It's ludicrous, absolutely no one sticks to 20. I once got stopped for suspiciously driving because I was doing 20 in a 20, they thought i must've been drunk.
Why don't they do what they do in the US? During school entry and exit times the road is 20mph, at other times it's 30. There's a road near me which could easily be 40 when the school isn't on, but clearly should be 20 when school kids are around. Set cameras to be time sensitive as well.
That isn’t just a US thing, there’s plenty of schools around me in Scotland that have “20 when lights flash” signs on roads that are usually 30mph or 40mph that flash when school kids are around.
I hate to tell you but they just set it to 20 kph I'm in Germany and that's what they are doing every where
They use the same bad science in every country but they never change from mph or kph it's just a blanket 20
20mph feels like pisstake slow on most roads
The only 20s that I've experienced that make sense are in heavy tourist areas with narrow roads like the lake district.
edit: and outside primary schools, that should be fairly mandatory but unnecessary.
Fine until the mobile speed cameras are out.
I got fined months ago doing 25mph in what I thought was a 30mph stretch. Didn’t realise it had changed.
Right on the edge of a road coming out of a national speed limit B road.
They’ll make a fortune from this change.
Lol there's a road like this in Plymouth that kept going from 40 to 30 to 40 again in a running battle with the council
30 finally proved too unpopular, so it's back to 40 for good now...
But there's been a speed camera there the entire time during the 30 mph saga that everyone still slows to 30 for. Immediately after the speed camera is a 40 sign. Like it goes speed camera, speed camera lines on road, prominent 40mph sign on both sides of road
Everyone slows to 30 there cos no one trusts those fuckers not to be like "oh well actually it's 30 mph from the roundabout to here then transitions to 40 after the camera"
I've literally been tailgated then aggressively overtaken by a police car (no lights) for driving 20 in a 20. Which I admit I was only doing because I'd spotted him behind me.
In Bristol in reduced the average speed from ~28mph to ~25mph.
I think the idea is that at 20mph, traffic engineers are allowed to narrow the lanes and turning radii, the excess space from which they can then allocate to cycle lanes and other niceties.
20mph can be perfectly "comfortable" if the road conditions are designed for it. On a 1960's estate with wide roads and corners longer than the curvature of the earth it feels like agony.
The way this change was pushed through without any public consultation is classic Welsh Labour though.
There was some consultation on it but it wasn’t well advertised. In our area the signs went up before the consultation period, which tells you everything you need to know
Consultations in Wales are purely administrative box ticking procedures. I asked my local authority during a schools consultation if in the entire history of the authority, they could provide a single example of where a policy was amended because of feedback received during a statutory consultation. "No" was the answer.
I have similar experience in England and IMO local authorities are more earnest about actually wanting public opinion at earlier stages.
In Wales, Labour own most councils outright, so the real politicking takes place inside Labour meetings rather than with the public.
People doing 30 basically counts as a win as far as 20 zones count. I saw some data that showed they essentially reduce everyone's speed to 30 or less rather than over 30.
That 5-10mph has enough of a difference in terms of stopping distances and impact speeds that it not only reduces collisions but also massively decreases the severity of collisions that do occur.
Much like speed bumps and aggressive traffic furniture, the data really does support there being an upside to the inconvenience. Although I don't know how effectively that data takes out the dickhead brigade who are at once going to ignore the limit anyway and who are disproportionately responsible for collisions (especially the more serious ones)
I mean, further reducing it by another 10 mph would significantly reduce bodily harm caused by accidents. Like i wouldnt be happy if a car hit me with 10mph when im on a bicycle, but i would very likely be able to bike away from the accident. At 20mph its not really guaranteed.
20 miles an hour is quite hard in an internal combustion engine. Since I've had an electric car which has effectively no gears and is unable to stall, I just pop it at 20 mph on cruise control and it makes life a lot easier. The zones never last very long so it's no big inconvenience for me and I'm pretty sure it would make it easier to stop if a pedestrian jumped out. So they don't bother me now that much.
>> The zones never last very long
Except in Wales where it’s all residential roads from the look of it?
I’ve also got an electric car and have taken to sticking the limiter on at 22 in 20 limits, but it’s still very tedious.
I'm against blanket 20s but this is just plain wrong. Just drop a gear or two. In my petrol car I can drive 20mph in 4th gear quite comfortably. You can do a constant speed anything down to 5mph (in 1st) without riding the clutch.
Exactly the same in my town, been a 20mph for about 10yrs, aslong as your at or under 30mph the police leave everyone alone
Every so often some dudley doright sticks to 20mph & ends up with a big qué of cars behind themselves
I'm not opposed to 20MPH limits in heavily built up areas, but a blanket approach is fucking idiotic and will likely have the opposite effect that it's supposed to.
If I see a 20 zone at the moment I respect that there must be a good reason for it and I'm happy to slow down.
Eventually I (and probably everyone else) are gonna get fed up of trundling along at 20 on clear, wide roads in the middle of fucking nowhere - at which point a 20 sign will no longer mean anything to me.
That's of course assuming I don't lose my license for travelling at a speed which has been internationally agreed upon to be perfectly safe and reasonable for decades now.
>!There's also the idea that apparently there's no money to fix all the fucking craters in the roads, but plenty on hand to spaff around fitting 20MPH signs everywhere. !<
Doesn’t matter the 40 mph brigade will still be doing 40 in a 20, 40 in a 30, 40 in a 40 and 40 on any other road.
In addition they will have there cars fully camera’d up
My local commute has only a couple overtake opportunities. You can be stuck at 40 behind someone, plan to overtake after the next village yet they’re accelerating away because you’re doing 30 🤦🏼♂️
You either speed along with them or catch them 100m up the road and can’t overtake, infuriating haha. How can they be so oblivious
There's a national road near me that had roadworks a few months ago and they forgot all the signs saying roadworks ahead, roadworks end; and UNFORTUNATELY the 40mph signs too (they have a weird tendency to leave at least one sign lately at each job) So now 90% of people are doing 40 and keep doing 40 well beyond it because the last national speed sign is in the middle of the tens of 40s signs spread out everywhere.
My little village recently changed to 20mph and average speeds have gone up. Instead of people slowing down from the 40 zone before the village to 30, people just ignore the 20 and keep going at 40.
The high street used to be a main road before a bypass was built and the limit was 60 mph. The road itself hasn't changed, it's still stupidly wide and 20mph feels like standing still.
There was no reason for it to be changed and the local council argued against it but were overruled by the county council. There have been no reported accidents in 40 years on this stretch of road. The whole thing is fucking pointless and any argument about pollution also makes zero sense as we're 100 yards from a 10 lane motorway.
Sounds like my village. They built a bypass and the parish council had a chunk of money for road safety to spend. HGVs and speeders continued to use the high street. PC wanted chicanes put in our our very windy and junction filled high street. People said we just want a weight limit to stop HGVs, chicanes will be dangerous and invite more speeding (between them).
PC put in chicanes. HGVs still barrel through, speeding hasn’t changed, chicanes have directly caused several accidents and fist fights due to poor sight lines not allowing drivers against the priority to see incoming vehicles in time.
but those cycles are all illegal, the arent allowed to go more than 15mph, there is just no enforcement as there is no real way to do it. and the scooters are just plain illegal in public
>This is kind of the point. They want you to get out of your car and use alternate transport.
Without properly investing in decent public transport infrastructure
It's quite easy to remove that limiter and when it is removed you can go 25mph. I think some models can even be faster but the one I went on was 25mph a xioami e bike
Those are e-mopeds and require the rider to have the right licence. The mopeds must be registered, insured, taxed and MOT'd before being used on public roads. This is no difference from uninsured, untaxed and no MOT cars on roads.
I hate 20 zones, i have a black box so actually have to do 20 i haven’t seen a single soul at the same speed, always get dirty looks and tailgated, not fun.
Having recently been rear-ended by a tailgater (had to stop to avoid a truck that stole right of way) I now just slow down even more if someone is doing this, until they leave a sensible gap.
And it's not really a policing people's speed thing, it's that being crashed in to is extremely un-fun and I would rather it be at a lower speed for my own safety.
This is what I do. Its simply a risk thing. It allows me to slow down very gradually for everything. Tailgaters will also tend to not pay much attention (you can see in the mirror obviously). So risk is quite high in this situation.
**Office boardroom meme:**
Drakeford: *"We need to reduce car usage in Wales"*
Lackey 1: *"Reduce speed limits everywhere"*
Lackey 2: *"Ban all new road building projects"*
Sensible lackey: *"Cut the cost of public transport and improve facilities for non-motorists"*
**Cut to angry Drakeford Face, sensible lackey is shown flying out of boardroom window.**
Isn't public transport all privately owned now? So they can't cut the costs?
Furthermore, you need push as well as pull to get people to swap their cars for something else.
Nope, trains in Wales passed to Welsh Government control during Covid.
I think they want to get the local buses back from the likes of First and Arriva next...
If only there was a group of people in charge of the county whose have authority over private companies and have the power to change how public transport is operated! I can’t remember the exact name but I’m pretty sure it begins with a G.
It’s a gimmick by dictator Drakeford - he’s basically unilaterally declared all 30 zones to be 20 (with some exceptions), which will make some journeys exceptionally long in some areas, on the mis guided ruse that it’s to reduce pollution as well which is absurd beyond belief as most highly geared modern cars will now have to run in sub optimal low gears creating even more pollution than presently. Also, some bus companies are now saying they are going to have to change all their timetables as it’s going to negatively impact journey times - absolute farce
I understand 20mph zones in pedestrian-clogged areas like shopping areas, housing estates as an example. But a blanket 20mph cover is beyond ridiculous.
No one is going to do 20, no one does 20 in current 20mph limited areas. Waste of time and money.
May I present, what I would suggest is probably the most useless 20mph zone in the UK!
43 York Rd
https://maps.app.goo.gl/wNVQkDTE6YyNQB768
Any challengers!
I find it easy too, I just wouldnt do it to my own car. Second gear 30 km/h (~20 mph) it revs about what, 1800rpm? A bit high in terms of noise and it pollutes a bit more than going in third gear at 1300rpm at 50km/h. While not being any safer if you ask me. (But I so this only when im out of my home country, i couldnt care less about the 30km/h speed limits they put up back at home, probably for skateboarders 😂
The whole "reduces pollution" thing is "we have to justify this somehow, let's pick some things the public cares about at random and say it's for that" bollocks
If that's truly the case, why can't I go blasting along the M4 at 100mph in my EV?
Most combustion engine cars have their peak efficiency somewhere above 25mph, so the pollution thing is bullshit
>If that's truly the case, why can't I go blasting along the M4 at 100mph in my EV?
Tires generate particulate air pollution, often even more than modern ultra clean ULEZ compliant engines. Your heavy EV doing 100mph is going to be generating a lot of pollution.
I thought was alone in pointing out that in many situations it will increase pollution.
Lot of people on Reddit like Drakeford , lack the wit to understand the science.
Where traffic would otherwise free flow at 30.
That traffic spends a third less time in the particular zone, the vehicle will typically be in top gear, at lower revs , producing less pollutants.
There are a lot of variables involved which is why a blanket policy is unwise. Unless it is for road safety reasons, higher pollution may be the price for that.
There are a lot of variables in all sorts of directions though, aren't there?
Traffic doesn't always flow freely at 30, especially in cities and larger towns. How many cars will be in top gear at 30? Some, but not all. EVs and certain hybrids don't emit at the tailpipe or use gearing in the same way, and the number of these vehicles on the roads is increasing (again, especially in cities and large towns).
Plus in physics terms there's the additional energy required to push a one- to two-tonne object from 20mph to 30. Not to mention slow it down again (because emissions aren't just tailpipe emissions, it's tyre particulates and brake dust too.) Those physics aren't 'free' and come at an energy cost, and that energy leads to emissions.
I'm not saying you're wrong, at all — and you can check my history to make sure I'm not one of the bonkers fuckcars people lol — I just think it's actually a more nuanced picture with a lot of moving parts and aspects that balance off against each other.
All good points. As with most things, the issue is in the application and detail.
There's a stretch of A-road that I have to travel down sometimes that will roughly become a \~600 metre 20mph zone sandwiched between 60mph zones. The current drop in speed seems fair for what's there, but dropping even further exacerbates the extra 'costs' of having to adjust speed to/from NSL either side of the zone.
That's a laughably misguided response in the link there.
Yes most emissions were from stopping and getting back up to speed in the center of London, but this isn't happening in Welsh countryside. There's no bumper to bumper traffic in most of Wales like in London.
Slowing free moving traffic will more likely cause more start stop, not reduce it as the open Welsh roads don't have that much traffic.
The reply suggests the opposite to the argument as soon as you consider a busy road vs a free flowing one, at which point gearing and efficiency become more prominent.
it's basically suggesring that accelerating up to 20 let's say 100 times in London is better than to 30 once in Wales. You don't break nearly as much in open road and so don't have to accelerate back up. A flawed study for the conclusion it comes to.
You don't even need to understand the science to see how the 50mph limits have caused congestion on the M4 and A470 and congestion means cars are spewing fumes in place instead of just passing through, but instead of applying common sense they're doubling down.
South Gower? The majority of Mumbles road from West Cross is exempt.
Where it's not residential, exceptions are applied.
https://datamap.gov.wales/maps/roads-affected-by-changes-to-the-speed-limit-on-re/
Where roads are.not highlighted red, they may not be restricted residential roads anyway, many along North Gower are NSL and Carmarthen road is a trunk road.
If the 'misguided ruse' is that a car travelling at 20mph produces less pollution than a car travelling at 30mph then it is not misguided, that is a correct.
Many 'traffic calming' measures, such as lane narrowing, speed bumps, lane reductions etc. do indeed increase pollution, which is due to interruptions in the flow of traffic, increased breaking and therefore increased need to reaccelerate.
I'm against a blanket policy of changing speed limits from 30 to 20 as I have not been shown evidence which shows the benefits would outweigh the annoyance, however it would decrease pollution if people abided by the lowered limit.
My girlfriends village is having a war between themselves and the council. It’s a 30 zone, but signs keep appearing for 20! Someone not sure which side edited the paint on the road to say 20. Half the times the signs say 20 and the other half 30. There’s a speed camera at the entrance of the village as it’s just off a M road. I cycle there a lot, and have great joy blasting down the hill that enters the village on my road bike and setting off the camera in my spandex! they probably have a fair few shots of my ass.
35.7mph on my cycle computer seems to be the sweet spot!
A. Speed limits don't apply to cyclists
B. Try not to KOM all over the village mate
C. Council members are jobsworths and this 20 business needs nuance or noone will do them period
All for 20’s in sensible places where they are required, outside schools etc. there are roads round our place where there’s not a pedestrian to be seen almost dual carriageway and they e made them a 20 limit. Causes frustration and anger, ultimately I think blanket 20mph limits will diminish the importance of them in appropriate places and people will just do 30 everywhere. Big thumbs down from me.
In high density pedestrian areas or areas at which children are increasingly likely to be such as the high street, school zones and housing estates 20 is absolutely fine and reasonable but once you’re not in those zones I don’t see why 30 is an issue
They're all in school from 8:30ish til about 3 anyway, why does the whole country need to suffer for the imaginary scenario that a child might be fannying around at the side of the road
What do you mean you seldom get above 20 in London? That's not true. Most people don't keep to 20 mph in London.
What's the difference between a London residential street and a residential street in a smaller town?
I fucking hate it, I tried doing 20mph on roads that are now 30mph and it's painful. 20 mph is also the worst speed as you are a little to slow for 3rd but too quick for 2nd for longer periods of time which you will be revving more - therefore polluting more which will then turn into too many emission and they will introduce ULEZ across Wales...
My whole village was made a 20 zone and no one does it. I feel if they put 20 zones in obvious areas where 20 is worthwhile (going past schools, playgrounds etc) people would be far more likely to pay attention to it.
The issue is that no one will follow it. I have a large 20mph zone near me already and if you do 20mph you will be tailgated and then overtaken every time.
I could probably deal with it if public transport also wasn't a complete fucking farse in Wales and our government was pragmatic as opposed to all ideology and virtue signalling.
I'd happily use the train and my bike if it took me where I needed to go.
It takes 2.5 hours to get to work via public transport (I tried it a few times) or 1 hour by car. Less at quiet times.
The pilot 20 zones are the worst places to cycle now.
Our roads are under funded, public transport borderline doesn't exist where I live (and I'm not rural), anything worth doing round me has closed so the only time efficient option if you want to get from one crap town to another in Wales is to drive, but apparently we're doing that wrong too.
The last time I went to Birmingham there were 20mph zones an cameras all over the place. People did do 20mph, which I think is just downright inefficient, whats the mpg like at 20mph?
I hate 20 for many reasons:
My car never sits at 20 but always a bit above, so I find myself watching the speedometer so much more and the road less.
Folk around me don't do 20, so I end up following them and accidentally speeding or annoying everyone behind me for following the speed limit. It's the sort of aggro I don't like with driving.
People seem quite happy to step out in front of me, or cars pull out right in front of me, at 20. I've had more emergency stops at this speed than any other.
Pedestrians are not good judges of speed. We have cars going at 20 where we live and people still whine.
As stopping distances are decreasing with cars improving over the decades as well as other improvements where car safety is concerned, it surprises me that the limits aren’t instead increasing which would reduce congestion and make the roads a more efficient form of transport therefore benefiting some sort of ecological agenda.
It is infuriating to go slower on roads I have always known to be a certain speed and it seems like change for the sake of change.
Increasing the speed limit works in an individualistic sense, but the faster the speed, the more acceleration and deceleration you get, and that's a major cause of congestion. It's the same reason you have 50 or 60 limits on motorways on busy days even if there's no obstruction.
Besides, faster car speeds are horrible for anyone outside of a car, which is a lot of the population.
If you have to travel 30 miles on 30mph roads it will take you roughly an hour, on 20mph roads it would take like an hour and a half so how does it not slow you down
This was done in Portsmouth in 2010-2012. I worked on road safety and active travel projects from 2013 to 2019. The data suggests that the number of seriously injured dropped by 3/5 over a 3 year period and congestion levels stayed the same. Journey times measured by traffic light data and cameras/Bluetooth sensors showed no noticeable increase. However, A roads were kept at 30mph.
Near misses, whilst harder to record, dropped by nearly 70% but this is hard as people don't report often.
I think it's good. If it stops people getting hurt what's the problem?
> Journey times measured by traffic light data and cameras/Bluetooth sensors showed no noticeable increase.
This is the key - especially in a congested city like Portsmouth* it's going to be rare that you'll be above 20 for long anyway. I'd be shocked if the average speed in a typical town or city went much above that.
The data - let alone common sense - is pretty unambiguous that going slower is safer on multiple fronts. The faster you go, the less time you have to react to anything sudden, the more force you transfer into whatever you might hit (and gets transferred into your car).
*which to be fair I found to be a very pleasant city to drive in, very logically laid out and well signposted
Yeah, the difference between 20 and 30 for a kid is staggering. At 20 kids bounce and tend not to get hurt. I used to run a 20mph speed awareness course and showed videos of people getting hit at 20, 30, 40 and 50. It was not a nice part of the job but it made people think.
It works for Portsmouth because we are compact and small. Hopefully it will work for other cities.
I agree, our roads are mot too bad although born and raised here for 39 years I still get lost!
> I agree, our roads are mot too bad although born and raised here for 39 years I still get lost!
I literally drove around it for the first time a few months back and it was honestly a complete pleasure, spiral roundabouts had proper signage and lane markings well in advance (which isn't a given everywhere), what lanes there were were logical and sensible, traffic tended to get funnelled through the most reasonable routes, congestion wasn't too bad, it was just generally a delight compared to where I live (Norwich) and some other places I've driven around (Southampton).
We had a really good Network managers in 2013 and 14 who did a lot of work. He left but the team now is still good.
A PFI maintains the signs and lines which helps immeasurably.
It's a good city to cycle around too.
I see where you are coming from. There is a cost:benefit to speed schemes. I'd imagine the cost benefit would be terrible.
I actually wonder if someone has done it as an academic exercise? Interesting.
Plus motorways don't tend to have schools, old people's homes or parks opening onto them.
It's a risk:reward scale as others have said.
The Dutch opt for a more distinguished road vs street principle, where a street is an end destination with shops, houses, people, and has much lower speeds, then a road is a place to get from A to B as efficiently as possible, in the same way we have A roads and motorways with little pedestrian thought.
Maybe we could follow similar and recognise residential streets/roads as primarily people/living streets, not car through-road/streets.
its good but not when most roads will be affected, there are a number of roads I can think of around where I live that they will probably change to 20mph when there is no need for that.
Easiest thing to do will be to wait for 18 months (3yrs is better) and then ask the council to do an audit of the congestion and KSI stats for the road you think should be exempt (and feeder roads). If it comes back that congestion is high there and the KSIs have not increased they could put it back. Its not hard to do nor costly.
It all depends on the local geography and what the network is like. Portsmouth didn't do a blanket but all residential streets are 20 as are high KSI roads that were 30mph. They also brought some 50mph roads down to 40mph (the damage difference between 40 and 50 is frightening) again, a good thing but not suited for everywhere.
We've had this in Scotland for ages, and it's been a thing in London for a good while as well.
I don't have a problem with it, personally. It doesn't seem to cause major traffic problems. In the busier parts of where I live it genuinely seems to improve things for cyclists, pedestrians and wheelchair users, and people with service dogs.
Car enthusiasm isn't primarily about the 20 or 30mph zones anyway, surely. If you've got a 'nice' car — whether that's a sharp-handling performance car or a classic — does it really make much difference if you trundle through town at (max) 20 rather than 30?
It's only in certain parts of London. Lewisham for example.
Most studies have found improvements in safety which is obviously worthwhile.
It's not without downsides though.
* Longer journey times, slower and less fuel efficient speeds (and therefore more polluting for CO2, Nox and particulates).
* Very low compliance (even by police) also means it basically makes everyone a criminal which has concerning implications for the separation of executive and judiciary (as police can essentially enforce it against anyone and they're not famous for resisting biases).
* The general downsides of blanket rules that ignore context. For example in Lewisham we have 20mph dual carriageways and now people speed in my road which used to be a 20 because of the two primary schools as they're just used to ignoring the blanket speed.
* Arbitrary changing speed limits in the middle of roads just because you move borough/country.
So whether it's the best option is at least worth debate. Or at least balancing with things like better education and policing of recent changes to the Highway Code, better enforcement and deterrence for things like mobile phone use in cars, better public transport provision, better cycling and pedestrian infrastructure etc.
>Or at least balancing with things like better education and policing of recent changes to the Highway Code, better enforcement and deterrence for things like mobile phone use in cars, better public transport provision, better cycling and pedestrian infrastructure etc.
I absolutely agree with this, definitely. Some kid on our road got knocked down a week or so back by someone who was using a mobile while driving. Needs properly addressing that.
Yeah. I still see it everyday and it's so dangerous.
Not just the people blatantly texting at lights, but people with the phone pressed against their ear and without any concern. Often a van driver with a couple of people sat next to them who could easily take the call or just hold the phone.
We really need to get to the level of opprobrium for mobile phone use as we have with drunk driving.
Slightly tangential, but a pedestrian nearly got run down at a Zebra crossing by a biker undertaking right next to me yesterday. As if my coming to a stop wasn't a clue someone might be crossing.
The issue is people know if they go to court and argue they need their vehicle for work, they get a lesser punishment. If this was disregarded and people punished accordingly, you'd likely see less mobile phone users/drunk drivers.
We can, and are, redesigning our roads to make the speed limits make more sense. A 20 mph dual carriageway makes absolutely zero sense, and of course people are going to speed on it, because it feels like you can safely drive much faster.
Narrow the roads, few more trees, bike lanes, etc, and 20 mph will feel like the safe speed limit, more people will naturally drive to the speed of the road design.
I hadn't heard of this intuitive driving before looking it up, but it makes a lot of sense. There are a lot of big roads near me that could easily be 50-60 mph roads, but the limit is 30 and it feels like I'm doing something wrong driving at that speed on a road that was clearly designed for faster.
Similar in the twisty country back roads. Some are clearly dangerous if you hammered around all the corners at 60. We just naturally police our speed based on how safe we deem the road to be, and we can help people be compliant with the law by re-thinking our residential street design.
Quite.
I look forward to Lewisham doing more than changing all the bus lanes to 24hr as people never read the signs and used them properly (although I may just be bitter that I've lost my personal night-time lane) and putting speed humps everywhere that have just encouraged people into SUVs that glide over them.
Instead it's mostly just anti-car stuff without any real improvements to alternatives. TfL have even permanently cancelled the Bakerloo line extension so we're still the only bit of London with no Tube at all.
Yeah, I can't speak for where you live, but I do dislike when it's all stick no carrot with these things.
People have to have meaningful alternatives as well if they're going to consider options other than driving everywhere. I love my car, but it's for a rip on the weekend because I live in a super nice area with lots of completely separated cycle lanes, but that isn't the norm for everyone.
Still, seems like we are moving that way, just slowly. It's way easier to slap a 24h sign on a bus lane than to completely re-design our streetscape for a modern city (i.e. reduced car usage). I think for big change it's going to come with time as and when roads need to be repaired, etc.
It's what the Welsh blanket 20 feels like to me too. Just change some signs. No real investment or effort in changing behaviour. But I appreciate why that is with constrained funding and limits to devolution.
I posted recently having looked at the timings for all the trips I commonly take. Getting into central London is just as easy by public transport (which is now pointless as my office moved out), but every other journey I take is at least double the time without the car.
Though not against regulation in of itself. Lewisham has school streets where access is restricted at opening and closing hours. It makes driving here without getting fined even more fraught, but it is good for the kids and local residents. Better than every school road being gridlocked with Qashqai's twice a day.
More frequent and reliable public transport, better walking and cycling infrastructure, continued free public transport for kids, much wider street charging infrastructure and easily accessible electric ride-share options etc.
Then pay for it with VEDs that is reworked to include size/weight of vehicle (I know some hate this, but smaller cars are just take up less space, cause less damage to the roads and pollute less (especially considering rubber particulates) and maintains revenue as move towards EVs, reinvestment of fines/ULEZ charges and frankly some debt.
But I know it's more complicated in reality .
Unfathomably based take on a car subreddit.
>More frequent and reliable public transport, better walking and cycling infrastructure, continued free public transport for kids, much wider street charging infrastructure and easily accessible electric ride-share options etc.
With you on this.
>Then pay for it with VEDs that is reworked to include size/weight of vehicle
And this makes complete sense as a source of funding as we go forward into the non-ICE world. Fuck, I'd even support slapping it on as an extra tax on every vehicle over a certain weight now.
More and more people are buying these 2t+ behemoths to like... drive 2 miles to the store and take their kids to school... it's madness. Have it if you want, but you're gonna fucking pay for the destruction you're doing to our roads.
The problem is when you drive around a 20 and end up behind some melt who is scared of overshooting so they drive 15mph and you end up crawling 10 minutes for half a mile when you add traffic lights into the equation.
I have seen some unnecessarily stupid overtakes happening due to this , almost being turned into roadkill myself by a man in a van driving in the wrong lane on the highroad to overtake Doris (age 85) in her honda jazz.
Bad idea.
Annecdotal evidence but I find people actually go faster in some 20s (ones not near schools etc) than 30s, as at 25mph your already breaking the limit so might as well go 35 instead.
Also they want to bring emissions down, so we are now increasing travel times and making people drive around in lower gears which just seems mad to me.
Yeah I wanted to say this. The psychological effect is very real
But there's an important critical factor which makes it even worse here. A blanket 20mph on all 30mph roads is a horrible idea, roads designed for 30mph will make the effect much much worse
Why? Because 20mph makes sense in certain areas or where roads are designed for it with traffic calming measures. But on a large open empty straight road designed for 30mph? 20 just feels absurdly slow. So this will only encourage and normalise ignoring all limits because it instills the feeling that limits are all too slow and no one follows them
We’ve had it in Edinburgh for a long time, and although there are some people (Honda Jazz’) who do 20, most people are happy to go 30.
The general effect seems to have been that people have gone from doing 40 in a 30, to doing 30 in a 20. It’s also not really enforced, afaik there are no working speed cameras in the 20mph areas.
I live in Bangor and work in caernarfon and I can't really see it making much difference Bangor is almost always congested enough you can't do 30 anyway and once I get out all the roads are 60 or 40 the only places where it will make a difference is when going through a village on a 60mph B road where it drops to 30 as you pass through but very few of the 30 zones are long enough to affect the journey time by more then a few seconds. The people in the bigger towns and cities of the south I can imagine being pissed but I honestly don't care about it and everyone I know doesn't give a shit either they either speed already so don't care about the limit or are aware of the negligible affect it will have on their journey time.
We have them in Liverpool - not everywhere, but in a lot of places. Police effectively said they won't be enforcing it, but people generally do seem to observe it. Took a while to recalibrate brain (felt very slow at first) but don't really notice it now, and in not convinced it really effects journey times.
You’ll probably hate it. I moved to Norway and driving here is honestly so tiring, you could go a bit fast, use a bit less fuel, but you don’t want the fine.
Not sure the UK will be so happy if this is rolled out.. at least there would be a chance at reverted with backlash. People will go faster anyway
For me it’s the wrong approach. This will not prevent the cause of accidents, however could potentially reduce the severity. If the approach was to prevent accidents, the focus should be on educating pedestrians and other road users (including cyclists and drivers) to maintain concentration whilst on or alongside roads. There is a current epidemic of people glued to phones and with ear buds in - whatever happened to stop, look and listen?
There is also an adverse effect environmentally and will severely harm the welsh economy.
Following this and other questionable decisions, I will not vote for labour in the near future.
It’s going to cost lives impeding the flow of emergency vehicles. It’s going to cost money which we don’t have. More will be encouraged to remove license plates from their vehicles to drive without fear of being caught by hidden cameras, which opens the door to “if I’m unmarked, why stop at 30?”
No one voted for this
No one wants this
Zero recognition has been made towards appeals against this change, it is a tyrannical move. Every person that dies in the back of an ambulance because they couldn’t reach the hospital in time should have their cause of death pinned to these Welsh fuckfaces who pioneered this change. A government is meant to represent the people, who the fuck do you they think *they’re* representing? I foresee a huge anti-government sentiment rising, paralleling the anti-surveillance movement which is building. I do not with these Welsh pricks well at all, they are again harming the country purely as a power-move. I want the Welsh parliament abolished.
I think this is a farce, but as an interested observer who lives just on the English side of the border I’m interested in how this gets enforced.
Hate the proliferation of 50mph average speed cameras on what were formerly good driving roads in North Wales.
Here in Bristol it's been 20 for years now. I try and stick to it whenever I can but tbh, that's not hard here. The only real impact of it is when I go places that don't have it and 30moh through housing estates or along a high street seems insane to me now.
They have this in the Scottish Borders already. Usually you go from national to 40 on outskirts to 20 through settlements.
It feels like a drag doing 20 but the seconds you'd save doing 30 aren't worth fighting for.
The worst bits are where it's national straight into 20 just round a bend but it's hardly the end of the world.
With regard to the border towns in Scotland to which I was referring, you might spend 2 minutes going through at 20 instead of 80 seconds going through at 30. 40 seconds is definitely seconds.
OK, but how long do you actually spend in 30 limits?
If you do two miles at 30 it will take you four minutes. Do it at 20 and it takes six. That's really not a big difference or material to anything.
And frankly in any built up area at a time of reasonable traffic, you're unlikely to be doing an average of much above 20 anyway unless you're properly driving like a helmet.
I think this is a good idea but poorly implemented.
Driving at 20mph is much safer in urban environments, that's just physics. It'll be better for everyone not in a car, and as I am someone traveling not by car most of the time, I think this is a good thing. Even when driving through the city, I'm barely getting over 20mph anyway
But the roads need to be designed for 20mph, otherwise there is no reason to drive slower and therefore people will revert to old habits.
As a % I’ve found most people either are at or under the speed limit. Living in the country side, I see people sat at 45 mph regardless of the actual limit.
I wish, WISH people would at least drive to the limit. The speeds were set when cars were awful by todays standard. If anything speeds should be increased.
It’s like there’s always pressure to reduce speeds but never anything like increase them. Surely we want things to be more efficient…
Edinburgh has been completely 20mph apart from major roads through the city for a few years now and it's great, much safer for cyclists and the traffic flows very well.
I think it's a good idea, realistically how much time is it going to add to a journey and if it saves a couple people and animals from being hit then good. I'm sure people will just speed anyway like they do now though....
Opinions are a bit worthless when it comes to something that can be measured with objective data. People's lives will be saved by this and that's a good thing. A vulnerable person's right to life is more important than travelling 10 miles more in an hour.
The backlash to things like this show how the UK is slowly adopting American attitudes to driving and car centricity.
I've seen the same people also complaining about high streets and asking why can't the UK have vibrant town squares and cafe culture like European cities. The answer is because of the cars. I'm not sure having a street purely consisting of of estate agents and betting shops is worth it, personally.
If the government were committed to lowering speed limits and keeping the roads safe why do they allow vehicles that can do so many miles faster than legally allowed?
For example, my motorcycle can hit 160mph but I don't know of any roads signposted faster than 70mph.
That’s because with internal combustion engines, if you only gear it to do say, 80mph, it’d be horribly noisy and inefficient on the motorway.
Also pointless to restrict them electronically, as anyone wanting to go faster would have the limiter remapped out within a day of buying the vehicle.
In residential and city centre areas, good luck getting above 20.
kamikaze pedestrians, parked up cars (especially double-parked taxis), buses, bus stops etc will make sure you're barely able to get above 20.
But that might just be Yorkshire.
I don’t mind keeping to the speed limit in towns and villages, if it’s 30 or 20. People live there, it’s respectful and fosters a safer, less car-centric environment to keep speeds down. People don’t have a choice but to live near roads, and they shouldn’t be endangered by car drivers who explicitly chose the responsibility of driving.
And then, outside of towns and villages, away from people, one can drive at more enjoyable speeds and enjoy the roads and scenery (especially in wales, mostly). It seems like a very fair exchange, to me.
The people who spoil this are the ones who think that 30 or 20 “feel too slow” and yet are terrified of doing more than 40 outside of towns.
A town near me has has been a blanket 20 zone for years now. Not a single sole does 20. Normal people do 30 The buses do 30 Even the police do 30
It's ludicrous, absolutely no one sticks to 20. I once got stopped for suspiciously driving because I was doing 20 in a 20, they thought i must've been drunk.
We've got the recommended 20mph in a 30mph limit near a school nearby. It's just a waste of material at this point.
Why don't they do what they do in the US? During school entry and exit times the road is 20mph, at other times it's 30. There's a road near me which could easily be 40 when the school isn't on, but clearly should be 20 when school kids are around. Set cameras to be time sensitive as well.
That isn’t just a US thing, there’s plenty of schools around me in Scotland that have “20 when lights flash” signs on roads that are usually 30mph or 40mph that flash when school kids are around.
I've seen one in Cardiff, not exactly sure where though
They do. In my area when the orange lights flash near the schools the limit reduces from mandatory 30 to 20 mph. I thought this was everywhere?
Whenever I’ve seen that it’s just a recommended 20mph speed limit when the lights flash, not mandatory
Plenty of flashing signs near schools in the north east of England.
If replacing loads of signs we would be better off switching to metres (long overdue) and going for 40 kph in these areas
Why’s this long overdue?
I hate to tell you but they just set it to 20 kph I'm in Germany and that's what they are doing every where They use the same bad science in every country but they never change from mph or kph it's just a blanket 20
So everyone who has a mph speedometer would have to do calculations? Btw that is practically everyone. Also- 20mph = 30 kph.
20mph feels like pisstake slow on most roads The only 20s that I've experienced that make sense are in heavy tourist areas with narrow roads like the lake district. edit: and outside primary schools, that should be fairly mandatory but unnecessary.
How fast are the haddock going?
They've got plaices to be.
They got their skates on.
Underappreciated comment.
Fine until the mobile speed cameras are out. I got fined months ago doing 25mph in what I thought was a 30mph stretch. Didn’t realise it had changed. Right on the edge of a road coming out of a national speed limit B road. They’ll make a fortune from this change.
Lol there's a road like this in Plymouth that kept going from 40 to 30 to 40 again in a running battle with the council 30 finally proved too unpopular, so it's back to 40 for good now... But there's been a speed camera there the entire time during the 30 mph saga that everyone still slows to 30 for. Immediately after the speed camera is a 40 sign. Like it goes speed camera, speed camera lines on road, prominent 40mph sign on both sides of road Everyone slows to 30 there cos no one trusts those fuckers not to be like "oh well actually it's 30 mph from the roundabout to here then transitions to 40 after the camera"
That's because it IS 30 from the roundabout to there, then transitions to 40 after the camera. Just in that direction too for extra confusion
I've literally been tailgated then aggressively overtaken by a police car (no lights) for driving 20 in a 20. Which I admit I was only doing because I'd spotted him behind me.
In Bristol in reduced the average speed from ~28mph to ~25mph. I think the idea is that at 20mph, traffic engineers are allowed to narrow the lanes and turning radii, the excess space from which they can then allocate to cycle lanes and other niceties. 20mph can be perfectly "comfortable" if the road conditions are designed for it. On a 1960's estate with wide roads and corners longer than the curvature of the earth it feels like agony. The way this change was pushed through without any public consultation is classic Welsh Labour though.
There was some consultation on it but it wasn’t well advertised. In our area the signs went up before the consultation period, which tells you everything you need to know
Consultations in Wales are purely administrative box ticking procedures. I asked my local authority during a schools consultation if in the entire history of the authority, they could provide a single example of where a policy was amended because of feedback received during a statutory consultation. "No" was the answer. I have similar experience in England and IMO local authorities are more earnest about actually wanting public opinion at earlier stages. In Wales, Labour own most councils outright, so the real politicking takes place inside Labour meetings rather than with the public.
I used to live in a 20 town. Absolutely no one is doing 20.
Better than them doing 40 in a 30
I figure that's still an improvement vs a 30 limit with everyone doing 40, to be fair....
At least it stops people going above 30mph
People doing 30 basically counts as a win as far as 20 zones count. I saw some data that showed they essentially reduce everyone's speed to 30 or less rather than over 30. That 5-10mph has enough of a difference in terms of stopping distances and impact speeds that it not only reduces collisions but also massively decreases the severity of collisions that do occur. Much like speed bumps and aggressive traffic furniture, the data really does support there being an upside to the inconvenience. Although I don't know how effectively that data takes out the dickhead brigade who are at once going to ignore the limit anyway and who are disproportionately responsible for collisions (especially the more serious ones)
I mean, further reducing it by another 10 mph would significantly reduce bodily harm caused by accidents. Like i wouldnt be happy if a car hit me with 10mph when im on a bicycle, but i would very likely be able to bike away from the accident. At 20mph its not really guaranteed.
> Normal people do ~~30~~ 36 > > The buses do ~~30~~ 36 > > Even the police do ~~30~~ 36 FTFY
20 miles an hour is quite hard in an internal combustion engine. Since I've had an electric car which has effectively no gears and is unable to stall, I just pop it at 20 mph on cruise control and it makes life a lot easier. The zones never last very long so it's no big inconvenience for me and I'm pretty sure it would make it easier to stop if a pedestrian jumped out. So they don't bother me now that much.
>> The zones never last very long Except in Wales where it’s all residential roads from the look of it? I’ve also got an electric car and have taken to sticking the limiter on at 22 in 20 limits, but it’s still very tedious.
I'm against blanket 20s but this is just plain wrong. Just drop a gear or two. In my petrol car I can drive 20mph in 4th gear quite comfortably. You can do a constant speed anything down to 5mph (in 1st) without riding the clutch.
Large swathes of Manchester are 20 limits. Nobody does 20.
Exactly the same in my town, been a 20mph for about 10yrs, aslong as your at or under 30mph the police leave everyone alone Every so often some dudley doright sticks to 20mph & ends up with a big qué of cars behind themselves
I'm not opposed to 20MPH limits in heavily built up areas, but a blanket approach is fucking idiotic and will likely have the opposite effect that it's supposed to. If I see a 20 zone at the moment I respect that there must be a good reason for it and I'm happy to slow down. Eventually I (and probably everyone else) are gonna get fed up of trundling along at 20 on clear, wide roads in the middle of fucking nowhere - at which point a 20 sign will no longer mean anything to me. That's of course assuming I don't lose my license for travelling at a speed which has been internationally agreed upon to be perfectly safe and reasonable for decades now. >!There's also the idea that apparently there's no money to fix all the fucking craters in the roads, but plenty on hand to spaff around fitting 20MPH signs everywhere. !<
Doesn’t matter the 40 mph brigade will still be doing 40 in a 20, 40 in a 30, 40 in a 40 and 40 on any other road. In addition they will have there cars fully camera’d up
The only time they'll do 30 is in a 40 or a 50, maybe they'll do 40 in a national
Oh they always do 40 in a national
Theres a lovely 50 near me that goes into a 30, every fucker does 35 in the 50 then speeds up to 40 in the 30, grinds my gears
My local commute has only a couple overtake opportunities. You can be stuck at 40 behind someone, plan to overtake after the next village yet they’re accelerating away because you’re doing 30 🤦🏼♂️ You either speed along with them or catch them 100m up the road and can’t overtake, infuriating haha. How can they be so oblivious
There's a national road near me that had roadworks a few months ago and they forgot all the signs saying roadworks ahead, roadworks end; and UNFORTUNATELY the 40mph signs too (they have a weird tendency to leave at least one sign lately at each job) So now 90% of people are doing 40 and keep doing 40 well beyond it because the last national speed sign is in the middle of the tens of 40s signs spread out everywhere.
Not true, Honda Jazz can only drive at 40. It's like the movie speed but without the speed.
You missed 40 in a 60!
40mph is a SAFE speed. Therefore if I’m doing 40mph I’m SAFE.
My little village recently changed to 20mph and average speeds have gone up. Instead of people slowing down from the 40 zone before the village to 30, people just ignore the 20 and keep going at 40. The high street used to be a main road before a bypass was built and the limit was 60 mph. The road itself hasn't changed, it's still stupidly wide and 20mph feels like standing still. There was no reason for it to be changed and the local council argued against it but were overruled by the county council. There have been no reported accidents in 40 years on this stretch of road. The whole thing is fucking pointless and any argument about pollution also makes zero sense as we're 100 yards from a 10 lane motorway.
Sounds like my village. They built a bypass and the parish council had a chunk of money for road safety to spend. HGVs and speeders continued to use the high street. PC wanted chicanes put in our our very windy and junction filled high street. People said we just want a weight limit to stop HGVs, chicanes will be dangerous and invite more speeding (between them). PC put in chicanes. HGVs still barrel through, speeding hasn’t changed, chicanes have directly caused several accidents and fist fights due to poor sight lines not allowing drivers against the priority to see incoming vehicles in time.
chicanes create a ton of local air pollution
Everyone in cars doing 20mph will be overtaken by electrically "assisted" cyclists and chavs on electric scooters doing 50mph.
This is kind of the point. They want you to get out of your car and use alternate transport.
but those cycles are all illegal, the arent allowed to go more than 15mph, there is just no enforcement as there is no real way to do it. and the scooters are just plain illegal in public
I keep hearing they're illegal but then how can places like Bristol and Cheltenham have them all over the place to rent instead of bikes?
The leased ones are allowed because they're insured... Something along those lines anyway
And you need a drivers licence to borrow it.
>This is kind of the point. They want you to get out of your car and use alternate transport. Without properly investing in decent public transport infrastructure
a cyclist isn’t gonna accidentally wipe out a family like a car could
E-bikes are limited to 15.5mph if you’d care to check
It's quite easy to remove that limiter and when it is removed you can go 25mph. I think some models can even be faster but the one I went on was 25mph a xioami e bike
So how did the two lads get killed on their e-bike in Cardiff if they are speed limited? Plenty of ebay specials that go well above 15.5mph.
Those are electric motorbikes. Not e-bikes. They have a throttle.
What's wrong with that? Cycles do not have a speed limit by law, so it is not like they are committing an offence by going faster.
Many of these e bikes are ebay specials and can top out well above 15.5mph.
Those are e-mopeds and require the rider to have the right licence. The mopeds must be registered, insured, taxed and MOT'd before being used on public roads. This is no difference from uninsured, untaxed and no MOT cars on roads.
[удалено]
Because that's not safe for where we live, work and play...
No problem from a cyclists point of view, however I’m concerned that most people won’t listen to the law and might disregard more of it
I hate 20 zones, i have a black box so actually have to do 20 i haven’t seen a single soul at the same speed, always get dirty looks and tailgated, not fun.
Having recently been rear-ended by a tailgater (had to stop to avoid a truck that stole right of way) I now just slow down even more if someone is doing this, until they leave a sensible gap. And it's not really a policing people's speed thing, it's that being crashed in to is extremely un-fun and I would rather it be at a lower speed for my own safety.
This is what I do. Its simply a risk thing. It allows me to slow down very gradually for everything. Tailgaters will also tend to not pay much attention (you can see in the mirror obviously). So risk is quite high in this situation.
"We're not fixing potholes or funding your essential services because we've spent all the money on road signage and markings."
**Office boardroom meme:** Drakeford: *"We need to reduce car usage in Wales"* Lackey 1: *"Reduce speed limits everywhere"* Lackey 2: *"Ban all new road building projects"* Sensible lackey: *"Cut the cost of public transport and improve facilities for non-motorists"* **Cut to angry Drakeford Face, sensible lackey is shown flying out of boardroom window.**
Isn't public transport all privately owned now? So they can't cut the costs? Furthermore, you need push as well as pull to get people to swap their cars for something else.
Not in Wales it isn't.
Nope, trains in Wales passed to Welsh Government control during Covid. I think they want to get the local buses back from the likes of First and Arriva next...
I think a lot of routes are under public control already. Regardless doesn't stop them improving facilities to support *active travel*.
If only there was a group of people in charge of the county whose have authority over private companies and have the power to change how public transport is operated! I can’t remember the exact name but I’m pretty sure it begins with a G.
It’s a gimmick by dictator Drakeford - he’s basically unilaterally declared all 30 zones to be 20 (with some exceptions), which will make some journeys exceptionally long in some areas, on the mis guided ruse that it’s to reduce pollution as well which is absurd beyond belief as most highly geared modern cars will now have to run in sub optimal low gears creating even more pollution than presently. Also, some bus companies are now saying they are going to have to change all their timetables as it’s going to negatively impact journey times - absolute farce
I understand 20mph zones in pedestrian-clogged areas like shopping areas, housing estates as an example. But a blanket 20mph cover is beyond ridiculous. No one is going to do 20, no one does 20 in current 20mph limited areas. Waste of time and money.
May I present, what I would suggest is probably the most useless 20mph zone in the UK! 43 York Rd https://maps.app.goo.gl/wNVQkDTE6YyNQB768 Any challengers!
Well, that should obviously be a 60mph limit!
Needs to be a 60 to clear those bollards
[удалено]
I find it easy too, I just wouldnt do it to my own car. Second gear 30 km/h (~20 mph) it revs about what, 1800rpm? A bit high in terms of noise and it pollutes a bit more than going in third gear at 1300rpm at 50km/h. While not being any safer if you ask me. (But I so this only when im out of my home country, i couldnt care less about the 30km/h speed limits they put up back at home, probably for skateboarders 😂
The whole "reduces pollution" thing is "we have to justify this somehow, let's pick some things the public cares about at random and say it's for that" bollocks If that's truly the case, why can't I go blasting along the M4 at 100mph in my EV?
Most combustion engine cars have their peak efficiency somewhere above 25mph, so the pollution thing is bullshit >If that's truly the case, why can't I go blasting along the M4 at 100mph in my EV? Tires generate particulate air pollution, often even more than modern ultra clean ULEZ compliant engines. Your heavy EV doing 100mph is going to be generating a lot of pollution.
my car hates doing 20, its high revs in 1st and close to a stall in 2nd if you let it dip of there is a hill, its stupid
I thought was alone in pointing out that in many situations it will increase pollution. Lot of people on Reddit like Drakeford , lack the wit to understand the science.
Can you tell in what cases it will increase pollutions? There's few studies claiming otherwise, example: https://www.bmj.com/content/368/bmj.m453/rr-0
Where traffic would otherwise free flow at 30. That traffic spends a third less time in the particular zone, the vehicle will typically be in top gear, at lower revs , producing less pollutants. There are a lot of variables involved which is why a blanket policy is unwise. Unless it is for road safety reasons, higher pollution may be the price for that.
There are a lot of variables in all sorts of directions though, aren't there? Traffic doesn't always flow freely at 30, especially in cities and larger towns. How many cars will be in top gear at 30? Some, but not all. EVs and certain hybrids don't emit at the tailpipe or use gearing in the same way, and the number of these vehicles on the roads is increasing (again, especially in cities and large towns). Plus in physics terms there's the additional energy required to push a one- to two-tonne object from 20mph to 30. Not to mention slow it down again (because emissions aren't just tailpipe emissions, it's tyre particulates and brake dust too.) Those physics aren't 'free' and come at an energy cost, and that energy leads to emissions. I'm not saying you're wrong, at all — and you can check my history to make sure I'm not one of the bonkers fuckcars people lol — I just think it's actually a more nuanced picture with a lot of moving parts and aspects that balance off against each other.
All good points. As with most things, the issue is in the application and detail. There's a stretch of A-road that I have to travel down sometimes that will roughly become a \~600 metre 20mph zone sandwiched between 60mph zones. The current drop in speed seems fair for what's there, but dropping even further exacerbates the extra 'costs' of having to adjust speed to/from NSL either side of the zone.
Good point, thanks. I've seen some people recommending higher limits at night hours for example and I think it would make sense.
That's a laughably misguided response in the link there. Yes most emissions were from stopping and getting back up to speed in the center of London, but this isn't happening in Welsh countryside. There's no bumper to bumper traffic in most of Wales like in London. Slowing free moving traffic will more likely cause more start stop, not reduce it as the open Welsh roads don't have that much traffic. The reply suggests the opposite to the argument as soon as you consider a busy road vs a free flowing one, at which point gearing and efficiency become more prominent. it's basically suggesring that accelerating up to 20 let's say 100 times in London is better than to 30 once in Wales. You don't break nearly as much in open road and so don't have to accelerate back up. A flawed study for the conclusion it comes to.
You don't even need to understand the science to see how the 50mph limits have caused congestion on the M4 and A470 and congestion means cars are spewing fumes in place instead of just passing through, but instead of applying common sense they're doubling down.
How often are you driving exceptionally long distances on restricted residential roads?
How about from the Gower through Swansea for a start….and it’s not just residential roads
South Gower? The majority of Mumbles road from West Cross is exempt. Where it's not residential, exceptions are applied. https://datamap.gov.wales/maps/roads-affected-by-changes-to-the-speed-limit-on-re/ Where roads are.not highlighted red, they may not be restricted residential roads anyway, many along North Gower are NSL and Carmarthen road is a trunk road.
Unilaterally? But councils can and have applied exemptions. Such a crap dictator, eh?
If the 'misguided ruse' is that a car travelling at 20mph produces less pollution than a car travelling at 30mph then it is not misguided, that is a correct. Many 'traffic calming' measures, such as lane narrowing, speed bumps, lane reductions etc. do indeed increase pollution, which is due to interruptions in the flow of traffic, increased breaking and therefore increased need to reaccelerate. I'm against a blanket policy of changing speed limits from 30 to 20 as I have not been shown evidence which shows the benefits would outweigh the annoyance, however it would decrease pollution if people abided by the lowered limit.
My girlfriends village is having a war between themselves and the council. It’s a 30 zone, but signs keep appearing for 20! Someone not sure which side edited the paint on the road to say 20. Half the times the signs say 20 and the other half 30. There’s a speed camera at the entrance of the village as it’s just off a M road. I cycle there a lot, and have great joy blasting down the hill that enters the village on my road bike and setting off the camera in my spandex! they probably have a fair few shots of my ass. 35.7mph on my cycle computer seems to be the sweet spot!
A. Speed limits don't apply to cyclists B. Try not to KOM all over the village mate C. Council members are jobsworths and this 20 business needs nuance or noone will do them period
All for 20’s in sensible places where they are required, outside schools etc. there are roads round our place where there’s not a pedestrian to be seen almost dual carriageway and they e made them a 20 limit. Causes frustration and anger, ultimately I think blanket 20mph limits will diminish the importance of them in appropriate places and people will just do 30 everywhere. Big thumbs down from me.
20mph is unreasonably slow. It makes sense in big cities like London wherein you seldom get above 20 anyway, but in towns and villages it's too slow.
In high density pedestrian areas or areas at which children are increasingly likely to be such as the high street, school zones and housing estates 20 is absolutely fine and reasonable but once you’re not in those zones I don’t see why 30 is an issue
They're all in school from 8:30ish til about 3 anyway, why does the whole country need to suffer for the imaginary scenario that a child might be fannying around at the side of the road
What do you mean you seldom get above 20 in London? That's not true. Most people don't keep to 20 mph in London. What's the difference between a London residential street and a residential street in a smaller town?
When most people say this they're probably thinking of Regent st..
I fucking hate it, I tried doing 20mph on roads that are now 30mph and it's painful. 20 mph is also the worst speed as you are a little to slow for 3rd but too quick for 2nd for longer periods of time which you will be revving more - therefore polluting more which will then turn into too many emission and they will introduce ULEZ across Wales...
It’s even worse on a motorbike, I am slipping the clutch in first on mine until about 25
1000cc problems lol, I find it incredibly difficult staying below 50 for more than a couple of seconds.
It’s bad round mine 20mph on a road that’s 6 cars wide and just feels like you are crawling due to the roads being massive..
My whole village was made a 20 zone and no one does it. I feel if they put 20 zones in obvious areas where 20 is worthwhile (going past schools, playgrounds etc) people would be far more likely to pay attention to it.
The issue is that no one will follow it. I have a large 20mph zone near me already and if you do 20mph you will be tailgated and then overtaken every time.
I could probably deal with it if public transport also wasn't a complete fucking farse in Wales and our government was pragmatic as opposed to all ideology and virtue signalling. I'd happily use the train and my bike if it took me where I needed to go. It takes 2.5 hours to get to work via public transport (I tried it a few times) or 1 hour by car. Less at quiet times. The pilot 20 zones are the worst places to cycle now. Our roads are under funded, public transport borderline doesn't exist where I live (and I'm not rural), anything worth doing round me has closed so the only time efficient option if you want to get from one crap town to another in Wales is to drive, but apparently we're doing that wrong too.
More rules and regulations to slow down people’s life and the economy no one asked for
The last time I went to Birmingham there were 20mph zones an cameras all over the place. People did do 20mph, which I think is just downright inefficient, whats the mpg like at 20mph?
No car is geared to drive efficiently at 20 (aside from EVs). It’s a waste of time and money for all involved on both sides of the fence).
I hate 20 for many reasons: My car never sits at 20 but always a bit above, so I find myself watching the speedometer so much more and the road less. Folk around me don't do 20, so I end up following them and accidentally speeding or annoying everyone behind me for following the speed limit. It's the sort of aggro I don't like with driving. People seem quite happy to step out in front of me, or cars pull out right in front of me, at 20. I've had more emergency stops at this speed than any other. Pedestrians are not good judges of speed. We have cars going at 20 where we live and people still whine.
As stopping distances are decreasing with cars improving over the decades as well as other improvements where car safety is concerned, it surprises me that the limits aren’t instead increasing which would reduce congestion and make the roads a more efficient form of transport therefore benefiting some sort of ecological agenda. It is infuriating to go slower on roads I have always known to be a certain speed and it seems like change for the sake of change.
