20mph speed limits to be extended across northern part of York

York Press: 20mph speed limits to be extended across northern part of York 20mph speed limits to be extended across northern part of York

COUNCIL bosses are to launch the next stage of a controversial scheme to extend 20ph limits across York.

The lower speeds have already been introduced on most residential streets in the west of the city, and the northern part of York - including Clifton, Heworth, Huntington, New Earswick, Haxby and Strensall - is next in line, with traffic regulation order signs being displayed this month.

City of York Council says city-wide 20mph limits will make streets safer and encourage more people to walk and cycle. Opponents claim the scheme, which has a £500,000 budget, is too expensive, cannot be enforced and 20mph should be targeted at areas with the worst accident records.

Notices about the reduced speed limits will be posted on affected streets, after which there will be a 28-day period for official representations or objections to be made, while residents will be sent leaflets about the plans.

Coun Dave Merrett, cabinet member for transport, said 20mph gave drivers "more time to react to the presence of other road users" and could make the city "more attractive".

Julie Townsend, deputy chief executive of road charity Brake - which wants 20mph, rather than 30mph, as the standard residential speed limit - said: "We need to tackle the senseless and violent casualties which continue to happen daily on our raods and we need to enable people to live healthy, active, social lives.

"We've reached the point where it makes no sense to retain 30mph as the default limit in built-up areas. and Brake wholeheartedly supports York's plan to implement more 20mph limits."

The 20mph limits will be mainly self-enforcing. A survey on the west York proposals last year, sent to 13,000 homes, received only 97 responses with just seven of these in favour of the scheme, although the council said the consultation was not intended to test its popularity.

Earlier this year, York councillor Anna Semlyen, speaking in her capacity as campaign manager for the 20's Plenty For Us group, said there was "little point half-heartedly sounding out general opinion" on the principle of 20mph limits, claiming public support for them had already been shown. More information is at york.gov.uk/20mph.

Comments (66)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:28am Thu 3 Apr 14

The Great Buda says...

More money down the drain.
More money down the drain. The Great Buda
  • Score: -93

10:32am Thu 3 Apr 14

Woody G Mellor says...

This lot just never learn. Clowns.
This lot just never learn. Clowns. Woody G Mellor
  • Score: -71

10:35am Thu 3 Apr 14

Kevin Turvey says...

Bearing in mind the last disaster, is this wise?
Although it seems never to be career limiting...... yet!
Bearing in mind the last disaster, is this wise? Although it seems never to be career limiting...... yet! Kevin Turvey
  • Score: -76

10:37am Thu 3 Apr 14

AGuyFromStrensall says...

It's impressive that this scheme even makes Lendal Bridge look less barking in comparison!

(Wonder why we're being allowed an opinion today? I thought we were all gagged on this topic...)
It's impressive that this scheme even makes Lendal Bridge look less barking in comparison! (Wonder why we're being allowed an opinion today? I thought we were all gagged on this topic...) AGuyFromStrensall
  • Score: -41

10:43am Thu 3 Apr 14

YOUWILLDOASISAY says...

I think we need a speed camera in our cul-de-sac, just to complete the stupidity.
I think we need a speed camera in our cul-de-sac, just to complete the stupidity. YOUWILLDOASISAY
  • Score: -16

10:46am Thu 3 Apr 14

HeworthM says...

Living near to the current 20mph zone outside of Heworth CE Primary, it is interesting to see how many times one of the law enforcers driving sets off the flashing 20mph sign - without the blue lights/siren on their car being on.
(before anyone suggests it, I am not suggesting ANPR cameras are used to catch the rozzers!!)
Living near to the current 20mph zone outside of Heworth CE Primary, it is interesting to see how many times one of the law enforcers driving sets off the flashing 20mph sign - without the blue lights/siren on their car being on. (before anyone suggests it, I am not suggesting ANPR cameras are used to catch the rozzers!!) HeworthM
  • Score: -20

10:47am Thu 3 Apr 14

strangebuttrue? says...

So the only people who can be found to support this are one anti car councillor who has just wasted probably millions of our money on a failed anti car bridge closing scheme, one further anti car councillor who is a well know campaigner for this rubbish and one other campaigner. So yet more of our hard earned money is thrown down the tubes to put up more street clutter at the end of cul-de-sacs to appease a tiny minority.
So the only people who can be found to support this are one anti car councillor who has just wasted probably millions of our money on a failed anti car bridge closing scheme, one further anti car councillor who is a well know campaigner for this rubbish and one other campaigner. So yet more of our hard earned money is thrown down the tubes to put up more street clutter at the end of cul-de-sacs to appease a tiny minority. strangebuttrue?
  • Score: -24

10:48am Thu 3 Apr 14

Kevin Turvey says...

‘Coun Dave Merrett, ‘ "more attractive"’

Dave, please explain fully why this is so, how measured, monitored and externally verified. Preferably before this is implemented on site.


‘Earlier this year, York councillor and leading 20mph campaigner Anna Semlyen said residents should not be consulted on the issue, claiming public support for the limits had already been shown. More information is at york.gov.uk/20mph.


Recent events have fully proven how correct the council always are and how always incorrect the residents are don’t you think?


Further proof if it was required that this council is not fit for purpose, have any regard for the democratic process or respect for the people that it purports to serve.

A wholesale clear out of this diseased council is now required by the populace and possibly legal criminal redress for damages, deliberate actions to undermine democracy and waste taxpayers money!
‘Coun Dave Merrett, ‘ "more attractive"’ Dave, please explain fully why this is so, how measured, monitored and externally verified. Preferably before this is implemented on site. ‘Earlier this year, York councillor and leading 20mph campaigner Anna Semlyen said residents should not be consulted on the issue, claiming public support for the limits had already been shown. More information is at york.gov.uk/20mph. Recent events have fully proven how correct the council always are and how always incorrect the residents are don’t you think? Further proof if it was required that this council is not fit for purpose, have any regard for the democratic process or respect for the people that it purports to serve. A wholesale clear out of this diseased council is now required by the populace and possibly legal criminal redress for damages, deliberate actions to undermine democracy and waste taxpayers money! Kevin Turvey
  • Score: -21

10:48am Thu 3 Apr 14

BioLogic says...

Seriously? I mean don't get me wrong, its an effective strategy. If you want to deflect from looking stupid over Lendal Bridge, make yourself look more stupid about something else, that'll work.....

Merritt needs to take a long hard look and walk away from this transport post before he does himself any more harm.

Serious question to the floor - These traffic schemes are clearly not popular, The vast majority are either dead against them or ambivalent, with only a very small minority actively supporting them. Therefore as a strategy for re-election its a disaster waiting to happen, and a sure fire way to ensure that you get one term in office. Do these schemes really mean that much to this Labour Administration that they are prepared to sacrifice their Political future over it. I struggle to believe that a Political Climber like James Alexander would think like that. Is he hoping that Merritt catches all of the electoral flak and he manages to slip through without taking a hit?
Seriously? I mean don't get me wrong, its an effective strategy. If you want to deflect from looking stupid over Lendal Bridge, make yourself look more stupid about something else, that'll work..... Merritt needs to take a long hard look and walk away from this transport post before he does himself any more harm. Serious question to the floor - These traffic schemes are clearly not popular, The vast majority are either dead against them or ambivalent, with only a very small minority actively supporting them. Therefore as a strategy for re-election its a disaster waiting to happen, and a sure fire way to ensure that you get one term in office. Do these schemes really mean that much to this Labour Administration that they are prepared to sacrifice their Political future over it. I struggle to believe that a Political Climber like James Alexander would think like that. Is he hoping that Merritt catches all of the electoral flak and he manages to slip through without taking a hit? BioLogic
  • Score: -24

10:48am Thu 3 Apr 14

3.8liter says...

Another good reason for not voting Labour next year.
Have the council checked that this is legal???
Another good reason for not voting Labour next year. Have the council checked that this is legal??? 3.8liter
  • Score: -27

10:49am Thu 3 Apr 14

JHardacre says...

How daft is this. At 20mph cars will take 50% longer to traverse any given stretch - that's at least 50% MORE pollution given that at 20 cars will have to change down a gear, possibly two. Maybe fine on cul-de-sacs and PURELY residential streets but not on through routes. Here's hoping the next council will repeal this stupidity.
How daft is this. At 20mph cars will take 50% longer to traverse any given stretch - that's at least 50% MORE pollution given that at 20 cars will have to change down a gear, possibly two. Maybe fine on cul-de-sacs and PURELY residential streets but not on through routes. Here's hoping the next council will repeal this stupidity. JHardacre
  • Score: -22

11:07am Thu 3 Apr 14

Von_Dutch says...

JHardacre wrote:
How daft is this. At 20mph cars will take 50% longer to traverse any given stretch - that's at least 50% MORE pollution given that at 20 cars will have to change down a gear, possibly two. Maybe fine on cul-de-sacs and PURELY residential streets but not on through routes. Here's hoping the next council will repeal this stupidity.
Isn't this the point though? It IS only being done on purely residential roads (where you really shouldn't be going 30mph in the first place), so the journey-times and pollution argument doesn't hold any water. (With the obvious exception of the stupid 20mph section of Bishy Road and Nunnery Lane of course...)
[quote][p][bold]JHardacre[/bold] wrote: How daft is this. At 20mph cars will take 50% longer to traverse any given stretch - that's at least 50% MORE pollution given that at 20 cars will have to change down a gear, possibly two. Maybe fine on cul-de-sacs and PURELY residential streets but not on through routes. Here's hoping the next council will repeal this stupidity.[/p][/quote]Isn't this the point though? It IS only being done on purely residential roads (where you really shouldn't be going 30mph in the first place), so the journey-times and pollution argument doesn't hold any water. (With the obvious exception of the stupid 20mph section of Bishy Road and Nunnery Lane of course...) Von_Dutch
  • Score: 189

11:11am Thu 3 Apr 14

AGuyFromStrensall says...

Von_Dutch wrote:
JHardacre wrote:
How daft is this. At 20mph cars will take 50% longer to traverse any given stretch - that's at least 50% MORE pollution given that at 20 cars will have to change down a gear, possibly two. Maybe fine on cul-de-sacs and PURELY residential streets but not on through routes. Here's hoping the next council will repeal this stupidity.
Isn't this the point though? It IS only being done on purely residential roads (where you really shouldn't be going 30mph in the first place), so the journey-times and pollution argument doesn't hold any water. (With the obvious exception of the stupid 20mph section of Bishy Road and Nunnery Lane of course...)
So basically what you're saying is that anyone who drives with any consideration wouldn't be going 30mph anyway in these areas anyway?

So, remind me what the point of spending this eye watering amount of money is?
[quote][p][bold]Von_Dutch[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JHardacre[/bold] wrote: How daft is this. At 20mph cars will take 50% longer to traverse any given stretch - that's at least 50% MORE pollution given that at 20 cars will have to change down a gear, possibly two. Maybe fine on cul-de-sacs and PURELY residential streets but not on through routes. Here's hoping the next council will repeal this stupidity.[/p][/quote]Isn't this the point though? It IS only being done on purely residential roads (where you really shouldn't be going 30mph in the first place), so the journey-times and pollution argument doesn't hold any water. (With the obvious exception of the stupid 20mph section of Bishy Road and Nunnery Lane of course...)[/p][/quote]So basically what you're saying is that anyone who drives with any consideration wouldn't be going 30mph anyway in these areas anyway? So, remind me what the point of spending this eye watering amount of money is? AGuyFromStrensall
  • Score: -27

11:18am Thu 3 Apr 14

Von_Dutch says...

AGuyFromStrensall wrote:
Von_Dutch wrote:
JHardacre wrote: How daft is this. At 20mph cars will take 50% longer to traverse any given stretch - that's at least 50% MORE pollution given that at 20 cars will have to change down a gear, possibly two. Maybe fine on cul-de-sacs and PURELY residential streets but not on through routes. Here's hoping the next council will repeal this stupidity.
Isn't this the point though? It IS only being done on purely residential roads (where you really shouldn't be going 30mph in the first place), so the journey-times and pollution argument doesn't hold any water. (With the obvious exception of the stupid 20mph section of Bishy Road and Nunnery Lane of course...)
So basically what you're saying is that anyone who drives with any consideration wouldn't be going 30mph anyway in these areas anyway? So, remind me what the point of spending this eye watering amount of money is?
I'm not saying it's a great idea, and certainly not due to the costs involved. However the sheer resistance to this type of thing from some quarters is ridiculous and the arguments they use against it are in the most irrelevent. I drive around the UK quite a bit with my job and see 20mph speed limits in residential streets all the time. They're nothing new. Just helps differentiate the main roads from the residential side roads. Apart from the cost, i really don't see the problem here.
[quote][p][bold]AGuyFromStrensall[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Von_Dutch[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JHardacre[/bold] wrote: How daft is this. At 20mph cars will take 50% longer to traverse any given stretch - that's at least 50% MORE pollution given that at 20 cars will have to change down a gear, possibly two. Maybe fine on cul-de-sacs and PURELY residential streets but not on through routes. Here's hoping the next council will repeal this stupidity.[/p][/quote]Isn't this the point though? It IS only being done on purely residential roads (where you really shouldn't be going 30mph in the first place), so the journey-times and pollution argument doesn't hold any water. (With the obvious exception of the stupid 20mph section of Bishy Road and Nunnery Lane of course...)[/p][/quote]So basically what you're saying is that anyone who drives with any consideration wouldn't be going 30mph anyway in these areas anyway? So, remind me what the point of spending this eye watering amount of money is?[/p][/quote]I'm not saying it's a great idea, and certainly not due to the costs involved. However the sheer resistance to this type of thing from some quarters is ridiculous and the arguments they use against it are in the most irrelevent. I drive around the UK quite a bit with my job and see 20mph speed limits in residential streets all the time. They're nothing new. Just helps differentiate the main roads from the residential side roads. Apart from the cost, i really don't see the problem here. Von_Dutch
  • Score: 159

11:20am Thu 3 Apr 14

BL2 says...

This must be stopped now! This is public money that is being wasted on something that doesn't work and is widely derided and ignored!
This must be stopped now! This is public money that is being wasted on something that doesn't work and is widely derided and ignored! BL2
  • Score: -55

11:25am Thu 3 Apr 14

AGuyFromStrensall says...

Von_Dutch wrote:
AGuyFromStrensall wrote:
Von_Dutch wrote:
JHardacre wrote: How daft is this. At 20mph cars will take 50% longer to traverse any given stretch - that's at least 50% MORE pollution given that at 20 cars will have to change down a gear, possibly two. Maybe fine on cul-de-sacs and PURELY residential streets but not on through routes. Here's hoping the next council will repeal this stupidity.
Isn't this the point though? It IS only being done on purely residential roads (where you really shouldn't be going 30mph in the first place), so the journey-times and pollution argument doesn't hold any water. (With the obvious exception of the stupid 20mph section of Bishy Road and Nunnery Lane of course...)
So basically what you're saying is that anyone who drives with any consideration wouldn't be going 30mph anyway in these areas anyway? So, remind me what the point of spending this eye watering amount of money is?
I'm not saying it's a great idea, and certainly not due to the costs involved. However the sheer resistance to this type of thing from some quarters is ridiculous and the arguments they use against it are in the most irrelevent. I drive around the UK quite a bit with my job and see 20mph speed limits in residential streets all the time. They're nothing new. Just helps differentiate the main roads from the residential side roads. Apart from the cost, i really don't see the problem here.
So basically you're saying that you agree is really no point in a blanket ban?

