A 30 KPH limit for Dublin

km991148 · 03-07-2021 10:07am

crooked cockney villain wrote: »

Why should I have my commute time doubled to help save the life of a phone wielding cyclist?

Why do you feel so entitled?

Never mind what other people are doing - do you do this generally in life? Are you constantly looking over your neighbours shoulders and comparing?

Cienciano · 03-07-2021 10:07am

magicbastarder wrote: »

i will freely admit that at times the narrator here is a little irritating, but the argument that cars should be limited to 30km/h in the city for noise reasons alone is one that resonates with me.
his argument that motorcyclists on excessively noisy motorbikes should get in the sea also resonates with me.

[E]

Buses sre the loudest fúckers on the road. Walk down the road on a phone call, chances are you won't hear a thing when a bus goes past

Thelonious Monk · 03-07-2021 10:12am

crooked cockney villain wrote: »

Why should I have my commute time doubled to help save the life of a phone wielding cyclist?

Well you could always just run anyone over that was getting on your nerves?

km991148 · 03-07-2021 10:13am

crooked cockney villain wrote: »

Why should I have my commute time doubled to help save the life of a phone wielding cyclist?

And if you are really interested in reducing commute times, you would be actively encouraging more people to cycle.

Cyclists commuting by bicycle have reduced your commute time significantly. You should be thankful, but your anger and hatred won't let you see that.

One person with poor road skills doesn't negate that fact.

Also.. bonus points..that fat guy you saw, think about it.. he's actively try to get fit.. that's great for society! (Why should I pay taxes to provide health care to those that won't look after their health?).

km991148 · 03-07-2021 10:15am

Cienciano wrote: »

Buses sre the loudest fúckers on the road. Walk down the road on a phone call, chances are you won't hear a thing when a bus goes past

Lol ye some are ridiculous, especially clapped out ones rattling along but my current annoyance is motorbikes.. I live on a main road, the ones that rev the **** outta them at lights... FFS..!

magicbastarder · 03-07-2021 10:16am

Cienciano wrote: »

Buses sre the loudest fúckers on the road.

i live on a busy road, it's (some) motorbikes which are the loudest. some - a minority - aren't far off the volume of someone driving by in a car leaning on the horn.

anyway, i am always bemused at those motorists who get angry at cyclists who wear headphones.
motorists create the noise.
they isolate themselves from it in cars which are specifically designed to reduce the volume of ambient noise.
they listen to the radio or listen to music.

they then get angry at cyclists for deigning to mitigate the effects of the noise they themselves have created and have isolated themselves from.

Thelonious Monk · 03-07-2021 10:17am

Cienciano wrote: »

Buses sre the loudest fúckers on the road. Walk down the road on a phone call, chances are you won't hear a thing when a bus goes past

I haven't noticed yet but I wonder if the new buses are quieter, I think they are, I live on the first bus connects routes so I'll keep it in mind next time one passes me

AndrewJRenko · 03-07-2021 11:19am

Larbre34 wrote: »

With the increase in popularity of hybrid or fully electric cars and light commercials, the problem is going to be how to add noise back into them to make them sufficiently audible to other road users.

Yes cars and bikes with custom exhausts and heavy commercials are a noise pollutant, but that already has regulation in the NCT and DoE testing systems and can be further tackled through curfews and weight limits.

The noise mitigation between 50 and 30, as an average across general traffic, is so negligible as to be inconsequential to this particular argument.

Do we really need/want to add noise back in? The only value in this that I'm aware of is for people with sight loss. Surely there could be a better tech solution to support such people to highlight proximity of EVs, rather than actively creating harmful noise for large numbers of people?

https://www.eea.europa.eu/highlights/road-traffic-remains-biggest-source

crooked cockney villain wrote: »

Why should I have my commute time doubled to help save the life of a phone wielding cyclist?

This is way off reality. What doubles your commute time is all the other people driving round in 80% empty cars mostly for small journeys that are easily walked or cycled. That's why Dublin was in the top three slowest traffic cities in Europe, or was it in the world - average speeds of < 10 kmph iirc. If you want your commute to be faster, you should be encouraging as many others to switch from driving to cycling, leaving more room for you on the road. In the meantime, suggesting that you should be entitled to harm other people because you don't like their mode of transport doesn't really help your cause.

crooked cockney villain wrote: »

With the headphones so many Dublin cyclists insist on wearing most of them wouldn't hear a bin lorry, so it hardly makes a difference.

With the car audio systems and headphones many Dublin drivers insist on using, most of them wouldn't hear a bin lorry, so it hardly makes a difference.

03-07-2021 11:49am

I think there might be sufficient enough reason to build a couple more motorways, but I think we'd want to be sure of that before slamming a load more concrete down and potentially destroying the habitats of all the wildlife that lives there. There should be a commitment (and follow-through) from the government to purchase and properly re-wild land equivalent to the motorway area any time they go ahead with construction.

Electric cars are fine, but I'd love to see a real attempt to introduce FCEVs in Ireland (beyond a single bus). I'd quite like to be able to buy a fuel cell system to power my home, too, but that's another story.

Edit: This wasn't the motorway thread!

I still want FCEVs. Dublin cyclists have never bothered me. They're a good bunch and it's hardly their fault the city is too old for widening roads to accommodate them properly.

A UK city I often visit has a regular, well-serviced and free park-and-ride system in place. Buses every ten minutes, large car park with plenty of space, the ride into the city takes about 10-20 mins depending where you're going and there are plenty of stops on the way through. Unless I'm traveling with a disabled relative or picking up something too big to cart back on the bus, I use it every time—and so does pretty much everyone I know. It's cheaper, easier, usually faster and more convenient than battling city traffic and trying to find parking in the city. And DCC can get some more of those Hydrogen buses on it so it's a zero carbon deal.

Larbre34 · 03-07-2021 12:12pm

Don't make this about bikes versus cars.

For all of our lives, as people who walk in car parks or across roads, we have developed the instinct to hear cars approach and be roughly aware of how far away they are, even before we see them.

Electric cars change that completely. If its running on low rolling resistance tyres (they nearly all do) and the wind is against it, you won't hear it at all.

The same goes for new hybrid buses we now see on the streets. The point being, speed and noise will stop being connected.

_Kaiser_ · 03-07-2021 12:30pm

magicbastarder wrote: »

i live on a busy road, it's (some) motorbikes which are the loudest. some - a minority - aren't far off the volume of someone driving by in a car leaning on the horn.

anyway, i am always bemused at those motorists who get angry at cyclists who wear headphones.
motorists create the noise.
they isolate themselves from it in cars which are specifically designed to reduce the volume of ambient noise.
they listen to the radio or listen to music.

they then get angry at cyclists for deigning to mitigate the effects of the noise they themselves have created and have isolated themselves from.

Because its about different levels of risk.

If a car runs into another car due to inattention then at normal city speeds there's going to be some damaged parts and insurance hikes for the most part.

If a cyclist swerves in front of a car or larger vehicle because they didn't hear them through the headphones (especially with many being actively noise cancelling these days) that's a very different outcome.

This isn't some equality battle. There are very different considerations at play here.

AndrewJRenko · 03-07-2021 12:51pm

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Because its about different levels of risk.

If a car runs into another car due to inattention then at normal city speeds there's going to be some damaged parts and insurance hikes for the most part.

If a cyclist swerves in front of a car or larger vehicle because they didn't hear them through the headphones (especially with many being actively noise cancelling these days) that's a very different outcome.

This isn't some equality battle. There are very different considerations at play here.

Far more people are killed and injured in cars than on bike's.

km991148 · 03-07-2021 1:06pm

Larbre34 wrote: »

Don't make this about bikes versus cars.

For all of our lives, as people who walk in car parks or across roads, we have developed the instinct to hear cars approach and be roughly aware of how far away they are, even before we see them.

Electric cars change that completely. If its running on low rolling resistance tyres (they nearly all do) and the wind is against it, you won't hear it at all.

The same goes for new hybrid buses we now see on the streets. The point being, speed and noise will stop being connected.

Noise pollution dropping due to 30kmph is good - a noise (not as loud as an ICE vehicle) can be added that isn't as loud as the constant background hum of traffic (or the peaks and troughs of revving/ accelerating etc).

Cyclists have had this problem for years and there aren't really that many collisions (albeit the mass of a cyclist is smaller - but I still wouldn't like to hit someone at 25-30kmph on a bike).

km991148 · 03-07-2021 1:15pm

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

If a cyclist swerves in front of a car or larger vehicle because they didn't hear them through the headphones (especially with many being actively noise cancelling these days) that's a very different outcome.

I'd also question any driver that manages to hit a cyclist that swerves into their path.

Would indicate the vehicle was driven too close. Cyclists can swerve for all sorts of reasons (potholes, badly parked cars, doors, drains, peds stepping out etc)

cnocbui · 03-07-2021 1:34pm

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Far more people are killed and injured in cars than on bike's.

Well thats not saying much. It's a bit of a duh!. Proprtionally with respect to the number of vehicles vs bikes, it is not the case, by a wide margin.

https://www.lawyer.ie/cycling-accident-injury-death-statistics/

I make it roughly 4.74% of Dublin cyclists attending hospital in Dublin in 2014-15.

I didn't readily find a breakdown of the number of car occupant injuries in Dublin specifically, but it's unlikely important because the figure nationally is so low it's not going to make a difference: The national injury rate for car occupants in 2014 is roughly 0.27%.

https://www.rsa.ie/Documents/Fatal%20Collision%20Stats/Road_Collision_Factbooks_and_Tables/Road%20Collision%20Facts%202014%20-%20Tables.pdf
https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-1916/1916irl/economy/tp/

km991148 · 03-07-2021 1:36pm

I guess we need more air bags and crumple zones on bikes then..

These stats dont mean much on their own tbh - even if it was sources from somewhere with less bias..

AndrewJRenko · 03-07-2021 1:38pm

cnocbui wrote: »

Well thats not saying much. It's a bit of a duh!. Proprtionally with respect to the number of vehicles vs bikes, it is not the case, by a wide margin.

https://www.lawyer.ie/cycling-accident-injury-death-statistics/

I make it roughly 4.74% of Dublin cyclists attending hospital in Dublin in 2014-15.

I didn't readily find a breakdown of the number of car occupant injuries in Dublin specifically, but it's unlikely important because the figure nationally is so low it's not going to make a difference: The national injury rate for car occupants in 2014 is roughly 0.27%.

https://www.rsa.ie/Documents/Fatal%20Collision%20Stats/Road_Collision_Factbooks_and_Tables/Road%20Collision%20Facts%202014%20-%20Tables.pdf
https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-1916/1916irl/economy/tp/

Why are you looking at percentages? If you want to reduce deaths and injuries, look at where the actual numbers of deaths and injuries are happening, which is primarily in motor vehicles. Cyclists are the smallest category of deaths and injuries, after motorists, motorcyclists, and pedestrians.

km991148 · 03-07-2021 2:18pm

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Why are you looking at percentages? If you want to reduce deaths and injuries, look at where the actual numbers of deaths and injuries are happening, which is primarily in motor vehicles. Cyclists are the smallest category of deaths and injuries, after motorists, motorcyclists, and pedestrians.

Plus - the injury rate for car occupant - :pac:

Suppose we don't mind the following:

How many non vehicular road users are killed or injured by vehicular traffic?
How many secondary deaths and problems with respiratory systems due to pollution etc?

I mean 30kmph in cities is really a no brainer at this stage - probably why most cities are doing it.

magicbastarder · 03-07-2021 2:28pm

Larbre34 wrote: »

The point being, speed and noise will stop being connected.

i don't buy the argument that what was originally an incidental effect of the noise is now baked in and irrevocable though. that we have to artificially engineer noise pollution as a safety feature.

magicbastarder · 03-07-2021 2:37pm

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

This isn't some equality battle.

you're 100% right on that front. but if cyclists have to bear the brunt of the danger created by vehicles an order of magnitude or more larger than them, it's quite ironic that the pilots of those motor vehicles get to experience the luxury being specifically denied to those exposed to that risk.

crooked cockney villain · 10-08-2021 9:08pm

Was there ever a final decision made on this? Last I heard was about two months ago, public consulation replies were overwhelmingly negative but the wasters were seeking to push on anyway.

Got reminded of this nonsense this morning when a Google type road king Spanish la tried weaving rightwards without glancing behind him, as they all do, causing me to jam on the brakes to avoid hitting him, then got the usual sour puss on him for having the gall to call out his ignorant cycling.

lawred2 · 10-08-2021 9:13pm

I'd hardly class the Malahide Road as a dual carriage way. It is in parts but mostly it's one car lane.

crooked cockney villain · 10-08-2021 9:14pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117734910#Comment_117734910

All day Sunday, every day pre 7am and post...7am is it?

Does it for me.

lawred2 · 10-08-2021 9:16pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117734918#Comment_117734918

Shhhh will you... don't be saying that. People will start using the bus lane on Sundays with that talk.

AndrewJRenko · 10-08-2021 9:27pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117734889#Comment_117734889

If you had to jam on the brakes, you were going too fast or too close or both.

crooked cockney villain · 10-08-2021 9:29pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117734963#Comment_117734963

LOLZ.

I am passing this daft kunt a good 4- 6 ft to his right. He was swaying out of the cycle lane. How many feet do you require?

Mount the footpath on the other side?

Can you show me what percentage of cyclist accidents in Dublin have actually been found to have been caused by driver conduct rather than cyclist negligence?

John_Rambo · 13-08-2021 8:43pm

Statistics from the Gardai state that they catch 24 times more motorists than cyclists braking red lights.

Statistic from Transdev, the LUAS people reveal that motorists account for more than half of all crashes and emergency braking incidents, pedestrians more than one third and cyclists less than 10 per cent.

AndrewJRenko · 13-08-2021 8:56pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117734979#Comment_117734979

Did you not have those statistics BEFORE you jumped to your conclusions?

magicbastarder · 14-08-2021 11:01am

Can you show me what percentage of cyclist accidents in Dublin have actually been found to have been caused by driver conduct rather than cyclist negligence?

don't think anyone has ever compiled those statistics for dublin. but studies in london and (i think) toronto found that motorists were to blame in most KSIs involving collisions between motorists and cyclists.

magicbastarder · 14-08-2021 11:06am

from a different report:

"With adult cyclists, police found the driver solely responsible in about 60%-75% of all cases, and riders solely at fault 17%-25% of the time."

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2009/dec/15/cycling-bike-accidents-study

A 30 KPH limit for Dublin

Comments