Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

VIC Speed limit in Melb's central district cut to 40km/h.

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by Sir Ride Alot, Sep 23, 2012.

  1. Continuing on from the below thread as it's over 130 days old.

    Re: Speed limit in Melb's central district cut to 40km/h.

    The sooner Doyle is booted out the better.

    Time to slow down, Melbourne
    Date September 22, 2012 Adam Carey

    SPEED limits on Melbourne's city streets are set to drop to 40km/h in the hope the number of on-road casualties will be cut by about 25 a year.

    The new limit will be introduced progressively in the next six weeks and will apply to roads inside the Hoddle grid, bounded by Flinders, Spring, Spencer and La Trobe streets.

    Melbourne lord mayor Robert Doyle said the change would make the city safer for all road users, without any impact on congestion. Most roads in the city grid currently have a 50km/h speed limit.

    ''Research shows if we reduce the speed limit … we will prevent one fatality, nine serious injury crashes and up to 25 casualty crashes every year,'' Cr Doyle said. ''If it saves a single life, it's worth doing.''

    Response to the announcement was mixed, with pedestrian advocates calling for an even lower limit of 30km/h, while motoring lobbyist the RACV said it would ask the state government to step in and reverse the change.

    Ben Rossiter, chief executive of Victoria Walks, said about 70 per cent of city journeys were made on foot, so it made sense to set speed limits that made walking safer.

    Statistically, a person hit at 50km/h has a 15 per cent chance of survival, compared with 75 per cent at 40km/h and 90 per cent at 30km/h.

    But the RACV slammed the ''misguided policy'', suggesting it could contribute to crashes by provoking driver frustration.

    Brian Negus, the club's public policy general manager, said the new limit was fine for some city streets, ''but it's not appropriate for roads that have more of an arterial function, like King Street, Spencer Street and La Trobe Street''.

    Mr Negus said the prediction that the speed-limit change would prevent 25 casualties a year was a ''totally theoretical calculation''.

    ''It's not the speed limit, it's the actual speed that's critical, and if people are not travelling at 40km/h precisely, then you won't get those savings.''

    The RACV would call on the state government to reverse the change, he said.

    Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/time-to-slow-down-melbourne-20120921-26cer.html#ixzz27F2NpU41
  2. Umm, in all of that there is not one mention of why the pedestrians are on the bloody street in the first place! Or are people driving on the FOOTPATH.

    So just throwing out another solution, (it's a bit wild and out there compared with slowing the traffic) keep the bloody pedestrians on the footpaths and the cars on the roads, create things called "crossings" and have the pedestrians cross at them, the cars can slow and even stop at these "crossings".

    Here's the kicker, introduce traffic laws that attract demerit points (from drivers license) for pedestrian offences committed on roadways.

    Nah, much easier to make everyone drive really really slowly so when we hit these morons they don't die and can then reproduce more morons.

    Get hit at a crossing = Drivers fault.
    Get hit anywhere else = You are in the wrong place.
    • Like Like x 5
  3. to be honest a lot of the time 40 is probably about right on these roads... and its probably what most of the traffic is actually travelling at - when it can move....
    all i think will happen now is they will wind back all the speed cameras to 40, make a packet of dough on people speeding up for orange lights, and pedestrians will feel safer crossing away from crossings and will do so more often.

    i saw a good analysis years ago about the effect that dropping urban limits from 60 to 50 in australia and it showed that it had made no difference when taking into account the existing trend...... i just see this as worse.
  4. Yeah I don't think it's too big a deal. If you ride to conditions, that's about right a lot of the time. An example of time and place really...
  5. If pedestrian fatalities are such an issue why not do what most other cities around the world do and build a few over/underpasses. Afterall the CBD is not that big and the bulk of the pedestrian traffic is usually concentrated around a few intersections. Get people away from the roads and everyone wins.

    Singapore is a perfect example of this, with the underground walkways also doubling as shopping centres. Again this would make sense for Melbourne, since it would mean people don't have to walk around outdoors in the cold/wet of winter. Combine this with more underground and multi-storey parking, eliminating all on-street parking (other than loading zones), and you could easily raise the speed limit through the CBD.
  6. Sounds like a cheap and easy solution...

    I've got no probs with the very centres of CBDs being ultra pedestrian focussed. Much more liveable.
  7. Pedestrian focused cities only work if you have a public transport system at a standard that allows people to not have to bother with owning/driving their own vehicle.

    No city in Australia has yet managed that, especially when it comes to handling peak hour demand.
  8. I've got no problem with it. It's only the CBD grid, which is practically a glorified carpark anyway.
  9. the speed limit isn't the issue, the laws regarding pedestrians need to be changed/introduce fines, in the usa you can be fined for "jay walking"

    should be the same here.. if you're too impatient to wait at a crossing and find it fun to run in front of cars because you think you can make it, its your own ****ing fault if you get hit.

    fine pedestrians.. they will get the idea soon enough.
  10. Er... You can be fined for J-walking in Melbourne. Police do blitz this from time to time...
  11. And if this doesn't work out I suppose they will cut it further because people aren't getting the message?

    I like the idea for George St in the city, making it car free (exc bus and light rail) for certain hours of the day.
  12. Yep. But it's a lot easier for them to go after vehicles with easily photographed plates than try and chase down a pedestrian in a crowd (thus making everyone else around aware of their presence).

    This is why I won't be surprised if they continue trying to put the responsibility on drivers so they can bring even more easily enforceable restrictions. Of course if they can force drink drivers to fit interlocks to their car I don't see what would be so difficult in forcing convicted jaywalkers to wear a flourescent pink high-vis vest at all times when outdoors for 6-12 months. :demon:
  13. i don't live in the city/haven't read much about blitzes on pedestrians ... my bad.

    they should enforce it more then, then these situations wouldn't arise.

    pretty sure i grew up knowing to look left look right look left again before running across the road.. any time i've gone into the city.. i always see people running in front of cars...

  14. The problem with the police blitzes on jaywalking are that the penalties are lighter than the penalties for just about everything else.

    If (as suggested) they were linked with points on the persons car license then people might start taking notice instead of paying the fine and keeping jaywalking.
  15. All 40k zones are first-gear only for me now. My way of saying "Fuck you".
    • Like Like x 1

  16. No no no and hell no. There is absolutely no reason to link non-driving offenses to the driving license.
  17. I do this all the time and I'm not going to stop. If it's a big enough gap for me to make it cleanly (which means that nobody will have to brake for me), I'm going.
  18. So people with a licence are penalised more than those without one?
  19. Anyone noticed when the lights change in the city, everyone looks at the ground and walks across....

    I love that they are just trying to prevent injuries, not actually solve the problem of people walking wherever they want regardless of crossings or traffic.

    Pedestrians in Hi-Vis the only solution.
  20. Yep, they should farking know better.