Inappropriate Speed limits?

magpie

Good work Mace Face

Our man in Havana

So you are saying that the signed 60km/h limit has no legal effect and hence completly unenforceable?

MaceFace

From what I was told about 6 months ago (not from a person in the know though), temporary speed limit signs are not enforced, because it is the council who put in the limits, not the government. The council have no say in the law.

The only difference to this was when the temp road sign also had sign which read "Enforced by the Gardai". I have seen these previously on the N7.

So, it does appear that that was under the old law, but with this new Act, they seemed to have fixed it.
But, apparently there are still some small points to iron out before it comes into force.
So, it would appear that temp speed limits are still useless (at least till they sort it out).

Of course, if I am wrong, I am sure someone will say (has anyone got a ticket for speeding in a road works area?).

Seth Brundle

I can't comment on recieving a ticket in a road works area but there was originally a Gatso along the temporary road along the port tunnel works on the M1. It had been moved a few times and turned direction. It hasn't been around for a good while though.

unkel

mackerski wrote:

if you fancy yourself as a speed-limit enforcer, I suggest you apply to be accepted into Templemore

LOL

mike65

ToxicPaddy wrote:

Ive seen some fairly crazy things since the switch to KPH but the strangest has
to be the main Waterford to Tramore road...

When you're leaving Waterford to go to Tramore its 100kph zone and the signs
say so.. however on the same road heading in the opposite direction, from
Tramore to Waterford its only an 80kph zone...

explain that one to me please??? :rolleyes:

Tox

You sure? I must pay more attention over the next fews days...

Mike.

Our man in Havana

It should be 80km/h both ways, its a R road, R675 if memory serves me correctly.

BrianD3

MaceFace wrote:

Of course, if I am wrong, I am sure someone will say (has anyone got a ticket for speeding in a road works area?).

IIRC that there were numerous tickets handed out a few years back on the M4 when the Celbridge interchange was being built. Temporary speed limit was 50 mph. And I believe the 50 mph signs were still in place long after the road works had finished :rolleyes:

Re: inappropriate limits, take the N4 from Enfield to Lucan. Enfield relief road now has a 37 mph limit only 6 mph faster than Enfield village itself.

As you leave Enfield, you're into a 62 mph zone but this only last about 1/2 mile before it becomes a 50 mph zone. This lasts for 3 miles, then for no apparent reason reverts to 62 mph for about a mile.

Then goes to 37 mph for roadworks. Sign is placed in a poor location just past a junction where it can easily be missed if there is a lorry waiting to pull out of the side road. Expect to see Gatso vans appearing in this area soon :rolleyes: Limit then goes to 75 mph as you enter the motorway.

BrianD3

BrianD

ToxicPaddy wrote:

Ive seen some fairly crazy things since the switch to KPH but the strangest has
to be the main Waterford to Tramore road...

When you're leaving Waterford to go to Tramore its 100kph zone and the signs
say so.. however on the same road heading in the opposite direction, from
Tramore to Waterford its only an 80kph zone...

explain that one to me please??? :rolleyes:

Tox

The new regulations allow different speed limits on the same stretch of road (as in the above case). For example, the inbound section of road could be approaching a roundabout or junction and a lower speed limit appropriate. On the outbound you are on open road so a higher limit is appropriate.

BrianD

wrote:

As you leave Enfield, you're into a 62 mph zone but this only last about 1/2 mile before it becomes a 50 mph zone. This lasts for 3 miles, then for no apparent reason reverts to 62 mph for about a mile.

The reason may not apparent to you but is to local residents. This section of road was subject to a long running campaign by locals to have the limit reduced due to a high number of fatalities - many of them pedestrians. A number of years ago white crosses were erected at the spot of each fatality. Very effective campaign and the speed limit was reduced.

The lower speed limit adds no more than a minute to your journey over this stretch of road (lets say its 5km in length)

DubTony

ToxicPaddy wrote:

Ive seen some fairly crazy things since the switch to KPH but the strangest has
to be the main Waterford to Tramore road...

When you're leaving Waterford to go to Tramore its 100kph zone and the signs
say so.. however on the same road heading in the opposite direction, from
Tramore to Waterford its only an 80kph zone...

explain that one to me please???

Tox

I've seen this while travelling in other countries. Maybe someone in Waterford has some smarts. Sometimes a road with quite a lot of bends will have hazards on one side of the road that don't adversely affect the traffic on the other. For example, driving through a village in Cambridgeshire the speed limit on one side is 50 mph and on the other is 30 mph. There are 2 reasons for this. The first is that on the 30 mph side a house sits just two feet back from the road on a slight bend. Traffic approaching the house on the 50 mph side can see this easily and it has little effect on safety at that point.
However, traffic coming in the opposite direction won't know about the house until they come round the bend. As they do the house seems to appear out of nowhere.

The second is that the village has a busy timber yard. As trucks emerge they are permitted to turn left only. So the traffic approaching on that side of the road goes at 30mph while the traffic on the other cruises along nicely at 50.

BTW, speed limits of 50 mph are not uncommon through small villages in England.

Has the Waterford to Tramore road a similar situation?

Tony

Seth Brundle

BrianD wrote:

The reason may not apparent to you but is to local residents. This section of road was subject to a long running campaign by locals to have the limit reduced due to a high number of fatalities - many of them pedestrians. A number of years ago white crosses were erected at the spot of each fatality. Very effective campaign and the speed limit was reduced.

<off topic>I remember driving along this heading to Longford one Sunday. Traffic was literally travelling 10m, stopping for a minute, 10m, stopping...
It was obvious that most drivers were getting more and more annoyed at the delay. Eventually about midway along the stretch there was an ambulance in the middle of the road and I figured that at least there was a decent reason for the delay.
It turned out that it was some safety group asking people to drive carefully and the ambulance was purely decorative. Every car took their leaflet and sped off totally pissed off!
Methinks it was a waste of time!

BrianD3

BrianD wrote:

The reason may not apparent to you but is to local residents. This section of road was subject to a long running campaign by locals to have the limit reduced due to a high number of fatalities - many of them pedestrians. A number of years ago white crosses were erected at the spot of each fatality. Very effective campaign and the speed limit was reduced.

The lower speed limit adds no more than a minute to your journey over this stretch of road (lets say its 5km in length)

You've missed the point BrianD - why have a very short 62 mph zone either side of the 50 mph zone. If this stretch of road is so unsafe why not just make the whole thing 50 mph or else leave the whole thing 62 mph. Lets say you're coming towards Enfield from Dublin, you're at in a 50 mph zone, then you enter a 62 mph zone then almost straightaway you're back down to 37 mph then 31 mph. Going in the other direction it's different as least you're accelerating from a 62 to a 75 (once/if the 37 mph limit for roadworks gets removed) however the section of road that is a 62 is no safer IMO than the section which is 50 mph so it makes no sense to have different limits.

Also, the 50 mph section on the N4 near Enfield is a far better (in terms of visibility, width, road surface, size of hard shoulder, right turns etc.) stretch of road than many stretches on the N3 and N6 that are 62 mph.

These inconsistencies are what happen when speed limits are influenced by actions such as "residents protests" A proper, integrated startegy for setting speed limits is what's needed.

BrianD3

mike65

DubTony wrote:

Maybe someone in Waterford has some smarts. Sometimes a road with quite a lot of bends will have hazards on one side of the road that don't adversely affect the traffic on the other

Has the Waterford to Tramore road a similar situation?

Tony

No, the road is straight and level at the "clearway" (as was) section with no exits either side.

Mike.

DubTony

I lived in Boston in 1990 for a few months. There they have many different speed limits on the same road, for many different reasons. Where I lived in Weston, the speed limit reduced from 45 to 30 for a stretch of about 200 yards. But the reason for the reduction was posted, a simple yellow sign with "Blind Persons" on it BEFORE the speed limit reduction. That's something we don't do here.

In the case of road works they have a completely different system. At EVERY section of raod where work is being carried out, irrepsective of whether it's a manhole being lifted or a major widening scheme, a cop is present at all times while work is being done. His job was simply to ensure people were aware of the hazard.
On small works cones are placed to direct traffic and create traffic lanes. The first cone usually had an orange flag sticking out of it. The cop would simply direct traffic if it got busy and when traffic was light he would generally sit in his car which had it's roof lights "flashing" all the time.
The effect was that approaching traffic automatically slowed.

On major works a patrol car (Sometimes 2) was placed at the beginning of the works and at least one police officer stood on the road. His presence ensured that traffic slowed down. When traffic was heavy, more cops arrived to help ensure traffic flow was maintained. It was not unusual to see 20 or more police officers directing traffic at major works during peak time.

One project involved widening of a major highway. While police officers were always present, at the end of the day, when work finished, cones were moved to the side of the road, and all evidence of work was removed. Steel plates were bolted to the ground to cover holes on the road and temporary speed limit signs were removed. It was possible to travel through this section and not even know that there had been work done that day.

To ensure speed limits were enforced while work was carried out, signs indicating doubling of fines for speeders were used.

But the important point is that the temporary speed limits were only used while work was actually being carried out.

While travelling the M9 when the "barriers" were being erected, cones were used to close the overtaking lane. I was heading south on a bank holiday Monday. So no work had been done there since the previous Friday. The whole outside lane was closed from the M7 to Kilcullen, even though some of the work was already completed.

The problem here in Ireland is that councils and the government are lazy when it comes to traffic management and safety. The attitude toward car drivers seems to be "to hell with them, let them wait" while not addressing traffic problema and safety in any structured way. This leads to people ignoring ridiculously low speed limits even when they are required.

Tony

BrianD

Also, the 50 mph section on the N4 near Enfield is a far better (in terms of visibility, width, road surface, size of hard shoulder, right turns etc.) stretch of road than many stretches on the N3 and N6 that are 62 mph.

They accident stats would seem to indicate differently. The N4 may have more junctions or access points than on comparable routes.

These inconsistencies are what happen when speed limits are influenced by actions such as "residents protests" A proper, integrated startegy for setting speed limits is what's needed.

I would be of the opinion that limits should be set by some sort of national body with both local authorities and other interested bodies having an input. The biggest problem is that limits are being set by councils who really don't really know any better. Somebody else spoke to councillors about the N7 limits that was referred to in a posting. Surely the councillors would have known about the road widening in their area? Furthermore, vested interests have also been influential in persuading councillors to implemenr speed limits in the past - hence some long 50 km/h stretches outside towns.

Going back to the N4, I think the limit is justified but I can see your point. We don't need a bunch of one off houses bunching together because they want people driving at 100 km/h outside their bungalows.

Stark

On major works a patrol car (Sometimes 2) was placed at the beginning of the works and at least one police officer stood on the road. His presence ensured that traffic slowed down. When traffic was heavy, more cops arrived to help ensure traffic flow was maintained. It was not unusual to see 20 or more police officers directing traffic at major works during peak time.

I think garda resources are way too stretched in this country as it is, without implementing this.

DubTony

Stark wrote:

I think garda resources are way too stretched in this country as it is, without implementing this.

Stark, you're absolutely right. Unfortunately Garda resources are stretched doing work that is not in tune with what Gardai should do. When the M50 finished at Firhouse, it was common to see at least 4 Gardai directing traffic at the Firhouse Rd./ Bridge junction, the Firhouse Rd./Ballycullen Rd. junction and the Firhouse Rd./Knocklyon Rd. junction.

This was done morning and evening. The resources were available then. The madness that was that traffic hellhole is no worse than we see in other areas today.

It's about willingness to use resources wisely. Put cops on the street and in their cars and watch people slow down. How many times have you been in a slow moving outside lane of a motorway only because the Garda car on the inside was only doing 50. Most people are scared ****less to even travel at the limit when there's a cop around.

Tony

BrianD3

I would be of the opinion that limits should be set by some sort of national body with both local authorities and other interested bodies having an input. The biggest problem is that limits are being set by councils who really don't really know any better.

IMO what's needed is a standardised, objective, transparent process for setting speed limits. Eack local authority should have a team of road engineers specifically trained and employed to evaluate and set speed limits according to detailed, set, standard procedures. Computerised GIS programs and things like statistical risk assessments would play a part in the process.

There would also be procedures in place when it comes to temporary speed limits and roadworks - the US system that DubTony described sounds like it works very well.

All of this would be the opposite to some half-assed, make it up as you go along type of thing.

If this worked well and was transparent then there would be no need for anyone to ever question a speed limit. They would still have the right to object however and there would be a set procedure for objections.

If county councillors or residents ojected to a limit as being too low or too high, then the engineer could point to the procedures that were followed and give exact and clear reasons as to why that particular limit was chosen. Likely outcome would be dismissal of the objection.

All in an ideal world of course

BrianD3

mackerski

50 mph...37 mph... 62 mph...75 mph...

As one of the few folks here with a metric dash, I'm probably not the best person to say this but... these limits can all be easily represented by nice, round, divisible-by-ten numbers. How long is everybody planning to carry the torch for the old units?

Dermot

BrianD3

I'll probably contunue to use the old units for a good while TBH. At teh moment I just can't visualise 60 km/h as well as I can 37 mph Also, it's easier to use mph when trying to illustrate to others how the limits have changed. Tell someone that Enfield village is now 50 km/h and the relief road is 60 km/h and it won't have much impact. Tell then that the part which was 40 mph is now 37 mph and the part that was 30 mph is now 31 mph and they will take a bit more notice.

It's going to be many years before ireland is truly metric with the imperial units dying out altogether. In 20 years time I fully expect that loads of people wil still be talking in "miles per gallon" when describing the economy of their car.

BrianD3

Seth Brundle

BrianD3 wrote:

IMO what's needed is a standardised, objective, transparent process for setting speed limits. Eack local authority should have a team of road engineers specifically trained and employed to evaluate and set speed limits according to detailed, set, standard procedures. Computerised GIS programs and things like statistical risk assessments would play a part in the process.

<snip>

If county councillors or residents ojected to a limit as being too low or too high, then the engineer could point to the procedures that were followed and give exact and clear reasons as to why that particular limit was chosen. Likely outcome would be dismissal of the objection.

Kind of like the planning system Brian? A system whereby the planners professional recommendations can and are frequently ignored by the councillors.
If politicians remain in charge of local authorities then nothing will change for the better!

Victor

magpie wrote:

It's ridiculous. 38mph on a dual carriageway.

But it doesn't have a median crash barrier!

The only possible reason for this lunacy is revenue generation.

Or the expected roadworks.

Victor

MaceFace wrote:

Forget temp speed limits!

.... and kill people.

From what I'm reading above, the limit at Naas-Rathcoole is enforceable as it is a permanent limit. That the limit may be reviewed shortly is at this time, irrelevant.

ambro25

BrianD3 wrote:

In 20 years time I fully expect that loads of people wil still be talking in "miles per gallon" when describing the economy of their car.

Unfortunately true, but which is an absolute pain in the butt for people raised on metric units, like me - on the Continent, eco measures are traditionally given in liters consumed per 100kms (which I have translated down to 'liters per 60 miles' for years in the UK, since fuel was sold by the liter and not by the gallon anymore).

MaceFace

Victor wrote:

.... and kill people.

Not if you are travelling the road when there are NO roadworks. Maybe this will change in the future, but last Sunday there was no roadworks going on, but because there may be road works in 6 months time as part of the same project, and the temp speed limits can not be enforced, the entire lenght of the project has been made permanent! Doesn't make sense.

The N7 has road works for the last 6 months at least up at the new flyover the Dublin side of CityWest. I have NEVER once seen a worker here.

From what I'm reading above, the limit at Naas-Rathcoole is enforceable as it is a permanent limit. That the limit may be reviewed shortly is at this time, irrelevant.

Yes, but if you go back to the start of this thread, you will see that this is not about speed limits around the country, but about a particular example and a call for help in changing it.
If enough people who travel this N7 call the councillors and put pressure on them, as well as Joe Boland from Kildare County Council, common sense may just apply where the speed restrictions are only on the parts of the road where road works are currently on!

edmund_f

my opinion,

when I was learning to drive I was shown that speed does not kill, the crash usually has a lot to do with it. Accepted that excessive speed will turn a serious accident into a fatal accident. During my training the emphasis was put on hazard avoidance, car, road, traffic craft.

I would ask the question, the penalty point system has been in place now for enough time that we should be seeing a marked improvement in the collisions statistics for Ireland. It seems to be the opposite?

http://www.garda.ie/angarda/statistics98/nroadstats.html

Based on the admittedly subjective assumption that driving is all about driving safely, not having accidents, or cause others to have accidents. It is not about following the law.

The law in Ireland seems to be of the 'quick fix' variety. The Government and the stupid cops seems happy to blind the Irish public with propaganda

'young male drivers kill'

'speed kills'

and terror 'we had XX hundred thousand detections for speeding during 2004' (no idea of the figure)

An interesting statistic would be to find out the exact number of accidents per Km driven, think in England they use a statistic of road fatalities/billion Km driven. I would imagine that young male driver are responsible for a disproportionate amount of accidents as they are responsible for a disproportionate amount of the driving on Irish roads.

The enforcement in Ireland is a complete unashamed joke. The idiots in the blue suites seem to be under the impression that they can systematically alienate every normally law abiding citizen in Ireland and then claim to be (a) under resourced (b) helping.

number of detections for drink driving is a fraction of those for speeding. I doubt anyone would disagree that being drunk is much more dangerous than speeding (generally as you are drunk you do not see the hazard causing the accident and then you do not hit your brakes as quickly, thus actually a higher impact speed)

It would be another interesting point to find out the 'quality' of the speeding tickets i.e. someone driving at 100Km/hr on a country 80Km/hr limit would deserve a ticket, as they were exceeding the limit of the road and their car, not just the road. You can be pretty much guaranteed that very few of the detections during 2004 were like this. Actually giving points to dangerous drivers!?

To get back to the point of 'Inappropriate speed limits'

the question is what are we going to do about it.

A simple suggestion is to actually strictly abide by them. At the end of the day, if anyone is trying to use these limits as revenue generation, statistic collection etc, or in other words, for any other purpose than protecting people like you and me, abiding by them will thwart any possible subversive use. When this happens, which it will, (anyone that disagrees a helpful cop will show you the errors of your way) it will be shown how much resources were actually wasted by our current government, and exploited by a lazy pig policy.

Inappropriate as they are, they are the law. The only thing you can do is stick to them, warn others, and write to TD's.


I would ask a final question. These speed limits on the N4, N7 etc. by driving at a consistent 55 Mph versus the current speed limits, how much time do you actually save??.


Rant over, feel free to disagree, but please explain and suggest a better method.

Seth Brundle

Victor wrote:

Magpie wrote:

It's ridiculous. 38mph on a dual carriageway.

But it doesn't have a median crash barrier!

How many roads in Ireland do have a median crash barrier?

unkel

mackerski wrote:

nice, round, divisible-by-ten numbers. How long is everybody planning to carry the torch for the old units?

Yeah we might as well stop that old British crap

We ARE metric now :cool:

magpie

Based on the admittedly subjective assumption that driving is all about driving safely, not having accidents, or cause others to have accidents. It is not about following the law.

The law in Ireland seems to be of the 'quick fix' variety. The Government and the stupid cops seems happy to blind the Irish public with propaganda

'young male drivers kill'

'speed kills'

and terror 'we had XX hundred thousand detections for speeding during 2004' (no idea of the figure)

That's sense Withnail.

Unfortunately a large number of people, including many on boards, accept the government mantras at face value, repeat them back to you ad nauseam any time you attempt to enter into a rational discussion about it and content themselves with reminding you that 'you chose to break the law' rather than discussing the glaringly obvious problems with the law and how it is enforced in the first place.

Therefore I'm bowing out of this particular argument.