A 30 KPH limit for Dublin

Pinch Flat

"neo-cyclists-fronts". Yep that's me. I was like you one time - I would spend 3 - 4 hours of my day in a car, stuck in a traffic jams and spending hours to travel the 15kms to and from work. Got back in the car in the evening and did it all over again. Five days a week. I literally had no time to myself. Cycling has relieved me of all that stress - guaranteed travel times from A to B, no parking worries and with very little outlay. I do drive as well, as do most cyclists. Just more efficient to spend 30 minutes cycling to work rather than hours in a car.

cnocbui

cnocbui wrote: »

Do you think the ambulance and fire services would agree with you, along with delivery drivers, couriers and others who are on the road as their job? I couldn't disagree with you more.

With an average rush hour speeds of less than 20kmh I don't think it is going to make much of a difference tbf

85603

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

You'll be shocked to hear that thousands of people cycle to work in Dublin every day, and the current strategy for most progressive cities is to reduce private car access to city centres, so get used to it, the hard pressed motorist is going to get even harder presseder.

Yep, we all have to compromise.

And that'll go for the eternally blameless underdog cyclist too. The act is wearing thin. Cyclists are just another lobby in it for themselves.

There are places that cyclists (and horses and escooters) just shouldnt be, for their own good and everyone elses too. Once we can get past the weeping cyclist narrative we can get down to some planning.

cnocbui

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Good article here on Traffic Calming Measures and Low Traffic Neighbourhoods in London, and how they haven't affected emergency services at all really

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2021/apr/23/opponents-of-ltns-claim-they-delay-emergency-services-but-look-at-the-facts

Utterly risible. Basically, the single study I like is the only credible one, the one that doesn't suit my agenda ( Road transport Bike blog) is bad.

Newly-released data shows The London Fire Brigade was delayed to call outs more than 330 times a month between June and November 2020 – up 18 per cent from the previous year – due to new traffic calming measures in the Capital.

In the boroughs that had introduced low-traffic zones last year, those delays soared by a third, or 35 per cent.

But frontline emergency workers claim senior figures are ‘ignoring’ the issue because they are coming under increasing pressure to support the schemes which are being pushed by the Mayor of London.

One serving officer at the LFB told The Times: ‘The bosses are controlled by Sadiq Khan and don’t want to upset him as he controls the budget.’

https://broread.com/2021/03/29/traffic-calming-measures-trigger-spike-in-fire-service-delays/

Doesn't sound like the boots on the ground who actually deliver the service are too happy with traffic calming, but they don't matter, because some academic, who I suspect is a keen cyclist and is definitely an advocate, given more than half her publications seem to be related to cycling, says the EMS responders should be ignored, because she's looked at some numbers, and they are what's important. I'd go so far to say she's a tainted source, given her having to put in a disclaimer about writing a pro cycling 'study' of anti car measures in an area where she actually lives. Others thought her biased as well and published a report criticising her 'study'

And it's not just the fire service who are critical. The chairman of the London Ambulance service clearly states that a significant number of people die because of traffic calming measures:

The Chairman of the London Ambulance Service, Sigurd Reinton, recently claimed that speed humps are killing hundreds of Londoners by delaying 999 crews. He said “For every life saved through traffic calming, more are lost because of ambulance delays.”

There are about 8,000 heart attack victims in London every year, and London has a particularly poor survival rate. One reason is no doubt because even a small delay increases the death rate enormously. For example 90% of victims survive if treated within 2 minutes, but it falls to 10% if treatment is delayed for 6 minutes. So for every additional minute of delay caused, up to an extra 800 victims of cardiac arrest could die. This compares with a total of 300 people who die from traffic accidents.

Research in the USA supports these claims. One report from Boulder, Colorado suggests that for every life saved by traffic calming, as many as 85 people may die because emergency vehicles are delayed. It found response times are typically extended by 14% by speed-reduction measures.

https://lawactually.blogspot.com/2009/04/when-speed-humps-can-kill.html

Thelonious Monk

I would imagine what delays emergency services the most are other cars. Apparently over half of all car journeys in Ireland are under 2k, if we could encourage these people out of cars our streets would be a lot quieter.

Thelonious Monk

85603 wrote: »

Yep, we all have to compromise.

And that'll go for the eternally blameless underdog cyclist too. The act is wearing thin. Cyclists are just another lobby in it for themselves.

There are places that cyclists (and horses and escooters) just shouldnt be, for their own good and everyone elses too. Once we can get past the weeping cyclist narrative we can get down to some planning.

Well cyclists are blameless as they don't cause congestion or pollution or accidents.
Thankfully councils are realising this and starting to roll out some infrastructure, albeit slowly and not ambitious enough.

Heraclius

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

I would imagine what delays emergency services the most are other cars. Apparently over half of all car journeys in Ireland are under 2k, if we could encourage these people out of cars our streets would be a lot quieter.

He is unlikely to change his mind I suspect.

Thelonious Monk

Heraclius wrote: »

He is unlikely to change his mind I suspect.

I know, it's pointless. There are just way too many cars on our roads and we need to stop designing society around them, it has been an absolute disaster.

Heraclius

It would benefit every essential service and deliveries if more private motorists were cycling, walking or using public transport.

Heraclius

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

I know, it's pointless. There are just way too many cars on our roads and we need to stop designing society around them, it has been an absolute disaster.

It will be very difficult to change the culture here unfortunately. I hope over the coming decade there will be growing acceptance of the need to focus on cycling, in walking and public transport.

I'm not sure the 30kph speed limit is necessary currently myself. I'd prefer tight enforcement of existing limits rather than introducing a new one that probably won't be enforced.

Dick Turnip

cnocbui wrote: »

And it's not just the fire service who are critical. The chairman of the London Ambulance service clearly states that a significant number of people die because of traffic calming measures:

A significantly higher number of people die because of traffic.

I'm not dismissing those reports but would need further study obviously.

Are the services delayed in some cases, because roads they would have used other wise are not closed? Or because there's more traffic on the major roads they're using? If it's the latter it could equally be argued that it's the traffic on the roads delaying them, not the LTNs in of themselves?

If an ambulance was called in Dublin city centre today would you say it was delayed because it had to follow some one way routes around Wicklow/Exchequer/Grafton St for example? Or is that just accepted as that's the way the roads & streets are setup there and have been for years?

Thelonious Monk

If you look at the Dublin Fire Brigade Twitter, you regularly see them calling out obnoxious motorists for obnoxious parking that blocks them from getting down various streets. I've never seen them tweet about speed bumps or one way streets hindering their cause.

85603

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Well cyclists are blameless as they don't cause congestion or pollution or accidents.
Thankfully councils are realising this and starting to roll out some infrastructure, albeit slowly and not ambitious enough.

Really?

Like the mamil poncing around busy roads to an industrial estate in the morning, causing a hold up becauss he wants to play out his little sport fantasy in the road.
Sure hes not breaking any law, but that doesnt mean hes not guilty of being a drag on society.

Why exactly are cyclists getting a pass in this society of so many regulations. Some of their activities are inherently risky. It may only be time before the health and safety culture turns its eye to these vulnerable road users.

Thelonious Monk

85603 wrote: »

Really?

Like the mamil poncing around busy roads to an industrial estate in the morning, causing a hold up becauss he wants to play out his little sport fantasy in the road.
Sure hes not breaking any law, but that doesnt mean hes not guilty of being a drag on society.

Why exactly are cyclists getting a pass in this society of so many regulations. Some of their activities are inherently risky. It may only be time before the health and safety culture turns its eye to these vulnerable road users.

you're just an odd person who hates people that use bikes, there's no logic in any of the nonsense you're coming out with

Marcos

One serving officer at the LFB claimed ‘bosses are controlled by Sadiq Khan (pictured) and don’t want to upset him as he controls the budget’

Does the DFB have it's budget controlled by Owen Keegan? Are similar traffic calming measures here having similar effects on response times?

Some of these examples below would be worrying and definitely a case of unintended consequences.

In just 48 hours last week, a blue-lit fire engine was halted, a police car’s driver was forced to turn around and an ambulance had to weave between traffic after congestion built up on Chiswick High Road in west London.

Video footage taken from a flat overlooking the busy road, which features Cycleway 9, showed the emergency services struggling to get past slow-moving cars and buses in three separate incidents on Friday and Saturday.

The first clip, dated March 25 and timestamped at 2.48pm, showed a fire engine attempting to rush through traffic.

It was halted when drivers couldn’t move their cars out of its way because of black and white bollards marking out the cycleway.

In the second clip, filmed at 4.38pm, a police officer was forced to make the decision to turn around after their car became wedged between two red buses.

And on Friday at 3.09pm an ambulance was filmed weaving across both sides of the road in a desperate bid to make it through traffic.

It comes months after footage emerged of a fire engine becoming stuck in a road block, put in place to create a ‘Covid friendly’ cycle lanes.

The video showed the blue-lit emergency vehicle wedged between a wooden planter and a parked white car in Ferndale, south London.

As firefighters ditched the vehicle and made the short walk to the nearby incident, one angry resident could be heard raging against the scheme, saying: ‘You are trying to say this is good for us?’

Dick Turnip

85603 wrote: »

Really?

Like the mamil poncing around busy roads to an industrial estate in the morning, causing a hold up becauss he wants to play out his little sport fantasy in the road.
Sure hes not breaking any law, but that doesnt mean hes not guilty of being a drag on society.

Why exactly are cyclists getting a pass in this society of so many regulations. Some of their activities are inherently risky. It may only be time before the health and safety culture turns its eye to these vulnerable road users.

In fairness you're a thinly disguised troll. Much like when phrases like libtard, snowflake or godwin's law are used in general debate, once you see mamil used in a cycling thread you know what you're dealing with.

But just to tease out the fallacy that if someone is wearing lycra or cycling gear they are playing out a "little sport fantasy", did you ever think it might be just because that type of clothing has proven to be the most suitable for a cycle of medium to long distance? Jeans won't keep you warm or dry on a wet winter's day for example.

If someone wears speedos to the pool are they living out a little sport fantasy too?

Dick Turnip

Marcos wrote: »

Does the DFB have it's budget controlled by Owen Keegan? Are similar traffic calming measures here having similar effects on response times?

Some of these examples below would be worrying and definitely a case of unintended consequences.

It comes months after footage emerged of a fire engine becoming stuck in a road block, put in place to create a ‘Covid friendly’ cycle lanes.

The video showed the blue-lit emergency vehicle wedged between a wooden planter and a parked white car in Ferndale, south London.

As firefighters ditched the vehicle and made the short walk to the nearby incident, one angry resident could be heard raging against the scheme, saying: ‘You are trying to say this is good for us?’

In this case - why is it seen that the cause of the delay is the cycle lane and not the parked white car?

Cilldara_2000

Hmmm, one article from teh Guardian saying these things aren't causing problems, another quoting from the Daily Mail but the poster didn't feel that linking to the article was necessary, saying that there's been a few isolated incidents without fully setting out the context.

I'm in a right quandary trying to figure out which one is more credible.

Dick Turnip

85603 wrote: »

Some of their activities are inherently risky. It may only be time before the health and safety culture turns its eye to these vulnerable road users.

So you do agree with more segregated paths

cnocbui

Dick Turnip wrote: »

A significantly higher number of people die because of traffic.

I'm not dismissing those reports but would need further study obviously.

Are the services delayed in some cases, because roads they would have used other wise are not closed? Or because there's more traffic on the major roads they're using? If it's the latter it could equally be argued that it's the traffic on the roads delaying them, not the LTNs in of themselves?

