Brian wrote:
>
> OK, Stuart, but:
> The approval is meant to be for a device to deter traffic
> from exceeding the legal speed limit.
>
> What is installed is a device which prevents traffic from
> even reaching the legal speed limit.
>
I see your point Brian, perhaps an example of good design are the speed bumps on Brimington Common, Richard M will know where I mean. These are outside a school where there is also a temporary (non statutory) 20 mph limit at start, lunch, home time. The speed bumps are actually best taken at exactly 30mph in my car at least. Slower and the suspension does not have any give, any faster and you go into orbit, so top marks for the council there.
But despite the bumps and the 20 mph limit it did not prevent Volvo woman going through there at about 50 the other morning! If someone really does not care then nothing will stop them being lethal.
|
Hi Stuart, know exactly where you mean. (I live at Stretton BTW - I guess you know the area). Yes, you must give them a 'try'!
The real 'madness' as I see it here is that the local council took it upon themselves to erect these monsters without even attempting to reduce the limit from 40 to even 30 (20 would not bother me - it's effectively a 5mph improvement after all). These humps are outside a school, admittedly. But there is no pavement on the opposite side of the road, which could have been seen as a hazard to crossing, and even if there was, surely a pedestrian crossing of some sort would have been a better idea? There is also no amber flashing lights at busy times, like you see outside many other schools.
The problem here is that there is only really a potential, concentrated hazard on this stretch of road during school opening / closing times (let's also add a bit for dinner times). That equates to, say two hours per day. So that's ten hours per week. So what happens during the other 158 hours in the week? Thousands of law abiding motorists (and cyclists) accumulate expensive damage to their vehicles (or cycles) if they have to use the road, that's what - for I am not convinced that taking these things at even 15mph is not causing damage somewhere. (I don't drive a tank after all). Oh, and let's not forget the additional pollution they cause, and wear and tear on brakes, clutches etc. Hardly good for the environment is it? (Or ambulances). And best of all, the chances are that the potential hazard doesn't even apply when they are using the road! This is one situation where I would have been happy to see a (well signposted) Gatso - on a time operated basis of course.
I don't know...
|
RichardM wrote:
>
> Hi Stuart, know exactly where you mean. (I live at Stretton
> BTW - I guess you know the area). Yes, you must give them a
> 'try'!
>
Hi Richard,
Had a look at these today, yes they are not really negotiable @ 40 unless you a) have zero mechanical sympathy and b) want an RV with the International Space Station. As you say 20 is OK and if I were in a rush, away from school times obviously, I would probably go over them at 30 but no more. But then the car is not mine and I think that I would definitely not take 'er indoors motor over much above 20. However they are not enough to stop the really delinquent driver who just does not care.
On the subject of how quick you go depends on whether you pay for your own motoring. You know we always used to say that, in competition, driving someone else's car was worth between one and two seconds per stage mile.
Since you live in Stretton what do you reckon about the changes in the last year to the A61 between Clay X and Higham! Surely the road did have the accident record to warrant that?
regds,
Stuart
|
|
I meant to say Surely the road did NOT have .....
|
Stuart,
Crumbs, we are getting local(!) Well, by what you say I assume you travelled along the '61 just over a year ago, spring time I think it was, when the (and I do not apologise for saying this again) wonderful council imposed a 30 limit along this whole stretch, approx 3 miles. It was previously a 50 limit. The intention was (I read the planning application), to create 'traffic calming' measures on this stretch, and I feared the worst from this description. But amazingly, and after what seemed like an eternity of disruption, all that they changed was to hatch off the centre of the road using red coloured tarmac to (presumably) give the impression of a danger area to discourage overtaking. Oh, and a couple of sets of central bollards were erected as well. The irony is that whilst the 50 limit works fine on here, (it's a good road) when you get to Tupton on the way into Chesterfield, it's 60 all the way, yet that road has sharper bends, far more side roads, lots of driveways backing onto it etc. Surely concentrating on that stretch would have been a better idea for the Highways department? Oh god, hope that's not given anyone any ideas ;-)
After the work had finished, I was dreading a new lower speed limit would be in place on this previously good and 'as-safe-as-any' A road, but was surprised to find the 50 limit retained! (I'm definately NOT complaining). So I assume you have perhaps not been on this stretch recently, and assumed a major act of ' highway vandalism' had taken place from what you saw last year?
The worst thing for me though was the dreaded 30 temporary speed limit which was in place even at weekends when no one was working on the road. I had at that time recently been given an SP30, so was not keen to be clobbered again. Believe me, only *me* stuck to that limit, causing considerable risk to myself, whilst everyone else just carried on at 50 as per usual thinking I was a nutter. And the worst thing? I never saw the cops once - they could have made a fortune! Actually, are temporary speed limits enforced by the police?? Anyone know for definate?
|
Temporary speed limits are DEFINATELY enforceable by the police. Are you sure you are not confusing them with "advisory" speed limits, generally black on an oblong white background?
The sign must comply with the requirements of The Road Traffic Act to be legally binding, ie inside a red bordered circle.
|
|
|
RichardM wrote:
>
> Crumbs, we are getting local(!) Well, by what you say I
> assume you travelled along the '61 just over a year ago,
I cover this stretch both ways generally twice a week when in UK for the last oh 15 years at least, but being about to move out of the area this "pleasure" is going to be denied to me.
> spring time I think it was, when the (and I do not apologise
> for saying this again) wonderful council imposed a 30 limit
> along this whole stretch, approx 3 miles. It was previously a
> 50 limit.
I remember this road when it had NSL and there are far worse roads. Fairly open, good sight lines, premises set back, pavements each side, v little pedestrian traffic, not many junctions,what is the problem with the road? Maybe it should be what is the problem with the council? I never saw an accident on this stretch, but I notice there has been a notice with police request for witnesses due to a fatal RTA out for sometime recently. So the changes cannot have been much cop can they.
> ........disruption, all that they changed was to hatch off the centre
> of the road using red coloured tarmac to (presumably) give
> the impression of a danger area to discourage overtaking. Oh,
> and a couple of sets of central bollards were erected as
> well..........
Maybe because the overtaking opportunities are restructed then people take bigger risks when they get a chance, hence fatal commented above.
>
> The worst thing for me though was the dreaded 30 temporary
> speed limit which was in place even at weekends when no one
> was working on the road. I had at that time recently been
> given an SP30, so was not keen to be clobbered again. Believe
> me, only *me* stuck to that limit, causing considerable risk
> to myself, whilst everyone else just carried on at 50 as per
> usual thinking I was a nutter. And the worst thing? I never
> saw the cops once - they could have made a fortune! Actually,
> are temporary speed limits enforced by the police?? Anyone
> know for definate?
Wha hay! So there *was* someone else who stuck to that 30 limit, yes it was quite intimidating at the time trying to behave.
I understand as Tom says when there is the proper limit roundel that they can enforce the limit, and in some cases do, though its questionable whether you get the points. A colleague got nicked in a temporary and that is what happened to him, FPN and £60 but no points. I must say if plod really want to make a fortune they should try another temporary limit, A461 from jn with A5 @ Muckley corner towards Walsall. It is due to construction of Brum Northern relief toll road. I keep to to the signed 40 but only about 10% of the rest do, still thats a better % than the A61.
regards,
Stuart
|
Thanks Tom and Stuart,
That's cleared up a couple of nagging points for me re temp / advisory limits. Sorry to go local again to all the 'foreigners', but there is a ridiculous example of an advisory limit on the curved exit slip from the A61 in Chesterfield on the southbound dual carriageway, it goes from the 50 limit straight to an advisory 20. As it is a single carriageway you would encounter much aggression from following traffic if you were the only one to comply strictly with this speed, so at least I now know I will be able to take it at a safe 'defensive' speed next time (approx 30) without fear of prosecution!
|
|
Advisory speed limits are often misused by highways authorities to try and avoid legal claims for damage caused by faulty repairs. For example, after resurfacing a road they will put up an advisory limit of 10mph, which they know no-one will have a hope in hell of sticking to. When they then get a claim for a shattered windscreen or damaged paint because they couldn't be bothered to roll the loose chippings properly, they will point out that this would not have happened if the victim had observed the "limit".
|
|
|
|
|
|
