Mobile Camera Placement Criteria
Discussion
I'm getting more and more wound up by this.
I live in Leighton Buzzard, and the main road to Hemel, which is an extremely busy road in rush hours, has a number of villages with a couple of 40 and 30 limits.
One village in particular, (Billington, if you know it) used to be a 40 limit, but changed to a 30 limit about 3 years ago. I in fact got an SP30 there in Sept 2000, unmarked car on the verge with wires over the road, no fixed camera.
A while back, in the local rag, there was an article on the use of camera in the village, and how the powers that be had ruled out their use as they were not acheiving the aim of reducing speed. They stated the reason to reduce the speed was to reduce the road noise, as the local residents had complained. FFS, why live there, next to a busy A road, if you don't like road noise! I just can't figure out who would do this... So, in the article, they said they had decided to use a warning sign that detects speed and displays it as you go past. Went past it the other day on the way home from work, doing exactly 30 with the other convoy of cars that the road becomes, and it flashes up 24mph... ?!?!?! Thats beside the point, but it was stated that these would be used more and more, as the camera was getting drivers backs up, and wasn't reducing the 'road noise'.
Driving along the other day, at or below 30 (once bitten twice shy really for me), and there are two camera van operators casing the area for van placement. A few days later still, and a sign appears - "389 caught here in one day" or some such phrase. It isn't a dangerous road, there is, as far as I know, no history of accidents there, they admit the cameras do not work, yet they still do it.
The village is on a hill, and the limit is for about half a mile through it, with NSL either side. Going down either side of the hill, people select a lower gear rather than brake anyway, which is just going to make the noise produced by the cars worse anyway!
If it's all done for people's comfort in reducing noise, then education not fleecing is the way forward surely, or a review of the appropriate limit for that bit of road.
Pure revenue generation and taking advantage.
Sorry
Rant over....
Comments??
I live in Leighton Buzzard, and the main road to Hemel, which is an extremely busy road in rush hours, has a number of villages with a couple of 40 and 30 limits.
One village in particular, (Billington, if you know it) used to be a 40 limit, but changed to a 30 limit about 3 years ago. I in fact got an SP30 there in Sept 2000, unmarked car on the verge with wires over the road, no fixed camera.
A while back, in the local rag, there was an article on the use of camera in the village, and how the powers that be had ruled out their use as they were not acheiving the aim of reducing speed. They stated the reason to reduce the speed was to reduce the road noise, as the local residents had complained. FFS, why live there, next to a busy A road, if you don't like road noise! I just can't figure out who would do this... So, in the article, they said they had decided to use a warning sign that detects speed and displays it as you go past. Went past it the other day on the way home from work, doing exactly 30 with the other convoy of cars that the road becomes, and it flashes up 24mph... ?!?!?! Thats beside the point, but it was stated that these would be used more and more, as the camera was getting drivers backs up, and wasn't reducing the 'road noise'.
Driving along the other day, at or below 30 (once bitten twice shy really for me), and there are two camera van operators casing the area for van placement. A few days later still, and a sign appears - "389 caught here in one day" or some such phrase. It isn't a dangerous road, there is, as far as I know, no history of accidents there, they admit the cameras do not work, yet they still do it.
The village is on a hill, and the limit is for about half a mile through it, with NSL either side. Going down either side of the hill, people select a lower gear rather than brake anyway, which is just going to make the noise produced by the cars worse anyway!
If it's all done for people's comfort in reducing noise, then education not fleecing is the way forward surely, or a review of the appropriate limit for that bit of road.
Pure revenue generation and taking advantage.
Sorry
Rant over....
Comments??
I read recently on a particularly sickening scamera site (Leics) www.speedorsafety.com/why.html regarding speed camera placement "Camera sites in Leicester, Leicestershire & Rutland are chosen because they have a history of speed-related accidents and excessive speeding." that probably sums it up; roads that are dangerous and roads that are not - think thats got'em all covered then. 
The placement of speed camera's is actually based on the same principles used by supermarket companies, and goes like this:
You may not need the shop, as the area no doubt is congested with the bloody things (
hmmmm a tax springs to mind - supermarket congestion charge) but the customer base is usually greater than the total shop capacity and there is always room for squeezing a few more customers.
You may not need the shop, as the area no doubt is congested with the bloody things (
hmmmm a tax springs to mind - supermarket congestion charge) but the customer base is usually greater than the total shop capacity and there is always room for squeezing a few more customers.Message Board | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff