Council wants 30km/h speed limit

[joolz]

Originally Posted by Auslandau

.... and the idea of reducing the speed limit to 30ks isn't?


No .... its a knee jerk reaction to 'apparently' keep the pedestrians safer on the roads. Now you see the funny bit in that sentence?

Funny but so true.

Last time i checked...
Pedestrians use FOOT paths.
Vehicles use ROAD ways.

Now its Pedestrians use what ever they want for free.
Vehicles pay registration to only use a road way and face fines to protect pedestrians due to pathetic laws..

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

Point 2- I live in QLD, we don't get Melbourne radio or tv too well up here so no I have not.

Since the issue relates to the melbourne CBD and the close city muncipality of Yarra wouldnt it be prudent to actually listen to the two councillors(Ive provided a link to the interview)......then make a more informed comment.

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by sudszy

disagree, most of the repsonses above are just knee jerk responses to the three words..."reduced speed limit"

Disagree.

Most of the governments knee jerk responses to the words "road incident" is "reduce speed limit"

They rarely introduce other ideas. All we hear is reduce speed! reduce speed REDUCE SPEED!! Its all the governments can do, its all they know!

Originally Posted by geckoGT

What some seem to miss is the undertone to the concern everyone has here. That concern is that once this comes in at one location (Melbourne CBD), other locations follow. Once the precedence is set, it is easier for the situation to be more widespread.

Next thing you know, every road that has a reasonable density of shops etc with pedestrian crossings becomes a 30 km/h zone. Sounds far fetched I know but look at the widespread reduction is speed limits that we have seen over the last 2 decades, despite the quality of roads has seemed to have improved as well as the capabilities from a safety perspective have definitely improved.

That is very true.
I can't imagine having 30km/h speed limits in Newcastle CBD. The current speed limits range from 40km/h to 60km/h.
Its a hole and no one goes there, it would be painful driving in there at 30km/h. You don't see to many pedestrians, let alone one on the road.

[ILLaViTaR]

If they keep this attitude going I'll start doing 150 in 50 zones.

[geckoGT]

Listening to it right now.

Thoughts as I do.

What is the advantage with having a 30 km/h limit at 3 am?

My experience of city driving (that is a lot of it) is that at times that the pedestrian traffic, the number of bikes etc are at the highest, the speed of the cars is at its lowest due to traffic and would be struggling to reach 30 km/h anyway. So this speed change would only have effect at times when it is not needed.

What is the pedestrian v car rate at times when pedestrian and cyclist traffic at its highest. My experience is that there are not many fatal collisions involving car v pedestrian/cyclist during high traffic hours. These fatalities occur during off peak periods, times when pedestrian education would be more effective in preventing all injuries, not just reducing fatalities. Preventing the pedestrian v car collision in the first place is a lot more effective than reducing the speed of the collision in preventing injuries.

The councillor from Yarra herself admits cars do not reach that speed anyway during the busy periods, so she is admitting it is just to effect off peak periods. So she is contradicting herself when compared to the basis of the whole notion.

So it is now finished, I learnt nothing from it except the Mayor of Yarra contradicts her own argument and that is 16 mins of my life I will ever get back, thanks

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by joolz

Funny but so true.

Last time i checked...
Pedestrians use FOOT paths.
Vehicles use ROAD ways.

Now its Pedestrians use what ever they want for free.
Vehicles pay registration to only use a road way and face fines to protect pedestrians due to pathetic laws..

sorry paying rego doesnt give you exclusive rights to the roads which are not funded by registration payments.

Perhaps its also wise to consider one of the key reasons rego/plates was instituted for vehicles ....... so far in the history of man there has been no hit and run incident where a car driver has been left dead and bleeding by the side of the road after colliding with a pedestrian who has run off into the distance

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by sudszy

sorry paying rego doesnt give you exclusive rights to the roads which are not funded by registration payments.

Thats strange, I thought the government did tell us that is what vehicle registrations contribute to, hence why trucks pay more than cars, because they cause more wear on the roads.

[Jim Goose]

Depending on the age of the car... your speedo doesnt need to be accurate below 40kmh... so how again will they police this?

18.5.1.1.2. indicate the actual vehicle speed, for all speeds above 40 km/h, to an accuracy of ± 10 per cent.

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

and that is 16 mins of my life I will ever get back, thanks

Very precious.....but consider the bigger issue and those who will never get any minutes of their life back.

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

Depending on the age of the car... your speedo doesnt need to be accurate below 40kmh... so how again will they police this?

18.5.1.1.2. indicate the actual vehicle speed, for all speeds above 40 km/h, to an accuracy of ± 10 per cent.

Possibly the aim is not to police it but to change the attitudes, behaviour, culture of motorists , perhaps it will be just tickets for those above 40km/h if speedos are so inaccurate.

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by sudszy

Possibly the aim is not to police it but to change the attitudes, behaviour, culture of motorists , perhaps it will be just tickets for those above 40km/h if speedos are so inaccurate.

So the speed limit would then be 40 km/h then?

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by sudszy

Very precious.....but consider the bigger issue and those who will never get any minutes of their life back.

Don't walk on the road in front of cars and you wont have to worry about that. Its really that simple.

[Resurrection]

Why bother? Many people don't drive at the 40km/hr speed limit. I am passed frequently when doing 40 in a 40 zone. If the 40 km/hr speed limit is enforced it should be adequate. They say 30 is safer than 40. Well how about 20 which is safer than 30 and 10 which is safer again? The only safe speed involving 1,200+ kg obects is zero.

[Auslandau]

Originally Posted by sudszy

... so far in the history of man there has been no hit and run incident where a car driver has been left dead and bleeding by the side of the road after colliding with a pedestrian who has run off into the distance

If we follow that stupid anecdote ...... there are many reports every week of pedestrians who hit other pedestrians leaving them dead and bleeding by the side of the road and then run off in the distance.

Originally Posted by sudszy

Possibly the aim is not to police it but to change the attitudes, behaviour, culture of motorists , perhaps it will be just tickets for those above 40km/h if speedos are so inaccurate.

This is Melb .... 10k leeway???

Cannot see any benefit other than the appearance of "Look ... we have slowed down the cars from 10kph to ... um 30.

It wont happen anyways so why the stress.

[uranium_death]

The worst commercial I have ever seen is a Wipe Off 5 TAC one where a girl doesn't look where she's walking, and walks in front of a car.
If the driver went a little slower, she'd only have a bruised leg...

BUT maybe if she did what I was taught in kindergarten and to look both ways before you cross, it wouldn't be an issue? Nobody would get hurt...

The road is for cars. I see too many people walking in front of cars expecting everybody to stop for them...

[Falc'man]

Originally Posted by sudszy

Very precious.....but consider the bigger issue and those who will never get any minutes of their life back.

...when it comes to spin you'd put politicians to shame. If I ran you over with a Mack truck travelling at 60km/h in a 60km/h zone ...ahhh, only if... who would be at fault?
I guess you will support and argue the idea of having 20km/h speed limits? Or 10km/h speed limits? Zero?
what a stupid question, of course you will.

[jpd80]

VicRoads spokesman Nial Finegan said there were no plans to cut speed limits to 30km/h, but any proposals would be considered.

"It is VicRoads practice to put in place 40km/h speed limits in areas of high pedestrian numbers such as strip shopping centres and school speed zones," he said.

" Speed limits of less than 40 km/h are quite unusual."

This is where I don't understand the council's thinking with a 30 kph speed limit.

The argument for 40 kph was that most vehicles in good condition could stop withing a body length in an emergency situation.
Pedestrian fatalities are usually caused by speed where the victim's legs are swept out and a head strike occurs on the bonnet,
you don't get that at 40 kph or less as most drivers have already reduced speed even further.

This is a case of a council not working with speed limits already there, if there's a problem with motorists and
do something that will make a difference like putting in designated cycle lanes.

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by jpd80

This is a case of a council not working with speed limits already there, if there's a problem with motorists and
do something that will make a difference like putting in designated cycle lanes.

That won't happen because that costs money. Lowering the speed limit makes money, quite simple really.

[gtxb67]

Originally Posted by sudszy

Very precious.....but consider the bigger issue and those who will never get any minutes of their life back.

let's ban cars altogether then. no more attitudes to change and no more speeding fines . . . . everyone is happy

and the people who choose to not look when crossing the road, will not make other people accountable . . . . win, win, win

[MAD]

It's 100% clear that sudszy has absolutely no interest in hearing other viewpoints. His only aim is to argue every single point that is not the same as his. Even if it means being totally illogical and irrational.

[martinijosh]

Originally Posted by MAD

It's 100% clear that sudszy has absolutely no interest in hearing other viewpoints. His only aim is to argue every single point that is not the same as his. Even if it means being totally illogical and irrational.

So what you're saying is, Sudszy is a woman?



In reply to the above regarding registration - if you look at the registration fee break down (in qld at least) there's a section there where part of the rego is used for traffic improvement, and one for roadway maintenance I think.

Been awhile since I looked at it.

[DJM83]

Originally Posted by sudszy

Most here have a knee jerk response to this issue, and perhaps have not considered the issue at length. Initially this was introduced on ABC 774 this morning as a solution to the congestion problem, I was a little puzzled, simply to discourage drivers?

So is dropping the speed limit.

Originally Posted by sudszy

Whilst many here have carried on about how Darwinism should take care of careless pedestrians, the issue of cyclists and collisions with vehicles in the CBD is not as clearcut.

Foot paths are for pedestrians, roads are for cars. Its not really that hard.
How about fining pedestrians that walk against the red or 'jaywalk', another reason there is a lot of car vs pedestrian incidents.

Originally Posted by sudszy

One advantage I can see with cars being restricted to 30km/h is that they will be less likely to try and squeeze past cyclists restricting the situations where cyclists have to ride in the gutter, close to parked cars etc, all which are dangerous places to have to ride. Ultimately this is where the CBD is heading, encourage more cycles and less cars.

You would be the only one to see and advantage of this.
If bike riders followed the road rules aswell it wouldnt be near as bad, if they want to use the roads, abide by the laws car owners have to. If you dont want to follow the rules then yes they should ride in the gutter.
(before any bikes riders crack up, i was an avid mountain biker for many years so i know what its like to deal with cars on a daily basis)
SINGLE BLOODY FILE, ive lost count of how many times on the weekend near where i live i see packs of 20-30 bikes taking up a single lane, no wonder there is so many car vs bike incidents.

Originally Posted by sudszy

sorry paying rego doesnt give you exclusive rights to the roads which are not funded by registration payments.

Care to explain the 'Traffic improvement fee' on my QLD registration papers?

[Brazen]

Originally Posted by JC

This quote is from the article:

"Monash University Accident Research Centre senior research fellow Dr Bruce Corben said reducing speeds from 50km/h to 30km/h reduced the risk of death by up to 90 per cent."

Once again, this proves the incompetency of Monash University.

Sure, you may decrease the chance of death by reducing speed, but at the same time you increase the chance of accidents as people concetrate less, become distracted easier and get more frustrated as they drive slower.

Lets pull some numbers out of the air.... So whilst hitting a person at 30kmh compared to 50kmh decreases the chance of death by 90%, you are probably 15 times more likely to have an accident travelling at 30 compared to 50. Therefore fatal accidents will increase! Hence why a lot of the time fatal accidents decrease when speed limits are increased.

Another reason why determining speed limits by simply driving a car into a crash test dummy does not work! It does not take into account driver behaivour or concentration levels.

Although Monash probably scored another government grant or 'research fee' for its findings from Melbourne Council.

[FGII-XR6]

This is actually a health initiative , keep lowering the speed limit and it will be quicker to walk making everyone healthier and fitter

[aussie muscle]

Originally Posted by mik

in our area we have a school crossing area that`s 40 kph even out of school hours

that and road works zones that are left up over the weekend when they wont be working.

i actually complained about the road works issue to the transport minister. the RTA said they left the zone active over the long weekend (easter, so four days of no works) because of loose stones on the road from roadworks.

[ltd]

This is dumb beyond belief. Next time I see anyones name on the manifest which has "CR" or "MP" etc, I'm going to refuse them boarding and tell them 'speed kills, get out, walk and swim you bastard'.

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by ltd

This is dumb beyond belief. Next time I see anyones name on the manifest which has "CR" or "MP" etc, I'm going to refuse them boarding and tell them 'speed kills, get out, walk and swim you bastard'.

[Bobman]

Anyone who lives in Melbourne would have noticed the increasing number of 40km/h zones (some 24 hour, some end at midnight).

These are around Glenhuntly Road, Toorak Road, Malvern Road, Church Street, Glenferrie Road, Burwood Road, etc.

Absolute joke as well as you are driving along at 10pm on a week day, deserted roads which were once 60km/h and pedestrians will jay walk whenever they please, yet the motorist is punished!?

[|Nate]

I noticed that some main city streets are randomly 40 ?!
It was 11:30pm and I was coming back from Buller, there wasn't another car on the road for a couple of km's yet there is a glowing big "40" sign, seriously, who's that going to save?

If anything it'll kill me from going so slowly and falling asleep at the wheel.

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by Brazen

Once again, this proves the incompetency of Monash University.

Sure, you may decrease the chance of death by reducing speed, but at the same time you increase the chance of accidents as people concetrate less, become distracted easier and get more frustrated as they drive slower.

Lets pull some numbers out of the air.... So whilst hitting a person at 30kmh compared to 50kmh decreases the chance of death by 90%, you are probably 15 times more likely to have an accident travelling at 30 compared to 50. Therefore fatal accidents will increase! Hence why a lot of the time fatal accidents decrease when speed limits are increased.

Another reason why determining speed limits by simply driving a car into a crash test dummy does not work! It does not take into account driver behaivour or concentration levels.

Although Monash probably scored another government grant or 'research fee' for its findings from Melbourne Council.

Hmm, you are criticising a University that works with real data and has academics that peer review their work and you have overturned their findings with your own institution of "pull some numbers out of the air" .

Perhaps you(or anyone else) can pull some numbers from somewhere that support your claims rather than just repeating the rhetoric we keep hearing here.