Hell hath no fury...

Simon Mason [email hidden] opined the
following...

<snipped - ridiculous claptrap>

Quoted message said:

Colin Pay,

Goddard Avenue,

Hull.

But look on the bright side Simon, you know where he lives!

Jon

"Doki" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

My understanding is that it's illegal to put 30 repeaters
up in a 30 zone

if

Quoted message said:

there are streetlamps and they are correctly spaced. It's
been spoken

about

Quoted message said:

a few times in uk.rec.driving. Why not write a letter
saying something

along

Quoted message said:

those lines (if you already haven't), and suggesting that
if motorists

want

Quoted message said:

something changed, they really ought to be lobbying their
MP rather than ranting in the paper. Nobody's going to get
let off their fine or stop the cameras being set up on the
road. FWIW, I think 30 repeaters would be a

good

Quoted message said:

idea, despite the fact that I know my highway code, I'm
prefer not to

claim

Quoted message said:

that I'm infallible...

Doki, The fact that it is illegal (and unnecessary) to
install 30 mph repeaters has been pointed out in the paper
countless times, but these drivers who are fined simply
can't get their head around the HC, the law, or how to read
road signs so they will insist on blaming someone else for
their own pig ignorance.

There are big signs up in the bus/cycle lanes clearly
stating the times of operation and yet 99% of motorists will
steer clear of it for the 21 hours it is open to cars and
yet for the 3 hours they are banned the bus/cycle lanes are
choked with cars.

--

Simon M.

"Simon Mason" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Doki" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

My understanding is that it's illegal to put 30
repeaters up in a 30

zone

Quoted message said:

if

Quoted message said:

there are streetlamps and they are correctly spaced.
It's been spoken

about

snip

Quoted message said:

Doki, The fact that it is illegal (and unnecessary) to
install 30 mph

repeaters

Quoted message said:

has been pointed out in the paper countless times, but
these drivers who

are

Quoted message said:

fined simply can't get their head around the HC, the law,
or how to read road signs so they will insist on blaming
someone else for their own pig ignorance.

AIUI the fact is it is not illegal to put up 30 mph
repeater signs if special dispensation is requested and
permission granted. Personally, from the limited impression
I get from the correspondence you have posted, I wouldn't
begrudge these motorists their 30mph signs on this stretch
of road. Whatever the HC says, if there is any scope for
confusion on the ground, let it be removed! It does not
mean that just because they put some reminders up on a bit
of dual carriageway that happens to have street lights,
that they'd have to put them in on every little residential
road in the country.

Rich

Simon Mason said:

Colin Pay, ^^^

Is that his real name - its too good to be true ;-)

Tony

Richard Goodman said:

AIUI the fact is it is not illegal to put up 30 mph
repeater signs if special dispensation is requested and
permission granted. Personally, from the limited
impression I get from the correspondence you have posted,
I wouldn't begrudge these motorists their 30mph signs on
this stretch of road. Whatever the HC says, if there is
any scope for confusion on the ground, let it be removed!
It does not mean that just because they put some reminders
up on a bit of dual carriageway that happens to have
street lights, that they'd have to put them in on every
little residential road in the country.

Rich

I'm afraid I agree. What is the objection to providing
extra clarity?

Tony

"Doki" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

I'd say unnecessary is debateable. I expect it would
reduce average speeds on that road a fair bit, and it's
probably cheaper than trying to teach

god

Quoted message said:

knows how many people the highway code / to look for
signs. However, it's

in

Quoted message said:

the interests of the govt / police / safety camera
partnership to collect fines rather than reduce the speed
of traffic. You may argue that the cameras will reduce
speeds on the road, but I bet there's a fair bit of
traffic on the road that isn't from the local area and so
won't have seen the furore in the local papers, so carry
on regardless. A SPECs system (average speed cameras on
overhead gantries) would bring speeds down to

dead

Quoted message said:

on 30 for the entire length of the road, but they tend to
make a loss

after

Quoted message said:

they've been installed a few weeks and caught nearly
everyone who drives

up

Quoted message said:

and down the road, so they're not popular with the
"safety" bods.

Sorry - I didn't mean to stoke up yet another barely on-
topic debate on this previously covered subject, merely
post a letter typical of people who get annoyed at being
fined and try and blame anyone but themselves.

I cycle down a another dual carriageway where it is clearly
marked 40 mph and people do 50, so signs have nothing to do
with it. Unless there's another even more stupid letter I
won't post anymore on this subject :-)

--
Simon M

Doki said:

Simon Mason said:

...like a motorist fined. The current uproar in our local
rag continues thanks to a city centre dual carriageway
that a lot of motorists believe is 40 mph, despite the
fact it is so obviously 30 mph to anyone who knows the
HC. Last week came the tale of Mrs Average who was too
busy thinking about cooking tea and her husband on
sacking people rather than on trivial things like the
speed limit on the road they were on.

My understanding is that it's illegal to put 30 repeaters
up in a 30 zone if there are streetlamps and they are
correctly spaced.

Correct but it is not illegal to put up non standard
advisory signs reminding drivers that they are in a
30mph zone.

There are several roads round here that have just that -
black rectangular signs with orange writing on lamp posts
and other coulourways that I can't recall.

If the objective is slower cars and safer streets rather
than f****** the stupid motorist then surely all should
support that sort of signing on roads about which there is
clearly confusion.

pk

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

AIUI the fact is it is not illegal to put up 30 mph
repeater signs if special dispensation is requested and
permission granted. Personally,

from

Quoted message said:

the limited impression I get from the correspondence you
have posted, I wouldn't begrudge these motorists their
30mph signs on this stretch of

road.

Quoted message said:

Whatever the HC says, if there is any scope for confusion
on the ground,

let

Quoted message said:

it be removed! It does not mean that just because they
put some

reminders

Quoted message said:

up on a bit of dual carriageway that happens to have
street lights, that they'd have to put them in on every
little residential road in the

country.

Quoted message said:

Yep. Got 400 yards of 30mph road just outside of Builth
Wells. The 30 mph sign applicable is on one of the 3
approach roads to the town and thus several minutes of
driving time from the bit of road I write of. This bit of
road has no buildings alongside it and no roads running off
it. The reason it is 30 mph is the primary school at the
end of the 400 yards - a perfectly good reason for keeping
it 30 mph.

But it looks like typical 50 mph road and catches people out
- including careful and thoughtful people. So why not put a
reminder or two along this particular length of road?

Cynical me says it is because it makes the perfect place
to put a radar trap on a sunny Sunday and make a
shedload of cash.

John

PK said:

Doki wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

My understanding is that it's illegal to put 30 repeaters
up in a 30 zone if there are streetlamps and they are
correctly spaced.

Correct but it is not illegal to put up non standard
advisory signs reminding drivers that they are in a
30mph zone.

Very true. I approve of these signs. I don't think they do
much to slow the traffic but they at least remove the excuse
that "I didn't know the speed limit".

--
Dave...

Get a bicycle. You will not regret it. If you live. -
Mark Twain

Simon Mason said:

I cycle down a another dual carriageway where it is clearly
marked 40 mph and people do 50, so signs have nothing to do
with it. Unless there's another even more stupid letter I
won't post anymore on this subject :-)

I tend to agree. I cycle along a fairly narrow single
carriageway road that goes from 30 mph to NSL, then, about
300 yards later back to 30. The transition back to 30 is
emphasised not just by the usual 30 signs but also by a
large figure 30 painted on the road. Most motorists do
around 50 along the whole stretch. Their speed does not
alter perceptibly as they transition from NSL to 30 (or from
30 to NSL, come to that).

--
Dave...

Get a bicycle. You will not regret it. If you live. -
Mark Twain

Simon Mason said:

Letter: Re Sergeant Peter Swann's comments (Mail,
April 3).

Shame on me for risking the lives of my fellow citizens. I
was unaware (due to having much better things to do than
read the Highway Code after a hard day's work) that the
speed limit on Freetown Way was 30mph.

This prat's memory is so far gone that he has to re-read the
Highway Code every time he gets into his MDG? The brief
period between a hard day's work and the journey home is not
really the time to be acquainting oneself with the HC.

Here's an off-the-wall idea. How about allowing the police
to require any driver they stop for questionable driving to
take a short on-the-spot HC test? Failure would result in
seizure of the vehicle and instant disqualification until
they successfully re-pass the full test whereupon the
vehicle would be returned, after payment of a reasonable
storage fee, and restoration of driving privileges. An
automatically scored multiple choice exam with, say, 10
randomly selected questions could easily be loaded onto a
PDA and carried in the patrol car.

--
Dave...

Get a bicycle. You will not regret it. If you live. -
Mark Twain

On Sat, 24 Apr 2004 16:54:36 +0100, "Doki" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Simon Mason said:

...like a motorist fined. The current uproar in our local
rag continues thanks to a city centre dual carriageway
that a lot of motorists believe is 40 mph, despite the
fact it is so obviously 30 mph to anyone who knows the
HC. Last week came the tale of Mrs Average who was too
busy thinking about cooking tea and her husband on
sacking people rather than on trivial things like the
speed limit on the road they were on.

My understanding is that it's illegal to put 30 repeaters
up in a 30 zone if there are streetlamps and they are
correctly spaced. It's been spoken about a few times in
uk.rec.driving. Why not write a letter saying something
along those lines (if you already haven't), and suggesting
that if motorists want something changed, they really ought
to be lobbying their MP rather than ranting in the paper.
Nobody's going to get let off their fine or stop the
cameras being set up on the road. FWIW, I think 30
repeaters would be a good idea, despite the fact that I
know my highway code, I'm prefer not to claim that I'm
infallible...

If you want to achieve change then writing to papers is all
part of the campaign I would imagine.

You are right about 30 zones and repeaters. There is a great
deal of demand for repeaters from both residents and
motorists. I used to be rather sympathetic until I realised
that it is far better for 30 to be regarded as the default
for built up areas (streetlight spacing being the legal
definition). To the law abiding the current legislation says
"if in doubt, treat as a 30 zone".

With better enforcement, drivers would soon learn.

I wouldn't want to see the law changed on this. It would
introduce the significant cost of erecting, maintaining and
in some cases illuminating an awful lot of 30 signs. Missing
signs would give speeders a get-out-of-jail card.
--

Transport & Urban Planning Blog

now at notonmywatch.blogs.comnotonmywatch.blogs.comOpen ↗

PK said:

Doki said:

Simon Mason said:

...like a motorist fined. The current uproar in our
local rag continues thanks to a city centre dual
carriageway that a lot of motorists believe is 40 mph,
despite the fact it is so obviously 30 mph to anyone who
knows the HC. Last week came the tale of Mrs Average who
was too busy thinking about cooking tea and her husband
on sacking people rather than on trivial things like the
speed limit on the road they were on.

My understanding is that it's illegal to put 30 repeaters
up in a 30 zone if there are streetlamps and they are
correctly spaced.

Correct but it is not illegal to put up non standard
advisory signs reminding drivers that they are in a
30mph zone.

There are several roads round here that have just that -
black rectangular signs with orange writing on lamp posts
and other coulourways that I can't recall.

If the objective is slower cars and safer streets rather
than f****** the stupid motorist then surely all should
support that sort of signing on roads about which there is
clearly confusion.

The objective is to develop streets into space that is
safe and attractive for many uses and to move away from
the "all street design elements are for cars" mentality of
the past 40 years.

Increasing the plethora of signage for motor vehicles serves
to increase the apparent primacy of the motor car. Road
signs are designed to be read at speed and a
disproportionate in size and appearance to non-driving
street users.

Increasing the signage for drivers reduces the quality of
the streetscape visually and increases the dominance of the
car. In 30 zones we currently have the fortunate arrangement
that means that streetlights serve as speed limit signs. If
drivers don't know this, that is their problem. If the
police don't enforce this then the solution is to lobby for
more enforcement not more signs.
--

Transport & Urban Planning Blog

now at notonmywatch.blogs.comnotonmywatch.blogs.comOpen ↗

On Sat, 24 Apr 2004 23:47:49 +0100, Dave Kahn <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

PK said:

Doki wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

My understanding is that it's illegal to put 30
repeaters up in a 30 zone if there are streetlamps and
they are correctly spaced.

Correct but it is not illegal to put up non standard
advisory signs reminding drivers that they are in a
30mph zone.

Very true. I approve of these signs. I don't think they do
much to slow the traffic but they at least remove the
excuse that "I didn't know the speed limit".

If caught speeding in a built up 30 zone, this excuse will
not stand a cat's chance. However, if the law were changed
and signs required then all it would take is a missing or
obscured sign and the speeder gets off scot free.

Better to stick with lampposts as the indicator.
--

Transport & Urban Planning Blog

now at notonmywatch.blogs.comnotonmywatch.blogs.comOpen ↗

"Dave Kahn" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Simon Mason said:

Letter: Re Sergeant Peter Swann's comments (Mail,
April 3).

Shame on me for risking the lives of my fellow citizens.
I was unaware

(due

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

to having much better things to do than read the Highway
Code after a

hard

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

day's work) that the speed limit on Freetown Way
was 30mph.

This prat's memory is so far gone that he has to re-read
the Highway Code every time he gets into his MDG? The
brief period between a hard day's work and the journey
home is not really the time to be acquainting oneself
with the HC.

Here's an off-the-wall idea. How about allowing the police
to require any driver they stop for questionable driving
to take a short on-the-spot HC test? Failure would result
in seizure of the vehicle and instant disqualification
until they successfully re-pass the full test whereupon
the vehicle would be returned, after payment of a
reasonable storage fee, and restoration of driving
privileges. An automatically scored multiple choice exam
with, say, 10 randomly selected questions could easily be
loaded onto a PDA and carried in the patrol car.

--
Dave...

Hear Hear,

Any driver that is not familiar with the highway code should
be banned until they pass the theory test. When this fuss
about the speed limits started I was aghast to think that
a) there are drivers on the road who don't know the
highway code
b) are think skinned enough to publicly admit it
c) are willing to knowingly continue driving and thus
endanger others
d) are mainly in Hull, (as I asked three people where I work
in London all knew the rule). ie A survey in London
showed that 100% knew the correct answer.

Paul.
PSI have two cars and have driven for 35 years, so am not
anti-car as such. As a cyclist since a child I am against
inappropriate use of cars. I particularly dislike the
attitude of many people these days to ignore the
universally accepted/imposed standards in favour of their
own 'common sense rules' (which varies from individual to
individual).
PPAs a goody goody I buy and read each new edition of the HC
as it is published but even someone as marvellous as me
still has to do a refresher read every couple of years.

Not Responding said:

The objective is to develop streets into space that is
safe and attractive for many uses and to move away from
the "all street design elements are for cars" mentality of
the past 40 years.

Increasing the plethora of signage for motor vehicles
serves to increase the apparent primacy of the motor car.
Road signs are designed to be read at speed and a
disproportionate in size and appearance to non-driving
street users.

Increasing the signage for drivers reduces the quality of
the streetscape visually and increases the dominance of
the car. In 30 zones we currently have the fortunate
arrangement that means that streetlights serve as speed
limit signs. If drivers don't know this, that is their
problem. If the police don't enforce this then the
solution is to lobby for more enforcement not more signs.

Hear hear to all of that. One thing I'm astoubnded by when
returning to the UK from driving on continental roads is
the huge scale of the lettering on UK road signs and he
size of the signs thamselves. Surely drivers who have
difficulty reading anything smaller shouldn't be driving in
the first place?

mae <[email hidden]> wedi ysgrifennu:

Quoted message said:

The fact that it is illegal (and unnecessary) to install
30 mph repeaters has been pointed out in the paper
countless times, but these drivers who are fined simply
can't get their head around the HC, the law, or how to
read road signs so they will insist on blaming someone
else for their own pig ignorance.

How about the council declares a 20mph limit on the road in
question? Then the half-wit motorists can have their
repeaters. That should provide an uncortoversial solution to
the issue.

--
Rob

Please keep conversations in the newsgroup so that all may contribute
and benefit.

Robert Bruce said:

How about the council declares a 20mph limit on the road in
question? Then the half-wit motorists can have their
repeaters. That should provide an uncortoversial solution
to the issue.

A fine solution. Perhaps some form of ghetto to get the
cars out of the way of faster two-wheeled traffic would be
called for?

mae Eatmorepies<[email hidden]> wedi ysgrifennu:

Quoted message said:

Yep. Got 400 yards of 30mph road just outside of Builth
Wells. The 30 mph sign applicable is on one of the 3
approach roads to the town and thus several minutes of
driving time from the bit of road I write of. This bit of
road has no buildings alongside it and no roads running
off it. The reason it is 30 mph is the primary school at
the end of the 400 yards - a perfectly good reason for
keeping it 30 mph.

But it looks like typical 50 mph road and catches people
out - including careful and thoughtful people. So why
not put a reminder or two along this particular length
of road?

This bit of road is not only "just outside Builth", it's
also right in the *middle* of the village of Llanelwedd.
If it catches people out it's because they've failed to
notice the bloody great red stripes that Powys CC has
painted on the road.

Quoted message said:

Cynical me says it is because it makes the perfect place
to put a radar trap on a sunny Sunday and make a shedload
of cash.

A tax on stupidity. Who could object?

Rob

Please keep conversations in the newsgroup so that all may
contribute and benefit.