20mph limits & speed humps do not work - IAM on DfT data
Discussion
Agoogy said:
Should spend the cash used to make speed bumps by filling in the potholes and generally repairing the roads to a better standard, perhaps with a grippier/more modern surface. ...
Different budget, sadly - it's a government "road safety" grant which is "ring-fenced" for "road safety schemes", plus the council HAVE to spend it in the same financial year or they will get less the following financial year 
. Hence comedy schemes that, frankly, are so often 
...Bolton council, incidentally, is going for "conflict" a.o.t. speed humps for traffic 'management' nowadays - that is,
like chicanes on bends with priority given to traffic approaching blind in a 20mph zone; got one of these on my estate, not good.C.A.R. said:
I've always wondered what some of those speedbumps must be like to experience in the back of an Ambulance... Can't be ideal!
I know someone with a back injury that will require him to attend hospital for the rest of his life. Humps give him an agonising time.For the same reason, an elderly lady in my neck of the woods had to sell her family home, after generations of occupation, when humps were installed in her road.
GPSHead said:
I'm far from convinced that they help matters, but if we must have them, then they should be restricted to the start/end of school during term time. Anything else is malicious anti-motorist unpleasantness, which of course is all too common these days. Few things are more antagonistic than having to creep through a deserted 20mph "school" zone at midnight.
Until recently the local council had been fairly sensible - School 20mph zones were only active when amber lights were flashing, which was usually only around the start and end of the school day during the school term.But they've since gone in for blanket 20mph areas. Our area is supposed to be a "trial" but there is little hope of it being reverting to 30mph. This is despite there being no speed humps, the police stating that they will cannot and will not enforce it and that the council have made the roads more dangerous by erecting even more street furniture (in a conservation area no less).
covboy said:
These have gone the whole way
http://www.freeradio.co.uk/news/uncategorized/20mp...
"Cabinet Member for City Services Lindsley Harvard said: “We are working hard to create a city centre that is more attractive and more pedestrian-friendly".http://www.freeradio.co.uk/news/uncategorized/20mp...
What a load of rubbish. The best way to achieve this is by good policing and not loosing what is it 15% of our police force. What makes me feel safer. Crossing the road which I actually have control over or being mugged or beaten up which I have very little control over.
As far as speed bumps go weren't they supposed to getting rid of them as it is an ambulances nightmare. Try taking them in a Smart Car. You end up backing traffic up and a que of frustrated motorists behind you. Luckily my truck has enough track to run most speed bumps without interference.
OpulentBob said:
Not quite.
Look at the downsizing of highways departments over the last few years. We have been losing people hand over fist. I've been at risk of redundancy for the last 4 years. I work for a private company, sub-contracted to the public sector, so I'm going to be the first in the line for a bullet. The reason I've survived this long is that I'm CHEAP. A LOT LOT cheaper than equivalent people in the public sector.
Do you think we have a choice in numbers of staff? Of course we don't. The management (project managers, accountants, political types, non-engineers) make the decisions, and then proceed to make people redundant until their spreadsheet says that the figures balance.
Large developments generally provide funding to the council under something called a "Section 106 agreement". This S106 agreement sets out what the contribution is to be used for, and is agreed between the developer and the council. It is not council dictation. They are in the public domain. Ask for a copy of one, and actually have a read of it, before accusing the Highways Dept of incompetence. If you still think they're in the wrong, you'll have a decent bit of proof to back it up. I can even email you a copy of one if you'd like. I've got dozens. Then I'm sure you'd be happy to amend your post to something slightly more accurate/well informed?
ninja-lewis said:
OP, do you have a link? Would like to forward it on to someone.
Chimune said:
1stly - any chance of a link to the quote?
IAMwww.iam.org.uk/news/latest-news/1087-road-deaths-a...
ABD
PR in full said:
20mph Zones and Speed Humps Do Not Work
New Casualty Statistics Show Failing Policies of 20 Zones and Speed Humps
Based on the latest accident figures published by the Department for Transport and analysed by the IAM, those areas that have introduced 20-mph zones and speed humps have worse Killed and Seriously Injured (KSI) figures than those which have not. The IAM reports (see Note 1 below) that:
1. The biggest KSI increases between 2010 and 2011 were in St. Helens and Portsmouth. The latter had an increase of 57% whereas the national change was only plus 2% (probably due to weather factors). Portsmouth is one of the few cities that have introduced a 20-mph zone over the whole of the area, and subsequently claimed a positive accident improvement based on very limited data. This more recent information shows that the expenditure of over half a million pounds of taxpayers money on this scheme was a total waste of money and that those who promote the Portsmouth scheme as a success are seriously misleading the general public. The money should have been spent on other road safety measures that are known to be effective.
2. Are speed humps a good solution? No. The evidence from Islington and Camden in London, which are undoubtedly the boroughs with more speed humps than others, and have also used 20-mph schemes extensively enforced by humps, show that they also have the worst figures of KSIs per vehicle mile travelled.
The ABD continues to call for the use of effective road safety measures supported by sound scientific evidence, rather than simplistic attempts to reduce accidents by wasting money on speed reduction techniques.
It's hot off the press but will appear here shortly at the top of the list:New Casualty Statistics Show Failing Policies of 20 Zones and Speed Humps
Based on the latest accident figures published by the Department for Transport and analysed by the IAM, those areas that have introduced 20-mph zones and speed humps have worse Killed and Seriously Injured (KSI) figures than those which have not. The IAM reports (see Note 1 below) that:
1. The biggest KSI increases between 2010 and 2011 were in St. Helens and Portsmouth. The latter had an increase of 57% whereas the national change was only plus 2% (probably due to weather factors). Portsmouth is one of the few cities that have introduced a 20-mph zone over the whole of the area, and subsequently claimed a positive accident improvement based on very limited data. This more recent information shows that the expenditure of over half a million pounds of taxpayers money on this scheme was a total waste of money and that those who promote the Portsmouth scheme as a success are seriously misleading the general public. The money should have been spent on other road safety measures that are known to be effective.
2. Are speed humps a good solution? No. The evidence from Islington and Camden in London, which are undoubtedly the boroughs with more speed humps than others, and have also used 20-mph schemes extensively enforced by humps, show that they also have the worst figures of KSIs per vehicle mile travelled.
The ABD continues to call for the use of effective road safety measures supported by sound scientific evidence, rather than simplistic attempts to reduce accidents by wasting money on speed reduction techniques.
http://www.abd.org.uk/pr/index.htm
It's all a waste of money in Oxford and if the greenies push on in Brighton & Hove it's doubtful BiB will have the resources to do much more.
http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/archive/2012/04/04/New...waste_of_moneybecause_police_won_t_enforce_them/
http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/archive/2012/04/04/New...waste_of_moneybecause_police_won_t_enforce_them/
Speed bumps are horrendous. Some of the mounds they are putting in round Exeter are so huge you literally have to come to a full stop, drop into 1st and crawl over them to avoid damaging a standard e36 on factory sport springs. They've recently had to rip a couple up and redo them as police cars practically ripped their undersides to shreds when responding to calls.
Well this lot seem to think we don't need them.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2170367/Lo...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2170367/Lo...
vdp1 said:
Well this lot seem to think we don't need them.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2170367/Lo...
No 20mph limit on the http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2170367/Lo...
C.A.R. said:
I've always wondered what some of those speedbumps must be like to experience in the back of an Ambulance... Can't be ideal!
Let me tell you about speed bumps and ambulances: nightmare!Going to a job, you have to slow to a crawl otherwise you end up doing a Dukes-of-Hazzard styley leap: that is not fun in a 4 tonne vehicle.
With a patient on board, it is even worse. You have to slow right down regardless of how time critical your patient is. Spinal patients are worse: come to a dead stop, then inch over it in 1st gear, then very slow acceleration away from it and very early braking for the next one.
silverfoxcc said:
And 20mph in school areas. Gret idea, but not in the school hoildays or at 2am. WTF??
Scotland have a 20mph when light is flashin concept. Is that toooo difficult for the Tree huggers/pc/h+s numpties that think they know best doen here
I think here in Scotland we have it right, like this:Scotland have a 20mph when light is flashin concept. Is that toooo difficult for the Tree huggers/pc/h+s numpties that think they know best doen here
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=kirkcaldy&hl=e...
40mph except at school time when it drops to 20. Seems to work.
OpulentBob said:
Blame the 70year old ex-Doctor who plays golf with the Councillor who has pushed for the 20mph zones - when not outside schools, they are normally outside the houses of people with the ear of MP's/council officers.
Have you ever lived with a speed bump outside your house? My folks have one. It was a nightmare with the extra noise, everything slowing down then accelerating away. They appealed to the council and, although they didn't get it removed, they had it lowered, which helped somewhat. They would love to have it taken away totally.Matter of time before the average speed cameras are rolled out in the 20mph zones in Brighton and Hove. The Greens will not rest until the entire city population is using non motorised transport to get around. Until then they will continue to restrict parking either by non provision or massive parking charges, enforced by private firms who have paid the council £££ for contracts. This coupled with the reduced speed limits and the "traffic calming" measures of making all roads single lane, using bus stops to hold up private vehicles (no space to pass - they're actually building bus stops OUT into the road to achieve this).
As a resident I would warn people visiting not to drive in unless you want to sit in traffic most of the time and be subject to massive parking costs akin to Westminster - IF you can find a space. Make sure you do pay for parking and don't overstay your time, otherwise you WILL get a ticket (from the council). There's not alot to see as most private business are leaving the city, unless it's run by the council or something to do with cycling or recycling.
If you visit by bicycle, ignore all of the above, ride where you like, pavements are good, but anywhere will do. Don't worry, you won't be pulled up for this as many do it. Feel free to ride up one way streets and ignore traffic lights and every / any rule of the road as / when it suits you. If a private motorist dares to collide with you, you'll have the full weight of the council and local journalists behind you so you will be able to claim anything you like from the evil motorist and his compulsory insurance, while calling for more measures to persecute the motorist.
I really hope that every idiot in Brighton & Hove that voted Green really enjoys the what the city is / has become.
As a resident I would warn people visiting not to drive in unless you want to sit in traffic most of the time and be subject to massive parking costs akin to Westminster - IF you can find a space. Make sure you do pay for parking and don't overstay your time, otherwise you WILL get a ticket (from the council). There's not alot to see as most private business are leaving the city, unless it's run by the council or something to do with cycling or recycling.
If you visit by bicycle, ignore all of the above, ride where you like, pavements are good, but anywhere will do. Don't worry, you won't be pulled up for this as many do it. Feel free to ride up one way streets and ignore traffic lights and every / any rule of the road as / when it suits you. If a private motorist dares to collide with you, you'll have the full weight of the council and local journalists behind you so you will be able to claim anything you like from the evil motorist and his compulsory insurance, while calling for more measures to persecute the motorist.
I really hope that every idiot in Brighton & Hove that voted Green really enjoys the what the city is / has become.
2011 24% casualty increase in 20 zones.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/A...
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/20m...
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4481938/...
So much for official research.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/A...
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/20m...
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4481938/...
So much for official research.
Edited by mybrainhurts on Saturday 11th August 21:32
Comparing the absolute numbers killed and injured year-on-year is about as meaningful as comparing the growth in aviation accidents between the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Unless we know how many people are travelling along all of the 20mph roads in each of the years the statistic merely serves to mislead the innumerate. I would wager that the amount of travel along 20mph roads also increased by approximately 25% between 2010 and 2011, and that 20mph roads were likely no more dangerous in 2011 than they were in 2010.
With speed humps, I do feel that more of my attention is spent on negociating the hump in a manner that will cause the least wear/damage to my vehicle, than on looking for kids/other hazards that the humps are supposed to protect.
I wonder how many accidents are caused or worsened by increased stopping distances due to worn or defective suspension parts?
I wonder how many accidents are caused or worsened by increased stopping distances due to worn or defective suspension parts?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff