Brighton and Hove city centre to get 20mph limits from April (From The Argus)

So this bigot has freely admitted that he is deliberately trying to choke traffic flows so more peope use public transport? Does he not realise that alot of people have no choice? Before you know it they will be campaigning for a 10mph speed limit.

That's a thumping consultation - out of a population of some 450,000, this decision was approved by just under 2000 people.
Very Green.

What next...a red flag in front of vehicles...and more choking fumes.

Most vehicles won't get out of second gear,causing more pollution,I agree 20 mph in certain streets,but not a blanket ban around the City.

Ian Davey, Chairman of the Transport Committee, lists "Bricycles" as a "disclosable interest" on the B&HCC website.

Bricycles aims are listed on its website as:

"A cycle-friendly road network in the City
A 20 mph speed limit in the City
Road traffic reduction
An adequate local and national budget for cycling
Good secure cycle parking in Brighton and Hove
Better road surfaces and signing of cycle routes
One-way streets made two-way for cycling
The continuation of bikes on trains
Not to compromise the rights of pedestrians or the less able-bodied in the pursuit of these goals."

Political dogma beats common sense.

I find myself in the unusual (not to say uncomfortable) position of agreeing with Councillor Theobald on this.

In theory a 20mph speed limit is good for certain roads but as he says, too many roads are included.

It appears strange to me that Edward Street - a dual carriageway - is included in the plan, but the single lane Eastern Road, which is much more residential,(not to mention the schools and hospitals) is not.

"It is estimated that the scheme will cost £1.5 million to run over the next three years."

Nice to know the council isn't cutting visiting library services and services to the elderly and disabled to help pay for this.

Perhaps the flippant way that the council considers transport is best summed up by Councillor Chris Hawtrees comment "It is one of the most exciting in my time in this lark".

Mr Hawtree, It is not "a lark" It is a serious matter costing millions of pounds and effecting tens of thousands of people.

Seems like common sense to me. 20 miles an hour is fast enough around town.

Also today NICE has asked for walking and cycling to be the prefered methods for short journeys to combat the obesity timebomb: http://www.guardian.
co.uk/society/2012/n
ov/28/cycle-walk-mai
ntain-health-advises
-nice

Why don't they just ban cars from brighton end of

Perhaps Chris Hawtree is a distant relative of Carry On's Charles Hawtrey? If so, it might explain his glib comment on the subject.

So If cant drive more than 20mph, I am going to wait for a bus and then that cant drive more than 20mph? Pathetic. I will still be doing more than 20mph, the police said they wont enforce it.

I live in a 20mph zone and its not enforced.
It's pointless.

Most cars can comfortably drive in 3rd gear at 20 mph - and the modern engines are more fuel efficient in 3rd compared with older vehicles - or so i was told at a recent driver awareness training course. No irony intended, i was clocked doing 36 in a 30 mph area - very much my own fault.

Where have the rozzers say they will not enforce a law? (apart from fox hunting, obviously)

Why don't they just ban cars from brighton end of”
From the Brighton end of what, Sir?

20 isn't a bad speed to do, but i do think that perhaps they have cast their net too wide.

£1.5m on something that can't be enforced. Why not focus just on high risk areas outside schools and narrow roads, reduce the cost and get public support

Now the green councillors, who are on "a lark", have a dual carriageway with a 20mph limit

So will it achieve the first stated aim of getting us onto public transport? Well how could it - they will be held up too. Perhaps why the bus company opposed it too

Will it reduce pollution? No cars pollute more at 20mph

So more pollution, more costs. Possibly less serious accidents which is good - if and only if people support and follow. As the scheme is so wide and won't be enforced then it's done without public support - so roads that appear to be 20mph will have people then suddenly speeding along (without fear as police won't enforce) and so increasing risk of serious accidents

This has been taken too far - and so will be greeted with protest and disobeyance. Far better to start small, around schools and other key areas and then grow where needed. This expensive blanket shows just how much the greens don't understand real politics and how the other parties are abstaining to give them enough rope to hang themselves.

The Drive, Dyke Road, London Road, Davigdor Road all 20mph?

Try again

That's a 20mph ,maximum ,so when I,m sitting at 16mph,I,m going to be stress free from those that have always been at 37mph in a 30 zone and brake when they see the occasional speed camera,thank's councillor's at least you're guaranteed a high turn out at the next election !!
Or is it a new approach in so much you must do 20, its a minumum/maximum speed limit ?

I live in Lancing and work in Brighton. It is cheaper for me to run my motorbike as transport to and from work than it is to buy bus tickets for a year. Plus it takes me door to door and no walking to and from a bus stop.

Make public transport affordable Green numpties and maybe people will use it.

That said, traffic does not travel much over 20 during the day anyway so won't make much difference. Just the people that currently do 25 in a 30 will now do 15 I guess.

I expect we will see most drivers voting with their right foot and generally ignoring the 20 limits altogether.

A good example of how it works is Nevill Road, where they have already tried to implement a 20 limit. Being a busy main road, most of the time, most drivers will be going around 30mph - the new limit has made no difference at all. When it's congested, or there are school children playing in the road, people slow down as they should.

Studies have shown that when contemptibly low limits are imposed that are completely mismatched to the character of a road, because most drivers will consciously break the unreasonable limit the average speeds may become higher than when a more appropriate speed limit is in force which many drivers will accept.

What we have here is a politically motivated scheme targeted against road users, not changes made on technical grounds where the exact circumstances in every street have been examined.

This is a big change which needed a proper debate in the community. It seems likely that 20mph will increase journey times and discourage people coming into Brighton and Hove, with the inevitable impact on jobs. If 20mph is safer (and the evidence from schemes elsewhere in the UK is mixed on this) then the loss of jobs might be justified, but people have to want this change and be willing to accept the jobs cut as the price.

So Cllr. Hawtree regards his resonsibility for the governance of our city as 'a lark'.
If his attitude is widely shared by his Green Party council comrades this would go a long way towards explaining the dire circumstances in which we find ourselves.
The Green councillors larking around may be keeping them amused but it is doing terrible damage which will take a long time to put right.

Green councillor and transport committee member Chris Hawtree said: “I’m very excited by this. It is one of the most exciting in my time in this lark and it really lifts the heart – perhaps literally.”

Does he mean running the city is 'a lark'?
Be afraid. Be very afraid.

So this scheme will cost 1.5 million quid, Where will this money come from to fund this, maybe put parking charges up even more?

This moronic jumped up Green council wont be happy until every car is banished from the roads of Brighton and for what? in the name of 'being green' and when every business has closed the great unwashed can all sit round a camp fire singing 'Kumbayah' and give themselves a great big paton the back.

So this scheme will cost 1.5 million quid, Where will this money come from to fund this, maybe put parking charges up even more?

This moronic jumped up Green council wont be happy until every car is banished from the roads of Brighton and for what? in the name of 'being green' and when every business has closed the great unwashed can all sit round a camp fire singing 'Kumbayah' and give themselves a great big paton the back.

Cllr. Hawtree and the Use of English.

We all know about how precise Cllr. Hawtree is about the use of language. So what precisely is a 'lark'?

1. an amusing adventure or escapade

2. an activity regarded as foolish or a waste of time

OED

No doubt everyone will enjoy the increase in average speed resulting!

Let the Green nightmare carry on until the next election.Only then we will be free of this nightmare Council

we have had these limits in oxford for a while now, and many are ignored. only recently has enforcement taken place, with many motorists getting caught. at rush hour, i would be very surprised if the speed gets anywhere near 20, anyway. some of the best observers of the limit, incidentally, are the bus and taxi drivers!!!!

Joshiman wrote:
Let the Green nightmare carry on until the next election.Only then we will be free of this nightmare Council

But when might that be?
The Green Party nationally is becoming more and more disenchanted with the ludicrous antics of the comrades in Brighton. And Ms. Lucas is now checking out the removal men with a new urgency. Is it too much to hope that one or both of them might step in to end the reign of these comedians?

http://www.theargus.
co.uk/news/4994945.B
righton_and_Hove_cou
ncillor_criticised_o
ver__nutter__letter/

kkj wrote:
I find myself in the unusual (not to say uncomfortable) position of agreeing with Councillor Theobald on this.

In theory a 20mph speed limit is good for certain roads but as he says, too many roads are included.

It appears strange to me that Edward Street - a dual carriageway - is included in the plan, but the single lane Eastern Road, which is much more residential,(not to mention the schools and hospitals) is not.

Ditto. I have no objection in principle to 20mph roads, but a blanket imposition is not the best approach. And once again they trot out the line that it will make us all 'healthier' as we'll all give up our cars and walk. How on earth do they come to these conclusions? Like a lot of Brighton residents I already walk and use a bus as well as drive and this will make no difference to my travel arrangements. It'll probably make the air quality worse though.

GraemeDavis wrote:
This is a big change which needed a proper debate in the community. It seems likely that 20mph will increase journey times and discourage people coming into Brighton and Hove, with the inevitable impact on jobs. If 20mph is safer (and the evidence from schemes elsewhere in the UK is mixed on this) then the loss of jobs might be justified, but people have to want this change and be willing to accept the jobs cut as the price.

I disagree that this will affect jobs in Brighton. Why is it inevitable?

I think you're trying to use silly scare tactics.

Joshiman wrote:
Let the Green nightmare carry on until the next election.Only then we will be free of this nightmare Council

I wish people would actually detail the points that make the Greens so 'dangerous', or 'scary', or 'nightmarey' or 'disasterous'. It all just seems like hollow rhetoric.

When I look out my window everything seems to be going along as normal like it did in the previous administrations. And that's with the Tories' budget cuts included.

And when I read in the press about what the Tories, Lib Dems and Labour are getting up to I think it's quite nice we have an alternative party running our city. I just dont see the scary politics some people are imagining.

Total waste of time and money. And they want a 2% increase in Council Tax next year?
I wouldn't mind so much if the council's spending was sensible, but when it's for a few Greenies to have a "lark", or indeed for anyone to do this, I don't want them doing it with my money.
A lark indeed !!! Since when is governing a city a lark?
Says everything we need to know about these people.

Fercri Sakes wrote:

Joshiman wrote:
Let the Green nightmare carry on until the next election.Only then we will be free of this nightmare Council

I wish people would actually detail the points that make the Greens so 'dangerous', or 'scary', or 'nightmarey' or 'disasterous'. It all just seems like hollow rhetoric.

When I look out my window everything seems to be going along as normal like it did in the previous administrations. And that's with the Tories' budget cuts included.

And when I read in the press about what the Tories, Lib Dems and Labour are getting up to I think it's quite nice we have an alternative party running our city. I just dont see the scary politics some people are imagining.

Try opening your eyes and engaging your brain next time you look out of your ivory tower

20 mph in certain parts of the city centre, yes fine. But in every area between sackville and freshfield?

-Davigdor road
-Montpellier Road
-Western Road
-Church Road
-Dyke Road (!)
-The Drove
-Edwards Street
-Queens Park road

These are major central roads. Come on Council you bunch of tw@ts, you must be having a laugh!

20 mph in certain parts of the city centre, yes fine. But in every area between sackville and freshfield?

-Davigdor road
-Montpellier Road
-Western Road
-Church Road
-Dyke Road (!)
-The Drove
-Edwards Street
-Queens Park road

These are major central roads. Come on Council you bunch of tw@ts, you must be having a laugh!

Phani Tikkala wrote:

Fercri Sakes wrote:

Joshiman wrote:
Let the Green nightmare carry on until the next election.Only then we will be free of this nightmare Council

I wish people would actually detail the points that make the Greens so 'dangerous', or 'scary', or 'nightmarey' or 'disasterous'. It all just seems like hollow rhetoric.

When I look out my window everything seems to be going along as normal like it did in the previous administrations. And that's with the Tories' budget cuts included.

And when I read in the press about what the Tories, Lib Dems and Labour are getting up to I think it's quite nice we have an alternative party running our city. I just dont see the scary politics some people are imagining.

Try opening your eyes and engaging your brain next time you look out of your ivory tower

Again, that's just rhetoric. I'm more of a 'fact' kind of person.

I must admit - it's an enormous area - but I'm of opinion that it won't make that much difference (if any) to journey times within the city so makes sense.

Having commuted for 4 years driving from Brighton to Guidlford I know only too well the difference a bit of speed makes...

I used to drive like an idiot - you know, the kind of d1ck that would overtake unecessarily, accelerate hard out of junctions, speed along country lanes, outside lane of motorway 80/90mph flying past everyone... not many people would overtake me... I'd be the one overtaking... you know the type? Stressed, aggressive - frustrated in traffic, despairing of the amount of fuel burnt, the cost of fuel etc...

Then one day I decided to try an alternative approach to driving...

I decided to slow down and see what difference it made.

Bearing in mind the distances I covered 90miles daily. Cross Country, from here to Guildford, back lanes (not motorway) - I used to do this route as fast as I thought I could, howling along - 70, 80, 85mph (obviously within reason) - overtaking as many as I could, jumping red lights, so on... (what a t055er) -

So, I chose to pootle along, 50/60mph. Only overtaking the odd tractor when absolutely necessary... not taking unecessary risks... and so on... chilled out, happy, listening to radio, windows down, enjoying the scenery... life is good.

I'd get to work 5 minutes later than normal... 5 minutes... the time it takes to boil a kettle... a lot less stressed, I discovered how to enjoy driving... and that it was as muchas to do with journey as was with 'getting there'... it made very little difference to the TIME - but made a huge difference to my demeanour - arriving at work refreshed and ready to take on the day.

Plus, I could get an extra 2 days out of a tank of fuel... thats a 180miles! Which bearing in mind the rising fuel costs... was quite an achievement.

So apply that principle to city driving... with all the traffic lights, the roadworks, the pedestrians, the buses etc... there's enough hazards to make it slow going - that is a fact is it not? - so to say that reducing the top speed to 20mph will effect your journey time is, quite frankly, IMO, rubbish.

I've said this before, and have proven it too with an estate agent when I was viewing properties around the city a few years ago... he offered me a lift in his car between properties... not huge distances, we're talking, a mile, mile and half max between each one... I explained it's ok, I'll be there before he would... to which he snorted... only to be proved wrong... I was indeed waiting for him at each property. He drove. I rode.

It's a misconception that cars are fast... they're not... they can go fast sure, but it doesn't mean that they are a fast means to get around - I'm forever being overtaken by plenty of drivers... only pull up alongside or behind them at the next set of lights... and the next... the difference being... they accelerate hard to 'get in front' only to wait for ages at traffic lights... where as I pootle... and may wait at lights, or sail through them as they're changing to green... (often undertaking mr speedy, who is then compelled again to overtake)... and the same dance plays through at the next set...

I genuinely think the more people slow down... the better it will be for everyone.

StyleCop wrote:
I must admit - it's an enormous area - but I'm of opinion that it won't make that much difference (if any) to journey times within the city so makes sense.

Having commuted for 4 years driving from Brighton to Guidlford I know only too well the difference a bit of speed makes...

I used to drive like an idiot - you know, the kind of d1ck that would overtake unecessarily, accelerate hard out of junctions, speed along country lanes, outside lane of motorway 80/90mph flying past everyone... not many people would overtake me... I'd be the one overtaking... you know the type? Stressed, aggressive - frustrated in traffic, despairing of the amount of fuel burnt, the cost of fuel etc...

Then one day I decided to try an alternative approach to driving...

I decided to slow down and see what difference it made.

Bearing in mind the distances I covered 90miles daily. Cross Country, from here to Guildford, back lanes (not motorway) - I used to do this route as fast as I thought I could, howling along - 70, 80, 85mph (obviously within reason) - overtaking as many as I could, jumping red lights, so on... (what a t055er) -

So, I chose to pootle along, 50/60mph. Only overtaking the odd tractor when absolutely necessary... not taking unecessary risks... and so on... chilled out, happy, listening to radio, windows down, enjoying the scenery... life is good.

I'd get to work 5 minutes later than normal... 5 minutes... the time it takes to boil a kettle... a lot less stressed, I discovered how to enjoy driving... and that it was as muchas to do with journey as was with 'getting there'... it made very little difference to the TIME - but made a huge difference to my demeanour - arriving at work refreshed and ready to take on the day.

Plus, I could get an extra 2 days out of a tank of fuel... thats a 180miles! Which bearing in mind the rising fuel costs... was quite an achievement.

So apply that principle to city driving... with all the traffic lights, the roadworks, the pedestrians, the buses etc... there's enough hazards to make it slow going - that is a fact is it not? - so to say that reducing the top speed to 20mph will effect your journey time is, quite frankly, IMO, rubbish.

I've said this before, and have proven it too with an estate agent when I was viewing properties around the city a few years ago... he offered me a lift in his car between properties... not huge distances, we're talking, a mile, mile and half max between each one... I explained it's ok, I'll be there before he would... to which he snorted... only to be proved wrong... I was indeed waiting for him at each property. He drove. I rode.

It's a misconception that cars are fast... they're not... they can go fast sure, but it doesn't mean that they are a fast means to get around - I'm forever being overtaken by plenty of drivers... only pull up alongside or behind them at the next set of lights... and the next... the difference being... they accelerate hard to 'get in front' only to wait for ages at traffic lights... where as I pootle... and may wait at lights, or sail through them as they're changing to green... (often undertaking mr speedy, who is then compelled again to overtake)... and the same dance plays through at the next set...

I genuinely think the more people slow down... the better it will be for everyone.

Some nice arguments there, well balanced. I prefer to drive at 90+mph where possible and where safe because I enjoy it! And it gets me there faster.

Hoarder12345444 wrote:

StyleCop wrote: I must admit - it's an enormous area - but I'm of opinion that it won't make that much difference (if any) to journey times within the city so makes sense. Having commuted for 4 years driving from Brighton to Guidlford I know only too well the difference a bit of speed makes... I used to drive like an idiot - you know, the kind of d1ck that would overtake unecessarily, accelerate hard out of junctions, speed along country lanes, outside lane of motorway 80/90mph flying past everyone... not many people would overtake me... I'd be the one overtaking... you know the type? Stressed, aggressive - frustrated in traffic, despairing of the amount of fuel burnt, the cost of fuel etc... Then one day I decided to try an alternative approach to driving... I decided to slow down and see what difference it made. Bearing in mind the distances I covered 90miles daily. Cross Country, from here to Guildford, back lanes (not motorway) - I used to do this route as fast as I thought I could, howling along - 70, 80, 85mph (obviously within reason) - overtaking as many as I could, jumping red lights, so on... (what a t055er) - So, I chose to pootle along, 50/60mph. Only overtaking the odd tractor when absolutely necessary... not taking unecessary risks... and so on... chilled out, happy, listening to radio, windows down, enjoying the scenery... life is good. I'd get to work 5 minutes later than normal... 5 minutes... the time it takes to boil a kettle... a lot less stressed, I discovered how to enjoy driving... and that it was as muchas to do with journey as was with 'getting there'... it made very little difference to the TIME - but made a huge difference to my demeanour - arriving at work refreshed and ready to take on the day. Plus, I could get an extra 2 days out of a tank of fuel... thats a 180miles! Which bearing in mind the rising fuel costs... was quite an achievement. So apply that principle to city driving... with all the traffic lights, the roadworks, the pedestrians, the buses etc... there's enough hazards to make it slow going - that is a fact is it not? - so to say that reducing the top speed to 20mph will effect your journey time is, quite frankly, IMO, rubbish. I've said this before, and have proven it too with an estate agent when I was viewing properties around the city a few years ago... he offered me a lift in his car between properties... not huge distances, we're talking, a mile, mile and half max between each one... I explained it's ok, I'll be there before he would... to which he snorted... only to be proved wrong... I was indeed waiting for him at each property. He drove. I rode. It's a misconception that cars are fast... they're not... they can go fast sure, but it doesn't mean that they are a fast means to get around - I'm forever being overtaken by plenty of drivers... only pull up alongside or behind them at the next set of lights... and the next... the difference being... they accelerate hard to 'get in front' only to wait for ages at traffic lights... where as I pootle... and may wait at lights, or sail through them as they're changing to green... (often undertaking mr speedy, who is then compelled again to overtake)... and the same dance plays through at the next set... I genuinely think the more people slow down... the better it will be for everyone.

Some nice arguments there, well balanced. I prefer to drive at 90+mph where possible and where safe because I enjoy it! And it gets me there faster.

:) indeed.

I'd agree - certainly about the where possible and where safe - unfortunately in this country it's not possible anwhere, (apart from on private property/racetrack) but that's by the by...

Don't get me wrong - I enjoy driving fast - I still do... and am quite capable of it - I have a nice car - I've always had sports cars or coupes... but I just find it much more pleasurable driving sedately these days... maybe it's just an age thing - who knows.

I'm actually an advocate of faster motorways and slower cities - so yeah, I'd agree wholeheartedly with driving at 90 where possible and safe. Let's face it most modern cars can cruise effectively at those speeds and over long distances with little to no traffic high speeds certainly make an overall difference.

But my argument here is for urban driving - it's a different beast, and within the area being specified here - there's no need to drive at excessive speeds.

I suppose in reality though, I think most people will drive at 30 in 20 zones, 40 in 30's and so on... that just seems to be what people do...

Personally, I drive around the city fairly slowly... by most standards. It give pedestrians time to cross, other drivers time to pull out of junctions and keeps me chilled out... (for the most part) :)

...until some 'kin w4nk3r cuts me up... !

:)

StyleCop wrote:

Hoarder12345444 wrote:

StyleCop wrote: I must admit - it's an enormous area - but I'm of opinion that it won't make that much difference (if any) to journey times within the city so makes sense. Having commuted for 4 years driving from Brighton to Guidlford I know only too well the difference a bit of speed makes... I used to drive like an idiot - you know, the kind of d1ck that would overtake unecessarily, accelerate hard out of junctions, speed along country lanes, outside lane of motorway 80/90mph flying past everyone... not many people would overtake me... I'd be the one overtaking... you know the type? Stressed, aggressive - frustrated in traffic, despairing of the amount of fuel burnt, the cost of fuel etc... Then one day I decided to try an alternative approach to driving... I decided to slow down and see what difference it made. Bearing in mind the distances I covered 90miles daily. Cross Country, from here to Guildford, back lanes (not motorway) - I used to do this route as fast as I thought I could, howling along - 70, 80, 85mph (obviously within reason) - overtaking as many as I could, jumping red lights, so on... (what a t055er) - So, I chose to pootle along, 50/60mph. Only overtaking the odd tractor when absolutely necessary... not taking unecessary risks... and so on... chilled out, happy, listening to radio, windows down, enjoying the scenery... life is good. I'd get to work 5 minutes later than normal... 5 minutes... the time it takes to boil a kettle... a lot less stressed, I discovered how to enjoy driving... and that it was as muchas to do with journey as was with 'getting there'... it made very little difference to the TIME - but made a huge difference to my demeanour - arriving at work refreshed and ready to take on the day. Plus, I could get an extra 2 days out of a tank of fuel... thats a 180miles! Which bearing in mind the rising fuel costs... was quite an achievement. So apply that principle to city driving... with all the traffic lights, the roadworks, the pedestrians, the buses etc... there's enough hazards to make it slow going - that is a fact is it not? - so to say that reducing the top speed to 20mph will effect your journey time is, quite frankly, IMO, rubbish. I've said this before, and have proven it too with an estate agent when I was viewing properties around the city a few years ago... he offered me a lift in his car between properties... not huge distances, we're talking, a mile, mile and half max between each one... I explained it's ok, I'll be there before he would... to which he snorted... only to be proved wrong... I was indeed waiting for him at each property. He drove. I rode. It's a misconception that cars are fast... they're not... they can go fast sure, but it doesn't mean that they are a fast means to get around - I'm forever being overtaken by plenty of drivers... only pull up alongside or behind them at the next set of lights... and the next... the difference being... they accelerate hard to 'get in front' only to wait for ages at traffic lights... where as I pootle... and may wait at lights, or sail through them as they're changing to green... (often undertaking mr speedy, who is then compelled again to overtake)... and the same dance plays through at the next set... I genuinely think the more people slow down... the better it will be for everyone.

Some nice arguments there, well balanced. I prefer to drive at 90+mph where possible and where safe because I enjoy it! And it gets me there faster.

:) indeed.

I'd agree - certainly about the where possible and where safe - unfortunately in this country it's not possible anwhere, (apart from on private property/racetrack) but that's by the by...

Don't get me wrong - I enjoy driving fast - I still do... and am quite capable of it - I have a nice car - I've always had sports cars or coupes... but I just find it much more pleasurable driving sedately these days... maybe it's just an age thing - who knows.

I'm actually an advocate of faster motorways and slower cities - so yeah, I'd agree wholeheartedly with driving at 90 where possible and safe. Let's face it most modern cars can cruise effectively at those speeds and over long distances with little to no traffic high speeds certainly make an overall difference.

But my argument here is for urban driving - it's a different beast, and within the area being specified here - there's no need to drive at excessive speeds.

I suppose in reality though, I think most people will drive at 30 in 20 zones, 40 in 30's and so on... that just seems to be what people do...

Personally, I drive around the city fairly slowly... by most standards. It give pedestrians time to cross, other drivers time to pull out of junctions and keeps me chilled out... (for the most part) :)

...until some 'kin w4nk3r cuts me up... !

:)

I wonder if those demonic cyclists who seem to appear from nowhere will stick to 20mph? Many seem to travel much faster, particularly when I am a pedestrian. I suppose they never have to slow down for anything so are able to maintain their speed.

It costs in excess of £1m all in to manage a serious road traffic accident.

Hence if this reduction in speed leads to 2 less serious accidents it'll pay for itself.

Will it be enforced? Well it only takes a couple of drivers to stick to 20 then everyone else has to.

Plus anyone who is involved in an accident whilst traveling at the now common 40 in a current 30 zone would then be 20 over the limit, and that's an easy 'driving without due care and attention' charge at least, and that's really not worth it to get to my destination 30 secs sooner.

GraemeDavis wrote:
This is a big change which needed a proper debate in the community. It seems likely that 20mph will increase journey times and discourage people coming into Brighton and Hove, with the inevitable impact on jobs. If 20mph is safer (and the evidence from schemes elsewhere in the UK is mixed on this) then the loss of jobs might be justified, but people have to want this change and be willing to accept the jobs cut as the price.

Don't be so silly. The so called 'evidence' you refer to is misinformation touted by the Assoc of British Drivers.

As for costing jobs? Brighton is a tourist city. Tourists like milling around and chilling. Slower traffic means less will get run over when they get hammered!

Sheer lunacy this council and the country have become a JOKE! I will be emigrating a.s.a.p.

Patsyr wrote:

StyleCop wrote:

Hoarder12345444 wrote:

StyleCop wrote: I must admit - it's an enormous area - but I'm of opinion that it won't make that much difference (if any) to journey times within the city so makes sense. Having commuted for 4 years driving from Brighton to Guidlford I know only too well the difference a bit of speed makes... I used to drive like an idiot - you know, the kind of d1ck that would overtake unecessarily, accelerate hard out of junctions, speed along country lanes, outside lane of motorway 80/90mph flying past everyone... not many people would overtake me... I'd be the one overtaking... you know the type? Stressed, aggressive - frustrated in traffic, despairing of the amount of fuel burnt, the cost of fuel etc... Then one day I decided to try an alternative approach to driving... I decided to slow down and see what difference it made. Bearing in mind the distances I covered 90miles daily. Cross Country, from here to Guildford, back lanes (not motorway) - I used to do this route as fast as I thought I could, howling along - 70, 80, 85mph (obviously within reason) - overtaking as many as I could, jumping red lights, so on... (what a t055er) - So, I chose to pootle along, 50/60mph. Only overtaking the odd tractor when absolutely necessary... not taking unecessary risks... and so on... chilled out, happy, listening to radio, windows down, enjoying the scenery... life is good. I'd get to work 5 minutes later than normal... 5 minutes... the time it takes to boil a kettle... a lot less stressed, I discovered how to enjoy driving... and that it was as muchas to do with journey as was with 'getting there'... it made very little difference to the TIME - but made a huge difference to my demeanour - arriving at work refreshed and ready to take on the day. Plus, I could get an extra 2 days out of a tank of fuel... thats a 180miles! Which bearing in mind the rising fuel costs... was quite an achievement. So apply that principle to city driving... with all the traffic lights, the roadworks, the pedestrians, the buses etc... there's enough hazards to make it slow going - that is a fact is it not? - so to say that reducing the top speed to 20mph will effect your journey time is, quite frankly, IMO, rubbish. I've said this before, and have proven it too with an estate agent when I was viewing properties around the city a few years ago... he offered me a lift in his car between properties... not huge distances, we're talking, a mile, mile and half max between each one... I explained it's ok, I'll be there before he would... to which he snorted... only to be proved wrong... I was indeed waiting for him at each property. He drove. I rode. It's a misconception that cars are fast... they're not... they can go fast sure, but it doesn't mean that they are a fast means to get around - I'm forever being overtaken by plenty of drivers... only pull up alongside or behind them at the next set of lights... and the next... the difference being... they accelerate hard to 'get in front' only to wait for ages at traffic lights... where as I pootle... and may wait at lights, or sail through them as they're changing to green... (often undertaking mr speedy, who is then compelled again to overtake)... and the same dance plays through at the next set... I genuinely think the more people slow down... the better it will be for everyone.

Some nice arguments there, well balanced. I prefer to drive at 90+mph where possible and where safe because I enjoy it! And it gets me there faster.

:) indeed.

I'd agree - certainly about the where possible and where safe - unfortunately in this country it's not possible anwhere, (apart from on private property/racetrack) but that's by the by...

Don't get me wrong - I enjoy driving fast - I still do... and am quite capable of it - I have a nice car - I've always had sports cars or coupes... but I just find it much more pleasurable driving sedately these days... maybe it's just an age thing - who knows.

I'm actually an advocate of faster motorways and slower cities - so yeah, I'd agree wholeheartedly with driving at 90 where possible and safe. Let's face it most modern cars can cruise effectively at those speeds and over long distances with little to no traffic high speeds certainly make an overall difference.

But my argument here is for urban driving - it's a different beast, and within the area being specified here - there's no need to drive at excessive speeds.

I suppose in reality though, I think most people will drive at 30 in 20 zones, 40 in 30's and so on... that just seems to be what people do...

Personally, I drive around the city fairly slowly... by most standards. It give pedestrians time to cross, other drivers time to pull out of junctions and keeps me chilled out... (for the most part) :)

...until some 'kin w4nk3r cuts me up... !

:)

I wonder if those demonic cyclists who seem to appear from nowhere will stick to 20mph? Many seem to travel much faster, particularly when I am a pedestrian. I suppose they never have to slow down for anything so are able to maintain their speed.

Demonic eh... that's quite a claim. :)

You should try cycling, its quite good fun.

First thing to point out; unless you're exceptionally fit, have legs like Bradley wiggins and a skinny road bike, you'll find it very hard to maintain 20mph on a bicycle. So I doubt very much your concern is valid.

But... because the limits are lowered it should mean a cyclist and a car can share a road easier due to lower speeds, its easier for a cyclist to stay in flow of slower moving traffic and so long as they adhere to the rules and have good road sense (which I accept isn't the case in a lot of instances) then in theory safety should increase.

The slower we go in urban areas, the more reaction time we have.

And that applies to everyone, pedestrian, cyclist and driver.

In theory.

I'm fascinated by the idea of this - but seeing the clear animosity towards the concept I have my doubts whether it will be successful.

People are just to set in their ways and psychologically will always think they're not making progress when on the road, because of the enforced limits.

Taxi drivers are perfectly positioned for providing an experiment - where they could spend a day driving at these slower speeds and see if makes any difference to their journey times / fares.

I would like to congratulate the greens in getting at least 1 car out of 'their' city due to their 'anti-car' policies.

Unfortunately for local business' I will be spending my money elsewhere.

Brightonlad86 wrote:
I would like to congratulate the greens in getting at least 1 car out of 'their' city due to their 'anti-car' policies. Unfortunately for local business' I will be spending my money elsewhere.

Bye

graham_Seagull wrote:

Brightonlad86 wrote: I would like to congratulate the greens in getting at least 1 car out of 'their' city due to their 'anti-car' policies. Unfortunately for local business' I will be spending my money elsewhere.

Bye

Ah, I see... Another typical 'snobbish' comment from somebody who fails to see the wider picture..

Vote of no confidence in the Green administration e petition now live on the Brighton and Hove City Council website. If you love your city and want to end the waste and destruction of the Greens, please sign the petition. We need 1250 signatures to get this discussed in full council. Surely there are 1250 angry people in the city who want to make a difference? Save Our City.

Dealing with idiots wrote:
Vote of no confidence in the Green administration e petition now live on the Brighton and Hove City Council website. If you love your city and want to end the waste and destruction of the Greens, please sign the petition. We need 1250 signatures to get this discussed in full council. Surely there are 1250 angry people in the city who want to make a difference? Save Our City.

Oh adam...

ye of little faith.

Full marks for effort - but judging by the results of the other epetitions i'd be most impressed if you gather enough interest.

Welcome to grass-root politics.

Warning to the environmentalists.Th
e Green party in Brighton are about to double CO2 emmissions .

Brightonlad86 wrote:

graham_Seagull wrote:

Brightonlad86 wrote: I would like to congratulate the greens in getting at least 1 car out of 'their' city due to their 'anti-car' policies. Unfortunately for local business' I will be spending my money elsewhere.

Bye

Ah, I see... Another typical 'snobbish' comment from somebody who fails to see the wider picture..

Yes, and not only that but applied to visitors it contradicts his earlier post about Brighton being a tourist city. Greens don't do logic. Rhetoric, dogma and ideology, yes, but deep analysis is beyond them. He'd probably say that all tourists can come by public transport!

Will Madeira Drive be 20mph for the speed trials and will cyclists have to stick to this limit??????????

I think that in a lot of cases driving at slower speeds is more dangerous as it gives pedestrians the 'come on' to take the chance and run across the road in front of you.

I think that in a lot of cases driving at slower speeds is more dangerous as it gives pedestrians the 'come on' to take the chance and run across the road in front of you.

Idiot residents of Brighton vote the Green Party into power; utter shock that the Greens then instigate bizarre, politically-correct Marxist policies....

StyleCop wrote:

Dealing with idiots wrote: Vote of no confidence in the Green administration e petition now live on the Brighton and Hove City Council website. If you love your city and want to end the waste and destruction of the Greens, please sign the petition. We need 1250 signatures to get this discussed in full council. Surely there are 1250 angry people in the city who want to make a difference? Save Our City.

Oh adam... ye of little faith. Full marks for effort - but judging by the results of the other epetitions i'd be most impressed if you gather enough interest. Welcome to grass-root politics.

Adam has enormous faith in the people of Brighton and Hove, just none in Jason and the astronauts. By your online name should we ask if it is a case of Style over substance?

If you do something for a reason then most will fall into line, however having a blanket ban for political reasons will alienate most from everything you say.

I for one have seen NO increase in cycling due to all the road surface that has been given over to them as great expense.

How many people have been killed on City roads without alcohol being involved either by the driver or the pedestrian?

Will a 20mph limit change this?

Fercri Sakes wrote:

Joshiman wrote:
Let the Green nightmare carry on until the next election.Only then we will be free of this nightmare Council

I wish people would actually detail the points that make the Greens so 'dangerous', or 'scary', or 'nightmarey' or 'disasterous'. It all just seems like hollow rhetoric.

When I look out my window everything seems to be going along as normal like it did in the previous administrations. And that's with the Tories' budget cuts included.

And when I read in the press about what the Tories, Lib Dems and Labour are getting up to I think it's quite nice we have an alternative party running our city. I just dont see the scary politics some people are imagining.

is that before or after they let you out your padded cell lol

Jimmy Stewart's Imaginary Rabbit wrote:

Brightonlad86 wrote:

graham_Seagull wrote:

Brightonlad86 wrote: I would like to congratulate the greens in getting at least 1 car out of 'their' city due to their 'anti-car' policies. Unfortunately for local business' I will be spending my money elsewhere.

Bye

Ah, I see... Another typical 'snobbish' comment from somebody who fails to see the wider picture..

Yes, and not only that but applied to visitors it contradicts his earlier post about Brighton being a tourist city. Greens don't do logic. Rhetoric, dogma and ideology, yes, but deep analysis is beyond them. He'd probably say that all tourists can come by public transport!

yes your right the poor fool does sound like a complete buffoon doesn't he lol

graham_Seagull wrote:
It costs in excess of £1m all in to manage a serious road traffic accident.

Hence if this reduction in speed leads to 2 less serious accidents it'll pay for itself.

Will it be enforced? Well it only takes a couple of drivers to stick to 20 then everyone else has to.

Plus anyone who is involved in an accident whilst traveling at the now common 40 in a current 30 zone would then be 20 over the limit, and that's an easy 'driving without due care and attention' charge at least, and that's really not worth it to get to my destination 30 secs sooner.

what are you talking about you stupid person