Here we go - 30km/h speed zone Collingwood and Fitzroy (VIC)

bobbified on 08/08/2018 - 16:34
Last edited 08/08/2018 - 16:52 by 1 other user

30km/h speed zone to be enforced in Melbourne's inner north

https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/30km-h-speed-zon…

Speeds will drop to 30km/h on residential streets in Collingwood and Fitzroy from September in a move believed to be an Australian first.

It is understood that this will serve as a test case and the new speed limit could be proposed for other areas in Melbourne if the trial is successful.

Within weeks, Victoria Police will fine motorists who break the new speed limit, which will apply to eight kilometres of local roads bound by Alexandra Parade and Hoddle, Johnston and Nicholson streets.

The new speed zone (which will not apply to Smith and Brunswick streets) will be a 12-month trial led by Yarra Council, backed by a $250,000 grant from the Transport Accident Commission. The area is currently a 40km/h zone.

I suspect speed camera revenue targets are not being met in some areas. This "trial" will spread in no time and it'll roll out exactly the way the current 40km/h did years ago. Once the rollout of 30km/h areas are complete in a few years, they'll have a trial of 20km/h and so on. It's absolutely ridiculous.

Does anyone actually still believe the "if you don't speed or break the law, you've got nothing to worry about" crap that some people spew? What about when they restrict speeds to 20km/h? And then to 10km/h? At what point would those people (if any) think it's ridiculous?

Automotive Car Driving Melbourne Ridiculous Speed Limit Victoria

Comments

      • try2bhelpful on 08/08/2018 - 21:55
        -1

        People like to exaggerate.

        • HighAndDry on 09/08/2018 - 10:07
          +2

          I wish the 30km/h speed limit was an exaggeration.

  • GourmetFoodie on 08/08/2018 - 21:02
    +7

    Crazy. So sick of this revenue raising.

  • cloudy on 08/08/2018 - 21:13
    +6

    its so slow on those roads im gonna just push my car.

  • BartholemewH on 08/08/2018 - 21:20
    +1

    What about granny on her Gopher? They should have number plates damn it!

  • Vieira4 on 08/08/2018 - 21:53
    +2

    Oh man, I'm so glad I don't live in the draconian state of Victoria.

  • BuyoTheCat on 08/08/2018 - 22:17
    +3

    Soon, road deaths are going to be caused by pedestrians running into cars

    • Zedsdeadbabyzedsdead on 09/08/2018 - 08:12
      +1

      Instead of hit and run it will be 'walk and cause minimal damage'.

  • try2bhelpful on 08/08/2018 - 22:35
    +5

    Yeah, every time I’ve been to a council meeting on cars using side streets as rat runs it has been all about the revenue raising. If you think the speed limit drop is draconian you should see what some of the people in the area are proposing. The 30 kph limit will not apply to the main arterials so if you are taking Smith St, Brunswick St, etc you will not be affected. You could always take public transport into the city. If the council really wanted to revenue raise they would just remove the traffic calming setups and put in cameras e everywhere, we probably wouldn’t need to pay rates again - however the odds are we would have a few more dead kids due to speeding motorists.

    There is a really interesting phenomena about the inner city schools around me and it is kids are very seldom dropped off by parents in cars - most of the kids actually walk or ride to school. Not a lot of Toorak trucks at the gate but a lot of kids on the streets.

    I’m willing to live with a 12 month study to see what the outcome is, but then I grew up in an era when the Victorian annual road toll was over 1000 people per year; it is now 1/4 of the peak. Believe me, It is better this than more blocked off and/or one way streets. I’ve seen the alternative options here and it ain’t pretty.

    • brazen00 on 09/08/2018 - 07:18

      Finally, a voice of reason!

    • Zedsdeadbabyzedsdead on 09/08/2018 - 08:15

      "we probably wouldn’t need to pay rates again"

      Sure…

    • Euphemistic on 09/08/2018 - 09:06
      +3

      Council don't get any revenue from speeding fines, only from parking fines. State Gov gets all the speeding fine revenue.

    • HighAndDry on 09/08/2018 - 10:08
      +1

      I’m willing to live with a 12 month study to see what the outcome is

      The problem is it's never actually done as a study, it's done as an acclimatization exercise to get people used to the new regs while avoiding criticism by saying it's just a temporary study, and once the initial shock and outrage has passed, they'll just make it permanent.

      • ely on 11/08/2018 - 23:49

        Elsewhere you whine about studies being done elsewhere so not being relevant, here (and also elsewhere in this discussion) you whine about studies being done here as well ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

        Oh, and you were also whining about people with preconceived notions as well ╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻

  • Some Human on 08/08/2018 - 23:34

    But if you don't speed or break the law, you've got nothing to worry about.

  • El Grande on 08/08/2018 - 23:43
    +2

    WHY!!! Minimum should be 50. The brakes on the newer cars are better than before. There is no case for reducing the speed limit to 30. I think in Europe the minimum is 30 Miles which is about 50km/hr.

    • Euphemistic on 09/08/2018 - 09:07
      +3

      I think you'll find that the case is given for 30km/h speed limits, which is why they are proposed. And Europe have plenty of areas, built up, high pedestrian activity etc that are around 30km/h or whatever the mph conversion is.

  • [Deactivated] on 09/08/2018 - 00:22
    +3

    When you live in a left leaning (progressive) state you will always have them tinkering with things until they break it - like the education, criminal justice & immigration systems.

    Enjoy your 30km speed limits, mass migration increasing congestion (Victorians vote for it federally), and "gangs" roaming the streets.

    Please do not move to a conservative area and bring your policies with you.

    • HighAndDry on 09/08/2018 - 15:26
      +2

      Yup. One or two people run over a year in these areas from speeding? Reduce the Speed Limit!

      Dozens of break-ins, robberies, and other violent crimes by the same demographic? Welp, can't do anything about that!

      • Euphemistic on 09/08/2018 - 15:30

        Have you got comparative stats on that? Last time I saw any actual statistics, crime was down. Doesn’t stop the media from carrying on abuot stuff to sell newspapers or politicians rabbiting on about it trying to get votes.

        • HighAndDry on 09/08/2018 - 15:31
          +1

          Crime overall is down. Crime by that one demographic is way up.

          I mean - if we're using the logic of "Some improvement is good enough", we'd also have stopped at 50km/h speed limits. I'd be happy to apply that same logic to both situations, you?

        • Euphemistic on 09/08/2018 - 15:35
          +2

          @HighAndDry: I suppose you are right. I suspect they are actually doing things to reduce crime. Strangely there are different departments involved in managing each of those issues and they might be able to look at both at once.

        • HighAndDry on 09/08/2018 - 15:36

          @Euphemistic: I don't doubt they're doing things to reduce crime, they just don't seem to be as attached to any one particular factor as people are to "reduce the speed limit!" in addressing road accidents.

        • Euphemistic on 09/08/2018 - 15:45
          +2

          @HighAndDry: strangely, people don't get so excited because a crime reduction program largely doesn't affect them. Mention road rules and suddenly… https://anglicanmemes.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/tumblr_mn4…

        • HighAndDry on 09/08/2018 - 19:04

          @Euphemistic: Weren't people literally in the streets protesting because they thought policing might start targeting the demographic with the highest proportional rate of crimes?

  • Tuftsdude on 09/08/2018 - 01:01
    +4

    Lower speeds will just frustrate more drivers and increase road rage imo.

    We already have plenty of idiots going well below speeds everywhere. One of my favourites is St George's Rd, 2 lanes each side, 70 road and you have turtle fest on both sides, you'd be lucky if there was someone going above 50. There's a reason I don't work in the city anymore.

    • Miss B on 13/08/2018 - 14:35

      We have plenty of idiots with road rage over little things, blaming other people for their actions. Only one person can control each person's road rage.

      • Tuftsdude on 13/08/2018 - 14:44
        +2

        And we have many assholes on the road that deserve having their licences pulled. Yesterday I was driving on the M80 and back, 80k's~, at least 7 times I had slow drivers on the right lane not giving way to someone faster then them, when they could give way..

        But what really frustrates me is 2 or 3 times when a driver sees you coming faster than them on the right lane and indicates in front of you driving 3-10 kmph slower, for no apparent reason. If you do that, (profanity) you, truly.
        (Edit: not aimed at above Commentator, just the ones who do it).

        • Miss B on 13/08/2018 - 15:55

          There are always going to be annoying people on the road, but reacting to that and the lowering of speed limits by driving badly is at least as stupid and no less assholey. If people can't handle driving 30k/h in some residential streets without road rage, they probably shouldn't be driving until they can get that under control.

        • Tuftsdude on 13/08/2018 - 16:02

          @Miss B: What's your job and how often are you on the road, if you don't mind me asking?

        • Miss B on 13/08/2018 - 16:10

          @Tuftsdude:
          Not that often. Usually a maximum of an hour a day during the week. I often do 2-5 hour trips on the weekend.

        • Tuftsdude on 13/08/2018 - 16:25

          @Miss B: Fair enough. Personally for me I use the road a lot. I see friends everywhere, I do shift work all over Melbourne across a 24 hour roster and work a few jobs, so the traffic really gets to me, but even more than that the slow drivers who don't care about the others on the road. I see someone speeding behind me, I give them way. My mum who is a slow driver knows to do the same. The speeds are already very slow compared to other countries (I.e. U.k) and the fines and speed traps ridiculous. I've had to turn down jobs because of traffic and notoriously slow drivers from the Northern suburbs to the S.E.

          What I'm saying, if you don't use the roads as much as some of us, you won't feel the frustration, especially for those of us who have responsibilities outside of work like family, etc.

        • Miss B on 13/08/2018 - 16:35
          +1

          @Tuftsdude:
          If people are frustrated and it doesn't affect their driving I don't think it's an argument against lowering the speed in an area with a lot of cars, cyclists and pedestrians. If it affects their driving, the speed limit isn't the issue.

        • Tuftsdude on 13/08/2018 - 16:45

          @Miss B: You don't get it. Our speeds are already slow. Traffic plenty because of that. Lower speeds will only have a negative effect on drivers and traffic.

      • HighAndDry on 14/08/2018 - 14:23

        Do you apply this sense of personal responsibility to pedestrians walking onto the road? If they didn't, we wouldn't need such slow speed limits.

  • garetz on 09/08/2018 - 02:07
    +1

    Anything above walking speed is excessive IMO.

  • conza on 09/08/2018 - 08:11

    I think it's time to start protesting, this is really insane, 40 km/h is bad enough, but this is too far. I'd be happy to settle at 50 km/h, 30 km/h is a joke. People need to start speeding and taking their complaint to court, otherwise someone needs to organise a protest to get people's attention, no one wants this.

    • Euphemistic on 09/08/2018 - 15:06

      That's an awesome idea. You first.

  • brazen00 on 09/08/2018 - 08:15
    +10

    I don't see why this is such an issue for so many people. These are residential streets, not arterial roads. The main roads will still keep their higher speed limits.

    • If you live in the area and have to drive somewhere, you make your way as directly as possible to an arterial road. Dropping the speed limit from 40 to 30 will have negligible impact on your trip. You, personally, have not been affected.
    • If you do not live in the area and have to visit the area, you make your way as close as possible on an arterial road, and the last bit of your journey is on the residential streets, for as little distance as possible. Dropping the speed limit from 40 to 30 will have negligible impact on your trip. You, personally, have not been affected.
    • If you do not live in the area and are driving through, you stick to the arterial roads which have not changed. You, personally, have not been affected.
    • If you walk through the area, and have the misfortune of being hit by a car, you have a 50% greater chance of survival. You, personally, have been affected positively.
    • If you drive through the area, and have the misfortune of hitting a pedestrian, you have a 50% greater chance of not killing them. You, personally, have been affected positively.
    • Zedsdeadbabyzedsdead on 09/08/2018 - 08:18
      +4

      "Dropping the speed limit from 40 to 30 will have negligible impact on your trip. You, personally, will not be affected."

      Only if time is an illusion.

      • brazen00 on 09/08/2018 - 08:22

        Let's maths this shit up.

        Say you spend 500m of the beginning and 500m at the end of your journey on residential streets.

        You go at 40 instead of 30.

        Congratulations, you just got there 30 seconds earlier.

        Dropping the speed limit from 40 to 30 will have negligible impact on your trip. You, personally, will not be affected.

        • Zedsdeadbabyzedsdead on 09/08/2018 - 08:28
          +6

          With reasoning like this you should take a job in the public sector.

        • bobbified on 09/08/2018 - 08:30
          -3

          you just got there 30 seconds earlier

          That's an extra 30 seconds on the road that you could hit someone. Oh wait - but at 30km/h, they're 50% less likely to die!

        • Zedsdeadbabyzedsdead on 09/08/2018 - 08:33

          @bobbified: Works 60% of the time, everytime.

        • brazen00 on 09/08/2018 - 08:33
          -3

          @Zedsdeadbabyzedsdead: "reasoning like this" is called "maths".

        • Zedsdeadbabyzedsdead on 09/08/2018 - 08:36
          +1

          @brazen00: What, like numbers?

        • brazen00 on 09/08/2018 - 08:36

          @Zedsdeadbabyzedsdead: That's them!

        • Zedsdeadbabyzedsdead on 09/08/2018 - 08:40

          @brazen00: "you just got there 30 seconds earlier"

          "That's an extra 30 seconds on the road that you could hit someone. Oh wait - but at 30km/h, they're 50% less likely to die!"

          So what do think about the above?

        • brazen00 on 09/08/2018 - 08:41
          -2

          @Zedsdeadbabyzedsdead: You spent 25% more time on the road but if you hit someone, you're 50% less likely to kill them. Sounds like a win.

        • brazen00 on 09/08/2018 - 08:42
          +1

          @Zedsdeadbabyzedsdead: Plus, you're less likely to hit them because they and you have more chance of taking evasive action. So the my other comment is worst case.

        • Zedsdeadbabyzedsdead on 09/08/2018 - 08:43

          @brazen00: Not for the people that died…

        • brazen00 on 09/08/2018 - 08:43

          @Zedsdeadbabyzedsdead: Which will be fewer people than if you were going at 40.

        • Zedsdeadbabyzedsdead on 09/08/2018 - 08:45

          @brazen00: But they are still dead. How do we solve people dying in general?

        • brazen00 on 09/08/2018 - 08:49

          @Zedsdeadbabyzedsdead: Congratulations on your strawman

          We weren't talking about stopping people dying in general, we were talking about impacts to people of dropping the limit from 40 to 30.

        • Zedsdeadbabyzedsdead on 09/08/2018 - 08:49

          @brazen00: Why not reduce it to 10 then?

        • brazen00 on 09/08/2018 - 08:50

          @Zedsdeadbabyzedsdead: You can make that argument if you like. Sounds like a bit of a slippery slope though

        • Zedsdeadbabyzedsdead on 09/08/2018 - 08:55

          @brazen00: "Because no proof is presented to show that such extreme hypotheticals will in fact occur"

          It's already dropped from 60 to 30 which I class as extreme. I honestly think they will drop it to 10 eventually.

        • brazen00 on 09/08/2018 - 08:57

          @Zedsdeadbabyzedsdead: Then we disagree on that also. I don't think it will drop beyond 30. Perhaps councils will decide to cut off more streets as dead-ends for cars (but through for pedestrians/bikes) and other measures, but personally I don't think they will drop the speed any more. I could be wrong.

        • Zedsdeadbabyzedsdead on 09/08/2018 - 08:59

          @brazen00: "I don't think it will drop beyond 30."
          "I could be wrong"

        • brazen00 on 09/08/2018 - 09:00

          @Zedsdeadbabyzedsdead: Yes, I could. So could you. I don't have a crystal ball. I'm not sure why this is worthy of being pointed out, but there you have it.

        • brazen00 on 09/08/2018 - 09:03

          @Zedsdeadbabyzedsdead: But we've gone way off the original point now, which was that people won't be negatively impacted and may be positively impacted.

        • Zedsdeadbabyzedsdead on 09/08/2018 - 09:10

          @brazen00: You only managed to miss out a few dozen variables from the equation. Apart from that, nice one!

        • brazen00 on 09/08/2018 - 09:10

          @Zedsdeadbabyzedsdead: Care to share?

        • Zedsdeadbabyzedsdead on 09/08/2018 - 09:13
          -1

          @brazen00: If you go through the entire thread you will probably spot them.

        • mezje on 09/08/2018 - 09:30
          +1

          This isn't what bothers people, it's the pending enforcement of these speed limits which is the issue.

          Travelling at 30 is really not that easy to maintain, especially when bouncing between 40 and 50 zones in the area.

          When I tell friends in Japan about our speed limits and how they are enforced they just laugh and wonder how on earth any motorist is able to control their speed that well travelling around town. To them low speed limits just mean go slow and be sensible, not stare at your speedo or face (relative) extreme financial consequences.

        • brazen00 on 09/08/2018 - 09:35

          @mezje: Really? I don't agree that it's not easy to maintain. You don't need to stare at your speedo, that's a furphy. Your speedo should be in your peripheral vision anyway. Glance every now and then. You only need to do it a couple of times to get a feel for the speed.

        • Roman Sandstorm on 09/08/2018 - 09:47
          +2

          In fact, it's even less impactful than this.

          I don't think there are many 500m stretches in the designated residential streets before you reach one of the arterials.

          Plus, you have to factor accelerating from 0 km/h to 30 km/h (or 0 km/h to 40 km/h for the comparison). The actual time spent driving at 30 km/h as opposed to 40 km/h will likely result in a 5 or 10 second 'delay' at most.

          Furthermore, if you know the area you know that many of these streets are extremely skinny (room for only one car at a time at many places), and difficult to traverse with any parked cars, so even now the time spent at 40 km/h in many areas would be negligible.

          What, at first glance may appear to be a frustrating and annoying curtailment, upon consideration really becomes a very minor matter.

          Whether it succeeds in reducing pedestrian and bicycle incidents may take considerably longer than one year to determine, given that the numbers of such incidents are probably quite low (in that area), and thus statistical variance may apply before sufficient numbers are gathered.

          [Perhaps increasing the existing speed limit from 40 km/h to 50 km/h in a similar inner-urban demographic area to run as a 'control', and seeing if incident numbers correspondingly increased would be a more conclusive methodology. However, I am guessing there may be some minor ethical concerns about potentially deliberately getting more cyclists and pedestrians harmed.]

        • brazen00 on 09/08/2018 - 09:55
          +2

          @Roman Sandstorm: This needs to be highlighted:

          What, at first glance may appear to be a frustrating and annoying curtailment, upon consideration really becomes a very minor matter.

        • bobbified on 09/08/2018 - 11:53
          +1

          @Roman Sandstorm:

          The actual time spent driving at 30 km/h as opposed to 40 km/h will likely result in a 5 or 10 second 'delay' at most.

          …so even now the time spent at 40 km/h in many areas would be negligible.

          If that's the case, why are they changing it at all?

          The speed limit is actually the limit. It is not a speed that everyone must drive at.

          if you know the area you know that many of these streets are extremely skinny

          Given that the streets might be narrow, most people would probably be travelling at less than 40km/h anyway. The only effect of reducing the speed to 30km/h is the possibility of enforcement. I'd suggest that it's counterproductive compared to before, in that there's now the threat of a speeding ticket.

          Also, right now, the 30/km speed zones are "trialled" in one area - they will no doubt expand into other areas.

        • brazen00 on 09/08/2018 - 12:41

          @bobbified:

          If that's the case, why are they changing it at all?

          It's a point of perspective. The time spent for each individual is negligible, but when you add it up across the community, it is material. Which is why changing it doesn't have a negative impact on the individual (driving) but does have a positive impact on the community.

        • bobbified on 09/08/2018 - 12:44

          @brazen00:

          if you know the area you know that many of these streets are extremely skinny

          When you get a speeding ticket at 33km/h, then is that an individual impact or a community impact?

        • burningrage on 09/08/2018 - 13:17
          +3

          You should count from where it used to be. Of course 60 to 50 to 40 to 30 would sound negligible.

          But from then 60 to 30, thats double the time and lets not forget at times you need to go faster in order to catch the green light and now with half the speed you will more likely to miss that light and given average red light is 90seconds, add that too to your math.

          Then times that to say 260 working days of the year and suddenly it may not seem as small as you think.

        • brazen00 on 09/08/2018 - 13:19
          +1

          @bobbified: That's what you call "your own fault".

        • brazen00 on 09/08/2018 - 13:23

          @burningrage: On those times (and it's only sometimes), you're still talking about 2 minutes a day.

        • kale chips suck on 09/08/2018 - 13:34
          +1

          @bobbified:

          "Also, right now, the 30/km speed zones are "trialled" in one area - they will no doubt expand into other areas"

          This is why they're trialling it where they are trialling it. Given it's already so congested and slow anyway, there's not likely to be much reaction. So they run their trial unapposed, decree it a success, then roll it out anywhere they want.

          Because VicRorts.

          Also, just a FYI, the Monash traffic research center research is funded by the TAC. A bit like when Phillip Morris funded tobacco research. Same same.

        • mezje on 09/08/2018 - 13:52

          Next time you are driving try maintain @ 30kmh +/- 3kmh. It is not that easy and simply unneeded, wouldn't be an issue if more leniency was given but it's not. Police can and will be enforcing this.

          If you are driving a manual car where gears are short this is made even more difficult. The focus should be on good driving, being alert and aware of your surroundings and your vehicle. Maintaining brakes, tyres and other safety items etc not just pushing speed limits lower and lower.

        • bobbified on 09/08/2018 - 14:34

          @brazen00:
          To prevent tickets, drivers must at least divert some of their attention to make sure they're not a few k's over - the same attention that would otherwise be focused on the road and actual driving.

        • brazen00 on 09/08/2018 - 14:39

          @bobbified: Does that not happen at 40?

        • bobbified on 09/08/2018 - 14:47

          @brazen00:
          It's been mentioned that the streets are narrow and most people don't drive at 40km/h anyway. Which means the limit could've been left as-is and drivers wouldn't be so worried about a speeding ticket.

          Now that it's 30, extra attention has to be given (relative to when it was 40), esp when they were already driving around at 30 before!

          Blame the draconian enforcement!

        • Euphemistic on 09/08/2018 - 14:59
          +1

          @bobbified: If speed limits are left as is, then we will still have the same number of incidents, which apparently is too many.

          When they dropped the limit to 40 did we not take an extra period of time to adapt to the speed giving extra attention to the speedo.

          Make the limit 40 and people will think 50 is OK and run the risk of a ticket at 50 (and find that it doesn't happen that much). Make it 30.

        • HighAndDry on 09/08/2018 - 19:09

          @Euphemistic: Make the limit 30 and people will think 40 is OK and run the risk of a ticket at 40 (and find that it doesn't happen that much). Make it 20.

          Wait no,

          Make the limit 20 and people will think 30 is OK and run the risk of a ticket at 30 (and find that it doesn't happen that much). Make it 10.

          There's no objective reason for the speed limit to even be at 40. It's an arbitrary cut-off that a group of busy bodies decided is apparently a good number, and that the government happily welcomed because it'll make them more money.

        • Euphemistic on 09/08/2018 - 20:31
          +2

          @HighAndDry: maybe strangely, but there is sone science around the speed limits. Impacts to pedestrians, stopping distance, reaction times and link all that with traffic volumes and road design and you can determine a safe speed. 40 has been recognised for school zones, but given people tend to drive a bit over the limit (because we think we can get away with it and it won’t hurt anyone) the limit probably needs to be 30 to allow for that.

          (I’m not a roads engineer nor a crash specialist so can’t give you actual numbers)

    • one man clan on 09/08/2018 - 09:20
      +2

      Just reading through this thread laughing at all the people who think the sky is falling over this that probably live nowhere near Fitzroy.

      These changes aren't happening on highways people.

      • brazen00 on 09/08/2018 - 09:21

        You'd think the trial was all roads in Oz, including motorways.

      • Ghost47 on 09/08/2018 - 18:59

        It is possible that if this is seen as "successful" that it could spread to other areas. From the article:

        "Monash University Accident Research Centre Associate Professor Jennie Oxley, who will monitor the 12-month trial with Yarra Council and VicRoads, said researchers would recommend that the speed zone be rolled out more widely — especially in areas with a large number of schools — if the Yarra trial was a success."

        I know of schools that are on main roads, eg. Burwood Highway has a couple of 40 km/hr zones. If this is "successful" it's possible those zones could drop to 30km/hr.

        It's all too easy to laugh at others for having a whinge without considering the bigger picture or actual implications or the precedent that this trial may set.

    • HighAndDry on 09/08/2018 - 15:28
      +7

      Again, next it'll be:

      Dropping the speed limit from 30 to 20 will have negligible impact on your trip. You, personally, have not been affected.

      And then:

      Dropping the speed limit from 20 to 10 will have negligible impact on your trip. You, personally, have not been affected.

      Then:

      You're already going at 10km/h, why not just get out and push?

      You're forgetting these used to be 50km/h streets, and yes, going from 50km/h to 30km/h DOES have an impact.

    • rover100 on 10/08/2018 - 15:10
      +2

      Glad it's Melbourne and not Sydney. 30km is a joke. Should just make driving tests harder and more strict if you have idiots not paying attention on the road.

      • GG57 on 10/08/2018 - 15:20

        Sydney has a 30km/hr speed limit on Druitt Street

        • HighAndDry on 10/08/2018 - 16:45

          Huh interesting. Literally never noticed, or noticed anyone else paying that limit any attention.

  • lddv04 on 09/08/2018 - 09:15

    Thanks to your friendly hipster Green voter!

  • gres on 09/08/2018 - 09:36

    who actually votes for this stuff?

    politicians and public servants again forgetting they are representatives of the people and employees of the people,

    • brazen00 on 09/08/2018 - 09:37
      +2

      The people who live there?

      • HighAndDry on 09/08/2018 - 15:30

        By "there", you mean Fitzroy right? Because all I see is you all over this thread, and at least according to OzB, you're all the way up in Brisbane.

        • brazen00 on 09/08/2018 - 15:59

          Yep, you'll note I didn't say "me".

        • brazen00 on 09/08/2018 - 16:11
          +1

          Because all I see is you

          I didn't know you felt that way.

        • HighAndDry on 09/08/2018 - 16:15

          @brazen00: Oh, in that case you're kind of still wrong. No one votes for specific policies - hell, I don't think anyone in the last election even knew this was on the cards. And the people whose votes caused this… fairly sure it'd be the State election, which would include everyone from people living in the area, to people living out in the countryside who'll never come within 100kms of the place.

          To pretend that these policies are driven by, and only by, the people living there and affected by it is… well, wrong, and just a cheap rhetorical tactic (whether done knowingly or not).

        • HighAndDry on 09/08/2018 - 16:17
          +2

          @brazen00: Ha! What's that they say about the line between love and hate being a thin one?

        • ezzaf on 10/08/2018 - 10:00
          +3

          @HighAndDry: It's a council led trial, and yes I did see candidates in Yarra campaigning with a strategy of making local roads safer. So yeah, as a local resident this policy doesn't surprise me.

    • ezzaf on 10/08/2018 - 09:56
      +5

      People like me, who live in Yarra? I'm very happy with the plan the council is putting in place. The area is heavily congested, and roads in question are minor roads. A 30kph speed limit seems appropriate to me.

      And yes, I do drive on the roads in question. Having to drive slightly slower on them isn't going to cause any problems. Traffic congestion on the main roads causes far more delays (in Yarra) than the speed limit on a residential street.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join