City gets 20mph limit despite opposition from Brighton and Hove taxi drivers (From The Argus)

SirColesy wrote:
Hope all you green party hippies are happy with this! I'd love to know the facts behind this decision; morons!

Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
but the policy is not policed iloveworthing so pedestrians and cyclists are lulled into a false sense of security.

downfader wrote:

Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
but the policy is not policed iloveworthing so pedestrians and cyclists are lulled into a false sense of security.

That's partly because residents HAVE to make more of an issue about it at their PACT meetings with the Police. People have the concern but wont speak up.

falmer seagull wrote:
Nobody denies that pedestrians would have a better survival rate if struck by car at 20mph. However, we are not told the statistics on fatalities on the inner Brighton roads! Most fatalities to my knowledge have been down to the two way bus lanes!

iloveworthing wrote:
I think this is great. So many other places in the UK have introduced 20mph limits on residential roads to make things safer for pedestrians, cyclists, children and older people. I visit Brighton a lot (generally train and on foot) and the reduced limits will certainly make me feel safer crossing roads with my children, as well as walking along narrow pavements without the fear of speeding traffic.

imnotpc wrote:
Don't worry eveyone its not policed or enforcable so everyone will totally ignore it anyway lol.Did they consider that 20mph limits actually increase accidents this a fact.You got to love the tree huggers hahahaha

charlie smirke wrote:

downfader wrote:

Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
but the policy is not policed iloveworthing so pedestrians and cyclists are lulled into a false sense of security.

That's partly because residents HAVE to make more of an issue about it at their PACT meetings with the Police. People have the concern but wont speak up.

What are PACT meetings ? I don't think we have any of those!

gusset snatcher wrote:
and the cost of implementation..... £1.5mill... i believe this limit is only valid around schools..... it's almost like going back to having a man with a red flag in front of cars.

keswick wrote:
This Green Party is totally against anyone attempting to get in to Brighton by car. Yet again they show that they are totally unfit to govern this city and will be shown the door at the next election.

The chaos that will reign in Lewes Road is there for all to see and the scheme is only under construction. It was chaos after the match at Falmer last Saturday and that will be the norm.

As for Mr Chocolate bar perhaps he should take notice when he is contacted asking why a local councillor ignores a request from a constituent on more than one occasion. Still if I had contacted Mr Sven over my pink bike I would have been swamped with replies. Totally unfit for office the lot of them.

Michael Inkpin-Leissner wrote:
Thank you Greens, you added 30 min. for my way to work. Brilliant. Because thanks to you guys, the traffic jams will be longer and longer lasting.
You British Greens are a big embarrassment for all Green Parties in Europe. May I remind you, you are working for the people and not for ideology!

downfader wrote:
NOT ONE of you complaining has validated your complaint with how far you drive...

..therefore this means that you have nothing to complain about, then.

SirColesy wrote:
Hope all you green party hippies are happy with this! I'd love to know the facts behind this decision; morons!

Ballroom Blitz wrote:
It won't make any difference to me. I'll learn where all the cameras are, and then continue to drive at approx 40mph when I can, and bollards to the flipping Green idiots.
They will never catch me. They haven't for the last 10 years I have been here.
And whatever the rest of you think: I am 100% safe. Never had an accident in 30 years.

Ballroom Blitz wrote:
It won't make any difference to me. I'll learn where all the cameras are, and then continue to drive at approx 40mph when I can, and bollards to the flipping Green idiots.
They will never catch me. They haven't for the last 10 years I have been here.
And whatever the rest of you think: I am 100% safe. Never had an accident in 30 years.

Fight_Back wrote:

downfader wrote:
NOT ONE of you complaining has validated your complaint with how far you drive...

..therefore this means that you have nothing to complain about, then.

What a bizarre argument that people that live in the city don't have a right of complaint about a policy unless they fulfil certain criteria outside being a city resident. Only a Green could think that !

HJarrs wrote:
I welcome the 20mph limit and it seems to me that we should now be lobbying council and Police for enforcement rather than moaning on about it.

downfader wrote:

Ballroom Blitz wrote:
It won't make any difference to me. I'll learn where all the cameras are, and then continue to drive at approx 40mph when I can, and bollards to the flipping Green idiots.
They will never catch me. They haven't for the last 10 years I have been here.
And whatever the rest of you think: I am 100% safe. Never had an accident in 30 years.

But how many have you caused?

downfader wrote:

imnotpc wrote:
Don't worry eveyone its not policed or enforcable so everyone will totally ignore it anyway lol.Did they consider that 20mph limits actually increase accidents this a fact.You got to love the tree huggers hahahaha

No, not true.

There was an increase in KSIs on 20 zones in 2011, but there were two big caveats to the stats:

1. Not even the Government knew how many miles of 20 zones there were, so it was hard to work out the risk factor compared to motorways, urban areas etc

2. the increase actually amounted to 2 extra deaths. The year before had something like 4 in total. Compare that to the 600 extra pedestrians killed in other areas and the hundreds of thousands seriously injured each year in non-20 zones.

And the tree-hugger comments are pretty lame. There are plenty of families who want their children to be safer. Plenty of Doctors and Nurses who also want to deal with LESS injuries and deaths from the motor traffic and support it.

iloveworthing wrote:
I think this is great. So many other places in the UK have introduced 20mph limits on residential roads to make things safer for pedestrians, cyclists, children and older people. I visit Brighton a lot (generally train and on foot) and the reduced limits will certainly make me feel safer crossing roads with my children, as well as walking along narrow pavements without the fear of speeding traffic.

leobrighton wrote:
GOOD News just hope its vigourously enforced. Could have collected hundreds in fines just through the driving I witnessed between 7.30 and 9 this morning as well as a few much more serious criminal offences committed by drivers, miracle people don't get killed daily. As for the taxi drivers well there in another league altogether.

imnotpc wrote:

downfader wrote:

imnotpc wrote:
Don't worry eveyone its not policed or enforcable so everyone will totally ignore it anyway lol.Did they consider that 20mph limits actually increase accidents this a fact.You got to love the tree huggers hahahaha

No, not true.

There was an increase in KSIs on 20 zones in 2011, but there were two big caveats to the stats:

1. Not even the Government knew how many miles of 20 zones there were, so it was hard to work out the risk factor compared to motorways, urban areas etc

2. the increase actually amounted to 2 extra deaths. The year before had something like 4 in total. Compare that to the 600 extra pedestrians killed in other areas and the hundreds of thousands seriously injured each year in non-20 zones.

And the tree-hugger comments are pretty lame. There are plenty of families who want their children to be safer. Plenty of Doctors and Nurses who also want to deal with LESS injuries and deaths from the motor traffic and support it.

blah blah blah you can't take the fact that it actually increases accidents,it doesn't have be deaths.There has been a massive increase in rta's where there is 20mph limits.I know the truth hurts but it is the truth sorry

downfader wrote:

Fight_Back wrote:

downfader wrote:
NOT ONE of you complaining has validated your complaint with how far you drive...

..therefore this means that you have nothing to complain about, then.

What a bizarre argument that people that live in the city don't have a right of complaint about a policy unless they fulfil certain criteria outside being a city resident. Only a Green could think that !

I've never voted green in my life, but on the basis of all of your "anger" I think I've just been converted.

Thanks

And yes it is a valid argument. The DFT have been clear on the data over the last 10 years. Read my above comment - most of the traffic is local and is short distance. Is it not selfish for those people to drive and clog the roads for others?

downfader wrote:

Michael Inkpin-Leissner wrote:
Thank you Greens, you added 30 min. for my way to work. Brilliant. Because thanks to you guys, the traffic jams will be longer and longer lasting.
You British Greens are a big embarrassment for all Green Parties in Europe. May I remind you, you are working for the people and not for ideology!

So if you're already in a traffic jam - how exactly will a 10mph drop in maximum speed limit affect non-moving traffic..?

Bizarre and ludicrous comment

Fight_Back wrote:

downfader wrote:

Fight_Back wrote:

downfader wrote:
NOT ONE of you complaining has validated your complaint with how far you drive...

..therefore this means that you have nothing to complain about, then.

What a bizarre argument that people that live in the city don't have a right of complaint about a policy unless they fulfil certain criteria outside being a city resident. Only a Green could think that !

I've never voted green in my life, but on the basis of all of your "anger" I think I've just been converted.

Thanks

And yes it is a valid argument. The DFT have been clear on the data over the last 10 years. Read my above comment - most of the traffic is local and is short distance. Is it not selfish for those people to drive and clog the roads for others?

Using your argument, unless you walk x amount of miles on a city pavement you have no right to complain about the lighting or poor repair of said pavement.

Any taxpayer and any voter within the city has every right to complain about a city council policy - it's called democracy. Sorry, maybe I should have suggested you're a communist as their against democracy.

Any driver that pays the appropriate taxes and fees and holds a valid drivers licence with insurance can drive on the road. You might not like it if they only do a couple of miles but they still have the right to do so. Given your strange limit I guess I'm not allowed to drive in the city as I drop my partner at work in the North Laine area and then drive to Worthing ?

Hoarder12345444 wrote:
Wow, what a real dictator Kitkat is!! I will not be driving 20mph, I have to get to work each day, thankyou.

downfader wrote:

Fight_Back wrote:

downfader wrote:

Fight_Back wrote:

downfader wrote:
NOT ONE of you complaining has validated your complaint with how far you drive...

..therefore this means that you have nothing to complain about, then.

What a bizarre argument that people that live in the city don't have a right of complaint about a policy unless they fulfil certain criteria outside being a city resident. Only a Green could think that !

I've never voted green in my life, but on the basis of all of your "anger" I think I've just been converted.

Thanks

And yes it is a valid argument. The DFT have been clear on the data over the last 10 years. Read my above comment - most of the traffic is local and is short distance. Is it not selfish for those people to drive and clog the roads for others?

Using your argument, unless you walk x amount of miles on a city pavement you have no right to complain about the lighting or poor repair of said pavement.

Any taxpayer and any voter within the city has every right to complain about a city council policy - it's called democracy. Sorry, maybe I should have suggested you're a communist as their against democracy.

Any driver that pays the appropriate taxes and fees and holds a valid drivers licence with insurance can drive on the road. You might not like it if they only do a couple of miles but they still have the right to do so. Given your strange limit I guess I'm not allowed to drive in the city as I drop my partner at work in the North Laine area and then drive to Worthing ?

No. Car sharing is fine. You're making assumptions out of anger.

So where should all of these extra cars go? If the roads are jammed and people are unnecessarily using the car then surely there could be some kind of link..

..let me think...

Democracy is no excuse from absolving yourselves from social responsibility.

No excuse from absolving yourself from environmental responsibility either - some more facts: 14% of all pollution in the UK comes from private domestic cars. 80% of the most toxic and harmful air pollutants come from cars, too.

Social and environmental responsibility.

Michael Inkpin-Leissner wrote:

downfader wrote:

Michael Inkpin-Leissner wrote:
Thank you Greens, you added 30 min. for my way to work. Brilliant. Because thanks to you guys, the traffic jams will be longer and longer lasting.
You British Greens are a big embarrassment for all Green Parties in Europe. May I remind you, you are working for the people and not for ideology!

So if you're already in a traffic jam - how exactly will a 10mph drop in maximum speed limit affect non-moving traffic..?

Bizarre and ludicrous comment

Ever tried to make it out of Brighton in rush hour? I guess, the person who put that comment on my post is not in need to be urgent available. Otherwise I can't explain this not really thought threw comment by downfader. Thanks to the Greens, my costs for parking rose from 88 pounds a months to about 400. Thanks to the Greens, within half a year all major roads out of Brighton have road works going on, all at the very same time. I do not want to be part in some of the kindergarden discussions here. I want to make a point for citizens who have to commute out of Brighton.

downfader wrote:

Michael Inkpin-Leissner wrote:

downfader wrote:

Michael Inkpin-Leissner wrote:
Thank you Greens, you added 30 min. for my way to work. Brilliant. Because thanks to you guys, the traffic jams will be longer and longer lasting.
You British Greens are a big embarrassment for all Green Parties in Europe. May I remind you, you are working for the people and not for ideology!

