Jump to content

 

 

Default 20mph speed limit


Recommended Posts

Just now, stewarty said:

Thats one way of looking at it.  But occasionally there are areas where intervention is sensible in terms of reducing the total burden on the taxpayer caused by said mistakes, as well as reducing the harm to innocent individuals as a result.

And in that respect, what is it that the proposed changes will offer that isn't already available to apply appropriate speed limits? Don't 20mph limits exist today?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I live in a new build cul de sac that has narrow roads with only room for cars going one way in bits and a lot of kids playing outside. The council initially put up 20 mph signs after residents as asked for them and then came along and removed them and put up 30mph signs. Total madness.

Link to post
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, stewarty said:

The tweet references the bill proposed and a breakdown of Police Scotland and Health Board costs attributed to accidents, multiplied by an assumed rate of reduction in accidents based on a study/ model in Bristol, factoring in the individual and business output costs assumed due to incapacity of individuals and their employment.  See the last couple of pages.

 

https://www.parliament.scot/S5_Bills/Restricted Roads (20 mph Speed Limit) (Scotland) Bill/SPBill39FMS052018.pdf

 

Edit: and calculates total savings between £20m and £30m per year. 

 

 

Thanks for that. It doesn’t really seem to go into any detail on the increased traffic on the 30mph through routes which undoubtedly will have an effect on the economy.

Edited by StuGers
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Bill said:

And in that respect, what is it that the proposed changes will offer that isn't already available to apply appropriate speed limits? Don't 20mph limits exist today?

I don't disagree that local authorities are free to do so just now.

 

But its being argued that the total cost to the economy, including the taxpayer will be reduced.


I'm not persuaded its entirely the right thing to do purely in terms of cost.  But I think a gradual move towards 20mph in built up areas is probably a good thing overall due to the suggested benefits... assuming they stack up to scrutiny.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, stewarty said:

I don't disagree that local authorities are free to do so just now.

 

But its being argued that the total cost to the economy, including the taxpayer will be reduced.


I'm not persuaded its entirely the right thing to do purely in terms of cost.  But I think a gradual move towards 20mph in built up areas is probably a good thing overall due to the suggested benefits... assuming they stack up to scrutiny.

I've already stated that if 20mph or even 10mph is appropriate in a given circumstance then that's what it should be. I started this topic because I had a problem with only one aspect of the proposal and that can be summed up in the word "default". It's disappointing that no one seems interested .

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bill said:

I've already stated that if 20mph or even 10mph is appropriate in a given circumstance then that's what it should be. I started this topic because I had a problem with only one aspect of the proposal and that can be summed up in the word "default". It's disappointing that no one seems interested .

Well thats the aspect I've been debating.  And I agree with your view, but also can see there is potentially merit in expanding the law in this regard, but question the suggested approach given that I think they are likely to be underestimating the actual costs given the likely need to match up speed limits with calming measures.   

 

I think the are needs more research, in other words.  But in the mean time I'm happy for local authorities to make judgements as needed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Bluedell said:

There definitely should not be a blanket approach. Each road should be assessed on its own merits.

 

Surely councils can do this without legislation changes?

I agree with that in that every road is different and should be classed on it's own merit. Roads where there is little traffic or people would just cause frustration driving at 20mph.

Link to post
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, stewarty said:

I don't disagree that local authorities are free to do so just now.

 

But its being argued that the total cost to the economy, including the taxpayer will be reduced.


I'm not persuaded its entirely the right thing to do purely in terms of cost.  But I think a gradual move towards 20mph in built up areas is probably a good thing overall due to the suggested benefits... assuming they stack up to scrutiny.

Reducing traffic speed always has an adverse affect to the economy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.