20 mph Zones

Discussion on Advanced and Defensive Driving.

Postby rodk » Sat Aug 15, 2015 10:11 am


I tend to agree with you Chris.

After hearing on the news of the anniversary of the 2nd World War, the millions slain, the death camps, the atomic bomb, the atrocities committed, and the news of ongoing current conflict and wars around the globe I logged on to my computer to look at this discussion.

And here according to Alasdair their is a war being waged against Cotswold villagers. Is it "so-called Islamic State"? The tanks of a fascist army over-running the villages? The bombs of a terrorist organisation? No, apparently it the idea that on the streets in the village those driving 1 or 2 tons of motorised vehicles may have to keep their speed down to 20mph hour. Goodness, in the average Cotswold village that means it may take 5 seconds longer to drive down to the newsagent.

And further on, I and the 20's Plenty movement are being accused of being dishonest.

I do thank everyone for their contributions. I have tried to keep my comments informative, objective and polite, but when the arguments against me get to level shown in recent posts then I suspect that Alasdair and others of like mind will never be convinced. And I certainly have better things to do with my time.

Best regards

Rod King
rodk
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2015 8:17 am

Postby akirk » Sat Aug 15, 2015 11:14 am


rodk wrote:I tend to agree with you Chris.

After hearing on the news of the anniversary of the 2nd World War, the millions slain, the death camps, the atomic bomb, the atrocities committed, and the news of ongoing current conflict and wars around the globe I logged on to my computer to look at this discussion.

And here according to Alasdair their is a war being waged against Cotswold villagers. Is it "so-called Islamic State"? The tanks of a fascist army over-running the villages? The bombs of a terrorist organisation? No, apparently it the idea that on the streets in the village those driving 1 or 2 tons of motorised vehicles may have to keep their speed down to 20mph hour. Goodness, in the average Cotswold village that means it may take 5 seconds longer to drive down to the newsagent.

And further on, I and the 20's Plenty movement are being accused of being dishonest.

I do thank everyone for their contributions. I have tried to keep my comments informative, objective and polite, but when the arguments against me get to level shown in recent posts then I suspect that Alasdair and others of like mind will never be convinced. And I certainly have better things to do with my time.

Best regards

Rod King


Rod, you continue to confirm your approach ;) and your discussion gets more and more silly...
You obviously think you have the right to tell everyone how to live...
You continue to ignore the points being made (that we all support the concept of 20mph, but would like to see just a little intelligence being used in how it is deployed)
You obviously don't like robust debate, but not everyone is going to accept what you say as the gospel truth, especially when you fail to back it up...
You clearly contradict yourself and claim not to over maybe one of the most fundamental parts of your campaign - dishonest? I will let you decide, but perhaps this is one of the first times that you have had a discussion with an articulate group of people who agree with the core safety concept, but maybe don't like your approach... perhaps you need to revist the logic of your arguments - any honest campaign as you claim to be will continually review against outside feedback - does this change what we think / are we accurate / did we get it right or wrong / etc...
It seems though that you are not prepared to do that - in fact you are not prepared to listen at all which says a lot...

If you and your supporters are so perfect let me suggest a challenge :)
black box systems or apps for all your supporters and all those on here...
lets see what the average speed is across the country in residential areas - I would hazard a guess that it is likely to be lower amongst those on here...

no-one here has an objection to driving at or under 20 when appropriate in a residential area...
maybe we don't like the silliness of limiting areas un-necessarily
maybe we don't like that a member of the public with no remit or authority is trying to tell the country how to live - if you want that power - go and get elected...

a blunt response - yes, no apologies for that when a campaign seems to be gathering steam with no evidential basis for what it is trying to do (move to 20mph default) and no legal need to do what they aim for (we can already impose 20mph limits where necessary), then sometimes a blunt response is required - if you are confident that your way is the only possible way you would have no issue with a debate on the many points raised, but you have been remarkably selective in how you respond... if you want respect for your campaign, you need to earn it...

Alasdair
akirk
 
Posts: 668
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2014 11:07 am
Location: Cotswolds

Postby jcochrane » Sat Aug 15, 2015 11:27 am


rodk

The point you seem to have refused to accept is that we agree but not the way you are going about it.

We've heard from you as to why a lower limit is needed in some places at certain times but we already know this and agree.

What you have not explained is why the draconian approach you want.
jcochrane
 
Posts: 1877
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 2:52 pm
Location: East Surrey and wherever good driving roads can be found.

Postby RobC » Sat Aug 15, 2015 12:05 pm


And further on, I and the 20's Plenty movement are being accused of being dishonest.

I do thank everyone for their contributions. I have tried to keep my comments informative, objective and polite, but when the arguments against me get to level shown in recent posts then I suspect that Alasdair and others of like mind will never be convinced. And I certainly have better things to do with my time.

Best regards Rod King


akirk wrote:
if you want respect for your campaign, you need to earn it...

Alasdair


Hi Alisdair

It seems to me that Rod has unsurprisingly signed off so further comment was unnecessary.

It also seems to me that Rod is a man of action and not just words and has already earned respect for his campaign with his MBE for services to road safety.

Rob
National Safe Driving Enterprise CIC
RobC
 
Posts: 174
Joined: Sun Aug 04, 2013 7:53 am




Postby martine » Sat Aug 15, 2015 12:38 pm


Hey - we can carry on the debate without Rob if he doesn't want to continue.

How should the guidance on introducing 20 limits (selectively) be phrased?

What are the downsides of 20 limits?

Does anyone have any definitive evidence of pollution and fuel consumption at 20 opposed to 30?

Any unexpected benefits of driving at 20?
Martin - Bristol IAM: IMI National Observer and Group Secretary, DSA: ADI, Fleet, RoSPA (Dip)
martine
 
Posts: 4430
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Bristol, UK




Postby akirk » Sat Aug 15, 2015 12:56 pm


might be good to carry it on - and perhaps less emotive :)

an interesting item for discussion might also be 20mph as a tool for safety v. other options (training / road design / car design / etc.)

also interesting to discuss the technology in use - Volvo are promoting their vehicle pedestrian safety system quite heavily - but it only works at below 25kph (c. 15/16mph) - how does that impact our choice of speed limits - for example, should we say that all residential areas should be below 15mph and all cars should carry such a system - would that stop pedestrian casualties?

perhaps we need to consider autonomous cars and their impact on this discussion...

with the volvo system & autonomous cars, where the machine stops when it detects a pedestrian - how is that going to change pedestrian behaviour - will it introduce a new sport for teenagers who can disrupt a car's progress by simply stepping out in front of it?! :D

Alasdair
akirk
 
Posts: 668
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2014 11:07 am
Location: Cotswolds

Postby MGF » Sat Aug 15, 2015 1:44 pm


rodk wrote:MGF

The guidance says :-

30. The following will be important factors when considering what is an appropriate speed limit:
 history of collisions, including frequency, severity, types and causes;
 road geometry and engineering (width, sightlines, bends, junctions, accesses and safety barriers etc.);
 road function (strategic, through traffic, local access etc.);
 Composition of road users (including existing and potential levels of vulnerable road users);
 existing traffic speeds; and
 road environment, including level of road-side development and possible impacts on residents (e.g. severance, noise, or air quality).

While these factors need to be considered for all road types, they may be weighted differently in urban or rural areas. The impact on community and environmental outcomes should also be considered.


Rod


Thanks Rod,

I've tried to identify how this is done in practice and found the following from Coventry City Council. It appears that having been petitioned by local residents for a 20mph limit in their neighbourhood an analysis by the Council found that 20 mph wasn't appropriate according to the criteria but nonetheless the Council decided to implement the request in accordance with the Council's policy of making the City a 20 mph City. A policy which appears to be inconsistent with the guidance.

*****
2.2 The petition requests that a 20 mph speed limit is introduced on all of these roads and uses the phrase “20s plenty”. This refers to the name of a campaign which is supported by a number of road safety, pedestrian, cycling and health charities to encourage local authorities to introduce 20 mph limits or zones across wide areas of residential roads.

2.7 The Council prioritises requests for road safety and traffic management measures with preference given to those areas where the best opportunity for accident savings can occur. Hence the areas experiencing higher than average speeds and exhibiting the highest injury-accident figures are the most likely to be treated.

2.8 Having said that The Council has an aspiration of Coventry being a 20mph City. On the 2 September 2014 Cabinet Member (Public Services) approved a prioritisation methodology for identifying where 20mph zones or 20mph limits could be introduced and that these areas would be prioritised using the criteria approved in that report.

2.9 Therefore in line with the approved prioritisation methodology it is recommended that a 20 mph speed limit project and design be prioritised at the area highlighted by the petitioners...



http://democraticservices.coventry.gov. ... 0Limit.pdf

****

My understanding is that the '20's Plenty' campaign seeks a default urban speed limit of 20 mph instead of 30 mph.

Central government hasn't done this but instead has given local authorities very wide powers to reduce the default 30 limit to 20 en masse.

Consequently there is no consistency in how limits are set. Something which has, historically, been an important part of roads regulation.

Essentially we have a default urban limit of 30 mph in some areas and a, de facto default urban speed limit of 20 mph in others.

As for the arguments being made here against a default 20 mph limit, these could equally be applied to 30 mph. Why 30 mph instead of 40 or 50 or 10? What magic does the number 30 hold?
MGF
 
Posts: 2547
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: Warwickshire

Postby martine » Sat Aug 15, 2015 2:55 pm


MGF wrote:As for the arguments being made here against a default 20 mph limit, these could equally be applied to 30 mph. Why 30 mph instead of 40 or 50 or 10? What magic does the number 30 hold?

It doesn't but it's what we're used to and seems a sensible compromise and 'natural'. Any change from the norm has to be justified - I don't think many people here are convinced of the justification. In Bristol the widespread 20's have cost £2.3m to implement...that's a lot of money that could be spend on other road safety stuff.
Martin - Bristol IAM: IMI National Observer and Group Secretary, DSA: ADI, Fleet, RoSPA (Dip)
martine
 
Posts: 4430
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Bristol, UK




Postby TripleS » Sat Aug 15, 2015 3:13 pm


StressedDave wrote:I think we're missing a solution here... if we bring back the red flag act we would increase the safety and eliminate adult unemployment too.


Good idea; but we'd need to boost immigration somewhat. We don't have enough bods to cover the task.

OK, here ends the political contribution. :roll:
TripleS
 
Posts: 6025
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2005 9:47 pm
Location: Briggswath, Whitby

Postby fungus » Sat Aug 15, 2015 11:23 pm


mefoster wrote:If Rod is still reading, I would like to ask a question.

We are all fully aware of his position re: urban speed limits, especially in "residential" areas. What is his position re: rural speed limits? i.e. How does he feel about the NSL as applied to rural roads?


Please don't. We might get a response like " forties just too sporty" :lol:
Nigel ADI
IAM observer
User avatar
fungus
 
Posts: 1739
Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2008 8:16 pm
Location: Dorset

Postby TheInsanity1234 » Tue Aug 18, 2015 3:17 pm


martine wrote:
TheInsanity1234 wrote:...But y'know, feel free to ignore me...

OK will do...* :D






*actually I thought that was a very mature and considered post

Thank you.

Sometimes I do have my senses with me :mrgreen:
TheInsanity1234
 
Posts: 822
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2014 9:22 pm
Location: West Berkshire

Previous

Return to Advanced Driving Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


cron