So if you're already in a traffic jam - how exactly will a 10mph drop in maximum speed limit affect non-moving traffic..?

Bizarre and ludicrous comment

Ever tried to make it out of Brighton in rush hour? I guess, the person who put that comment on my post is not in need to be urgent available. Otherwise I can't explain this not really thought threw comment by downfader. Thanks to the Greens, my costs for parking rose from 88 pounds a months to about 400. Thanks to the Greens, within half a year all major roads out of Brighton have road works going on, all at the very same time. I do not want to be part in some of the kindergarden discussions here. I want to make a point for citizens who have to commute out of Brighton.

Every city has this problem. Brighton is no exception.

If expediency was such an issue over long distance then why not invest in a motorbike?

Stop with the "poor little me" people, it does you no favours. Plenty of people cope without the car or find strategies with their employer to car share or get discount rail travel.

BornInBrighton1968 wrote:
Don't forget that the Green Party loons were voted in mainly by students, who thought that they we being ever-so trendy and alternative by voting Green (yet still fly-tip all of their junk at the end of Term when they go back home to mummy and daddy).

Now is the time for all Brighton men and women of good character to stand together to remove the incompetent, ultra politically-correc Green loons from power.

If we all work together, it could happen in a matter of months!

Michael Inkpin-Leissner wrote:

downfader wrote:

Michael Inkpin-Leissner wrote:

downfader wrote:

Michael Inkpin-Leissner wrote:
Thank you Greens, you added 30 min. for my way to work. Brilliant. Because thanks to you guys, the traffic jams will be longer and longer lasting.
You British Greens are a big embarrassment for all Green Parties in Europe. May I remind you, you are working for the people and not for ideology!

So if you're already in a traffic jam - how exactly will a 10mph drop in maximum speed limit affect non-moving traffic..?

Bizarre and ludicrous comment

Ever tried to make it out of Brighton in rush hour? I guess, the person who put that comment on my post is not in need to be urgent available. Otherwise I can't explain this not really thought threw comment by downfader. Thanks to the Greens, my costs for parking rose from 88 pounds a months to about 400. Thanks to the Greens, within half a year all major roads out of Brighton have road works going on, all at the very same time. I do not want to be part in some of the kindergarden discussions here. I want to make a point for citizens who have to commute out of Brighton.

Every city has this problem. Brighton is no exception.

If expediency was such an issue over long distance then why not invest in a motorbike?

Stop with the "poor little me" people, it does you no favours. Plenty of people cope without the car or find strategies with their employer to car share or get discount rail travel.

Downfader, enjoy your tour de commentaries here. You want to be heard but have nothing constructive to say. But i agree, my mistake to comment here to feed guys like you

bus nut wrote:
So can someone tell me how the police will enforce the speed limit for cyclists as they speed down these roads faster than 20mph but have no Speedo so with that in mind they wouldn't even know they were speeding well done the greens maybe now the cyclists will finally make the government some money in fixed penalties lol rofl oh dear no body thought about that did they

downfader wrote:

Hoarder12345444 wrote:
Wow, what a real dictator Kitkat is!! I will not be driving 20mph, I have to get to work each day, thankyou.

Set off earlier. Its as easy as that.

Fight_Back wrote:
Totally unenforceable so I'll be ignoring it and driving at 30 thank you.

downfader wrote:

Michael Inkpin-Leissner wrote:

downfader wrote:

Michael Inkpin-Leissner wrote:
Thank you Greens, you added 30 min. for my way to work. Brilliant. Because thanks to you guys, the traffic jams will be longer and longer lasting.
You British Greens are a big embarrassment for all Green Parties in Europe. May I remind you, you are working for the people and not for ideology!

So if you're already in a traffic jam - how exactly will a 10mph drop in maximum speed limit affect non-moving traffic..?

Bizarre and ludicrous comment

Ever tried to make it out of Brighton in rush hour? I guess, the person who put that comment on my post is not in need to be urgent available. Otherwise I can't explain this not really thought threw comment by downfader. Thanks to the Greens, my costs for parking rose from 88 pounds a months to about 400. Thanks to the Greens, within half a year all major roads out of Brighton have road works going on, all at the very same time. I do not want to be part in some of the kindergarden discussions here. I want to make a point for citizens who have to commute out of Brighton.

Every city has this problem. Brighton is no exception.

If expediency was such an issue over long distance then why not invest in a motorbike?

Stop with the "poor little me" people, it does you no favours. Plenty of people cope without the car or find strategies with their employer to car share or get discount rail travel.

downfader wrote:

bus nut wrote:
So can someone tell me how the police will enforce the speed limit for cyclists as they speed down these roads faster than 20mph but have no Speedo so with that in mind they wouldn't even know they were speeding well done the greens maybe now the cyclists will finally make the government some money in fixed penalties lol rofl oh dear no body thought about that did they

IIRC the laws on speed are selective to "motorised vehicles" under the road traffic act for exactly the reason you note. Cycles dont have speedometers (you can buy them though, called odemeters or cycle computers)

Most cyclists dont go above 15mph

The Real Phil wrote:

Fight_Back wrote:
Totally unenforceable so I'll be ignoring it and driving at 30 thank you.

Obviously a quote from one who does not care who dies, just so long as they get to their destination more quickly. With all of the moaners and whingers, is there not one person who is grateful that they do not live in the Somerset village where the speed limit is 15 MPH at all times on the main road through the county?

biker brighton wrote:
yes and taxi drivers always stick to the 30 mph limit don't they
i regally travel to work early hours
this week so far have been overtaken on the crossing at hospital and several times on seafront they seen to be exempt from the law
So are the bus drivers that overload there buses going to uni in the early hours bonus pay is it ?

downfader wrote:

Ballroom Blitz wrote:
It won't make any difference to me. I'll learn where all the cameras are, and then continue to drive at approx 40mph when I can, and bollards to the flipping Green idiots.
They will never catch me. They haven't for the last 10 years I have been here.
And whatever the rest of you think: I am 100% safe. Never had an accident in 30 years.

