Dublin @30km

Roadhawk

Deedsie wrote: »

I am so appreciative of someone from the pro motoring POV putting in that word you have no idea. Thank you for not painting every single cyclist with the same brush. This is genuinely great to see.

Id have said majority

Hilly Bill

Deedsie wrote: »

No just that attitude in general, I got done. You get done cause you were driving to fast in an urban area. Take responsibility for your own actions and stop blaming others.,

Who did i blame? and i wasn't going fast :-)

Hilly Bill

Deedsie wrote: »

I am so appreciative of someone from the pro motoring POV putting in that word you have no idea. Thank you for not painting every single cyclist with the same brush. This is genuinely great to see.

Where you going with your pro motoring pov lark?

Hilly Bill

Deedsie wrote: »

While I like driving, I think I'd be on the pro pedestrian, public transport and cyclist side when it comes to commuting in Dublin.

I wasn't aware that we had to take sides regarding the mode of transport we prefer on a thread that's discussing a speed limit.

beauf

I dunno why people keep banging on about average speed or when its gridlock. Completely irrelevant.

Where there is no gridlock I've seen no reduction in car speeds myself. A speed camera is a rare sight in my opinion. Without enforcement, making up new rules is pointless.

Hilly Bill

It's not a lower limit that will change anything but a bit of education for those that don't care about other road users. Improving the cop on of people will help save lives instead of being forced to crawl outside rush hour as if it's our first time in a car.

beauf

People would drive over you, just to move 10m in grid lock. They are beyond cop on.

Hilly Bill

The only way to stop people breaking the limit is to have no limit. ;-)

beauf

That would be an Irish solution certainly.

Fighting Tao

Many people don't want to learn regardless of how much education they get.

PhilipsR

So the likes of Collins Avenue, Griffith Avenue and Tonlegee Road are going to be 30 km/h?

I can understand in proper built up residential areas, but Griffith Avenue and Collins Avenue are very wide and open. It's ridiculous to put a 30km/h zone there.

Bus journeys are going to get even slower if this proposal gets passed.

Roadhawk

PhilipsR wrote: »

So the likes of Collins Avenue, Griffith Avenue and Tonlegee Road are going to be 30 km/h?

I can understand in proper built up residential areas, but Griffith Avenue and Collins Avenue are very wide and open. It's ridiculous to put a 30km/h zone there.

It makes sense to have a 30km limit around schools, shopping centers and in residential estates but nowhere else.

PhilipsR wrote: »

Bus journeys are going to get even slower if this proposal gets passed.

I think its passed proposal stage and being expanded form March 2017. Its being done in phases. Buses will surely get slower and taxis more expensive

Roadhawk

Look on the bright side...at 30km you wont have to slow down for corners

PhilipsR

Apologies, didn't mean passed but actually adopted.

monument

PhilipsR wrote: »

So the likes of Collins Avenue, Griffith Avenue and Tonlegee Road are going to be 30 km/h?

I can understand in proper built up residential areas, but Griffith Avenue and Collins Avenue are very wide and open. It's ridiculous to put a 30km/h zone there.

Bus journeys are going to get even slower if this proposal gets passed.

All of those roads will remain at 50km/h.

monument

Roadhawk wrote: »

Look on the bright side...at 30km you wont have to slow down for corners

Roadhawk wrote: »

It makes sense to have a 30km limit around schools, shopping centers and in residential estates but nowhere else.



I think its passed proposal stage and being expanded form March 2017. Its being done in phases. Buses will surely get slower and taxis more expensive

Implying those roads listed by the other poster are included under the 30km/h plan is clear-cut trolling. Drop the trolling generally or you won't be welcome here.

-- moderator

magicbastarder

probably belongs in a different thread, but there is a little bit of overlap between making residential streets less desirable for motorists looking to pass as through traffic, and this phenomenon:
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/opinion-la/la-ol-waze-traffic-app-neighborhoods-readers-20150506-story.html

is there anything like waze in ireland? i.e. a realtime traffic monitoring app which suggests lesser known alternative routes?

plodder

PhilipsR wrote: »

So the likes of Collins Avenue, Griffith Avenue and Tonlegee Road are going to be 30 km/h?

I can understand in proper built up residential areas, but Griffith Avenue and Collins Avenue are very wide and open. It's ridiculous to put a 30km/h zone there.

Bus journeys are going to get even slower if this proposal gets passed.

Collins ave and Griffith ave are not included in it*. It's limited to residential streets, except for the city centre.

http://www.dublincity.ie/sites/default/files/content/RoadsandTraffic/Documents/Appendix%20E%20-%20rt3369_10%20-%2030KP%20Speed%20Limit%20Review-01.06.2016.pdf

* Neither is Tonlegee rd. or any of the main rds around there.

[edit] Pointed out already, but maybe map will be useful. You may have to squint to make out the colour differences though ...

markpb

magicbastarder wrote:

is there anything like waze in ireland? i.e. a realtime traffic monitoring app which suggests lesser known alternative routes?

Yes, it's called Google Maps and (Google) Waze. The later doesn't really have enough users in Ireland to provide useful data. The former tends not to route people off main roads in my experience.

Buffman

So, as part of the Road Traffic Bill 2016, 20km/h will soon be a legal speed limit available to councils.

The bill also creates a new option for local authorities to impose a special speed limit of 20km/h in built-up areas. This will be in addition to the existing possible speed limits for built-up areas of 50km/h, 40km/h and 30km/h.

So, what's next? 10, 5, 1, a person with red warning flag and bell walking in front of the vehicle?:rolleyes:

beauf

Does it matter if every one ignores it and it's not enforced.

Going Forward

I've just heard the idiot Shane Ross on RTE1 positioning this urban speed limit reduction in respect of the increase in road traffic fatalities.

Buffman

Deedsie wrote: »

For resedential estates should people be travelling faster than 20km/h anyway?

I think 30km/h was acceptable. I had a quick trail of 20 on my way home, I found it awkwardly slow and hard to maintain without looking at the speedometer constantly.

30 is my normal 'estate' speed and I think it was OK to be honest. If I see any possible danger, I adjust my speed accordingly. I'd be worried that an extremely low limit like 20km/h (12 mph) would have drivers concentrating on the speedometer and not on the road.

Maybe in the future technology can help with Head Up Display or audible speedometers, self-drive, cruise control etc. The cruise control in my current car only works above 35km/h so not much use for ultra-low speed limits.

John_Rambo

The Pheasant2 wrote: »

Nanny statery at its worst - Dublin already has safe roads relative to other EU capitals...just a box ticking exercise for Dublin city council; news laws just for the sake of it.

Most of whom are following suit and implementing 30kph city centre limits.

I was against it at first, but now that I see it working, it's a no brainer.

SeanW

Fighting Tao wrote: »

Why do you think it's stupid? Do peoples lives not matter to you?

Ok, whose lives is this limit saving? Some of the existing 30kph limits, like this one, make one wonder on what planet 30kph limits make sense.

Fighting Tao wrote: »

It has already made them a safer place for pedestrians crossing at the bridges as it just takes one car to drive within the law to prevent others breaking it and possibly endangering others lives. Now to do something about the red light jumpers and amber gamblers. Maybe cameras could be installed too at the busier crossings.

The majority of red light jumpers in Dublin are not motorists. The vast majority. And lower traffic speeds have the sole effect of encouraging non-motorist road users to behave like muppets. I see it every day.

Fighting Tao wrote: »

Well it's quite simple. The faster a car hits a pedestrian the more likely they will be seriously injured or die.

How does this affect pedestrians that don't exist?

Fighting Tao wrote: »

If you round like a normal person it's 19mph. Only a bad driver can't drive at that speed. Keep up the practice. You should improve. I can drive in 4th gear in my car at that speed. No problem at all.

If the limit is idiotic and totally unrelated to the conditions of the road in question, as per the 30kph speed limit I posted above, if you try to obey it you are going to be spending all your time watching your speedometer.

And your car must be a POS if you can drive at 18.6 miles per hour in 4th gear.

I seriously can't understand people's need to go as fast as possible all th time. Relax!

As fast as is safe, considering the prevailing conditions. Very often is unrelated to the speed limits, and it seems to be getting worse.

CramCycle wrote: »

A far better improvement to public safety would be red light cameras and average speed cameras but I really can't see the negatives unless there is no attempt at random location enforcement.

Red light cameras, under current regulations, will only catch a small minority of red light jumpers. The vast majority of them would not be affected.

seamus wrote: »

I can't believe this, "it's hard to drive slowly", "people will be watching the speedometer and not the road" nonsense is still flying around.

