On 5 Feb 2017 at 11:16pm Matt Sharpe wrote:
Thank you to all those involved for their work on the 20mph speed limit within the town.
Who enforces it, ?
And, most importantly, why don't they ?
Pointless spending money on metal signs, and painted markings on the roads, if nobody actually enforces it, points and £'s, makes Lewes a safer place ! Currently, we the tax payer, are paying out for pointless signage !
Monies raised through fines, distributed as charitable donations to worthy causes ? Air ambulance, mental health in the community to start the ball rolling ? Fixed per centage amount per cause, topping up the donations from the Lewes Lions ???
On 6 Feb 2017 at 12:10am Jeff wrote:
I heard that the 20mph speed limit is unenforceable and many police forces have publicly stated that they won't try to enforce them
On 6 Feb 2017 at 12:48am Beeswax wrote:
I guess they hope that there'll be enough law abiders to bring down the average speed a significant amount most of the time. That's been the effect where I live.
On 6 Feb 2017 at 5:43am Landporter wrote:
Well thanks for that Matt Sharpe, we really need another do gooder on here. Bet you walk around town with a hi-viz vest on and a clipboard.
On 6 Feb 2017 at 8:07am Earl of Lewes wrote:
20mph is too slow, but the limit serves a useful purpose. When the limit was 30, many drivers would go up to 40. Now it's 20, some people will go up to 30, but very few go further.
On 6 Feb 2017 at 9:51am The Greek wrote:
I believe Sussex Police said they wouldn't enforce 20mph limits due to the cost of retro-fitting equipment or something...
On 6 Feb 2017 at 10:51am @EOL wrote:
Yes 20 is too slow... Until it's you or one of your children hit by a speeding car.
You do understand why it's 20 right, at 20 people live if they're hit by a car, at 30 people start dying (at 40 most die).
Why exactly is 20 slow, is your time so important that you can't do a sensible speed in the middle of a busy town?
Whether the police enforce it or not you should follow it because it cuts pollution and cuts deaths, maybe if you can't follow the speed limit you shouldn't be driving.
On 6 Feb 2017 at 11:26am Highwayman wrote:
Even an unenforceable 20mph limit succeeds in reducing the speed of traffic. If you want slower traffic, support the 20mph limit. If, on the other hand, you want to see less congestion, don't imagine that this will be achieved by slowing everything down.
On 6 Feb 2017 at 12:20pm anon wrote:
why not make it 10 lol,the stupid council just want no cars ,but full of houses and people with lots of money .
On 6 Feb 2017 at 2:20pm honesty please wrote:
Most of the Lewes 20 mph campaigners own houses on the busier roads. Why? Because they simply want less road noise to improve their properties and increase their house prices even further. Southover High St is a case in point. Sceptical but true.
On 6 Feb 2017 at 2:37pm Earl of Lewes wrote:
@@EOL - I take your point. I'm a very safe driver and actually go under 20mph when there are lots of schoolchildren around and the visibility is poor. But I'm not convinced that a limit that many ignore is the answer. There should be more education about safe driving according to the time of day and conditions. I suppose all this will become academic once smart cars appear.
On 6 Feb 2017 at 2:41pm Clifford wrote:
honesty please wrote: '...they simply want less road noise to improve their properties and increase their house prices even further.'
Do you think the same applies in these places too, or just Lewes?
'Elsewhere in Europe, Paris and Milan have announced plans to introduce 30kph (19mph) speed restrictions. Spain has gone further - recent changes to the country’s road traffic laws mean that 30kph limits will soon apply in most urban areas. The plans are supported by the European Transport Safety Council, which advises the European commission and has called for lower speed limits across all residential areas. In the US, New York City has reduced its default speed limit from 30mph to 25mph and other US states look to be following suit.'
On 6 Feb 2017 at 2:47pm Pedro wrote:
I don't think its unreasonable to support any measures to reduce average speeds on our roads if it ultimately reduce road deaths. Road death fatalities has halved since 2000 (from around 3,500 down to 1,750) so whatever we (collectively as motorists) or the government agencies have been doing, seems to be working. Still more to be done, but if we need to go a bit slower to save more lives, then the solution seems obvious.
On 6 Feb 2017 at 3:09pm Cynic wrote:
Let's get one myth out of the way.....20 mph limits do not reduce pollution. Pollution increases due to the fact that every vehicle is in a lower gear. That means more rpm from the engine. That means more fuel burnt. That means more emissions.
On 6 Feb 2017 at 3:28pm Observer wrote:
" If, on the other hand, you want to see less congestion, don't imagine that this will be achieved by slowing everything down."
Driving more slowly could actually speed things up if it involves more smooth driving. A lot of traffic jams are caused by sudden braking (after sudden acceleration) rather than slow traffic per se.
It's not a pollution/air quality thing, though. It's a safety thing.
On 6 Feb 2017 at 3:30pm Observer wrote:
Edit: actually, its braking and acceleraeting, stop-start driving, that causes the most polllution. So traffic circulating freely at 20mph will cause much less pollution than cars speeding up to 30mph and then stopping, and speeding back up to 30mph again. In a town like Lewes the faster the cars go, the more likely they are to have to drive in a stop-start fashion.
On 6 Feb 2017 at 3:45pm Carman wrote:
In a town the size of Lewes, having to cross town at 20 instead of 30mph makes insignificant difference to journey time.
On 6 Feb 2017 at 4:41pm Ghia wrote:
It's all my VW will do up school hill