New Dublin Speed Limit - MORE Dangerous?

jaceq

schemingbohemia wrote: »

sorry can you remind me where the new speed limit is again???

with the bus gate, buses have been much more reliable and moving at a better pace.

I meant that public transport is so city center centric, not the speed limit.

schemingbohemia

I understood what you meant but there's no logic to it, you're complaining that people don't use public transport because it's city center(sic) centric yet the speed limit that people like you are complaining about is only in the city centre.

fptosca

Zoney wrote: »

Roundabouts are still incredibly iffy even doing this - it's amazing the speed some people will build up on the roundabout itself! If you've only a couple of rbouts on your route - it may be safer to lose a couple mins and act as pedestrian. Then again, maybe not - some roundabouts are lethal as pedestrian - especially with lack of indicator use by drivers, and again, inappropriate speed. Lugging a bicycle across makes the pedestrian job even more iffy.

Slow traffic on roundabouts is a problem as well as it congests traffic from all roads leading to it. Roundabouts are build to get it and out as soon as possible, obviously within limits. This is a concept that most drivers do not understand.
Pedestrians crosses right before or after the roundabout are a real hazard. They just don't give time enough to the pedestrians to find the gap to cross to the other side. Traffic lights wouldn't help either as traffic will collapse on the roundabout itself. Pedestrias crossess should be a few meters far from the roundabout.

thebman

schemingbohemia wrote: »

I understood what you meant but there's no logic to it, you're complaining that people don't use public transport because it's city center(sic) centric yet the speed limit that people like you are complaining about is only in the city centre.

Take into account that public transport is crap and unreliable.

People drive because you'll lose your job if you depend on the bus. The buses clog up the city centre because they all go there. Dublin Bus will say the cars block the city centre making them late but its not entirely true either.

Anyway they shouldn't all be going everywhere via the city centre as not everyone wants to go into the city centre and back out to where they actually wanted to go.

Basically the whole Dublin City transport system is a joke as it stands. The speed limit is the ultimate kick in the face for people who want to use public transport to get to the city centre but find it too unreliable to do so by acting like the only reason they don't get out of their cars is because they are too lazy to walk to the bus stop.

HonalD

thebman wrote: »

Take into account that public transport is crap and unreliable.

Basically the whole Dublin City transport system is a joke as it stands. The speed limit is the ultimate kick in the face for people who want to use public transport to get to the city centre but find it too unreliable to do so by acting like the only reason they don't get out of their cars is because they are too lazy to walk to the bus stop.

Not sure you've made a strong enough case to back up your comments. I've been reading the thread and IMO a reduced speed limit in a city centre is to the benefit of all who use the city centre. Any impact on motorists going to their parking space is counter balanced by an improvement for the motorist walking from your parking space to your destination. Benefits to cyclists and pedestrians are obvious to all who have full sight and full senses. Can we move on now?

Zoney

fptosca wrote: »

Slow traffic on roundabouts is a problem as well as it congests traffic from all roads leading to it. Roundabouts are build to get it and out as soon as possible, obviously within limits. This is a concept that most drivers do not understand.

That is also a broken concept - as it cannot be reconciled with allowing pedestrians to cross at the exits (even a few meters up). It's a concept that is only useful on major road junctions in rural areas/national road network.

It's probably why some urban roundabouts in the UK are being replaced by traffic lights. You simply can't get the necessary traffic flow without jams, thus the best policy is to ration access to the junction (even it out or give priority to main routes) and allow pedestrians to cross.

schemingbohemia

wtf have roundabouts got to do with this? there isn't a single roundabout in the 30kph zone, this whole thread has gone totally off topic into a pedestrian/cyclist vs driver thread that should really be in the motors section.

i still haven't a clue what thebman is on about in relation to bus services and 30kph.

thebman

HonalD wrote: »

Not sure you've made a strong enough case to back up your comments. I've been reading the thread and IMO a reduced speed limit in a city centre is to the benefit of all who use the city centre. Any impact on motorists going to their parking space is counter balanced by an improvement for the motorist walking from your parking space to your destination. Benefits to cyclists and pedestrians are obvious to all who have full sight and full senses. Can we move on now?

Are you serious?

How do you know it benefits motorists in anyway going from their car park space to destination? I imagine most use already designated crossings.

This only benefits idiotic jaywalkers that thing they own the streets. Let them walk in front of cars and darwinism kicks in and saves us all from these fools with death wishes.

dynamick

Emme wrote: »

IMHO this new speed limit is lethal as well as ridiculous and I don't even drive regularly in the city centre. What do others think?

Research published in the British Medical Journal last year studied the effect of cutting speed limits from 30mph to 20mph in many areas of London over the past decade.

http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/339/dec10_3/b4469

The conclusion was clearly that introduction of 20mph zones greatly reduced casualties - particularly for children and for the more severe injuries.

I would tend to believe this study more than the feeling you got from cycling around town.

This is a classic political dilemma. The policy committee and the council that voted on this change was greatly influenced by this report. They voted for it because they believe that the change in limit will prevent many serious accidents from occurring in future. Yet they have to balance this belief against the impression that the general public wish to reverse this measure.

What is the right thing to do here? Allow more people to be injured and follow what seems to be the will of the people as expressed in the media? Or ignore the press and do something that may be for the greater good?

Stark

thebman wrote: »

I imagine most use already designated crossings.

Sure they do.

I imagine most people don't actually realise how many roads they cross every day without using a designated pedestrian crossing and waiting for the green man every single time.

concussion

Leaving aside the figures and stats of fatalaties at 30 vs 50 kph, a max speed of 30 kph allows for a much shorter stopping time. How many serious injuries will now be less serious. How many minor injuries will be avoided altogether as the driver will be able to stop in time? This isn't about reducing the small amount of deaths in the city centre, it's about safety overall.

DrumSteve

concussion wrote: »

Leaving aside the figures and stats of fatalaties at 30 vs 50 kph, a max speed of 30 kph allows for a much shorter stopping time. How many serious injuries will now be less serious. How many minor injuries will be avoided altogether as the driver will be able to stop in time? This isn't about reducing the small amount of deaths in the city centre, it's about safety overall.

if its about safety why dont we just bring it in everywhere there may be pedestrians? why not all urban centres i.e. blanchardstown,clondalkin or tallaght?

markpb

DrumSteve wrote: »

if its about safety why dont we just bring it in everywhere there may be pedestrians? why not all urban centres i.e. blanchardstown,clondalkin or tallaght?

Ignoring for a minute that at least two of those areas aren't in the DCC district so it would be up their local authority to make that change, urban areas alone don't necessarily have high pedestrian traffic.

concussion

DrumSteve wrote: »

if its about safety why dont we just bring it in everywhere there may be pedestrians? why not all urban centres i.e. blanchardstown,clondalkin or tallaght?

I think you're onto something here. I fully support the idea that areas of high pedestrian density should have a 30 kph limit.

DrumSteve

markpb wrote: »

Ignoring for a minute that at least two of those areas aren't in the DCC district so it would be up their local authority to make that change, urban areas alone don't necessarily have high pedestrian traffic.

is there really a need to be that pedantic? Why does it matter if they are not in DCC? Urban areas by their very nature would have high pedestrian traffic especially during school hours.

Zoney

thebman wrote: »

This only benefits idiotic jaywalkers that thing they own the streets. Let them walk in front of cars and darwinism kicks in and saves us all from these fools with death wishes.

You mean the general public here in Ireland?

thebman

Stark wrote: »

Sure they do.

I imagine most people don't actually realise how many roads they cross every day without using a designated pedestrian crossing and waiting for the green man every single time.

On busy roads, hell yeah I do especially in the City Centre.

Anyone that doesn't is just asking to get hit. If you put a perfectly reasonable system in place and people refuse to adhere to it, that person is responsible for their actions and must accept the consequences if they refuse to use the system.

In the case of crossing the roads the consequence of not ensuring it is safe to cross if you refuse to use the designated crossing area is getting hit by a car. The person won't use the system in place and is incapable of judging for themselves if it is safe to cross.

In the case of children they should be accompanied by an adult if in the city centre and its the adults responsibility to ensure the child doesn't wander onto the road.

I disagree with catering for instances where people refuse to adhere to the agreed system and insist that everyone else adjust because they refuse to and insist everyone else go slower in case it isn't safe for them to cross when they blindly walk across the road or ignore their child walking out onto the road in the middle of the centre of the capital city which is always going to be busy with something that could seriously injure a child. Its not a safe place for a child that isn't aware that walking in front of things might get them hurt.

Its not about safety really, the safety systems are in place. People aren't using them so this is really about protecting people from themselves and their responsibility or in other words, being a nanny state.

Also the speed limit isn't the minimum speed a car should be doing through a given area, it is the max speed. If it isn't safe to do the max speed then the driver should adjust their speed accordingly. If they aren't doing this, they should be stopped by the police.

We already have the systems in place to deal with people going at unsafe speeds and to get people across the road safely. This is just trying to cater for people that refuse to adhere to safety systems already in place.

We've already seen people reporting an increase in reckless behavior from pedestrians because they feel safer just walking out in front of traffic so we are just encouraging more people to not adhere to the systems by catering for the few that have originally refused to use them.

Its a never ending cycle of catering to the few to try to protect them from themselves or until the exception which was undesirable behavior becomes the norm.

Zoney wrote: »

You mean the general public here in Ireland?

Not really, if you know its safe to cross then go ahead. That is what the general public do. Its only a select few that lack the ability to tell if its safe or not to cross and still refuse to use designated crossing areas.

dynamick

20 mph zones in london since 1991



If it's worked there so well for nearly 20yrs then why not here?

Zoney

thebman wrote: »

Not really, if you know its safe to cross then go ahead. That is what the general public do. Its only a select few that lack the ability to tell if its safe or not to cross and still refuse to use designated crossing areas.

Well, I would disagree, and say that most people do not use designated crossing areas, and although for the most part people check before crossing, a lot of people take chances (and there are those who don't even check, or wear headphones, or talk on the phone, etc.)

As such I don't think an attitude of "ah sure just leave the jaywalkers to get run down" is particularly helpful.

And really, I don't in fact agree with restricting pedestrians use of the streets in city centres. We still are not up to scratch on pedestrianised areas etc. and in the interim the least we could do is make it safer for pedestrians to negotiate city centre traffic.

I say this as someone who does mostly use dedicated pedestrian crossings where they exist (and exclusively if in a not entirely familiar environment such as Dublin or Cork, or indeed abroad).

thebman

Zoney wrote: »

Well, I would disagree, and say that most people do not use designated crossing areas, and although for the most part people check before crossing, a lot of people take chances (and there are those who don't even check, or wear headphones, or talk on the phone, etc.)

As such I don't think an attitude of "ah sure just leave the jaywalkers to get run down" is particularly helpful.

And really, I don't in fact agree with restricting pedestrians use of the streets in city centres. We still are not up to scratch on pedestrianised areas etc. and in the interim the least we could do is make it safer for pedestrians to negotiate city centre traffic.

I say this as someone who does mostly use dedicated pedestrian crossings where they exist (and exclusively if in a not entirely familiar environment such as Dublin or Cork, or indeed abroad).

I don't have a problem with 20KPH zones in very localised areas of heavy pedestrian traffic. This seems to be an especially half arsed implementation of one TBH. It wasn't well thought out like most things Irish committee's seem to implement.

If they can't do it right they shouldn't do it at all. They need to find out what areas would benefit best from it. I don't think the quays should be at 20KPH except at the junction with O'Connell street. I don't think the rest of the quays warrants a 20KPH limit TBH.

I also think it should not apply at all times but only at peak pedestrian traffic times.

Stark

I would agree with your point about 30km/hr on the quays being excessive. I think the limit is justified on the other streets though. All of which are easily avoidable for someone driving through the city centre (I know, I pass through the city regularly and haven't had need to use a 30km/hr street).

I'm down in Cork regularly and I can't see how giving the likes of Patrick Street, Oliver Plunkett street, North main street etc. back to pedestrians has been a bad thing for anyone. The traffic is still able to get through the city centre without problems and it's generally pleasant for everyone.

Zoney

Those streets in Cork should also be 30 km/h. After all traffic doesn't usually go faster than that, and with so many pedestrians around, it would surely be safer. Even given the ample street space for pedestrians and all the crossings - it nevertheless doesn't seem sensible that someone can in theory legally drive at 50 km/h right beside packed crowds.

In Limerick it would also be the semi-pedestrianised areas that could do with a 30 km/h limit (again it would be a tall order and rather insensible to do more anyway at the moment, but you'd be legally allowed to). These are those parts of Catherine St. and Thomas Street that were done up, as well as the planned semi-pedestrianisation of William Street (always has shoppers crisscrossing, as despite the run-down buildings and low quality shops, it's one of the main streets and these days usually busier than the pedestrianised Cruises Street) and also O'Connell Street for about two blocks either side of William St. Probably Henry Street for two blocks near Dunnes as well.

Stark

Zoney wrote: »

Those streets in Cork should also be 30 km/h. After all traffic doesn't usually go faster than that, and with so many pedestrians around, it would surely be safer. Even given the ample street space for pedestrians and all the crossings - it nevertheless doesn't seem sensible that someone can in theory legally drive at 50 km/h right beside packed crowds.

Probably. But I think the whole system polices itself fairly well.

BostonB

One problem is we have a major transport route going through an area of major pedestrian traffic. The second theres little enforcement of dangerous behaviour/speeding of either pedestrians or vehicular traffic.

HonalD

thebman wrote: »

I don't have a problem with 20KPH zones in very localised areas of heavy pedestrian traffic. This seems to be an especially half arsed implementation of one TBH. It wasn't well thought out like most things Irish committee's seem to implement.

If they can't do it right they shouldn't do it at all. They need to find out what areas would benefit best from it. I don't think the quays should be at 20KPH except at the junction with O'Connell street. I don't think the rest of the quays warrants a 20KPH limit TBH.

I also think it should not apply at all times but only at peak pedestrian traffic times.

Let it go man, you obviously don't accept the safety argument so you're not for turning. The limit is here and should stay. If life was easy (including reducing speed limits) then someone else would do it.....chill out, relax and Slow Down! :cool:

parsi

Stark wrote: »

I would agree with your point about 30km/hr on the quays being excessive. I think the limit is justified on the other streets though. All of which are easily avoidable for someone driving through the city centre (I know, I pass through the city regularly and haven't had need to use a 30km/hr street).

I'm down in Cork regularly and I can't see how giving the likes of Patrick Street, Oliver Plunkett street, North main street etc. back to pedestrians has been a bad thing for anyone. The traffic is still able to get through the city centre without problems and it's generally pleasant for everyone.

Here in Cork it is a regular occurrence for drivers to sail through red lights - particular crunch points are at the Port of Cork office (Custom House), Easons , Mc Donalds and Dunnes (latter 2 are on St Patrick Street) - basic common denominator : they are pedestrian lights only (effectively in the case of Custom House).