New Spreedcam location rule revealed..

[roosevelt]

see below;

www.edp24.co.uk/search/story.aspx?brand=EDPOnline&category=News&tBrand=&tCategory=&itemid=NOED06%20Apr%202004%2021%3A00%3A32%3A640&tBrand=EDPOnline&tCategory=search&archive=0

[streaky]

article said:

"The only place [the rule change] exists in the public domain is in the new DfT handbook in the House of Commons library."

OK, hands up all those who frequent the HoC library.

"Public domain"? Who do they think they're kidding?

Streaky

[destroyer]

streaky said:

article said: "The only place [the rule change] exists in the public domain is in the new DfT handbook in the House of Commons library." OK, hands up all those who frequent the HoC library. "Public domain"? Who do they think they're kidding? Streaky

What that report does not say is that there must be at least 20% of the traffic in that location exceeding the speed limit and the 85percentile speed is more than the ACPO guideline level for speed enforcement. This means that the location will have a high number of speeders and a high number of accidents.
Now why did the reporter not say that. The report is misleading becaue it misses this out.
That's fresh from the library!

[V8 Archie]

Fecking eejits! I assume this means that we can now look forward to more scameras near areas with a confusing road layout, unclear signage, etc.. Just the sort of places where a responisble road safety body would not be throwing in extra pieces of distracting street furniture.

Mind you, I don't think anyone has ever accuse these partnerships of being responsible.

[bluepolarbear]

destroyer said:

This means that the location will have a high number of speeders and a high number of accidents.

Not sure if I've missed understood your comment or whether you are claiming some new causation effect between speed travelled and accident rate?

What the report and your post fails to mention is that the guidelines only apply 85% sites the other 15% can be whether they please.

Empty dual carriageway anyone?