Zurich’s 30 km/h Campaign Faces an Uphill Battle Ahead of the Vote

SwissReporting – Switzerland in English

Zurich, Late November 2025

In Zurich, the debate over slower traffic is reaching its climax. Voters are being asked whether more streets in the city should be limited to a maximum speed of 30 kilometres per hour. What started as a local traffic measure has turned into a symbolic fight about mobility, climate policy and quality of life in Switzerland’s largest city.

However, recent signals suggest that supporters of the 30 km/h policy are heading for defeat. Opinion surveys and the tone of the public debate indicate that a clear majority of voters may reject a broad expansion of speed-30 zones, especially on major roads.

What Is at Stake?

The proposal aims to extend 30 km/h limits beyond residential neighbourhoods to larger parts of the city, including some important traffic arteries. Advocates argue that lower speeds mean quieter streets, fewer accidents and a more liveable city. They also see it as part of a broader transition towards climate-friendly, people-centred urban planning.

Opponents, on the other hand, warn of longer travel times, more congestion and higher costs for public transport and logistics. They accuse the city government of pushing a “hidden car ban” and say that families, commuters and small businesses would be the ones paying the price.

Why the Yes-Side Is Struggling

Several factors are making the campaign for more 30 km/h zones difficult:

• Unclear everyday benefits: Many residents already experience numerous speed-30 areas in their neighbourhoods. For them, it is not obvious how much additional benefit another layer of restrictions would bring.
• Concern about main roads: While slower speeds on side streets are widely accepted, the idea of reducing the limit on important arteries triggers fears of traffic jams, delays and detours.
• Economic worries: Retailers, delivery companies and tradespeople have voiced concerns that longer travel times would increase their costs in a city where rents and wages are already high.
• Fatigue with constant traffic reforms: In recent years, Zurich has repeatedly debated bike lanes, parking rules and road redesigns. Some voters signal that they have had “enough experiments” for the moment.

All of this gives the opponents of Tempo 30 a simple, powerful message: the city should improve public transport and cycling infrastructure, but not “block” the roads that still carry most of the traffic.

Arguments from the 30 km/h Supporters

Despite the headwind, the yes-camp stresses that lower speeds would bring long-term advantages:

• Safety: The risk of serious injury in a collision drops drastically between 50 and 30 km/h. For pedestrians and cyclists, this can be the difference between life and death.
• Noise reduction: Slower traffic produces less noise, especially at night. This is crucial in a dense city where many people live directly along busy streets.
• Climate and air quality: Combined with better public transport and cycling infrastructure, lower speeds can support climate goals and reduce local pollution.
• Quality of life: The initiative is framed as part of a broader vision: streets that are not only corridors for cars, but shared spaces where people feel comfortable walking, cycling and spending time.

They also argue that many European cities are moving in a similar direction, and that Zurich risks falling behind if it clings to the old 50 km/h standard everywhere.

What the Vote Means for Residents and Expats

For people living in Zurich – including many expatriates and international workers – the outcome of the vote will shape daily life in subtle but important ways.

• If the proposal is rejected, the current mix of 30 and 50 km/h zones will largely remain. The focus will likely shift to targeted safety measures and local traffic calming rather than city-wide changes.
• If it is approved against expectations, residents can expect more widespread slow-traffic areas over the coming years, with quieter but also potentially slower commutes by car or bus.

In both scenarios, the debate itself reveals a lot about Zurich’s future: the balance between cars and public transport, between fast mobility and liveability, and between local quality of life and regional economic connectivity.

A Symbolic Test for Urban Switzerland

Beyond Zurich, the vote is watched closely across Switzerland. Many cities are facing similar questions: how far should they go in slowing traffic, reclaiming space for pedestrians and cyclists, and aligning with climate goals?

If voters clearly reject the expansion of 30 km/h zones, it may slow down comparable projects in other Swiss municipalities. A narrow result, however, could encourage more cautious, incremental reforms rather than sweeping changes.

Regardless of the final numbers, the Tempo-30 debate underlines a core tension in modern Switzerland: how to remain a highly mobile, economically dynamic country while at the same time making its cities quieter, safer and more human-centred.