But how many have you caused?

Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
...and this is why the policy of punishing motorists is failing and hitting the majority of the city because the council has not established why people use their cars. They have made assumptions based on their own lifestyles.
In other cities/towns where significant changes are made, a census is held stopping motorists asking for info about their reason for travelling ie the Lewes Road.
This council assumes that people can use public transport or cycle when in fact Sussex is a rural county with traders travelling all over the place to multiple jobs trying to earn a living with the average house price in the city now almost 12 times the average city salary, with nurses working shifts not covered by buses, a bus system which works in a grid system meaning two bus trips for most journeys and many estates in the city only having a bus once an hour such as Meadowview and on Sundays once every few hours. And even then some people live a 20 minute walk from a stop in poorly lit estates which is not favoured by many women such as my wife who used to cycle to her nursing job until she was shoved off her bike by a drunken man. You try cycling up Bear Road at midnight in minus zero temperatures after a 12 hour shift at the county hospital.
The topography of the city makes it challenging for older people to walk or people generally to use bikes.
But remember, those implementing
these schemes are councillors who don't work, don't have regular employment, don't work shifts, they are those self-employed consultant types who can meander about in the day without time pressures. Most live in the city centre and most do not have the family connections in the city, where they may be working full time and then haring across town at weekends looking after elderly relatives and getting kids to football club.
They are all middle aged or older, self employed, or 'wives' who live in the city centre. When they do have to travel out of the city to relatives they hire the car from the car club and then suddenly experience how ordinary people live every day, not just the one off for Christmas or Easter.
That's the key problem. B&H is more than the Regency Square mile and more than a handful of wealthy, time rich middle class yummy mummies and self employed people. It's a working city.
We are not Bath, York or Ross on Wye.
However, perhaps the council is ethnically cleansing the working class from the city to create a fringe festival feel every day.

iloveworthing wrote:
I think this is great. So many other places in the UK have introduced 20mph limits on residential roads to make things safer for pedestrians, cyclists, children and older people. I visit Brighton a lot (generally train and on foot) and the reduced limits will certainly make me feel safer crossing roads with my children, as well as walking along narrow pavements without the fear of speeding traffic.

Brightonlad86 wrote:
What's the point having a 20mph speed limit when the 'bad' drivers don't stick to the limit anyway??

If people wish to make life difficult for me ill just spend my money elsewhere.. And I'm sure many others are of the same mindset.

I refuse to use public transport!! I've always ended up with some obese sod taking up 3/4 of my seat, smelly tramps, rowdy teens, drunks/druggies.... You get the idea.

biker brighton wrote:
yes and taxi drivers always stick to the 30 mph limit don't they i regally travel to work early hours this week so far have been overtaken on the crossing at hospital and several times on seafront they seen to be exempt from the law So are the bus drivers that overload there buses going to uni in the early hours bonus pay is it ?

Ballroom Blitz wrote:

Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
...and this is why the policy of punishing motorists is failing and hitting the majority of the city because the council has not established why people use their cars. They have made assumptions based on their own lifestyles.
In other cities/towns where significant changes are made, a census is held stopping motorists asking for info about their reason for travelling ie the Lewes Road.
This council assumes that people can use public transport or cycle when in fact Sussex is a rural county with traders travelling all over the place to multiple jobs trying to earn a living with the average house price in the city now almost 12 times the average city salary, with nurses working shifts not covered by buses, a bus system which works in a grid system meaning two bus trips for most journeys and many estates in the city only having a bus once an hour such as Meadowview and on Sundays once every few hours. And even then some people live a 20 minute walk from a stop in poorly lit estates which is not favoured by many women such as my wife who used to cycle to her nursing job until she was shoved off her bike by a drunken man. You try cycling up Bear Road at midnight in minus zero temperatures after a 12 hour shift at the county hospital.
The topography of the city makes it challenging for older people to walk or people generally to use bikes.
But remember, those implementing
these schemes are councillors who don't work, don't have regular employment, don't work shifts, they are those self-employed consultant types who can meander about in the day without time pressures. Most live in the city centre and most do not have the family connections in the city, where they may be working full time and then haring across town at weekends looking after elderly relatives and getting kids to football club.
They are all middle aged or older, self employed, or 'wives' who live in the city centre. When they do have to travel out of the city to relatives they hire the car from the car club and then suddenly experience how ordinary people live every day, not just the one off for Christmas or Easter.
That's the key problem. B&H is more than the Regency Square mile and more than a handful of wealthy, time rich middle class yummy mummies and self employed people. It's a working city.
We are not Bath, York or Ross on Wye.
However, perhaps the council is ethnically cleansing the working class from the city to create a fringe festival feel every day.

Extremely well put.

downfader wrote:
Anyone who complains about the 20mph limits should

a) declare their mileage (if you're driving when there are other options then that makes you a whinger, long distance means more than 30 miles a day)

b) whether you're able bodied (nobody is going to dispute disabled access to the road)

c) if you work with tools, heavy loads, etc (actually the difference in journey times is little as these people will mostly be using the motorways etc)

Sussex jim wrote:

downfader wrote:
Anyone who complains about the 20mph limits should

a) declare their mileage (if you're driving when there are other options then that makes you a whinger, long distance means more than 30 miles a day)

b) whether you're able bodied (nobody is going to dispute disabled access to the road)

c) if you work with tools, heavy loads, etc (actually the difference in journey times is little as these people will mostly be using the motorways etc)

It would be more sensible for tradesmen to be able to park their van containing tools and materials where they are working, for as long as necessary, and take priority over people who dump their personal chariot in the street all day while they work in an office or shop.

comanche762 wrote:
when when when is the elections i've never been interested in politics or the like but since these tree huggers have come in my levels of interest has sky rocketed , what a bunch of lets spend a fortune on useless cyclelanes that nobody uses self indulgent morons

Fight_Back wrote:
Totally unenforceable so I'll be ignoring it and driving at 30 thank you.

Automaton wrote:
And our fuel economy will increase at lower speed.
Www.fueleconomy.gov

So more petrol used. Very greem

sussexguy wrote:

iloveworthing wrote: I think this is great. So many other places in the UK have introduced 20mph limits on residential roads to make things safer for pedestrians, cyclists, children and older people. I visit Brighton a lot (generally train and on foot) and the reduced limits will certainly make me feel safer crossing roads with my children, as well as walking along narrow pavements without the fear of speeding traffic.

Well, maybe you should be using the proper pedestrian crossings when taking your children across the road, as well as avoiding walking in the road when going along narrow pavements. All over Brighton and Hove I see pedestrians stepping out into the traffic, in order to avoid walking to the nearest crossing or waiting patiently at traffic lights. Meanwhile I have yet to see the traffic slowing down to 20 mph in areas of Hove where that has become the legal limit.

doggle wrote:
Lovin' all the ranters out in force on this one, bless you all for giving me a good giggle as you vent your spleen :-)

As for still doing 30mph as you're so blase about the danger of motor vehicles 'cos you're alright Jack and **** the rest, you won't if you're behind me, 19mph it is!

Glad someone is standing up to the motoring lobby, it's about time :-)

gusset snatcher wrote:
I don't know why the greens don't just ban cars from the town...... end of..... they are oblivious to the fact that there will always be cars.... even green cars..... when are they going to realise that

ruberducker wrote:
the police refuse to enforce it:SO UP YOURS KITCRAP. cant wait for the next election.

gheese77 wrote:

ruberducker wrote:
the police refuse to enforce it:SO UP YOURS KITCRAP. cant wait for the next election.

Dont count on it - if you have an accident and you were over the speed limit - you will be in more trouble

Phani Tikkala wrote:

Automaton wrote:
And our fuel economy will increase at lower speed.
Www.fueleconomy.gov

So more petrol used. Very greem

Cobblers

First, you're using US stats, and everyone knows that they drive far bigger gas guzzlers over there.

Second, you've been economical with the truth. Here are 2 more excerpts from that website:

Idling can use a quarter to a half gallon of fuel per hour, depending on engine size and air conditioner (AC) use.

..so sitting in queues moving slowly is LESS economic (or green)

Plus it goes on to say that the higher the gear you use the more economic it is. Try driving round in 4th gear at 20mph.

Phani Tikkala wrote:

Automaton wrote:
And our fuel economy will increase at lower speed.
Www.fueleconomy.gov

So more petrol used. Very greem

Cobblers

First, you're using US stats, and everyone knows that they drive far bigger gas guzzlers over there.

Second, you've been economical with the truth. Here are 2 more excerpts from that website:

Idling can use a quarter to a half gallon of fuel per hour, depending on engine size and air conditioner (AC) use.

..so sitting in queues moving slowly is LESS economic (or green)

Plus it goes on to say that the higher the gear you use the more economic it is. Try driving round in 4th gear at 20mph.

gheese77 wrote:

gusset snatcher wrote:
I don't know why the greens don't just ban cars from the town...... end of..... they are oblivious to the fact that there will always be cars.... even green cars..... when are they going to realise that

Banning cars from town centre would be a good idea - lookk at old photos of the town - it looks a much more pleasant place. Also there is no such thing as a green car, just some cars are less harmful to the environment per distance travelled than others.

Automaton wrote:

Phani Tikkala wrote:

Automaton wrote:
And our fuel economy will increase at lower speed.
Www.fueleconomy.gov

So more petrol used. Very greem

Cobblers

First, you're using US stats, and everyone knows that they drive far bigger gas guzzlers over there.

Second, you've been economical with the truth. Here are 2 more excerpts from that website:

Idling can use a quarter to a half gallon of fuel per hour, depending on engine size and air conditioner (AC) use.

..so sitting in queues moving slowly is LESS economic (or green)

Plus it goes on to say that the higher the gear you use the more economic it is. Try driving round in 4th gear at 20mph.

Can you explain why we will be sitting in queues less if there are the same number of cars. Isn't this what is going to happen more in Lewes road!



Only have a problem with 20 mph on major roads

gheese77 wrote:

gusset snatcher wrote:
I don't know why the greens don't just ban cars from the town...... end of..... they are oblivious to the fact that there will always be cars.... even green cars..... when are they going to realise that

Banning cars from town centre would be a good idea - lookk at old photos of the town - it looks a much more pleasant place. Also there is no such thing as a green car, just some cars are less harmful to the environment per distance travelled than others.

PJW Brighton wrote:
Why all the comments about Greens on here? This proposal was volted for by Councillors from all three parties on the Transport Committee, and is being implemented by Councils all over the country lead by different parties; indeed all over the world. Why? because it brings better quality of life for communities.

upsidedowntuctuc wrote:

Automaton wrote:

Phani Tikkala wrote:

Automaton wrote:
And our fuel economy will increase at lower speed.
Www.fueleconomy.gov

So more petrol used. Very greem

Cobblers

First, you're using US stats, and everyone knows that they drive far bigger gas guzzlers over there.

Second, you've been economical with the truth. Here are 2 more excerpts from that website:

Idling can use a quarter to a half gallon of fuel per hour, depending on engine size and air conditioner (AC) use.

..so sitting in queues moving slowly is LESS economic (or green)

Plus it goes on to say that the higher the gear you use the more economic it is. Try driving round in 4th gear at 20mph.

Can you explain why we will be sitting in queues less if there are the same number of cars. Isn't this what is going to happen more in Lewes road!



Only have a problem with 20 mph on major roads

"Can you explain why we will be sitting in queues less if there are the same number of cars. Isn't this what is going to happen more in Lewes road!"
Spot on !!
It will take 33% longer to get out of the City in rush hour so more cars will join back of queues.
To the poster who said it was only 7 minutes longer for a 7 mile journey that is 14 minutes a day and if done 5 times a week that's 1 hour 10 minutes multiply by 48 weeks a year to allow for holidays makes 56 hours a year which is 2 days 8 hours a year extra time and pollution!
Green???????? Behind the ears for certain ...

saveHOVE wrote:
Cllr Janio made a good point at Transport Commitee about the cost to the bus companies of taking longer for each start to finish route journey. It would mean making fewer runs in the day or having to add extra buses.

Will this mean higher bus fares?

falmer seagull wrote:
Nobody denies that pedestrians would have a better survival rate if struck by car at 20mph. However, we are not told the statistics on fatalities on the inner Brighton roads! Most fatalities to my knowledge have been down to the two way bus lanes!

downfader wrote:

bus nut wrote:
So can someone tell me how the police will enforce the speed limit for cyclists as they speed down these roads faster than 20mph but have no Speedo so with that in mind they wouldn't even know they were speeding well done the greens maybe now the cyclists will finally make the government some money in fixed penalties lol rofl oh dear no body thought about that did they

IIRC the laws on speed are selective to "motorised vehicles" under the road traffic act for exactly the reason you note. Cycles dont have speedometers (you can buy them though, called odemeters or cycle computers)

Most cyclists dont go above 15mph

ghost bus driver wrote:

falmer seagull wrote:
Nobody denies that pedestrians would have a better survival rate if struck by car at 20mph. However, we are not told the statistics on fatalities on the inner Brighton roads! Most fatalities to my knowledge have been down to the two way bus lanes!

The police call that area The Killing Fields.

downfader wrote:

Michael Inkpin-Leissner wrote:

downfader wrote:

Michael Inkpin-Leissner wrote:
Thank you Greens, you added 30 min. for my way to work. Brilliant. Because thanks to you guys, the traffic jams will be longer and longer lasting.
You British Greens are a big embarrassment for all Green Parties in Europe. May I remind you, you are working for the people and not for ideology!

So if you're already in a traffic jam - how exactly will a 10mph drop in maximum speed limit affect non-moving traffic..?

Bizarre and ludicrous comment

Ever tried to make it out of Brighton in rush hour? I guess, the person who put that comment on my post is not in need to be urgent available. Otherwise I can't explain this not really thought threw comment by downfader. Thanks to the Greens, my costs for parking rose from 88 pounds a months to about 400. Thanks to the Greens, within half a year all major roads out of Brighton have road works going on, all at the very same time. I do not want to be part in some of the kindergarden discussions here. I want to make a point for citizens who have to commute out of Brighton.

Every city has this problem. Brighton is no exception.

If expediency was such an issue over long distance then why not invest in a motorbike?

Stop with the "poor little me" people, it does you no favours. Plenty of people cope without the car or find strategies with their employer to car share or get discount rail travel.

D5 wrote:

upsidedowntuctuc wrote:

Automaton wrote:

Phani Tikkala wrote:

Automaton wrote:
And our fuel economy will increase at lower speed.
Www.fueleconomy.gov

So more petrol used. Very greem

Cobblers

First, you're using US stats, and everyone knows that they drive far bigger gas guzzlers over there.

Second, you've been economical with the truth. Here are 2 more excerpts from that website:

Idling can use a quarter to a half gallon of fuel per hour, depending on engine size and air conditioner (AC) use.

..so sitting in queues moving slowly is LESS economic (or green)

Plus it goes on to say that the higher the gear you use the more economic it is. Try driving round in 4th gear at 20mph.

Can you explain why we will be sitting in queues less if there are the same number of cars. Isn't this what is going to happen more in Lewes road!



Only have a problem with 20 mph on major roads

"Can you explain why we will be sitting in queues less if there are the same number of cars. Isn't this what is going to happen more in Lewes road!"
Spot on !!
It will take 33% longer to get out of the City in rush hour so more cars will join back of queues.
To the poster who said it was only 7 minutes longer for a 7 mile journey that is 14 minutes a day and if done 5 times a week that's 1 hour 10 minutes multiply by 48 weeks a year to allow for holidays makes 56 hours a year which is 2 days 8 hours a year extra time and pollution!
Green???????? Behind the ears for certain ...

I will answer your question.
The majority using the roads into Brighton are indeed workers in the city making very small journeys.
The nurses, the police officers,the solicitors etc etc -they do not need to. bus/train/walk/cycle - easy.

If they used public transport -including cabbies, then the trades,en and the delivery guys and all the other guys out there providing services there wouldnt be as much congestion.

Also -the lewes rd bus lane will be fine if you use the bus -let everybody else queue in the long lane of other cars -maybe then they will use the bus -like happened on the coast road where bus usage has soared.

Funny how people always criticise the bus companies for taking payment yet never seem to mind being fleeced by the oil companies,the insurance companies,thetax etc etc for a motor car which they then insist on driving slowly in because everyone else is.

bizare.

Me? I cycle whenever i can. Get the bus/train/taxi and walk..

downfader wrote:
How does it lower emissions? It makes cycling and walking safer and people get out of their cars for those short journeys... as they did in Germany, France, Netherlands etc.

It makes the elderly and disabled more comfortable in crossing the road - over the past few years there has been an increase in those groups using the car for short journeys, too. A fear of traffic and its speed means they struggle to get across in time or read the traffic speed as well as a younger person might.

Remember those here moaning really HAVE to declare what I asked for above to validate their concern.

-75% of all urban traffic is only heading 5 miles or less (DFT statistics). Single occupancy too - eg just one person in the car

-25% of all urban traffic is for less than 2 miles.

-DFT figures for 2011 found that the average car mileage for a day was 6 miles

-DFT figures also show that nearly 90% of all traffic is domestic driver, not professionals like Taxi drivers etc.

downfader wrote:
NOT ONE of you complaining has validated your complaint with how far you drive...

..therefore this means that you have nothing to complain about, then.

biker brighton wrote:
yes and taxi drivers always stick to the 30 mph limit don't they
i regally travel to work early hours
this week so far have been overtaken on the crossing at hospital and several times on seafront they seen to be exempt from the law
So are the bus drivers that overload there buses going to uni in the early hours bonus pay is it ?

Automaton wrote:

D5 wrote:

upsidedowntuctuc wrote:

Automaton wrote:

Phani Tikkala wrote:

Automaton wrote:
And our fuel economy will increase at lower speed.
Www.fueleconomy.gov

So more petrol used. Very greem

Cobblers

First, you're using US stats, and everyone knows that they drive far bigger gas guzzlers over there.

Second, you've been economical with the truth. Here are 2 more excerpts from that website:

Idling can use a quarter to a half gallon of fuel per hour, depending on engine size and air conditioner (AC) use.

..so sitting in queues moving slowly is LESS economic (or green)

Plus it goes on to say that the higher the gear you use the more economic it is. Try driving round in 4th gear at 20mph.

Can you explain why we will be sitting in queues less if there are the same number of cars. Isn't this what is going to happen more in Lewes road!



Only have a problem with 20 mph on major roads

"Can you explain why we will be sitting in queues less if there are the same number of cars. Isn't this what is going to happen more in Lewes road!"
Spot on !!
It will take 33% longer to get out of the City in rush hour so more cars will join back of queues.
To the poster who said it was only 7 minutes longer for a 7 mile journey that is 14 minutes a day and if done 5 times a week that's 1 hour 10 minutes multiply by 48 weeks a year to allow for holidays makes 56 hours a year which is 2 days 8 hours a year extra time and pollution!
Green???????? Behind the ears for certain ...

I will answer your question.
The majority using the roads into Brighton are indeed workers in the city making very small journeys.
The nurses, the police officers,the solicitors etc etc -they do not need to. bus/train/walk/cycle - easy.

If they used public transport -including cabbies, then the trades,en and the delivery guys and all the other guys out there providing services there wouldnt be as much congestion.

Also -the lewes rd bus lane will be fine if you use the bus -let everybody else queue in the long lane of other cars -maybe then they will use the bus -like happened on the coast road where bus usage has soared.

Funny how people always criticise the bus companies for taking payment yet never seem to mind being fleeced by the oil companies,the insurance companies,thetax etc etc for a motor car which they then insist on driving slowly in because everyone else is.

bizare.

Me? I cycle whenever i can. Get the bus/train/taxi and walk..

Still dosent answer how 20 mph reduces congestion. You are just supposing that all people who drive short distances will suddenly change to using the bus. If this happens ( which it won't) then obviously congestion will reduce.
Surprisingly many people do not have the time to cycle , or the energy given the hilly nature of Brigton. And many people have to stop on their route eg to collect kids etc. bus fares are also too expensive.
Perhaps we could introduce a new law ie anybody driving less than 5 miles to work is banned from driving!

timmys1981 wrote:

downfader wrote:
How does it lower emissions? It makes cycling and walking safer and people get out of their cars for those short journeys... as they did in Germany, France, Netherlands etc.

It makes the elderly and disabled more comfortable in crossing the road - over the past few years there has been an increase in those groups using the car for short journeys, too. A fear of traffic and its speed means they struggle to get across in time or read the traffic speed as well as a younger person might.

Remember those here moaning really HAVE to declare what I asked for above to validate their concern.

-75% of all urban traffic is only heading 5 miles or less (DFT statistics). Single occupancy too - eg just one person in the car

-25% of all urban traffic is for less than 2 miles.

-DFT figures for 2011 found that the average car mileage for a day was 6 miles

-DFT figures also show that nearly 90% of all traffic is domestic driver, not professionals like Taxi drivers etc.

So what i have a car and if i want to travel less than 5 miles in it i will who do you think you are trying to make the decision for me. If you are a cyclist please let me know and i will endevour to knock you off. I will not "get out of my car" for short journeys i will "get in it and drive there". I will not "make old people comfortable". I will floor it and scare the crap out of them with wheel spin when they take 5 minutes to get across a crossing on a green light.

NOBODY is going to do 20mph we have places to be...

D5 wrote:

Automaton wrote:

D5 wrote:

upsidedowntuctuc wrote:

Automaton wrote:

Phani Tikkala wrote:

Automaton wrote:
And our fuel economy will increase at lower speed.
Www.fueleconomy.gov

So more petrol used. Very greem

Cobblers

First, you're using US stats, and everyone knows that they drive far bigger gas guzzlers over there.

Second, you've been economical with the truth. Here are 2 more excerpts from that website:

Idling can use a quarter to a half gallon of fuel per hour, depending on engine size and air conditioner (AC) use.

..so sitting in queues moving slowly is LESS economic (or green)

Plus it goes on to say that the higher the gear you use the more economic it is. Try driving round in 4th gear at 20mph.

Can you explain why we will be sitting in queues less if there are the same number of cars. Isn't this what is going to happen more in Lewes road!



Only have a problem with 20 mph on major roads

"Can you explain why we will be sitting in queues less if there are the same number of cars. Isn't this what is going to happen more in Lewes road!"
Spot on !!
It will take 33% longer to get out of the City in rush hour so more cars will join back of queues.
To the poster who said it was only 7 minutes longer for a 7 mile journey that is 14 minutes a day and if done 5 times a week that's 1 hour 10 minutes multiply by 48 weeks a year to allow for holidays makes 56 hours a year which is 2 days 8 hours a year extra time and pollution!
Green???????? Behind the ears for certain ...

I will answer your question.
The majority using the roads into Brighton are indeed workers in the city making very small journeys.
The nurses, the police officers,the solicitors etc etc -they do not need to. bus/train/walk/cycle - easy.

If they used public transport -including cabbies, then the trades,en and the delivery guys and all the other guys out there providing services there wouldnt be as much congestion.

Also -the lewes rd bus lane will be fine if you use the bus -let everybody else queue in the long lane of other cars -maybe then they will use the bus -like happened on the coast road where bus usage has soared.

