New angle on lower limits

[covboy]

This is different !

http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news...

[otolith]

See also the Green angle on reduced speed limits, which is "we aren't allowed to stab people in the face with a fork for driving a car, so this will have to do".

[eatcustard]

Thank god I don't ever need to go to that area

[JustinP1]

“We know from similar schemes elsewhere in the country that reducing the speed limit from 30mph to 20mph can significantly increase the numbers of walkers and cyclists and that can only be a good thing.”

I call BS on this.

I'd love to see any study which shows a clear link between reducing speed limits below 30 and 'significantly increase the number of walkers'.

[BigBob]

+1

[singlecoil]

I expect this will prove to be so unpopular with the locals that the people instigating it will be voted out at the next election.

[AMArchie]

JustinP1 said:

“We know from similar schemes elsewhere in the country that reducing the speed limit from 30mph to 20mph can significantly increase the numbers of walkers and cyclists and that can only be a good thing.”

I call BS on this.

Agree. By extension, I guess if the limit was to be reduced to say 10mph, then even more folk would think "I'll take the push-bike, and leave the car behind. So...10mph limits in residential areas then...? What a load of BS

[walm]

BigBob said:

+1

Not sure whether I am in favour or not but here is the original report.
12%
http://www.betterbybike.info/content/uploads/2014/...

As mentioned here:
www.20splentyforus.org.uk

In there:
http://www.20splentyforus.org.uk/BriefingSheets/20...

[anonymous-user]

walm said:

BigBob said:

+1

Not sure whether I am in favour or not but here is the original report.
12%
http://www.betterbybike.info/content/uploads/2014/...

As mentioned here:
www.20splentyforus.org.uk

In there:
http://www.20splentyforus.org.uk/BriefingSheets/20...

I'm not against 20 limits in heavily built up areas, residential areas etc but I don't see any real evidence in those links. Reporting what someone else has said isn't evidence and neither is people "feeling" there has been an increase in cycling.

I walk a lot, cycle a bit, especially in the summer and can't say I have ever been influenced by changes in speed limits. Is that evidence?

It always strikes me as verging on desperation when people quote suggestion and vague impression as evidence.

[JustinP1]

I've found some gold from the original report which everyone is citing in the press releases: https://www.bristol.gov.uk/sites/default/files/doc...

Report said:

"8.14 In the before survey, a very high number of residents said that they walk around their local area on most days, 87% (80%). Whilst this reduced by 12% to 75% in the inner south, this was offset by a rise of 8% in residents who said that they now walk every week. In the inner east area, this increased by 5% to 85%.

So, in this area, walking REDUCED by 12%.

Report said:

9.3 Table 1 below shows that:
• In the inner south area, pedestrian activity increased by 1% on a weekday and 12% on the weekend.
• The inner south area saw a total increase in weekday cycling levels of 4% and weekend cycling by 12%

So, in the week - there is no difference is walking at all. 1% is not significant and would be way less than the margin of error. However, this is where the 12% figure comes from, however, it is entirely false to state that waling or cycling has increased by 12%. Indeed, the report itself confirms this:

Report said:

Conclusions
9.4 Early indications are that overall levels of walking and cycling activity across the pilot area have increased both at weekends and on weekdays. However, it is not possible to confidently state that these changes were due solely to the introduction of the new lower speed limit.

So, when you cut through the quotes, re-quotes and Chinese whispers, the figures taken are highly selective and falsely represented. And, the authors of the very report conclude that their findings meant that it could not be stated that the reduction in speed limit had any direct effect.

That's the truth.

Anyone want to correct the authors of the press releases?

[singlecoil]

JustinP1 said:

Lots of stuff

But none of it matters. If the locals don't like it, they can vote the people doing it out of office. If the locals do like it, then I expect it will stay.

[Hol]

JustinP1 said:

“We know from similar schemes elsewhere in the country that reducing the speed limit from 30mph to 20mph can significantly increase the numbers of walkers and cyclists and that can only be a good thing.”

I call BS on this.

I'd love to see any study which shows a clear link between reducing speed limits below 30 and 'significantly increase the number of walkers'.

They obviously mean the number of people walking in the middle of the road.
Because it will be safer to do so.

[Dr Jekyll]

singlecoil said:

But none of it matters. If the locals don't like it, they can vote the people doing it out of office. If the locals do like it, then I expect it will stay.

No they can't, because there won't anyone to vote in who will scrap the limits. All council candidates tend to regard motorists as despicable scum to be obstructed at every opportunity.

[singlecoil]

Dr Jekyll said:

singlecoil said:

But none of it matters. If the locals don't like it, they can vote the people doing it out of office. If the locals do like it, then I expect it will stay.

No they can't, because there won't anyone to vote in who will scrap the limits. All council candidates tend to regard motorists as despicable scum to be obstructed at every opportunity.

Then there's a wonderful opportunity to anyone who wants to get into local politics.

You are wrong anyway, because if any opposition party thinks there is strong feeling against the current regime, they won't hesitate to make use of it.

[Devil2575]

singlecoil said:

Dr Jekyll said:

singlecoil said:

But none of it matters. If the locals don't like it, they can vote the people doing it out of office. If the locals do like it, then I expect it will stay.

No they can't, because there won't anyone to vote in who will scrap the limits. All council candidates tend to regard motorists as despicable scum to be obstructed at every opportunity.

Then there's a wonderful opportunity to anyone who wants to get into local politics.

You are wrong anyway, because if any opposition party thinks there is strong feeling against the current regime, they won't hesitate to make use of it.

Indeed.

If you don't like what local politicians are doing then do something about it.

[Dr Jekyll]

Devil2575 said:

Indeed.

If you don't like what local politicians are doing then do something about it.

[walm]

Good work on actually reading it Justin - that is hilarious!
God I hate spin doctors.
So the 12% rise is actually a FALL and may not be anything to do with the speed limit change.
Honestly - you couldn't make it up.
Or rather - you could, if 20 is plenty.

[singlecoil]

Dr Jekyll said:

Devil2575 said:

Indeed.

If you don't like what local politicians are doing then do something about it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy

[otolith]

People will always tend vote for lower limits outside their front door and moan about others doing the same. These things need to be set objectively and in consideration of the needs of the greater travelling public.

[eccles]

So you'll spend longer on your journey time, so you have less time to exercise, so obesity will go up.

That seems to about the level of logic applied.