sigh.
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
20mph zones may go Scotland wide after Edinburgh trial
(797 posts)-
Posted 9 years ago #
-
I have done endless research and have discovered a truly remarkable proof that 20mph is wrong which the EEN is too small to contain.
Posted 9 years ago # -
I'm genuinely intrigued to know just which cities have shown an increase in injuries and fatalities after introducing 20mph. It's a very unquestioning acceptance by the EEN of that opinion piece.
Posted 9 years ago # -
I assumed it was just the continuing misunderstanding of the stats. I.e. injuries/fatalities *have* gone up in 20pmh zones (nationwide) but that's just a result of there being far more roads with a 20mph limit these days.
Posted 9 years ago # -
links courtesy of sallyhinch with whom i was having a similar discussion yesterday
""half of the 20mph schemes we looked at, casualties and/or collisions were significantly lower than would otherwise have been expected – and in only one of the schemes were collisions higher than would otherwise have been expected" -
See more at: http://www.roadsafetygb.org.uk/news/3161.html#sthash.W1fF7E7C.dpuf
http://www.roadsafetygb.org.uk/news/3161.htmlalso
https://fullfact.org/factchecks/speed_humps_20_mph_limit_zones_plenty_Portsmouth_KSI-27588
Posted 9 years ago # -
and this from glasgow.....
Posted 9 years ago # -
From above link -
"
CYCLE campaigners in Glasgow have been left baffled after a petition to create a "20mph city" mirroring Edinburgh was blocked because the council said it was already doing enough.
"
Good to know that one city is "doing enough"...
Posted 9 years ago # -
So it's all about Warrington -
"
What did the data tell us?
• In five areas - London, Birmingham, Portsmouth, Newcastle and Gateshead – collisions and/or casualties fell at a significantly greater rate after a 20mph scheme was implemented, than would have otherwise been expected.
• In Warrington, while collisions fell at a significantly greater rate after the scheme was implemented, the number of casualties increased slightly."
Posted 9 years ago # -
I don't understand how there can be fewer collisions but more casualties?
Posted 9 years ago # -
Min - collisions can easily produce more than one casualty. Figures could easily be skewed by a couple of collisions involving lots of casualties, e.g. one involving a bus.
Posted 9 years ago # -
Oh okay, so that could be the result of just one incident then. Warrington doesn't do pedestrian crossings so it is not surprising that there are a lot of collisions in its town centre.
Posted 9 years ago # -
Hahahaha, brilliant! Suspecting this is what he's seized on. So he can do extensive research that shows casualties increase because of 20mph zones, by ignoring the vast vast majority where casualties (and incidents) decrease dramatically. And the EEN prints it, allowing him to make the statement as if it's fact. Sigh.
Okay, maybe I will give someone a shout and see if they want an opinion piece.
Posted 9 years ago # -
@wc please do. i sent one in last night....
Posted 9 years ago # -
"I have over 6000 likes on the Facebook page and 2700 have signed the online petition and they all say 'no'.
So assuming he has consulted all the residents of the city (he complained that the council hadn't after all) that makes roughly 473,000 people who haven't said no.
Posted 9 years ago # -
....and I don't think his rigorously constructed "survey" would meet Electoral Reform Society standards...
Posted 9 years ago # -
There is a link to an official report on the Warrington trial from CHdot's link to the RSGB site. It says "In total 20 of the 37 casualties recorded during the trial (after) period were injured in a collision that involved a bus".
For those unfamiliar with the RSGB site, I'd say that although it is described as "The website for road safety professionals throughout the UK and beyond", many of the comments on it come from amateurs with as much bias and almost as little sense as often found in the Evening News. If the Warrington report had found a significant increase and not just a fluke we would have heard much more about it.
Posted 9 years ago # -
Here is the evaluation of the Warrington trial 20mph zones:
http://www.warrington.gov.uk/download/downloads/id/2362/20mph_pilot_scheme_full_report
It's very positive about the effectiveness of 20mph limits.
Incredibly, my guess about bus accidents skewing the figures was correct, the report states:
"In total 20 of the 37 casualties recorded during the trial period were injured in a collision that involved
a bus, with the remaining 9 casualties being vulnerable road users or car occupants. It would appear that multiple injuries to bus passengers have therefore skewed the injury figures, leading to a marked increase in injured parties."EDIT - beaten by the (not so) slowcoach!
Posted 9 years ago # -
Seems 'we' have researched enough to show that the wilder claims of the 'antis' are just - wild.
I presume this has been posted before, but worth repeating -
"
Busting the myths around Edinburgh's 20mph roll-out
"
http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/news/article/1743/busting_the_myths_around_edinburghs_20mph_roll-out
This all comes up again next month -
"
A detailed implementation plan, including costings, will be considered by the Transport and Environment Committee in March.
"
That meeting on the 17th is expected to have a deputation from those who think 20 is too slow.
I hope there will be at least one deputation in support.
No harm in contacting councillors to point out that you don't believe the myths - and hope they don't either!
Posted 9 years ago # -
One unknown unknown is how soon 'Smith Commission changes' will be devolved to Holyrood.
Another unknown is how soon the Scottish Government consequently change the rules on signage (etc.) for 20mph streets.
Posted 9 years ago # -
New UK signs regs TSRGD 2015 are expected to come into force in April, I think. Special authorisation for non-standard signs is already (largely?) devolved. That is how Scotland got ahead with special signs for part-time 20mph limits at schools. Also how England got ahead with 20mph zones using far fewer road humps than the UK regs require, as most of the UK (ie England) has special authorisation for them, while the Scottish Government has failed to make the same provision.
Posted 9 years ago # -
From Rod King:
Attached is full Warrington report (pm me your email if you want a copy). Note that in residential streets of pilot there was a 27% reduction in casualties even when adjusted for reductions in other parts of town. See para 8.14
Town centre was deemed to be unique and not indicative of whole town. WBC discounted the town centre figures also because of skewing from bus crashes which were seen as not connected with the speed limit reduction.
Also see 13.10 for the FYRR of 800%
Note that Warrington just gained awards for their 20mph roll-out across whole town. 12 months before plane and £160,000 under budget. See
http://www.warrington.gov.uk/news/article/1553/council_is_recognised_for_20mph_initiative
also note results in Brighton
and our briefing :-
Posted 9 years ago # -
Hi Everybody
Any questions on 20mph then please ask.
There are lots of briefings on various aspects at http://www.20splentyforus.org.uk/briefings.htm
Rod
Posted 9 years ago # -
Discussion due on RScot
"
Cathy MacDonald asks - would you welcome '20 mph cities' in Scotland?
Cyclists are calling for Glasgow to become the next '20 mph city' in Scotland. A petition from cycle campaign group GoBike to create a 20 mph
"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b051w1x9
Though currently talking about food banks.
Posted 9 years ago # -
"
"Improving the safety of all road users in Glasgow remains a top priority for the council.
While not every road in the city is suitable for a 20mph limit, we continue to explore innovative methods to reduce speed within our communities.
We have already introduced 20mph zones in residential streets right across the city and will continue to do so where appropriate."The story continues.......
"
http://www.magnatom.net/2015/02/the-battle-for-middle-glasgow.html
Posted 9 years ago # -
20mph on RScot soon.
Preview insert -
Good comments from Stuart Hay Living Streets.
v
Motoring journalist 'when people are wandering along at 20 they're not always paying attention - pay more attention at 30'
Posted 9 years ago # -
I was thinking some more about this (with a view to an article, in case SRD doesn't get into the paper, but I suspect I'd not be able to keep to any sort of limited word count), and the argument that "20 is fine for residential streets, but not arterial routes".
A lot has (rightly) been made of the fact that places like Leith Walk are residential areas, but the other thing I was thinking was, take Lothian Road as an example. There are flats there, so the residential argument can be made, but apart form anything else, streets like that, with shops and multitudinous businesses, are actually busier with pedestrians than most residential streets. There's actually more chances of an incident on an 'arterial' non-residential route such as that, surely, and therefore actually more need of 20mph on those streets?
Then there's the simple thought of, why is someone entitled to safety around their house or flat, but that same person when going shopping, or working, or sightseeing, is no longer seen as important enough to warrant protection?
Posted 9 years ago # -
Bob Downie GoBike
"Make streets safer for everyone"
Posted 9 years ago # -
On RScot NOW
Posted 9 years ago # -
Posted 9 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
