Safe Speed Forums

Yes we get a lot of NIMBYs here in rural Shropshire. They retire and move here from big cities, looking for the country life but then complain about everything from cock crowing, farm smells, mud on roads, people having the audacity to use "their" bit of road, saying that anything narrower than a dual carriageway is a "track", people who want to get from a to b without using an A road are "rat runners", they join the council then get "their" bit of road made into an access only, then move back to the city after 2 years of moaning about unfriendly rural people are.

_________________
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.

...and then he said...



I'm confused!




Perhaps you didn't read my post properly? I live in a VERY SIMILAR VILLAGE myself! The only small difference is that the people here seem to have had the wit to realise that they were about to buy a house on an NSL road before they did so - and therefore didn't get all upset when they moved in and found cars using "their" road! Don't get me wrong, I have some sympathy for your predicament (if not your actions). We too get our share of idiots who drive past my front gate at excessive speed for the conditions. Just beyond my gate, the road is about one and a half cars wide with 10' hedges on either side. There are two blind "S" bends in as many hundred yards. You're pushing your luck along there at much over 20MPH in the dry. In fact, a couple of years ago now, some "muppet" got themselves a free (and instant) cabriolet conversion as they ran under the back of a trailer being pulled by a tractor!

As I said before, if it works for you and the rest of your village, good luck to you. Personally, I can't see why you're messing about with salt though. I would have thought in a rural area, someone in your village would have access to a JCB - why not just dig the lot up and make your collective dream come true?!

This is demonstrably wrong. Every day, the vast majority of motorists adjust their speed to a safe level for the conditions and hazard density presented to them. This is one reason why we actually have very few collisions given the weight of traffic on our roads.

If it was so dangerous on your lanes, the majority (as you claim it to be) would not be going too fast. It may be your perceptions that are wrong. To avoid me reading all this thread again, can you say how many actual collisions there have been in your area prior to your actions.

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

But the number of actual accidents isn't the complaint of people in these situations. It is the feeling of living in peril, of being continually endangered every time you step out of your house. Just because pedestrians avoid accidents by jumping over hedges or climbing trees doesn't mean that the vehicles are not travelling at a dangerous and unacceptable speed.

_________________
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

If I felt endangered by gangs of hoodies hanging round in my street, would you support me and my neighbours taking "vigilante" action against them? This is an exact analogy to the situation described above where the police and council appear to be able to do little to answer residents complaints.

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

That is just the assumption I thought he (GDS) was making too, along with idea that drivers are using 'his' road like that just to annoy the locals.

Then there is the presumed negative connotation given to the term "rat runner", when what it means is someone who has found a time saving possibly more fuel efficient, i.e. greener, route. Not too mention they may just prefer a steady and relaxing if slower route through the countryside than a stop start trek on the main roads. By deliberately annoying and frustrating drivers GDS & Co. are likely creating a more dangerous situation, of course the effects may be felt outside their village so what would they care?

_________________
Driving fast is for a particular time and place, I can do it I just only do it occasionally because I am a gentleman.
- James May

Well I've lived in a rural area all my life and when driving for Parcelforce I was in mid (rural) Wales and have yet to find any village that fits the description of GDS's "village" ....120 houses on three tracks not wide enough for two cars to pass without entering someones gateway.....do me a favour!!!. I think it's all in his mind. Unless he can provide us with a google map link so that we can see for ourselves.

_________________
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.

Having read the Sam posts again, so am I. In the first post he says:


But in the 2nd post says:


As ever, if this village actually exists, the “speeding”/rat-running problem is most likely caused by inadequate long-distance routes in the area. I’d like to know Sam’s diagnosis of why his village is prone to such problems.

The point about acting like NIMBYlantes being successful is interesting though, it’s often been suggested that speed cameras actually drive traffic on to alternative roads rather than slowing it down; I wonder where the traffic in Sam’s village has gone?

I for one commute down some highly unsuitable minor roads, as the obvious A-road is now a mess of 30, 40 and 50 limits, all enforced sporadically. My route is faster, more fun, and NIMBYlante-free!

