Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
New DCC (Dublin City Centre) 30kph limit
Comments
-
WRONG! The most this should add to most people's journey's is one minute.shotamouse wrote: »Look, the reason why DCC are doing this is because 30km/h speed limits in crowded urban areas are proven to save lives. If you are more worried about a few minutes being added to your journey then you really need to get a sense of perspective.
Too many cars.Why don't the authorities do something about jaywalking?
Can I get a copy of your submission to the public consultation?It's not the best thought out plan in the world.
Mine ran to 39 pages.
Look at the map actually posted. http://www.dublincity.ie/RoadsandTraffic/RoadSafety/Documents/3369%20_04%20Sept%2009%20City%20Centre%2030%20kph%20zone.pdfThe attached is the rough area of the limit, according to that article.
Because there are a load of other routes available? I think there are 8 Liffey bridge outside the 30km/h area.Cookie_Monster wrote: »If that the case why couldn't they have waited till the M50 is actually finished to 3 lane the whole length? (apart from the fact the M50 will probably never be finished :P)
Because traffic was going too fast.
All speeding tickets attract a fine and penalty points.Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »Penalty points or speeding fines. Which one? Anyone know?0 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1. Car engines are designed to be most efficient running between 50-80 Kmh, running them at lower speed decreases fuel efficiency.
With a quick search on efficient speeds to drive, the graphs I'm finding tend to show that fuel usage at around 30km/h is around the same as speeds near 100km/h.
Are you also suggesting banning all speeds above 80km/h on all roads?2. The Council Chairman stated the speed limit will be self policing, with red lights set to a sequence preventing any one from going more than 30kmh. What is this based on? The acceleration of a sports car, normal car or heavily loaded HGV, they will get to 30kmh at different rates, will the lights be green or red for all of them, or will some be stop/starting all along the 3;lane wide Quays
It's based on travelling at 30km/h.
The bases of green waves of different sorts in different countries. Just as with higher speed green waves, not everything will get through.3. Average cycling speed is around 30kmh, same as the new speed limit. So buses and bikes, which share the same space on the road, will now be matching each other for speed along the roads. How will cyclists feel about having a large bus stuck beside them, not allowed to go past, just sitting on their shoulder.
Bus lanes on most of the quays and on other roads within this new zone are not wide enough for buses to safely pass cyclists, so the new speed limit does not change things. On O'Connell Street, cyclists seem to mostly go faster than (or around the same speed as) buses, so the main concern of cyclists will likely remain the same there -- buses pulling in an out, rather than buses staying at the same speed.
Around College Green / Dame Street is around the same story. If anything, it'll stop what I currently find what happens -- buses going at speed to pass cyclists out only for the cyclists to catch up with buses at red lights.4. Public transport will be slowed down, ironically the new area stretches almost exactly from the Bus Eireann depot at broadstone as far as Bus Aras. Taxi journey's will be more expensive even if slightly.
Public transport speed is already very low in this area, and the new limit should have little or no affect at peek times, and little affect outside rush hour.5. At 50kmh more traffic can pass through the area in an efficient way than 30kmh.As traffic volumes build in the morning, the regular traffic jams that form every morning will start earlier, at lower rates of traffic and lead to more severe and regular jams.
50km/h? At rush hours? In Dublin City Centre? Even anywhere near Dublin city centre? Besides rushing from one light to the next, or maybe the next light after that?
Traffic flowing at 50km/h isn't realistic at rush hour, or most of the time in Dublin city. But, in theory, 30km/h could allow more traffic to pass through.6. It is unneccesary. Dublin city already has a very good safety standard, with speed being one of the least influencing factors in recent fatal accidents (most fatal accidents involving cyclists are from HGVs turning at low speeds). Lowering the limits on the main roads will simply annoy people. Angry people do not make good decisions. That said no-one is arguing with lower speed limits within pedestrian heavy areas such as Abbey St, Temple Bar etc.
Great, because all the main roads included -- the quays in this zone, O'Connell Street, Dame Street, George's Street, College Green etc -- are all pedestrian heavy areas.
Speed and mass difference are the two main factors why pedestrians and cyclists end up so badly after being hit by cars. It's harder to tackle mass, but this is lowering the speed. As was said in The Irish Times yesterday: "In relation to cutting the speed of traffic on the city quays he said a pedestrian struck by a vehicle travelling at 50km/h has a 50 per cent chance of being killed, while the risk drops to 5 per cent if the vehicle is travelling at 30 km/h."
"Angry people do not make good decisions" -- Any anger will, I'm sure be taken into account by courts if what you're trying to imply happens. People who take their out or those who lose control easily have no business driving in the first place.7. Perception. This adds to the perception that Dublin is not car friendly, which is still the main mode of transport for most commuters and shoppers/socialisers.
How far away are the car parks to outside this zone?
Most drivers who are commuting, shopping or socialising will never reach any high speed, and if they do they only speed up to reach traffic or a set of lights.When the College Green Bus Gate was introduced, businesses in the area suffered a massive slump, so much that the Bus Gate was suspended in the evening during the run up to Christams to help them. The perception of a very low speed limit on the main access roads to the main shopping areas, will dissaude more shoppers/socialisers away from DCC and out to shopping centres etc. Results in further drop to Dublin trade.
Business suffered a massive slump due to the bus gate? Not the rescission? Or losing trade to the north? No? :rolleyes:8. Cyclists brought into the spotlight. With the aim of promoting cycling being mentioned repeatedly as one of the main reasons behind the new limits, frustrated drivers will turn a lot of attention to Cyclists' behaviour. The speed limit also applies to them, and with the limit being controlled by lights, any reasonably fit cyclist who can go faster than 30kmh will either have to stop start too, or break the lights. If they break the lights, expect the shouts of drivers onto Joe Duffy etc to grow about this 'unfair system'. Even the most law abiding cyclist on here, who has all the lights, always signals, never goes through a light etc will accept that a sizeable percentage of other cyclists do. The good cyclist will be tarred by the same brush.
Polls of motorists over and over again show motorists admitting to braking the speed limits, and other traffic laws. A recent example from Ireland (by the AA and not some anti-car group or anything): AA survey: 70% of Irish drivers admit speeding
It would be great if road traffic legislation would be enforced for all road users no matter what mode of transport they chose.9. 'If it saves one life, it'll be worth it'. If this pointless, vacuous cliche is rolled out again by any supporter of this measure, it should immediately be pointed out that wrapping the entire population in bubble wrap will also save lives, so why is that not being proposed. Or more reasonably make it a legal obligation for pedestrians to wear hi-viz jackets, or similar. Banning cars will save lives too, where do you draw a line here.
The research shows 30km/h is a very good place to draw the line in areas populated with large amounts of pedestrians.
The benefits of hi-viz jackets where cars are travelling at 50km/h is unproven and, in any case, unrealistic. And, as you can guess, wrapping the entire population in bubble wrap, is not being proposed because it is unrealistic in practical and cost terms.10. Fish in barrel. Try driving at 30kmh. Honestly try, on a nice quiet wide road. See how much concentration it takes, how improper it feels. Now imagine having to do this daily if you're a transport or delivery driver particularly during quiet times in Dublin - 5am, Sunday at 9pm for examples. The new limit promotes a need to watch your speedo not the road. It also makes it easy to catch anyone that drifts over the limit on a road that is designed for higher limits, has proven to safely take hogher limits...
I've heard drivers I know say the same thing about 50km/h speed limits.
Watching speedo also applies to 50, 40km/h etc, people adjust. Same goes for anything around the idea of it feeling improper or unnatural etc.and is being artificially having it's limits reduced rather than having it reengineered to reduce speed. How many private speed cameras are on the way?
Engineering is planned, not natural, thus also artificial.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
With a quick search on efficient speeds to drive, the graphs I'm finding tend to show that fuel usage at around 30km/h is around the same as speeds near 100km/h.
Are you also suggesting banning all speeds above 80km/h on all roads?
This was in response to another poster stating that 30kmh was more efficient than 50kmh. It isn't. As regards suggesting banning all speed above 80kmh, I'm not but the Green Party did. They were laughed out of it, so why not this.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055362779It's based on travelling at 30km/h.
The bases of green waves of different sorts in different countries. Just as with higher speed green waves, not everything will get through.
So you accept some will not get through, but at a lower limit this will reduce the efficieny of the roads which were designed and engineered for a higher trueput.Bus lanes on most of the quays and on other roads within this new zone are not wide enough for buses to safely pass cyclists, so the new speed limit does not change things. On O'Connell Street, cyclists seem to mostly go faster than (or around the same speed as) buses, so the main concern of cyclists will likely remain the same there -- buses pulling in an out, rather than buses staying at the same speed.
Around College Green / Dame Street is around the same story. If anything, it'll stop what I currently find what happens -- buses going at speed to pass cyclists out only for the cyclists to catch up with buses at red lights.
If there was an efficient 50kmh 'Green Wave' buses would not have to stop at red lights, and eventually would pull away from the bikes. At 30kmh buses are now no faster than bikes and you will have a bunnyhopping situation of cointinious overtaking, retaking
involving large vehicles and cyclists as seen on O'Connell St which is a 30kmh zone.Public transport speed is already very low in this area, and the new limit should have little or no affect at peek times, and little affect outside rush hour. .
As I said the zone stretches near exactly from the Bus Eireann Depot at Broadstone all the way to Bus Aras, so almost every service has to travel the lenght of the new limits zone to get to start/finish point. They will be travelling empty, with no stops inbetween so would be able to travel at higher than average public transport speeds. Now they wont, so expect delays. Also as I'll explain later, the 'rush hour' period will be extended so delays will become more frequent.
50km/h? At rush hours? In Dublin City Centre? Even anywhere near Dublin city centre? Besides rushing from one light to the next, or maybe the next light after that?
Traffic flowing at 50km/h isn't realistic at rush hour, or most of the time in Dublin city. But, in theory, 30km/h could allow more traffic to pass through.
Rush hour is rush hour, so the new limits will have no effect then, except that with reduced efficiency on the main through roads 'rush hour' will start earlier as it will take fewer vehicle to trigger jams. An earlier start to traffic congestion will lead to longer delays as traffic levels rise during the day. So worse delays, more frequently and with fewer numbers of vehicles need to trigger it. But then who can argue with theory?Great, because all the main roads included -- the quays in this zone, O'Connell Street, Dame Street, George's Street, College Green etc -- are all pedestrian heavy areas.
Speed and mass difference are the two main factors why pedestrians and cyclists end up so badly after being hit by cars. It's harder to tackle mass, but this is lowering the speed. As was said in The Irish Times yesterday: "In relation to cutting the speed of traffic on the city quays he said a pedestrian struck by a vehicle travelling at 50km/h has a 50 per cent chance of being killed, while the risk drops to 5 per cent if the vehicle is travelling at 30 km/h."
"Angry people do not make good decisions" -- Any anger will, I'm sure be taken into account by courts if what you're trying to imply happens. People who take their out or those who lose control easily have no business driving in the first place.
The new speed limits are not being argued with where applied logically, O'Connell St has had those limits for years and no complaints before or after because it made sense. However main trough roads such as Church St, Gardiner St, Ormonde Quay are not pedestrian heavy or have suitable footpaths and pedestrian crossings so as to minimise pedestrain/vehicle interactions. Dublin's great safety record backs this up, there was no need for the limit change.
As for the anger issue, all drivers are recommended to reduce all distractions and frustrations so as to be able to concentrate on driving. Frustrated and angry drivers will make mistakes, and while the courts might take a dim view on this, the damage will already be done, someone will be hurt. Prevention is better than cure. As for people who easily lose control having no place behind the wheel, yes I agree, but they are behind the wheel and cannot be simply identified and removed.How far away are the car parks to outside this zone?
