Dizzy Posted February 13, 2012 Report Share Posted February 13, 2012 Haven't we read it the same way then Adrian ? I said 'inside' the bounday roads and what I meant was not 'including' the boundary roads. Perhaps I didn't explain myself very well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evil Sid Posted February 13, 2012 Report Share Posted February 13, 2012 from the front page article. Roads to be considered must be "residential" - that is there must be 21 of more dwellings on them - and must not be key link roads, primary emergency service routes or primary bus routes. Which means that my road,although a dead end' does not qualify as there are only 12 houses on it. all the other roads around me will be twenty but mine won't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rodk Posted February 13, 2012 Report Share Posted February 13, 2012 I have just returned from the Executive Board meeting at the Town Hall. Councillor Dirir presented her report and said that the 20mph roll-out was to be implemented over 5 years maximum, and that additional funding was being sought with an objective of implementing in 3 years. If I can clarify a few points raised in earlier posts :- The roads shown in the list of areas are the boundary roads. The criteria set are a framework and are not prescriptive. 20mph limits have regular repeater signs to remind drivers of the speed limit. The report was unanimously approved by the Executive Board and therefore enables oficers to proceed with the implementation. Best regards Rod 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted February 13, 2012 Report Share Posted February 13, 2012 Thanks for the update Rod. The outcome was what I expected given the quote on page 35 of the report which I read today where it stated that "The view of councillors was such that they were satisfied for officers to use their ‘specialist expertise’ to establish the qualifying criteria for a road to be designated 20mph taking into account other stake holders views. So who were the stakeholders ? Am I right in thinking stakeholders have so far just been the you (ie 20's P).. who have pushed for it, Warrington Borough Transport.. who are a little concerned but that is outweighed by the hope that we may all start to use busses (but alas we we wont cos they are too expensive and journey times take too long) and of course the Police who are the ones who have to deal with accidents but who still seem to be somewhat undecided Only time will tell who is right eh and that the roads will indeed become a safer place and that it really will make a difference and lives will be saved and injuries will be reduced for your sake and that of the officers with the expertise Or will it just be ignored and lead pedestrians and others into a false sense of security and into an increase of incidents... I really hope not Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted February 13, 2012 Report Share Posted February 13, 2012 PS... it also said that extensive consultation had taken place and listed various councils and also the Warrington and National Guardian Newspaper Resident and action group views/comments Warrington Worldwide readers and posters comments were not taken into account then eh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfie Posted February 13, 2012 Report Share Posted February 13, 2012 Warrington Worldwide readers and posters comments were not taken into account then eh? Wouldn't have made any difference if they had. :roll: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdrianR Posted February 14, 2012 Report Share Posted February 14, 2012 with all this money saved from less accidents, i trust Warrington Hospital will then thereafter start the redundancy consultation for those who will no longer be needed such as A&E nurses, orthopaedic consultants etc. Add to this the garages who will no longer be needed to repair the cars or will repair them quicker and thus need less staff, insurers who will need less staff to deal with fewer accidents etc Interesting that WBT says the busses are optimised for 30mph and thus pollutants will increase if they are affected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted February 14, 2012 Report Share Posted February 14, 2012 A bit of an odd comment Adrian as I'm sure they will be just as busy. You make it sound like you now believe the 20 will reduce accidents after all but you would prefer it not to incase it results in people loosing jobs Wouldn't worry about the garages though as the majority of accidents and bumps happen at lower speeds so they will probably get an increase in work Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted February 14, 2012 Report Share Posted February 14, 2012 Wouldn't have made any difference if they had. :roll: Nope... but seeing as though the WG was actually listed as being a consultee (I dont recall them ever having any sort of consultation or chats or about it and have never heard of their residents action group either) you'd have though after all the topics and pages on here about it that out of politeness Warr WW would have been mentioned too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wahl Posted February 14, 2012 Report Share Posted February 14, 2012 a sad day for warrington and a victory for pressure groups based on dubious information 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted February 14, 2012 Report Share Posted February 14, 2012 Last comment I promise... but Adrian you mentioned garages earlier and I mentioned not to worry as the majority of bumps and scrapes happen at lower speeds.... but seems Rods lot agree with you so I may be wrong. Rod's 20's P website lists the various BENEFITS to MOTORISTS in 20 mph areas and here are two of them Motoring costs drop. point 6.....As crashes fall in severity and frequency, so do legal and repair bills. This will be reflected in motor insurance premiums dropping in 20 mph limit post codes. point 7.... Repair bills fall and vehicles maintain value from fewer crashes, less brake and tyre wear. Now personally I doubt that insurance premiums will drop in 20mph zones at all so not sure why they say that, maybe you can advise Adrain given your background or maybe Rod could confirm that insurance companies HAVE stated this so once it comes into force we can all make sure we are getting our discounts? The rest of of the motorist benefits are listed here including 'easier parking' and 'less congestio'n... hope you don't mind me posting a link Rod 20's Plenty - 10 ways that 20 mph limits benefits drivers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted February 14, 2012 Report Share Posted February 14, 2012 I would go so far as to say that point 6 is a blatant load of bollox..... No insurance company will offer a reduced motor insurance premium based solely on the fact that you live in a 20mph limited area. Gloucester Council actually say: "Motor insurance premiums could lower in 20mph-limit post codes"....which of course they won't because motor insurance companies are bigger crooks than the banks.....(They make up a ridiculously high premium, then they "reduce it" by your no-claims bonus which you have built up after 25 years without an accident, and you still pay more than last year!!!) As a business model, it is brilliant. Make it law that you have to have insurance and then let the biggest crooks since Jessie james run the companies that provide the insurance (oh, and stick a bit of tax on there for good measure!) Although how the 20'snonsense brigade have managed to convince the councillors with statements such as "It benefits drivers through lower fuel consumption and insurance premiums" when plainly both of those "facts" are just really made up as higher revving engines use more fuel.... is beyond me... They must have played the "Elf and Safety Card" in their meetings and convinced the councillors that spending £750,000 is a cracking idea when you have no money 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
disgusted Posted February 15, 2012 Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 It is indeed 'bollox' Baz. When I lived in the Isle of Man, residential streets there had a 20mph limit imposed across the island in about the year 2000-ish, (these were of course proper residential streets, not RodK's 'any street I can get away with it' residential streets), and of course absolutely no dispensation emerged from insurance companies, even island specific local insurance companies who would be only too aware of the change in local driving conditions made no allowance at all. So as you say, as indeed with the fuel consumption saving red herring, it is in fact utter bollox. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfie Posted February 15, 2012 Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 How a misguided safety policy is increasing pollution and slowing our towns to a crawl Is Twenty Plenty? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdrianR Posted February 15, 2012 Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 I agree with the sentiments above. The point i was making was that if the 20mph has all these alleged economic savings, then should we not see it in action once the same is rolled out. If it is true we will have less accidents or they will be less severe, then the only way the alleged savings can be achieved is if people who otherwise dealt with these now non existent or reduced crashes are no longer employed to do whatever they did in whatever field they did because they are no longer needed. As most say, no such thing will happen and thus this will have actually costs money and not saved anything. BTW I have 2 sub 20 mph crashes on my desk at the moment both worth in excess of £100k due to the injuries sufferred. However I also have many at higher speeds worth a lot less. Any explanation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evil Sid Posted February 15, 2012 Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 could be something to do with the type of ad at the top of the page. Currently first 4 lawyers no win no fee personal injury lawyers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted February 15, 2012 Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 Big browser brother is always watching Evils. Check out some of the other adverts you get on the headers of other topics. All are relevant in 'some' way Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boris1066 Posted February 15, 2012 Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 How a misguided safety policy is increasing pollution and slowing our towns to a crawl Is Twenty Plenty? How can any sane person reading the content of that link agree to squander so much tax payers wedge ? Just make sure that when they come up for re-elction you make sure that the Dirirs of the town don't get back in !! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted February 15, 2012 Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 too late by then Boris.... the 20's nonsense campaign will have been implimented... I just despair when I drive round near Fordton now, on both sides of EVERY side street off the 30 stretches are signs... all installed at a stupid amount of money.... I thought we were supposed to reducing the number of distracting signs and street "furniture"...... As for voting the Dirrirriirrirrrs on the council..... I have already put my plan forward; to vote out EVERY SINGLE SITTING COUNCILLOR at the next election... use the power of the vote to tell them we have had enough of their squandering and waste Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 Nowt to say then Rod ? Noticed you online a few times since the decision but you say nothing now, why's that ?!?! 'Silence is golden, golden ...but my eyes still see..' eh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 Nowt to say then Rod ? Noticed you online a few times since the decision but you say nothing now, why's that ?!?! 'Silence is golden, golden ...but my eyes still see..' eh Probably checking for plaudits. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rodk Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 Nowt to say then Rod ? Noticed you online a few times since the decision but you say nothing now, why's that ?!?! 'Silence is golden, golden ...but my eyes still see..' eh What more is there to say? Most of the posters have already agreed that 20mph limits are correct for residential roads. What is important is that this initiative is being implemented with strong support from all parties in a timely manner. Excellent news. Regards Rod 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
disgusted Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 What more is there to say? Most of the posters have already agreed that 20mph limits are correct for residential roads. What is important is that this initiative is being implemented with strong support from all parties in a timely manner. Excellent news. Regards Rod I have to admire your unending obtuseness, stubborness, and ability to at no time acknowledge the valid concerns of every poster on this thread, while simultaneously claiming the backing of everyone here, despite there seemingly being agreement with your proposal on just one single solitary point (ie. that this could apply to only full residential roads, not through roads). And you wonder why you have no popular support? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 Has anyone considered implementing a national speed limit of 20mph on residential estates. If we can have a national speed limit of 60mp which relies on how many lamp posts are on a road, surely we can have one for residential roads without the expense of erecting all the signs? I mean how many 60 mph signs do you see? Just a thought. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 A good idea but what actually determines 'in stone' what constitites a residential street/estate ? There still seems to be some confusion and/or leeway depending on local authority etc and in our case it now seems to depend on the mumber of busses per hour and other possible factors so these would lead to even more confusion especialy for people out of the area unless all roads are marked accordingly. Must admit having driven through Orford/Longford? today all those new signs do make the area look very messy Also, if you look at the likes of Warrington Road over at Penketh that is a dual carriageway and the number of people who get caught speeding on it is quite frightening. It's actually a 30mph limit but not very well signed at all so understandable how people make the mistake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.