Walk in the road or on the pavement

[saaby93]

Ever since the Portsmouth 20mph trial showed an increased tendency for stepping out into the road it's not been clear 20mph limits are actually any safer than 30mph
http://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/9874263.Accidents__may_be_more_likely__on_20mph_zones/

Every year there's a higher proportion of seriously injured in 20mph than 30mph
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploa...



In the photo do those barriers stop kids from getting out of the road and onto the pavement
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-27381676

[Chicane-UK]

Not quite sure I understand the use of a poll here in making your point and not entirely sure what point you're trying to make?

[kambites]

You seem to be taking very selective pieces of information from the articles to draw clearly biased conclusions.

The rate of increase in accidents in 20 zones is, fairly obviously, roughly proportional to the amount of road covered by 20 zones. The article itself concludes that there is not enough evidence either way to make valid conclusions about the effectiveness of 20 limits yet.

[RealSquirrels]

with some specific exceptions (e.g. motorways) the road is for people, bikes, horses, cows, sheep, whatever, as much as it is for cars.

[saaby93]

kambites said:

You seem to be taking very selective pieces of information from the articles to draw clearly biased conclusions.

The rate of increase in accidents in 20 zones is, fairly obviously, roughly proportional to the amount of road covered by 20 zones. The article itself concludes that there is not enough evidence either way to make valid conclusions about the effectiveness of 20 limits yet.

I was deliberataly trying not to be biased and if you go back through the stats its always been the same
People take more care the higher the limit (and overall injuries in all limits except 20mph reduce)
If the roads had been left at 30mph wouldnt the stats have shown an overall reduction?
That's the conundrum

[kambites]

That's my point, it's quite possible that overall injuries in all limits except 20s are reducing because all of those limits are reducing in extent. Neither of those articles contains any statistical evidence or even real indication that dropping a speed limit to 20 increases the number of accidents.

The only way to gather useful information is to look at specific stretches of road which have been changed, and see whether the number of accidents on those stretches have risen or fallen since the change. National statistics provide no information whatsoever. Personally (purely from my own limited observation) I believe that 20 limits on purely residential streets significantly increase safety and indeed the general pleasantness of the environment.


If someone had details on the number of miles of each speed limit in the country, we might be able to draw some conclusions, but even that's not particularly useful because the limits tend to be used on different kinds of roads. It might be that accident rates in 20 limits are quite legitimately higher than those in 30 limits because by their very nature 20 limits tend to be put on more dangerous roads. That doesn't mean that those particular roads wouldn't be even more dangerous if they were 30 limits.

Edited by kambites on Tuesday 13th May 09:06

[saaby93]

yes they realised that comparing the number of miles of each wouldnt be particularly useful as it may not be comparing like with like

There are reports comparing before and after, the Portsmouth one said the increase in stepping out accidents was statistically significant.
It may feel nicer and safer to be in a 20mph but if that lulls you into a false sense of security so you do less safe things how do you weigh it up overall.
Is it best to feel safe or to be safe?

[kambites]

I can see no evidence of anything other than some person theorising that more people are stepping out. The incidence of it can't be said to be statistically significant without statistics to back it up.

It sounds highly unlikely to me simply because I don't believe pedestrians take the speed limit into account at all when determining how to act on residential streets.

[Dave Hedgehog]

RealSquirrels said:

with some specific exceptions (e.g. motorways) the road is for people, bikes, horses, cows, sheep, whatever, as much as it is for cars.

and its this kind of weak minded thinking that is causing all the problems

[Mr Gear]

Maybe pedestrians avoid walking on roads that are dangerous, noisy and polluted... I.e. the faster ones?

Make a place less pleasant for people and they avoid it?

[irocfan]

"I remember when I were a lad" we were all taught that roads are NOT for playing in - suspect that if that was drummed into kids today that there may well be less tragic car/person interfaces

[kambites]

Mr Gear said:

Maybe pedestrians avoid walking on roads that are dangerous, noisy and polluted... I.e. the faster ones?

Make a place less pleasant for people and they avoid it?

That depends rather on the type of road. The sort of road that they should be making 20 limits are the ones where 99% of the time there's no cars there anyway so the roads are generally neither noisy nor polluted nor obviously dangerous seeming whether they're a 20 or a 30 limit.

If they're making busy roads 20 limits (which I certainly haven't noticed around here) that's another matter entirely, and I could believe that it's a problem.

[Dodsy]

My experiences when taking the kids to school have taught me that mums in the morning leave their brains and common sense at a jar at home.

I have seen them scream at cars to slow down when the car is clearly going well under 20MPH. They deliberately step out in front of cars 'he has to stop and I'm not waiting' then berate the driver for stopping too close to them. They tell their kids that as long as the car isnt right in front of them to just go ahead and cross the road 'he will slow down'. They park their cars on the zig zags as its 'safer to park here as there is lots of space'. They park their cars fully on the pavement blocking it apart from a small gap forcing everyone to walk in the road.

And the schools dont teach road safety any more. When I was at school we were taught the green cross code etc. When I asked the school if/when they would be covering road safety they told me its the parents responsibility and they dont have time for it any more.

ETA: would you believe it, google maps has captured someone doing it. ! Note that this car is parked and there is no one in it. ANd that if it were a more normal school run car (Mondeo or big 4x4) it would block the whole pavement.

Edited by Dodsy on Tuesday 13th May 10:46

[trashbat]

As well as the statistics, I expect that in places like Portsmouth, the effect has been minor, but it doesn't tell you very much about 20 limits. Why? Because in those changed limits, the average speed was already low - it's hard to go much quicker on roads that are busy yet often too narrow for cars to pass alongside.

[zebra]

irocfan said:

"I remember when I were a lad" we were all taught that roads are NOT for playing in - suspect that if that was drummed into kids today that there may well be less tragic car/person interfaces

It was after that advice from my parents that me and my mates stopped our kick-a-bout 5-a-side matches on the North Bound M6.

[kambites]

There does seem to be something about the school run that brings out the worst in both drivers and pedestrians. I've no idea why but it seems that "I'm picking my kids up from school" is viewed as a licence to legitimately do pretty much whatever the hell you like at a time when, one could argue, sticking to the rules is at its most important.

[saaby93]

trashbat said:

As well as the statistics, I expect that in places like Portsmouth, the effect has been minor, but it doesn't tell you very much about 20 limits. Why? Because in those changed limits, the average speed was already low - it's hard to go much quicker on roads that are busy yet often too narrow for cars to pass alongside.

That was the point well made

Traffic speeds didn't reduce much (1mph), the wrong type of accidents increased
whereas they expected a reduction with a 1mph drop in speeds

http://assets.dft.gov.uk/publications/speed-limits...
Second set of stats for kambites

[saaby93]

Dodsy said:

ETA: would you believe it, google maps has captured someone doing it. ! Note that this car is parked and there is no one in it. ANd that if it were a more normal school run car (Mondeo or big 4x4) it would block the whole pavement.

Another topic - the point of those zigzag things

[kambites]

saaby93 said:

http://assets.dft.gov.uk/publications/speed-limits...
Second set of stats for kambites

That's a more useful sort of study, but that seems to be saying that all accident types fell in all regions when they introduced the 20 limits.

Still doesn't tell you whether that's a result of the change in speed limits though, other things might have changed in that time period as well.

[Impasse]

Porstmouth is a very compact and densely populated city. It needs these 20 limits around the residential areas, although they don't stop the occasional 40+mph-er doing their flypast. None of the major routes in, out or through the city are covered by the 20 limits and money has been spent to ensure traffic flows wherever possible.
It's not all good news, the bus lanes for the Park And Ride scheme have encroached onto the tarmac previously used by cars, but the intent to provide vehicles with easy entry and exit of the city is definitely there.

The 20mph limits are but an irrelevance to most traffic and only a very minor inconvenience to local traffic. If pedestrians still insist on reshaping the front of someone's car, then at least the lower speed will ensure the car is an easy repair.