When I used to work in the Worcester area and live near Bridgnorth, instead of taking the main A442 dual , I used to go the back roads, the other side of the river (no scameras in those days), it was just as quick, much more fun with lots of twisting roads and far more scenic, less stressful because you would hardly see another car for miles.

_________________
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.

Yes. If the vigilante action was non-violent, such as playing loud classical music or high frequency noise. Or watering my hedge with a high pressure hose, or making a smoky bonfire upwind of them.

_________________
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

What if the non-violent action was illegal?

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

graball – You know I’m not going to name the village. This is because it would risk speed obsessed drivers paying us a visit and the authorities discovering what is happening.

We are not complaining about anything other than illegal driving practices – reducing the rats has just been a welcome added bonus..

Johnnythboy – You clearly have not read my posts properly. The action we take is not at all time consuming. We create chicanes by parking cars on the lanes – easy. At peak rush hour our volunteers are people who would be going out in their cars to buy a newspaper anyway. They simply drive within the law and obey the many SLOW markings on the road by slowing down to 20mph at the signs and before and after. Our horse riding club changed their “club” time by one hour to co-inside with rush hour without giving their members any idea of why. And residents have used quick methods of blocking their drivers such as logging the corners. We have been very careful not to draw attention to our actions and have bought them in over time.

Steve – the main issue over and above the rat running is speeding. This is what originally drew our attention to the rat-running. Neither are pleasant, and by tackling the speeding we have reduced the rat running. Everyone is entitled and welcome to use our roads if they use them lawfully and show consideration to non motorised traffic. Far from us being selfish, it is those who drive illegally that are the selfish ones. They are the ones who prompted us into action.

Where do I say I am against traffic police? We would welcome cameras or traffic police equally. However, much of the “speeding” is within the limit – inappropriate speed is just as big a problem as speed over the limit.

Where do I claim cameras will sop drivers using drives as passing places?

Where do I say that those involved in our campaign have recently moved here only to complain? The 30mph limit has been in place since 1984 - surely it is reasonable to expect all drivers to drive within it?

Where do I say we are spreading our methods to neighbouring villages? We have an informal agreement with nearby villages via resident associations where drivers pledge to drive within the speed limit through each others villages.

Why are we risking arrest? Everything we are doing is within the law – although we will check with our lawyer the situation regarding graball’s very good idea of salting roads whilst it rains.

Thanks for your suggestion of something more constructive – but we’ve solved the problem, what could be more constructive than that? We know that one reason the village route was quicker for them was because they were driving over the speed limit. At and below the limit, the route becomes much less attractive.

Such has been the reduction of traffic that at 5pm in the afternoon, the density is now similar to what is at 2:30pm. The maniacs are no longer allowed to be maniacs and most have moved on - where to no one cares.

I am a driver of some 30 years. I am in no way anti-motorist. But I am anti-law breaking and anti-dangerous driving.

I believe that 70% of the village do not work. Of those who do, many have to walk to nearby bus stops and train stations along lanes with no footpaths. They welcome our efforts. Those with cars fully accept the slight inconvenience that has been caused’ i.e. arriving at the main A road in 10minutes rather than in 6minutes.
 
Mole – Sorry to confuse you, although I suspected someone would pull me up about this apparent contradiction. There are few children in the village. Those that do live here feel more confident using the roads to cycle or walk now that the traffic is slower. I repeat - child road safety was never really a consideration in our case.

I sympathise with your plight – mostly our actions were taken because residents were finding it almost impossible to pull out of their drives due to speeding traffic.

We do not have any NSL roads – at no time have I claimed we do. Anyone buying here in the past 25 yeas will have bought their houses on a 30mph road.

We have at least 20 blind S bends on three lanes totalling around 4 miles in length. It is true that speeds nearer 20mph are more appropriate but drivers were putting their foot down and hoping for the best!

Our methods have worked. And worked very well.

I like the idea of the JCB – I will check with our lawyer.

Malcolmw – you are so wrong. There is a reason for traffic calming and cameras you know – this is because drivers cannot be trusted to drive at “safe” speeds.

There have been over 20 collisions mostly involving side damage to cars pulling out of drives in the past 5 years. During the past 18 months (since we introduced our methods) there have been zero collisions.

Why should anyone who thinks it okay to speed be concerned about what is or what isn't legal?

dcbwhaley - Spot on, the illegal behaviour of drivers was not pleasant. We should not have to put up with it and we no longer do.

toltec - If other villages are suffering because of our action I would advise them to do what we have because it works. If drivers are becoming more dangerous because they are being forced to drive within the law, maybe they should consider giving up driving and taking an alternatie form of transport.

AND NO, I SHALL NOT REVEAL THE LOCATION FOR REASONS STATED EARLIER. I HOPE YOU UNDERSTAND.

I UNDERSTAND, BECAUSE I THINK YOU'RE MAKING IT UP!

And where did I imply that your little scheme was time-consuming? You're not reading my posts properly!

"We had a similar rat running [/ speeding] problem..."
"Reclaim your streets..."
You’re trying to displace the rat-runners (as well as stop the speeding)


Your actions impinge on those who are acting with consideration, and you are trying to drive them away too; that is selfish!


Maybe not against them, but you clearly come out against the use of them; you indicated that you don't believe police are effective, and you believe in 'pressing for a camera'. So why not push for trafpol?


So a camera really won't do anything will it.


where did I say you did? It was one of your complaints; I merely pointed out another way how a camera would be ineffective.


The move doesn't have to be recent (not did I mention that it had to be).
It would be reasonable if the limit was reasonable (unfortunately the reader cannot know that in this case).


"We are in contact with other areas who use similar methods and all have reported good results."
You spreading it to them, or them to you, unless you all started doing this simultaneously without conferring with each other?


Obstruction (I did say this in my prior post to you), without due consideration. Drivers have been arrested for going too slow even though there is no prescribed minimum speed limit. Then there is the wilful damage to public property regarding the use of salt ("This corrodes the roads...").


Solved in a selfish manner. Granted those at inappropriate speed are selfish, but that doesn't give you a moral right to press your selfish actions onto those who aren't.
Besides, you’ve only treated the problem, not solved it. As soon as you stop your treatment the problem (whatever that is) will return. Why not solve the problem the proper way (as we have described) instead?


"...the practice caused a 15-20minute hold up" is rather more than a 4 minute delay; which is it?
A "rather well-off village" where 70% of the residents don't work?
A "rather well-off village" where many of those who do work commute from an isolated community without using personal motorised transport?


I would bet money many of these are the fault of the person pulling out (not looking, frustration, inattention). Unfortunately the reader can never know.


RTTM

I think I need to repeat some critical points:
This campaign isn’t against speed enforcement; it is against the way it is done.

Is it really wise to encourage horse riders to venture out into peak time traffic, especially when surrounded by the so-called "maniacs" on "blind bends"?

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Thought for the night before I retire... is this the next step on the UK's return to utter parochialism? Before long attempts to visit the next village will be met by a posse armed with pitchforks.

One more thing, Sam: if your nimbylante sheme actually exists, how do you distinguish between people driving perfectly legally and considerately, and "speeders"? Or are all drivers who aren't recognised locals made equally unwelcome? Do people have to warn the posse if they are expecting visitors, so they don't get treated like lepers? Or do they get given a little permit or badge in advance? Honestly, this thing's a minefield!

By the way, as Sam won't reveal the name of the village under discussion, I suggest we use 'Royston Vasey' until we know.

Sorry, but I'm still confused!

You say:

Fair enough.

Then you say:

So... they're speeding but they're not speeding???

If "inappropriate speed" is really your problem, then you might not like it, but you can't call it "illegal". Whatever constitues "inappropriate" is simply down to your opinion. I'd appreciate it if you could try to put some accurate numbers on this, so we can all get a better feel fro the extent of the problem. What precentage would you say were exceeding the speed limit?

Plenty of villages round here have 30MPH limits through them. People who park their cars so as to partially obstruct the narrower roads tend to get their door mirrors knocked off fairly regularly. If that hasn't happened in your village in the last 18 months, then I must confess to being jolly impressed by the standard of driving exhibited by your "rat runners"!


If he says "do it" - I'd sack him if I were you! (unless you all own that stretch of road, of course)!

By the way, you're jolly lucky to live in such a small village that's so poorly served with roads but has a nearby bus stop AND train station! My nearest station is 7 miles away!

GSD, get real or see a psychiatrist ( I know my spellings wrong but at least I'm man enough to admit it), it's all in your crazy mixed up head man. Such villages don't exist now and certainlty didn't exist in the 80's. Crawl out of your london flat and get some fresh air...country air if you can find some....ha ha ha ....good joke , if a little sad!!!!

_________________
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.

I'm wondering if GSD is actually GreenSheD, it's the sort of piffle that one would expect from hiim!!!

_________________
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.

There is more:

Over 20 (mostly) driveway crashes, spread across a village of 120 residences where 70% of residents do not work, and many of those who do don't drive - that must be getting on for an average of every residence with a driver (in your village) being involved in a crash.

Building on Mole's comment:
"However, much of the “speeding” is within the limit"
"30mph limit which was regularly ignored by the vast majority"

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

So then are you 'counting seconds' that they travel between the same points? I assume that is what you mean? How do you know the distance ? To be absolutely sure I would be out with a measure and check precisely, and learn from my viewpoint/s (in your case from teh garden and perhaps front window), the location of those 'markers' and allow for the 'front' of a car marker point, to the 'rear' of the car marker points to be accurate.

Well if you can provide us the Google map reference it would be interesting to see this, but I am imagining that there is a wide central section which his a magnet to most kids. However I would immediately ensure there were at least an appropriate sign such as this one HERE which is the new Home Zone sign. Now I do not particularly agree with this whole concept. To my mind if I want children to play they should never ever be encouraged to do so on the roads. roads are for traffic, children must be taught they are potentially dangerous areas and they must be extremely careful at all times and look out for each other. I would get all the locals together and ask the Council to help to make a kiddies area so that they are not playing in the central section - just to start with. Are there no gardens for children to play in - you mention yours but it may not be kiddie suitable ? (on your street)
I would locate a place too, for the kids or look at having the road adjusted, so that the central bit is moved to the side and perhaps make up a park type arrangement with a chainlink fence more suitable for ball games etc. (Well OK I'd try really hard to achieve this !)

Modern cars can distance the driver from the road sensations more, but it has to be the responsibility of the road users to ensure their own safety as much as possible, and for all to be aware of each other. Generally speaking we do this very well.
I think your concern is rightly with the prevention of possible contact between the two, than just either one. Prior to any impact there has to be a scenario that can warn both the pedestrian and the car driver of the potential hazard to each other. Mostly people and drivers (road users) will pause, or slow to avoid each other at most a 'near-miss' might take place. One of the problems with the 'Kill me at 30mph' campaign is that it fails to acknowledge the fact that people see developing hazards and react to this - the 10seconds before impact, and this shows in the figures that many, many people lives are not even put in danger, because we observe a potential hazard and take avoiding action. This could be to slow, to brake, to swerve / & brake or for the pedestrian, to stop, to pause, to leap back on the pavement etc. So by having awareness of the local environment, when a hazard 'appears' (pedestrian), is not totally new but potentially expected, so the action to avoid any collision is already underway. The speed has been reduced, so more information can be judged and risk assessed fully. But the figures given out would have more Killed and Serious Injuries (KSI's), if every person at certain speeds were hit without this avoidance action. The big factor that they miss out in these figures, is that people react, and anticipate, which means that pedestrians are rarely hit at the speeds that might kill or seriously injure. Generally speaking, most road users do everything they can to avoid an accident, no one goes out to have an accident. Drivers risk assess, so they slow down when hazards present, and when clear and safe they increase their speed.
technology can be our friend and helper as well as our ''enemy'' by working 'too' hard for us, and these dulled senses can be, one of them.

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