£94m but no change in attitude.....?

£94m won't change CHAV's of Blighty's attitude.

daugs":1qijocyj said:

20mph limit doesn't work

Click to expand...

Not sure that is entirely true. I certainly notice traffic is slower in the 20 zones locally here and in London.

"RoSPA's Policy Position on 20mph Speed Limits

20mph zones are very effective at preventing injuries and RoSPA would like to see their wider use in residential areas.

20mph zones significantly decrease the risk of being injured in a collision and their greater use, especially in residential areas, would help to reduce the number of traffic injuries in the UK."

(http://www.rospa.com/roadsafety/advicea ... zones.aspx)

:facepalm: http://the-mouth.co.uk/council-pledges- ... -epidemic/

highlandsflyer":fznprxw7 said:

daugs":fznprxw7 said:

20mph limit doesn't work

Click to expand...

Not sure that is entirely true. I certainly notice traffic is slower in the 20 zones locally here and in London.

"RoSPA's Policy Position on 20mph Speed Limits

20mph zones are very effective at preventing injuries and RoSPA would like to see their wider use in residential areas.

20mph zones significantly decrease the risk of being injured in a collision and their greater use, especially in residential areas, would help to reduce the number of traffic injuries in the UK."

(http://www.rospa.com/roadsafety/advicea ... zones.aspx)

Click to expand...

all that is true when cars at 20mph ie speed is the issue, driving slower obviously reduces risks but the limit is frequently ignored at which point the issues persist, its like suggesting people keep to the limit on motorways ? sadly RoSPA are frequently in an ivory tower well away from reality trying to gain some behaviour moderation without saying anything too unpopular, who was it who issued the advice in the recent hot weather to avoid sunburn by staying indoors ? not RoSPA but hopefully you get my point. Whoever makes these decisions introduced more 20mph zones where we were and the added frustration seemed to just make drivers ignore them more.

In London the average speed is well below 20mph already, its the behaviour patterns that need to change, the sudden acceleration and braking probably increases the risks of accidents.

as an aside, has anyone mentioned if cyclists should obey the 20mph speed limit as well ??

my neighbours will drive from one end of the village to the doctors or to the shop or to their friends house, a total journey of less than a mile round trip.

Knock this sort of behaviour on the head maybe.

Frustratingly I have learned the £3.6m awarded to the New Forest National Park will be foolishly spent on pointless 'bicycle buses', bicycle hire parking facilities, additional signage on certain existing cycle routes, and some sort of 'family cycling centre' in Brockenhurst. The National Park Authority have decided what is best without any engagement with the substantial local cycling community. In reality not one penny is being spent on making existing cycling journeys in the New Forest any safer, and therefore there is unlikely to be any rise in cycling numbers. What a wasted opportunity.

"Call You and Yours" on Radio4,, midday today , is about the cyclist/driver conflagration.
probably worth a listen!

daugs":pgmzt2bj said:

as an aside, has anyone mentioned if cyclists should obey the 20mph speed limit as well ??

Click to expand...

All power to your elbow if you can get up to speed in all the traffic and pollution.

Suggesting speed limits have no effect is daft.

We travel at 90+ in the overtaking lane at the moment, if they changed motorway limits to 80 that would become 100+.

By the same token, 20mph limits replacing 30mph limits will mean a number of drivers taking notice and observing the limits.

How is that bad?

Statistically it appears to have a beneficial effect.

highlandsflyer":5khfyrw8 said:

Suggesting speed limits have no effect is daft.

...............................

By the same token, 20mph limits replacing 30mph limits will mean a number of drivers taking notice and observing the limits.

How is that bad?

Statistically it appears to have a beneficial effect.

Click to expand...

I'm not suggesting speed limits have no effect, I'm suggesting that reducing them is not an effective solution (to the problem in relation to cycling and per OP spending £94m) not least as the type of motorist that respects them is probably the motorist that gives cyclists enough room, doesn't ride them into the kerb to overtake when there isn't room etc, the impatient motorist with a lack of regard or consideration is the issue.

The RoSPA site refers to the fatalities and injuries but the emphasis seems to be to reduce pedestrian statistics with cyclists getting an "also" mention, the policy quoted refers to 20 mph zone that are designed to reduce drivers speed by physical measures, having lived on a 20mph road with speed bumps for over 10 years I can say that when Camden Council increased the measures and zones that the effect I observed was a deterioration in the areas already a 20mph zone which were the higher risk areas to begin with since they were initially selected for the measures.

daugs":1a7bkko2 said:

highlandsflyer":1a7bkko2 said:

Suggesting speed limits have no effect is daft.

...............................

By the same token, 20mph limits replacing 30mph limits will mean a number of drivers taking notice and observing the limits.

How is that bad?

Statistically it appears to have a beneficial effect.

Click to expand...

I'm not suggesting speed limits have no effect, I'm suggesting that reducing them is not an effective solution (to the problem in relation to cycling and per OP spending £94m) not least as the type of motorist that respects them is probably the motorist that gives cyclists enough room, doesn't ride them into the kerb to overtake when there isn't room etc, the impatient motorist with a lack of regard or consideration is the issue.

The RoSPA site refers to the fatalities and injuries but the emphasis seems to be to reduce pedestrian statistics with cyclists getting an "also" mention, the policy quoted refers to 20 mph zone that are designed to reduce drivers speed by physical measures, having lived on a 20mph road with speed bumps for over 10 years I can say that when Camden Council increased the measures and zones that the effect I observed was a deterioration in the areas already a 20mph zone.

Click to expand...

My worry in all of this, is that money / resource will be thrown at this with the solution being more cycle facilities - which some will laud as the 3rd coming... but all the same will completely miss the point, and embolden the attitude of those drivers who are seemingly completely intolerant of cyclists on the road. The more and more cycle paths and facilities there are, the more the idiots with the "no road tax" mantra will feel even more empowered to have that belief that cyclists have no damned placed on the road, getting in their way.

The issue will remain, though, segregation will never be comprehensive or universal, so there will always be points where motorists and cyclists have to share the roads, but the more cyclists are maginalised, and assumed that they have separate facilities, the more we encourage that mindset.

If the issue regarding driver attitude towards cyclists, that's becoming more and more prevalent, is not addressed and arrested, cycling on the road is heading more and more towards Spike Bike.