RE: 'Humps too ugly for Scotland'
Monday 14th November 2005
Too much for ScotlandSpeed humps are too ugly for Scotland, according to the Scottish Executive, the country's ruling body. It's decided to replace humps with 20mph zones in residential areas following lengthy criticism from motorists complaining about damage to their cars, and emergency vehicle operators who say that the lumps slow them down.
'Humps too ugly for Scotland'
Scottish rulers want good design not road humps
Too much for Scotland
Instead, according to the Executive's plans, humps and narrowings should be replaced by improved street environment design that gives priority to pedestrians and encourages speeds no higher than 20mph in residential areas, or 10mph in some parts.
Motoring organisations said the Executive's move was "good news all round", pointing out that the humps increase pollution and noise.
However, Glasgow City Council said it wouldn't remove existing humps.
Discussion
Don't forget that not only to speed bumps increase pollution and knacker you car, they also knacker the road!
They put some large "plateu" style jobs in on a road near my house about two years ago. Unfortunately it's on a bus route and, although there is only one bus per hour, there are now huge holes in the surface 100mm deep on either side of each speed mountain (I was going to call them bumps, but that in no way does them justice), on both sides of the road.
They put some large "plateu" style jobs in on a road near my house about two years ago. Unfortunately it's on a bus route and, although there is only one bus per hour, there are now huge holes in the surface 100mm deep on either side of each speed mountain (I was going to call them bumps, but that in no way does them justice), on both sides of the road.
Remove speed humps certainly, they are a fools attempt to annoy drivers and do nothing positive. However, there always seems to be a sting in the tail when something apparantly sensible is proposed as in this instance and, as usual, I'm not disappointed. Speeds of 20mph and maybe 10mph. That'll be treated with the contempt it deserves. Just for once can't these control freaks find a real problem and not try on a daily basis to impose yet more restrictions?
ashes said:I have no problem with this limit, so long as it's not abused by making these zones too commonplace supported by fiscal driven enforcement.
"10 mph in some parts"
I am hiring a man with a red flag to beat the rush.......
These limits work well in Germany (walking pace only), designating some streets as children's play areas. A driver will spend very little time in these zones, so there shouldn't really be a significant problem.
You know, there was a time when speed was considered progress, you know, it used to take a day to travel up 10 miles and such, then horses came, then the horseless carriage.... planes, trains.
Suddenly travelling from London to Edinburgh from door step to door step could be done in a few hours...
Anyway, what the hell was I whining about?
Oh yeah, I'm bloody sick and tired, I mean why don't I just get out and jog to my destination with all the traffic jams, 10 and 20 mph limits and ridiculously low limits imposed from miles out of urban areas, I'm sure with their rate of progress it will make sense in 15-20 years.
Suddenly travelling from London to Edinburgh from door step to door step could be done in a few hours...
Anyway, what the hell was I whining about?
Oh yeah, I'm bloody sick and tired, I mean why don't I just get out and jog to my destination with all the traffic jams, 10 and 20 mph limits and ridiculously low limits imposed from miles out of urban areas, I'm sure with their rate of progress it will make sense in 15-20 years.
I live in Glasgow. In fact, I live in a 20mph zone.
The 20mph zones I have come across are always in residential areas where speeds are rarely in excess of 15mph anyway. They are predominately the inner streets in a development. Main roads around the periphery are left as 30s.
TBH, it's a bit pointless. If you are driving safely in these areas your speed will not exceed 20. If you are driving recklessly will you care if you are exceeding 20mph? Without plod to enforce the limit it has no value.
The 20mph zones I have come across are always in residential areas where speeds are rarely in excess of 15mph anyway. They are predominately the inner streets in a development. Main roads around the periphery are left as 30s.
TBH, it's a bit pointless. If you are driving safely in these areas your speed will not exceed 20. If you are driving recklessly will you care if you are exceeding 20mph? Without plod to enforce the limit it has no value.
MrsMiggins said:
.....Without plod to enforce the limit it has no value.
That is I think the attitude of many drivers now. Without police or cameras, the implication is that the limit is not important because any important limit will by now have a static camera and/or vans.
Therefore the camera partnerships have, in a few short years, changed drivers' attitudes from "it's a speed limit so I'll aim to obey it" to "it's a speed limit but I don't care unless there's a camera". In doing this, they have both devalued sensible speed limits and justified the continued rollout of cameras. That will explain it then?
Peter Ward said:
.....Without plod to enforce the limit it has no value.
That is I think the attitude of many drivers now. Without police or cameras, the implication is that the limit is not important because any important limit will by now have a static camera and/or vans.
Therefore the camera partnerships have, in a few short years, changed drivers' attitudes from "it's a speed limit so I'll aim to obey it" to "it's a speed limit but I don't care unless there's a camera". In doing this, they have both devalued sensible speed limits and justified the continued rollout of cameras. That will explain it then?
That wasn't really what I meant.
The areas with a 20mph limit round here have a 20 limit because driving any faster would be inappropriate. In many places 20mph is still dangerously fast. My point was that most drivers already recognised that.
Speeds in my street didn't change the day the limit dropped by 10mph because no-one was driving around here at 30 anyway. Anyone who would choose to drive at that speed around here is clearly a nutter, so unlikely to be bothered by the speed limit, whatever it is. So, in that sense, the limit change was meaningless. Safe drivers were never likely to exceed 20 and any nutters who decide to drive around here at 30, 40 or 50 mph won't be dissuaded be the new, lower number on the sign. Only cops on the spot stopping and charging will change their behaviour, but I can't remember the last time I saw a cop car round here.
los angeles said:
Thread hyjack: huge said:Like traffic "humps" they are more symbolic than useful. We have no indigenous industry to honour. They relate more to television production.
They didn't show you recieving your Scottish BAFTA on Reporting Scotland....have a word
>> Edited by los angeles on Monday 14th November 19:26
Thats not a thread hijack....I reckon you've got the "hump"
Whats the American take on speed "calming" measures anyway....suppose with their big old soggy suspension they wouldnt notice them ?
los angeles said:
I think speed humps have lost their impact as so many people drive 4X4's or very softly spring cars that just sail over them anyway at whatever speed
Just had some installed on the road at the and of my close. Now if I leave home the quicker way out of the village (and back of course) I have 3 humps to traverse, all on a hill. The other way only 1 but there will apparently also be some 'speed tables' though oddly the work seems to have stopped now the humps are in.
Anyway, by the end of week one all the 4x4's were ignoring the humps and keeping up to speed. The buses just don't care since their track width means they are not affected, though with the road narrowing as well I anticipate incidents at some point.
I stop and trickle over, if for no other reason than it might get the nearest residents upset and motivate them to make a fuss. The point is that no matter which way I approach them I thnump the suspension and trying to straddle them means all the suspension bushes are going to get a very regular horizontal workout that is unlikely to be of benefit to them. I do not wish to add to the revenues of the local garage trade unnecessarily so I will take things very easy.
Most of the locals now just seem to blast over them at normal speeds (around 30) in ordinary banger mobiles. I can't imagine that to do so is advisable. I expect to hear tales of unexpected suspension repair costs and possibly a few unexplainable accidents in coming months.
LWB 4x4 for me next time if they don't get the humps removed. A small one wouold react like a bucking bronco I reckon, but LWB and air suspension should ride them OK and the extra CO2 will help the local gardens grow.
It would have to be and oil burner though - pity about the particulates.
but never mind, the 'authorities' know what they are doing. Don't they?
Seems like the S.E. is seeing sense yet again.
I am all for 20mph and 10mph limits where appropriate, we have a 20mph (not manditory) zone on our road, i wish drivers would stick to it.
If you argue that 70mph is nonsense on the m-way then you have to accept that 30mph is probably too fast in residental areas. Its time we looked at speedlimits more closely, and where they can got up then do that, but you cant be surprised to find that some will have to come down.
I am all for 20mph and 10mph limits where appropriate, we have a 20mph (not manditory) zone on our road, i wish drivers would stick to it.
If you argue that 70mph is nonsense on the m-way then you have to accept that 30mph is probably too fast in residental areas. Its time we looked at speedlimits more closely, and where they can got up then do that, but you cant be surprised to find that some will have to come down.
said:
MrsMiggins Only cops on the spot stopping and charging will change their behaviour, but I can't remember the last time I saw a cop car round here.
A perfect arguement, but the introduction of the 20mph zone could be irrelevant if the copper was on hand to stop "dangerous" driving within the existing 30mph limit.
This has always been an arguement against the flawed road safety policy that concentrates on speed alone. The majority of accidents involving excess speed are within the posted speed limit. Just because the posted limit for a stretch of road is 30mph, you don't necessaryily drive to that limit. The residential estate I live on is a blanket 30mph, but where the road is narrow, or curves, or is likely to have kids playing (there are entances to the school and park that my daughters use), I and most sensible drivers slow to 15-25mph. This may vary depending on time of day, visibility, weather/road conditions.
Sensible drivers choose sensible speeds. Unfortunately no amount of legislation alone will stop stupid drivers. If you have a 20mph limit, stupid drivers will still drive at the speed they want, unless, as you say, there is enforcement. What about driving at 20mph in a 20mph zone when there is ice on the road. Is this safe?
Forget tinkering with speed limits, you can never get it correct for all conditions unless you put variable dot matrix displays on every bend, crossing, junction, area of reduced visibility, etc.. Better to concentrate on better road engineering, driver and pedestrian training, and enforcement by qualified police officers.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff