Think of the impact

Published in Letters by

IN RESPONSE to the Soapbox letter of December 4, I welcome debate on 20mph limits without humps (not zones which do have traffic calming).

We can compare impacts as though it were a fall from a tower block. Assume a storey is three metres: being hit at 20mph is like falling from between the first and the second floor.

At 30mph it is the third floor, 40mph is between the fifth and sixth floor and 50mph is the ninth floor. You are seven times more likely to survive a 20mph crash than 30mph as a walker or cyclist.

A ward meeting is where everyone can have their say and be listened to. Debate was lively and comments were noted. The York 20mph policy aims to make York safer and encourage more people to walk and cycle.

Regarding salt to make pavements safe, please be reassured that all the highways salt bins are filled and ward committee saltbins will be in the event of severe weather. The argument for 20mph is that it is safer, quieter, less polluting and makes streets better places to be.

In Bristol, support from residents for a maximum speed limit on their own street of 20mph rose after implementation from 73 per cent to 88 per cent.

Coun Anna Semlyen, Grange Street, York.

Comments (7)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

1:01pm Thu 6 Dec 12

Buzz Light-year says...

...And you will stop at nothing to get your pet project through.
...And you will stop at nothing to get your pet project through. Buzz Light-year
  • Score: 0

6:52pm Thu 6 Dec 12

capt spaulding says...

My thoughts entireley. The last few days of obstruction by you know who proves it.
My thoughts entireley. The last few days of obstruction by you know who proves it. capt spaulding
  • Score: 0

6:54pm Thu 6 Dec 12

capt spaulding says...

Buzz Light-year wrote:
...And you will stop at nothing to get your pet project through.
If this goes the way of his nibs
Cap Spaulding will be no more
[quote][p][bold]Buzz Light-year[/bold] wrote: ...And you will stop at nothing to get your pet project through.[/p][/quote]If this goes the way of his nibs Cap Spaulding will be no more capt spaulding
  • Score: 0

3:27am Fri 7 Dec 12

Magicman! says...

Councillor, I cycle everywhere in York and would much rather you spend the money on widening roads to provide decent cycling infastructure physically seperate from the roads or at least at road level but 2m wide so less proficient cyclists can ride safely without vehicles passing just 2 inches from their handlebars.

20mph sould be reserved for special areas to signal a significance for something nearby that requires a lower speed such as a school, by making everywhere 20mph you reduce that significance and it is likely drivers will lose that subconcious signal that tells them to go a bit more steadily outside a school.
Councillor, I cycle everywhere in York and would much rather you spend the money on widening roads to provide decent cycling infastructure physically seperate from the roads or at least at road level but 2m wide so less proficient cyclists can ride safely without vehicles passing just 2 inches from their handlebars. 20mph sould be reserved for special areas to signal a significance for something nearby that requires a lower speed such as a school, by making everywhere 20mph you reduce that significance and it is likely drivers will lose that subconcious signal that tells them to go a bit more steadily outside a school. Magicman!
  • Score: 0

11:27pm Fri 7 Dec 12

strangebuttrue? says...

How does a councillor get away with spouting this minority campaign rubbish.

First the analogy used – Pathetic. How can you compare falling from a building onto solid ground with that of being hit by a vehicle which has had many millions of pound spent on it to minimise the effect of a frontal collision with a pedestrian.

I have been unfortunate enough, as a passenger, to be in a car involved in a 20 mph collision with a pedestrian who rushed out from behind a wall right in front of the car I was in. I have also witnessed a 30 mph collision between a car and a cyclist, small cycle which meant the cyclist was at about the same height as a pedestrian - below what I actually witnessed.

In the 20 mph collision with the pedestrian a figure appear from the right about 4 feet from the car I was travelling in and was hit. The lady, as we discovered, was carried on the very front of the car for a few feet and then disappeared under the front of the still moving car. Fortunately the driver had the reactions of a cat and we stopped just before the front wheel ran over her head. When we got out the lady was right under the front of the car and well bruised and cut as a result. Now you may say that had we been going 30 she would have been killed well - In the 30 mph collision that I witnessed the man was thrown onto the bonnet of the car and came to rest against the windscreen then was rapidly on his feet and on his way fast enough to avoid the perusing car driver who no doubt wanted his bonnet paid for. These actual observations appears to confirm what the expert collision investigator was saying when he wrote into the press to say that in low speed accidents you could be more likely to be seriously injured or killed. By the way both collisions could have been avoided by following simple rules like pedestrians should look before they cross and for the cyclist give way.

You also don’t need to be too clever these days to see the effect of 20 mph v 30 mph on fuel consumption. Most of us have a little computer telling us our MPG in the car thanks to the green lobby. Now on mine, and I have measured this numerous times, I use about 30% more fuel at 20 mph than I do at 30 mph because my car has to be in 2nd gear when doing 20 mph and the RPM (RPM = noise) are higher. So this tells me I am more polluting and noisier at 20 than 30.

As for the Bristol percentages as I have said before. Did the silent majority bother to take part knowing they would be ignored as were the people of York who voted down this 20 mph proposal on this very web site by a large majority. Also what was the question asked in Bristol, what number responded?

Nice to see the Press actually publishing a couple of alternative views over the last couple of days which appeared to be talking sense then they go and spoil it all again by printing this load of minority campaigners non factual garbage.
How does a councillor get away with spouting this minority campaign rubbish. First the analogy used – Pathetic. How can you compare falling from a building onto solid ground with that of being hit by a vehicle which has had many millions of pound spent on it to minimise the effect of a frontal collision with a pedestrian. I have been unfortunate enough, as a passenger, to be in a car involved in a 20 mph collision with a pedestrian who rushed out from behind a wall right in front of the car I was in. I have also witnessed a 30 mph collision between a car and a cyclist, small cycle which meant the cyclist was at about the same height as a pedestrian - below what I actually witnessed. In the 20 mph collision with the pedestrian a figure appear from the right about 4 feet from the car I was travelling in and was hit. The lady, as we discovered, was carried on the very front of the car for a few feet and then disappeared under the front of the still moving car. Fortunately the driver had the reactions of a cat and we stopped just before the front wheel ran over her head. When we got out the lady was right under the front of the car and well bruised and cut as a result. Now you may say that had we been going 30 she would have been killed well - In the 30 mph collision that I witnessed the man was thrown onto the bonnet of the car and came to rest against the windscreen then was rapidly on his feet and on his way fast enough to avoid the perusing car driver who no doubt wanted his bonnet paid for. These actual observations appears to confirm what the expert collision investigator was saying when he wrote into the press to say that in low speed accidents you could be more likely to be seriously injured or killed. By the way both collisions could have been avoided by following simple rules like pedestrians should look before they cross and for the cyclist give way. You also don’t need to be too clever these days to see the effect of 20 mph v 30 mph on fuel consumption. Most of us have a little computer telling us our MPG in the car thanks to the green lobby. Now on mine, and I have measured this numerous times, I use about 30% more fuel at 20 mph than I do at 30 mph because my car has to be in 2nd gear when doing 20 mph and the RPM (RPM = noise) are higher. So this tells me I am more polluting and noisier at 20 than 30. As for the Bristol percentages as I have said before. Did the silent majority bother to take part knowing they would be ignored as were the people of York who voted down this 20 mph proposal on this very web site by a large majority. Also what was the question asked in Bristol, what number responded? Nice to see the Press actually publishing a couple of alternative views over the last couple of days which appeared to be talking sense then they go and spoil it all again by printing this load of minority campaigners non factual garbage. strangebuttrue?
  • Score: 0

5:33pm Sat 8 Dec 12

Mulgrave says...

Cllr Semelyn refers to Bristol residents voting for 20 mph limits on 'their own street'. Unless it is actually a private road, the residents of a street have no more or less right of passage over it than anyone else.

I accept that for smaller residential streets there is no problem with giving residents the majority say, however this is most certainly not the case with public highways such as Bishopthorpe Road, and Scarcroft Road.

It is a disgrace that these were tagged onto the scheme to canvass opinion for a reduction to 20mph for 'side roads' in the area, and not put out for wider debate to include the many people who use them from outside the local area.

I think 'localism' is completely the wrong way of approaching this issue, and will lead to dangerous inconsistencies in limits between areas in a town and between different towns.

The way we are informed 'they are doing this in Bristol or that in Portsmouth etc' reminds me of a child trying to get its own way by quoting the friend who always stays up later or gets more pocket money.
Cllr Semelyn refers to Bristol residents voting for 20 mph limits on 'their own street'. Unless it is actually a private road, the residents of a street have no more or less right of passage over it than anyone else. I accept that for smaller residential streets there is no problem with giving residents the majority say, however this is most certainly not the case with public highways such as Bishopthorpe Road, and Scarcroft Road. It is a disgrace that these were tagged onto the scheme to canvass opinion for a reduction to 20mph for 'side roads' in the area, and not put out for wider debate to include the many people who use them from outside the local area. I think 'localism' is completely the wrong way of approaching this issue, and will lead to dangerous inconsistencies in limits between areas in a town and between different towns. The way we are informed 'they are doing this in Bristol or that in Portsmouth etc' reminds me of a child trying to get its own way by quoting the friend who always stays up later or gets more pocket money. Mulgrave
  • Score: 0

11:34pm Sat 8 Dec 12

ColdAsChristmas says...

Salt in the bins for all council tax payers, not just the wards. As for 20 mph signs....yet another CofYC waste of our money. Rather like their wind turbine they wasted a fortune on, now gone but keeping quiet about. I wonder what else they are not telling us about.
A public authority holding secret meetings, whatever next?
Salt in the bins for all council tax payers, not just the wards. As for 20 mph signs....yet another CofYC waste of our money. Rather like their wind turbine they wasted a fortune on, now gone but keeping quiet about. I wonder what else they are not telling us about. A public authority holding secret meetings, whatever next? ColdAsChristmas
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree