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

magicbastarder · 18-04-2021 08:40AM

no, they won't, as speed limits don't apply to cyclists. speed limits apply to motorised vehicles.

Duckjob · 18-04-2021 12:20PM

SeeMoreBut wrote: »

Will cyclists be stopped when breaking 30 kph also as that speed is easily achievable for lot a cyclists

No, and this kinetic energy calculator might help you understand how irelevant that question is from any sort of road safety perspective.

In short, a 90kg cyclist on a 15kg bike travelling at 50kph carries just over 18% of the kinetic energy of the same person driving at 30kph in 1500kg car.

So such queries have no rational basis in any discussion around road safety.

frozenfrozen · 21-04-2021 02:20PM

https://www.rte.ie/news/dublin/2021/0421/1211193-dublin-speed-limit-campaign/

Dublin City Council's chief executive has criticised his own officials over a "one-sided" campaign to make 30km/h the default speed limit in the city area.

Owen Keegan admitted that the council could be accused of trying to "unduly influence" the current public consultation process and that it may have to be cancelled.

The council had begun a non-statutory public consultation process on the lower limit, while at the same time running the 'Loving 30' campaign in favour of it.

Following a query by Independent councillor Damian Farrell, the council's chief executive replied by email to say that the council could be accused of trying to "unduly influence the public consultation process".

"It is one thing to respond to criticism of a project during a public consultation process. However, to campaign actively on one side of the argument, I accept is questionable," Mr Keegan said.

Mr Keegan also stated that he accepts that a 30km/h limit will only deliver benefits if most drivers comply and the evidence is that current compliance is low.

Opponents of the new law point out that the Department of Transport has found that when limits are set at an unrealistically low level, drivers tend to lose respect for all limits and choose their own speed.

Mr Keegan stated he will ask for a report from officials on whether the consultation should be cancelled or if the "one-sided" nature of the campaign should be taken into account when assessing the response.

Mr Farrell stated in an email to fellow councillors that he believes the integrity of the consultation is "totally shot".

I agree with the point of people choosing their own speeds if it is set too low. If 'everywhere' is a super be careful 30km/h zone then nowhere is

*by everywhere I know it's not literally everywhere

odyssey06 · 21-04-2021 02:34PM

The survey is deliberately constructed in such a way as to encourage one particular response.

21-04-2021 02:50PM

frozenfrozen wrote: »

I agree with the point of people choosing their own speeds if it is set too low. If 'everywhere' is a super be careful 30km/h zone then nowhere is

*by everywhere I know it's not literally everywhere

This is why the engineering is critical. Simply put, you make it incredibly difficult to achieve speeds beyond what you decide. Want speed limits of 30k to be adhered to, then narrow the lanes, introduce chicanes, speed bumps, choke points, rumble surfaces etc etc etc

This is not a new thing. Its already done in countries all over the world.

Charles Babbage · 21-04-2021 02:53PM

SeeMoreBut wrote: »

Will cyclists be stopped when breaking 30 kph also as that speed is easily achievable for lot a cyclists

they won't even stop them even if they are on the footpath

Zebra3 · 21-04-2021 03:06PM

Charles Babbage wrote: »

they won't even stop them even if they are on the footpath

The cars illegally parked on the footpaths will stop them.

Duckjob · 21-04-2021 03:46PM

Charles Babbage wrote: »

they won't even stop them even if they are on the footpath

There, there. Do you feel better now you got that out ?

SeanW · 21-04-2021 04:00PM

Victor wrote: »

1.3 million dead from traffic collisions each year. The pollution kills millions more.

In Ireland, less than 150 die in traffic collisions each year:
https://etsc.eu/wp-content/uploads/14-PIN-annual-report-FINAL.pdf
We collect data on fatalities per billion km driven and the number is 3.3 fatalities per billion km driven. In other words, more than 300,000,000 kilometres driven between fatalities. Ireland ranks consistently as global best practice when it comes to traffic fatalities. Only marginally worse than Norway which is basically worlds best by all objective measures.

We also had fairly good pollution statistics before the pandemic hit.
http://waqi.info/#/c/53.557/-7.288/6.7z
The worst figures I've ever seen for Irish air pollution, have been over the past few months during lockdowns with large scale restrictions on movement.

Alias G · 21-04-2021 05:36PM

SeanW wrote: »

In Ireland, less than 150 die in traffic collisions each year:
https://etsc.eu/wp-content/uploads/14-PIN-annual-report-FINAL.pdf
We collect data on fatalities per billion km driven and the number is 3.3 fatalities per billion km driven. In other words, more than 300,000,000 kilometres driven between fatalities. Ireland ranks consistently as global best practice when it comes to traffic fatalities. Only marginally worse than Norway which is basically worlds best by all objective measures.

We also had fairly good pollution statistics before the pandemic hit.
http://waqi.info/#/c/53.557/-7.288/6.7z
The worst figures I've ever seen for Irish air pollution, have been over the past few months during lockdowns with large scale restrictions on movement.

I love how you can casually dismiss 150 annual deaths as a perfectly acceptable level of attrition. Multiple that figure by the number of families and close personal acquaintances directly impacted for a better understanding of the level of grief and despair visited upon fellow Irish citizens every year. Being best in class in one statistic should not preclude continuing efforts to improve safety on our roads. If it did, we wouldn't remain best in class for long.
Nor should it preclude making our urban centres more pleasant places to visit and navigate. But a modal shift from cars to walking, cycling and public transport will help acomplish that objective. No one is going to hold a gun to your head and demand that you no longer use your car. But it is only fair and reasonable that we begin to design our infrastructure to safely share the streetscape with those who wish to avail of greener and more efficient modes of transport.

odyssey06 · 21-04-2021 05:56PM

Alias G wrote: »

I love how you can casually dismiss 150 annual deaths as a perfectly acceptable level of attrition. Multiple that figure by the number of families and close personal acquaintances directly impacted for a better understanding of the level of grief and despair visited upon fellow Irish citizens every year. Being best in class in one statistic should not preclude continuing efforts to improve safety on our roads. If it did, we wouldn't remain best in class for long.
Nor should it preclude making our urban centres more pleasant places to visit and navigate. But a modal shift from cars to walking, cycling and public transport will help acomplish that objective. No one is going to hold a gun to your head and demand that you no longer use your car. But it is only fair and reasonable that we begin to design our infrastructure to safely share the streetscape with those who wish to avail of greener and more efficient modes of transport.

If 150 deaths is being used as justification for this measure it seems reasonable to ask Hlhow many of those 150 deaths occurred on the types of streets targeted by this initiative?

Are the suburb trunk routes affected part of the urban centre?

Public transport routes using these streets will also be impacted by this limit, with impacts to service timetables.

Charles Babbage · 21-04-2021 06:09PM

Duckjob wrote: »

There, there. Do you feel better now you got that out ?

If the intention is to improve the urban environment then preventing cycling on the footpath would be an easy measure to start with, then they could propose further measures. That they do not do the easy things shows the lack of integrity of this initiative.

donvito99 · 21-04-2021 06:15PM

Charles Babbage wrote: »

If the intention is to improve the urban environment then preventing cycling on the footpath would be an easy measure to start with, then they could propose further measures. That they do not do the easy things shows the lack of integrity of this initiative.

It's already illegal to cycle on the footpath.

If the Guards devoted resources to ticketing people cycling on the footpath, that's less resources devoted to things that actually impair safety on the roads.

Also, a 30kph speed limit is much easier to do than "preventing" cycling on the footpath. Don't know what you're getting at there.

Alias G · 21-04-2021 07:31PM

odyssey06 wrote: »

If 150 deaths is being used as justification for this measure it seems reasonable to ask Hlhow many of those 150 deaths occurred on the types of streets targeted by this initiative?

Are the suburb trunk routes affected part of the urban centre?

Public transport routes using these streets will also be impacted by this limit, with impacts to service timetables.

I didn't use the annual road death statistic as a justification for the proposed speed limit. That figure was introduced by one of your fellow status quo advocates. I was merely a bit appalled by how comfortable he was with the figure. That bring said, there have been high profile fatalities invilolving children which have formed part of the motivation to implement the 30kp/h limit. Even if there is no net reduction in annual road fatalities but it creates and urban environment where more people feel confident enough to opt for the bicycle rather than adding an additional car to the gridlock, then it will have had a positive impact.

This is a DCC proposal. Even if it is implemented on trunk routes, it would only apply as far as the municipal boundary. The suburban routes are not in scope.

Effect on public transport will be neglible. Average kp/h on routes traversing the area in question are typically under 30 anyway.

odyssey06 · 21-04-2021 07:42PM

Alias G wrote: »

I didn't use the annual road death statistic as a justification for the proposed speed limit. That figure was introduced by one of your fellow status quo advocates. I was merely a bit appalled by how comfortable he was with the figure. That bring said, there have been high profile fatalities invilolving children which have formed part of the motivation to implement the 30kp/h limit. Even if there is no net reduction in annual road fatalities but it creates and urban environment where more people feel confident enough to opt for the bicycle rather than adding an additional car to the gridlock, then it will have had a positive impact.

This is a DCC proposal. Even if it is implemented on trunk routes, it would only apply as far as the municipal boundary. The suburban routes are not in scope.

Effect on public transport will be neglible. Average kp/h on routes traversing the area in question are typically under 30 anyway.

That is effectively the same as using 150 deaths to justify this proposal. Our roads are safe.
What are these high profile deaths on the type of roads in scope of this proposal?
Inc trunk roads.

Is it your contention that everywhere in DCC area is part of the urban centre?
Even suburbs such as Raheny?

Average kph is a deceptive stat given that it includes time stopped at lights. Public transport timetables will be impacted by this across its daily schedule so to cite public transport as a reason to justify it is absurd. Ask bus drivers or timetablers what they think of this.

magicbastarder · 21-04-2021 08:06PM

i really, really wish road deaths weren't jockeyed about as the sole metric for how safe or usable our roads are.
huge numbers of schoolchildren are driven to school, and the safety of them getting there on their own is a huge factor. but concerns about safety seem to be swept away with comments relating to our low road deaths.

as i will repeat for probably the nineteenth time; no one dies swimming in shark infested pools in ireland, but we don't draw the conclusion that swimming in shark infested pools is safe.

Peregrine · 21-04-2021 08:12PM

odyssey06 wrote: »

That is effectively the same as using 150 deaths to justify this proposal. Our roads are safe.

Would you let your kids walk to school by themselves? Or cycle by themselves?

Most parents don't. Not anymore.

Deaths are a poor metric of road safety. For example, people are too afraid to cycle and say it's too dangerous. So very few people cycle. As a result, very few people die cycling. That doesn't mean our roads are safe.

odyssey06 · 21-04-2021 08:17PM

magicbastarder wrote: »

i really, really wish road deaths weren't jockeyed about as the sole metric for how safe or usable our roads are.
huge numbers of schoolchildren are driven to school, and the safety of them getting there on their own is a huge factor. but concerns about safety seem to be swept away with comments relating to our low road deaths.

as i will repeat for probably the nineteenth time; no one dies swimming in shark infested pools in ireland, but we don't draw the conclusion that swimming in shark infested pools is safe.

The safety of getting kids to school on their own does not just include road safety does it?
Would they be any less safe on the road in a dublin bus or dart or luas?

Were more kids sent on their way on their own steam in the 80s say when road deaths etc were higher and probably less safe by any other road safety metric?

magicbastarder · 21-04-2021 08:18PM

approximately 2% of *secondary* school students cycle to school in ireland.
in the netherlands, 37% of *primary* school students cycle.

magicbastarder · 21-04-2021 08:19PM

odyssey06 wrote: »

The safety of getting kids to school on their own does not just include road safety does it?

i didn't claim it was. i did say it was a 'huge factor'.
when many adults claim its too dangerous to cycle *themselves*, you can imagine their attitudes to their kids cycling.

odyssey06 · 21-04-2021 08:22PM

magicbastarder wrote: »

i didn't claim it was. i did say it was a 'huge factor'.
when many adults claim its too dangerous to cycle *themselves*, you can imagine their attitudes to their kids cycling.

And yet roads have never been safer in living memory.

Peregrine · 21-04-2021 08:24PM

https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2020/0701/1150834-road-deaths-eu/
Ireland has lowest road traffic fatality rate in EU

Is anyone on this thread going to insult everyone's intelligence and argue that we have the safest roads in Europe? Safer than the Netherlands, Sweden and Denmark? We've gradually scared vulnuerable road users off our roads.

Using road deaths only as a metric of road safety shows very poor understanding of road safety.

odyssey06 · 21-04-2021 08:30PM

Peregrine wrote: »

https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2020/0701/1150834-road-deaths-eu/
Ireland has lowest road traffic fatality rate in EU

Is anyone on this thread going to insult everyone's intelligence and argue that we have the safest roads in Europe? Safer than the Netherlands, Sweden and Denmark? We've gradually scared vulnuerable road users off our roads.

Using road deaths only as a metric of road safety shows very poor understanding of road safety.

