'A40 speed limit: is TFL incompetent or misleading? ' blog discussion

Options
This is the discussion to link on the back of Martin's blog. Please read the blog first, as this discussion follows it.




Please click 'post reply' to discuss below.
«1

Comments

  • Hoody
    Hoody Posts: 154 Forumite
    Options
    Happening on roads all around Bucks and Oxfordshire, they are seemingly lowering speed limits to 30 where they used to be 60mph, and moving the points at which these speed limits start with little or no warning in many cases. And often it is on straight country roads that never seem to have any accidents that this is happening. Just another blatant money grabbing scheme via speed traps..
  • koloko
    koloko Posts: 1,766 Forumite
    First Anniversary Combo Breaker
    edited 17 February 2012 at 11:53AM
    Options
    deleted deleted deleted
  • System
    System Posts: 178,104 Community Admin
    Photogenic Name Dropper First Post
    Options
    koloko wrote: »
    As a someone with a background in the management of the trunk roads in the UK, I'm afraid I have to say "good". The evidence that suggests that going faster is safer is over-hyped and can be countered.
    Oh good, bring back the man with the red flag!

    I can see no justification for dropping the speed of a TRUNK road (you know, a road that is designed to get you from A to B quickly) to 30MPH. It defeats the whole object of that type of road.
  • koloko
    koloko Posts: 1,766 Forumite
    First Anniversary Combo Breaker
    edited 17 February 2012 at 11:53AM
    Options
    deleted deleted deleted
  • redux
    redux Posts: 22,976 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post
    edited 23 January 2012 at 7:17PM
    Options
    Could our expert road redesigner explain to me the purpose of 4 white lines in the middle of the road?

    This was where a single carriageway went from having double white lines to having cross-hatching in the middle, but a few years ago there was an intermediate stage of quadruple white lines on part of it.

    Also, why does this junction need a pedestrian refuge island halfway across the minor road, at the point where the actually B4000 writing is, added since Google Streetview took its pictures, when there is insignificant pedestrian use and no pavement?

    Or in plenty of other places, a road that has been the same layout for years, and then maybe even gets less busy, suddenly needs to be redesigned 3 or 4 times in less than 10 years?

    Are some of these road schemes, and the careful studies needed in advance, just ways of keeping people busy?
  • bargepole
    bargepole Posts: 3,231 Forumite
    Name Dropper Combo Breaker First Post First Anniversary
    Options
    koloko wrote: »
    As a someone with a background in the management of the trunk roads in the UK, I'm afraid I have to say "good". The evidence that suggests that going faster is safer is over-hyped and can be countered.

    On a sombre note, if you had to see the state of the bodies that get cleared up in RTAs by our teams, you might not be so cocksure. I don't know the reasons behind this particular stretch of traffic management, however I can assure you that it is not a "blatant money grabbing scheme via speed traps".

    To change the speed limit or layout of any stretch of trunk road in this country requires an exhaustive study that analyses every option available - be that resurfacing, reallignment, or simple speed reduction (or increase). Usually we undertake these studies as evidence has come to us that there has been an increase in the number of accidents, or that the road surface has deteriorated. Our decision making has never been (and is not allowed to be) based on income from speed cameras.
    What a bunch of sanctimonious self-serving claptrap.

    There are examples all over the UK of perfectly good dual-carriageway trunk roads having their previous NSL reduced arbitrarily to 50, 40 or whatever, for no discernible reason.

    If the road surface has deteriorated, then repair it - the govt. rakes in billions every year from fuel duty, road tax, and other stealth taxes such as speeding and parking tickets, so it's not like they can't afford it.

    I have been providing assistance, including Lay Representation at Court hearings (current score: won 57, lost 14), to defendants in parking cases for over 5 years. I have an LLB (Hons) degree, and have a Graduate Diploma in Civil Litigation from CILEx. However, any advice given on these forums by me is NOT formal legal advice, and I accept no liability for its accuracy.
  • koloko
    koloko Posts: 1,766 Forumite
    First Anniversary Combo Breaker
    edited 17 February 2012 at 11:53AM
    Options
    deleted deleted deleted
  • MSE_Martin
    MSE_Martin Posts: 8,272 Money Saving Expert
    First Post First Anniversary Combo Breaker
    Options
    koloko wrote: »
    As a someone with a background in the management of the trunk roads in the UK, I'm afraid I have to say "good". The evidence that suggests that going faster is safer is over-hyped and can be countered.

    On a sombre note, if you had to see the state of the bodies that get cleared up in RTAs by our teams, you might not be so cocksure. I don't know the reasons behind this particular stretch of traffic management, however I can assure you that it is not a "blatant money grabbing scheme via speed traps".