Most drivers who are commuting, shopping or socialising will never reach any high speed, and if they do they only speed up to reach traffic or a set of lights.
Most major car parks are in the heart of DCC which is now the centre of the new speed zone. Are you suggesting that the 50kmh they have been safely and happily driving for years is a high speed? Or that a 50kmh set 'green wave' would have had them still hitting sets of lights? Now they'll just be hitting more traffic and more lights.Business suffered a massive slump due to the bus gate? Not the rescission? Or losing trade to the north? No? :rolleyes:
It's perception. The half percent VAT rise in 2008 had little impact on prices, but people perceived they were being fleeced and there was better value up North so off they went. Now people will perceive Dublin is difficult to get into, that there will by speed cameras everywhere. As for the Bus Gate, if it had no effect why was it suspended? In times of difficult trading you do everything to attract business, not send out messages saying 'look we've made it more difficult'.Polls of motorists over and over again show motorists admitting to braking the speed limits, and other traffic laws. A recent example from Ireland (by the AA and not some anti-car group or anything): AA survey: 70% of Irish drivers admit speeding
It would be great if road traffic legislation would be enforced for all road users no matter what mode of transport they chose.
I do not want to make this thread a Cyclist v Motorist V Pedestrian V Bus arguement. I was simply pointing out that with the reasoning behind these new limits being stated boldly as to encourage cycling, attention will be turned to cyclists and their behaviour by opponents of the new limits. If there is any speed enforcement along these roads we'll want to see it fairly applied. This means that any of the faster, more enthusiastic cyclists who can top 30kmh, will now also have to stop/start at red lights along this great 'Green Wave'. Glad you agree that Road Traffic Legislation should be applied to all.The research shows 30km/h is a very good place to draw the line in areas populated with large amounts of pedestrians.
The benefits of hi-viz jackets where cars are travelling at 50km/h is unproven and, in any case, unrealistic. And, as you can guess, wrapping the entire population in bubble wrap, is not being proposed because it is unrealistic in practical and cost terms.
Using the 'If it saves one life' argument in a tired cliche used to justify any safety initiative that's introduced. The more nonsensical the more the cliche is used. I simply provided other nonsensicle ideas that will save lives if introduced, but realistically cannot be. But if I want to use hysterics I could now call your bluff by saying 'See!!! You don't care about lives!! Bubble wrap would save the children! Will someone not think of the children!!!!:eek:'
Dublin had one of the safest traffic statistics prior to this new limit, they were not needed at such a blanket level, it's nonsensical, but someone 'Must think of the Children!'I've heard drivers I know say the same thing about 50km/h speed limits.
Watching speedo also applies to 50, 40km/h etc, people adjust. Same goes for anything around the idea of it feeling improper or unnatural etc.
ireland is littered with examples of poorly applied limits - the great example being the 80kmh Country Borreen, or arguably the 80kmh 4 lane wide N4 - people can distinguish between what is a logical, safe limit (honestly they can, stop sniggering). The 4 lane wide Quays at the Four Courts were designed and engineered for a safe through-flow at 50kmh, it 'feels' right. 30kmh feels wrong - yes at off peak times, but sure in the rush hour 30kmh feels like a miracle, but safe speed and the 'feel' of the road is dependent on traffic. Driving at what feels the wrong spped demands more attention, knowing the road will be enforced makes you deteremined to keep to the limits, queue more watching the speedo, less on the road. As I said take a car out to a quiet, wide road and drive at 30kmh, see how much attention it takes to keep to the limit.Engineering is planned, not natural, thus also artificial.
Ok, badly phrased by me, but that is a little pedantic. Roads that are engineered to 30kmh will have a 'feel' that that is a logical limit, or engineering to make you slow down (speed bumps, chicanes, narrow road stretches). They will not by 2 lanes wide, dead straight with clear visibilty (Gardiner St, Church St, the Quays)0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
Not going to go into another point by point reply here, just focusing on more obvious issues if that's alright.Largely irrelevant when average speeds are 12km/h. Cruising at a constant 30km/h is probably much more efficient than racing tot he next traffic light.The plan is that if you maintain 30km/h on the quays you should see very few red lights.Not necessarily. Stop-start traffic is on average slower than cruising traffic.
All this assumes that the promised 30kmh 'Green Wave' of lights will work efficiently and properly, while ignoring that a 50kmh 'Green Wave' which could have been implemented would have removed such things as 'rushing to the next lights' etc. Yes stop start traffic is slower than cruising traffic, but why does 50 automatically be assumed as stop start and 30 as lovely free flowing? Who gets priority where main routes cross? So a 50kmh cruising speed would be more efficient than a 30kmh cruising speed through the city, it would reduce overall traffic, while 30kmh does not promise this lovely cruise you seem to anticipate.Now iamgein whats its like to be a pedestrian who is afraid of that traffic that you stay at home all day.Speed is still an intimidating factor. Pedestrians don't deserve to be intimidated away from city streets into suburban shopping centres.
IMO this is a little hysterical, suggesting cowering peolpe terrified of the killer 50kmh traffic, that will magically become cute and cuddly at 30kmh.No it doesn't. Read the Road Traffic Acts and associated regulations.Or they can maintain 30km/h. Cyclists looking to "go fast" don't go to the city centre to do it.Perhaps for a fit adult cyclist, sure. Many others would be in the 15km/h bracketAt least not the bus isn't trying to reach 50km/h to pass them.
I didn't know cyclists were exempt from speed limits, thanks for pointing that out. But as for cyclists not going into the city to go fast, true, I'd assume like most commuters they're just going in to get to work. And like most commuters they'll want to get home as quickly as possible. There'll also be an element of competitiveness and excercise involved for some , pushing themselves on.
And again I may stand corrected on average cyclists speed down from 30kmh (my opinion) to 15 (yours), but that just means buses will not be accelerating to 50 to get by cyclists quickly, instead they'll be cruising along at 30 side by side with them.Just where are you in a rush to at 5am?
Work. Not everyone gets a lie in every morning and you'll be surprised how busy Dublin is at that hour with early start workers, lots and lots of delivery vans trying to get work done before the rush hour congestion starts and of course tourists and more noticeably truckers trying to get to the port for the ferries that arrive in around 6.30am. So you get a lot of trucks going to and from the ferry port before the 7am 5 axle ban starts. So imagine having driven across Ireland in an artic, now dawdling along the Quays (not everyone needs to go across those 11 bridges you mention) clock watching for the ferry departure.
Awww! No public transport then?I'd allow them for the emergency services.
No, this will save quiet a few lives.
While looking for statistics on road deaths in DCC I came across this article below. It's interesting for a few stats mentioned in it. It mentions the 5,000 people who cycle into Dublin daily which is a long way from the 700,000 commuters on public transport a sizeable proportion of which will be on buses, now slowed to cycling speed for the 5,000s benefit. It also mentions the 7 cyclist deaths and 27 pedestrian deaths recorded a to that point (September) nationally. With these deaths being spread nationally, anecdotedly pedestrian deaths mostly on country roads and with the accepted view that most cyclists deaths in DCC being attributed to HGVs turning, what definition of 'quite a few' are you applying here - assuming that deaths will still not drop to 0.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2009/0915/breaking21.htm
Also interestingly, and as an aside if it's not too morbid, in the incident mentioned (the 1st Dublin Bike scheme's death) the Truck driver was not arrested or charged and his vehicle was not impounded for technical examination, which to me by default suggests no suggestion of fault on the driver's part.0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
Cookie_Monster wrote: »Well thats more of an issue then
Though that said the publicity its gotten everywhere should alert you to it
I know it exists. I just don't know which roads. Its seems to be on one side of Stephens green but not the other. Who know what other madness they've decided on where it starts stops. Will the publicity help a tourist next week? next month, next year.0 -
-
Advertisement
Advertisement