As is focusing on speed only.
The roads in scope of this proposal are not unsafe because of the speed limit and the road death figures show this.
Look at bottlenecks, junction layouts, road quality etc

What would be the equivalent speed limit on the roads in scope of this proposal in denmark or holland?

magicbastarder · 21-04-2021 08:33PM

" for instance, in the Netherlands, 70% of the urban roads are limited to 30 km/h"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/30_km/h_zone

Peregrine · 21-04-2021 08:38PM

odyssey06 wrote: »

As is focusing on speed only.
The roads in scope of this proposal are not unsafe because of the speed limit and the road death figures show this.
Look at bottlenecks, junction layouts, road quality etc

What would be the equivalent speed limit on the roads in scope of this proposal in denmark or holland?

They're not "focusing on speed only". That's just plain wrong. Speed is one of many things they're focusing on. It's also one of many things that impact road safety.

You may not have noticed but they have been doing a few road layout changes recently. They're taking heat left, right and centre for it. Ended up in the High Court and everything. It was hard to miss, really.

magicbastarder · 21-04-2021 08:41PM

odyssey06 wrote: »

And yet roads have never been safer in living memory.

the roads will be even safer yet when everyone is driving around in tanks.

magicbastarder · 21-04-2021 09:05PM

Peregrine wrote: »

We've gradually scared vulnuerable road users off our roads.

going back to NL - 37% of primary school students cycle to school. 17% of primary school students cycle unaccompanied by an adult.
can you imagine that many kids cycled to school in ireland? it'd be carnage, in the absolute worst sense of the word.

SeanW · 21-04-2021 09:33PM

Alias G wrote: »

I love how you can casually dismiss 150 annual deaths as a perfectly acceptable level of attrition. Multiple that figure by the number of families and close personal acquaintances directly impacted for a better understanding of the level of grief and despair visited upon fellow Irish citizens every year. Being best in class in one statistic should not preclude continuing efforts to improve safety on our roads. If it did, we wouldn't remain best in class for long.
Nor should it preclude making our urban centres more pleasant places to visit and navigate. But a modal shift from cars to walking, cycling and public transport will help acomplish that objective. No one is going to hold a gun to your head and demand that you no longer use your car. But it is only fair and reasonable that we begin to design our infrastructure to safely share the streetscape with those who wish to avail of greener and more efficient modes of transport.

Strangely, I actually agree with as much of this post as I disagree with :rolleyes: Firstly, I'm fine with reasonable measures to improve our already good statistics. Just not ones that are overly broad and excessive. Secondly, I agree that core urban centres should be made more attractive to people not necessarily driving. As a routine pedestrian, there are things I'd find useful like faster countdowns for the green man at pedestrian crossings (including those countdown timers they used to have around O'Connell Bridge), wider footpaths in some cases, the introduction of "scramble crossings" etc. Also, I have no objection to reasonable demands for things like cycle lanes, as these too can clearly be part of best practice. As long as the measures being proposed are fair, reasonable and effective, I have no objections - and there are plenty of things that could be done that would meet those criteria.

Alias G wrote: »

I didn't use the annual road death statistic as a justification for the proposed speed limit. That figure was introduced by one of your fellow status quo advocates.

Not quite. I was responding to another poster who posted a figure of 1.3 million fatalities per year worldwide, as evidence of the need for broad changes in Ireland. Quoting death statistics is common among those calling for extreme measures to be taken against Irish motorists.

magicbastarder wrote: »

i really, really wish road deaths weren't jockeyed about as the sole metric for how safe or usable our roads are.
huge numbers of schoolchildren are driven to school, and the safety of them getting there on their own is a huge factor. but concerns about safety seem to be swept away with comments relating to our low road deaths.

If you want cycle lanes and the like to make your journey safer and less stressful, go for it. Unfortunately, much of the reference to road death statistics comes from those who are simply using them as cudgels against Irish motorists. For my part, I only quote international evidence to put such claims into context.

Charles Babbage · 21-04-2021 09:37PM

donvito99 wrote: »

It's already illegal to cycle on the footpath.

If the Guards devoted resources to ticketing people cycling on the footpath, that's less resources devoted to things that actually impair safety on the roads.

Also, a 30kph speed limit is much easier to do than "preventing" cycling on the footpath. Don't know what you're getting at there.

Pedestrians are the most vulnerable group an they are entitled to some space without people tying to ram them with metal objects.

But there are other aspects of enforcement that should be concentrated on in the first instance, cameras to identify people breaking red lights for instance, not only cyclists but people making left and right turns without waiting for the arrow.

Marcusm · 21-04-2021 09:39PM

magicbastarder wrote: »

no, they won't, as speed limits don't apply to cyclists. speed limits apply to motorised vehicles.

The equivalent offence for a cyclist is “cycling furiously” but it is subjective.

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

Comments