you don't get above 20mph on the m6 through Birmingham most mornings so by your logic the m6 speed limit should be reduced to 20 mph at all times? is that correct? a limit is just a lawfully permitted speed that may be achieved not a target.
-
Welcome to Stafford Forum. Please or sign-up and start posting!
Chell Road and Foregate Street restructured again ?
- Thread starter Tumble weed
- Start date
Why not slow traffic down on the m6 to 20mph? people die on it every year slowing traffic down to 20mph would make it safer for everyone?
Speed does not kill inappropriate speed kills.
Cyclists kill people every year so why are they not required to have 3rd party insurance and pass a test to prove they have the skills to keep others safe? or remove said licence if their cycling skill level falls below the acceptable standard?
In risk management, you can't eliminate all risks but instead limit them to a level considered acceptable.
Also, 20mph zone does not make roads safer according to DFT.
In many cases, accident and injuries have increased after 20mph zones were introduced.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/12/17/20mph-limit-dangerous-costly-reverse-council-admits/
One theory of what causes 20 zones to become more dangerous is that all road users become more complacent and willing to take greater risks because they "feel safer" thereby making the road more dangerous.
Speed does not kill inappropriate speed kills.
Cyclists kill people every year so why are they not required to have 3rd party insurance and pass a test to prove they have the skills to keep others safe? or remove said licence if their cycling skill level falls below the acceptable standard?
In risk management, you can't eliminate all risks but instead limit them to a level considered acceptable.
Also, 20mph zone does not make roads safer according to DFT.
In many cases, accident and injuries have increased after 20mph zones were introduced.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/12/17/20mph-limit-dangerous-costly-reverse-council-admits/
One theory of what causes 20 zones to become more dangerous is that all road users become more complacent and willing to take greater risks because they "feel safer" thereby making the road more dangerous.
tek-monkey
wanna see my snake?
Chell road is what, 400m? And has 2 sets of traffic lights and a roundabout at each end, and is pretty heavy with pedestrian traffic. I see absolutely no reason to exceed 20mph during shop hours tbh, especially once the new toad is in, but having nearly been hit several times as a cyclist maybe I'm just a bit more cautious than many car drivers?
I completely understand why some cyclists use the pavement, most drivers don't obey the highway code around them and it can be bloody scary at times. If I had filmed my daily commute into town I bet I could have had at least a dozen drivers prosecuted each week, I remember one I'd dared to hold up for a few meters yelling at me to get back on the effing path.
I completely understand why some cyclists use the pavement, most drivers don't obey the highway code around them and it can be bloody scary at times. If I had filmed my daily commute into town I bet I could have had at least a dozen drivers prosecuted each week, I remember one I'd dared to hold up for a few meters yelling at me to get back on the effing path.
Gramaisc
Forum O. G.
When you own office buildings, then you need to maintain their asset value, and if your ex-school chums can help you do that, then you just need to ask...
I suspect.
tek-monkey
wanna see my snake?
If the m6 had 2 very close together pedestrian crossings and roundabouts every 400m I'd say yes?
How much time do you think you gain on that stretch doing 30 instead of 20? Maybe we should scrap the 20 zones outside of schools too? In fact why not just have 70 everywhere, it's a limit not a target, everyone can be trusted to drive at the correct speed for the conditions?
Thehooperman
Well-Known Forumite
I know what you're saying but how many businesses own their own office buildings nowadays.
I work for Network Rail and most of our office space is rented even the old BR office buildings.
proactive
Enjoying a drop of red.
Some of us don't have the luxury of having the type of business where most/all of the staff can work from home.
However whether people work from home or travel to work, I can't see a link between that and Chell Road becoming a 20mph, pedestrian focused zone AFTER the WAR has taken away 95% of car traffic from the area.
And the argument linking the Chell Road speed limit to the M6 speed limit is such utter bollocks I don't really know where to start.
A sense of perspective is required, by some, I think.
However whether people work from home or travel to work, I can't see a link between that and Chell Road becoming a 20mph, pedestrian focused zone AFTER the WAR has taken away 95% of car traffic from the area.
And the argument linking the Chell Road speed limit to the M6 speed limit is such utter bollocks I don't really know where to start.
A sense of perspective is required, by some, I think.
Thehooperman
Well-Known Forumite
I think the highway code is somewhat outdated!
The idea that cyclists should be on the road possibly dates from an era of empty roads and before modern cars and enormous juggernauts swamped the roads. I don't know when that rule was introduced but I shall continue to preserve my life and cycle on the pavements where proper segregated cycle paths are not provided. Pedestrians are provided a safe space to walk, pavements, cyclists should be provided with the same facility
So is it right to endanger pedestrians because vehicle drivers have no perception of space or cyclists? Many cyclists are arrogant tw!ts who think they have the right to ride on the pavement at high speed and have no respect or perception for the legal users of the pavement.
Surely the answer is segregation between pedestrians, cyclists and motor vehicles and where this can't be achieved is for vehicle drivers to be brought to task to be competent when driving near cyclists ON the highway.
Thehooperman
Well-Known Forumite
I'm not sure that it was, I read @Gramaisc's post as he was talking about companies owning their own offices and I was asking how many companies do that nowadays.
Gramaisc
Forum O. G.
I was really suggesting the the "property companies" do feel an urge to create a demand for their product.
No point owning something that people don't want to purchase, if that's your business.
Even if you do own your own office space, people might like to increase, or not decrease, its asset value.
I read it as meaning the investors that own many buildings not the actual tenants.
No doubt he'll clarify this.
Gramaisc
Forum O. G.
^I read it as meaning the investors that own many buildings not the actual tenants.
No doubt he'll clarify this.
See above.
We just need a bit of "carpet bombing" to clear some of the ground first before rebuilding.
yep, I did just after I posted
