30kph in towns/cities survey

Transportation, Travel and Trips
1

"Are you in favour of 30 km/h zones in towns and cities?

A majority of the Swiss population is in favour of the creation of 30 km/h zones in localities, according to a survey by the Swiss Accident Prevention Bureau (BPA). In the field, the city centre of Sion has taken the plunge.

According to the study published on Tuesday, 52% of the Swiss population is in favour of a 30 km/h speed limit in towns and cities, except on the main roads, which would remain limited to 50 km/h.

This support is more pronounced among older people (59%) than among young people aged 15 to 24 (40%). Both men (51%) and women (54%) are in favour of this measure.

In terms of language regions, the measure is particularly popular in Ticino, where two-thirds of respondents support it. French-speaking Switzerland follows with 55% support. In the German-speaking part of the country, support is more mixed (50%).

Priority rule
According to BPA analyses, the number of serious accidents could be reduced by at least a third if the speed limit in local areas were set at 30 km/h. “More needs to be done to demonstrate to the public the safety potential of such a system within towns and cities, including on the main roads,” said Stefan Siegrist, director of the BPA, in a statement accompanying the report.

The survey also reveals a lack of awareness of the priority rule applicable in 30 km/h zones. Nearly three quarters of Swiss people (70%) believe that pedestrians have priority over cars in these zones. As a reminder, motorists, motorcyclists and cyclists have priority in these zones.

30 km/h zone in the centre of Sion
Coincidentally, the town of Sion also announced on Tuesday that it intended to lower the speed limit in the town centre. In close collaboration with the canton, it has launched a public enquiry into the creation of a 30 km/h zone over a large part of the road network (including the main network), it said in a press release.

“This is a very positive measure for the people of Sédun,” Vincent Kempf, head of the town planning and mobility department, told Keystone-ATS.

It will make it possible to act on several fronts, such as noise pollution, air quality and the reduction of conflicts between the various road users, in particular by improving the safety of pedestrians and cyclists. It also aims to reduce transit traffic by encouraging motorists to use the motorway as a bypass.

If no objections are lodged, the speed limit will be reduced to 30 km/h on several stretches from spring 2022 onwards, adds Vincent Kempf. In a second phase, the perimeter of the zone should be extended to other roads that require a more extensive redesign of the roadway. Studies are underway."

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

https://www.bluewin.ch/fr/infos/suis…-s-921265.html

Short answer - no.

2
I totally agree to make local streets where kids play a 30 zone. But the city of Zurich plans to make ALL streets within the city 30... including say hardbrücke, a four lane bridge designed to make traffic pass from one side of the city to the other as fast as possible and at the same time with as little disturbance to the locals as possible. Making this 30 is borderline insane, will cause not less but more traffic and certainly won’t make it safer either.

3
30 is great where you have lots of pedestrians, otherwise it's overkill.

4

Most people will ignore it anyway.

5
No with Swiss speeding fines being what they are they will drive at 40 rather than 60. That’s OK.

6
Everyone that is not working seems to be in favour of the plan.

7
I wonder if the people that is in favor of the speed limit reduction is aware that buses and trams should also go at 30 km/h

That means more vehicles and drivers are needed to keep serving customers with the same frequency. So, not so environmentally friendly, higher costs and the worry that less people uses public transport because it because too damned slow because frequency of service had to be reduced to keep the costs under control.

Full discussion for ZH https://mobimag-ch.translate.goog/te...&_x_tr_pto=nui

8
I would prefer they construct dedicated bike lanes separated from traffic.

9
The reality is with today’s traffic congestion, 30 or 50 often make little difference.

However I have experienced pedestrians getting frustrated waiting for cars approaching at 30kph and walk out in front of them. Bankstrasse in Uster (ZH) where the SBB train station is, is a prime example. There are no pedestrian crossings, just changes in the road surface across the road, suggesting to pedestrians some sort of priority.

Crossing the road often without looking or looking and still crossing, placing a lot of faith in drivers...

10
What congestion?

The only congestion I ever see is cross border workers with one person in each vehicle, traveling opposite to me outside of city centers.

Tom

11
Talked with some work colleagues that know a bit more about this, its their job.

Their worry is the unintended consequences. If commuting times become longer, living outside the city becomes less attractive, even more people than today would like to live in the city and no surprise at all....even higher rent. The whole thing can make the city less livable when the goal was to make it livable in first place.

Coming from the other side of the Atlantic I'm really surprised people complains about noise because this is a feature of the absence of urban zoning. If in the same block there are shops, dance schools and apartments, of course noisy trucks have to deliver goods and pick up waste, and people makes noise in gyms and dance schools.

I'm not saying the urban development model of suburbs and huge highways and shopping malls 20km away from city center is better. Just saying that the origin of noise it's not "cars" but mixed use urban zoning. It's sooooo convenient to have a Migros just downstairs....that has a price, pay it or go live outside the city. Fun thing is snowflakes would complain about loud farming machinery.

12
In our locality, 30 km/h limit needed - people speed through and a lot of young kids in the area, been a topic of discussion for some time and now it looks like a 30 limit is pending

So, yes, I am in favor

13
Also being involved in those discussions as this is (sometimes) part of my job: the point of this measure is to make commuting with cars less attractive inside the city, for all dwellers, those from in and out of the city. It will be less affecting long distance traveling.

The arguments is kind of funny, it will just lover the prices in places with worse public transport connection and raise in those with better, irrespective if that place is in the city or outside of it. The attractive areas are already going through a process of densification and will be still going in the future. Less personal transport is one of the strategies how to keep a quality life there. Tools to lower the rent does not include more unregulated market.

At the same time many small towns and villages in Switzerland do want to keep their way of life and don't have much interest in becoming part of another satellite urban sprawl or that their way of life is changed too much by city dwellers who romanticize life in the land, there are many initiatives about it.

14
People that commute via car in Switzerland, really do it because they don't really have a choice. They (we) pay dearly on all fronts, including time spent sitting on lights designed to discourage the behaviour. Well guess what, the discouragement is towards a practically "only choice".

If public transport has a personal cost X (monetary, time, convenience) and car has a personal cost Y, people are using cars as long as Y is lower than X.

If public transport does not become a lot more convenient, we're just increasing Y and are making motorists' lives worse until we get them so bad it makes no difference to them to take the damn train.

My wife does not commute to downtown Zurich by car because she enjoys it. She does it because public transport will take twice as much as a normal trip would and approximately the same with the worst traffic. And that's without taking into consideration that if she misses a train, there's another 20-30 min depending on time of day. If I commute via public transport my commutes becomes from 40 min total daily, to cool round 2 hours. I freaking love my cars, but even I would commute by public transport if I had a choice. I did for a long time when I was lucky enough to live in Oerlikon and work downtown Zurich. I'd rather spend the money and the kilometers on fun drives - trust me those Km are freaking expensive and they add the f_ up.

But if I commute by car, I get to spend more time with my family and I can stop at the supermarket on my way home, and not clog it on a dreaded Saturday. So I do that.

If I'm discouraged to cross Zurich (as an example) and use the highway, I'd do that, but the problem is that most highways are at absolute capacity at rush hours. Have a look at Nordring/Westring of ZH the fun times when people go to work and get back from it. You think you need more cars there? Good luck with that brilliant idea.

And in the end, you're sending them on a ring road, only to dump them in a traffic light that punishes entry to the city. Well Mr Urban Planner, guess what - I NEED TO GO TO THE CITY BECAUSE I LIVE THERE.

So, summarising nobody commutes for fun. Nobody gets in the car for the f* of it. It's excruciatingly expensive relative to public transport and you get the privilege of the snarky looks of people that can just commute Hongg to Paradeplatz with one tram connection and can't believe why you would chose to destroy the environment like that.

But by all means, let's try to get cars slower and try to get them out of our back yards.

15
A fair point, but I suppose the advent of (initially forced, but since coming into favour) home office means that fewer people will be commuting, so if you only have to come in once or twice a week, perhaps this extra commute time is a bit less annoying.

As regards the post above saying it might make living outside of the city and commuting less desirable - yes, perhaps, but that again is likely to be more than balanced by the opportunity to do home office.

16
I'm torn.

If noise is the issue, then they should really look into what is causing the noise. It's not Hans-Peter in his Tesla, is it? More like Justin-Blerim in his souped up Bavarian fartmobile and they can be just as noisy at lower speeds, if anything, they tend to rev even more out of sheer spite. Make it illegal (as in, lose your licence for a month illegal) to have the flap exhaust set to open after 9 pm and before 7 am, problem partially sorted. I'm sure the more car savvy are about to explain to me that this is not feasible, yadda yadda, but honestly, if I am not allowed to randomly let off fireworks in the middle of the street at night, I don't see why cars should be allowed to make so much noise.

The safety part makes sense, most people survive being hit at 30 km/h, whereas very few survive a 50 km/h impact. However - if you are running into the road in such a way that a car can hit you at full speed, it's a bit of a Darwin moment, even if you are a kid. So I'm ok with having side streets set to 30 km/h but there is absolutely no reason for main streets to be slowed down. And maybe stop this nonsense of pedestrians just walking out on to zebra crossings at the last minute with their eyes only briefly glancing up from their phones? We have so few unavoidable accidents caused by speed in urban areas, but plenty of avoidable ones caused by lack of attention and driving competence. Maybe address those issues first?

By the way: I'm allowed to drive the smaller fire brigade vehicles with the blue lights and siren going and what many people don't realise is that I am not actually allowed to go faster than the speed limit. I will obviously not go slower, if you get my meaning, but we can't just gun down the road as quick as we like, even if there is an exceptionally cute kitten waiting to be rescued.

So if the speed limit is set to 30 km/h everywhere in town, we will take 40% more time to arrive at your emergency. I don't know about you but I would rather not wait an extra 4 minutes (the rule is that the first crews should arrive within 10 to 15 minutes of you making the call, depending on where you live) to come and rescue me from a burning building just so we don't have to address the real problems that have spawned this daft "solution".

17
I would be in favour simply because of the noise (and it's not just engine noise and that electric cars make less), it's also wind and road/tyre noise. I used to live by the river in Züriwest, the speed limit was 50 and I couldn't sleep at night with the windows open, they knocked it down to 30 and I could. I don't know the exact science, but I'm sure I read somewhere that the noise reduction is something like 60% going from 50 to 30 kmph.

18
30 km/h speed limit during the night (22h00 to 6h00) is something done already in some villages where the main village street is the same road connecting with other towns. This is a compromise that avoid disrupting life during the day and also letting sleep people with exceptionally good audition.

Kittster raises a good point: emergency vehicles. Does people want ambulances, fire crews and police go at 30 km/h too?

In the end, I think it's a street by street issue that needs to be analyzed carefully. No blanket solutions.

Some streets in my village make no sense to have a 50 km/h limit: narrow street in single unit home area with no sidewalk on any side, cars parked on both sides, center lanes where cars in opposite directions almost hit mirrors when traveling in opposite directions, add pedestrians and bikes. Somehow, this street is still 50 km/h. Other streets are 1 km of farm or the perimeter wall of an industry, zero chance of someone crossing the street...still 50 km/h.

19
For decades coutries were investing money into roads, in parrarel supporting car industry, somewhere in 80ties, 90ites it became clear that this is a dead end. More roads means more traffic and more sprawl that creates even more traffic and again demans more roads etc...it just does not work.

Switzerland stopped investing heavily into road infrastructure already some time ago. That must be obvious to anyone. I don't think they did it out of some idealism, but because they are very rational and carefull how they spend public money.

Basically, there will not be much more fast ring roads or highways, they are just letting drivers to stop driving, as the roads will be too full.

Dissinvestment in personal transport is also slow, and same is with investment to public transport. This idea that we first need to make public so great that anyone will sell his car is just a false fallacy. Slow but succesfull move of many cities to the goal of lesser traffic clearly shows that it works. And people don't die and don't get bancrupt because of it.

20
Actually! before the turn of the century most highways were built to only enter the cities and not go around em. At least for Zürich. The politicians just couldn't imagine why anybody would want to go further than Zürich. As for public transport, am certain if it was made free, a lot more would use it. I say let the taxes pay for it. Personally, hate having to spend a concerted effort to figure out what to pay to get to a destination only to find out I got the wrong ticket and have a fine to boot. Too much hassle.