Bill Posted January 18, 2011 Report Share Posted January 18, 2011 The last time I did a quiz, well I didnt actually take part, I stood at the bar and did it in my head (if that makes sense.) Anyway at half time they stopped for a break having asked 22 questions out of which I was only certain of one answer. One out of twenty two is pretty poor by anyones standard but even worse when you realize that the only one I got, the answer was Mr Blobby Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted January 18, 2011 Report Share Posted January 18, 2011 Well Baz it will go ahead because no one will really complain or should loud enough... but those who want it certainly WILL shout loud enough and are probably putting together their very very large representation of mindless waffle ' in favour' as we all sit discussing it on here Maybe we should ask Gary to print off all the many posts and comments that have appeared on various threads about the 20 mph saga on the forum over the past year .... including all the nonsense by Mr K....and hand them over on our behalf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted January 18, 2011 Report Share Posted January 18, 2011 Baz, you have to distinguish between the lycra Brigade and the vast majority of folk who hop on a bike cos it's easier than walking, then proceed through lights on red, on the wrong side of the road, going the wrong way down one way streets and hopping on and off pavements to suit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wahl Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 Dizzy here is where the "council" carefully placed their diktat http://www.warrington.gov.uk/home/transport_planning_and_environment/Roads/collision_investigation/ 4 February is the deadline for objections send email to the legal department at wbc. From the Warrington Borough Council 20 mph Pilots ? Public Perception surveys Author: B Mercer Date: 27th August 2010 "As the pilots were experimental Traffic Regulation Orders, there was no legal requirement to consult and it was essential that the communities and road users of Warrington were not aware of the trials whilst the ?before? data was being collected The perception surveys were delivered to 100 random addresses in each of the study area. A high number of surveys were sent out to ensure a high enough return rate." By high means high number of cyclists. The local consultation was sent to 100 selected people of whom 48 replied. the rest of the householders were ignored This is considered representative by the council ha! ha! what a fiddle! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 Thank you Wahl... no wonder I couldn't find it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wahl Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 I think that certain people do not appear to want the public to see what they are doing - after all it is a democracy spelt dictatorship! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 In which case I will post my comment here that I also put under the news article.... maybe the person called 'WBCouncil' who started posting will read it and get something doen about it Dizzy said this on 18 Jan 2011 5:07:50 PM UTC DEAR WBC.... I can't find any information or the list of ALL PROPOSED ROADS on your stupidly unhelpful website or anywhere else for that matter.. MAYBE YOU WOULD LIKE TO PUT IT ON YOUR HOME PAGE ASAP !!!! Obviously I can now thanks to WAHL... but other people still wont be aware or able to find it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted January 22, 2011 Report Share Posted January 22, 2011 Seems the Council have hit on a way to reduce traffic speeds, without the need for 20mph limits - they're called pot holes! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted January 22, 2011 Report Share Posted January 22, 2011 Indeed they have Obs What will the cyclists make of the potholes though... the whingers will whinge but the more adventurous and lively ones will 'bunny hop' over them and be thrilled by the newly available terrain adventure Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wahl Posted January 25, 2011 Report Share Posted January 25, 2011 council want to spend another ?20000 on signs and also a letter to tell all residents there is a 20 limit that they could not be told about before in case they might spoil the trial .objections by 4 Feb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Posted January 25, 2011 Report Share Posted January 25, 2011 Whal You might want to check that figure because ?20K won't buy a lot of road signs at all. Even less if all you have is the small change from a mail shot. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evil Sid Posted January 25, 2011 Report Share Posted January 25, 2011 ahh but they have the signs from last time so all they have to do is buy a couple of bottles of paint stripper some brushes and scrapers get a couple of likely lads off the dole to scrape the silver paint off and they can say they have saved loads of money Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted January 25, 2011 Report Share Posted January 25, 2011 It was all a bloody fix anyway..... otherwise they would have taken the 20mph signs down after the trial. Why these council bods get away with lying is beyond me. No bloody wonder they don't knock on doors at election time anymore...... they'd all get battered before they got to the end of their first streets! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted January 25, 2011 Report Share Posted January 25, 2011 but not with 20 mph signs though that are still firmly in place Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wahl Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 Bill the figure is correct straght from the council's mouth. The ?1500 is for a mailing that should have been done at the start of the trial but they did not anyone to know!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 Yet another bash the motorist story in the news today.... http://www.warrington-worldwide.co.uk/articles/9863/1/Children-become-speed-cops/Page1.html the bit that bloody annoys me is that the smug and smarmy hobby bobby only has criticism for the two drivers they stopped during one hour who were breaking the speed limit and no yet priase or acknowledgement for the 342 that were'nt and that stuck to the limit the quote "The road has a 30mph limit but it is clear that some drivers (2 out of 344 in an hour) are choosing to ignore the restrictions that are in place" summs up their attitudes to drivers quite well in my opinion.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 but statistically speaking Baz.... 2 speeders an hour 'could' = 48 speeders over a 24 hour period which 'could' = 336 speeders a week which 'could' = 17472 speeders a year (possibly depending how I work it out) Can someone who has an awake brain cell today explain to me why it works out at a different total depending on how I do it.. my brain is tired) way one 48 (over 24 hours) x 7 (days) = 336 (week) 336 * 52 (weeks) = 17472 way 2 48 (over 24 hours) * 365 (days in the year) = 17520 which strangely enough is a difference of 48 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfie Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 Because 52 x 7 only = 364 days The extra day gives you the extra 48 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdrianR Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 48 speeders a day presumes a uniformity of passign vehicles during that period which reflects that considered in the 1 hour monitored. 2 in 1 hour peak wouldnt mean that 48 were in a day. far to simple to make that leap. cars are slower in peak, the risk are higher, off peak the other way round. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 Because 52 x 7 only = 364 daysThe extra day gives you the extra 48 Thanks Wolfie it was really starting to bug me and I wonder over the years how many things I have calculated wrong without realising Anyway back to 20 mph and speeding cars are slower in peak, the risk are higher, off peak the other way round. brain agian sorry Are you saying that the risks are higher during peak times because the cars are travelling slower Does that mean with a 20mph speed limit the risks at peak time would go up even further Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdrianR Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 no - at peak more likley to be more pedestrians, vehicle movements etc so the chances of an impact between the two will be statistically higher than when there are less cars on the road etc. Speed is a seperate issue. The problem with the current trial was that it was on a limited area and thousands of car journeys disappeared from the stats, probably because people like me avoided the areas where the 20 mph limit was and went another way. Its just moving the problem around and a blanket 20mph will drive people away from the town end of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 I can see that with all the potholes, we will all be speeding to get across them, rather than bump down into them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 I'm sure a lot of people avoided the 20 zones Adrain. I used to avoid the one on the main road near Warrington College as it felt so 'odd' to be travelling on a main road at 20... not to mention all the other drivers who weren't bothering sticking to it or hadn't seen the tiny little speed sign who were still doing 30 and getting annoyed with me. I think it made me a worse driver as I kept checking my speedo to make sure I hadn't gone over 20 incase I got a speeding ticket and I'm sure my eyes probably saw more of my dashboard than the road or pedestrians Like you say it will just move the problem and the traffic around. As for a blanket 20mph driving people away from the town I recon that's already happening anyway. It was reported today 'elsewhere' that the council are suprised at the drop in number of issued parking tickets in town... they put it down to there being better parking facilities available etc... personally I recon it's because more and more people are going elsewhere where the parking is free etc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 Methinks generally, drivers will ignore 20mph, and in most cases residential streets have speed humps or pot holes to keep us below 10mph. But one idea being floated, is to arm the public with speed guns, as there won't be enough coppers with the cuts - so, the "big society" will enforce it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 BRAVE people. 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.