You must slow to 40km/h - Victoria

[ruSTynutz]

               

Road rule 79A has been expanded to improve safety for incident response workers as well as emergency workers on our roads.

From 1 July 2025, all drivers and riders must slow down to 40 km/h and pass safely whenever they see flashing lights
(red, blue, magenta, or yellow) on the roadside or emergency or incident response workers.

Whether responding to an accident, a vehicle breakdown, or a life threating situation - all emergency and incident response
workers deserve to be safe when doing their jobs on our roads.

                                             For more information: https://tinyurl.com/bdf2ux85

[Bodø]

It's 25 in SA.

[Brock]

And its caused some serious accidents.

[Williamson]

And its caused some serious accidents.

Scaremongering!  No evidence of that, it's just inattention, distraction, poor drivers making poor excuses for poor driving.

[ruSTynutz]

It's 25 in SA.

Is that cos' South Australian drivers & riders are the worst compared to the rest of Australia? 

[ruSTynutz]

And its caused some serious accidents.

Scaremongering!  No evidence of that, it's just inattention, distraction, poor drivers making poor excuses for poor driving.

Plenty of evidence out there...and even if some of it is caused by inattention etc, having to abruptly slow down, especially on a 100-110kph highway is just asking for trouble... https://youtu.be/8cLCYU3O62k?si=EBeD8GgB5dLhqd7O 

[Shiney]

A few years ago, when traveling interstate, I almost had a crash due to this.

Coming around a bend on the highway the truck in front of me suddenly swerved into another lane.
The car he swerved around had dropped from 110 to 40. (there was a cop on the side on the highway obstructed by trees on the bend).
I managed to swerve past the car at the last second.

The car driver must have spotted the cop and stood on the breaks to drop speed so fast.


The main problem with this law is that the speed change is so drastic.
If people (like the car driver) don't spot the lights until they are close, they will have to break very heavily to drop to such a low speed.

Doing this in a 60 kph zone makes sense but in a 110 kph zone it is a reckless rule in my opinion.

[ruSTynutz]

Perfect example of why this road law can be dangerous, Dave...and now that road users in Victoria must also reduce their speed for tow trucks, breakdown support (such as the RACV) and freeway/tollway incident response vehicles there are likely to be even more incidents...

[Langers]

It's 25 in SA.

Is that cos' South Australian drivers & riders are the worst compared to the rest of Australia? 

Yes, most definitely - excepting me and a few Ozstoc members (most have no idea how to negotiate a roundabout, zipper merge, indicate (BMW drivers and those from distant lands being the worst), let another driver in on multi lane roads (excepting those arrsoles who think they can drive all the way past other vehicles whose drivers have done the right thing and moved into a lane because the one they were in has been blocked off - under NO circumstances let those pig ignorant drivers in).
And let's not forget we are a Nanny state, hence the 25kph where every other State is 40kph.

Mind you, I wouldn't live anywhere else for quids. Vic - shocking roads and pretty much trading insolvent; NSW - idiotic reversing in to park and too many people; Qld, NT and northern WA - too humid. Tasmania - hmmm, it has a lot going for it but SA weather is better.

[Williamson]

Whilst there will often be an exception (perhaps Dave's situation mentioned above), I'm sure we all learned to drive / ride with the basic premise that you should always drive at a speed that allows you to stop within the distance you can see ahead, considering your reaction time and the road conditions, ie. adjusting your speed based on factors like road condition, weather, visibility, and traffic.

These factors are often changing, sometimes with plenty of notice (flashing lights on a roadside vehicle), other times with little notice (a vehicle without operating stop lights coming to a dead stop).  The reason behind a need to slow down or stop is largely irrelevant, but if there is a need, there's a NEED, adequate notice or not.   Let's face it, flashing lights provide much more notice than non operative stop lights on a car.

There were occassions I worked on the road, more often roadside, but with my role I could pay plenty of attention to traffic and step aside when needed.  But with emergency workers and road workers (who's attention is on their primary task, rather than traffic), I can understand why this rule has been introduced (now extended).  I'm pretty sure that emergency workers and road workers would agree, and appreciate this rule.

