what is the law on repeaters?

[gridgway]

what makes a legal repeater to mark a speed limit? I assume that the circle with a number painted on the road is legal for marking the speed limit. Anyone know?

Good to see the met doing a good job this morning. Out with a speed gun in Richmond park. The pushbikes go faster than the cars are allowed to go ffs (20 thru the park).

Grahm

[tvrgit]

markings on the road are not legal repeater signs - repeaters are smaller versions of the speed limit signs mounted "at regular intervals" through the speed limit.

Repeaters are not required for most 30 mph limits if the road is lit.

[Peter Ward]

What is the status of a 30 limit if repeaters are used where they're not necessary? For example, coming to a speed camera and there's a combined camera sign and red-ringed 30 sign?

[tvrgit]

extra 30 mph signs are not required, but are permitted.

The "30" sign before a camera is an extra reminder but not a "repeater" in terms of the regulations, so permitted

[7db]

tvrgit said:

extra 30 mph signs are not required, but are permitted.

30 mph repeaters are forbidden on streetlit restricted roads.

[gridgway]

In richmond park it is not streetlit and there are 20 signs painted on the road in circles. What does that make the legal speed limit?
Graham

[7db]

20s are tricky. They come as zones or limits. There are subtle differences in signage requirements. What do the signs on entry say?

[gridgway]

20 mph zone I think.

[tvrgit]

7db said:

tvrgit said: extra 30 mph signs are not required, but are permitted. 30 mph repeaters are forbidden on streetlit restricted roads.

You're right, don't know what I was thinking of with that one.

[vonhosen]

gridgway said:

20 mph zone I think.

Parks tend to be limits, not zones (IME), don't know for sure with Richmond Park because I don't drive through it.

>> Edited by vonhosen on Sunday 14th May 21:01

[7db]

I just checked with a friend:-

To contract things rather a lot...

* The 20mph limit can only be introduced where speeds are already low and requires repeaters - i.e you can reasonably expect drivers to stick to the posted limit and just need to remind them.
* The 20mph zone is where measures are needed to slow people to 20mph and does not require repeaters - i.e. the measures make people drive slower as the evidence shows they won't slow down unless you make them...
* Both are enforcable.

[turbobloke]

7db said:

I just checked with a friend:- To contract things rather a lot... * The 20mph limit can only be introduced where speeds are already low and requires repeaters - i.e you can reasonably expect drivers to stick to the posted limit and just need to remind them. * The 20mph zone is where measures are needed to slow people to 20mph and does not require repeaters - i.e. the measures make people drive slower as the evidence shows they won't slow down unless you make them... * Both are enforcable.

If people already drive that slow, the purely limit type of 20 isn't necessary
If measures are required in a zone to force people to drive that slowly, somebody's been listening to the nursery rhyme "twenty's plenty" and need to reach puberty fast before being let loose on transport planning again.

[jasandjules]

In this day and age, I would assume any indication of a speed limit should be obeyed if you want to keep your license.

Even if it is a limit/zone/please sir don't drive faster than this sign, you can bet your butt that plod will nick you for it, and the law will get changed to ensure you pay the fine and take the points too if that is what it takes....

[turbobloke]

Driving safely is more important than driving by numbers

Safely means observation and anticipation, and hazards come in various types and liveries these days

[Peter Ward]

7db said:

tvrgit said: extra 30 mph signs are not required, but are permitted. 30 mph repeaters are forbidden on streetlit restricted roads.

So if they're present, does that affect the enforcability of the limit? If so, there are a lot of invalid tickets being given out. If not, then "forbidden" seems pointless.

[turbobloke]

Peter Ward said:

7db said: tvrgit said: extra 30 mph signs are not required, but are permitted. 30 mph repeaters are forbidden on streetlit restricted roads. So if they're present, does that affect the enforcability of the limit? If so, there are a lot of invalid tickets being given out. If not, then "forbidden" seems pointless.

This has been a productive, then contentious, and now fairly closed path to tread! The wrong legislation has been used in numerous areas on numerous occasions to set invalid speed limits. However the authorities catch on and after a while they stopped contesting challenges in order not to widen awareness of all the snafus, and eventually an appeal to a higher Court decided iirc that it would interpret the legislation in the least obvious way that you would when reading it! Directly contravening a clear ruling statement from the Judge in the lower Court (but that's what they do for a living of course). There's a lot on the ABD site about this, for starters try here

[7db]

gridgway said:

20 mph zone I think.

No repeaters necessary. Every point on the road should be 50m or less from a traffic calming feature

[gridgway]

7db said:

gridgway said: 20 mph zone I think. No repeaters necessary. Every point on the road should be 50m or less from a traffic calming feature

All there is in Richmond Park is a sign when you go in (which I thought said 20 zone, but could be mistaken) and 20 signs painted on the road. There are no traffic calming features (unless the 20 signs are they).

Graham

[7db]

The signs on the road aren't traffic calming features.

It is possible that Richmond Park, in common with the New Forest, has dispensation from SoS to dispense with the repeaters as it's a pretty place. Windsor Great Park is apprently possibly one of these two.