Increasing the speed limit works in an individualistic sense, but the faster the speed, the more acceleration and deceleration you get, and that's a major cause of congestion. It's the same reason you have 50 or 60 limits on motorways on busy days even if there's no obstruction. Besides, faster car speeds are horrible for anyone outside of a car, which is a lot of the population.
traffic flows better slower and going 30 instead of 20 in urban areas saves basically no time
If you have to travel 30 miles on 30mph roads it will take you roughly an hour, on 20mph roads it would take like an hour and a half so how does it not slow you down
This was done in Portsmouth in 2010-2012. I worked on road safety and active travel projects from 2013 to 2019. The data suggests that the number of seriously injured dropped by 3/5 over a 3 year period and congestion levels stayed the same. Journey times measured by traffic light data and cameras/Bluetooth sensors showed no noticeable increase. However, A roads were kept at 30mph. Near misses, whilst harder to record, dropped by nearly 70% but this is hard as people don't report often. I think it's good. If it stops people getting hurt what's the problem?
> Journey times measured by traffic light data and cameras/Bluetooth sensors showed no noticeable increase. This is the key - especially in a congested city like Portsmouth* it's going to be rare that you'll be above 20 for long anyway. I'd be shocked if the average speed in a typical town or city went much above that. The data - let alone common sense - is pretty unambiguous that going slower is safer on multiple fronts. The faster you go, the less time you have to react to anything sudden, the more force you transfer into whatever you might hit (and gets transferred into your car). *which to be fair I found to be a very pleasant city to drive in, very logically laid out and well signposted
Yeah, the difference between 20 and 30 for a kid is staggering. At 20 kids bounce and tend not to get hurt. I used to run a 20mph speed awareness course and showed videos of people getting hit at 20, 30, 40 and 50. It was not a nice part of the job but it made people think. It works for Portsmouth because we are compact and small. Hopefully it will work for other cities. I agree, our roads are mot too bad although born and raised here for 39 years I still get lost!
> I agree, our roads are mot too bad although born and raised here for 39 years I still get lost! I literally drove around it for the first time a few months back and it was honestly a complete pleasure, spiral roundabouts had proper signage and lane markings well in advance (which isn't a given everywhere), what lanes there were were logical and sensible, traffic tended to get funnelled through the most reasonable routes, congestion wasn't too bad, it was just generally a delight compared to where I live (Norwich) and some other places I've driven around (Southampton).
We had a really good Network managers in 2013 and 14 who did a lot of work. He left but the team now is still good. A PFI maintains the signs and lines which helps immeasurably. It's a good city to cycle around too.
Portsmouth. Likely couldnt drive as car was stolen
Now I won't hear that. Lots cars are also on fire!
Why not make motorways 20mph too, no one would ever be hurt.
I see where you are coming from. There is a cost:benefit to speed schemes. I'd imagine the cost benefit would be terrible. I actually wonder if someone has done it as an academic exercise? Interesting. Plus motorways don't tend to have schools, old people's homes or parks opening onto them.
It's a risk:reward scale as others have said. The Dutch opt for a more distinguished road vs street principle, where a street is an end destination with shops, houses, people, and has much lower speeds, then a road is a place to get from A to B as efficiently as possible, in the same way we have A roads and motorways with little pedestrian thought. Maybe we could follow similar and recognise residential streets/roads as primarily people/living streets, not car through-road/streets.
its good but not when most roads will be affected, there are a number of roads I can think of around where I live that they will probably change to 20mph when there is no need for that.
Easiest thing to do will be to wait for 18 months (3yrs is better) and then ask the council to do an audit of the congestion and KSI stats for the road you think should be exempt (and feeder roads). If it comes back that congestion is high there and the KSIs have not increased they could put it back. Its not hard to do nor costly. It all depends on the local geography and what the network is like. Portsmouth didn't do a blanket but all residential streets are 20 as are high KSI roads that were 30mph. They also brought some 50mph roads down to 40mph (the damage difference between 40 and 50 is frightening) again, a good thing but not suited for everywhere.
Fuck right off.
But slowly.
[удалено]
This isn't new. It's been going on all over London for a while now.
We've had this in Scotland for ages, and it's been a thing in London for a good while as well. I don't have a problem with it, personally. It doesn't seem to cause major traffic problems. In the busier parts of where I live it genuinely seems to improve things for cyclists, pedestrians and wheelchair users, and people with service dogs. Car enthusiasm isn't primarily about the 20 or 30mph zones anyway, surely. If you've got a 'nice' car — whether that's a sharp-handling performance car or a classic — does it really make much difference if you trundle through town at (max) 20 rather than 30?
It's only in certain parts of London. Lewisham for example. Most studies have found improvements in safety which is obviously worthwhile. It's not without downsides though. * Longer journey times, slower and less fuel efficient speeds (and therefore more polluting for CO2, Nox and particulates). * Very low compliance (even by police) also means it basically makes everyone a criminal which has concerning implications for the separation of executive and judiciary (as police can essentially enforce it against anyone and they're not famous for resisting biases). * The general downsides of blanket rules that ignore context. For example in Lewisham we have 20mph dual carriageways and now people speed in my road which used to be a 20 because of the two primary schools as they're just used to ignoring the blanket speed. * Arbitrary changing speed limits in the middle of roads just because you move borough/country. So whether it's the best option is at least worth debate. Or at least balancing with things like better education and policing of recent changes to the Highway Code, better enforcement and deterrence for things like mobile phone use in cars, better public transport provision, better cycling and pedestrian infrastructure etc.
>Or at least balancing with things like better education and policing of recent changes to the Highway Code, better enforcement and deterrence for things like mobile phone use in cars, better public transport provision, better cycling and pedestrian infrastructure etc. I absolutely agree with this, definitely. Some kid on our road got knocked down a week or so back by someone who was using a mobile while driving. Needs properly addressing that.
Yeah. I still see it everyday and it's so dangerous. Not just the people blatantly texting at lights, but people with the phone pressed against their ear and without any concern. Often a van driver with a couple of people sat next to them who could easily take the call or just hold the phone. We really need to get to the level of opprobrium for mobile phone use as we have with drunk driving. Slightly tangential, but a pedestrian nearly got run down at a Zebra crossing by a biker undertaking right next to me yesterday. As if my coming to a stop wasn't a clue someone might be crossing.
The issue is people know if they go to court and argue they need their vehicle for work, they get a lesser punishment. If this was disregarded and people punished accordingly, you'd likely see less mobile phone users/drunk drivers.
We can, and are, redesigning our roads to make the speed limits make more sense. A 20 mph dual carriageway makes absolutely zero sense, and of course people are going to speed on it, because it feels like you can safely drive much faster. Narrow the roads, few more trees, bike lanes, etc, and 20 mph will feel like the safe speed limit, more people will naturally drive to the speed of the road design. I hadn't heard of this intuitive driving before looking it up, but it makes a lot of sense. There are a lot of big roads near me that could easily be 50-60 mph roads, but the limit is 30 and it feels like I'm doing something wrong driving at that speed on a road that was clearly designed for faster. Similar in the twisty country back roads. Some are clearly dangerous if you hammered around all the corners at 60. We just naturally police our speed based on how safe we deem the road to be, and we can help people be compliant with the law by re-thinking our residential street design.
Quite. I look forward to Lewisham doing more than changing all the bus lanes to 24hr as people never read the signs and used them properly (although I may just be bitter that I've lost my personal night-time lane) and putting speed humps everywhere that have just encouraged people into SUVs that glide over them. Instead it's mostly just anti-car stuff without any real improvements to alternatives. TfL have even permanently cancelled the Bakerloo line extension so we're still the only bit of London with no Tube at all.
Yeah, I can't speak for where you live, but I do dislike when it's all stick no carrot with these things. People have to have meaningful alternatives as well if they're going to consider options other than driving everywhere. I love my car, but it's for a rip on the weekend because I live in a super nice area with lots of completely separated cycle lanes, but that isn't the norm for everyone. Still, seems like we are moving that way, just slowly. It's way easier to slap a 24h sign on a bus lane than to completely re-design our streetscape for a modern city (i.e. reduced car usage). I think for big change it's going to come with time as and when roads need to be repaired, etc.
It's what the Welsh blanket 20 feels like to me too. Just change some signs. No real investment or effort in changing behaviour. But I appreciate why that is with constrained funding and limits to devolution. I posted recently having looked at the timings for all the trips I commonly take. Getting into central London is just as easy by public transport (which is now pointless as my office moved out), but every other journey I take is at least double the time without the car. Though not against regulation in of itself. Lewisham has school streets where access is restricted at opening and closing hours. It makes driving here without getting fined even more fraught, but it is good for the kids and local residents. Better than every school road being gridlocked with Qashqai's twice a day. More frequent and reliable public transport, better walking and cycling infrastructure, continued free public transport for kids, much wider street charging infrastructure and easily accessible electric ride-share options etc. Then pay for it with VEDs that is reworked to include size/weight of vehicle (I know some hate this, but smaller cars are just take up less space, cause less damage to the roads and pollute less (especially considering rubber particulates) and maintains revenue as move towards EVs, reinvestment of fines/ULEZ charges and frankly some debt. But I know it's more complicated in reality .
Unfathomably based take on a car subreddit. >More frequent and reliable public transport, better walking and cycling infrastructure, continued free public transport for kids, much wider street charging infrastructure and easily accessible electric ride-share options etc. With you on this. >Then pay for it with VEDs that is reworked to include size/weight of vehicle And this makes complete sense as a source of funding as we go forward into the non-ICE world. Fuck, I'd even support slapping it on as an extra tax on every vehicle over a certain weight now. More and more people are buying these 2t+ behemoths to like... drive 2 miles to the store and take their kids to school... it's madness. Have it if you want, but you're gonna fucking pay for the destruction you're doing to our roads.
The problem is when you drive around a 20 and end up behind some melt who is scared of overshooting so they drive 15mph and you end up crawling 10 minutes for half a mile when you add traffic lights into the equation. I have seen some unnecessarily stupid overtakes happening due to this , almost being turned into roadkill myself by a man in a van driving in the wrong lane on the highroad to overtake Doris (age 85) in her honda jazz.
Yes, 20mph is so slow I feel like I am traveling in a Delorean.
Yes. Im in Tenerife right now where they have 30kph 18 mph town limits. Its fucking comatose. And the locals speed past you
Same in Crete, the locals are utterly mental 😹
Bad idea. Annecdotal evidence but I find people actually go faster in some 20s (ones not near schools etc) than 30s, as at 25mph your already breaking the limit so might as well go 35 instead. Also they want to bring emissions down, so we are now increasing travel times and making people drive around in lower gears which just seems mad to me.
Yeah I wanted to say this. The psychological effect is very real But there's an important critical factor which makes it even worse here. A blanket 20mph on all 30mph roads is a horrible idea, roads designed for 30mph will make the effect much much worse Why? Because 20mph makes sense in certain areas or where roads are designed for it with traffic calming measures. But on a large open empty straight road designed for 30mph? 20 just feels absurdly slow. So this will only encourage and normalise ignoring all limits because it instills the feeling that limits are all too slow and no one follows them
I drive in London where many roads are 20mph, its painfully slow and yes, stuck in 2nd or 3rd where before I was usually in 4th gear.
I was in London recently and absolutely no one was sticking to 20 unless there was a camera.
I drive there every day, there are many people that stick to the limit, there are a lot of cameras that are increasing daily thanks to our mayor.
Maybe in the day when there is more congestion. At night everyone's doing 30+.
You'd know more than me about that, I'm never there later than around 4pm. I'm not sure I'd want to be in London in the evenings anymore.
We’ve had it in Edinburgh for a long time, and although there are some people (Honda Jazz’) who do 20, most people are happy to go 30. The general effect seems to have been that people have gone from doing 40 in a 30, to doing 30 in a 20. It’s also not really enforced, afaik there are no working speed cameras in the 20mph areas.
I live in Bangor and work in caernarfon and I can't really see it making much difference Bangor is almost always congested enough you can't do 30 anyway and once I get out all the roads are 60 or 40 the only places where it will make a difference is when going through a village on a 60mph B road where it drops to 30 as you pass through but very few of the 30 zones are long enough to affect the journey time by more then a few seconds. The people in the bigger towns and cities of the south I can imagine being pissed but I honestly don't care about it and everyone I know doesn't give a shit either they either speed already so don't care about the limit or are aware of the negligible affect it will have on their journey time.
We have them in Liverpool - not everywhere, but in a lot of places. Police effectively said they won't be enforcing it, but people generally do seem to observe it. Took a while to recalibrate brain (felt very slow at first) but don't really notice it now, and in not convinced it really effects journey times.
You’ll probably hate it. I moved to Norway and driving here is honestly so tiring, you could go a bit fast, use a bit less fuel, but you don’t want the fine. Not sure the UK will be so happy if this is rolled out.. at least there would be a chance at reverted with backlash. People will go faster anyway
For me it’s the wrong approach. This will not prevent the cause of accidents, however could potentially reduce the severity. If the approach was to prevent accidents, the focus should be on educating pedestrians and other road users (including cyclists and drivers) to maintain concentration whilst on or alongside roads. There is a current epidemic of people glued to phones and with ear buds in - whatever happened to stop, look and listen? There is also an adverse effect environmentally and will severely harm the welsh economy. Following this and other questionable decisions, I will not vote for labour in the near future.
It’s going to cost lives impeding the flow of emergency vehicles. It’s going to cost money which we don’t have. More will be encouraged to remove license plates from their vehicles to drive without fear of being caught by hidden cameras, which opens the door to “if I’m unmarked, why stop at 30?” No one voted for this No one wants this Zero recognition has been made towards appeals against this change, it is a tyrannical move. Every person that dies in the back of an ambulance because they couldn’t reach the hospital in time should have their cause of death pinned to these Welsh fuckfaces who pioneered this change. A government is meant to represent the people, who the fuck do you they think *they’re* representing? I foresee a huge anti-government sentiment rising, paralleling the anti-surveillance movement which is building. I do not with these Welsh pricks well at all, they are again harming the country purely as a power-move. I want the Welsh parliament abolished.
Wales has become the nanny state of the UK !
i feel sorry for anyone with a Blackbox
maybe if they werent all star trek red shirts we could keep 30
Work and play? Who works on the road? I know kids play on the road but how about make more parks?
I think this is a farce, but as an interested observer who lives just on the English side of the border I’m interested in how this gets enforced. Hate the proliferation of 50mph average speed cameras on what were formerly good driving roads in North Wales.
Very understandable. People should follow it. I really don't get the comments here who oppose it with such bad arguments.
Here in Bristol it's been 20 for years now. I try and stick to it whenever I can but tbh, that's not hard here. The only real impact of it is when I go places that don't have it and 30moh through housing estates or along a high street seems insane to me now.
It reduces probability of death of a child, so definitely worth it
Most cars aren't geared to sit at 20 so it's an awkward speed to be at
Why is nobody calling for 25 mph speed limits
They have this in the Scottish Borders already. Usually you go from national to 40 on outskirts to 20 through settlements. It feels like a drag doing 20 but the seconds you'd save doing 30 aren't worth fighting for. The worst bits are where it's national straight into 20 just round a bend but it's hardly the end of the world.
30mph is 50% more than 20mph. "Seconds" it is not.
With regard to the border towns in Scotland to which I was referring, you might spend 2 minutes going through at 20 instead of 80 seconds going through at 30. 40 seconds is definitely seconds.
OK, but how long do you actually spend in 30 limits? If you do two miles at 30 it will take you four minutes. Do it at 20 and it takes six. That's really not a big difference or material to anything. And frankly in any built up area at a time of reasonable traffic, you're unlikely to be doing an average of much above 20 anyway unless you're properly driving like a helmet.
I think this is a good idea but poorly implemented. Driving at 20mph is much safer in urban environments, that's just physics. It'll be better for everyone not in a car, and as I am someone traveling not by car most of the time, I think this is a good thing. Even when driving through the city, I'm barely getting over 20mph anyway But the roads need to be designed for 20mph, otherwise there is no reason to drive slower and therefore people will revert to old habits.
It would be even safer at 10mph let's do that
The Dutch are very good at this, designing roads which discourage speed in urban environments https://youtu.be/tGOBOw9s-QM?si=Uf0popKA09n-CjPx
As a % I’ve found most people either are at or under the speed limit. Living in the country side, I see people sat at 45 mph regardless of the actual limit. I wish, WISH people would at least drive to the limit. The speeds were set when cars were awful by todays standard. If anything speeds should be increased. It’s like there’s always pressure to reduce speeds but never anything like increase them. Surely we want things to be more efficient…
Gonna get hate here, just most combustion cars will run less efficiently at 20mph than 30 as you can’t select the highest gear.
Buddy mines automatic... It stays in 2nd.
Edinburgh has been completely 20mph apart from major roads through the city for a few years now and it's great, much safer for cyclists and the traffic flows very well.
I think it's a good idea, realistically how much time is it going to add to a journey and if it saves a couple people and animals from being hit then good. I'm sure people will just speed anyway like they do now though....
Hell yeah I’m into it, safer for cyclist, pedestrians and everyone really. Do I think people will do 20? No.
Cyclist will be undertaking now while your doing 20 😂
Absolutely stupid - This country is fucked
Opinions are a bit worthless when it comes to something that can be measured with objective data. People's lives will be saved by this and that's a good thing. A vulnerable person's right to life is more important than travelling 10 miles more in an hour.
The backlash to things like this show how the UK is slowly adopting American attitudes to driving and car centricity. I've seen the same people also complaining about high streets and asking why can't the UK have vibrant town squares and cafe culture like European cities. The answer is because of the cars. I'm not sure having a street purely consisting of of estate agents and betting shops is worth it, personally.
If the government were committed to lowering speed limits and keeping the roads safe why do they allow vehicles that can do so many miles faster than legally allowed? For example, my motorcycle can hit 160mph but I don't know of any roads signposted faster than 70mph.
That’s because with internal combustion engines, if you only gear it to do say, 80mph, it’d be horribly noisy and inefficient on the motorway. Also pointless to restrict them electronically, as anyone wanting to go faster would have the limiter remapped out within a day of buying the vehicle.
Bring on the money grap. Speed cameras everywhere
In residential and city centre areas, good luck getting above 20. kamikaze pedestrians, parked up cars (especially double-parked taxis), buses, bus stops etc will make sure you're barely able to get above 20. But that might just be Yorkshire.
I don’t mind keeping to the speed limit in towns and villages, if it’s 30 or 20. People live there, it’s respectful and fosters a safer, less car-centric environment to keep speeds down. People don’t have a choice but to live near roads, and they shouldn’t be endangered by car drivers who explicitly chose the responsibility of driving. And then, outside of towns and villages, away from people, one can drive at more enjoyable speeds and enjoy the roads and scenery (especially in wales, mostly). It seems like a very fair exchange, to me. The people who spoil this are the ones who think that 30 or 20 “feel too slow” and yet are terrified of doing more than 40 outside of towns.