20 mph limit (in East Dulwich)

[Moos]

Er, Huguenot, Loz was suggesting you are like Sir Humphrey.

And I don't think he was implying Mr. Barber is making personal profit from this.

[Loz]

You are really making yourself look a bit short changed in the mental department here, Huguenot.

My post however, wasn't completely clear in that the 'you' meant Southwark Council as a whole, rather than James personally. It's not unusual for councils to have ever-changing speed limits unnecessarily. And a camera waiting in the lower zone. If you need a lower limit, stick with it.

Really, I doubt even you could come up with a good conspiracy theory about how a councillor could personally profit from speed limits.

And I see, Huguenot, that you have failed to show me calling James a liar in any post. Care to try and regain some semblance of decency and withdraw that little crap-flinging nonsense?

[Huguenot]

Ah, so in fact you're calling me a liar? That's okay then :D

Have a great day Loz!

[Loz]

Not so fast, matey.

You come on here, fling baseless accusations around and then think you can slink out of the thread? You have accused me incorrectly. I suggest you grow some balls, apologise and withdraw your comments.

And, in future, when posting, it's a good idea to:

1) read the other posts you are going to comment upon. That's all of the post. Even the big words.

2) try and understand their argument

3) then post your reply.

If you are not capable of 1) and 2), then leave 3) to the adults.

[James Barber]

Can we all have a cease fire. The debate is being lost in a mist of frustration.

The term traffic calming belies the blood pressure raising it can cause!

Catching people who break 20mph speed limits would be the Police. All revenue raised goes to central government treasury and Southwark Council doesn't see a penny of it. If councils did, then council finance officers would be beating councillors doors down asking for more.

[Huguenot]

Loz with all due respect, if comparing me with a television character who had a reputation for being an odious self-centered liar was only intended to claim we had similar hairstyles then I give up on you. ;-)

If by saying that changing speed limits looked like a revenue raiser you actually meant that it clearly wasn't, then, really...

I'm afraid the only name-caller here has been you, and it's only accelerating. I love this idea of 'the likes of you'. What is my 'likes'?

As I said, have a great day. :)

[Amysdad]

[hibbs]

intexasatthe moment Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Right ,ok ,here's the answer

>

> The whole length of Barry Road is 30mph limit at

> present. The proposal includes introducing a 20mph

> speed limit on Barry Road from its junction with

> Lordship Lane to its junction with

> Underhill/Whateley Road .I do apologise for the

> confusion on the drawing.

>

> Which then raises the question - what's the

> rationale behind a speed limit of 20mph on only

> part of Barry Rd.

> You're driving along at 30mph and when you reach

> the Underhill junction you suddenly switch to

> 20mph ? ( or vice versa )

> And if you've not all dozed off yet - personally I

> think Barry Rd should be left at 30mph .

I live on Barry Road and it terrifies me how fast the cars travel down there, I would welcome a speed limit of 20mph for the whole road please.

[SteveT]

All of it 20 mph

or all of it 30 mph

not a dual speed road it's far too complicated and there will be braking and revving continuously at that junction it's not fuel efficient.

[Wombat]

I'd accept a blanket 20mph limit round here as long as, at the same time, all the holier-than-thou cyclists on this thread agree to carry a registration plate and insurance so that they too are accountable.

[Horsebox]

Wombat Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I'd accept a blanket 20mph limit round here as

> long as, at the same time, all the

> holier-than-thou cyclists on this thread agree to

> carry a registration plate and insurance so that

> they too are accountable.

Accountable for what, exactly?

Cyclists tend not travel in excess of 20mph and are hardly likely to kill somobody in a collision anyway.

And who in their right mind would introduce a cycle registration/insurance scheme solely for East Dulwich?

Epic Clarkson-esque driver Fail.

[skidmarks]

There is pretty much a blanket 30mph zone covering all of the residential areas in the UK. Do we really think that introducing a blanket 20mph zone all drivers will suddenly drive at this new speed limit when they didn?t drive at 30mph before?

The only way a 20mph zone will work is with lots of speed reducing features so it is physically impossible to drive faster but will cost a fortune or by camera enforcement which really is not popular.

[Domitianus]

hibbs Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> intexasatthe moment Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Right ,ok ,here's the answer

> >

> > The whole length of Barry Road is 30mph limit

> at

> > present. The proposal includes introducing a

> 20mph

> > speed limit on Barry Road from its junction

> with

> > Lordship Lane to its junction with

> > Underhill/Whateley Road .I do apologise for the

> > confusion on the drawing.

> >

> > Which then raises the question - what's the

> > rationale behind a speed limit of 20mph on only

> > part of Barry Rd.

> > You're driving along at 30mph and when you

> reach

> > the Underhill junction you suddenly switch to

> > 20mph ? ( or vice versa )

> > And if you've not all dozed off yet - personally

> I

> > think Barry Rd should be left at 30mph .

>

>

> I live on Barry Road and it terrifies me how fast

> the cars travel done there, I would welcome a

> speed limit of 20mph for the whole road please.

It still strikes me that the issue is not imposing new speed limits - it is enforcing EXISTING ones! Barry Road seems scary, NOT because it has a 30mph limit but because so many people pay ZERO attention to the 30mph limit and shoot down it at 40 or more.

If people completely disregard the 30mph limit they will not pay a blind bit of attention to a 20mph one....UNLESS it is actually enforced. Let's look at enforcing existing laws before setting out to establish new ones. If people actually drove at 30mph or less in accordance with the existing limit I suspect the road would appear much, much calmer and safer.

[Wombat]

Horsebox Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Wombat Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I'd accept a blanket 20mph limit round here as

> > long as, at the same time, all the

> > holier-than-thou cyclists on this thread agree

> to

> > carry a registration plate and insurance so

> that

> > they too are accountable.

>

> Accountable for what, exactly?

>

> Cyclists tend not travel in excess of 20mph and

> are hardly likely to kill somobody in a collision

> anyway.

>

> And who in their right mind would introduce a

> cycle registration/insurance scheme solely for

> East Dulwich?

>

> Epic Clarkson-esque driver Fail.

You're very very good. Got me.

Re-read my post and when you detect the irony in it feel free to write back.

[Horsebox]

Nope. No irony detected. Sounds like a driver whinging.

0/10.

Must try harder.

[Penguin68]

While changing the speed limit half way up a road is a distraction, I have often wondered why speed limits have to be a 24 hour a day thing. It's obvious that 20mph is a sensible limit for suburban roads, but that is because they are busy, have children and schools and so on. After 10.00pm they are quite different in nature and the need to maintain 20mph limits becomes less demanding; they are normally pretty empty, save for stumbling drunks, for whom I have limited sympathy. A 7.00am to 10.00pm 20mph limit and a 30mph limit thereafter would have the effect of offering safe suburban streets when they are being used significantly, while allowing free-er flowing traffic when it is safer to do so (far fewer pedestrians and vulnerable people about). We are used to timed parking restrictions - why not timed speed restrictions?

The accident map would be interesting if it could be time segmented - when do the accidents happen? I suspect that for accidents after 10.00pm drink is more likely to be a contributory factor than speed - and thus to reduce these, speed restrictions would be of less use than more education about/ enforcement of drink driving rules.