a dishonest campaign,am I not allowed to question it?
The vast majority of road deaths in Ireland occur on roads with a speed limit of 60 kmh or higher (73%),not on roads controlled by DCC.
The fact that they don't mention a fatality level would lead me to believe that it's in low single figures per year.

Are you talking about pedestrians or all road deaths on a road.

vandriver

beauf wrote: »

Are you talking about pedestrians or all road deaths on a road.

All deaths.

beauf

In fairness to DCC they are just stating a truism about higher speeds. You seem to be pointing out the same truism in national stats for all accidents.

You seem to be agreeing with them.

liamog

The RSA stats show there were 11 deaths of vulnerable road users (Pedestrians, Cyclists and Motorbikes) in County Dublin in 2020.

From the report we can see their were 6 pedestrians killed, 3 motorcyclists (only one motorcyclist fatality occurred in the whole country on a road with a below 80km/h speed limit) and infer that 2 cyclists were killed.

We're now down to a maximum of 9 deaths of vulnerable road users on Dublin roads, DCC should be able to share the statistics showing which of these occurred on the affected roads and the speed at the time of the incident.

Research in the UK showed that the rates of fatal impact on 30mph were around 2% not the 50% that is often reported (the source is a bit sus as they were an anti speed kills campaign). This is due to braking that occurs prior to impact. With the now mandatory AEB systems designed to detect pedestrians and cyclists, it would be very unusual for an impact to occur at full speed on a given road.

Using junk statistics to justify the changes without performing infrastructure works to reduce carriageway design speed is disengious, as is the argument that you have to reduce the speed before you perform any works.

148 people died on Irish roads last year, changing the Navan Road from 50km/h to 30km/h probably would not of changed that number at all.

Oak123

I would be happy just being able to travel at the speed limit without being tailgated all the time.

magicbastarder

as mentioned in another thread, speed is usually the main metric which is focused on, because it's clear and binary - you're either exceeding Xkm/h or you're not. it can be measured reliably by an unmanned station.
it's harder to identify and tackle other driver behaviour, because the nature of other transgressions can be more qualitative than quantitative.

Larbre34

RTÉ reporting that the City executive has dropped this nonsensical proposal, conceding that the process was flawed and the opposition strong.

Its now up to Councillors to vote for a clean sheet review of Speed Limits or to leave things as they are for the foreseeable future. The latter is most likely.

Keegan presiding over a clown show in the Civic Offices.

is_that_so

Larbre34 wrote: »

RTÉ reporting that the City executive has dropped this nonsensical proposal, conceding that the process was flawed and the opposition strong.

Its now up to Councillors to vote for a clean sheet review of Speed Limits or to leave things as they are for the foreseeable future. The latter is most likely.

Keegan presiding over a clown show in the Civic Offices.

Yep here's the article
https://www.rte.ie/news/dublin/2021/0519/1222707-dublin-speed-limit/

CatInABox

Strange that 50% percentage of the surveyed people supported the proposal in some form with 46% against, but it's being presented as if it had no support at all.

is_that_so

CatInABox wrote: »

Strange that 50% percentage of the surveyed people supported the proposal in some form with 46% against, but it's being presented as if it had no support at all.

Not enough support rather than none. Limited could mean anything.

odyssey06

CatInABox wrote: »

Strange that 50% percentage of the surveyed people supported the proposal in some form with 46% against, but it's being presented as if it had no support at all.

Almost all the submissions made directly or via councillors were against it.
The survey itself was rigged and presented as a propaganda exercise in favour of the desired outcome. It couldn't be stood over.

frozenfrozen

But we spoke about that at the time. It was would you like 40 or would you like 30km/h

Which led people who wanted neither to "support" lowering limits.

Cant be fcuked going back to quote myself but it was said and done at the time the support was far lower than any sort of 50:50

odyssey06

frozenfrozen wrote: »

But we spoke about that at the time. It was would you like 40 or would you like 30km/h
Which led people who wanted neither to "support" lowering limits.

Exactly. It wasn't a public consultation to actually gauge public opinion an issue.
The "con" part was a con job.

Roadhawk

is_that_so wrote: »

Yep here's the article
https://www.rte.ie/news/dublin/2021/0519/1222707-dublin-speed-limit/

MIC DROP

Best news all week.

magicbastarder

this is great news. it will make *so* much difference to the speed of slow moving city traffic.

Smee_Again

Absolutely, now that the limit has been left as it is commuters will still be able to drive at an average speed of 9.6km/h.

odyssey06

Smee_Again wrote: »

Absolutely, now that the limit has been left as it is commuters will still be able to drive at an average speed of 9.6km/h.

So the limit wasn't needed then.

Smee_Again

odyssey06 wrote: »

So the limit wasn't needed then.

Why do you say that? The benefits are fairly clear while the impact on journey times is negligible, seems a clear win-win.

magicbastarder

again, the difference between 'average speed' and 'maximum speed' seems lost on people.

vandriver

magicbastarder wrote: »

again, the difference between 'average speed' and 'maximum speed' seems lost on people.

Again,you seem incapable of realizing that to even make the low average speed that is quoted,you have to get up to 50 kmh between lights.

Smee_Again

vandriver wrote: »

Again,you seem incapable of realizing that to even make the low average speed that is quoted,you have to get up to 50 kmh between lights.

Have to? You able to back that up?

odyssey06

Smee_Again wrote: »

Why do you say that? The benefits are fairly clear while the impact on journey times is negligible, seems a clear win-win.

Well if journeys arent even hitting the speed when is the lìmit needed?
Are cars exceeding the 30 during rush as the average time is set by lengthy time stopped in traffic?
Are cars exceeding the 30 outside rush hour journeys in which case why are we talking about average rush hour based times?

odyssey06

magicbastarder wrote: »

again, the difference between 'average speed' and 'maximum speed' seems lost on people.

One of the inputs to average speed is maximum speed.

magicbastarder

vandriver wrote: »

Again,you seem incapable of realizing that to even make the low average speed that is quoted,you have to get up to 50 kmh between lights.

what?
a cyclist will beat an average speed of 10km/h without ever approaching 50km/h.