Argue about whether it's enforced, by all means. There have been 30km/h limits in Dublin City centre for a number of years now, I think we've put to bed any arguments about whether it's physically possible to drive that slowly, or safer to do so.

Try driving on the N3 past the M50 going into the City. 30kph on a grade separated dual carriageway with excellent visibility.

Dravokivich wrote: »

I don't think you honestly don't know why they have a 30 speed limit by those M50 junctions. Every idiot in a truck that exceeds it, turns over.

I've seen the moronic rationale explained once or twice. Coming from Cavan/Blanch/wherever going into the City, the road forks crossing the M50, with one part continuing across the M50 to become the R147, while another makes a sharp turn to join the M50 going Southbound. Its true that a lorry might tip over if it tries to take the the M50S entrance at speed. However, the 30 kph limit applies to both forks, including the road "straight through" and it applies not just to lorries but also to private passenger cars. So you approach this, say, at 9PM at night or later when traffic is extremely light, and are going straight through, and rightly wonder why that 30kph limit is there.

To say the least, it would be very difficult to obey if you tried to adhere to it strictly.

CramCycle

SeanW wrote: »

Red light cameras, under current regulations, will only catch a small minority of red light jumpers. The vast majority of them would not be affected.

I would expect them to change legislation, I didn't think they would just put them up for the craic. If the legislation was there, it would catch all of them at lights where the cameras were in place.

On a side note, coming into Enniskerry this morning and there was a queue heading in at 20kmph. There was a tractor/JCB on the road. To be fair he pulled in at one point but the car behind him didn't take the opportunity so he pulled back out. The point was, that there was a queue of maybe 20 cars, all holding 20kmph without issue, from sh1tboxes upto some new Mercs. No one got angry, everyone settled in. We all got where we were going. Point being, if anyone else says it is difficult to drive at 30kmph, I am calling shenanigans or calling them out on poor driving skill.

Dravokivich

SeanW wrote: »

Ok, whose lives is this limit saving? Some of the existing 30kph limits, like this one, make one wonder on what planet 30kph limits make sense.

If the limit is idiotic and totally unrelated to the conditions of the road in question, as per the 30kph speed limit I posted above, if you try to obey it you are going to be spending all your time watching your speedometer.

The speed limit is to take into consideration the use of that road by all vehicles. Scroll on up further through the road and you'll see a section that has an incline, followed by sharp decline with a turn that goes from right, into itself and left.

magicbastarder

SeanW wrote: »

The majority of red light jumpers in Dublin are not motorists. The vast majority.

i'm convinced motorists don't realise how much RLJing or amber gambling is done by motorists. cyclists (who i presume you're referring to as the 'vast majority') see it far more - because they're usually up the front of the queue, and can see the lights as crossing cars break them.

on one junction near me, on one full cycle of the lights, i counted i think twelve cars breaking either a clear amber they'd have had no trouble stopping at, or driving clear through a red.

_Kaiser_

All this talk of how traffic rarely gets about 30 anyway so why NOT have 30 km/h limits is just more half-truths to push this nonsensical idea.

At certain times of the day (rush hour) it may be the case that on certain roads, traffic is at a crawl - however outside of these times and particularly congested sections, there's no issue doing 30, 50 or more if the limits/conditions permit.

The only other justification given seems to be about how it'll be safer for pedestrians/cyclists.. to do what exactly? Walk/cycle out in front of traffic even more than they do now? I really don't understand why we have to pander to a minority of people who have no cop on or even sense of self-preservation - "walking out in front of traffic = bad.. cross at lights instead" or "Wandering across the road buried in my phone/music = bad. Look around and be aware instead" - but then that seems to be the norm nowadays.. rather than take ANY sort of personal responsibility, let's shift the focus to "someone else" instead.

What was needed is variable speed limits that can be adjusted subject to those ACTUAL traffic conditions rather than this blanket 24/7 30 km/h notion. But that'd involve actual effort and foresight. Far better to slap up a load of 30 km/h signs and point to what we did! :rolleyes:

magicbastarder

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

The only other justification given seems to be about how it'll be safer for pedestrians/cyclists.. to do what exactly? Walk/cycle out in front of traffic even more than they do now? I really don't understand why we have to pander to a minority of people who have no cop on or even sense of self-preservation

is this the level of debate we have? that accidents are not caused by motorists, but by pedestrians and cyclists?