A 30 KPH limit for Dublin

Thelonious Monk

Dravokivich wrote: »

Then why stop at 30? why not go lower? If we are to protect them. Are some people too sensitive to be told how to use the road correctly?

Well yes why stop at 30, we should be aiming at having less and less cars on the road, then speed limits wouldn't be an issue, especially in areas where there are lots of cyclists and pedestrians.

punisher5112

Let me clarify in the comments I made, as a bus driver we have a particular set of skills.... This is reading the road ahead, beside and behind....

In near 80% of the time we know when the person is going to step out, run out or can see the cyclist will change direction before they even decided to.


What's happening more over this unforseen pandemic is the amount now that don't look and give no pre warning they are going to do stupid things.


And for the stupid comments made towards me, yes of course I can see the kids and know they are wobbly and could swerve so won't pass until I can give much more room then usual if that makes sense to you.


It's serious out there and one thing I've noticed with the 30km/h speed limits is more pedestrian and cyclists take bigger risks and will just walk out or cycle across in front.

Dravokivich

Stark wrote: »

This whole thread was started by someone being oversensitive about being told how to use the road correctly.

Well their problem is of their own making really. I can see where some areas will justify the limit. And ideologically have no issues with it. But I can't agree to just pushing the narrative that a driver has the ultimate duty of care. And if the purpose of this is to protect pedestrians, what's being done for me when I'm a pedestrian?

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Well yes why stop at 30, we should be aiming at having less and less cars on the road, then speed limits wouldn't be an issue, especially in areas where there are lots of cyclists and pedestrians.

I don't agree with that either. Cars for the most part seem to be the viable option, take away the viable option and you are limiting people. Take away on street parking. Use the extra space for Public transport, cycleways, footpaths.

Dravokivich

punisher5112 wrote: »

It's serious out there and one thing I've noticed with the 30km/h speed limits is more pedestrian and cyclists take bigger risks and will just walk out or cycle across in front.

And I'm pretty sure I haven't gone to the same pub as this guy!

magicbastarder

punisher5112 wrote: »

In near 80% of the time we ... can see the cyclist will change direction before they even decided to.

you're in the wrong job, you should be a professional lotto player.

Dravokivich

magicbastarder wrote: »

you're in the wrong job, you should be a professional lotto player.

Well if his game is reading people, surely it'll be poker?

magicbastarder

to be fair, you do get a sixth sense - be it driving or cycling - about the behaviour of other drivers, cyclists, or peds. more a 'i'll keep a close eye on this one' though.

Stark

Dravokivich wrote: »

Well their problem is of their own making really. I can see where some areas will justify the limit. And ideologically have no issues with it. But I can't agree to just pushing the narrative that a driver has the ultimate duty of care. And if the purpose of this is to protect pedestrians, what's being done for me when I'm a pedestrian?

Are pedestrians who also drive a special class of pedestrian or something? You get the ability to step out on the road to give more space to other pedestrians on crowded narrow footpaths without getting mowed down. Ideally the footpaths should be widened to give space to pedestrians, but making the road safer is a good interim step.

Hurrache

Dravokivich wrote: »

Their behaviour has changed in because they think it's safer in those environments

But it is.

Dravokivich

Stark wrote: »

Are pedestrians who also drive a special class of pedestrian or something? You get the ability to step out on the road to give more space to other pedestrians on crowded narrow footpaths without getting mowed down. Ideally the footpaths should be widened to give space to pedestrians, but making the road safer is a good interim step.

The thing I wanted to get across is we are all pedestrians. But no activities seem to be in place for pedestrians. It's all focused on drivers. The cheapest and easiest thing to do is change the sign from 50 to 30. Paint 30 on a few spots on the road.

No review of pedestrian crossings and timings on any that have traffic lights for them. No surveying of where people typically step out to assess if a crossing is better suited there.

Too much work.

Hurrache wrote: »

But it is.

Only a fool would ever think a road is safe enough to step onto without looking.

magicbastarder

Dravokivich wrote: »

No review of pedestrian crossings and timings on any that have traffic lights for them. No surveying of where people typically step out to assess if a crossing is better suited there.

i have an email from DCC stating that they don't use zebra crossings much because they're poorly defined in irish law. IIRC, a pedestrian does not have right of way on them until they actually put a foot on it; which is pointless as it's supposed to present a pedestrian priority crossing, but you're expecting the ped to put a foot out onto a road where there's aleady approaching traffic (which is probematic), or wait until the road is clear (and this second option renders the crossing pointless)

Dravokivich

magicbastarder wrote: »

i have an email from DCC stating that they don't use zebra crossings much because they're poorly defined in irish law. IIRC, a pedestrian does not have right of way on them until they actually put a foot on it; which is pointless as it's supposed to present a pedestrian priority crossing, but you're expecting the ped to put a foot out onto a road where there's aleady approaching traffic (which is probematic), or wait until the road is clear (and this second option renders the crossing pointless)

I'm not too sure what would be poorly defined there. Did they go into it at all? What might catch some people out is when a road is split by a median or an island, each section is a separate road. So this becomes more of an education matter.

But regarding zebra crossings. There's a pedestrian crossing of the top of my head on Parnell St (across from cineworld) with lights for vehicles, but not for the pedestrians. If they won't do zebra crossings becuase they are afraid people don't know how to use them and it'll be difficult to defend themselves, how do they wind up with the Parnell St scenario? I wouldn't be surprised if people familiar with other sections of the city have seen something similar.

magicbastarder

andrew montague raised the question on my behalf, here is the response. as you can see, it was four years ago, i'm not aware whether any laws have changed since, but i doubt it:

Question to the Chief Executive
Council Meeting 04th JULY 2016
Q.85 COUNCILLOR ANDREW MONTAGUE
Can the Chief Executive install a zebra crossing at Castlemarket at the junction with South William Street?

CHIEF EXECUTIVE’S REPLY:
Dublin City Council does not recommend Zebra crossings as they may provide a false sense of safety for pedestrians. In Ireland, a pedestrian does not have the right-of-way until they have already stepped onto a Zebra crossing. For this reason Dublin City Council’s preferred option is for crossings where the onus is unambiguously on the driver to stop.

The location is listed for examination and report by the Traffic Advisory Group. The Councillor will be informed of the recommendation in due course.

Seth Brundle

Dravokivich wrote: »

Its what I see when driving. The lower speed limit sections in the city have more people coming out onto the roads without looking. The sections with 50kph, people generally always look before they step onto the road. Their behaviour has changed in because they think it's safer in those environments. We've encouraged carelessness by proxy.

ehm... why did you ask about conversations overheard in a pub?

oh so now it's something you've seen because a short while ago you referred to it as being something "we've told people"...

Dravokivich wrote: »

It's not something that happens and is more likely to with lower speed limits becuase we've told people they dont have to be responsible when walking about.

So I was correct in asking you where you have heard someone being told that they don't need to be responsible when out walking.
In summary, you were talking crap!

Dravokivich

magicbastarder wrote: »

andrew montague raised the question on my behalf, here is the response. as you can see, it was four years ago, i'm not aware whether any laws have changed since, but i doubt it:

where the onus is unambiguously on the driver to stop.

The crossing I mentioned has always been the way it is. It's installation pre-dates that question. And nothing has been done to align it to the councils position referenced in the answer. It's also in one of the original 30kph zones. Shows all they are doing is slowing drivers, but not working to improve facilities for pedestrians.

Seth Brundle wrote: »

oh so now it's something you've seen because a short while ago you referred to it as being something "we've told people"...

So I was correct in asking you where you have heard someone being told that they don't need to be responsible when out walking.
In summary, you were talking crap!

I'm not talking crap. There's been someone else who's posting here saying the same thing. Try reading my other posts in this thread. If pedestrian safety is the concern. What are they doing to aid pedestrians?

Seth Brundle

Dravokivich wrote: »

I'm not talking crap. There's been someone else who's posting here saying the same thing. Try reading my other posts in this thread.

Nobody has ever told pedestrians that "they dont have to be responsible when walking about" so you were posting nonsense.

Dravokivich wrote: »

If pedestrian safety is the concern. What are they doing to aid pedestrians?

I'm not sure if it's solely for pedestrian safety but for all road users.
However, in the city centre they're making more space for pedestrians and at the same time they are rolling out more segregated cycle lanes...
https://twitter.com/DubCityCouncil/status/1268476293869420545

Seth Brundle

Just as an FYI (and I guess a knowing wind up of some), some SDCC councillors are also considering reviewing speed limits following the DCC Transport Ctte's review...

https://twitter.com/cllrbarrysaul/status/1268221194664382465

Hurrache

Dravokivich wrote: »

What are they doing to aid pedestrians?

They gave pedestrians more road space in some areas, putting down wands to distinguish the space from the road. Those wands were subsequently driven over by vans, trucks, or just parked between, negating all the good work the council did for the pedestrians.

Hotblack Desiato

double jobbing wrote: »

To think the law is being brought in for the benefit of cyclists. The biggest bunch of rulebreaking ignorant no test no taxed ****ers on the road.

On the footpath, usually, these days.

Bring in cycle lanes instead of stupid 30km/h speed limits. But that would involve the council actually having to do something.

punisher5112

Great idea put in more wands so cyclists will just stay out on the road

kenmm

punisher5112 wrote: »

Let me clarify in the comments I made, as a bus driver we have a particular set of skills.... This is reading the road ahead, beside and behind....

In near 80% of the time we know when the person is going to step out, run out or can see the cyclist will change direction before they even decided to.


What's happening more over this unforseen pandemic is the amount now that don't look and give no pre warning they are going to do stupid things.


And for the stupid comments made towards me, yes of course I can see the kids and know they are wobbly and could swerve so won't pass until I can give much more room then usual if that makes sense to you.


It's serious out there and one thing I've noticed with the 30km/h speed limits is more pedestrian and cyclists take bigger risks and will just walk out or cycle across in front.

Clarification wasn't needed tbh - the other comment was pedantry.

And not reading the road ahead (actually general lack of awareness) is the biggest issue I see on the roads. Not just professional drivers like yourself should practice these skills, its for everyone that uses the roads. The ped that steps out, the cyclist with full headphones (seriously wtf), the cars at lights texting and messing up the timings of the lights, the late brakers not looking behind before jamming on, the close pass drivers close overtaking to race to the red light 100m ahead etc etc etc.

Have a campaign to improve awareness and hazard perception and a lot of other issues on the roads will fall away..


But thats not taxable via "go safe" vans, doesn't make a good headline and makes for boring threads. Much more entertaining to categorise each other and start the name calling.

Hotblack Desiato

Hurrache wrote: »

I think someone asked what difference it would make

Cars have brakes. This just assumes that the driver is basically comatose or something. Nice graph but not representative of reality.

Hotblack Desiato

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Well yes why stop at 30, we should be aiming at having less and less cars on the road, then speed limits wouldn't be an issue, especially in areas where there are lots of cyclists and pedestrians.

You want less cars (and so do I) but you, DCC and the government are providing no alternative.
Bus service is crap.
DART and Luas jam packed and don't serve most of the city anyway.
No metro.
Few proper cycling lanes.
Not even proper footpaths in many parts of the city centre.

Dr. Bre

Stay at home

kenmm

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Cars have brakes. This just assumes that the driver is basically comatose or something. Nice graph but not representative of reality.

The graph is representative of reality and you are also right (if what you mean is people don't pay enough attention and that may actually cause as many accidents).

This may be true, but instead of focusing on that (as per my above post) its easier to have a nice easy rule (lower speed limit) that more people can understand.
That (I assume)is what the powers that be believe will have the knock on effect of fewer deaths on the roads. But really it also serves other purposes (more speed van revenue, discouraging car use in the city, raising awareness).

Hotblack Desiato

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Nobody has ever told pedestrians that "they dont have to be responsible when walking about" so you were posting nonsense.

Yet a few posts above you Stark is suggesting that they can just step out into the road, and 30km/h makes this somehow safe.

Hurrache

punisher5112 wrote: »

Great idea put in more wands so cyclists will just stay out on the road

As a bus driver, how do you not understand, or have seen, any of these wands and how they're used for both pedestrians and cycle lanes?

punisher5112

Hurrache wrote: »

As a bus driver, how do you not understand, or have seen, any of these wands and how they're used for both pedestrians and cycle lanes?

What are you on about

Seth Brundle

kenmm wrote: »

The ped that steps out, the cyclist with full headphones (seriously wtf), the cars at lights texting and messing up the timings of the lights, the late brakers not looking behind before jamming on, the close pass drivers close overtaking to race to the red light 100m ahead etc etc etc.

Out of curiosity, why the "seriously wtf" for a cyclist with headphones (which I am not encouraging but has negligible effect on the safety) but not similar expression for the law breaking and unsafe drivers?
If I cycle whilst listening to music, how am I going to injure someone (assuming I'm being as observant as I would be normally)? If I am listening to music, how will that stop a passing car from driving too close? It's somewhat of a strawman argument!

kenmm

Hurrache wrote: »

As a bus driver, how do you not understand, or have seen, any of these wands and how they're used for both pedestrians and cycle lanes?

I think the point is - tarting up crappy old bus lanes with those wands isnt working - and from what punisher is witnessing is that more cyclists are staying out in thr driving lanes. They do understand their usage - but the reality of how they are being used differs from what the planners originally thought.

I think they are terrible, as a cyclists upon entering them has the choice - enter and be restricted to ~15kmph (or whatever the slowest cyclist is doing ahead, as they are so narrow there is no room fro overtaking) or stay out of the cycle lane and stick to ~30kmph, which is often slower than the traffic, but with the freedom to overtake, turn right etc.