Funny how people always criticise the bus companies for taking payment yet never seem to mind being fleeced by the oil companies,the insurance companies,thetax etc etc for a motor car which they then insist on driving slowly in because everyone else is.

bizare.

Me? I cycle whenever i can. Get the bus/train/taxi and walk..

Still dosent answer how 20 mph reduces congestion. You are just supposing that all people who drive short distances will suddenly change to using the bus. If this happens ( which it won't) then obviously congestion will reduce.
Surprisingly many people do not have the time to cycle , or the energy given the hilly nature of Brigton. And many people have to stop on their route eg to collect kids etc. bus fares are also too expensive.
Perhaps we could introduce a new law ie anybody driving less than 5 miles to work is banned from driving!

dude, wouldnt it be nice if people at least tried!!!!
Why argue for car usage when it's had its day, christ the only thing to do would be to demolish all buildings in brighton?
THERE ARE TOO MANY CARS!

sort out the car usage problem,then have a go at people who use public transport!!
How come i see thousands of people using buses - all you are sowing is dissent and problems. i know for a fact that many people use buses for school runs - i drive buses around brighton.
It is the people who cannot be bothered or at least try to or even worse the naysayers like you,who remind me of sports commentators, not on the pitch but know everything.

I await your "aha,bus driver, must be bad driver etc biased" - no, just happy carrying 100's of 1000's of people around and looking forward to bus lanes.
The 20mph question isnt a question if it is not going to be enforced is it so why give it so much prominence?

ruberducker wrote:
the police refuse to enforce it:SO UP YOURS KITCRAP.
cant wait for the next election.

Plantpot wrote:
There was a good article recently by Andrew Gilligan in The Telegraph. He made the point that when socialist councils have their funding reduced, they tend to cut things out of spite that result in people being inconvenienced so that they lay the blame fairly and squarely on the Tory government ( a purely political move), whereas Tory councils tend to try and preserve front line services. If it's true that the signage for the 20mph limits is to cost £1.5m, this would comfortably pay for say, the children's music service and mobile libraries.

graham_Seagull wrote:

timmys1981 wrote:

downfader wrote:
How does it lower emissions? It makes cycling and walking safer and people get out of their cars for those short journeys... as they did in Germany, France, Netherlands etc.

It makes the elderly and disabled more comfortable in crossing the road - over the past few years there has been an increase in those groups using the car for short journeys, too. A fear of traffic and its speed means they struggle to get across in time or read the traffic speed as well as a younger person might.

Remember those here moaning really HAVE to declare what I asked for above to validate their concern.

-75% of all urban traffic is only heading 5 miles or less (DFT statistics). Single occupancy too - eg just one person in the car

-25% of all urban traffic is for less than 2 miles.

-DFT figures for 2011 found that the average car mileage for a day was 6 miles

-DFT figures also show that nearly 90% of all traffic is domestic driver, not professionals like Taxi drivers etc.

So what i have a car and if i want to travel less than 5 miles in it i will who do you think you are trying to make the decision for me. If you are a cyclist please let me know and i will endevour to knock you off. I will not "get out of my car" for short journeys i will "get in it and drive there". I will not "make old people comfortable". I will floor it and scare the crap out of them with wheel spin when they take 5 minutes to get across a crossing on a green light.

NOBODY is going to do 20mph we have places to be...

If you are in an accident whilst traveling well in excess of 20mph in a 20 zone that's a careless driving charge, then watch your insurance prem skyrocket and wave your licence goodbye for 6 mths.
All for the sake of a few extra mins. Not worth it is it.

timmys1981 wrote:

graham_Seagull wrote:

timmys1981 wrote:

downfader wrote:
How does it lower emissions? It makes cycling and walking safer and people get out of their cars for those short journeys... as they did in Germany, France, Netherlands etc.

It makes the elderly and disabled more comfortable in crossing the road - over the past few years there has been an increase in those groups using the car for short journeys, too. A fear of traffic and its speed means they struggle to get across in time or read the traffic speed as well as a younger person might.

Remember those here moaning really HAVE to declare what I asked for above to validate their concern.

-75% of all urban traffic is only heading 5 miles or less (DFT statistics). Single occupancy too - eg just one person in the car

-25% of all urban traffic is for less than 2 miles.

-DFT figures for 2011 found that the average car mileage for a day was 6 miles

-DFT figures also show that nearly 90% of all traffic is domestic driver, not professionals like Taxi drivers etc.

So what i have a car and if i want to travel less than 5 miles in it i will who do you think you are trying to make the decision for me. If you are a cyclist please let me know and i will endevour to knock you off. I will not "get out of my car" for short journeys i will "get in it and drive there". I will not "make old people comfortable". I will floor it and scare the crap out of them with wheel spin when they take 5 minutes to get across a crossing on a green light.

NOBODY is going to do 20mph we have places to be...

If you are in an accident whilst traveling well in excess of 20mph in a 20 zone that's a careless driving charge, then watch your insurance prem skyrocket and wave your licence goodbye for 6 mths.
All for the sake of a few extra mins. Not worth it is it.

In over 15 years ive not had one yet and anyway it certainly wouldnt be the type of accident where there were skids marks from 35 to 0 to prove anything as i am not asleep at the wheel like many morons that drive in b&h

graham_Seagull wrote:

Plantpot wrote:
There was a good article recently by Andrew Gilligan in The Telegraph. He made the point that when socialist councils have their funding reduced, they tend to cut things out of spite that result in people being inconvenienced so that they lay the blame fairly and squarely on the Tory government ( a purely political move), whereas Tory councils tend to try and preserve front line services. If it's true that the signage for the 20mph limits is to cost £1.5m, this would comfortably pay for say, the children's music service and mobile libraries.

Andrew gilligan, that we'll known nut case who refutes man made climate change, who is really just a mega right wing nutcase who, unfortunately, some people read and believe.

graham_Seagull wrote:
It costs £1.5m to deal with a fatal rta.
So two less fatalities and the council/ police savings pay for the £1.5m impl cost of the 20mph zone.

Sounds like cracking good economics to me.