20 mph speed limits

[vbsydenham]

persecution of motorists

Thanks for that MWAV, needed a good chuckle this morning.

[Mayowthorpe]

Speeding in Sydenham seems to be getting worse by the day.

Why arent the police doing more about this? Surely, mobile speed cameras are an easy solution.

Who can we escalate this to, before we see more carnage on the roads. God help the day a family or small children are seriously injured or killed by these maniacs.

Chris?

[syenhamboy]

While a lower speed can be a contributory factor in reducing the harm to a person in the event of a vehicle striking a person (not always the case), everyone is obsessed with speed being the cause of road incidents, the more serious issue here is pedestrians doing the following:

I cannnot see how it is physically possible for a grown adult to be hit by a car on the road if they are looking while crossing the road.

As a car driver and a pedestrian I am staggered about how often I see people cross the road without looking at all or they step out in a line of traffic, without checking that a passing motorcyclist or over-taking vehicle may be hidden behind a bus.
If you're crossing the road without looking you have no chance if the driver is not paying attention or cannot see you due to headlight glare from oncoming cars. If you're looking while crossing the road, you can see what's coming and take evasive action if required.
Want to stop road incidents then let's start prosecuting Jay Walkers.

[stuart]

The problem is that people are people. We try to be good but sometimes we forget or there is something else pressing. No matter how may times you go through the green cross code - children will, if they see something excitingly happen on the other side of the road, just rush out. A motorist is just checking their sat-nav or whatever. Collisions will happen. We can work out trying to reduce them but collisions will still happen.

Who is at fault is secondary. What is primary is the outcome. If a car is travelling at 30 mph or more it is a KSI. If its 20 its avoidable or at worst surviveable. That is all. The statistics are pretty convincing. The difference between 30 and 20 is lifesaving.

Unless you believe those at fault should die. That is all.

Stuart

[Parker1970]

The problem is that people are people. We try to be good but sometimes we forget or there is something else pressing. No matter how may times you go through the green cross code - children will, if they see something excitingly happen on the other side of the road, just rush out. A motorist is just checking their sat-nav or whatever. Collisions will happen. We can work out trying to reduce them but collisions will still happen.

Who is at fault is secondary. What is primary is the outcome. If a car is travelling at 30 mph or more it is a KSI. If its 20 its avoidable or at worst surviveable. That is all. The statistics are pretty convincing. The difference between 30 and 20 is lifesaving.

Unless you believe those at fault should die. That is all.

Stuart

I agree with you Stuart, but I have also had people walk into the path of my car reading something on their phone and the most very annoying thing, watching parents take the hands of their children and run across the road when there is a zebra/pelican crossing just a few yards away. I hate it when I see parents doing that, it sends the complete opposite and very necessary message.

[bensonby]

Speeding in Sydenham seems to be getting worse by the day.

Why arent the police doing more about this? Surely, mobile speed cameras are an easy solution.

Who can we escalate this to, before we see more carnage on the roads. God help the day a family or small children are seriously injured or killed by these maniacs.

Chris?

I was chatting to some officers at Lewisham police station the other day and apparently the 20mph limit in Lewisham isn’t enforceable. The council apparently put the signs up without the necessary legislation and the speed limit actually remains at 30mph. I personally haven’t researched this assertion in detail.

[bensonby]

Want to stop road incidents then let's start prosecuting Jay Walkers.

There is no such offence in England and Wales.

[syenhamboy]

Exactly my point. make it law

Want to stop road incidents then let's start prosecuting Jay Walkers.

There is no such offence in England and Wales.

[stuart]

Exactly my point. make it law

Jaywalking: How the car industry outlawed crossing the road:
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-26073797

Stuart

[syenhamboy]

nobody in Denmark would ever ever cross the road unless the Green Man is showing.

They even wait for the Green Man when the road is closed for road works.

[alywin]

The situation's similar in Germany and the Netherlands, I believe.

[mosy]

Maybe the Green Man is on a short timer so the patience of a saint isn't needed. It surely is for at least one set of pedestrian lights on Sydenham Road.

Then again, even before the high street and crossings were revamped, they made an observational survey record which showed by volume where people crossed the road (it was posted on here at the time). Yup, you've guessed, people cross everywhere, usually on the diagonal, as they always have and always will do along all shopping streets. Surely it's the cars that are in the wrong place, not the pedestrians.

I heard on the radio or maybeTV that the 20mph limit isn't enforceable because it was all installed without the necessary legislative backup being passed alongside. If that is true, it's one heck of a lot of wasted money on paint and signs that people ignore anyway.

[John H]

Speeding in Sydenham seems to be getting worse by the day.

Why arent the police doing more about this? Surely, mobile speed cameras are an easy solution.

Who can we escalate this to, before we see more carnage on the roads. God help the day a family or small children are seriously injured or killed by these maniacs.

Chris?

I was chatting to some officers at Lewisham police station the other day and apparently the 20mph limit in Lewisham isn’t enforceable. The council apparently put the signs up without the necessary legislation and the speed limit actually remains at 30mph. I personally haven’t researched this assertion in detail.

Quite correct. To be legal the prevailing speed of traffic, when they were introduced, had to be 20 mph. The evidence suggests 20mph limits are a cause of accidents and do not contribute to road safety. Meanwhile they are responsible for a considerable increase in pollution and road humps contribute to increased noise and damage to vehicles resulting in accidents elsewhere.

[JGD]

Some update information on Traffic Management Orders related to the 20mph matter posted on se23.life over the weekend.

jgdohertyVerified23h1
And here is a starter for ten on 20mph TMO’s

https://www.lewisham.gov.uk/myservices/ ... imit.aspx2

A table in the middle of the link makes reference to Traffic order applications commencing in Mar 2016 and finishing in July 2016.

There is no evidence it was completed and from preliminary searches it would seem TMO’s are not so frequently published now.

My legislative knowledge is insufficient to comment on whether there is an obligation to publish.

Oops duplicating with @armadillo.

There is hard evidence from other matters where officers have not complied with or departed from their standard processes as exampled during the listing of the Bell Green gasometers…

Reply

ThorNogsonVerified21h
here are public record of notice of two Lewisham 20mph traffic orders. Along with everyone else so far I don’t know what process apart from this publication needs to be followed to make 20mph enforceable.

I understand that some roads are actually too short to allow enforcement to take place. Presumably that would apply whatever the speed limit is.

The second traffic order refers to ‘to enable the Police to better enforce the 20 mph speed limit restrictions in Lewisham, by specifically identifying each length of street involved in the Order.’, so specifically to help the police in their enforcement.

https://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/24429855
https://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/27568402

I’d speculate that the second order is something to do with this, from a well known pro 20mph web source.
‘In order for the police to enforce a limit then they require a clear distance for them to observe drivers and for drivers to see them. This may make certain sites less suitable for speed detection. Different measurement equipment are available. Whilst in the past some “radar” based speed detectors were not approved for use below 30mph, most forces have “laser” type devices that are fully approved for use at 20mph.’

[stuart]

The evidence suggests 20mph limits are a cause of accidents and do not contribute to road safety. Meanwhile they are responsible for a considerable increase in pollution and road humps contribute to increased noise and damage to vehicles resulting in accidents elsewhere.

That's strange. The study which led to the widespread adoption of 20mph limits indicated on the study of existing enforced areas in London of a reduction of 40% in KSI. More for the most vulnerable road users. The should be single most effective way of reducing them. The sting in the tail is 'enforced' What evidence has come to light to refute this?

Studies show that reducing speeds to 20 mph DECREASES pollution because of the reduction in wasted accelerations/deaccelerations in urban areas. Do you really think you know better than NICE: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng70/c ... -reduction

Noise? Are you really saying cars emit more noise at 20 mph than 30? Check this:
In urban areas with speeds of between 30 and 60 kph per hour, reducing speeds by 10 kph per hour
would cut noise levels by up to 40%. : http://www.ukna.org.uk/uploads/4/1/4/5/ ... _noise.pdf

Road humps? not much of a problem if you drive within the speed limit. That's their point. Yes it would be nicer not to have them but if 80% of drivers don't obey speed limits and the police don't enforce them - what's the alternative if you don't want to increase the carnage on our roads?

So how do we change attitudes to speed?

Stuart

[syd-gal]

The thing that always amazes me is people who get off the bus and immediately go in front of the bus to cross the road. Not only are they potentially preventing the bus from moving on, they are also in danger of getting stuck in the middle of the road until the traffic has cleared.

[vbsydenham]

I'd be interested to see your evidence, John H

[JRobinson]

statistics eh?!
If you take all the accidents where a pedestrian was hit by a vehicle, and just look at those where the speed of the vehicle was in the range 28 - 35, and those in the range 18-25 - you'll see, without any controversy, that there were fewer KSI (Killed or Seriously Injured), in the higher speed category. In a pedestrian/vehicle accident, there is a direct corrolation between injury severity, and speed of vehicle. Slower vehicles cause less sever injuries. (pedestrians on motorways hit by vehicles travelling in the 70mph range almost always suffer sever injuries or are killed outright, and people walking round car parks hit by vehicles doing 5 or 10 mph are often only slightly injured).

However, studies have shown that there are more accidents in newly created 20mph zones - fewer KSIs but more accidents. This is presumably just driver behaviour not yet adapting to the new limits with some people still wanting to drive quickly. give it a few years for the lower limit to become acceptable, and there should be fewer accidents. or it's because pedestrians take more risks when the traffic is moving slower... who knows.

regardless of if the 20mph limit is enforceable, or even legal, that is what the signs and roadmarkings say, so that is the limit which you should aim to drive slower than.
If you're involved in an accident, and you were driving at 30, and the limit is 20, it would be a very unwise decision to base your defence on the assumption that the 20mph limit was unenforceable.

accept it for what it is, and leave the house ten minutes earlier, or accept that the journey will take a bit longer.

[stuart]

Let’s also remember that driving the same journey at 20mph rather than 30mph will keep your car on the road for 33% longer. So comparisons of emissions at different speeds can be misleading if it’s the emissions rate that’s being quoted

I'm guessing you missed out on GCSE Maths Chris. But you are absolutely right about it being misleading when the average speed in inner London is 13.3 mph.

Your other stuff is mostly wrong too. Check the research of referenced here over the years. Critique it if you wish, but ignoring it is doing a bit of a Gove don't you think?

Stuart

[JGD]

An update posted on se23.life

Fairly conclusive evidence that the TMO has been made and debunks "a policeman said" story.

ThorNogsonVerified16h ThorNogson
and after a quick search, this is the public record showing that the traffic order was duly made and published by Lewisham. Unless anyone can say why this is not legitimate, it looks as though we do have a 20mph speed limit after all.
https://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/2791779