Jump to content

Speed Limits


Coffee

Recommended Posts

This was probably covered at some point but.

 

In Warrington many roads have got new speed limits a few years ago A56, A57, A49, A562 (the police seem very active on this road) but wonder has it really led to reduced accidents? What about the stupid cycle lane on the A56 Chester Rd and the new layout at the traffic lights were you have two lanes turning right and one going straight, idiotic or what?

 

On different note how about sending a couple of police cars around Orford Green/Poplars Avenue especially on Sundays were to some people it becomes a race track especially for motor cyclists, many are doing circuits at way above the speed limits.

 

I guess when our councilors get round to sticking up the 20mph speed limit signs it will stop this activity but until then

Link to post
Share on other sites

The council have been reducing limits all over the place. The road at the side of ASDA in Westbrook; previously a 60mph, now a 40. No accidents, no deaths, no houses, no buildings at all and even the cyclists have their own paths (which of course they don't use)  Just another excuse for them to waste money on road signs

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh dear coffee, I feel I must point out that criticising the cycle ways on this forum could well bring down the wrath of the dreaded ROD on your head. He is the KING of the cycle lanes and also the promoter of the 20 is plenty fast enough for motorised transport and cycles are the way to a brighter future. "YOU HAVE BEEN WAAARRNNED"  :mrgreen:  :mrgreen:
 

 

Apart from the pink ladies thread the posts regarding the lowering of speed limits to 20 and the avocation of cycle lanes constituted one of the longest "debates" on the forum.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am an avid supporter of a 20mph limit - though only on sections of road where schools are located, I can't see sense nor reason in placing them anywhere else, regarding cycle lanes, they are a complete waste of revenue and take up an area of road that can otherwise be used by motororised vehicles and I would ban all Lycra clad idiots from the highways!, other than that I have no strong opinions on the subject. :mrgreen:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the idea is that if people see safe cycling lanes they will take up cycling especially for getting to work & free up road space for the people who take kids 200 yards to school by car & use the car to go half a mile to the gym.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh dear coffee, I feel I must point out that criticising the cycle ways on this forum could well bring down the wrath of the dreaded ROD on your head. He is the KING of the cycle lanes and also the promoter of the 20 is plenty fast enough for motorised transport and cycles are the way to a brighter future. "YOU HAVE BEEN WAAARRNNED"  :mrgreen:  :mrgreen:

 

 

Not criticising the cycle lanes just positioning of them,  The same is true of bus lanes like the one on Winwick\Rd/Sandy Lane  were I have never seen a bus use it.

 

I am an avid supporter of a 20mph limit - though only on sections of road where schools are located, I can't see sense nor reason in placing them anywhere else, regarding cycle lanes, they are a complete waste of revenue and take up an area of road that can otherwise be used by motororised vehicles and I would ban all Lycra clad idiots from the highways!, other than that I have no strong opinions on the subject. :mrgreen:

 

school are either shut or the children are having lessons, at 9 am or 3 pm because of traffic the speed limit is usually lower.

 

Although not a fan of crossing patrols - they stop the traffic every 30 seconds not just for children, but adults, cyclists and anyone else - the council should provide them on busy roads like Long Lane.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I wonder what all those cyclists said when the first cars were allowed on the road. :unsure:  :unsure: 

 

Apparently roads were not built for cars.

They weren't built for cyclists either Wolfie!. if you care to go back far enough the Romans built them to enable their soldiers to march abreast and also for horse and carts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Correct, that's why I didn't specify who they were built for, just who they weren't built for.

They were not built for cyclists either.

 

As far as I am aware cycling has never played any significant role in transport. roads were never designed with cycling in mind

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just what algy said. But the question is................. who said they were? :unsure:  :unsure:  :wink:

 

 

 

I wonder what all those cyclists said when the first cars were allowed on the road. :unsure:  :unsure: 

 

Apparently roads were not built for cars.

 

Well you implied it in the above statement.

 

Don't cars pre date cycles? The steam cars were around in 1771 while  cycles appeared in 1817 (although if someone knows better please correct me)

 

Was the reaction to cars to make someone walk in front it with a red flag? From Wikipedia

 

In United Kingdom, the Locomotive Acts (also known as Red Flag Laws) was a policy requiring self-propelled vehicles to be led by a pedestrian waving a red flag or carrying a lantern to warn bystanders of the vehicle's approach.

  • Firstly, at least three persons shall be employed to drive or conduct such locomotive, and if more than two waggons or carriages he attached thereto, an additional person shall be employed, who shall take charge of such waggons or carriages :
  • Secondly, one of such persons, while any locomotive is in motion, shall precede such locomotive on foot by not less than sixty yards, and shall carry a red flag constantly displayed, and shall warn the riders and drivers of horses of the approach of such locomotives, and shall signal the driver thereof when it shall be necessary to stop, and shall assist horses, and carriages drawn by horses, passing the same,

The Red Flag Law was repealed in 1896

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well you implied it in the above statement.

I may have implied that cycles were around before cars, but I did not imply that roads were built for them.

and if you regard the first steam car running into a brick wall as being 'around in 1771' then I would agree, however they were probably a prototype for a steam railway locomotive rather than a car as they were eventually banned from public roads.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I may have implied that cycles were around before cars, but I did not imply that roads were built for them.

and if you regard the first steam car running into a brick wall as being 'around in 1771' then I would agree, however they were probably a prototype for a steam railway locomotive rather than a car as they were eventually banned from public roads.

 

Well that is what I understood from your post

 

As for steam cars no there were not many in the 1700s but by mid 1800 there was quite a number of steam vehicles, cars, lorries and traction engines!

Had their not been any steam vehicles there would have been no red flag law which was repealed before combustion engine cars started to appear. The first paddled cycle was invented  (I think ) in 1864, while the first combustion engine cars was invented in  1886 so cycles and cars came about around the same time

 

Here is a video of a replica of a stream vehicle from 1700s

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
If you think cycles should not be on the road why is cycling as popular as it is ? Of course cycles are for the road or would you prefer them to be ridden on the pavement ?

Cycles should be ridden on the roads but in a resonsible fashion so that the rider and other road users lives are not placed into jeapordy, there are too many idiots in these so called cycling clubs who have members who attempt to emulate the Bradley Wiggins of this world riding two and three abreast in a dangerous and irresponsible manner and generally making a nuisance of themselves.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Speed limits imposed anonymously and dictatorily in Warrington are utterly ridiculous. 

There is little logic or sense applied to these limits. The naïve politically correct attitude for 20mph that is not manageable has cost council tax payers some £750,000  money that could and should have been spent on useful projects like road widening and congestion easing.

  The stupidity of these limits is illustrated by the fact that most traffic ignores the most stupid impositions.

 

The artificial  road narrowing only creates congestion and is a complete waste of valuable road space. Such roads also cause unnecessary congestion and encourage dangerous driving .

 

The whole traffic management in Warrington is a disgrace and needs to be reviewed.

 

Cyclists should be fined for not using the expensive tarmac laid down in warrington  - tarmac that has spoilt the greenery and shrubbery and is an eyesore.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Speed limits imposed anonymously and dictatorily in Warrington are utterly ridiculous. 

There is little logic or sense applied to these limits. The naïve politically correct attitude for 20mph that is not manageable has cost council tax payers some £750,000  money that could and should have been spent on useful projects like road widening and congestion easing.

  The stupidity of these limits is illustrated by the fact that most traffic ignores the most stupid impositions.

 

The artificial  road narrowing only creates congestion and is a complete waste of valuable road space. Such roads also cause unnecessary congestion and encourage dangerous driving .

 

The whole traffic management in Warrington is a disgrace and needs to be reviewed.

 

Cyclists should be fined for not using the expensive tarmac laid down in warrington  - tarmac that has spoilt the greenery and shrubbery and is an eyesore.

 

well said.... I agree with the on the spot fines for cyclists not using the cycle lanes where they are provided.

 

Better still would be a national register of cyclists. Say from the age of 18, you have to register and pay £50 a year to ride a bike, just like the license fee for TV's.... then a registration number should be worn at all times (lycra versions could be made available) cameras could be placed on roads to spot these wayward loonies who feel that it is better to ride on the roads than the cycle lanes and the councils can keep all the money in fines for red light violations etc....

 

A real money spinner and then the government can screw someone else instead of motorists!!.... maybe even a tax on lycra!?

Link to post
Share on other sites

True enough.... Manchester Council have doubled their profits in less than a year!

 

About time we started to vote for independent councillors in this country instead of the party focused ones we have everywhere these days....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Slightly off topic, but I've always wondered why gyms have car parks 8)

Link to post
Share on other sites
well said.... I agree with the on the spot fines for cyclists not using the cycle lanes where they are provided.

 

Better still would be a national register of cyclists.

 

This happens in Poland from the age of 11 (although not sure if it is a national scheme or local one) you need to pass a test and buy a license,, if your stopped without a license you get fined the equivalent of  £10

 

However just too show councilors are just as clever as here in Wroclaw they banned cycles from the main market square, but just like here they are trying to force everyone out of cars and so the council opened a rental scheme right in the middle of the market sq!

 

Slightly off topic, but I've always wondered why gyms have car parks 8)

 

They are for cars asperity :P

 

If it a serious question you live across town from the gym or going from work then you need a place to put your car

 

If not you made me smile.

 
Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...