I almost let the one slip past – meaning to post last week but only just remembering it last night. I just have to comment though when something like this ends up in the NZ Herald’s “Ask Phoebe” column:
Can you please tell me who sets the speed limits on our roads in New Zealand and what criteria are used for determining these limits?
Generally, we have one limit of 50km/h on all urban roads, regardless of whether that road is a main road or a side-street. Compared to Australia, for instance, where the limit is 60km/h on main roads and 50km/h on routes carrying less traffic, our somewhat sedate limit of 50km/h seems unnecessarily restrictive.
For instance, East Coast Rd between Pinehill and Northcross is an incredibly wide road with footpaths set well back from the kerb offering unobstructed visibility in both directions, and it has a 50km/h limit. Not surprisingly, there is a speed camera located at the middle of that stretch, which is the second highest revenue-earning fixed camera location in Auckland. In any other developed country the limit would likely be 70 or 80km/h.
Geez where to start? Let’s just consider pedestrian safety for a moment, if you get hit by a car braking from 50 kph you’ve got a decent chance of surviving. If you get hit by a car doing 60 kph or more, even if it brakes your chances are dramatically lower.
Now let’s consider urban amenity. The faster the speed of traffic is along the route the noisier it is and the more that road severs the community it passes through. I had thought that Auckland was trying desperately to see its streets and roads as more than just a pipe for cars, but for their place-making values. Higher speeds is perhaps the most detrimental thing you could do to a street’s place-making function.
How about cyclists? Oh yeah I’m sure cyclists will feel just as safe along a 70-80 kph road as they would along that road with a 50 kph speed limit. The wider stretches of East Coast Road include on-street cycle-lanes of the green paint variety, meaning that people using them are definitely not shielded from the traffic.
Every other developed world country would NOT make an arterial route like East Coast Road into a 70-80 kph road. Most cities are trying to get away from this obsession about “everything to make the car go just that little bit faster”. We’re the outlier here in Auckland in terms of our continued obsession with building more road, yet even we aren’t stupid enough to be turning too many more (now that Manukau City Council has thankfully been disbanded) arterial roads into defacto motorways.
What on earth was Phoebe thinking?
Update: It seems that some of what I had thought was Phoebe’s answer was actually part of the question. Thanks to Andrew for pointing this out and apologies to Phoebe.
Processing...
I may say that I have heard of a proposal – and one which I strongly favour – to lower the speed limit in many residential areas, particularly those with narrow streets (like mine), to 40Km/hour. Particularly in view of the fact that the police give you either 4 or 9 (never sure which it is :-)) grace, the effective speed limit in our street is closer to 60Km/hour. Kids in the street, all sorts of reasons, mean I would love to see it lowered to 40 for us.
jj
there is an NZTA formula for determining the appropriate limit on a road, it covers things like the number and spacing on kerb crossings, type of control and spacing of intersections, adjacent land uses etc.
from memory, pedestrians and cyclists don’t rate highly in the equasion, but it was a while ago that I used it
Also, NZTA’s own safety manager has said that the classical way of setting speed limits by checking how fast the drivers are / want to be going is the wrong thing to do…
When I read that I figured the posturing about higher speeds was the correspondent, not Phoebe as the bold type implies.
Regardless of who wrote it the idea is still poorly thought through. How many seconds quicker will they get to the next traffic light queue?
I think her head would explode at the extensive use of 30km/h and 40km/h in Stockholm – most of the city centre is in fact 40km/h and nearly all residential streets are 40km/h or 30km/h with walking speed only on the plethora of shared spaces. So unless we’re not a developed nation, I don’t think the assertion that such a road would be 70km/h/80km/h holds.
“In any other developed country the limit would likely be 70 or 80km/h”
Even if this is true, would it be desired? I’m pretty sure if you put up a speed camera in any other developed country at a comparable road with a speed limit set at 70 or 80, it’d be a high revenue-earning one too. You build a defacto motorway, it’ll get used as a motorway…
Looked to me like that column had a formatting error. That whole paragrah is misformatted. The bit not in bold is still the question – note the author of the question is not mentioned for another two paragraphs.
From how I read it, this is the whole question from speedster Vlad Sorokin:
==============================
Can you please tell me who sets the speed limits on our roads in New Zealand and what criteria are used for determining these limits?
Generally, we have one limit of 50km/h on all urban roads, regardless of whether that road is a main road or a side-street. Compared to Australia, for instance, where the limit is 60km/h on main roads and 50km/h on routes carrying less traffic, our somewhat sedate limit of 50km/h seems unnecessarily restrictive.
For instance, East Coast Rd between Pinehill and Northcross is an incredibly wide road with footpaths set well back from the kerb offering unobstructed visibility in both directions, and it has a 50km/h limit. Not surprisingly, there is a speed camera located at the middle of that stretch, which is the second highest revenue-earning fixed camera location in Auckland. In any other developed country the limit would likely be 70 or 80km/h.
How can we initiate a review of these limits in certain areas, and with whom? Vlad Sorokin, Pinehill.
==============================
… and this is Phoebe’s reply:
==============================
Speed limits are set by the NZ Transport Agency, in conjunction with local councils where the limits apply to urban streets. For full coverage of how these limits are set, go to http://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/speed-limits/speed-limits-nz or Google “speed limits nz”.
To have the speed limit reviewed on a particular street, phone Auckland Transport on (09) 355 3553 or NZTA on (09) 969 9800.
==============================
I completely agree with Andrew — the quote is purely from the letter writer, not Phoebe.
I saw this and thought it was a bit bizarre. I wonder how many other people out there think this?
The thing is – even if you don’t care about safety, the gains from increasing Aucklands speed limits would be minimal. Most trips of any length use the motorway system. Also when you are traveling on arterial roads the speed is limited mainly by traffic and intersections. So we are talking travel time savings of seconds in general.
I have started trying to drive and ride at 50, not 55 or 60. It is much safer (you feel like you have lots of time to anticipate hazards), and it doesn’t take any significant amount of extra time to get anywhere.
I started to think about my own lack of logic at driving as fast as I could to save a minute of time by considering what I actually did at my destination. Eg getting to work, booting up computer then casually making a coffee and exchanging niceties with work colleagues – not worth risking death and injury for 😉
I inadvertently came across that Phoebe article too and wondered what happened to the usual attempt to provide some “authoritative” answer; seemed like a bit of an uninformed rant.
Although “technically” it is possible to implement speeds below 50km/h in urban NZ, practically the “system” is not currently set up well for departing from the default, providing little incentive or guidance on how to do it. Thus we are reliant on the relative efforts of local staff and politicians around the country, which vary greatly.
For a more thorough assessment of the state of play in NZ, you can read my paper on this last year: http://ir.canterbury.ac.nz/handle/10092/6293
Thanks. Mind if I gank that for use in Auckland Council and Auckland Transport?
Christopher Dempsey
Go for it; the more awareness, the better! Working on various bits of research to try to “plug the gaps” both technically and politically…
Perhaps she really meant “turn it into a four lane highway and make it a Road of National`s Stupity”?
I have to (partly) agree with Phoebe here, the problem here is the roads not the speed limits. Dropping the speed limits on roads that are nearly highways anyway will mean some people drive at the new speed limit, but unless there is a cop car some will continue to drive at the speed that feels comfortable – probably well over the original speed limit. Whether overall that makes the road safer or less safe (because of accidents caused by interactions between slow and fast drivers) is an interesting question. But its kind of irrelevant for pedestrians and cyclists because the fast drivers, and the huge exposed road to cross, are still going to make them feel unsafe.
Widening the footpaths, putting in cyclelanes, and restricting lines of sight with trees would solve both problems by making drivers slow down and making the roads themselves less of a hostile wasteland. If the NZTA decides they for some reason still want a multi-lane highway going through a residential area maybe they should go the other way and make safer by cordoning the vehicles off and being LESS pedestrian and cyclist friendly?
Phoebe. Falconer. Did. Not. Write. That.
See my previous comment and click through to the article to see. It’s a misapplication of bold text that makes it look like part of the write-in from Vlad Sorokin is Phoebe’s reply. It is not.
That said, Phoebe’s response doesn’t respond to Sorokin’s opinion, just his question of who to ask to initiate a review. It just refers him to the NZTA and Auckland Transport.
From the look of this road the council or the national roads board expected to four-lane this stretch of road instead of building a motorway. In any other developed country the limit on a road with extensive provision of slip roads and huge property setbacks would be 60kph (35 mph) except near those hillcrest interesections. But there would also be limits of 50 on the feeder roads and 40 in the cul de sacs. Of course the space set aside for 4-laning should have already been used for off-road cycle lanes so that 60kph would not be a problem.
Perhaps Peter M could consider editing his post to reflect that it was not Phoebe who wrote that rant. I fully agree though, we need lower speeds not higher speeds.
The title of the article seems to support the guys argument though. I read lose phoebe probably didn’t write that, but someone at the herald did.
John Roughan?
Every 10km/hr speed increase will save 12 seconds per km, and the section he refers to is under 2km, so at 60 you’d save 24 seconds max. But that assumes you constantly drive full speed, which you can’t with all the roundabouts and intersections, traffic queues, etc. Worth worrying about for 15secs gain? I suggest Vlad get one of those toilets with integrated auto bidet and with his hands free comb his hair saving at least as much time.
This is called as a planned city.
Thanks.