Jump to content

20 mph


vic
 Share

Recommended Posts

Boris.... they spend waste the money on bike lanes because it ticks the right boxes in the "green" agenda and keeep the likes of Rod King happy.

 

It would be money better spent if they used it to sort out the road network and the impending disaster of the Runcorn Toll Bridge instead of pandering to minority groups and the EU

Baz

Money better spent doesn't seem to be a priority within WBC. Their latest genuflection to the green agenda is the cycle/footpath alongside Cromwell Av.(Callands Rd/ToysR Us) with a branch line to M&S through the wood. Meanwhile callands Road detriates by the week.

 

During the construction of the path the street lights, which would have been in the centre of the path, were moved closer to the road. Instead of being approx 2 metres from the road the lights are now a bare metre from the kerb. What kind of skewed rish assessment was carried out to allow this to happen ?

 

Colliding with a lamp post is, I believe, not a very pleasant pedestrian experience, but shifting the risk nearer the road user,motorist or motor cyclist, is liable ot result in much more serious injury and costly collision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Colliding with a lamp post is, I believe, not a very pleasant pedestrian experience, but shifting the risk nearer the road user,motorist or motor cyclist, is liable ot result in much more serious injury and costly collision.

 

Ah but the cyclist and pedestrians will be safer. unless that is a cyclist happens to collide with a pedestrian because the lights do not light up the cycle path.:mellow:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Baz

Money better spent doesn't seem to be a priority within WBC. Their latest genuflection to the green agenda is the cycle/footpath alongside Cromwell Av.(Callands Rd/ToysR Us) with a branch line to M&S through the wood. Meanwhile callands Road detriates by the week.

 

During the construction of the path the street lights, which would have been in the centre of the path, were moved closer to the road. Instead of being approx 2 metres from the road the lights are now a bare metre from the kerb. What kind of skewed rish assessment was carried out to allow this to happen ?

 

Colliding with a lamp post is, I believe, not a very pleasant pedestrian experience, but shifting the risk nearer the road user,motorist or motor cyclist, is liable ot result in much more serious injury and costly collision.

 

 

The pain goes away after half an hour. :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ITO state

 

Neither we nor any third parties provide any warranty or guarantee as to the accuracy, timeliness, performance, completeness or suitability of the information and materials found or offered on this website for any particular purpose. You acknowledge that such information and materials may contain inaccuracies or errors and we expressly exclude liability for any such inaccuracies or errors to the fullest extent permitted by law.

 

 

Both are based on STATS19 figures from the police wrong

Seems this data is not created from police info bit of a pointless exercise

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Colliding with a lamp post is, I believe, not a very pleasant pedestrian experience.....

The pain goes away after half an hour. :wink:

 

Really .... maybe you should look at this Peter and I think Boris is qutie correct (although the full effect of 'girl vs lampost' is only apparent if you have your speakers turned on)

 

Don't worry it's not too graphic for those of you who may be slightly more sqeamish

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are a naughty girl Dizzy!! How will I ever get tosleep tonight after a traumatic experience like that! Where are all the injury claim lawyers when you need them? :lol: :lol: :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

As a fine upstanding (well sitting down at present) citizen I observe all the required speed limits in the town and all the numerous red traffic lights that are dotted around. So why is it that cyclist don't do the same.

 

Came out off the cockhedge car park and duly trundled along at the required twenty miles per to be overtaken by a lycra clad loon who then proceeded to ignore the fact the lights were on red narrowly avoiding having a thorough inspection of the buses underside only by swerving violently to one side and then shaking his fist at said bus driver. as I carried on at my sedate twenty I was then overtaken by a police car and two taxis not even the bus drivers observe the twenty limit as there is nobody about to enforce it.

 

Still it ticks all the right boxes I suppose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last night Liverpool's Regeneration and Transport Committee approved the roll-out of 20mph speed limits for residential roads in a program which will see the whole city completed by 2015.

 

PS Merry Christmas to you all.

 

Rod

 

Put forward and based on Warringtons 'success' I believe :unsure:<_<

 

Slightly confusing (or I guess you could say misleading) as we haven't actually adopted the full roll out as yet have we as there questions being asked and many reasonings/actual benefits/ and costs also being questioned too (again 'I believe')

 

PS Merry xmas to you too Rod :D

 

Personally I think we should all travel by horse and little one person traps like the two blokes I saw in Frodsham on Wednesday. A very nice way to travel if you ask me :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dizzy

 

You said :-

 

Slightly confusing (or I guess you could say misleading) as we haven't actually adopted the full roll out as yet have we as there questions being asked and many reasonings/actual benefits/ and costs also being questioned too (again 'I believe')

 

If by "we" you mean Warrington then the roll-out has already been decided and is currently being planned to commence in 2012. Warrington is one of many local authorities getting on with making its residential streets better for everyone, whatever their choice of transport.

 

Regards

 

Rod

Link to comment
Share on other sites

....and now Middlesbrough goes for 20mph speed limits throughout the town :-

 

http://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/teesside-news/2011/12/23/talking-point-is-it-time-to-cut-speed-limits-to-20mph-84229-30002377/

 

Rod

 

Bloody typical of councils. The news report was dated yesterday (ie Friday 23 Dec) and it states

 

"Middlesbrough Council has announced the first 678 roads to be covered by the 20mph limit. Residents have until January 3 to raise any objections.

 

Now call me stupid but yesterday was a Friday... it's now xmas eve... most councils are closed over the xmas/new year period so these poor people have to get their facts and objections in over xmas period ??

 

Councils should not be allowed to do consultations over xmas... end of !!!

 

I didn't read any further as I could feel myself getting grumpy :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well looking at the comments on that site.... not many positives there either...

 

so just who is in favour of spending tens of thousands (£250k in the case of Middlesbourgh) on sticking up more distracting road signs for these limits apart from cyclists & self serving councillors

 

I also wonder if 20's plenty have shares the street sign manufacturers.....? :D :grin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dizzy

 

You said :-

 

 

 

If by "we" you mean Warrington then the roll-out has already been decided and is currently being planned to commence in 2012. Warrington is one of many local authorities getting on with making its residential streets better for everyone, whatever their choice of transport.

 

Regards

 

Rod

 

 

Thank you for correcting me Rod and I must admit I do find all the different local news articles and statements rather confusing hence not really knowing what is going on other than it may take 10 years to implement.

 

I do have a question though about a statement I read about Warrington's rollout a while ago from Clr Kennedy who voted against the blanket 20mph in November and I quote.. as quoted by the local paper

 

'....While the council has set out its limited criteria for appropriate 20mph roads, evidence suggests that the 20mph campaigners, who have been instrumental in forming the council’s policy, are actually seeking, with the threat of legal liability, to have EVERY road within the borough set at 20mph, unless there are exceptional circumstances.

 

What does that mean ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you for correcting me Rod and I must admit I do find all the different local news articles and statements rather confusing hence not really knowing what is going on other than it may take 10 years to implement.

 

I do have a question though about a statement I read about Warrington's rollout a while ago from Clr Kennedy who voted against the blanket 20mph in November and I quote.. as quoted by the local paper

 

 

 

What does that mean ?

 

 

Dizzy

 

Well Councillor Kennedy misreported what I had merely pointed out to councillors. This was that both the guidance on setting speed limits and the common law duty of care when excercising their powers may make them liable for any consequences resulting from setting the speed limit too high.

 

It certainly was not a threat from 20mph campaigners at all but merely the presentation of a particular legal point. Whether this is something for WBC to consider is entirely up to them and their legal advisors.

 

I am not sure exactly why Councillor Kennedy did this.

 

We have always held a very consistent view that 20mph should be the default speed limit for residential roads and that the local Traffic Authority should make the case for any exceptions taking into account a range of factors, including users of the road, casualty history, DfT guidance, etc.

 

I would not say that we have been "instrumental" in forming the council's policy. Perhaps it would be correct to say that we have been "influential". But this has always been by pointing out evidence, results and reasoning, and certainly not by any "threats".

 

I trust that this answers your question.

 

Best regards

 

 

Rod

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure it does Rod as by pointing out the 'possible' legalities you have put them on the table to sway opinion and judgement.

 

I've used the 'I/we/you may be' legal statement many times to get a rethink of actions and terms and to be honest it's always been used in a very polite, mild and 'this is what could happen' scenario but in reality it was a sublime and non confrontational threat to force the other party into a state of compromise, rethink and/or unease and it nearly always works eh :wink:

 

However, I am confused by the fact that you say [b]"This was that both the guidance on setting speed limits and the common law duty of care when exercising their powers may make them liable for any consequences resulting from setting the speed limit too high.[/b]"

 

As the limits are already set on most roads at 30 mph (and have been for many years) then could the local council actually be held responsible and liable for leaving them at that? Yes duty of care is appropriate but as most roads have never had any incidents I would suggest that they have been upholding their 'duty of care' already. Surely it would need some government legislation to say that they SHOULD NOT be set at 30 for the local council to become liable should they refuse to co-operate.

 

Also if the local council reduces the local limits, which in turn results in a death or injury due to a false sense of security and feeling of safeness by a pedestrian/adult/child/cyclist/driver/whoever then couldn't the same arguement be used there against them (or even against yourselves)? ie if you hadn’t reduced them then this may not have happened as the young cyclist would not have been riding on the road or playing on the street etc etc etc?

 

I also wondered about how you could have been so be 'instrumental' in forming the council's actual polities as that did sound like you had made the rules they were now abiding by, and implementing... but you have now already answered that by saying you have merely been 'influential'. One heck of a big influence though eh :wink::lol:

 

Anyway it's xmas eve.... so whatever the new year brings and whatever speed it brings us I wish you and everyone else a safe and wonderful xmas and 2012 :D

 

oooh...and as a final comment.

 

With yet more new housing developments starting in Warrington, the new runcorn bridge. Peel Holdings plans for the gateway and port and of course our road infrastructure, endless traffic lights and whatever other congestion is thrown upon us... we may never manage to get upto 20 mph anyway :wink::blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

It certainly was not a threat from 20mph campaigners at all

well it bloody well looks like one to me and a lot of other people....

 

 

I am not sure exactly why Councillor Kennedy did this.

 

probably to point out your sneaky and underhanded tactics because as dizzy points out, shouting the word "legal liabilities" at a council is as good as them asking where to sign.....

 

 

We have always held a very consistent view that 20mph should be the default speed limit for residential roads

 

...and who put you in charge then Rod? I certainly didn't vote for you and neither did anyone else as far as I can recall.... but you insist on thinking you hold the moral high ground to interfere in everybody elses lives?.... you and your band of merry "men" seem to be some kind of "do as I say" control freaks and I can only think that there is a sinister and as yet unknown motive behind it all.....

 

this has always been by pointing out evidence, results and reasoning, and certainly not by any "threats".

 

Councillor Kennedy obviously doesn't think that Rod!

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...