Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
20 Mph Speed Limits to be Introduced Across Haringey
Following a consultation last year Haringey is to introduce a 20 mph on all residential streets and in town centres (excluding main roads).
Over 4,500 responses were received to last year's consultation and there was a clear majority in favour of a borough wide 20mph limit restricted to residential roads and roads with schools within the borough - 65% for and 35% against.
The Council have now announced their intention to introduce the new limit. Almost 50% of Haringey's roads are already part of 20mph zones. The new measure will affect all remaining residential streets that are not yet speed restricted as well as those in town centres. Main roads at this stage will remain as 30mph zones. See map on attached pdf for more details.
- Attachments:
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Anderson on
-
1. York
2. No, your expermiment wouldn't have worked because there was no enforcement. Although I've always thought it strange that people are quite happy to break the law in a care because "no one is looking" yet the same people wouldn't dream of doing so once they are outside their vehicle
3. If driving slowly makes people unhappy, perhaps they shouldn't drive
4. If people drive too close to other vehicles they are driving irresponsibly and shouldn't really be on the road
On a ore personal evidential note, I think that there may have been some enforcement on Wightman in the last few days as on my morning walk to work the traffic has been going more slowly (as in deliberately more slowly rather than in traffic jams) the traffic noise has decreased and I've not seen a heavy lorry.
Finally, if I want to get somewhere early, I don't walk into the driver's compartment and demand the train is driven faster, I leave the house earlier. Car drivers are perfectly capable of doing the same.
-
-
As an addendum, in the 2 years following the introduction of the 20mph speed limit in York, not one driver was found to have exceeded the limit by either the Police or by roadside cameras. The message seems to be that limiting speeds on individual roads does not work but over large areas it does.
-
Permalink Reply by Ian on
-
Hi Michael, nice healthy debate but I still don't buy it and I see you have avoided my questions on pollution in regards to speed humps being a bigger source of stop start acceleration pollution and other issues. There are speed camera enforcement at 30mph, 40mph, 70mph on roads and motorways but people still break them and are fined mostly because they did not see the cameras so having speed camera enforcement for 20mph will be no different. More people will actually speed at the new limit but because they don't get caught because they can more easily see the camera does not mean safety has improved and more people are now obeying the new limit. Another consequence of my experiment is that drivers start to drive even closer to the car in front and as I say the happy index for the population will decrease and who wants to live in a more unhappy society. When you weigh up the negatives of a across the board 20mph limit against what small percentage of problem you are trying to resolve, I believe the negative consequences will outweight any benefits. So why not have convert 20mph hidden cameras and drones in the sky 24/7 monitoring our driving. There is certainly a lot more that can and will be done in time in the name of safer roads as tech increases.
So York must be heaven on earth if no one was found to have broken the 20mph limit in 2 years by the police or 20mph speed cameras. Again the misleading data may be that there were only 2 very visible cameras in the whole area and police spot checks were infrequent and very visible. The misleading statistics can go on all day long but practical reality and common sense is a different matter altogether. We are being sold lies all day long by authorities in there efforts to control ALL aspects of our lives. In making new strategic direction on traffic policy a wise planner should also consider the impact on social behaviour and society and not just a mathematical decision only based on easily deduced misleading stats. I doubt there would be any lateral thinking other than the obvious and employees would be tasked with obtaining the stats needed to justify the change. Pure box ticking. Don't get me wrong I am all for safety if it makes sense as one of the biggest problems with drivers is most if not all think they are good drivers due to having a certain level of machine control but don't equate observation, prediction and safe distance as being the number one fact to be a good driver on the roads, hence you get 100 car pile ups on the motorways in foggy conditions by "good drivers". who then claim there is nothing they could have done.
Also if you don't drive a car as part of your work or even often it is very easy to cast a vote for harsher measures because it does not impact your life but if the impact is felt the vote is then cast the other way. We don't need pro car 30mph or anti car 20mph, we just need balance based on truth and not some authorities agenda. In closing I would quote some old saying "all that glitters is not gold" and the "road to hell is paved with good intentions".
-
Permalink Reply by Sarah on
-
I got my Haringey People magazine yesterday, which stated that the council has no plans to install more speed cameras. The 20mph zone will be self-policing, though some traffic calming measures may be installed.
I don't think a 20 zone will lead to increased road rage, as the traffic flow will be smoother. But an angry driver at 20mph is still safer than a calm one driving at 30.
One of the first studies of pedestrian injury and car impact speed found that at 20mph there was a 2.5% chance of being fatally injured, compared to a 20% chance at 30mph.
That quote is from this factsheet, which contains a lot of useful information.
-
-
I loathe speed humps. I think the only people who benefit from them are owners of garages who fix broken suspensions and cracked exhausts and bulding firms who do underpinning.
The research in York was contributed to by the Police and the analysis was by the university. There are similar academic studies in other cities where a 20mph limit has been introduced such as Bristol. There is also a lot of hard data on the reduction in pollution and particulates. On the issue of increase cycling and walking, it hasn't been the mums and dads who have suddenly taken to 2 wheels, it is amongst school age children whose parents feel more confident that they will be safer. Again this has been backed up by data from school travel surveys.
I think what it comes down to for me Ian is that some driver see speed limits as some kind of game. Avoiding sticking to them becomes a badge of honour.
I don't that that the introduction of a 20mph speed limit is somehow symptomatic of a Big Brother state but one point, that seems to particularly irk drivers, is the income local authorities take from fines. If someone was to suggest a petition to remove their power to do this and instead replace fining with points on the licence I would be more than happy to add my name. We may then end up in the situation in some US States (where drivers get their licenses suspended for a period for speeding) where it becomes a rarity.
-
-
I would not dispute speed/crash test injury results, as crash test dummies with sensors is an easy measure and well established test process and is also common sense.
Self imposed speed limit is probably only because cars are calibrated for accuracy of speed odometer at 30mph with a 10% tolerance hence we are also given a tolerance at 30mph before the speed camera is activated. At 20mph the speed cameras can be made accurate but there would be legal issues as the issue surrounding car odometer inaccuracy at 20mph plus older cars which are even more inaccurate. They are not doing this self imposing limit because of generousity but because of legal issues that would arise because of current car tech limitations.
"I don't think a 20 zone will lead to increased road rage, as the traffic flow will be smoother. But an angry driver at 20mph is still safer than a calm one driving at 30. "
My humble experiment demonstrated that road rage increases, I was overtaken by several drivers that looked at me when overtaking and then accelerated hard to demonstrate their annoyance as they overtook. This took place within areas already marked with 20mph on the ground. I was one driver on the road sticking to 20mph and causing people to get angry. What happens when 30% of drivers start to stick to 20mph making 50% or more of other drivers angry all day every day. An angry driver at 20 is far worst than a calm driver at 30. The reason why most people are not sticking to 20mph at present is because they don't believe in it and it makes no sense to them at times based on road conditions. Road rage does not need to manifest in violence but it creates frustration that builds up each and every day creating unhappy driving experience, angry members of society. In time 20mph speed cameras may surface as justification because other measures are not working to slow traffic down. If you want to move society from A - Z and control them more you don't do so in one measure/move. Slowly slowly step by step with justifications along the way.
As stated before driving on roads with speed humps is not smoother as there is constant slowing followed by fast acceleration. Driving slower also means cars are in the area of longer causing more pollution and again cars do not run at their best below 30mph. You think road rage will not increase. Please try it and see what happens. You will also feel enraged when the driver behind is driving inch close to your bumper in an attempt to intimidate and get you to drive faster. It all sounds good on paper and we can easily say that is the other drivers problem, but no it also affects all of us when rage and frustrating driving increases. As stated you need to analyses with critical impartial eyes and the truth and not just lower speeds has to be a better thing.
-
-
It seems to me that what this boils down to is that it won't work because a lot of drivers are self centred individuals who don't care a jot about others around them so they'll continue to do as they please. I don't hold to such a bleak view of my fellow citizens who drive cars and I think they are mainly people who really don't want to break the law or cause harm to others. If enforcement is necessary to make this happen and it catches anti-social drivers and perhaps gets them and their anger management issues off the road it can only be a good thing.
-
-
Hi Michael,
I am sure I could commission some research by experts into the negative issues of a 20mph speed reduction in addition to speed humps, pollution issues based on across section of new and old vehicles, social behaviour, etc etc that would contradict whatever research you may be referencing. The issues are who commissioned the research and funded it and what do they stand to gain. An independent research with no financial or political links would go along way to creating trust. Universities need funding and are also in the pockets of wealthy individuals and authorities. You also need to examine the methods used to conduct the research to identify if it is logical. In absence of a 100% independent study that looks at all aspects, for me it is just another corporate produced set of information to justify an agenda and yes, we are moving towards a more big brother state for sure.
What we need is a "ministry of truth" made up of incorruptible individuals crowd funded to research and investigate on our behalf as I certainly do not trust the authorities to do what is right for us and provide unbiased research.
-
-
BTW Michael, do you happen to work for local authority or connected in any way. The reason I am asking is because of independence. A general employee of any company cannot go on social media and cast doubt on their companies operation as this would be an immediate disciplinary. So without independence and if someone's future work is dependent on local authority funding, companies and employees have to play the game and independence is compromised.
-
-
I do work for a local authority Ian but not for Haringey so have no stake as an employee in the success or otherwise of what is proposed. I do live in Haringey so I consider that as resident, I have a major stake in what happens locally. As for disagreeing with the actions of Haringey or their policies I think if you searched for discussions I have contributed to (you could start with refuse collection) that I feel no compunction to keep my gob shut!
-
-
Couple of questions Ian.
Why do think Haringey want to introduce a 20mph zone? You seems to think it's not to protect people, improve traffic flow or reduce pollution, so what Is their motive?
What Is it that you would like to happen?
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