If an ambulance was called in Dublin city centre today would you say it was delayed because it had to follow some one way routes around Wicklow/Exchequer/Grafton St for example? Or is that just accepted as that's the way the roads & streets are setup there and have been for years?

You missed this bit, clearly:

an extra 800 victims of cardiac arrest could die. This compares with a total of 300 people who die from traffic accidents.

The more you slow traffic - such as with a blanket 30 kph limit - the more traffic you end up with on the network, because you reduce the system throughput.

Larbre34

ronoc wrote: »

With an average rush hour speeds of less than 20kmh I don't think it is going to make much of a difference tbf

Who said anything about rush hour?

This proposal would have meant enforcement against motorists exceeding 30 kph (18mph) on main roads, key economic and arterial routes, in and around the City at all hours of the day and night. It would never have gained public support and if it had, by some miracle, been introduced, the backlash would have been massive, probably from District Court judges just as much as ordinary motorists.

Its great to hear sense has prevailed and this has been aborted before any more time and money is wasted on it.

Cilldara_2000

cnocbui wrote: »

You missed this bit, clearly:



The more you slow traffic - such as with a blanket 30 kph limit - the more traffic you end up with on the network, because you reduce the system throughput.

This ambulance guy made these comments 18 years ago: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/2700013.stm

They may or may not be relevant to the current measures these articles refer to.

Chips Lovell

85603 wrote: »

Today the roads are built entirely for moving people and heavy goods, quickly, over long distances. Theyre built for motorists.
Everyone else is an 'also ran'.

While your opinion may be interesting to yourself, it doesn't trump the law and public policy which is that roads are a shared space.

frozenfrozen

What happened to this being about child safety? Almost as if that was just to try sway opinion while its actually just pro cyclist

85603

Chips Lovell wrote: »

While your opinion may be interesting to yourself, it doesn't trump the law and public policy which is that roads are a shared space.

Thank you for the update.

Dick Turnip

cnocbui wrote: »

You missed this bit, clearly:



The more you slow traffic - such as with a blanket 30 kph limit - the more traffic you end up with on the network, because you reduce the system throughput.

I didn't, your assumption is that all other parameters stay the same.

The aim should be to reduce the number of vehicles on the road, not to just slow the same number of vehicles down.

You get people out of cars by making the alternatives more appealing - making public transport more viable & reliable, and making cycling & walking safer.

Unfortunately, something has to give in this regard and that means some space needs to be dedicated to Buses, bikes & in some cases wider paths for pedestrians.

Again, I'm not overly bothered by the 30kph limit. I do believe there needs to be so much more done with regards to more cycle paths, more LTNs to cut off rat runs and more pedestrianisation of streets in city centre.

Dick Turnip

frozenfrozen wrote: »

What happened to this being about child safety? Almost as if that was just to try sway opinion while its actually just pro cyclist

Child safety is one strand of it - what makes you think people aren't saying it is?

85603

Dick Turnip wrote: »

So you do agree with more segregated paths

I agree with keeping cyclists, joggers, horses, well away from motorists.
Even if on rare occassions the building of such infrastructure infringes on infrastructure used by motorists.

I think certain areas, such as the roads leading to high traffic industrial areas, areas with high hgv traffic, should be off limits to cyclists and other non-conventional vehicle users.

Seth Brundle

85603 wrote: »

I think certain areas, such as the roads leading to high traffic industrial areas, areas with high hgv traffic, should be off limits to cyclists and other non-conventional vehicle users.

What about people who commute to work - are they not allowed to commute into these estates now?
That's a pretty stupid idea in fairness. Surely the drivers should exercise more care when they know there will be vulnerable road user about

85603

Seth Brundle wrote: »

What about people who commute to work - are they not allowed to commute into these estates now?
That's a pretty stupid idea in fairness. Surely the drivers should exercise more care when they know there will be vulnerable road user about

What about the increased risk of fatal accidents involving these non-motorists, surely that must take precedence.
Cycling in areas with consistent hgv traffic is very foolish.