Taxi union to oppose Brighton and Hove's 20mph scheme (From The Argus)

Will it be law? Or how will police in force this? Will we have speed cameras on side roads? I fully understand it around schools and the lanes, but new church road at 20 mph it's more looney ideas.

Not at all surprised by this reaction. Taxi drivers are some of the worst offenders at not keeping to the limits and cutting you up.
It is time there was a speed camera on the bus/taxi lane on the A259, taxis can often be seen at excessive speeds up to 50mph on this 30mph road.
They would never go at 20mph in the city!!

Taxi going 20 mph at three in morning with no one else around? They won't bother working, same for bus companies, during daylight going 30 is a struggle, no doubt cameras are the new local tax.

Taxis are cars, greens hate cars
simples

Would the last person closing his business please put out the closed sign

Good for the GMB. I hope they throw their full weight at the Greens and perhaps at last they will listen to someone (although I doubt it).

The taxi drivers should be consulted and it was an omission not to include them, but I am not sure why they should be given special treatment compared to other consultees. Taxi drivers are supposed to be proffessional drivers and many that I have used have been excellent, but there is a minority that show disrespect for other road users and pedestrians and these people need their licenses revoked. A few random speed checks would weed them out.

Why do the GMB Union think they weren't consulted? Anyone and everyone was free to respond to the consultation (which came out in favour of the 20mph limit). If they or their members didn't respond to the consultation that's their problem.

Why would taxi drivers, who flout every legality on the roads whether it be speeding, parking or obstruction, let alone tailgating and barging oncoming cars out of the way in congested streets, be even remotely considered on a consultation?

I worry about my granddaughter crossing the road, but I'm not sure that 20 mph is a good idea when hurrying home from the airport.

Civic Man.
In answer to your question and sweeping statement;
Taxi's are meant to be key stakeholders in the City's public transport scheme.
The officer involved stated she was in touch with the Bus company at least three to four times a week and yet did not consult with Taxis even once.
The issue is the Council not fulfilling it's legal obligations, rather than the cabs being anti 20MPH where it is necessary for safety.
The fact that cyclists were actively and vigorously consulted resulted in a small majority for the scheme.
The Bus company has severe reservations and are at present against it.
I wont trade blows with you over by debating how law abiding cyclists are in the City.

BLAH BLAH BLAH UNIONS
BLAH BLAH BLAH TAXIS

Maybe if taxis and buses weren't so reckless through town, they could be trusted to drive at 30. Maybe if pedestrians weren't so brain-dead and unaware of HOW TO CROSS A ROAD, we wouldn't need to wrap everyone up in cotton wool.

20 mph.. Why not got the full hog and ban traffic completely.

Taxis will never abide by any speed laws, they drive like they are on brands hatch circuit, park illegally, stop randomly.. You really think they will be able to abide by this ruling.. Its a joke!

and don't get me started on Bikes!

Don't listen to them council. I'm looking forward to this limit being brought in. Too many roads are dangerous to cross because of the speed drivers go and taxis are among the worst offenders

The roads that will be subject to the 20 mph speed limit are not the roads where the crashes occur. People are not "hit at 30 mph" Cars have such a thing called brakes which the driver applies when the stupid pedestrian aimlessly wanders out into the road instead of stopping and looking like a sensible person would.
If the "lark" is not enforced by the Police then only a few pedants will keep to the limit thereby wasting a huge sum of council money that could have been spent in a much more worthwhile manner.

Without sounding controvertial this seems like a knee jerk reaction without any basis.

As I mentioned in a previous post on the topic yesterday that Taxi Drivers are in a perfect position to test the theory that a reduction in speed limits won't make a *significant* difference to journey times in urban zones.

I'll stand corrected if proved otherwise.

Rather than jump up and down and shout, a simple time & motion study should be carried out;

Take 3 groups.

Group 1 - Drives as they would do now... (if we're to believe some of the rhetoric here, jumping lights and speeding aroud the city)

Group 2 - Drives within the law, exactly at the currently set limits, stopping at red lights, no jumping allowed, courteously, etc

Group 3 - as group 2, but reduces their speed by 10mph within the suggested area

It'll need more parameters I'm sure, but o this for a week...

Collect the results and compare times, fares and individual stress levels. I think there'll be a few surprises.

------

Top Gear once did a feature on Urban Driving and futility of it highlighting a very interesting result...

The conceit being all 4 presenters took different modes of transport in an attempt to get from a set point (A) to a set point (B)

I quote from the top gear website;

"In an attempt to find the quickest means to negotiate the virtually gridlocked streets of the capital, we organised a race. Starting in West London, with London City Airport the target destination, our presenters introduced their weapons of choice:

James made the case for the car. Unfortunately, the car in question was the massive new Mercedes GL500, which, at 17ft long and 6.5ft wide, is surely the king of the Chelsea tractors. Next to arrive was a Lycra-clad Hammond, who would be travelling by bicycle - a state-of-the-art, £1,700 bicycle, admittedly, but a bicycle none the less.

Next, we wheeled in the Stig, armed him with an Oyster card and told him to use public transport. Finally, Jeremy arrived and announced he would be using the river - and a 225bhp racing speedboat.

In a shock result that could spell the end of Top Gear as we know it, the bicycle came first, then the speedboat, then the Oyster card, and finally the car. Ahem."

Yes... the Bike came first! - admittedly this is London, and it was in Rush Hour, but the point remains that cars aren't as fast as people think they are within cities over short distances... they're easy and convenient, but fast...?

Put a speed camera on each and every road where there is a 20mph limit and see the 'system' grind to a halt under the weight of fines.

A very poorly thought out plan by the Council and, if is to be of any benefit, needs to be implemented a bit more sensibly.

Once people see major roads with a 20mph limit with buses held up then the scheme will become a laughing stock (probably nationally as happened with parking). Yes, narrow small residential roads and around schools could and should be 20mph. But main roads around the city as 20mph - why?

Well 20mph pollutes more than 30 - so not for that reason

Encouraging jobs and business into city. Well, no....

To stop the greens getting re-elected. Yes, that's the reason that the other parties haven't joined and voted down

This is a dangerous policy. I suspect serious accidents will go UP and not down. Why would this be? Well many will try and drive within the law (even though it's not enforced) so pedestrians will get used to allowing to cross at 20mph distances. Some, a significant minority won't, and will drive at 30 or more (perhaps taxis and buses among them as now not following all speed limits). Pedestrians/cyclists won't expect so chance of accident goes up.....

Another green experiment that will cost money to reverse. Good on the taxi drivers to challenge

Cycles are often the quickest mode of transport in B&H as no time is spent parking. Even walking is quicker over the shorter distances!

HJarrs wrote:
Cycles are often the quickest mode of transport in B&H as no time is spent parking. Even walking is quicker over the shorter distances!

here here...

StyleCop wrote:

HJarrs wrote:
Cycles are often the quickest mode of transport in B&H as no time is spent parking. Even walking is quicker over the shorter distances!

here here...

Yes, that's true now so why will 20mph over such a wide area help?

I cycle, walk, bus and occasionally drive around town (driving mainly limited to work/leisure trips away from town). Hopefully can therefore see from all sides. As a cyclist this doesn't make me feel safer - the car drivers who will ignore this unenforced 20mph limit are just the type of drivers that you need to be worried about now so it doesn't help

Not everyone can walk/cycle long distances - for health or practical reasons (hopefully including lots of shopping from local retailers if they aren't all to close!). To slow them down and increase their costs (as taxi and bus prices are bound to rise with this) seems unfair and potentially discriminatory

NickBtn wrote:

StyleCop wrote:

HJarrs wrote: Cycles are often the quickest mode of transport in B&H as no time is spent parking. Even walking is quicker over the shorter distances!

here here...

Yes, that's true now so why will 20mph over such a wide area help? I cycle, walk, bus and occasionally drive around town (driving mainly limited to work/leisure trips away from town). Hopefully can therefore see from all sides. As a cyclist this doesn't make me feel safer - the car drivers who will ignore this unenforced 20mph limit are just the type of drivers that you need to be worried about now so it doesn't help Not everyone can walk/cycle long distances - for health or practical reasons (hopefully including lots of shopping from local retailers if they aren't all to close!). To slow them down and increase their costs (as taxi and bus prices are bound to rise with this) seems unfair and potentially discriminatory

Hi Nick.

I too cycle, walk, and drive around the city dependant on circumstances - I also run (for fitness) and use the public transport irregularly. So likewise consider to have a broad view of the issue.

I think that if traffic is slower in urban zones it *may* well help pedestrians as they (The cars) are travelling at more 'pedestrian' speeds - therefore enabling easier, less fraught navigation of streets? -

I may be wrong, but that to me makes sense...

Of course, you're right regarding road users who ignore the rules - and we cannot legislate for ignorance.

Prices are constantly on the increase - the ratchet effect nature of the economy - but I don't see how, or why, a reduction in speed limits to lead to an increase in costs?

My experience of driving, fast... and slow... has led me to discover that driving slower increases my Fuel Economy quite considerably - and has very little effect to my overall drive time over shorter distances.

I accept that not everyone has the luxury of health or their own vehicles - but I think that's besides the point.

Wasn't there a study taken recently that claimed the average speed within a city center is ~17mph?

If that's true, then there's no reason why this limit will make any difference to journey times...

Hence the need for a proper study by the taxi companys to prove their grievance...

Until that happens, I stand by my claim that it's knee jerk, and baseless.

I understood that the guidelines stated that the 20mph limit should only be used in shopping areas and near schools. this council is ignoring that, just as they ignored the fact that fee-parking areas should not be used in purely residentitial areas, especially in evenings and weekends. I bitterly resent paying to park when visiting my brother, who is in a residential care home in Hove, which is in a residential road.

Hove Actually wrote:
Taxis are cars, greens hate cars simples Would the last person closing his business please put out the closed sign

Dear H.A.

Although I don't always agree with your points of view, I actually quite enjoy your contibutions to the comments boards...

But may I respectfully request you avoid using that annoying advertising slogan as a sign-off...

It's not big - and it's not clever.

If you cycle along the Lewes Road from Bear Road to town it's not quicker to cycle, unless you ignore all the lights.
There are so many lights and crossings, it is quicker to walk. You only just get some momentum and the lights go red and then you get the red sequence all the way. The worst thing is the number of people who walk past a crossing and push the button and then don't cross.
As for parking, HJarrs, you should try and park a bike in town. There are not enough racks hence the proliferation of people using lamp posts and the railings which is often a nuisance to pedestrians.

Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
If you cycle along the Lewes Road from Bear Road to town it's not quicker to cycle, unless you ignore all the lights. There are so many lights and crossings, it is quicker to walk. You only just get some momentum and the lights go red and then you get the red sequence all the way. The worst thing is the number of people who walk past a crossing and push the button and then don't cross. As for parking, HJarrs, you should try and park a bike in town. There are not enough racks hence the proliferation of people using lamp posts and the railings which is often a nuisance to pedestrians.

I absolutely agree; we need far more bike parking in the city.

Its about time something was done. In my opinion the best option would be to ban ALL forms of transport, including walking and cycling. Drivers are dangerous:usually blind drunk, parking willy nilly and speeding wildly around town centres with the sole aim of running over pedestrians and killing endangered snow leopards.
Cyclists on the other hand serve no other purpose than to recklessly plough through red lights whilst hurling profanity at all and sundry, usuallly rampaging around the city at night wearing camouflage and no headlights to avoid detection.
And don't get me started on pedestrians. These feral creatures, normally high on crack cocaine will step out in front of moving articulated lorries in order to claim compensation and disability benefits before returning to their subterranean squats to engage in wild orgies and plot to overthrow the western civilisation.
Ban ALL transport, and hose down anyone that says otherwise!

It should be made very clear that the intention is to eventually have a blanket scheme of 20mph throughout Brighton & Hove.

This is called a "20mph limit" scheme which is completely different to a "20mph zone" scheme.

This means that 99% of the road infrastructure will be "limited" to 20mph.

I would not think that any taxi driver would object to the "20mph zone" scheme which would cover residential areas and strategic places such as schools.

But... to have every road in the city set at 20mph is... quite frankly.. ridiculous.

Pebbles wrote:
It should be made very clear that the intention is to eventually have a blanket scheme of 20mph throughout Brighton & Hove. This is called a "20mph limit" scheme which is completely different to a "20mph zone" scheme. This means that 99% of the road infrastructure will be "limited" to 20mph. I would not think that any taxi driver would object to the "20mph zone" scheme which would cover residential areas and strategic places such as schools. But... to have every road in the city set at 20mph is... quite frankly.. ridiculous.

Hmmm...

I'm inclined to agree - if what you say is true and being part the long-term strategy.

Zoning makes perfect sense. But I can't imagine any authority agreeing to or having the power to bring in such a blanket limit.

Are you sure that's the intention...?

May I ask how you arrive at this conclusion?

StyleCop wrote:

NickBtn wrote:

StyleCop wrote:

HJarrs wrote: Cycles are often the quickest mode of transport in B&H as no time is spent parking. Even walking is quicker over the shorter distances!

here here...

Yes, that's true now so why will 20mph over such a wide area help? I cycle, walk, bus and occasionally drive around town (driving mainly limited to work/leisure trips away from town). Hopefully can therefore see from all sides. As a cyclist this doesn't make me feel safer - the car drivers who will ignore this unenforced 20mph limit are just the type of drivers that you need to be worried about now so it doesn't help Not everyone can walk/cycle long distances - for health or practical reasons (hopefully including lots of shopping from local retailers if they aren't all to close!). To slow them down and increase their costs (as taxi and bus prices are bound to rise with this) seems unfair and potentially discriminatory

Hi Nick.

I too cycle, walk, and drive around the city dependant on circumstances - I also run (for fitness) and use the public transport irregularly. So likewise consider to have a broad view of the issue.

I think that if traffic is slower in urban zones it *may* well help pedestrians as they (The cars) are travelling at more 'pedestrian' speeds - therefore enabling easier, less fraught navigation of streets? -

I may be wrong, but that to me makes sense...

Of course, you're right regarding road users who ignore the rules - and we cannot legislate for ignorance.

Prices are constantly on the increase - the ratchet effect nature of the economy - but I don't see how, or why, a reduction in speed limits to lead to an increase in costs?

My experience of driving, fast... and slow... has led me to discover that driving slower increases my Fuel Economy quite considerably - and has very little effect to my overall drive time over shorter distances.

I accept that not everyone has the luxury of health or their own vehicles - but I think that's besides the point.

Wasn't there a study taken recently that claimed the average speed within a city center is ~17mph?

If that's true, then there's no reason why this limit will make any difference to journey times...

Hence the need for a proper study by the taxi companys to prove their grievance...

Until that happens, I stand by my claim that it's knee jerk, and baseless.

StyleCop

I think prices for buses and taxis are likely to go up if the speed limit goes down. Many bus routes are in the proposed zone - this will reduce the speed that the buses can travel at (assuming they stick to the new limit!) so each journey will take longer. That means there will need to be more buses to keep the current frequency (eg one every ten minutes). So more buses, more drivers and more costs. Or the bus company could reduce the frequency - but this makes the buses much less attractive to use. Hardly a green transport policy to make buses cost more or less attractive to customers - reasons why B&H buses aren't keen on the proposals?

Taxi drivers will find it harder to make money as they will spend longer getting to a job. Less jobs, less money. They need to make a living so again pressure to put prices up

But these are my views and thoughts. I agree the taxi and bus companies should make their concerns very clear and at this stage public. Perhaps some figures on likely price rises and route changes might focus minds....

HJarrs wrote:
Cycles are often the quickest mode of transport in B&H as no time is spent parking. Even walking is quicker over the shorter distances!

I'd like to see you cycling all the way up Bear Road. I bet you live on a nice flat road right near the seafront (Kemp Town maybe), or in the centre of town with good transport links. I'm so sick of people like you preaching about cycling like it's a new religion. Brighton is really hilly and cycling is not for everyone, especially older people who rely on their cars. Only the brave would be happy to cycle in driving rain and gale force winds during the winter months.

I'd also like thank the Greens for painting a great big bus stop on Bear Road taking out a number of parking spaces - even though there is only one bus an hour and the service stops in the early evening. Note the bus is always empty and rarely does anyone ever get on or off at this stop.

Good on the taxi drivers. As other people have pointed out, 20mph is for narrow residential streets, not main roads. There is no way delivery drivers are going to stick to this limit, let alone anyone else. As Duncan Bannatyne would say, 'it's ridiculous and ludicrous'!

Certain areas should have 20 mph limit but its going too far if everywhere is 20mph.As for taxis they are more dangerous than buses in areas like churchill square so they should be targeted ,also why do taxis think they have a right at 3 am to toot their horn are the drivers too lazy to go and knock on the door that called them,its a constant nuisance in my area.

StyleCop wrote:

Pebbles wrote: It should be made very clear that the intention is to eventually have a blanket scheme of 20mph throughout Brighton & Hove. This is called a "20mph limit" scheme which is completely different to a "20mph zone" scheme. This means that 99% of the road infrastructure will be "limited" to 20mph. I would not think that any taxi driver would object to the "20mph zone" scheme which would cover residential areas and strategic places such as schools. But... to have every road in the city set at 20mph is... quite frankly.. ridiculous.

Hmmm... I'm inclined to agree - if what you say is true and being part the long-term strategy. Zoning makes perfect sense. But I can't imagine any authority agreeing to or having the power to bring in such a blanket limit. Are you sure that's the intention...? May I ask how you arrive at this conclusion?

This stage 1 of 4.

Full details...including map of all areas of the proposed phases.. can be viewed at:

www.bhtaxiforum.co.u
k/20mph.html

... and yes... I am in the trade (30 years)

The link didnt show correctly in the above post so lets try again...

www.bhtaxiforum.co.u
k//20mph.html

Ha.... ok.. so it did not show correctly again... so just copy the url link :)

What a Joke !!! great idea if you live in cambodia.. Can we hire a Green flag waver to walk in front of the bus.. or will the poor cyclist in the bus lane do the job...

i would hazard a guess that the current city average speed is less than 20mph anyway! as for the taxi drivers union getting involved, why? it is not their problem.

StyleCop wrote:
Without sounding controvertial this seems like a knee jerk reaction without any basis.

As I mentioned in a previous post on the topic yesterday that Taxi Drivers are in a perfect position to test the theory that a reduction in speed limits won't make a *significant* difference to journey times in urban zones.

I'll stand corrected if proved otherwise.

Rather than jump up and down and shout, a simple time & motion study should be carried out;

Take 3 groups.

Group 1 - Drives as they would do now... (if we're to believe some of the rhetoric here, jumping lights and speeding aroud the city)

Group 2 - Drives within the law, exactly at the currently set limits, stopping at red lights, no jumping allowed, courteously, etc

Group 3 - as group 2, but reduces their speed by 10mph within the suggested area

It'll need more parameters I'm sure, but o this for a week...

Collect the results and compare times, fares and individual stress levels. I think there'll be a few surprises.

------

Top Gear once did a feature on Urban Driving and futility of it highlighting a very interesting result...

The conceit being all 4 presenters took different modes of transport in an attempt to get from a set point (A) to a set point (B)

I quote from the top gear website;

"In an attempt to find the quickest means to negotiate the virtually gridlocked streets of the capital, we organised a race. Starting in West London, with London City Airport the target destination, our presenters introduced their weapons of choice:

James made the case for the car. Unfortunately, the car in question was the massive new Mercedes GL500, which, at 17ft long and 6.5ft wide, is surely the king of the Chelsea tractors. Next to arrive was a Lycra-clad Hammond, who would be travelling by bicycle - a state-of-the-art, £1,700 bicycle, admittedly, but a bicycle none the less.

Next, we wheeled in the Stig, armed him with an Oyster card and told him to use public transport. Finally, Jeremy arrived and announced he would be using the river - and a 225bhp racing speedboat.

In a shock result that could spell the end of Top Gear as we know it, the bicycle came first, then the speedboat, then the Oyster card, and finally the car. Ahem."

Yes... the Bike came first! - admittedly this is London, and it was in Rush Hour, but the point remains that cars aren't as fast as people think they are within cities over short distances... they're easy and convenient, but fast...?

Try running a business, carrying a weeks shopping or moving three small children around. Bike, no thanks.

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.
http://present.brigh
ton-hove.gov.uk/mgEP
etitionDisplay.aspx?
ID=360&RPID=6033530&
HPID=6033530