Jump to content

20 mph


vic
 Share

Recommended Posts

I always thought members of the public could only use speed guns for monitoring purposes Obs.

 

Give me one and maybe I can catch the bloody idiot in the lime green sporty ford (focus?) who likes to razz round the local side streets :evil::evil::evil: Twice this week I've seen IT already and once was going past the primary school :twisted:

 

While he may possibly not have gone over 30 mph we don't all need to know how quick he can do 0 to 30 and how loud his revs and exhaust are all the time. THE speed demon IDIOT WILL KILL SOMEONE !!!!

 

Sorry rant over :oops::evil:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just imagine if only one person in Warrington took heed and slowed down, and just imagine that as a result of this it was your child who didn't get run over and killed. We all moan about the speed and stupidity of other drivers we see around and about but the same folk will take the huff at having to go just a bit slower in certain areas. Well I'm sure you know best just go at whatever speed you feel is correct, you'll be banned before too long and the towns streets will be that little bit safer.

 

Pulls pin and retires to a safe distance. :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was that in reply to me PJ... if so you left your pin in :wink:

 

I'll answer either way just incase.

 

I fully understand what you are saying and yes I am one of those who moan about other drivers speed and stupidity but at the same time moan about this blanket 20 mph farce.

 

Yes, some people will stick to it but a lot wont and it certainly wont stop the dangers that the likes of 'Idiot Lime Man' creates. He/they will just go from 0 to 20 foot down and surely you are not telling me that that wouldn't still seriously injure or kill a kid.

 

By the way the car I am talking about is a 2.5L 20V and does 0 - 62 in under 6 seconds... it's not just a normal little ford focus :?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep Interesting :wink:

 

I guess no-one can actually say for certain wether it will make any difference in a particular area or not but it has already failed in Portsmouth and other 'experts' are saying it is not the answer at all so will the same happen everywhere else including HERE. If so just how much money will have been wasted all together and if it is worse how much will it cost to put it all back to how it was ?

 

Like said many many times it could make things worse in the fact that kids especially could fall into a false sense of security thinking that the roads are now perfectly safe... when in reality they will still be dangerous.

 

I do agree with certain roads being reduced to 20 though so I'm not 100% against it at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was expecting RodK to post when I saw him logged in at the bottom of the screen before... but he's gone again now :?

 

Rod you have done that a few times recently are you having problems posting on the forum...if so please let either me or another mod know :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dizzy

 

If the 22% reduction in casualties in portsmouth is "failure" then I would be interested in your definition of success.

 

If the reduction in casulalty costs in Warrington was 8 times the cost of implementing the pilots then was this "failure" as well.

 

These are real successes. The evidence shows that even if some children were lulled into a false sense of security by illegal speeders, the vast majority were given a better sense of security from responsible motorists moderating their speed.

 

And yes, 20 mph limits for residential streets are going to come everywhere, just as they have done in other parts of Europe.

 

Regards

 

 

Rod

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So then Rod, once you have tackled speeding motorists, what next? cyclists with no lights, no helmets, riding on footpaths? Using roads when cycle lanes are available, going through red lights.... or is that a little too close to home?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dizzy

 

If the 22% reduction in casualties in portsmouth is "failure" then I would be interested in your definition of success.

 

If the reduction in casulalty costs in Warrington was 8 times the cost of implementing the pilots then was this "failure" as well.

 

These are real successes. The evidence shows that even if some children were lulled into a false sense of security by illegal speeders, the vast majority were given a better sense of security from responsible motorists moderating their speed.

 

And yes, 20 mph limits for residential streets are going to come everywhere, just as they have done in other parts of Europe.

 

Regards

 

 

Rod

 

Hi Rod

 

My definition of success various depending on the issue or task. To answer your question though.... to me the Portsmouth trial was a failiure as it DID NOT have the desired effect of REDUCING road deaths or serious injuries

 

Re: the 20 mph case can you not see it from both sides of the fence?

 

On one side we have for example you and other 'experts' saying it will work and then on the other side of the fence we have others and other 'experts' saying it wont.

 

So was the reduction to 20 in Portsmouth a success... you say YES but then I read things like this everyhere and have yet to find one that full confirms your view

 

Urban 20mph zones fail to cut road death toll

 

Posted 5th Oct 2010 by Tom Webster

Filed under: Government/Legal, Pedestrian safety , News

 

 

Reducing inner-city speed limits to 20mph does not cut the numbers of people killed or seriously injured, according to a report produced for the Department for Transport.

 

A trial in Portsmouth has shown that dropping the speed limit from 30 to 20mph had no effect on the number of serious casualties, although it did reduce the amount of minor injuries on the roads.

 

The report showed that the number of people killed or seriously injured actually rose by 1.5 on average after the limit was lowered. However, the report compilers, Atkins consultants, did say that the numbers involved were so low that they would be subject to variations.

 

While there was no major effect on the amount of serious accidents, the number of minor accidents in the trial areas fell dramatically. The number of pedestrian casualties fell by 16 percent over the period, better than the national average of 13 percent.

 

The average speeds in the test location also fell dropping on average over the whole city from 19.8mph to 18.5mph.

 

I'm sorry and I know it is something that you yourself feel very strongly about but the rest of us are in limbo land and being forced into having something that we may/may not want and which may/may not work. There is no proof other than to show that it did reduce minor accidents which of course is good !

 

Like I keep saying though I am NOT against certain roads being made into 20 mph zones where there is an obvious danger.. but I am against a blanket or 'group' area rollout.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Rod so you've taken Dizzy's bait and now you have an enthisiastic audience :?

 

Why not post the links to your videos showing what New Yorkers think of your achievements and zeal :?:

 

I doubt it will do much good for the posters above as they have a taken a firm stance on the issue but there are other who simply surf and view, I think they will find it very interesting. I did. :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Geoff it was not BAIT... I thought he was having problems posting :roll::P

 

I personally have not taken a firm stance against anything.... I just seem to be stuck in a bloody big pothole surrounded by conflicting advice and evidence on the safest way to get out :roll:

 

Why don't you post the link :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dizzy WBC have actually posted a note in NEWS on their web site. You have to calculate the closing date for comments etc , but it is Friday 4 February.

Geoff I do not see what relevance New York has to Warrington. Probably the same relevance as Portsmout has to Warrington.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty good propaganda film. A biased view,. though.

A lot of half truths

I do object to "everyone sharing the roads" type comment. The pavements are for pedestrians. If they want to cross, they should be aware of the Code and places for crossing roads. Unfortunately this is not apparently taught in schools as far as I know, hence people are crossing roads etc without due care and attention. Similarly there are few cycle proficiency schemes being run at schools and little awareness of the Highway code rules and guidance.

Motorised traffic pay a lot of money for the "privilege" of being able to use the roads. Cyclists pay nothing. If cyclists over the age of 18 were taxed for the use of the road, then there may be some sympathy for their cause, and also some understanding about sharing road space. . Perhaps such a levy could be used for some road education?

Perhaps road space could be recognised as being a valuable asset and road design improved not restricted or obstructed?

Perhaps there should be more one way motor traffic only routes like mini motorways giving safet travel?.

Perhaps the use of coloured paint could be used properly and not to cover potholes and poor road design?

Perhaps cyclists could be banned from the actual road when there are cycle lanes available?

Perhaps cows can fly...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the link Geoff... interesting and well put together.

 

If I had seen that origionally and had not had all the endless false statistcis and other ridiculous arguements 'for' thrown in my eyeline then I would have just said 'what a good idea'.

 

Sadly after seeing and hearing everything else my views have been swayed the other way to quite some extent when it comes to blanket rollouts.

 

Must admit though the video concerned me a bit within the first 20 seconds.. not because anything had been said but because it showed a group of kids 'playing' on the road on their bikes !!!! :?

 

Anyway that aside ..... yes 20's plenty does all sound great on the video but it is a bit misleading to the people who have commented under the clip as the film makes it sound like it has already been rolled out across huge parts of the UK and it is working that also that 80% of uk people are in favour of it :?

 

I can see some benefits of course but then I can see the pitfalls too and Rod K has said now said that a blanket rollout WILL happen :shock::?

 

So....

 

In a blanket roll out in Warrington exactly WHICH roads would go down to 20 and which would remain higher. Surely there must be a draft map or proposed list available !?! If people like me could see it then we may find that it's not as bad as it sounds.

 

But HOW on earth would we (Warrington) implement a blanket rollout of 20 mph across the town.. where some roads are 20 and others are 30 +

 

Would only the roads with higher limits have speed limit signs with the rest automatically having to be taken as being 20?

 

I cant see the puting limit signs up on all roads so how would people coming through the area know thas most roads 20 apart from the main ones?

 

And then what happens if/when it goes a bit further afield too say to Halton, Liverpool, Manchester how on earth will it all work.

 

No wonder I can't comprehend it all as no-one is telling us :?

 

I can fully understand how they could implement it in a particular neighbourhood area but not across the whole towm.... just don't get how they would do it...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Couldn't find the New York one.

 

Geoff you can view the video taken during my walkaround Brooklyn with Senator Eric Adams here :-

 

When I was in New York I also had a meeting with the councillor who heads up transportation in New York. They are introducing a pilot 20 mph limit into a wide area of the Bronx. He was very impressed with the progress in New York City on making the streets far better places for pedestrians and cyclists.

 

Since then our StreetFilms video on "No Need for Speed" has attracted interest from around the world and we were particularly pleased to find it judged as one of the top 15 StreetFilms of 2010. Besides Warrington featuring in our film, the only other non US city featured in the selection was Copenhagen.

 

Those interested will also find a series of factsheets on our websites at http://www.20splentyforus.org.uk/fact_sheets.htm These include "10 ways that 20 mph speed limits help motorists".

 

Best regards

 

 

Rod

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dizzy

 

You said

Thanks for the link Geoff... interesting and well put together.

 

If I had seen that origionally and had not had all the endless false statistcis and other ridiculous arguements 'for' thrown in my eyeline then I would have just said 'what a good idea'.

 

The film has been on the home page of our 20's Plenty for Us website for several months now. You may find some of the other pages, reports, etc interesting as well.

 

See www.20splentyforus.org.uk

 

Best regards

 

Rod

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK :? I have been on your website before but I obviously must have missed the bits that answer the questions that I asked earlier so....

 

Can you or someone PLEASE point me in the direction of the bits that answer my questions over how a blanket rollout would be implemented and managed.

 

And also could you point me in the direction of the bit that gives me/us a complete list of the actual roads that you propose should be 20 mph in Warrington and which ones would remain as they are.

 

Thanks :D

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...