Initial analysis of the impact of widespread implementation of 20mph speed limits across Wales last week suggests a “dramatic” change in traffic speeds, with the results hailed “astonishing and far greater than would have been predicted”.
Rod King MBE, a campaign director at 20’s Plenty for Us told Wales Online he hopes the move will make routes “far more pleasant for walkers and cyclists”, his comments coming as a report by transport and public health data analysts Agilysis showed an on average reduction in vehicle speed on new 20mph routes of 2.9mph.
Agilysis’ Richard Owen said the results were “astonishing” and showed that Welsh drivers had “on the whole” accepted lower speed limits and “have changed their behaviour accordingly”.
“There will remain some drivers who choose to break the limit by significant amounts but the drop in speeds on the fastest urban roads has been marked,” he said.
Agilysis undertook the research after the implementation of the default urban speed limit on 17 September, and collected GPS data from mapping company TomTom to retrieve and analyse speed data within 24 hours of the change.
Looking at the data anonymously provided, Agilysis studied “a very significant sample and more than sufficient for this type of analysis” across a selection of vehicle types — privately owned cars, vans, plus commercial vehicles.
In total, 491.8km of roads that changed from 30mph to 20mph, were analysed across areas such as Cardiff, Newport, Swansea, Wrexham, Rhyl, Merthyr Tydfil, Lampeter, Bangor, Haverfordwest and Newtown. Minor local roads and quiet residential roads were excluded from the analysis as they do not have sufficient sample sizes for the time periods selected.
The headline figure pre-implementation of 20mph speed limits was the average weighted median speed across all the routes was 22.7mph, this dropped to 19.8mph post-implementation.
[Table: Agilysis]
In Cardiff the average weighted median speed dropped from 22.6mph to 19.7mph, while the biggest drop was seen in Rhyl & Prestatyn and Wrexham where the average speeds dropped from 23.2mph to 19.6mph, a reduction of 3.6mph from before the implementation.
[Table: Agilysis]
The report concluded the change in speed had been “dramatic” and suggested that compliance is “very good”. By using results from Cardiff and Wrexham, the report suggests that drivers’ journey times were, on average, between 45 and 63 seconds longer.
“The analysis period covered the 6am to 6pm period and compliance is expected to be lower outside of these times,” it suggested. “Fewer vulnerable road users (cyclists and pedestrians) are likely to use the roads at these times however and the impact on those killed or seriously injured may be lower. Nevertheless, there are opportunities using this approach to review compliance at different times of the day.”
Rod King of 20’s Plenty for Us added: “Our experience from so many implementations across the UK tells us that 20mph limits work, and they work particularly well on the faster urban roads.
“They are not a silver bullet, but do reduce speeds to make streets far more pleasant for walkers and cyclists, they lower faster speeds and produce a more consistent flow of traffic. This in turn makes it safer for all road users. A default urban/village 20mph limit is key to liveability and community life whilst at the same time retaining mobility for all. Well done Wales.”
122 thoughts on ““Far more pleasant for walkers and cyclists”: 20mph speed limit analysis hailed “astonishing”, with drivers’ journeys just 45 seconds longer”
Most cyclists know this, as
Most cyclists know this, as they’ve witnessed MGIF drivers simply get to the next set of traffic lights earlier. The traffic light sequence is what truly dictates average traffic speeds
Traffic lights and massively.
Traffic lights and massively….other cars. As soon as I get into a built up area its 99% of the time the cars that slow me down.
I was coming back from the airport in the car the other night and we were stuck behind someone doing 30 in a 60 but there was nowhere safe to overtake because a car takes up a whole lane on the road and is travelling at 30mph. If that was a bike we would all have been past them within a few minutes. As it was, we were all stuck behind this one car for at least 20 minutes.
I would wager a very large sum of money that if you totted up all the time car drivers spend stuck behind bikes vs stuck behind cars it would be in the low minutes per month for bikes and multiple hours per month for cars.
A bike takes a whole lane too
A bike takes a whole lane too if you are giving the correct 1.5m when passing. And as you were “all stuck” behind the 30 mph car for 20 minutes, that was 10 miles. Really? Which airport? Llandegley International?
And are they doing that
And are they doing that because it’s a nice, appropriate speed to to protect local amenity and improve safety or is it because they are incompetent and can’t manage a sensible speed for the conditions? I find myself torn there.
That’s from david9694 and I often wonder will it be driver aggression or driver incompetence that does for me in the end.
The lead investigator told us
The lead investigator told us “collecting the bears’ leavings, recording locations and times, lets us build a pretty good picture of which individuals are about, where in the wood they are ranging, and also some secondary data about family members they are associating with and their diet. We’re getting better at determining how long it has been on the ground – we can date to an accuracy of about 12 hours, but temperature and rainfall all have to be taken into account.
A lot of teams swear by observation, but the problem you have there is you got to spend a lot of time at a fixed location and you cannot be 100% sure which individuals you are seeing at different times. We use cameras in some locations, but you have to either get lucky or leave ground bait to get any useable shots.
I guess we’re gonna be collecting bear leavings for a little while yet.”
Are these based on free
Are these based on free-flowing traffic speeds or the speeds of all traffic?
Normally you look at the free-flowing figure to get the more realistic result.
I think the Atkins report showed an average drop of 1.3mph but for a very high increase in non-compliance.
Traffic speeds are mostly dictated by the design of the road and the conditions at the time, not by speed limits, this is more down to how our system 1 brains function.
People who genuinly drive too fast or discoutiously to pedestrians and cyclists are not doing so due to a lack of signage to tell them not to.
Agree in part – the best way
Agree in part – the best way to ensure people adopt appropriate speed is to ensure the design of the road conveys this itself. However – due to the “anchoring” psychological effect numbers are important. Also if a even a few drivers are sticking to the speed limit it will tend to bring others down.
It’s also unlikely that that level of infra change could be accomplished in less than decades!
Don’t have the links to hand but IIRC a measurable effect created by just changing numbers on the signs sign *was* reported by some studies cited when Scotland was looking at this idea.
ajuk.uk [at] gmail.com wrote:
Re: traffic speeds, what you say may be true in many places, but my recent experience of the M4 in Wales was that nearly all drivers were sticking to the 50mph limit, thanks perhaps to the many speed cameras. The traffic ws also flowing very smoothly and by comparison with the English part of the M4, driving was much less stressful.
That’s because there’s an
That’s because there’s an average-speed camera forcing people to do it. Also, while 50mph might be slower than the speed most people would go in the absence of a speed limit there, it’s not so slow compared to the road design that it’s unintuitive.
The road safety charity Strongtowns made a video explaining why you get so much non-compliance and it’s not down to people needing time to get used to it or willful disregard of the law. https://youtu.be/NDYQaa3K_BA?si=toSgzZZcFAmAnoCg
ajuk.uk [at] gmail.com wrote:
It’s amazing how many people don’t seem to understand average speed cameras though – braking immediately before each camera.
It’s well known that at least
It’s well known that at least 80% of people are below average intelligence.
Danbury wrote:
What about the other 30%?
At our place, one of the
At our place, one of the bosses is demanding to know why 40% of sick days are occurring on Mondays and Fridays.
Cyclists know that there is
Cyclists know that there is little point for car drivers to accelerate to the next set of traffic lights or junction. Also there is no point overtaking a cyclist, even a slow one as one will probably change routes within a few 100m and the driver will gain 5 seconds at best.
Ignoring the 20mph speed
Ignoring the 20mph speed limit briefly – it is interesting that TomTom holds and can process the speed of its users like this*. I know cycling computers have been used in the past to prove the speed of a cyclist before a collision – this would suggest the same could be done for vehicles? I can’t recall ever seeing that kind of analysis being presented in court.
*I realise it is a third party that has processed it in this instance, but the data is there
Google also holds this
Google also holds this information – and a lot more. In that you dont need to be using the navigation funciton. Current hurdles in using it are based around gps accuracy – the proximity of (for instance a minor road running next to a motorway). For a definable stretch of identifiable road – with some limited developer skills you can access annonymous speed data for vehicles (cars with mobile phones in them)
There is a Github that can be
There is a Github that can be downloaded that uses GPS signals to determine vehicle speeds via triangulation. It cannot access the device though and the load out has to have a specific road/street named and there is a fee I believe.
Github.com/BerkshireCar/SpeederBot
There is a Github that can be
There is a Github that can be downloaded that uses GPS signals to determine vehicle speeds via triangulation. It cannot access the device though and the load out has to have a specific road/street named and there is a fee I believe.
Github.com/BerkshireCar/SpeederBot
So basically, the report
So basically, the report tells us that there was no need for reducing the speed limits in the first place then.
If a reduction from 30 to 20mph resulted in only a 2.9mph reduction in average speed, that’s so negligible that why spend any money on changing the speed limits.
Stupid move from unsurprisingly a Labour government/herd of donkeys
Well I heard the average
Well I heard the average speed in many cities was less than 20mph – indeed Edinburgh is at around 14mph.
Ergo we don’t need speed limits in cities! What a waste of signs!
Maybe those numbers are a lie though? The other day I was cycling through town and I ended up waiting at some lights for over a minute not even moving! That’s nowhere near 14mph?!
Also I can’t work out how these cars keep smashing through walls and demolishing bus shelters in urban areas though. Maybe their drivers are just getting out and pushing them very hard?
Since it is now the default
Since it is now the default limit in Wales, there are only signs at the boundaries – and the lamp posts are the signs !
Like the one on inverleith
Like the one on inverleith row (20 limit) a couple of weeks ago?
“The car flipped up, flew across the road, and then landed on its roof, wiping out the bus stop.”
Must have got caught by a crosswind.
It probably had to jump out
It probably had to jump out of the way when a cyclist suddenly appeared in front of it.
Like the one on inverleith
Like the one on inverleith row (20 limit) a couple of weeks ago?
“The car flipped up, flew across the road, and then landed on its roof, wiping out the bus stop.”
Must have got caught by a crosswind.
You know what ‘average’ means
You know what ‘average’ means right?
2.9mph is quite a significant
2.9mph is quite a significant reduction.
However, a huge benefit that misses is the significant reduction in the proportion of serious speeder – who will now be doing 25-30mph rather than 35-40mph.
The numbers are in the Interim Monitoring Report.
It’s not really – it’s not
It’s not really – it’s not even average walking pace.
But it is an average – which means that it still takes account of those speeding drivers – and it’s clear that you cannot average 19.7mph without some drivers going over the speed limit. Whereas before, many were clearly not exceeding the speed limit, due to a much lower average speed vs the actual speed limit.
It simply shows that this was a pointless exercise in money wasting
That change in average speed
That change in average speed has cut out the peak speeds. An average is 19.8 for a limit of 20 versus an average of 22.7 for a limit of 30 effectively reduced the peak differential from 7.3 to 0.2 mph.
Much less acceleartion and braking, better both for safety and for the environment.
Yes so of course the peak
Yes so of course the peak speed could be higher – but it makes very little difference to actual road safety because the “actual” average has only dropped 2.9mph – which means that people are still going higher speeds – maybe just less of them.
Besides, as I mentioned – it’s nigh on impossible to think that everyone is staying under 20mph with an average speed of 19.8mph overall – for it to be an average, there must be still nearly 50% who go over the speed limit in any case.
If it really was pointless,
If it really was pointless, it might as well stay then since money has been spent and undoing it to get the 2.9 back would be as expensive again.
Nope not true and if it was
Nope not true and if it was that would have always been the way you set speed limits, the X over the limit thing sounds intuitive, but it’s a myth the DfT addressed this once stating.
“It is a common but mistaken belief that drivers allow themselves a set margin over the prevailing speed limit, and that if a limit is raised by 10 mph, they will travel 10 mph faster. In fact, an increase in an unrealistic speed limit rarely brings an increase in traffic speeds. It is much more likely that there will be no change, or even a fall.“
Just to show the level to which this is not true I compared speeds and levels of compliance to various sections of the more unrealistic 20-limits in Monmouthshire to every urban 40-limit road in Cheltnham and Gloucester.
This also shows that higher limits get much more respect and lower limits causes them to be held in contempt.
Meaningless: without a
Meaningless: without a comparison of the road types, usage relative to capacity, etc, this shows nothing. I can show you stretches of road with higher limits where effectively zero drivers obey the limit, and 20 limits where nobody gets anywhere near.
I offer you this thought: if you make cider with oranges, it’s not as good as the real thing. Therefore oranges are not good apples. About as logical as your post.
Well, take a look on
Well, take a look on streetview, I’d say they’re in some sections they’re pretty simalar road types.
These 40-limit roads there are repeaters activly telling drivers they can go faster and they still don’t, the repeaters do more to warn pedestrians that it’s not the sort of road to run into.
If someone was already doing
If someone was already doing 35-40 in a 30 I doubt they ever slow down for a 20 zone, unless there are unavoidable speed bumps in which case it’s last of the late brakers in an attempt not to get air time.
2.9mph is quite a significant
2.9mph is quite a significant reduction.
However, a huge benefit that misses is the significant reduction in the proportion of serious speeder – who will now be doing 25-30mph rather than 35-40mph.
The numbers are in the Interim Monitoring Report.
Left_is_for_Losers wrote:
In all your various reincarnations you have struggled with statistics. As for ‘herd of donkeys’ you would be better off with Led by Donkeys. https://twitter.com/ByDonkeys/status/1705455729514012920?t=7Dk-3GFnyFM4Dq8U_K5SQA&s=19
Reading Wales Online every
Reading Wales Online every day, this has not been popular with a vast swathe of the population. I have never seen as many negative comments in response to the article as I have on this subject.
Most agree that 20 is very appropriate in certain circumstances but not a blanket reduction as has happened in Wales. The current petition against it is over 400,000 signatures so will have to be debated in the Senedd. It could well cost Labour the control over Wales that they’ve enjoyed for as long as I can remember.
I suspect the conversation
I suspect the conversation will be very different by 2026.
Sniffer wrote:
It could all blow over and calm down, people accept the new normal, even notice a positive effect in their communities both in and out of a car (that is what I hope will happen), Or it could be such a negligible change as average speeds have not changed that much, and the survey was done very soon post induction, when people were being very strict and observant, so the change will become unnoticeable in a real and tangible way. Also when the speeding tickets start being posted through letter boxes (yes I know people should obey the limit, but people are flawed and don’t) they will now blame Labor and Mark D, it is perceived as their policy – their limit. It could be an interesting election in 2026.
Gimpl wrote:
Maybe you shouldn’t believe everything you read on the web? It has been reported that significant numbers of the people signing the petition don’t live in Wales. The reports of mass hysteria are exaggerated, as the figures above show, most people seem happy to obey the new limit.
The 20mph limit in residential areas is merely correcting a historical mistake as 30mph is far too fast for safety in these areas.
eburtthebike wrote:
Yet the average speed only dropped 2.9mph – meaning that although a 30 limit, in reality speeding/speed was not and is not an issue
…which prompts the usual
…which prompts the usual “which is it, drivers”?
Schrodingers 20 mph Speed Limit: simulataneously devastating the work of driving instructors and heating engineers, and not worth it because it only reduces averages by a titchey amount
What a ridiculous conclusion,
What a ridiculous conclusion, The average speed is in significant part determined by periods of stationary motion, such as at traffic lights and junctions, those are not significantly affected by the speed limit, so a change of overall average speed of 3mph will reflect a much greater reduction in fourth quartile speeds. It is slso very early days, I noticed that my ability to stay within the limit in 20 mph zones has considerably improved with practice as my habitual use of the accelerator and visual speed perception has adapted to a slower pace of instinctive driving. I’m sure that will not be an uncommon pattern amongst drivers.
eburtthebike wrote:
Maybe you shouldn’t
Gimpl wrote:
Maybe you shouldn’t believe everything you read on the web? It has been reported that significant numbers of the people signing the petition don’t live in Wales. The reports of mass hysteria are exaggerated, as the figures above show, most people seem happy to obey the new limit.
The 20mph limit in residential areas is merely correcting a historical mistake as 30mph is far too fast for safety in these areas.
Gimpl wrote:
Maybe you shouldn’t believe everything you read on the web? It has been reported that significant numbers of the people signing the petition don’t live in Wales. The reports of mass hysteria are exaggerated, as the figures above show, most people seem happy to obey the new limit.
The 20mph limit in residential areas is merely correcting a historical mistake as 30mph is far too fast for safety in these areas.
It isn’t a blanket reduction
It isn’t a blanket reduction – don’t believe what you hear on GB News and Motohoon Youtube Channels.
It is a change of default, with provision for exceptions where Local Highway Authorities deem appropriate. It applies to around 1/3 of roads and streets by mileage only.
Plus we have very robust data that 20mph limits, reasonably enforced, do wonders for road safety. See the ROSPA Factsheet on 20mph limits and road safety.
In short – what’s not to like? The only thing I don’t like is that we unfortunately have a neanderthal and cycnical Govt in England.
I don’t trust the petition. The moto lobby in England (55 million people vs 3 million in Wales) are all tripping over themselves to sign it. And there is no verification against fake postcodes.
The problem is that it almost
The problem is that it almost is, the guidence for exceptions do not allow councils to take into account traffic speeds and engineering recomendations in the allowence for making exceptions, as if there was never a reason to do that and no one had previously concidered not to. If there’s houses on the road is had to be 30 even if the houses are ribbon development.
This means some very modern wide arterial roads have to be included, including a number of roads where there was high non-compliance with the existing 30-limit and some roads that used to be 40 until a few years ago, with not changes to the design of the road.
All this seems to do is bring speed limits into contempt and undermine 20mph limits where they do make much more sense.
ajuk.uk [at] gmail.com wrote:
Welcome to Wrexham, this in now a 20mph road????
Er… and?
Er… and?
If it’s this one the road has some urban residential districts entirely suited for 20mph limits either end (and a school signed at the east end) – this middle bit is 0.5 mile according to Google Maps.
There appear to be some “traffic calming” meaures either end, so I would agree that spontaneous compliance may already be an issue.
Is the current designated speed 30mph? Presumably it apply all along this section? If so, why not 40, 50 or 60pmh? Perhaps they decided not to say “have at it” over this relatively short distance for a reason already (see traffic calming)?
I bet people would say “no safety issue, nobody will be walking or cycling [ or riding? ] along there”. Could that be explained by the relatively narrow road with some short sight lines for half of it and lack of footway – or indeed easily traversible verge (see the chap in picture also)?
If the council think that the potential loss of 30 seconds going from one “obviously lower speed is sensible” section to the other, or the fact that the second 1/4 mile section visually signals “country road, hoon it” to drivers will prove irresistable – they can vary the limit, no?
I’m all for not startling the horses but sometimes it’s donkeys you have and they just aren’t going to move independently. Is the kind of “change” we say we want / will put up with “yes to change, but just not for me” or “actually, we meant gradual change, in due course”?
Also – there appears to be a
Also – there appears to be a parallel A-road only a couple of hundred metres distant, if you don’t trust yourself…
Yes it was before the 17
Yes it was before the 17 September a 30mph limit, I remember 20ish years ago it was a 60mph sandwiched between the 30 zones (where the traffic calming is now). If we are to get compliance and adherence to the new limits then let’s be sensible even if it is only 0.5 mile distance should it not be upped to 30? There are many more examples I could cite such as 40mph and even 60mph limits that have now even within 10 years come down to a 30mph limit and will now be 20s if our local council has not got exemptions. If you are going to get people to adhere to the speed limits then you have to make some allowances and show some flexibility, at the moment it is almost brutal, black and white, I know of a busy two lane dual carriageway that now drops from a 60 limit down to a 20 into a roundabout with 5 exits. Yes I know the comments (who hate Me for even daring to criticise 20 limits) will say that 20 is appropriate for a such a busy roundabout, but it’s just does not work like that, as people need to get on and off the roundabout, look at where they are going (see me on my bike as I use that roundabout regularly) without being paranoid as to what speed they are doing.
I get that people are
I get that people are complaining – because change. I don’t think the change is remotely extreme (apart from the fact we’re making one in this area at all – but actually we have changed some road rules over time).
Well – yeah. We do have abitrary limits, in units of 10, it is black and white already (apart from some legal flexibility / police leeway…)
This was the complaint in Scotland when this was mooted. The committee complained this was replacing the concept of a perfectly sensible national default speed (30mph) whch could be varied by councils with the totally inflexible, quite frankly wacky idea of a national default speed (20mph) which could be varied by councils.
This is frequently aired. It’s just change. These aren’t minimum speed limits. Nothing to stop people going more cautiously. Yes, people have an idea what 30mph (ish) feels like, but there’s no reason why they can’t learn what 20mph feels like.
Its lucky that cyclist are
Its lucky that cyclist are not subject to speed limits looking at strava for this bit of road?
That’s beyond my abilities!
That’s beyond my abilities! Although are you sure they weren’t drafting motor vehicles? 😉
Perhaps the local authorities reduced the speed limit to 30mph originally because of fast cyclists? Perhaps the motorists now keeping at or below 20mph can help by acting as “rolling road blocks” to check this swarm of scorchers?
If I ruled the world … I’d be looking at more important things I hope. We can set expectations for lower speeds without getting stuck in “but these 10 places now seem odd to me / Gareth says no way is he doing that, so the whole idea must be bonkers”! However (not that anyone’s asking me) what are trip patterns and volumes here? Lots of traffic? Can it go via the neighbouring A-road? To encourage that – a cheap modal filter!
Also – are there people who want to get between each end here (rather than just using this a a cut- through? Perhaps kids going to that school?
Short distance – might they walk or (more easily) cycle if we make it feel pleasant? If not by blocking through motor traffic then by adding a decent footpath / cycle path.
Of course if it turns out that only 20 or so people drive this way each day … what’s the problem ??
chrisonatrike wrote:
I have cycled this road for a very long time, since I was a tenager and still use it very regularly so as to access the hills south of town. It is quite a quiet road as most traffic goes via the A5152 Rhostyllen or goes up the Ruthin road and turns south on A483. I have never seen it as a problem road quite the opposite, yes you will always get some nutters but in my experience this is a rare event, so it is a road I use to avoid traffic, pinch points and dodgy junctions. I know people who live nearby and have walked that road for many years. They have welcomed the drop to 30mph partially on the bendy bits as you come into town, but 20 on the long strait, that just seems a step too far. As shown in the strava screen shot, that’s slower than most cyclists can do and as one poster on this thread has voiced makes it more dangerous in their experience.
It sounds like it’s a good
It sounds like it’s a good resource to you – hope that continues.
Being partly fortunate (and also having made choices) to live near motor traffic-free surfaced paths I find that over time, without thinking about it, I tend to preferentially use them. Even if journeys are longer. Although they’re probably less time as there aren’t traffic lights to race to then stop, and even slowing for pedestrians isn’t as bad as stopping. (Dog walkers though… although you even get that on roads sometimes).
I’m not a racer though.
Blimey – fair play to them if 20mph seems to slow for walking! Perhaps it wasn’t cyclists on those Strava segments at all? ?
People can get used to anything. I think many folks presented with that road might be a bit wary (or not find it pleasant prospect) to walk it what with the lack of footway or even a flat verge and the “straight country road” aspect of 1/4 mile of it. If that’s your only route on foot and if you’ve done it a few times and rarely meet a vehicle, no drama!
Why do we think that people can’t get used to driving 1/4 mile at less than 30 though?
I guess we’ll see… clearly quite a few people have just refused to believe this was happening – or otherwise blocked it out – until it did. Plus we’ve just had a Westminster policy swing (or at least “setting a different tone”) on this area.
60kg lean keen climbing
Thanks again for the local knowledge. I thought perhaps this was the case.
I’m familiar with the following argument, it was exactly the same as we had up here:
Nothing AFAIK to stop councils varying things where they feel this is appropriate?
And “sensible” is debatable. Why wasn’t 60mph there sensible? Or 100? All speed limits for cars and motorcycles were abolished under the Road Traffic Act 1930 – and casualties went down for a while! Proof it worked! (They went back up again and continued to climb…)
I’m not sure just how short of a distance it is not sensible to not alter the limit over. We’re talking a maximum difference of 30 seconds on this stretch, assuming you went from 20 to 30 and at the end back again to 20 instantly…
I’m all for street design which works with humans. (See e.g. this entire philosophy from a nearby country which covers more than just designs and rules). I’m totally on board with “the road design should guide its users”.
However this will take us lots of time to implement in the UK (the worst offenders are urban roads with residential and commercial development which are trying to be “places” / “streets” AND traffic arteries at once…)
What everyone appears to be saying is, as usual – “look at my exception – I agree in principle but not here” (0.5 miles of road here).
I disagree with “well they won’t keep to the speed (or at least some of them won’t) so ergo … give up”. (I believe that was exactly the reason given for removing limits in the 1930.) There is an attraction to the approach of “find out what speed they’re doing – that’s the ‘natural speed’ of the road so make that the limit – hey presto, compliance!” Which is effectively the UK’s current way. Unfortunately that’s not the whole story either because expectations come into it. There is nothing particularly “natural” about doing 30mph as opposed to 20, 25, 34, 42 etc. 30mph is pretty arbitrary. Wales has decided just to make that default lower.
InThere are plenty of duel
There are plenty of duel carriageways where the national limit of 70 mph is far too high, the older sections of the A1 with vehicle crossings for instance and 60mph is much too high a default limit for most single carriageway roads given modern traffic densities. A ten mile per hour reduction in the national speed limits would be very sensible with 60 and 70 mph only allowed in sign designated roads of a suitable standard, ie near motorway standards for duel carriageways.
Yes, what never ceases to
Yes, what never ceases to amaze me is that the people behind these speed limit drops are some of the most vocal proponents of speed limits being “respected and obeyed,” all the while engaging in the very behaviour that contributes to the disregard of speed limits and makes exceeding them more socially acceptable. Any attempt to explain what exacerbates speeding is consistently dismissed with appeals to the law, hasty generalizations, or appeals to motive.
A decision probably made
A decision probably made because drivers at speed on the dominant entry road were in conflict with drivers entering the roundabout ahead of them from the junction next around the roundabout entering at much lower speeds. A common problem on roundabouts on duel carriageways.
But are people going at
But are people going at “speed” due to a lack of signage to tell them not to or because they’re just not being sensible?
I fully understand the
I fully understand the intuition behind removing that section of NSL road for such a short distance, but doing so isn’t based on the reality of what works. It might make more sense to have it at 40. However, by having no change at either end, the issue is that including that road means traffic entering either settlement at either end will no longer encounter a drop in speed limit in line with a change in the character of the road. This is something shown to exacerbate speeding.
They removed a “buffer zone” on the approach to a village near me and moved the speed limit to where the village starts, resulting in decreased speeds through that village. Also, a school should not be a reason for a permanently lower limit, as speed limits are meant to assume ideal conditions.
It would work if people reacted to this sort of thing the way you would want them to, but you have to set rules that are compatible with real-world human behavior.
ajuk.uk [at] gmail.com wrote:
Well, you’ll have some studies to share I guess…
As I’ve previously said, I agree that the best way to change speeds is to make the road design signal the speed. Until we get there though (lots of building) the evidence (even, already, in Wales) is that actually merely changing the signs does reduce speeds. 20s plenty has you covered I think, stuff here:
https://www.20splenty.org/20_questions_about_20_s_plenty
and
https://www.20splenty.org/faqs
Despite what’s been said elsewhere the UKs 30mph roads are no more “naturally” 30mph than any other number. It’s almost like 30mph is just … a default we chose. Certainly, some probably can’t be driven at motorway speed. Though some probably can, as 1/4 of a mile in the example under discussion…
In this case, will it “work”? Early evidence is there has been a change. Define “work”! I hope Wales is looking at crash stats, casualty numbers and severity as well as compliance. (As mentioned elsewhere, just “average speed on these roads” doesn’t tell you all that much).
Where is this principle set forth?
I do note that some places have variable limits eg. lower when school sign is flashing. I’m not experienced on the law or what the data on how well this works is though.
Well it’s certainly convenient (for the justice system) to find out what people are doing and make that the rule. Hey presto, instant compliance, have a tea break!
It’s a sensible principle but I’m not sure this case is a great example. Yes, we’re changing something. There is a risk with any change that people won’t accept it – especially if it seems like a loss of privilege! However going back we have actually done this universally in the UK (reintroduced speed limits where there were none) and in smaller areas.
We’re just changing one of our default numbers. That’s actually not an uncommon kind of change…
You could equally argue a universal change is simpler than tinkering here and there because people only have to modify one of the rules they remember, not keep adjusting to all the different places that have changed. Makes it easier for our lazy human natures.
I think this will “work” in the sense that all our existing speed limits will – more or less imperfectly. It definitely won’t mean drivers suddenly get “better” (although it should give more reaction time). Nor that all will adhere or even the majority in some places. The evidence is that overall speeds will drop, which is a good thing where drivers interact with other modes (or other drivers, or even just their surroundings…). Particularly because around these speeds slower makes a great deal of difference in survival and injury in collisions. (You aren’t going to care whether someone hits you at 60 or 70…).
It also can tie in with making things more pleasant – even for cycling. Although I don’t think just this change will suddenly see a cycling boom…
As I said a village near me
As I said a village near me removed the buffer zone and that caused speeding in the village to decrease. I’ve also known speed to go up after the limit has been dropped and vice versa.
I do remember a study being mentioned in the LTN once that said they didn’t work, unfortunately, I can’t find it.
A driver coming across a speed limit sign in open fields is highly likely to either miss it or dismiss it as irrelevant, increasing the chance they maintain an inappropriate speed through the village.
If people are not slowing down before they reach the speed limit signs, this is a learned behaviour that comes about from councils setting the limit signs back.
People in general are more likely to obey and make an effort to obey rules they perceive as reasonable and make sense, this is called the Pygmalion Effect, you show people contempt, they will respond accordingly.
TBF no matter what speed limit you set there people will speed up naturally as it will feel safe to do so as the posted speed limit does not match the one implied by the road’s design.
These limits I very much doubt are being set by advice from traffic engineers, it’s merely councils responding to demands from people who want the rules set in a way that they think will make them safer. Limits set too low or too high can reduce safety, it’s not a contest to see how low you can set them.
I’m pretty sure the principle of speed limits assuming ideal conditions is written into DfT guidelines, that’s why we have other laws like reckless driving you can cause an accident below the speed limit, but be judged to have been going too fast. There used to be far more emphasis on driving to the conditions rather than drive-by-numbers.
I think you’re making the common mistake of thinking of speed limits as a way to generally dictate the speed of traffic, rather than a tool to single out reckless drivers, then again so is the Welsh government.
ajuk.uk [at] gmail.com wrote:
Well the first makes sense but I think that could be for a number of reasons other than just “here’s a village, and here’s a sign, and I agree as that makes sense to me”. I don’t understand e.g. changing speed signage from 30 to 20 and finding people (not just Fred, who’s making a point and “prepared to go to gaol”) then do 40 though. Although perhaps they were actually doing that before…?
Yet again, I think we both agree on the best measure (infra design guides behaviour). I also would not be shocked to find LAs getting it wrong in places or ignoring lots of people making reasonable requests (budget, politics, vested interests and the particular prejudices of decision makers).
I think the driving to conditions adjustment is only works downwards though. “Because it was a long straight road and a nice day I put my foot down” – I’m happy not giving that a pass (being aware that our police and judiciary are currently human and may decide to be more “empathetic” anyway). If you hoon it past the cameras more fool you!
Er… isn’t the point of a signed speed limit to … indicate the speed? Am I misunderstanding something here? Noting yet again all the imperfections of this system … it sort of works? I’m pretty sure I remember them stressing speed limits and speed control generally when I did my driving lessons and test. (As opposed to “put your foot down until it feels about right to you”. ) And because of the many years our roads were built over and their variety, that can’t currently be due to some magic “feels just right” speed (yet again – I agree that it would be better to build roads this way). Also I’m not aware they make specific UK gearboxes to naturally sit at particular limits (similar but different than the foreign kilometer- specific ones)?
I’m pretty sure that speed limits are nothing to do with catching wrong ‘uns though. Where does that idea come from? Also apart from automated cameras the catching is done by… the police, who are equipped (with eyes and brains) and empowered to stop reckless drivers for any number of detected issues.
Why speed limits work at all given our minimal enforcement or feedback is another question, socially conventions and the psychological “anchoring effect” and lots else probably.
If there were no studies showing this made people change that would be one thing, but there is evidence it does. Not perfectly, not for everyone everywhere, but apparently speeds come down.
To help people get the “why” I’d love to see all the other things happening like some of the road space being taken for active travel, or through traffic being limited. Sadly due to experiential learning some people may only “get it” when they’re nicked, or smash into someone, or have a motorist speed by them in the new more relaxed streets environment…
Traffic speeds are mostly
Traffic speeds are mostly dictated by the disign of the road and the conditions at the time.
The idea behind speed limits is to single out the behaviour of nutters, if you have little intention of driving like a lunatic, you should find youself natually driving at or below the speed limit.
if you messure the speed that most people drive at to see what is normal driver behaviour, assume most people aren’t insane and have an aversion to crashing or running people over, that’s how you set speed limits. When limits are set this way, compliance is much higher, but speeds aren’t.
They can influnence speeds a bit, but they’re most effective at doing that when the match the road they’re on. If speed limits were something you could just set really low and it worked that would always have been the way you set them.
If you try to use them as more general traffic calming that’s how you end up bringing the limits into contempt and you end up with 99% non-compliance figres like they did in Monmouthshire. I don’t know who that is meant to single out or target.
you can also have other unintened consequences like satnav no longer seeing main roads as faster and pedestrians being given a faulse indication of actual traffic speeds.
You’ve mentioned “The idea
You’ve mentioned “The idea behind speed limits is to single out the behaviour of nutters,” again.
Is this your own belief, one from somewhere else or a legal principle (from which country)? I have not encountered it before?
The speed people drive is influenced by a mix of things, some more or less transient (“the media says its a war on the motorist, let’s join the resistance”) or nebulous. However infra AND the rules affect it. The former may be moderated by designs of vehicle and the latter by what is socially acceptable and the chance and legal penalties for disobedience.
Since signage *has* been changed (in other places than Wales) and speeds *have* then reduced, would that not suggest a correlation between these facts? I can’t recall now if your examples demonstrate the opposite effect or if something else was going on.
Previous compliance with limits isn’t great either, nor have you shown that “natural” limits emerge (how could they, with very different bits of road all over the UK and previous default limits?)
Rehearsing old ground again, we certainly *could* do more to make infra guide drivers more effectively. But there’s even less chance of retrofitting that everywhere anytime soon than there is of installing a policeman on every street.
I just see this as an (imperfect) effort to fairly cheaply collect low hanging road safety fruit. And I guess an incidental benefit (or source of needless conflict, take your pick) is that it alerts people that current driving privileges are not set in stone and tarmac.
It seems increasingly like these objections can be summarised by “but change!”
My opinion on speed limits is
Properly set speed limits has an overwhelmingly possitive effect on driver compliance and assure that vulnerable road users are given an accurate perception of what speed most traffic will be going.
My opinion on speed limits is based on seeing a lot of data on the lack of correlation between speeds and speed limits. One road in Bristol showed 97% non-compliance on one higher standard road clearly not designed for it and in Monmouthshire it was 99.4%. Who is that meant to single out or target?
That’s speed limits being brought into contempt and by the same people who will often most vocally proclaim that speed limits should be respected and obeyed.
If you drop the speed limit without changing the design of the road, all you’re doing it prohibiting the behaviour of some of the safest drivers on the road and forcing the police to target them to the detriment of limits targeting those who are least likely to slow down when limits are lower but also the the most likely to do harm.
It’s not about change Lee Waters keeps comparing the speed limit to such things as the smoking ban, this is wilful ignorance of the subject, speed limits are materially different and the Stongtowns video I posted gives one of best explinations I’ve seen as to why this is the case.
If there was never a good reason to look at traffic speeds or engineering recommendations in the setting of speed limits, that would have always been the way you set them, it’s not merely an oversight and no one thought not to.
I think I’m done in this one.
I think I’m done in this one. Let’s see what happens.
We agree on the best way to ensure given speeds. So I agree this change is imperfect especially as a standalone measure. However a) there is still good evidence that 30 to 20 reduction reduces speeds b) early numbers from this change show that effect here and c) that enhances safety. It can certainly facilitate other benefits (more pleasant for active travel etc.)
Oh OK, ‘afore I go…
From your repeated “bringing limits into contempt” is it that you have some other concern than mere road safety? I am more interested in the safety aspect (and actually “nicer places and active travel”) than law or adherence to rules per se. Is it that you have a different focus (eg. respect for law in general)? After all lots of drivers already treat parts of road law with contempt. And a small but sadly significant minority extend that contempt to include the wellbeing of others in the way of their vehicle (or indeed who failed to “respect ma authority!” in some way).
What do you mean by “prohibiting the behaviour of some of the safest drivers on the road”? Who are these people? What is being prohibited (to remind ourselves – by changing some 30mph roads to 20mph)? How does that reduce safety?
“forcing the police to target them ” Who is doing this and how are they doing it? There are people speeding (on roads with limits other than 20mph), driving on the pavement, running red lights, driving without insurance and licences and stealing bicycles – right now. Who is forcing the police to target them? How are the police managing to avoid doing so? If someone was forcing the police to do this, what activities do you think the police should be prioritising policing instead?
What are your suggestions as to when or how redesigning and rebuilding all our roads to a certain design speed is going to happen? Or is the idea simply to go round, measure that drivers are speeding (IIRC the numbers show most are, at least slightly, in some places) then just increase speed limits in most places? Since the psychological anchoring effect exists what evidence is there that overall speeds will not increase where this is done? How will increased speed on a road improve road safety (or anything, really)?
As far as I am aware, there
As far as I am aware, there is evidence to suggest that 20mph speed limits work well on roads that naturally lend themselves to lower speeds. I’ve never seen a study that suggests it’s a good idea to set speed limits uniformly low with complete indifference to traffic speeds or engineering recommendations, as the Welsh government has done. In fact, including such roads in the lower limits can undermine the effectiveness of lower speed limits where they do make sense.
It’s important to note that when non-compliance with speed limits is as high as I mentioned, those trying to obey the law may unintentionally increase their accident risk by driving significantly slower than the mean flow of traffic.
Regarding the point about ‘prohibiting the behaviour of safer drivers,’ what I meant is that these lower limits can unintentionally prohibits the behaviour of drivers who are already driving safely, such as those going well below 30mph and into the low 20s when it’s clearly safe to do so under prevailing conditions. Speed limits are typically meant to presume ideal conditions because, unlike people, they can’t adapt in real time. Factors like rain, darkness, parked cars along the road, excess pedestrians, and sightlines ahead should naturally influence people’s speed. That’s why there has always been a need for other laws, such as careless and reckless driving, to address behaviour not aligned with the road conditions.
People going well below 30mph if it’s clearly safe to be doing so are still being sensible.
Suggesting that these individuals are no longer sensible simply because the speed limit has changed is an appeal to the law. Without considering the broader context the existence of a law doesn’t necessarily make it a good one. They could enact a law mandating people to sit on a chair and eat milk, bread, and pine needles for sustenance, that doesn’t inherently make it a good law.
Where speed limits are bases on traffic speeds, those breaking the limits will overwhelmingly be same drivers to run red lights, tailgate and generally driver like c**ts.
People who don’t drive inappropriately to the conditions are overwhelmingly not doing so due to a lack of signage to tell them not to. For instance, I once avoided an accident involving two children in Cardiff by driving well below 30mph because it clearly wasn’t safe to be going faster on a busy shopping street filled with people.
When it comes to road design, where people and cars meet it’s better to design the roads in a way that causes uncertainty in drivers’ minds such as lowering kerbs and removing traffic controls, this can not only cause a better road environment for vehicles, cyclist and pedestrians, it also helps reduce pollution. As for faster main roads, it’s a good idea to give people plenty of places to cross safely such as installing refuge islands etc
Ah the refuge island.
Ah the refuge island.
You don’t ride a bicycle on the roads do you? You’d understand how ‘the pinch point’ adds to the conflict between the vulnerable cyclist and the invulnerable motorist.
And judging by the state of the retro reflective bollards on the ones I ride past, they don’t offer too much refuge to pedestrians.
My apologies, I didn’t leave
My apologies, I didn’t leave like I said. I will get my coat, honest…
Well I guess you’d say “two wrongs don’t make a right” but are you aware that they didn’t go through a careful road design and behaviour monitoring process for every current 30mph zone? Nope, it’s just a default, also applied without this process. Actually many places where it does apply do share an important characteristic – people are likely to be present outside of motor vehicles. The “engineering” point being that they are significantly less likely to die when hit at speeds closer to 20mph than 30mph.
Still not getting this. There are laws against the consumption of some drugs in this country and age restrictions on others. The existence of those laws (arbitrary, and far from universally adhered to) is not “prohibiting me from staying sober” eg. if I see others indulging at parties?
There’s certainly peer pressure in both cases (and other valid arguments like the point about eg. road design guiding behaviour etc) – that’s understood but doesn’t invalidate the notion of having a rule in the first place?
The fact that many drivers do not drive to the conditions is equally a separate issue. And one that I believe is already legislated for via inconsiderate / careless driving charges. Simply having a higher or lower number on a sign doesn’t have much to do with that.
I’m very happy to concur that that driving to conditions should also be taken far more seriously than it is. (Witness all the “sun in my eyes” / “I couldn’t not stop in time as it was wet” / “I did not see them as it was dark” excuses and mitigation in courts). If you are proposing all signs be dynamic (eg. can reduce the limit as local conditions change) that bears consideration. Although again it’s probably a prohibitively expensive way of addressing this. Seeing as we’ve already crossed the in- car- tech rubicon self- limiting accelerators / navigation devices which lower displayed limits might be a more realistic way forward?
Summarising there. Two points – do you actually think there shouldn’t be speed limits AT ALL and that we should then just police “appropriate driving” (I’m assuming you’re OK with enforcement on this issue? ) ? Of course we already do/can police exactly this (see all the “police funnies ” tweets like “we spotted this driver with a aofa on their bonnet and stopped them…”). It’s just not that common to meet police and they’re normally going elsewhere on some other errands.
The last bit appears to be a reference to the “shared space” concept. Sadly this has been found in practice to be one from the “good idea fairy” in that there are extremely limited circumstances under which it “works”. (I believe one of the originators later acknowledged this). It doesn’t “work” for the blind / partially sighted at all really.
https://www.aviewfromthecyclepath.com/2014/12/the-devastating-effect-of-shared-space.html
Plenty more here:
https://www.aviewfromthecyclepath.com/search/label/shared%20space
As soon as there are more than a couple of motor vehicles it only really works for their occupants, not pedestrians or cyclists. A version limited to cyclists and pedestrians works a bit better but still is unpleasant and inconvenient once the numbers of either mode creep up.
Hence the Dutch principles of a) separation of traffic by speed / mass / direction and b) clarity – ensuring those within a space know *exactly* where they are and what behaviours are expected of them.
https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2021/01/06/the-third-edition-of-sustainable-safety/
(Which finally returns to the best way to do spaces for transport – design the road so it cues drivers about what route of road it is and effectively sets its own speed. Sadly the opposite of how we’ve mostly designed roads in the UK or rather we’ve decided it’s safer to make most of them wide as possible and with wide radius corners etc…)
To your first point, the
To address your first point, the Atkins report states that average (free-flowing) traffic speeds only decrease by about 1.3 mph. However, this decrease is for a 10 mph drop in the speed that people are being told to expect traffic to be moving at. The Atkins report also examined schemes where most main roads are exempt.
Some very high-standard roads in Manchester saw speed increases after the speed limit was lowered, as did two roads in Bristol. I am aware of a dual carriageway near my location with a 30 mph speed limit that has a higher average speed than another one a few miles away with a 50 mph limit. This stark difference between speeds and speed limits surprised me when I first encountered this data.
I have spoken to police officers and driving examiners, all of whom were surprised by the data from road traffic counters (RTCs).
I initially became aware of this when I filed an FOI request for an urban 40 mph road near me and some other local high-standard 30 mph limit roads.
I had a suspicion that the average speed on the 40 mph limit road would only be slightly higher. However, when they sent me the response showing that the average speed on the 30-limit roads were all significantly higher, that’s when I had the realisation.
The Strongtowns video I mentioned before explains why speed limits are different to other laws, non-compliance is not purely about wilful disobedience to the law. The 30mph limit doesn’t work because people are just used to it, it’s the speed most sensible people would not exceed in the absence of a speed limit. They didn’t go through a process for every 30 zones, however, that’s why it’s good that UK limits rely on the process of streetlights and then you have reckless and dangerous driving laws. You go exactly 30mph down a tight street residential side street lined with parked cars and run over a child you can’t use “I wasn’t speeding” as a defence in court.
I don’t really understand your analogy to drug laws, it just seems like a strawman.
Yes, there should be speed limits, if you’re having to ask you’re not following me but their primary purpose is to single out the drivers trying to use roads as if it’s their own personal race track, not the normal behaviour of ordinary drivers and not be seen by drivers as a target speed.
If you’re speedo broke, could you driver safely?
ajuk.uk [at] gmail.com wrote:
I’m done with bargaining with drivers, I’m done with driver psychology, done with trying design the roads to cause drivers to slow down. We have been asking drivers nicely for 100 years now and look at how we are repaid day after bloody day.
A competition to see the lowest speed limit – very well put – bring it. The motor industry has been allowed to put these 2 tonne high-speed weapons in 100,000s of people’s hands – that needs to be curtailed with a black box device in every car so it cannot be mis-used by anyone in any way.
David9694 wrote:
If you blackbox a car so that it’s full control is taken from the drivist, many drivists will use their remaining control to continue their efforts to employ their car as a weapon in service of their churning lower brain. When they do their various harms, they’ll use the blackbox as an excuse or scapegoat. “The black box dun it!”
The fundamental issue is the nature of motorised transport of the unrailed kind. They’re inherently dangerous because of their mass, speed and freedom to go about spaces in which there are all sorts of things, including people, which are highly vulnerable to their least deviation from being properly controlled.
Rather than have segregated infrastructure for cyclists, peds, horseriders and so forth, there should be segregated infrastucture for motorised transport. Essentially, put them all on railed tracks, fenced off from other spaces in which they currently become such a danger.
Roads for peds, cyclists and horse riders only. How safe they would become! Tracks for your car, the vans and the lorries with automated driving. Beeching killed a lot of it but it could always be built back. ….. But I’m forgetting that HS2 debacle ….. . 🙂
Cugel wrote:
I can imagine people dropping their phones at this point (maybe into their cup holders or footwells) and exploding “they’re after our freedoms!”
It’s a seductive picture. And I note that again NL have actually taken a step towards this by banning (and sometimes physically preventing) overtaking on a class of roads. This is actually solely for drivers’ safety; such roads by law already requiring separate provision for horsists, footists and cyclists.
Unfortunately I’m still not a believer in “we only need to take the motorists off the roads”. As I’ve mentioned before cyclists and pedestrians mixing is not ideal – even in a bigger space. We all like to walk / cycle “abreast” and spread out to fill space. Better to give each mode its own area. Which can however be adjacent without safety issues or creating an unpleasant environment, unlike e.g. motorways.
Our current roads are almost all far wider than would be needed even if you could instantly replace cars by bikes – which is not ideal for those crossing them. Narrower NL cycle paths (which still appear 3-lane-motorways-wide to a UK cyclist) are better here. No trouble to traverse without needing formal crossings.
As for horses… I’m a bit prejudiced but I’m leery about sharing space with these highly strung high-speed fermentation vats on spindly legs. And if I’m on one of my funny bikes apparently the feeling’s mutual. Also roads are tough on their finger-and-toenails and they need special tap-shoes.
I don’t think of full
I don’t think of full pedestrianisation e.g of a set town centre streets as an ultimate goal. It would be ok if drivers could play nicely (black box) and were a lot fewer.
Horses on the roads are pretty niche, so not really on the cycling worry list, even the unshod “stealth” horses and donkeys of the New Forest.
I attempted to provide an
I attempted to provide an explanation that delves into the psychology behind speed limit non-compliance, but it appears that you’ve reverted to a hasty generalization about a specific group of individuals solely based on their status as drivers.
Quote:
I missed that bit! The Ranty Highwayman (an actual UK civil engineer) has an article which may be of interest. It’s on why ultimately how we design our roads (what we design them *for*) is indeed a political choice. That’s despite efforts of politicians to push the buck back to engineers… (The article is in the context of installing pedestrian crossings but the same applies for other things “that show drivers down!” )
https://therantyhighwayman.blogspot.com/2021/12/invitation-to-cross.html?m=1
A look at a different transport system and how slightly different overall *choices* of goals lead to some radically different designs and rules might also be interesting:
https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2021/01/06/the-third-edition-of-sustainable-safety/
https://swov.nl/en/fact-sheet/sustainable-road-safety
ajuk.uk [at] gmail.com wrote:
Isn’t it more of a contest to see how close to zero deaths we can get? So far, all the various 20mph speed limits around the UK have reduced traffic fatalities, so it seems like a quick and easy method of saving lives. I think you can make valid cases for certain roads to have higher limits, but it very much depends on how well drivers can handle higher speeds without hitting people and/or buildings.
You’re mixing up speed limits
You’re mixing up speed limits with actual traffic speeds.
ajuk.uk [at] gmail.com wrote:
Well, there’s clearly some correlation between the two. The idea is that without either a mechanical intervention or neural implants, the easiest way to reduce the speed of drivers it to change the speed limits.
Good news, took a spin this
Good news, took a spin this morning, they are listening. New signs have gone up, it’s now been exempted and staying at a 30 brilliant let’s hope that going forward we can see more of this.
I reckon you could turn that
Well that proves that the other comments about “but but we won’t be able to change the limits” are bunk.
I reckon you could turn that into 80 with some paint or black tape!
Also – for safety and to match reality (rather than some misplaced idealism) / enhance compliance you can make a 70 into a 90 pretty simply also!
If it saves one life (and the Labour party in Wales)…
On a less snarky note, at least there is a footway there, albeit not one likely to encourage rare pedestrians or non-racing-snake cyclists to share. (FWIW I think the Dutch solution for the countryside is about right – build decent cycle paths *instead* of footways in most instances. It’s entirely legal for pedestrians to walk on them. There won’t be many of either mode – if there are, you need a different solution – so sharing works just fine. Indeed it’s far more common that people cycle say half a mile or more than walk – it’s more convenient!)
One more thing – I don’t
One more thing – I don’t think that section of road would have been covered by the 20mph default anyway. Given the lack of lampposts, it would not have been classed as a “restricted road”, which is why it was (a long time previously) NSL. In order to change from NSL to 30mph, the Council would have needed to make an Order, backed with repeater signs (which you can see e.g. here).
New, more promient signage is now needed to mark the transition from “restricted road” (with 20mph limit) to the section where the speed limit has remained 30mph by virtue of the pre-existing Order.
ajuk.uk [at] gmail.com wrote:
The guidance does allow this, and if the councils choose to do so they can very easily apply for exceptions. Swansea Council certainly have done, with many roads staying at 30. In several of those exceptions they have pointed out the lack of previous incidents as reason to keep the 30, even on roads with several shops and lots of pedestrians crossing frequently. Looking at DataMapWales I suspect many councils have been less proactive, and have used their powers to apply for (sensible) exceptions far less than they perhaps should’ve done.
ajuk.uk [at] gmail.com wrote:
The guidance does allow this, and if the councils choose to do so they can very easily apply for exceptions. Swansea Council certainly have done, with many roads staying at 30. In several of those exceptions they have pointed out the lack of previous incidents as reason to keep the 30, even on roads with several shops and lots of pedestrians crossing frequently. Looking at DataMapWales I suspect many councils have been less proactive, and have used their powers to apply for (sensible) exceptions far less than they perhaps should’ve done.
The problem is that it almost
The problem is that it almost is, the guidence for exceptions do not allow councils to take into account traffic speeds and engineering recomendations in the allowence for making exceptions, as if there was never a reason to do that and no one had previously concidered not to. If there’s houses on the road is had to be 20 with few exceptions, even if the houses are ribbon development.
This means some very modern wide arterial roads have to be included that 20mph schemes normally exempt, including a number of roads where there was high non-compliance with the existing 30-limit and some roads that used to be 40 until a few years ago, with not changes to the design of the road.
All this seems to do is bring speed limits into contempt and undermine 20mph limits where they do make much more sense.
20 mph limit = a safer world
20 mph limit = a safer world and a nicer world Drivers and non-drivers included. Which whinge are you running with, drivers?
Not very interested in driver compliance as an argument. Drivers don’t rule the bloody planet.
Not all that interested, as chrisonatrike describes, in the designation of small segments of road at different speeds as an attempt at a compromise – drivers will prove that themselves with a “we’re terribly confused by all this” article, e.g. from towns that sit on the border.
But failing to take into
But failing to take into account real-world human behaviour is just obstinate.
You can make a road more dangerous with a limit set too low or too high relative to its engineering for that reason.
20 mph limit = a safer world
[ duplicate post – website choppy – needs more cowbell]
David9694 wrote:
It is not a blanket 20mph at
It is not a blanket 20mph at all, that is a myth that has been mainly been made up by the Tories for political point scoring.
20mph will only be near a school, hospital, community centre, rows of houses/shops, housing estates ie potentially large concentrations of pedestrians or cyclists travelling along or across a road.
Local authorities had the power to keep roads at 30mph and they all had a consultation process with the public before implementation, so that locals could have their say so things were done correctly.
Roads can be reviewed and errors corrected by local authorities once things have had a chance to bed in.
It has transformed the village I live in and made the environment much more pleasant and many feel the same, they just do not feel inclined to scream and shout about it on social media..
As for the petition, it can be signed by the same person multiple times and people from all over the world have signed, so making it worthless, it will be debated in the Senedd and then binned, believe me.
There will be no cost to Labour, when the drama queens and the cultists get bored and move onto something else or go back to ULEZ drama to shout about, things will settle down.
I hope you’re correct
I hope you’re correct
On the face of it, for a
On the face of it, for a small sacrifice there looks massive benefits.
Let us hope the reduced number of voy racer accelerations encourages active travel and as importantly reduces pollution.
The other thing go note is that itvwill boost sales of cheap city electric cars.
If anything the 20mph speed
If anything the 20mph speed limit seems to be more dangerous for me on my bike, the amount of people that have tried to overtake me and have been sat next to me slowly passing at 20mph, while oncoming traffic is approaching is scary,
If I’m doing 15mph and the cars doing 30mph that’s a quick overtake, (ignoring the aggro of drivers) but the same sinario with the car doing 20mph is a slow and dangerous and has cause more aggro off drivers in my case than the previous 30mph,
I’ve had everything from horns, close passes, swearing at me and people attempting the overtake and moving over too soon because of traffic, pushing me into the pavement, it’s horrible and I don’t want to go out on my road bike anymore,
I hadn’t appreciated when
I hadn’t appreciated when commenting in the forum yesterday that this study is only observing speeds on roads where the limit has changed. So what that highlights is that the old 30mph was, in many cases, academic. The change people are actually experiencing is a real terms reduction in average speed from 23 in a 30 to 19 in a 20.
There are many, many driving
There are many, many driving myths – one is that you have any control over how long your (non motorway) one hour journey is going to take. Brake, accelerate, overtake, take chances at lights, get yourself stressed – it will make no difference time wise.
I commute on two wheels along
I commute on two wheels along some very busy arterial roads in South London and have done for many years. What always strikes me is how many cars I filter past on my 26km journey. And it’s of note how many of them have just one person inside too. People commuting by car seem to have no understanding of how long they sit waiting in traffic queues. On the few occasions I’ve had to use my car, either to take or get something from the office, the different in commute time is substantial.
I think we have a winner for
I think we have a winner for a comment from my local “Next Door” discussion on all things War on Motorists. 20mph roads are “too slow and too safe“
Steve K wrote:
I didn’t know that Lord Humungus was on Next Door
Steve K wrote:
This is USA mode of “thinking” – “Don’t need no steenkin’ safety”.
Having frequented US woodworking websites and forums for many years, I learnt that the idea of guards, hold-downs, riving knives and other such tablewas devices mandatory in Europe (including Blighty) are regraded by many in the USA as a fundamental interference with their right to cut their own body parts off or get speared by an ejected offcut.
Counts say 67,000 tablesaw injuries per year in the USA with 30,000 of them serious (causing amputations and similar or death). This despite the medical costs in that benighted place!
There’s an attitude that suggests freedom is the equivalent of, “Do what you like”. This includes anything and everything, even if it does involve injuring others “accidently”. We think it’s bad here that drivists don’t get had-up to a sufficient degree for running other folk over. It’s even more lax in the USA.
The thing is, today’s speed-at-40-in-the-20-zone eejit could just as easily be a pedestrian victim of a similar fool the next day. Still, why think ahead more than 5 seconds if it hurts the brain and curtails this moment’s joyous freedom to press on the accelerator pedal as hard as possible?
Cugel wrote:
Well, their system is set up so that some people can make lots of profit from people getting injured and their prison system serves a dual purpose of providing “slave” labour for the businesses that own them and also stopping the incarcerated from being able to vote and in theory change the system.
The more lawless and dangerous the U.S. becomes, the more certain people profit.
Norm always insisted on
Norm always insisted on safety glasses on his New Yankee Workshop, and would always use a pushing stick, even showed how to make one.
ktache wrote:
Noo Yankee Workshop! That’s an ancient bit o’ telly now. 🙂
In Europe, a table saw generally comes with a push stick, so you don’t have to make one. It also comes with a riving knife, guard, blade brake and several other safety factors, unlike the awful US unisaw designs as used by Norm.
Mind, even them yankers have tried to update things a bit, with riving knives and guards now included with many US saws. Sadly, many are poory designed, get in the way and so get removed by the owners never to be put back …. as the table saw “accident” figures continue to reveal.
They also invented the SawStop thing – a device that senses flesh touching the spinning blade and drops/stops that blade below the table in micro-seconds. It adds a vast amount to the cost and also has a tendency to go-off when it doesn’t need to, costing you a new blade and a new sacrificial braking device as both are destroyed in the process.
Even safety can be used to turn a large profit, see? 🙂 A well-designed blade guard is very effective, simple and inexpensive …. as well as extensively tested by generations of European woodworkers.
PS No, there’s few uses for a table saw when maintaining your bike – although you could use one to
destroyamend one o’ them wooden bike frames perhaps.In the USA table saws seem to
In the USA table saws seem to be used to do many tasks that might be more likely done with band saws, track saws, cross cut saws and other tools in Europe. Hence their removal of blade guards and riving knives that get in the way.
How about this:
How about this:
https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/protest-over-20mph-wales-speed-8786422
Yes – that’s right. They are so angry about 20mph limits on residential roads in Wales that they are going to drive along the motorway at 20mph…
No, no, no this cannot be
No, no, no this cannot be right, my car simply can’t go at 20 mph, it would burn out the clutch, knacker the gearbox and the fuel tank would empty in minutes.
Now do that speed in a residential area, guys and hey presto!
“This DIY approach by drivers saves us a lot of glue and gaffer tape” said a JSO spokesman.
PS Has THAT petition now exceeded the number of driving licence holders in Wales?
Sounds like this nonsense is
Sounds like this nonsense is on. This has to be in the top 5 of ways to say “I am stupid, selfish and nasty”
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/routes-go-slow-protests-major-27816171
Residents call for action now
Residents call for action now on ‘death risk’ road in Telford
Mr Davies said he thinks the main issue is that when the Eastern Primary was closed for roadworks drivers found Finger Road to be a shorter route. There is also a chicane-style road layout which residents say makes matters worse.
“We need to get the traffic back down the more appropriate route,” he said.
He said this may be done with a 20mph speed limit and a modernisation of traffic calming measures, including wider speed bumps.
https://www.shropshirestar.com/news/local-hubs/telford/2023/09/28/residents-call-for-action-now-on-death-risk-road/
Thread resurrection – new
Thread resurrection – new figures show 20mph Wales failure (according to the Nasty Party).
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-68348709
Failed …because it’s made average speeds reduce by 4! MPH! or ONLY made them reduce by 4mph, and anyway it has COST BILLIONS.
Transport spokeswoman Natasha Asghar in article suggesting that they’re unwilling to sacrifice any money for lives…
(Sadly other parties – or members thereof – are available for those for whom this chimes with. Indeed most parties. )
chrisonabike wrote:
I thought the implementation cost would be dwarfed by the NHS savings from the lack of KSIs over time.
hawkinspeter wrote:
Only if the schme last long enough before the powers that be capitulate to the tantrums of drivers whose average speed has been reduced by a whole 13%
Ah – but “over time” –
Ah – but “over time” – Conservatives MPs are probably only looking a few months ahead now (with dread). Again – given “election” most parties will be similarly short-term-focussed. But we’re not hugely better than the US in this respect (although their whole government regularly shuts down and staff are not paid because political bickering).
Obviously the problem is not the findings of the monitoring but the fact that it’s happened at all.
I’m still trying to find a way to NOT read her quote as “money and an illusory amount of ‘convenience’ vs. lives*, livelihoods and liveability – obviously we would not be willing to choose the second!”
Transport spokeswoman Natasha Asghar added: “To sacrifice billions of pounds from the Welsh economy all for the sake of 4mph may satisfy Labour, but it is not a trade the Welsh Conservatives would be willing to make.”— BBC
* Sounds over-dramatic but it is “lives” because 20 – 30mph is the range where a small reduction in speed makes a significant difference in survivability for vulnerable road users when hit by a vehicle. Not to mention giving drivers more time to react in visually busy denser urban environments.
… and much less brake and
… and much less brake and tyre dust, NOx, CO2 etc., and lower fuel/servicing costs.
About 1/2 of my 27km commute
About 1/2 of my 27km commute by motorbike across South London to (and from again in the afternoon) is now along roads with a 20mph or 30km/h limit, instead of the 30mph or 50km/h limit before. When the new 20mph/30km/h urban speed limits came in, I was curious how much time it would add to the 45 minute trip. And the answer is, about 2mins.
Trundling along at 20mph on a sportsbike did take some relearning, I’ll be the first to admit. But looking at my journey time overall, it’s almost a non-issue. And for a car driver, I expect the percentage change may be even less as most of the time on a journey will be wasted waiting in queues of traffic at junctions and traffic lights.
In terms of road safety, the lower speed limits make sense. The statistics show a drop in crashes overall as well as a reduction in the severity of crashes/injuries. From the perspective of a driver, motorcyclist and cyclist, the lower limits actually make journeys easier because things don’t happen as quickly, so you’ve more time to react.
Isn’t the real story that the
Isn’t the real story that the average speed on Welsh roads is above the speed limit? More evidence of endemic law breaking by drivers.
And when you consider normal
And when you consider normal driving patterns (e.g. more hare rush-stop than tortoise) that means that lots of people will likely spend some time quite a bit above that.
OTOH sadly this is no news to anyone who’s been in a vehicle and paid any attention at all.
I just take heart that – remarkably, by just changing numbers on signs* – the average has indeed decreased, by a useful amount and that happened everywhere.
But we have to drive so…
* Though the same effect has been noted e.g. in Edinburgh and elsewhere
Steve K wrote:
is it? “The headline figure pre-implementation of 20mph speed limits was the average weighted median speed across all the routes was 22.7mph, this dropped to 19.8mph post-implementation.”
[quote]”Fewer vulnerable road users (cyclists and pedestrians) are likely to use the roads at these times however and the impact on those killed or seriously injured may be lower. Nevertheless, there are opportunities using this approach to review compliance at different times of the day.” {/quote]
sorry, what?
They were less dead than they
They might be less dead than they could have been!
https://www.theguardian.com
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/feb/21/20mph-speed-limit-seemed-unfeasible-i-learned-to-love-pootling-along