Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Parking and traffic in Phoenix Park

1767779818286

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,449 ✭✭✭✭Hurrache


    You don't need to brake at all to maintain or control your speed at that limit.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,518 ✭✭✭VonLuck


    I didn't say it was complicated. I said that it's a sign of an incorrect speed limit if you even have to think about it. A correctly designed road should not require you to really think about what speed you're doing. It should naturally feel right.

    Well technically you shouldn't need to brake at all at any speed, but my point is that your average driver will naturally be inclined to go over the 30km/h limit, realise they're going to fast and then slow down. And I say average driver because most cars I've seen on Chesterfield Avenue have been exceeding the 30km/h limit.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 54,535 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    a bit of chicken and egg going on with the claim that the speed limit is wrong, because of the design? you could also argue using that logic that the speed limit is correct, but the design is wrong?

    it's scope creep for the debate, but modern cars make it 'easier' to go fast without realising; in my father in law's car, 100km/h feels like probably 60 would in mine.

    maybe we should corrugate the road surface along the length of chesterfield avenue. it'd slow motorists down, but would be horrendous for noise.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,834 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    Speed limits are assigned for different reasons

    • Road engineering studies.
    • Environment/Conditions
    • Sin rules/behavior change.
    • Political

    Curiously most (but not all people) will drive(or cycle) at a reasonable speed due to self preservation. But if you set a speed for any of the above reasons this goes out of the window.

    Trouble with maintaining a lower than expect speed, can be that is there is a disconnect between the location and speed expectation. People have habit of driving too fast, or not within posted limits.


    This video touches many of these point. Its bit longwinded but might be of interest.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6gu265N-1Y&ab_channel=IdealMedia



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,245 ✭✭✭fatbhoy


    This thread is hilarious. Can't drive at a constant 30KM/H? LOL.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,834 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    We are seeking behavioral change. Then we should look at what does that.

    But a dead straight wide road with good sight lines and pedestrians well separated doesn't scream 30k to most people. As someone said visually narrowing the road with wands does help.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,834 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997



    That's overly simplistic.

    A squeaky wheel isn't always broken.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,051 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    100% this.

    The 30 limit for the rest of the Park is appropriate, but having it on Chesterfield Avenue makes a mockery of appropriate limits.

    The default urban limit of 50 km/h is entirely correct and consistent for Chesterfield Avenue.

    If they do make the 30 limit permanent, a) it won't be observed, as we see now and b) if they do ticket people for exceeding 30, more than a few will take it all the way to a Judge, who will be asking the OPW and the prosecuting Garda (if he turns up), why the hell is this long, wide, straight, well demarcated road 30 km/h??!!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,834 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    But they don't want you to see as a road. But a Park.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,518 ✭✭✭VonLuck


    It sounds like you don't drive at all to be honest! Also you have no understanding of road design. Maybe you should educate yourself and check out DMURS:

    "Research has found that:

    • The speed at which drivers travel is principally influenced by the characteristics of the street environment

    • If the design of a street creates the perception that it is safe to travel at higher speeds drivers will do so, even if this conflicts with the posted speed limit.

    By eliminating risk and promoting free-flowing conditions, drivers feel more inclined to drive at higher speeds. Furthermore if speed limits are perceived as not being appropriate to the environment, it can undermine the speed limit system as a whole. The extent to which speeding in urban areas is a problem has been identified in successive surveys carried out by the Road Safety Authority, with 3 out of 5 drivers on urban streets driving in excess of the posted speed limit."



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 54,535 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    everyone knows that road layout etc. will affect what speed drivers consider safe; but i don't buy the argument that speed limits thus should be set at what drivers in general consider to be 'safe'. largely because many drivers only consider their own safety in that subconcious calculation.

    the argument above is that we should set laws based on how much people obey them, which is a cart before horse argument. road design should follow on from setting the correct speed limit, not lead that decision.

    we don't ease laws against shoplifting simply because the current laws have failed to prevent it.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,518 ✭✭✭VonLuck


    I don't think everyone understands that. Certainly not here!

    And I don't think your shoplifting analogy is really an accurate comparison. It's more akin to leaving your goods unattended out on the street and being surprised that they've been stolen. The laws are still there, but they'll do little to help you if you haven't taken the necessary steps to prevent it happening in the first place.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,834 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    Probably a better example is cyclist breaking red lights.

    People assume its dangerous because it is for cars. But in fact a cyclist isn't going to run a red light unless its clear. So very few accidents happen because cyclists break the lights. So if there are few accidents is it actually dangerous. You can argue its a rule and its about a system and if bicycle breaks the lights it encourages cars to break the lights. Or at the very least causes conflict between road users. So perhaps its best to adhere to the red light as a cyclist.

    But in Paris they made turn left on a red a yield for a cyclist not a stop. So there's different ways of thinking of these problems.

    So speed limits are only one way to encourage better driving. Its not the only way or even the most effective.

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/road-design-calgary-psychology-of-speed-1.4850684



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,051 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Any mention of DMURS attracts the derision it deserves.

    Nothing has been a greater creator of modal conflict and risks where none existed prior, as this bloody document.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,518 ✭✭✭VonLuck


    Drivers are certainly breaking the rules, I've never denied that, but the rules in the first place aren't appropriate. If a large proportion of people are not following the rules then there certainly is something wrong. No point in saying that there's a 30km/h speed limit if people aren't going to follow it.

    I've also been in the park plenty of times and can say the complete opposite! The times where people obey the rules tends to be when one person is sticking to 30km/h and then the cars behind them eventually catch up and don't overtake.

    You can't really argue with a survey of speeds now can you?



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 44,499 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    Using the safety aspect of a motorway to prove a point that driving at speed can be safer isn't really a valid point unless you were to compare the safety stats of a motorway against the safety stats of a slower road which is also one-way and has no pedestrians, animals, slow traffic, no non-grade separated junctions, etc.

    As we don't have these comparative roads, it is not a fair comparison to make.

    Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/ .



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,834 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,834 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997



    The sweeping over simplistic generalizing was solely about speed and physics.

    That there are range of other facts was entirely my point.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,834 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997



    If there are no crossing its kind of irrelevant where you cross.

    Crossing at a roundabout is bad idea. Not only are drivers occupied by other cars, if they stop on the roundabout or leaving it, the odds of being rear ended are high.

    Basically its hard to cross when its busy, because there are no crossings. The idea you should make it easier to jaywalk or dash between traffic seems a dubious safety approach. if pedestrian crossing is an issue. Why the flip are there no crossings. Makes no sense.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,834 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    It makes a difference if its just a road vs a road in a park.

    Then its not simply about speed.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 15,801 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Basically its hard to cross when its busy, because there are no crossings. The idea you should make it easier to jaywalk or dash between traffic seems a dubious safety approach. if pedestrian crossing is an issue. Why the flip are there no crossings. Makes no sense.

    Its.A.Park



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,834 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997



    I'm not sure what "its a park" means

    Visually? Its a park full of plastic wands. Not really very park like its it.

    Policy not to have crossing? They have one here https://www.google.com/maps/@53.3514742,-6.3026141,3a,75y,86.3h,96.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQd-954Tyuc0Pyepg6fw-KQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

    Its a park so its not full of traffic? Its full of traffic at weekends precisely because its a huge park and full of tourist attractions and leisure activities. That before you get into its bang center of a load of infrastructure.

    Its park doesn't mean wildlife sanctuary.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,834 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    It of looks like a duck is a duck. Its a raised ramp (speed control) at the point where people cross due to openings either side. Its a crossing in all sense of the word.

    What toddler?

    I don't see how we can go from we have/need no crossing to we need 8 crossings. How about we have one at the zoo at least, the visitor center, where its busy with people crossing.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 54,535 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,051 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Its a working Park. A busy and bustling venue of employment and leisure attractions.

    Not too many other Parks in Ireland and elsewhere that contain a Zoo, a Hospital, a School, a Police Headquarters and two formal working residences.

    So it is a Park, but not just a Park and anyone trying to frame it in the context of other Parks, is being deliberately disingenuous, for reasons of having other agendae.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,834 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    Any type of speed should be discourage in the park. We're not that long removed from a toddler being killed a few hundred metres from chesterfield avenue. 

    From the news articles

    "Ratra Triangle - driving at a speed of 80 kph, speed limit 50 kph, consumed a litre of vodka and two grams of cocaine, driving on the wrong side road also driving without insurance...pulling doughnuts and performing handbrake turns ... struck standing next to her mother Katarzyna’s parked car"

    no reason to revert back to old speeds.

    While an absolute tragedy. I don't see how this has anything to do with normal speed limits.



  • Posts: 4,806 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Who would be the best person to contact to voice dissatisfaction with the reduced speed limit?

    Local TDs?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,051 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    The Minister of State for the OPW, Patrick O'Donovan (FG)

    Local FF and FG and SF Councillors and TDs. Also Senator Emer Currie has been making big noise about it, she's based in Dublin West with Varadkar.

    Anyone with a pulse, bar the Greens really.



  • Posts: 4,806 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Not as quickly as possible, as quickly as the previous speed limit allowed. There's no reason not to reinstate that limit.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,834 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    Hardly no reason.

    It's only a minor inconvenience anyway..



Advertisement