Dublin @30km

TheQuietFella wrote: »

It will only encourage more people to cross the roads where and when they like without a blind piece of consideration for other road users as is already the prescribed practice!

You do realise that Irish roads are designed such that pedestrians have to ask for permission to cross the road?

Victor wrote: »

You do realise that Irish roads are designed such that pedestrians have to ask for permission to cross the road?

So? I know it's heresy in this forum but I see nothing wrong with enforcing a bit of responsibility and discipline on pedestrians and cyclists as well.

I agree with the above point.. this will encourage more running out in front of traffic than is already the case and when there is inevitably an accident, the motorist will be at fault of course.. not the lemming who walked out in front of 2 tonnes at metal at the last minute.

30 km/h limits on main roads (ie: anything other than an actual housing estate) is nonsense and more pandering to those who refuse to take any responsibility for their own safety or actions. FFS we teach our kids to be wary of traffic, to cross where safe to so, look both ways etc. Why is that now suddenly different for commuting adults in the city centre?

I don't expect any reasonable replies to this question, but I for one will continue to drive as I always have - appropriate to the conditions (traffic volume, weather, visibility, location) rather than worrying about the numbers on a sign - which incidentally means that I often drive well below the 50/80 as it is anyway, but equally that I don't concern myself about going a little "faster" when conditions permit either.

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

I don't expect any reasonable replies to this question,

schemingbohemia wrote: »

Entitled much?

My point exactly :rolleyes:

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

While the current trend may be to marginalise and demonise those of us who choose to/need to use a car to get around, nonsense like the above doesn't deflect from the actual point I was making.. that ALL road users share a responsibility for their own safety and that of others - but the latter point doesn't (or shouldn't) include pandering to those who feel that looking after/out for them is "Someone else's" job and that they can behave as they wish regardless of the dangers or consequences.

It doesn't affect me though as I rarely bother venturing into town anymore anyway, but I'll continue to use my common sense, experience, and awareness of my surroundings and the conditions at the time, to direct me rather than letting "someone else" decide for me. I'd certainly think the former is more important when driving/mingling in traffic even if concepts of personal responsibility are dirty words to DCC now.

It's the same reason why I ignore 80 km/h signs on twisty back roads incidentally. It's a limit that makes no sense.

magicbastarder wrote: »

i keep hearing this - most recently from a taxi driver who claimed 'car drivers are vermin now'.
compare the experience cycling around the city to driving - or walking to driving, and let me know who has it easiest?

Don't cycle around the city. Do walk and drive. Walking is significantly easier.

Don't think that's quite how you intended to phrase the question!

magicbastarder wrote: »

anyway, it's not so much/only about intimidating pedestrians, i would guess; probably a factor that the exit is blind for drivers?

If you go observe them for a while you'll see what they're doing. I used to work in the area and would pass them several times a day. Their main purpose seems to be keeping cars off the pavement.

SuperValu in Ranelagh also is a lawsuit waiting to happen with the behaviour at the car park entry/exit.

schemingbohemia wrote: »

Driving at 30km/h is not pandering, it's increasing the safety levels of those that might come in contact with your vehicle - you obviously are a wonderful driver and are never distracted, or on your mobile phone, or ever rush through a red light at a junction - but others not as skilled as you in judging their surroundings will paralyse and kill cyclists and pedestrians, the impact of which is massively increased at 50km/h rather than 30km/h. These are facts that haven't been disputed by those against the speed limit reduction but their own need or desire to drive at a faster speed seems to TRUMP the safety of others and to victim blame.

Is there a list of other laws that you chose to disobey as you know better? Or is it just whilst driving that you feel entitled to decide the appropriate speed to drive at rather than what "the man" decides is appropriate?

Says much about enforcement in this country that you haven't been banned yet if, as you claim, you drive at whatever speed you like.

If you'd relax the hysteria and re-read what I actually wrote you'd see that there are in fact many occasions where I'd drive well below the posted limit on account of the conditions - traffic volume, weather, road surface, lots of kids around etc... it may suit your narrative to paint me/motorists as tearing around regardless in our death machines but that's not reality I'm afraid. (zero points though by the way, and I do over 1000km a week on all road types!)

You're still refusing to accept the idea though that these pedestrians and cyclists share a responsibility for their own safety and while I fully agree that motorists who jump lights and feck about on their phones while driving should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, I don't believe that indirectly encouraging peds/cyclists to take greater risks among vehicular traffic (which is what this measure does) is the way forward either.

Besides, certainly most of the road deaths I hear about involve single occupant crashes late at night, or 2/more vehicle collisions. Where's the "need" for this measure? It seems to me another typically Irish knee-jerk reaction to a problem that's not there and which doesn't address the real issue... namely the increasing gridlock in the city because of a combination of piss-poor and impractical public transport and Government policy on housing meaning more people HAVE to drive longer distances because they've been priced out.

30 km/h won't do anything to solve that.

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

If you'd relax the hysteria and re-read what I actually wrote you'd see that there are in fact many occasions where I'd drive well below the posted limit on account of the conditions - traffic volume, weather, road surface, lots of kids around etc... it may suit your narrative to paint me/motorists as tearing around regardless in our death machines but that's not reality I'm afraid. (zero points though by the way, and I do over 1000km a week on all road types!)

You're still refusing to accept the idea though that these pedestrians and cyclists share a responsibility for their own safety and while I fully agree that motorists who jump lights and feck about on their phones while driving should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, I don't believe that indirectly encouraging peds/cyclists to take greater risks among vehicular traffic (which is what this measure does) is the way forward either.

Besides, certainly most of the road deaths I hear about involve single occupant crashes late at night, or 2/more vehicle collisions. Where's the "need" for this measure? It seems to me another typically Irish knee-jerk reaction to a problem that's not there and which doesn't address the real issue... namely the increasing gridlock in the city because of a combination of piss-poor and impractical public transport and Government policy on housing meaning more people HAVE to drive longer distances because they've been priced out.

30 km/h won't do anything to solve that.

I fail to see how reducing the speed limit in the city centre in Dublin is going to suddenly encourage pedestrians and cyclists to go all lemming like and run across the road shouting "sure it's only 30km/h i'll be grand, it'll just be a flesh wound....."

Media doesn't tend to report on pedestrians ending up in wheelchairs, this measure could see collisions that don't result in deaths but are life-changing end up as merely broken legs by reducing the speed of impact.

Do you disagree that lesser speed reduces severity of collisions?

Not everything is about Deaths, even still this measure should see fewer pedestrian deaths, it will definitely reduce life-changing collisions if it is enforced.

A taxi overturns onto a pavement adjacent to residential streets and several schools and the headline is inconvenience to commuters?
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/commuters-facing-delays-as-after-taxi-overturns-in-rush-hour-traffic-35597301.html
This is a messed up situation. How did a taxi end up so out of control in this built up area that it ended up overturned?

Was driving a line of traffic today driving at 20kmph behind an Atlas wheeled excavator from the roundabout on Sean Moore Road into the last car park on strand road. 2.9k in total distance. Everyone was able to manage that speed comfortably. No one crashed. No one died. Car didn't stop working. Also arrived into work much more relaxed.

monument wrote: »

Yes, Leeson Street and St Stephen's Green east and south, and maybe Baggot Street, could have been streets along with maybe a few others where the likes of the AA could have made a practical difrence and kept them at 50km/h. But instead they went rogue and wanted 60km/h on some of the busiest streets and 80km/h on streets which were not even under review.




Berlin and other cities have 30km/h zones only in place at night -- because there's lots of residents trying to sleep -- that applies to Townsend St and Brunswick st, which combined likely have high populations than some small towns.

The bit of Sherrif Street pictured is Sherrif Street Lower and it's a cul de sac. Sherrif Street Upper (ie from the canal to the docks) will remain at 50km/h at all times (Bar a tiny bit coloured in while for 50km/h, it's not pictured on the map).

Pearse Street and Tara St are prime examples of streets which would, in my view, be unsuitable for 30km/h without major changes. The same might apply to the wider section of Townsend St and the curved bit of Sandwich Street which links Townsend St back to Pearse Street.

The things is that many of these main streets have huge numbers of pedestrians at peak times.

Roadhawk wrote: »

There is a great map for identifying the speed limits on each road:

http://product.itoworld.com/map/124?lon=-6.34644&lat=53.35920&zoom=12

The roads mapped in green are 30km. Looks accurate enough...

Those maps are generated from www.OpenStreetMap.org data. I added Dublin city centre recently. I've started to add the South Dublin speed limit changes that will kick in on 8 May: http://www.sdublincoco.ie/index.aspx?pageid=939&pid=37154 The ITO map refreshes every few weeks, whereas OSM updates almost immediately.