    To change the speed limit or layout of any stretch of trunk road in this country requires an exhaustive study that analyses every option available - be that resurfacing, reallignment, or simple speed reduction (or increase). Usually we undertake these studies as evidence has come to us that there has been an increase in the number of accidents, or that the road surface has deteriorated. Our decision making has never been (and is not allowed to be) based on income from speed cameras.


    If this were a thought out speed limit change I may agree. It wasn't

    It is a temporary change for repairs that was meant to be restored and hasn't.

    If TFL had said "for safety we're reducing the limit to 40" and monitored and policed it fine.

    It didnt it cut it temporarily, we have road markings which say 30mph with a 40mph written over the top. We have most people still going at 50 or 60 or 70 while those who try and obey the speed limit get beeped at or hounded.

    Its a farce.
    Martin Lewis, Money Saving Expert.
    Please note, answers don't constitute financial advice, it is based on generalised journalistic research. Always ensure any decision is made with regards to your own individual circumstance.
    Don't miss out on urgent MoneySaving, get my weekly e-mail at www.moneysavingexpert.com/tips.
    Debt-Free Wannabee Official Nerd Club: (Honorary) Members number 000
  • guesswho2000
    guesswho2000 Posts: 1,703 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post Uniform Washer
    edited 24 January 2012 at 6:39PM
    Options
    !!!!!! wrote: »
    I can see no justification for dropping the speed of a TRUNK road (you know, a road that is designed to get you from A to B quickly) to 30MPH. It defeats the whole object of that type of road.

    I can see perfect justification in some cases, a road's "trunk" status refers to the route, not the road. Many of these (although lots are now bypassed) have run directly through villages (the A47 in Cambridgeshire being one, running through Thorney until a few years ago, heavily traffic calmed, 30mph limit - still a trunk route until the bypass was constructed).
    redux wrote: »
    Could our expert road redesigner explain to me the purpose of 4 white lines in the middle of the road?

    This was where a single carriageway went from having double white lines to having cross-hatching in the middle, but a few years ago there was an intermediate stage of quadruple white lines on part of it.

    Possibly because an order was raised for changes to the lining prior to removal of the old (contractors will sometimes simply do exactly what is on a plan, regardless of what is on the carriageway, after all it isn't their job to know or understand the traffic regs), environmental issues (burning off thermoplastic markings) or other removal methods potentially causing damage to the road surface, or simply being ineffective.
    redux wrote: »
    Also, why does this junction need a pedestrian refuge island halfway across the minor road, at the point where the actually B4000 writing is, added since Google Streetview took its pictures, when there is insignificant pedestrian use and no pavement?

    Or in plenty of other places, a road that has been the same layout for years, and then maybe even gets less busy, suddenly needs to be redesigned 3 or 4 times in less than 10 years?

    Very difficult to say without seeing what's there now. There's a lot of open space, has any of this been developed since then? If so, it's possible the developer was required to fund infrastructure improvements as part of a S106 agreement (Town & Country Planning Act).

    Otherwise, was it actually a pedestrian island? For example, were there lowered kerbs/tactile paving on the island? It would seem strange for one of these to be installed if there were no footways either side for it to be linking. The red antiskid on the carriageway of the A338 on both approaches to the junction would indicate they're trying to highlight it, has there been a history of accidents? Sometimes traffic islands are installed to reduce vehicle speeds turning into/out of a junction as part of an accident reduction scheme.
  • bluelight
    Options
    Too low a speed limit can be just as dangerous as too high a speed limit. And, yes, koloko, I've seen the state of bodies pulled out of wrecked vehicles at the scene of RTCs (Road Traffic Collisions) during the time I was a policeman. Some so-called Safety Camera Partnerships have caused more accidents than they have prevented through their being blinded by the financial benefits of speed cameras and the highly-vocal campaigns of organisations like Brake.

    In one case, in the 20 years prior to a Gatso camera being erected on a stretch of road, only four serious injury/fatal accidents had occurred. In the first month of the Gatso being switched on, 11 accidents occurred. The safety camera partnership was forced to remove the camera.

    In another case, a speed limit was imposed on a slip road leading off a motorway which defied the laws of physics, requiring motorists travelling at 70 mph to slow down to 30 mph within 50 feet of the two speed limit signs. In addition to this, no traffic order was in force. It took a judge to order the cameras and signs to be removed and the safety camera partnership was landed with a massive bill for refunds of speeding fines, removal of penalty points from driving licences and compensation to drivers who had had their insurance premiums increased.

    In order to bring about change, it needs motorists to give those who are responsible for these idiotic decisions the hassle they truly deserve, if necessary, kicking the backsides of their local councillors and MPs. After all, they are there to serve the electorate, not tell the electorate what to do.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 343.7K Banking & Borrowing
  • 250.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 450K Spending & Discounts
  • 235.9K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 609K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 173.4K Life & Family
  • 248.5K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards