Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Sun Dec 17, 2017 03:02

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Traffic Calming ? ? ?
PostPosted: Sun May 31, 2009 16:38 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 12:43
Posts: 62
Location: Ribble Valley
I have been following the development of potential Toll Roads ever since during the 1990s when I deduced that road safety was being used as an excuse to obstruct any alternatives. All three main parties are keen to demonstrate just how green they are and combating Global Warming. However, they all appear to support the continued introduction of traffic calming, ( mini-roundabouts etc. ) which increases carbon dioxide emissions by at least 50%, likewise 20 Mph Zones ( without humps or chicanes ) which add to emissions by 10%. The nastier potentially toxic pollutants linked with Asthma are doubled by traffic calming. It could be said that traffic calming is a greater risk to public health than latent asbestos or passive smoking ?

The alleged road safety benefits are less than clear, heavily traffic calmed Burnley reported a 44% reduction in child deaths over the past seven years, yet Ribble Valley with minimal traffic calming also reported a fall of 42% despite being far away from any A&E department. The reduction in road deaths is a good thing, but may be mostly due to better paramedic ambulance services and now the air ambulance service. Better medical provision was introduced alongside traffic calming, it may be wrong to give traffic calming all the credit when its contribution may be minimal. I believe that casualties have been cut by 15% in the Borough of Barnet since they ripped out existing traffic calming, casualties for cyclists dropped by twice the London average.

It would appear that traffic calming has become a TB infested sacred cow for the eco-fascist leaning groups who were originally and still campaign for its introduction. It would appear that the eco-fascists cling to traffic calming in the belief that divers will be " irritated " out of their cars and use the train, at least a few anyway. If anyone had deliberately set out to design death traps for cyclists its doubtful whether they could have made a better job of it than traffic calming. I believe the Green Party have now opted for the " less pregnant " option of 20 Mph speed limits but still fail to admit their original mistake.

Getting back to Toll Roads, take the Ribble Valley for example, there were once two national speed limit routes into Preston, the direct A59 and through Longridge. The Longridge route now has a 40 Mph speed limit when it was safe to do 50 on most of the route. Similarly, the old A59 alternative route to the Whalley-Clitheroe by-pass has had the limit cut to 40 from 60, and many 40 sections have been reduced to an often ridiculous 30. I suspect that the busses struggle to keep time legally even though running on a 1960s timetable.

The Corporate Nazis in the civil service have been seriously planning toll roads for at least 20 years. In towns they use traffic calming to obstruct any direct route traffic might find as an alternative to toll roads. The safety fascists are making roads in towns almost totally impassable in decent time and now even TFL admits that it has been deliberately creating extra congestion under Labour's Livingstone.

It is interesting to note that almost all the scenes of recent fatal Knife Crime featured traffic calming or a 20 Mph speed limit. The installation of traffic calming is probably the key step towards a residential area becoming totally run down and lawless. By deterring regular through traffic from the streets criminals have more opportunities to commit crime without detection. Gangs of youths are more likely to congregate and cause trouble if they don't need to keep a sharp lookout for traffic. The evidence must show that almost all current semi-derelict slum areas have one thing in common, namely traffic calming installed at some point over the last 20 years. This must say something about the mentality of those alleged community leaders who campaign for the introduction of traffic calming. Take danger out of people's life ( particularly teenagers ) and they may replace it with something far worse.

The current main argument for imposing traffic calming is totally based on the NIMBY philosophy, ten bob fat cat property speculators desperately attempting to increase the theoretical value of their home. It would appear that they were under the impression that they actually own the road outside their mortgaged house and can dictate who can or can't use it, only a complete fool would buy a house with traffic calming on the street, especially if it was adjacent to an obstacle.

Perhaps one good reason that they have installed traffic calming in Asian areas in big towns is to help control any future civil unrest. Of course they have it in " rough " white dominated estates also, where the chattering classes consider a large proportion of the inhabitants are at or near the poverty line.

Humps in the road are an ideal protection against anyone stealing a service vehicle in an attempt to break out through the gates. Impossible to get any decent speed up if there are humps everywhere. Its only one easy step to ring fencing certain areas of towns and turning them into virtual Warsaw type ghettos. Nobody will be let in or out without a permit, plenty of work for private security guard companies now that much housing is under the control of housing associations. I believe that locked gates have already been installed on some " alley's ".

It would appear that traffic calming and the imposition of unrealistically low speed limits are being used to discourage drivers from using any route other than a potential future " Corporate Nazi " toll road, pay the toll or use more fuel and take twice as long to get there. People are already using far more fuel than they need to avoiding traffic calmed roads or unrealistically low speed limit routes, it also causes congestion on the main routes under pressure.

Traffic should flow though the town like blood in arteries, if the main route becomes restricted, traffic flows on the most convenient alternative route. Drivers are likely to " speed " in inappropriate places to make up time lost through traffic calming or sections of road with ridiculously low speed limits. This leads to more requests for traffic calming or lower speed limits from people who formerly had a relatively quiet section of road.

The result of alleged " green " transport policy is that the Corporate Nazis can engage in a spot of Corporate Ethnic Cleansing. If you can't afford the tolls or the fuel price you are forced to move home. No wonder city centre property developers support the introduction of the Manchester congestion charge. You can also bet that the politicians all have shares in the companies likely to benefit. There is a fortune to be made in the form of private tax for the in car equipment. The stock market parasites will make an imaginary fortune with a private toll road operating company plugged directly into the treasury. Its all false economic growth which by increasing the cost of living makes the British worker less competitive in the global economy. None of the current UK politicians can comprehend the fact that toll roads will put the relative basic human rights of the population back into the 18th century just for the sake of false profit.

Perhaps the government have no option but to proceed the eco-fascists favorite tool for corporate ethnic cleansing, Spy in the Sky road charging. Otherwise the Corporate Multinational Cartel could close key parts of UK industry. Of course nobody will notice that its basically a key fascist Big Brother policy because the alleged left wing Green Party support it. Many Corporate Nazi measures like Bin Tax and related fines for putting the wrong type of rubbish in your bin are also supported by the " greens " likewise the PFJ left love the smoking ban. Perhaps you will need a biometric ID card to register your Spy in the Sky in car equipment.

As for Spy in the Sky road charging technology its just another massively expensive and needlessly complicated IT project for the stock market " tech sector " to parasite on, its all potential false economic growth which increases the divide between rich and poor. It is perhaps hardly surprising to find that Graham Stringer was one of the Labour rebels calling for a leadership election, one of his main bones of contention is the proposed Manchester congestion charge. New investment in the infrastructure was tied to a road pricing plan, which even without actual satellite Spy in the Sky (overhead gantries with simple electronic tags for vehicles ) would cost billions to introduce and maintain. As with most government projects under PFI its just a virtual welfare state for the stock market parasites.

Traffic calming also reduces the safe life of a road, particularly if HGV's use it regularly.

Once again the A59 is being resurfaced through Copster Green. It will cost the council taxpayers twice as much as it needs to due to the traffic calming installed there. I believe that it is the second time that this section of road has needed major resurfacing since traffic calming was introduced there in the 1990s. I have travelled this road regularly since the 1970s and can't recall it needing any major work before the traffic calming was introduced. The " Pedestrian Islands" and central road hatching force all HGV's into the gutter over all the drain grates and man-hole covers.

The extreme nearside is the weakest part of any road, perhaps that's why HGV drivers trained in the 1980s were encouraged to remain 18 inches from the nearside kerb where possible. With central traffic islands this road friendly practical distance is impossible to achieve.

The service life of this road is only half of that before the traffic calming was introduced, the obvious solution to cut operating costs is to remove the traffic calming during the current works and then we will not be in the same expensive position.

It is now an almost pointless ongoing high cost for the sake of several central " pedestrian refuges " in an area with a low population. I have never yet seen a pedestrian using one of the said islands. Typical local government policy, always find the most inefficient way to squander council taxpayers hard earned money.

Bus services have been withdrawn from streets with humps due to the damage they cause to the new " low floor " disabled access vehicles, an alleged compromise was " speed cushions " but when cars park adjacent to them the buses still suffer damage having to run over the top. Bus operators rightly refuse to provide a service on such routes, a plan to ban parking on said streets was given a rocket by local residents, although none of them actually had the courage to suggest removing the traffic calming altogether.

The Corporate Nazi's now want 20 Mph limits because instead of killing a few potential wage slaves you get lots of brain injury permanent cripples. The plan is to battery farm them in private nursing homes ( once their parents get to frail to look after them ). BBC " click online " did a feature on the future of OAP care, suggesting that the infirm could live in high tech housing units where every move of the occupant was recorded by sensors. They claim that they could tell whether you were able to bend down, whether you were washing due to the amount of water used plus a range of other factors. Apparently the whole object of the exercise was not to send anyone to check on you unless you were apparently dead or close to it. All your movements would be on CCTV video also. Of course this will cost our welfare state a fortune, and now they are tightening up the criteria to claim disability benefits so if you don't go into a nursing home you starve freeze to death at home. They also want 20 Mph speed limits in order to sell potentially expensive Average Speed Cameras to theoretically enforce them.

Of course compensation claims will rocket, thus forcing up the cost of motor insurance, but like everything in safety policy sponsored by the stock market parasites via university boffins they think like Professor Marcos in the Ealing comedy The Lady-killers. " Its OK to steal ten thousand quid in an armed robbery because its only a farthing on all the policies "

A relative of mine was once an ambulance driver who was praised for saving the life of a young girl after a road accident. He went to see her when she was allegedly recovered, but all she could do was sit in a chair, almost a total vegetable. It distressed him so much he almost immediately quit the ambulance service and became an undertaker.

Some might say that its OK if you get adequate compensation, they have just increased payments for profoundly disabled servicemen. However speaking for my own experience of relative disability the money is no good to you if you have lost any chance of independence in your life and are unable to do the things most people take for granted. At least for some intelligent people, becoming severely disabled for life could be a fate worse than death.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 02, 2009 23:19 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 19:08
Posts: 3427
Brossen makes some good points which are certainly becoming very true in the area that I live.


"It would appear that the eco-fascists cling to traffic calming in the belief that drivers will be " irritated " out of their cars and use the train, at least a few anyway."

Certainly true round Telford....their 2006 Transport Plan claims to "encourage drivers to use public transport".

"The current main argument for imposing traffic calming is totally based on the NIMBY philosophy, ten bob fat cat property speculators desperately attempting to increase the theoretical value of their home. It would appear that they were under the impression that they actually own the road outside their mortgaged house and can dictate who can or can't use it, only a complete fool would buy a house with traffic calming on the street, especially if it was adjacent to an obstacle."

Again we have speed limits reduced on roads and requests for said roads to be access only shortly after a new resident has moved in.


"Traffic should flow though the town like blood in arteries, if the main route becomes restricted, traffic flows on the most convenient alternative route. Drivers are likely to " speed " in inappropriate places to make up time lost through traffic calming or sections of road with ridiculously low speed limits. This leads to more requests for traffic calming or lower speed limits from people who formerly had a relatively quiet section of road. "

Likewise we have roads being made access only or closed because they were straight roads and people are now being forced to use longer roads that go through islands with totally pointless traffic lights on them and long queues.

."Once again the A59 is being resurfaced through Copster Green. It will cost the council taxpayers twice as much as it needs to due to the traffic calming installed there. I believe that it is the second time that this section of road has needed major resurfacing since traffic calming was introduced there in the 1990s. I have travelled this road regularly since the 1970s and can't recall it needing any major work before the traffic calming was introduced. The " Pedestrian Islands" and central road hatching force all HGV's into the gutter over all the drain grates and man-hole covers."


We have many, many speed bumps by us and immediately after the bumps, the road wears very quickly.


"It is now an almost pointless on going high cost for the sake of several central " pedestrian refuges " in an area with a low population. I have never yet seen a pedestrian using one of the said islands. Typical local government policy, always find efficient way to squander council taxpayers hard earned money."

A main road in Telford was recently reduced from NSL to 40MPH. They could only do this by "re-engineering " the road (putting central refuges in but not for pedestrian use but to give the road the effect of being narrower and to discourage overtaking). These engineering changes cause an ANNUAl extra cost of £32,736 and are expected to reduce the annual accident average from a massive 1.6 to 1, the mean speed was expected to change from 47.6MPH to 41.6MPH. Was it worth it?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 03, 2009 07:49 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 14:26
Posts: 4362
Location: Hampshire/Wiltshire Border
graball wrote:
... are expected to reduce the annual accident average from a massive 1.6 to 1, the mean speed was expected to change from 47.6MPH to 41.6MPH.

Careful here! The Department of Self Serving Statistics are saying that a 6mph reduction in speed results in a 37.5% reduction in accidents. Cheap for £33K a year. :) :)

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 03, 2009 16:23 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 02:50
Posts: 2868
Location: Dorset
If people were to honk their horns as they went past every piece of "traffic calming" they would soon disappear.

_________________
Andrew.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 03, 2009 17:16 
Offline
Supporter
Supporter
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 13:45
Posts: 4041
Location: Near Buxton, Derbyshire
Ziltro wrote:
If people were to honk their horns as they went past every piece of "traffic calming" they would soon disappear.

...leaving driverless cars behind. Or would the cars disappear as well? :)

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 03, 2009 17:23 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 02:50
Posts: 2868
Location: Dorset
dcbwhaley wrote:
Ziltro wrote:
If people were to honk their horns as they went past every piece of "traffic calming" they would soon disappear.

...leaving driverless cars behind. Or would the cars disappear as well? :)

No, the obstructions would. I've read that is what happened in France. They know how to protest.

_________________
Andrew.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 03, 2009 18:15 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 19:08
Posts: 3427
It wouldn't be so bad if theses obstacles were outside the council offices but they are on semi rural roads with the nearest house several hundred yards away. No one would really hear. We did have one local bright spark who organised a "toot your horn if you are aginst the new traffic lights scheme"....he made the papers, they made him councillor, gave him liason to the highways dept and ....he disappeared.....

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 03, 2009 18:47 
Offline
Supporter
Supporter
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 13:45
Posts: 4041
Location: Near Buxton, Derbyshire
graball wrote:
It wouldn't be so bad if theses obstacles were outside the council offices but they are on semi rural roads with the nearest house several hundred yards away. No one would really hear. We did have one local bright spark who organised a "toot your horn if you are aginst the new traffic lights scheme"....he made the papers, they made him councillor, gave him liason to the highways dept and ....he disappeared.....


He should have listened to Ziltro. :D

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 04, 2009 01:26 
Offline
User

Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 10:38
Posts: 105
Location: Sydney, Australia
Ziltro wrote:
If people were to honk their horns as they went past every piece of "traffic calming" they would soon disappear.


We too have these wretched devices. When they were first suggested many residents wanted them but when the Council decided to put them in the residents all wanted them to be outside someone else's house. :shock:

Our Council has had a policy for about 7 years of not putting in any new humps however chicanes, roundabouts and islands are still possible. Following a Court case objecting to a roundabout the effective policy is that any objection to a feature is almost certain to stop the idea. If there is a demonstrable benefit such as a necessary pedestrian refuge or a splitter island at a junction then it is likely to be approved; if it is just a "nuisance" item then it will not proceed. The last Chairman of the Traffic Committee (me :) ) was very good at raising objections.

One of my freinds who has legal qualifications travelled down the worst street in our area (14 humps in about 1 kilometre) at abot 3.00 am and sounded his horn at each one. His grounds were that the humps were an indicator that the residents were fearful of vehicles and thus it was his bounden duty as a motorist to warn them of his presence. :lol:

Traffic Calming is a fad which has passed its use by date. Unfortunately its history exemplifies so many "Road safety" schemes that are emotionally driven but which are rarely thought through especially in the analysis of the unexpected consequences. (For the pedantics it is the proponents who cannot recognise the "unexpected", not the analysts)

_________________
The only thing that should be prohibited is prohibition.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 07, 2009 19:50 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 07, 2009 20:19
Posts: 227
dcbwhaley wrote:
Ziltro wrote:
If people were to honk their horns as they went past every piece of "traffic calming" they would soon disappear.

...leaving driverless cars behind. Or would the cars disappear as well? :)


Nasty, nasty sense of humour (NOT).......Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :clap: :clap: :clap:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 11, 2009 01:54 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 02:17
Posts: 7347
Location: Highlands
Well from a Brainstorming POV (and I would FAR rather see less antagonistic references to officials - un-necessary and lessens your argument - btw), we have to always be careful of seeking the truth.
We cannot add 2+2 and think it makes 5 we have to have proof and clarity of fact.
It makes a good rant and yes there are many things going on at the moment that we see as utter twaddle. There are some seriously concerning things too.

With regard to speed humps I totally agree that their sale by date is long and truly up. They have and never did have any place in road safety and I am appalled frankly that any one could even give such a concept more than a few seconds thought.
Councils have a great thirst to quench problems and it seems that if anyone gives a drop they are in danger of lapping it up with what seems to be with no due consideration to the consequences to others or effects on the area. There is seldom (seemingly) any alternative sales pitch concept, so they leap on the sole idea before them .... I might be speaking out of turn, but to me this is how it often appears.

I absolutely agree that routes need to FLOW. They are now back at measuring pollution levels in London and saying it's cars / busses etc , will if you stop the flow where do you think the fumes are going ?
Such lack of forethought .....
We need routes to flow and congestion will unblock especially if they go back to two lane road to all through traffic ... we can cope ! (And I do - like many, speak as a pedestrian, cyclist and driver ... :) )

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 27, 2009 01:03 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 15:49
Posts: 26
Location: Bristol
Somebody once said (I can't remember if it was here or on another forum) that if we allow local authorities to continue building speed bumps, then before long they will all join up and we will once again be able to enjoy uninterrupted motoring ... albeit 4 inches higher than before. Bring it on!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 15, 2010 17:10 
Offline
New User
New User

Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2010 08:36
Posts: 6
Absolutely spot on I wish I had said it, Brilliant. :clap: :clap: :clap:

They are giving away so much of our roads to buses and Cyclists ETC.there wont be any left for us.
I expect they will want us to stay at home and still pay for just having a car!!!.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 15, 2010 20:59 
Offline
New User
New User
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2010 21:45
Posts: 3
Location: Northumberland
just a quick comment...(observation)

Traffic calming measures = driver annoying factors

The classic example

Rumble strips across the carriageway.
These cause noise/vibration to warn the driver. Go over them as fast as needed to iron them out. Result is increased noise to local residents but no significant change to driving....
They get taken out.

Ditto if they are a skid hazard to motorcyclists!

_________________
Saluton. mi estas fervojistino. kaj vi?

visit www.stanegaterestorationsandreplicas.fotopic.net

to see what has been done! Perhaps we can do something for you?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.414s | 11 Queries | GZIP : Off ]