Too often there seems to be a knee jerk reaction to new road safety initiatives. I recall objections to sealt belts, helmets (motorcycle and bicycle), child restraints, BAC limits, lower speed limits, speed & red light cameras (to name a few - others can add to this list), but in time we (mostly at least) come to accept these initiatives.

There also seems to be a view that's okay to criticise some of the initiatives and that it's okay for normally law abiding citizens to reject and/or not comply with laws they deem unjust or wrong.  And then, some of these people try to justify their view that a law is unjust or wrong just because they don't like a new law.  Who can remember arguements like You won't be able to have proper control with a seat belt on, helmets give me a headache, my child undid the child restraint belt, I drive better when I've had a few, I concentrate better at high speed.?

As I mentioned earlier, poor drivers make poor excuses for poor driving.

[Langers]

I don't disagree with any of the above. What does make me unhappy are States (I'm looking at you SA) who arbitrarily decide to go against the nationally agreed road rules, making life more complicated than it needs to be. If 40kph is good enough for every other State and Territory then it should be good enough for the good people of SA.
Does anyone else have suburban roads where the speed limit is 40kph AND obnoxious speed humps?? It just beggars belief. I'm expecting a requirement for the man with the red flag to reappear any time soon in these sad little suburbs.
The other day there were roadworks on one of these 40kph roads, so they put up the 40kph road works signs and at the end of the road works they put up the 50kph sign. Hmmm  That'd be an interesting conundrum for the magistrate to rule on should some poor sod get done for over 40.

[ruSTynutz]

Speaking of roadworks...How often do you come across roadwork speed limit signs at least a kilometre (or more) before any actual work is happening?
Or you slow down to 40kph, putter along for what can be kilometres only to come across the end roadwork speed limit sign with not the slightest bit of roadwork sighted?
And our Safetycrats wonder why people ignore roadwork speed limits...

[ruSTynutz]

Does anyone else have suburban roads where the speed limit is 40kph AND obnoxious speed humps?? It just beggars belief. I'm expecting a requirement for the man with the red flag to reappear any time soon in these sad little suburbs.

I see there's a push for 30kph limits for many local streets here in Victoria...

[Williamson]

Does anyone else have suburban roads where the speed limit is 40kph AND obnoxious speed humps??

We did (probably still do) have speed humps raised pavement road safety platforms in the City of Whittlesea, most (but not all) were installed prior to the 40km/h School Speed Zones were introduced.

A little anecdote - I took a call one day at work, it went something like this:

Caller (lady): When did Council install the school speed zone signs in Davisson Street, Epping.  (St Lukes PS on west side, St Monica's east side)
 
Me:  The signs were installed by VicRoads, not Council.  But this was in October 2004.   (Had to check Google for that)

Caller:  That's BS.  How can you be so sure?

Me:  I'm very sure, but if you send an email / letter request for information, I'll check the records for you.

Caller:  Okay.  It's very important as I'll need evidence for a court hearing.  (Caller went on to explain) I've been doing 60km/h along that section of Davisson Street each morning and afternoon for the past 10 years, never got a ticket before.  Are you sure the signs weren't installed this week?

Me:  Send an email or letter.  If you're attending court, I think you should tell the magistrate that you've been doing 60km/h along that section of Davisson Street each morning and afternoon for the past 10 years, that may be taken into account with your case.

I recall recieving an email for info and sending a response.  Never did get a thank you.

[Langers]

"raised pavement road safety platforms"  do these idiots get paid by the letter? To steal a particularly irritating saying - Always was, always will be, a speed hump.

[Williamson]

Speaking of roadworks...How often do you come across roadwork speed limit signs at least a kilometre (or more) before any actual work is happening?
Or you slow down to 40kph, putter along for what can be kilometres only to come across the end roadwork speed limit sign with not the slightest bit of roadwork sighted?
And our Safetycrats wonder why people ignore roadwork speed limits...

Finally, something we agree on.  The way I see this is that it is mainly due to cut backs at VicRoads, Regional Road Victoria, Department of Transport (or whatever they're called this week), staff shortages, down skilled, people that just don't give a crap.

When I started with the Road Safety and Traffic Authority (RoSTA) back in 1976, there was a Speed Limits Sub-Committee (senior, experienced personnel from RoSTA, CRB and VicPol) who made every speed limit decision, a high level of consistency with speed limits and the appropriate installation (and removal) taken very seriously.  I recall some pretty decent fines were applied for non-compliance. 

Changes over the 50 years (what else could be expected) has led to just about every Tom, Dick & Harry at VicRoads, all of the Councils and their contractors getting invloved and no one taking responsibility.

[Williamson]

I see there's a push for 30kph limits for many local streets here in Victoria...

Due to my experience with road safety and in particular speed limits, I've been invited to sit on a committee to select a couple of rural townships for the 30km/h trial.  Korumburra sounds good.

[ruSTynutz]

So you're happy for us to blame you for our ridiculous speed limits then? 

[ruSTynutz]

Speaking of speed limits, whatever happened to using the 85th Percentile to set speed limits?
Not enough revenue obviously...lol.
Of course if the Safetycrats keep reducing our speed limits it pretty much guarantees ever increasing income from fines...something that is allowed for in the State budget.
So, in other words, they actually don't want people to obey speed limits...

[Williamson]

So you're happy for us to blame you for our ridiculous speed limits then? 

Well, we didn't agree for too long, anyway .....

Blame?  This seems to imply or declare that there is a fault or wrong.  Is there something wrong with an appropriately applied lower speed limit?

Ridiculous?   This means extremely silly, unreasonable, absurd, preposterous, etc.   Is an appropriately applied lower speed limit in the majority of local residential streets in townships like Korumburra, Leongatha, Benalla, etc. or in local streets Melbourne suburbs really ridiculous?   

Last time (pre-COVID) there were discussions on this matter (when I was a Local Government representative  on a speed limit review committee, in some earlier committees I was an RTA/VicRoads' rep.) this was discussed, a requirement (if this was to progress) was that there be exemptions.  This was lengths of roads or streets that currently had 60km/h limits, arterials and higher standard roads.

Although, I gotta admit that every Tom, Dick & Harry from VicRoads (or whatever) and all of the Councils, could have trouble with theappropriately applied bit and this could unravel pretty quickly.

Thinking about where I travelled this week around Greensborough and neighbouring suburbs, a 30km/h limit on local streets would not have much, if any, tangible impact on my trips.  The initial 30km/h trial is being implemented in areas like Brunswick, Coburg, and Fitzroy, in areas with high pedestrian and cyclist traffic. 

The State Government powers at be don't want to exclude our country cousins and are looking for rural township volunteers.   

Speaking of speed limits, whatever happened to using the 85th Percentile to set speed limits?
Not enough revenue obviously...lol.
Of course if the Safetycrats keep reducing our speed limits it pretty much guarantees ever increasing income from fines...something that is allowed for in the State budget.
So, in other words, they actually don't want people to obey speed limits...

I haven't been involved in a speed limit change for around three years, but last time the 85th%ile speed was still used, but it is only one factor used in determining a speed limit.  Today, tomorrow, who knows?

When speed cameras were first trialled in Victoria (late 1980's), they were pretty crude compared to today's speed and red-light safety cameras.  Despite this, it was pretty obvious that they were effective in detecting speeding drivers, and whilst they were not introduced as a revenue raising mechanism, it became pretty obvious that they would be effective for that purpose.  The politician and bean counters latched on quickly and firmly.

I reckon this was unfortunate because drivers that like speeding and get caught, convinced themselves that speed enforcement, particulalry cameras, was evil.  Just a flimsy attempt to justify their poor decision, poor driving.

Reducing speed limits does not guarantee income for the State Government, drivers exceeding the speed limit guarantees the income.  Whilst I don't condone speeding, a part of me welcomes it.  This because (from Google) in the 23/24 financial year, Victoria's road safety cameras generated $473 million in revenue.  Now they didn't get any of that from Helen or me.  If all of a sudden speed camera revenue was eliminated, the State Government would be going into debt at a faster rate than it currently is, and they would be looking at some other way of getting their hand into my back pocket. 

FMD, I do't need to remind any Victorians of the many varied and insidious ways the State Government is currently trying to rein in its debt.  I'm happy for errant drivers to pay a voluntry tax, in lieu me paying a compolsory tax.

[Dragonstaff]

"raised pavement road safety platforms"  do these idiots get paid by the letter? To steal a particularly irritating saying - Always was, always will be, a speed hump.

Is the speed hump the thing in the road, or the bureaucrat naming it?

[ruSTynutz]

Ridiculous?   This means extremely silly, unreasonable, absurd, preposterous, etc.   Is an appropriately applied lower speed limit in the majority of local residential streets in townships like Korumburra, Leongatha, Benalla, etc. or in local streets Melbourne suburbs really ridiculous?   

I was referring more to rural speed limits...
How many rural roads now have a reduced speed limit of 80kph down from 100kph?
Around South Gippsland they are everywhere.

I don't know if you've travelled to Phillip Island in recent times but if you have you'll find the speed limit through Grantville is now 60kph, reduced down from 80kph...Bear in mind this is a dual lane divided road. The 60k zone extends way out the other side of the township...
This is not a built up area. Compare this to many roads in the city with a higher limit and this ridiculously low 60kph limit is bought into perspective...
This is just one example of an inappropriately applied speed limit.
Probably great for raising revenue though...

[Williamson]

.... the speed limit through Grantville is now 60kph, reduced down from 80kph...Bear in mind this is a dual lane divided road. The 60k zone extends way out the other side of the township....

Yeah, I think I noticed this last time through Grant (probably on the way to or from an RTE).   From what I recall this would not meet the standards for a 60km/h limit, certainly those used for the best part of almost 50 years I was in the business, and what I recall from setting speed limits more recently, it would not meet current standards.

The process isn't simply black & white, there were some grey are open to interpretation, and with every Tom, Dick & Harry getting involved therein lies the problem.   At times over the years, political pressure had been brought to bear to influence the decision making process.  This was more often than not brought about at a local level, ie. the local resdients, busineess people, school councils/parents putting pressure on the local council, in turn the local MP, anf then the local decision maker.

Never at my time at VicRoads or Council was any pressure put on me that could lead to a decision with revenue in mind.

With respect to the 60km/h limit at Grant, and the vast majority of speed limits elsewhere, they are well signed.  In the past 10 years or so VicRoads has installed ginormous 60 signs at the start of the limit, repeater 60 signs at more than one location (often many) as drivers progress through the 60 limit (also in 70 and 80 limits)  So many signs that the speed limit should be clear and unambiguous to all drivers. 

Anyone saying that they had no idea what the speed limit was is just a flimsy excuse, and they should also be referred VicRoads for a licence review.

[Bodø]

repeater 60 signs at more than one location

One thing I noticed on my trips to Victoria is there was almost always repeater signs when the speed limits dropped (mostly around level crossings) and I though South Australia ought to do this too.  They've started to now, but still a long way behind Victoria.

[Biggles]

Awareness of the posted speed is not always the problem people like me (and those hinted at by Rusty) face.  It's the reasonableness of the limits, as hinted at by Williamson.  If the speed seems to be unrelated to the conditions, there's a strong temptation to exceed them, inviting a fine for doing a speed that is perfectly safe.  On the other hand, I wonder about the criteria used. 
For example, here in north Brisbane there's an arterial road through a busy shopping centre, Aspley that's posted as 70kph.  At least there is a fence on the median strip and a pedestrian light in the middle of the block. Over on the peninsula there's a busy local road through a block-long shopping centre, Margate, with parallel-parked cars, a median strip with trees and pedestrian crossings at each end of the block- yet they allow 60kph through the middle of it.  It's a rare case where I reckon a 50 zone would be more appropriate.  There's plenty of similar urban situations with only 40kph allowed.