New speed limit justification data
Discussion
A speed limit was recently halved for no reason that I could see. When approached with the question 'Why?', both the local Council and County Council scrupulously avoided explaining their actions.
I filed a Freedom of Information request and this produced some speed data (amusingly it arrived one day after the limit was istalled). To me it seems to support the fact that no reduction in the limit was required!
I smell rats.
Is there anyone here who is famiiar with speed survey results and could take a quick look just to make sure I haven't overlooked anything?
Many thanks.
I filed a Freedom of Information request and this produced some speed data (amusingly it arrived one day after the limit was istalled). To me it seems to support the fact that no reduction in the limit was required!
I smell rats.
Is there anyone here who is famiiar with speed survey results and could take a quick look just to make sure I haven't overlooked anything?
Many thanks.
Im not sure how this might help, but from when I looked at data a few years ago, it was very hit and miss.
The double black bands they tie across the road to measure traffic flow and speed only gave a general speed, with a 5mph variation (if i remember correctly).
It's been a while since I looked at any data though, and even then it was just a glance.
The double black bands they tie across the road to measure traffic flow and speed only gave a general speed, with a 5mph variation (if i remember correctly).
It's been a while since I looked at any data though, and even then it was just a glance.
Do councils need justification for dropping limits.
They have systematically dropped limits around my village despite one councillor (who advocated the reductions) admitting "there hasn't been any serious accidents....."
It seems an easy way to fulfil road safety pledges......drop a few limits....job done.
Doesn't matter that there was no data to support the need for a limit reduction - nor is any data generated to show that the reduction has had the intended effect.
They have systematically dropped limits around my village despite one councillor (who advocated the reductions) admitting "there hasn't been any serious accidents....."
It seems an easy way to fulfil road safety pledges......drop a few limits....job done.
Doesn't matter that there was no data to support the need for a limit reduction - nor is any data generated to show that the reduction has had the intended effect.
fjord said:
Im not sure how this might help, but from when I looked at data a few years ago, it was very hit and miss.
The double black bands they tie across the road to measure traffic flow and speed only gave a general speed, with a 5mph variation (if i remember correctly).
It's been a while since I looked at any data though, and even then it was just a glance.
I can see how data generated by such a device could support greater speed enforcement if lots of vehicles were shown to exceed the limit. The data could even be used to suggest that a particular limit is too low.The double black bands they tie across the road to measure traffic flow and speed only gave a general speed, with a 5mph variation (if i remember correctly).
It's been a while since I looked at any data though, and even then it was just a glance.
But how can it be used to support a reduction - unless they work on the basis:
"This road has a 40mph limit - which is appropriate.......however people regularly exceed that limit by up to 10mph, therefore to get people to travel at 40mph - we'll reduce the limit to 30. People will still exceed it by up to 10mph - but in doing so they'll only be travelling at the speed we deem appropriate anyway....so that's fine".
Moonhawk said:
Doesn't matter that there was no data to support the need for a limit reduction - nor is any data generated to show that the reduction has had the intended effect.
That seems to be the case so far, which I find incredible but unsurprising. Anyway, I have an expert on the case so even if we can't get the signs pulled up we can make them look like chumps 
Moonhawk said:
I can see how data generated by such a device could support greater speed enforcement if lots of vehicles were shown to exceed the limit. The data could even be used to suggest that a particular limit is too low.
But how can it be used to support a reduction - unless they work on the basis:
"This road has a 40mph limit - which is appropriate.......however people regularly exceed that limit by up to 10mph, therefore to get people to travel at 40mph - we'll reduce the limit to 30. People will still exceed it by up to 10mph - but in doing so they'll only be travelling at the speed we deem appropriate anyway....so that's fine".
They used to work on the basis that if > 15% of the traffic was exceeding a proposed or actual limit that limit was too low. Because empirically this has been shown to be the way to set limits which minimised cases of excessive speed. When they found that their proposed limit wasn't justified by this measure, they decided that the 50th percentile was what mattered, for no other reason than that this meant lower limits.But how can it be used to support a reduction - unless they work on the basis:
"This road has a 40mph limit - which is appropriate.......however people regularly exceed that limit by up to 10mph, therefore to get people to travel at 40mph - we'll reduce the limit to 30. People will still exceed it by up to 10mph - but in doing so they'll only be travelling at the speed we deem appropriate anyway....so that's fine".
So yes, whatever happens they will interpret it as meaning the limit must be reduced, because reducing limits is their purpose in life.
Simpo Two said:
A speed limit was recently halved for no reason that I could see.
You can at least be reassured that this was paid for by the "government road safety grant" to the local authority (a grant which has to be spent by the financial year end ie now or else the amount spent would be deducted from next year's settlement) rather than from local government funding...The need to spend the money plus a 'low priority road safety scheme' whose budget matched what was available (ie needed to be spent) is probably why this particular 'road safety scheme' has been carried out (the local authority will have many proposed 'road safety schemes' of various priorities they'd like to implement if they could afford it).
I wouldn't expect any rational explanation from the local authority in this instance
.Dr Jekyll said:
When they found that their proposed limit wasn't justified by this measure, they decided that the 50th percentile was what mattered, for no other reason than that this meant lower limits.
I guess it also helps with revenue from speed cameras etc. Why set a speed limit on the basis that only 15% will exceed it - when you can set it on the basis that 50% will. By doing so - you have increased your 'customer' base by over 300%
Some DFT stats:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploa...
Page 87: Exceeding the speed limit was a contributory factor in 5% of all accidents in 2011.
Of those I would imagine rather fewer would have it as the sole factor - but would instead be compounded with other factors.
To put this into context, road conditions accounted for almost 3 times that amount at 13% and driver error accounted for a whopping 74% (Table on page 85)
Speed is easy to go after though.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploa...
Page 87: Exceeding the speed limit was a contributory factor in 5% of all accidents in 2011.
Of those I would imagine rather fewer would have it as the sole factor - but would instead be compounded with other factors.
To put this into context, road conditions accounted for almost 3 times that amount at 13% and driver error accounted for a whopping 74% (Table on page 85)
Speed is easy to go after though.
I've lived a few hundred yards from the stretch of road for 25 years and have mever heard of or seen any accidents on it. It remained at 60 during the 'great cull' of the 1990s, and it remained at 60 when a small but high class development built opening onto it 10 years ago - at which time the road would of course been re-assessed.
Why it has been halved now for an undisclosed reason is beyond me - other than a tinpot councillor might live on that development perhaps...? The survey shows that the average traffic speed is 29-32mph, so no grounds for action.
I will also be sure to ask them the total cost of this non-improvement, not just in the civil engineering but all the salaries of the witless fools who enact this sort of nonsense. Oh, and I pay for all of them of course.
Why it has been halved now for an undisclosed reason is beyond me - other than a tinpot councillor might live on that development perhaps...? The survey shows that the average traffic speed is 29-32mph, so no grounds for action.
I will also be sure to ask them the total cost of this non-improvement, not just in the civil engineering but all the salaries of the witless fools who enact this sort of nonsense. Oh, and I pay for all of them of course.
Unfortunately in Nottinghamshire, where I currently reside and the neighbouring Derbyshire there are plenty of ridiculously low limits imposed by the clueless b
ds in the relevant councils tasked with reviewing speed limits.
Some accidents occur on straight well-sighted stretches of rural 'A' and 'B' road involving speed far in excess of the existing NSL, so what use is dropping the limit and punishing driving at a perfectly safe and appropriate speed for the road?
Given these days the vast majority of drivers adhere to the existing limits on the road, the inner cynic in me feels the unreasonably low limits are introduced solely to extort money out the motorist through enforcement and the resulting speed awareness courses.
ds in the relevant councils tasked with reviewing speed limits.Some accidents occur on straight well-sighted stretches of rural 'A' and 'B' road involving speed far in excess of the existing NSL, so what use is dropping the limit and punishing driving at a perfectly safe and appropriate speed for the road?
Given these days the vast majority of drivers adhere to the existing limits on the road, the inner cynic in me feels the unreasonably low limits are introduced solely to extort money out the motorist through enforcement and the resulting speed awareness courses.
I seem to remember a PHer a while ago saying that there was a fatal accident on the road outside their house and the limit was lowered or a speed camera put in.
The fatal accident involved joyriders being chased by the police, far in excess of what the limit was.
The fatal accident involved joyriders being chased by the police, far in excess of what the limit was.
Edited by andrewrob on Saturday 5th April 11:57
Some information here you might find interesting
cms.walsall.gov.uk/procedure_for_setting_local_speed_limits.pdf
Also bear in mind the fact that they cannot JUST reduce. Like implementation of the original speed limit they have to consult and seek opinion. Note the procedure in the gen.
dvd
cms.walsall.gov.uk/procedure_for_setting_local_speed_limits.pdf
Also bear in mind the fact that they cannot JUST reduce. Like implementation of the original speed limit they have to consult and seek opinion. Note the procedure in the gen.
dvd
Dwight VanDriver said:
Some information here you might find interesting
cms.walsall.gov.uk/procedure_for_setting_local_speed_limits.pdf
Also bear in mind the fact that they cannot JUST reduce. Like implementation of the original speed limit they have to consult and seek opinion. Note the procedure in the gen.
dvd
They don't however, have to take the slightest notice of the result of the consultation. cms.walsall.gov.uk/procedure_for_setting_local_speed_limits.pdf
Also bear in mind the fact that they cannot JUST reduce. Like implementation of the original speed limit they have to consult and seek opinion. Note the procedure in the gen.
dvd
I just bought a local paper which has the headline '"INSANE" DRIVERS PUTTING LIVES AT RISK'.
Redaing between the lines, it seems that one person, who uses this road as a pedestrian, doesn't like the traffic and has played the 'think of the children' card to make his personal trek more pleasant.
'Motorists ignore new 30mph speed limit' the paper goes on. But hang on, the signs went up on 3 April. The paper is dated 4 April. Something very strange is going on I think.
Redaing between the lines, it seems that one person, who uses this road as a pedestrian, doesn't like the traffic and has played the 'think of the children' card to make his personal trek more pleasant.
'Motorists ignore new 30mph speed limit' the paper goes on. But hang on, the signs went up on 3 April. The paper is dated 4 April. Something very strange is going on I think.
Funkateer said:
Unfortunately in Nottinghamshire, where I currently reside and the neighbouring Derbyshire there are plenty of ridiculously low limits imposed by the clueless bds in the relevant councils tasked with reviewing speed limits.
Some accidents occur on straight well-sighted stretches of rural 'A' and 'B' road involving speed far in excess of the existing NSL, so what use is dropping the limit and punishing driving at a perfectly safe and appropriate speed for the road?
Given these days the vast majority of drivers adhere to the existing limits on the road, the inner cynic in me feels the unreasonably low limits are introduced solely to extort money out the motorist through enforcement and the resulting speed awareness courses.
Ugh, A614 anyone? Straight as a die, let's make it 50 and put SPECS all along it. What a ball ache that drive is now when I'm going to Nottingham. ds in the relevant councils tasked with reviewing speed limits.Some accidents occur on straight well-sighted stretches of rural 'A' and 'B' road involving speed far in excess of the existing NSL, so what use is dropping the limit and punishing driving at a perfectly safe and appropriate speed for the road?
Given these days the vast majority of drivers adhere to the existing limits on the road, the inner cynic in me feels the unreasonably low limits are introduced solely to extort money out the motorist through enforcement and the resulting speed awareness courses.
The only plus side of SPECS, if you can call it that, is that there's nothing to be done but set your cruise to the designated speed and wake up when you get to the end. I hit a long patch of 50 on the M25 today - went along at 49.9mph going 'dum-de-dum', 'wibble' and generally talking to myself and suddenly there was my turn off, hurrah.
But we are getting OT here.
But we are getting OT here.
LooneyTunes said:
Basically the guidance is that they shouldn't be dropping limits unless people are already pretty much compliant with the proposed speed limit.
Which, depsite screams of 'insane drivers travelling at up to 80mph', they were.So, if traffic on a road that is technically NSL travels at 30mph, they adjust the limit to 30 (somewhat needlessly but hey-ho, it keeps them busy).
Ergo, if traffic on a road that is 30mph travels at 60mph, they adjust the limit to 60.
Ah... I see it only works one way.
LooneyTunes said:
Google: mean road speed limit guidance
Basically the guidance is that they shouldn't be dropping limits unless people are already pretty much compliant with the proposed speed limit.
Hmm - somehow I dont think they are following that guidance.Basically the guidance is that they shouldn't be dropping limits unless people are already pretty much compliant with the proposed speed limit.
One of the justifications used for dropping the 40 limit in my village to 30 was that people were regularly exceeding the 40 limit.
Going by the guidance you refer to - they have made the speed limit even less appropriate.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff