Home PageFacebookRSS News Feed
Read the current newsletter! Weekly
MacFixer, the iPhone, iPod, and iPad specialists
Residential Bristol Could Eventually Become 20mph Speed Zone

Article by: robert
Date: 22 May 2010

pocketgpsworld.comA pilot 20 mph speed limit came into operation yesterday in Inner South Bristol.

As part of its "Cycling City" project, Bristol Council say their "primary objective is to make walking and cycling around these areas safe and more attractive, thereby encouraging more people to walk and cycle around their own community."

They quote research that suggests that pedestrians struck at 30mph have about a 1 in 5 chance of being killed. At 20mph the chance of a pedestrian dying is reduced to 1 in 40.

When asked in an interview on Radio Bristol whether the whole of Bristol could see a 20 mph speed limit, Councillor Jon Rogers replied: "I think that would be what we would try to do. Obviously there's the cost... but the message we're getting from right across Bristol is that 20mph is enough."

Rogers, Bristol Council's executive member for transport and sustainability, did concede that the money had to be found to finance a city wide project and that money was currently limited.

It's interesting to note that there will be no speed cameras or physical traffic calming features such as speed humps or chicanes to enforce the limit. This begs the question: how many will simply ignore the limits and will the scheme be unenforceable without cameras?
Posted by mxmaciek on Sat May 22, 2010 10:23 am Reply with quote

I can imagine happy faces of the pedestrian and cyclists, moving around the cars driven with the speed of 20mph, emitting (2nd gear) 50% more flue gases per mile Laughing Laughing
This have to encourage somebody to walk or cycle? Perhaps, if the compressed air breathing apparatus will be cheaper.

Edited: After careful consideration, I have one safety advice for all of the councils across the UK:
Recent scientific crash tests carried by ADAC ant others demonstrated, that killing the pedestrian with the car, which is pushed to move by the driver is virtually impossible. And, such way of the movement, will not emit CO2 at all. Some GH gases can be emit, true, but from the completely different driver's end, especially on the uphill roads Very Happy

HD2, Galaxy S3

Posted by DarrenR21373 on Sat May 22, 2010 12:55 pm Reply with quote

I thought that CO2 was supposed to be the big killer (if you believe the green hype)?

If that is the case, why are councils up and down the land supporting schemes that increase CO2 emissions from vehicles? Research has shown that a vehicle driving at 20MPH is more polluting as it is less efficient than one doing 30...


Oh yeah, I forgot - lower speed limits mean more people "speed", making more money for the councils in fines - haven't they heard that the money is to go to the Treasury in future?

Drive carefully; the Government needs all the Taxpayers it can get.

Posted by Goober556 on Sun May 23, 2010 11:48 am Reply with quote

If its a choice between keeping CO2 emissions lower or less children being run over and killed, I'd choose less children being killed.

Posted by Border_Collie on Sun May 23, 2010 1:33 pm Reply with quote

less children being run over and killed

Less children would be run over if the parents took the time to teach them how to cross the road. Remember 'Find a safe place to cross. Look, right, look left, look right again, and listen. If it's all clear cross the road in a straight line looking and listening both ways'. Doesn't happen, does it?

At the school near me I see various dangers, the worst is when mummy is holding liitle 'David's' hand and pushing baby 'Victoria's' push chair with the other. Mummy pushes push chair in between two 'school run' cars to get to the other side, and positions it in the path of vehicles whilst waiting for a gap. What lesson is that to her their children?

Mummy parks on the wrong side of the road, gets 'David out and drags him out into the road so she can get the 'Victoria' out of the child seat, needing both hands. While doing so little David' is wandering around in the road. Another good lesson.

Then there's the mummy's who, although there is a 'Lollipop' controlled crossing a few yards up the road, hurries across carrying little 'Victoria' and dragging poor 'David' who's little legs have problems keeping up. A number of times I've see the child stumble and fall and mummy has to stop in the middle of the road to help him up. Yet another good lesson.

A senior school at the top of my road, on the A2, has a footbridge which, as well as being able to cross the road, has a direct link from the top into the school. I wouldn't mind a 1 for every kid I see running across the busy road even if only 10 or 15 yards from the footbridge.

Not to mention another crossing further up the road where several children frequently stand back by their houses, wait for a car to come and then run out onto the crossing, all to the delight of the laughing mums. And what happens if some poor sod can't stop quick enough and injures or kills the child on the crossing? Yep, driver's fault.

20mph? What next, 10mph? Why not go back to a bloke walking in front with a red flag?

I know, what about 'Find a safe place to cross. Look, right, look left, look right again, and listen. If it's all clear walk across the road in a straight line looking and listening both ways'.

What about bringing in a jay walking law? Fine could be the same as leaving the wrong kind of rubbish out or in the wrong bin. Let's say 60.

Not much chance of that, as the law which says cyclists can be fined for riding on the footpaths/pavements is not enforced. Occasionally get two 'coppers' on bikes using the footpath and even seen two '3CPO's' (PCSO's) move aside to let two Lycra clad 'berks' on racing bikes doing about 30mph plus down the incline on the footpath.

Formerly known as Lost_Property
And NO that's NOT me in the Avatar.

Posted by DennisN on Sun May 23, 2010 3:24 pm Reply with quote

To bring this to a really serious note.... It might be a good idea to carry out a national survey to find out whether people would prefer to be killed outright, rather than not killed by a slower moving vehicle which doesn't kill them, simply leaves them paraplegic. We see lots of heart jerking stories about "brave" people in wheelchairs with mobility controlled by a blink of the eyes. My younger brother was transformed from an enthusiastic triathlon performer to being unable to walk, talk, see. I never dare ask him.

Which would you prefer - to be run over at 30mph by an insured driver, or at 20mph by an uninsured one. Lost_Property has it right. Learn and teach how to cross the road. Punish driving offenders by taking their vehicles off them. Zero tolerance.


If it tastes good - it's fattening.

Two of them are obesiting!!

Posted by M8TJT on Sun May 23, 2010 3:56 pm Reply with quote

Lost_Property Wrote:
What about bringing in a jay walking law? Fine could be the same as leaving the wrong kind of rubbish out or in the wrong bin. Let's say 60.

Enforcement action for Litter / Rubbish offences under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 and the subsequent Clean Neighbourhoods Act

Bath & North East Somerset has introduced a more robust approach against litter droppers. Fixed Penalty Notices (FPNs) will be issued to people who drop litter in a public place. This also applies to traders or residents who place trade waste or domestic refuse out on the highway (roads and pavements) at any time other than that allotted.

A fine of 50 can be issued and failure to pay may lead to summary conviction and a fine not exceeding 2,500. Any proceeds from fines must be expended in a related area and will therefore be used to further reduce this type of offence

Posted by Andy_P on Sun May 23, 2010 4:18 pm Reply with quote

Many minor, residential roads in Ealing (West London) have quietly been re-designated as 20 mph limits recently.

I don't remember any discussion or announcements about it, and initially I was irritated by it.
But actually I don't have any great issues with the idea. I'm glad to see they haven't spent loads of money on extra "calming" measures like chicanes or humps, and I HAVE slowed down.

"Settling in nicely" ;-)

Posted by Border_Collie on Sun May 23, 2010 4:22 pm Reply with quote

In Medway for dropping litter it's an 80 reduced to 60 if paid within 10 days. Fail to pay and they take you to Court.

Getting back on track. In the not too distant future my road will be inside an area of approx 1 mile by half a mile reduced to a 20mph speed limit, 24/7. It's to be brought in because the number of schools in the area but 24/7!!! For school childrens safety? Oh I see, and to catch people out with the mobile camera up the road, at present 30mph, at which point there are no schools and not really part of any walking route to one of them. However, I mentioned the A2 earlier where the existing 40mph limit is to stay, even though there are more kids walking to and from school along that road than most of the others put together.

Formerly known as Lost_Property
And NO that's NOT me in the Avatar.

Posted by mxmaciek on Sun May 23, 2010 5:27 pm Reply with quote

Exactly my position. I live in the distance of 400yards from the Primary School and Nursery.

I would like to speak personally to the council members, who voted for 24/7/365 speed limit of 20mph because of the poor kids safety (particularly: in the Saturdays, approx. 22:30, when most of them are leaving the school, according to the council's thought).

The reason why I'd like to speak with them is: could they give me the phone of their psychiatrist, as the guy did perfect job: he put the people with so heave brain damages to so highlighted position Laughing

More, the happy-money-spending council decided that the painted circle with the nonsense on it is not enough, so they installed the humps on the road as well.

Emmm.... have I mentioned that the speed limit is on the one, least category road from the three surrounding streets?
And.. have I mentioned, that all of the three roads have the underground passage to the school? Confused

So, let's see: we have the school, surrounded by three streets, if we will use the categories, it would be 2xA and one B road. the A's have no special speed limit, while B - got one. B, is fitted with the humps, while A's - are not. At least, there is something equal for all of it: all three roads have underground passages, leading directly to the school's doors.

have you ever thought, how danger for the kids the Sudden Infant Death Syndrome - SIDS is?
I'd recommend to:
1) ban use of the beds for infants;
2) while going to sleep, each infant should be ventilated by respiratory and monitored by the professional nurse. Girls - at least until 2y.o, boys (if nurse will be young enough), up to 18 Laughing Laughing

same as for the street near my home: I WOULD understand the reason of the speed decrease, even if I think that if there is the underground passage, and if I think that the street is not the playground, in the hours, when there is somebody in the school. I would not understand why I have to slow down all year round, around the clock.
What I would say is missing in UK in general: instead of the speed limits, speed cams, humps, bumps, hedgehog in the road, I'd prefer the WARNING sign, mandatory in the country of my origin, obligating the driver to increase the attention. To be clear: this is NOT the information, but the warning sign, and the driver is obligated to increase the attention, slow down, give a way, whatever is necessary and safe, depending on the time and the conditions.
on the link jpg, look at A-17.

HD2, Galaxy S3

Posted by mikeprytherch on Mon May 24, 2010 7:02 pm Reply with quote

My initial reaction to this is to be completely horrified by the idea, however.....

Over the weekend I drove my wife's car, something that thankfully doesn't happen too often, and I noticed that the trip computer stated that since the last service (over 1,500 miles ago) the average speed of the car was 18.9 mph !, this got me thinking about this debate as my wife drives almost exclusively around our local area.

In urban areas what is your real average speed ? thinking about it when I drive around my location town I travel from one jam to another and actually getting to 30 is almost non-existent, perhaps at night only.

I think we need to implement dual zone speeds, I have 2 small kids and I like the idea of 20 zones outside schools and I don't mind them in and around town centres, however come the evening, the speeds should revert back to 30.

Posted by Border_Collie on Mon May 24, 2010 7:56 pm Reply with quote

I think we need to implement dual zone speeds, I have 2 small kids and I like the idea of 20 zones outside schools and I don't mind them in and around town centres, however come the evening, the speeds should revert back to 30.

Have to agree with you there. The the double amber flashing lights the 'lollipop person' switches on could easily be replaced and have one either side of the school flashing 20mph.

Another thing I would like to see, for safety of the kids, is no parking/dropping off within half a mile of the school entrance/s.

Together we would have cars slowing to 20mph, a clear view for the drivers, a clear view of the traffic for the children (which should give them a good idea of how far away and how quickly approaching cars reach the point they are at), about a ten minute walk morning and afternoon to help keep them fit.

Job done, everybody happy. Most importantly less children injured or killed. SIMPLE.

Formerly known as Lost_Property
And NO that's NOT me in the Avatar.

Click here to view more comments...
Reply to topic

CamerAlert Apps

iOS QR Code

Android QR Code

Terms & Privacy

GPS Shopping