Please let ACC know that you want speeds reduced in the CBD.
It's 40km/h or 'stay a backwater'
Lord Mayor Stephen Yarwood has accused his city of living up to its reputation as a “backwater' if it does not introduce 40km/h speed limits in the CBD.
Mr Yarwood again called for the City Council to trial 40km/h speed limits around the city to increase safety, promote development and make city living exciting.
“Every capital city in Adelaide is doing this and if we do not support it, we will be seen as a backwater that is pro cars,” Mr Yarwood warned the councillors.
He became embroiled in a heated debate with Cr Anne Moran.
“If you are so cringeworthingly embarrassed about your city, that is a real shame,” she said.
A report prepared by council staff recommend the council approve a 12-month trial of a 40km/h speed limits in roads bounded by Grote and King William streets and West and South terraces.
The matter was deferred and will be discussed at a Capital City Committee meeting chaired by Premier Jay Weatherill, early next year.
From City North Messenger of 21-Dec-2011 on page 11.
Lower speed limits are safer for everyone: car occupants, pedestrians and cyclists. Lower speeds also reduce fuel used and air pollution plus noise pollution, improving the ambience of a shopping precinct. Adelaide City Council was supporting a lower speed limit but now some councillors appear to have second thoughts. Please contact authorities to let them know that you support lower speed limits in the CBD. Add your reasons for visiting the city: business, education, employment, gym, recreation, resident, shopping, etc.
Capital City Committee, CapitalCity@sa.gov.au
Premier Jay Weatherwill, form at http://www.ministers.sa.gov.au/ministers/hon-jay-weatherill.html
Rachel Sanderson MP, Member for Adelaide, firstname.lastname@example.org
Email Adelaide City Council:
email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
I know - I see where this is heading so why don't we just cut to the chase and ban vehicular traffic full stop! We'll all use public transport. Oh wait, the bus drivers are getting lost, the trams stop dead in their tracks (let's face it, we are a backwater!), the trains pump out diesel fumes........
Sorry tradies you are unemployed if you can't get your tools of trade into a backpack. Sorry Mrs Smith your husband died in theatre because the surgeon's bus driver missed his stop. Tourism operators I'm sorry for your loss. Cadel bummer about that punture but your spare wheel will be on the next available ??
At the moment I still love Adelaide - Happy New Year :-)
Anne Moran should change her last name to Moron.
I'm not sure whether lowering speeds will work to be honest. I agree in principle and I don't own a car so I have no car agenda but I'm thinking a reduction of two lane roads coupled with lowering and CBD wide limit (so we don't need to cram our streets with multiple speeds signs and confuse people.
The KISS principle(s) need to be applied here. We need to restrict the number of cars coming into and through the city and improve that so-called 'ring road' (laughable because it has stoplights everywhere). That should be the priority.
And as I've said a billion times, drivers and cyclists should sit a test to ensure they understand the CURRENT rules and it should be done a minimum of every 5 years.
More educated road users equals less accidents.
I had the car today so got to see bit more of the road than usual, even though it's pretty quiet out there at the moment.
Today I say 2-3 drivers on mobile phones, 2-3 whizz by in excess of the posted speed limit, I was overtaken on the left on a single-lane road, I saw a cyclist riding on the footpath without a helmet, and I saw another cyclist attempt a risky turn into 70kph traffic and then give the bird to a driver that took evasive action and honked him.
I was reading in SAPOL's road accident statistics for 2010 which said 61 of 105 fatal accidents were attributed to irresponsible driver behaviour. In my own experience, most of the times I've run into trouble on the road is when the opposing vehicle (cars and cyclists included) failed to give way, and in most cases I was traveling faster than the opposing vehicle!
My point is that the main cause of road fatality is irresponsible driving (speeding, inattention etc) - speed limit reduction won't necessarily reduce the number of accidents because people will continue to be irresponsible. The only positive outcome of speed limit reduction is the severity of injury but in car versus cyclist accidents I don't think that will give cyclists much solace. I support ideas to make road users more responsible, but, as Gillian said, where do we stop?
As a long-term city resident, I think the speed limit should be lowered. The problem with a blanket speed limit, whatever it is, is that it will be excessive, from a safety perspective, on many of the streets in the city.
Perhaps a formula which graded the speed limit to the available clear width (and length!) of carriageway, with the onus on the driver to choose the appropriate speed restriction, would be more helpful. This is not an impossible ask; it just requires careful legal drafting.
David did you recently fix your roof? I think I walk past you most days to work.
Yes, the last of the 1869 iron off the main roof. Still have the verandah to do. As one of the neighbours said, when we took the scaffold down: "No more bell tower."
It seems to me that at it's maximum (Fullarton to West Terrace) the CBD is about 3 km wide. If you do that at 50 km/h it will take 3 x 6/5 = 3.6 minutes. If you do it at 40 km/h it will take 3 x 6/4 = 4.5 minutes. So the new speed restrictions will cost about a minute at the outside. Of course generally there is traffic and lights slowing you down so most of the time you are already doing less than 40 km/h so the new restrictions would have no effect at all.
So why would we bother?
Why bother if "you are already doing less than 40 km/h so the new restrictions would have no effect at all."?
Why bother if 64% of all fatalities occur on rural roads? Why bother if nearly 60% of road fatalities are attributed to irresponsible driver behaviour and 46% from driving dangerously? Why bother if 28% of those that die have a blood alcohol component > 0.05, 17% tested positive to drugs, 36% weren't wearing a seatbelt?
We are so focused on minimising the severity of the accidents yet somehow completely ignore the causes. There is a lot of irresponsible activity on our roads that changing speed limit will not address but is ultimately the easiest, band aid solution.
I drive a car - I don't like driving slowly. But...
Usually it is pretty well impossible to get much over 40km/hr in the city anyway so why not formalize that speed limit? It is a small area from side to side so setting a lower speed limit is not going to cause any real delay to vehicular traffic. As pointed out above the safety to those being actually hit by a vehicle at a lower speed is quite considerable, that seems like a good idea, lots of pedestrians in the city and cyclists also.
Frankly, many/most cars will stomp on the gas to get up to the speed limit. Imposing a lower speed limit clearly then calms said traffic, not much point burning off when you are going to be speeding pretty much out of first gear. As a cyclist I quite like that idea, especially as I very often cycle within the CBD of Adelaide. The only problem is that exceeding 40Km/hr is really quite easy on my push-bike, might get pinged :-( But I can cope with that...
Thanks Steve, Darren and rossmg.
I also have seen data from DTEI that a cyclist, when hit by a vehicle travelling above 40km/h, will most likely die. An unfair outcome when due to negligent driving by another. When cycling rather than driving, you are 15 times more likely to be injured.
The Monash University Accident Research Centre (MUARC) conducted a study with cyclists wearing helmet-mounted video cameras: Naturalistic cycling study: identifying risk factors for on-road commuter cyclists.
In total, 127 hours and 38 minutes were analysed for 13 participants and 54 events were identified: 2 collisions, 6 near-collisions and 46 incidents. Prior to events, 88.9% of cyclists travelled in a safe/legal manner. Sideswipe was the most frequent event type (40.7%). Most events occurred at an intersection / intersection-related location (70.3%). The vehicle driver was judged at fault in the majority of events (87.0%) and no post-event driver reaction was observed (83.3%).
Previous research (Newstead et al, 2004b) on unprotected road users found the average risk of death or serious injury for unprotected road users involved in reportable crashes is around 35%. This compares with an average serious injury risk of only 2.3% for light vehicle drivers in crashes with other light vehicles, only one fifteenth of the risk of an unprotected road user. Interpreting this in a total serious road trauma context shows the relative importance of reducing collisions involving unprotected road users compared with crashes of light vehicle drivers.