Then surely the cost is THE biggest problem here.
When council services are being cut and council tax is going up then everything should be under the greatest scrutiny for cost benefit analysis.
And under that basis this scheme doesn't even come close to standing up...
[quote][p][bold]Von_Dutch[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AGuyFromStrensall[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Von_Dutch[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JHardacre[/bold] wrote: How daft is this. At 20mph cars will take 50% longer to traverse any given stretch - that's at least 50% MORE pollution given that at 20 cars will have to change down a gear, possibly two. Maybe fine on cul-de-sacs and PURELY residential streets but not on through routes. Here's hoping the next council will repeal this stupidity.[/p][/quote]Isn't this the point though? It IS only being done on purely residential roads (where you really shouldn't be going 30mph in the first place), so the journey-times and pollution argument doesn't hold any water. (With the obvious exception of the stupid 20mph section of Bishy Road and Nunnery Lane of course...)[/p][/quote]So basically what you're saying is that anyone who drives with any consideration wouldn't be going 30mph anyway in these areas anyway? So, remind me what the point of spending this eye watering amount of money is?[/p][/quote]I'm not saying it's a great idea, and certainly not due to the costs involved. However the sheer resistance to this type of thing from some quarters is ridiculous and the arguments they use against it are in the most irrelevent. I drive around the UK quite a bit with my job and see 20mph speed limits in residential streets all the time. They're nothing new. Just helps differentiate the main roads from the residential side roads. Apart from the cost, i really don't see the problem here.[/p][/quote]So basically you're saying that you agree is really no point in a blanket ban? Then surely the cost is THE biggest problem here. When council services are being cut and council tax is going up then everything should be under the greatest scrutiny for cost benefit analysis. And under that basis this scheme doesn't even come close to standing up... AGuyFromStrensall
  • Score: -104

11:45am Thu 3 Apr 14

Shouter says...

What a bunch of clowns this lot are. Not content with their **** up over the bridge they now want to inflict other ill thought out pie in the sky schemes in their efforts to persecute the motorist.
What a bunch of clowns this lot are. Not content with their **** up over the bridge they now want to inflict other ill thought out pie in the sky schemes in their efforts to persecute the motorist. Shouter
  • Score: -116

11:48am Thu 3 Apr 14

Major Bloodnok says...

Kevin Turvey wrote:
‘Coun Dave Merrett, ‘ "more attractive"’

Dave, please explain fully why this is so, how measured, monitored and externally verified. Preferably before this is implemented on site.


‘Earlier this year, York councillor and leading 20mph campaigner Anna Semlyen said residents should not be consulted on the issue, claiming public support for the limits had already been shown. More information is at york.gov.uk/20mph.



Recent events have fully proven how correct the council always are and how always incorrect the residents are don’t you think?


Further proof if it was required that this council is not fit for purpose, have any regard for the democratic process or respect for the people that it purports to serve.

A wholesale clear out of this diseased council is now required by the populace and possibly legal criminal redress for damages, deliberate actions to undermine democracy and waste taxpayers money!
Well Said Sir
[quote][p][bold]Kevin Turvey[/bold] wrote: ‘Coun Dave Merrett, ‘ "more attractive"’ Dave, please explain fully why this is so, how measured, monitored and externally verified. Preferably before this is implemented on site. ‘Earlier this year, York councillor and leading 20mph campaigner Anna Semlyen said residents should not be consulted on the issue, claiming public support for the limits had already been shown. More information is at york.gov.uk/20mph. � � Recent events have fully proven how correct the council always are and how always incorrect the residents are don’t you think? Further proof if it was required that this council is not fit for purpose, have any regard for the democratic process or respect for the people that it purports to serve. A wholesale clear out of this diseased council is now required by the populace and possibly legal criminal redress for damages, deliberate actions to undermine democracy and waste taxpayers money![/p][/quote]Well Said Sir Major Bloodnok
  • Score: -45

12:09pm Thu 3 Apr 14

TheTruthHurts says...

I guess that i admire their spirit but its just the cost. 20mph the areas that need it but it doesnt have to be on a wide scale and as others have rightly said, the money could and should be put towards more essential stuff.
I guess that i admire their spirit but its just the cost. 20mph the areas that need it but it doesnt have to be on a wide scale and as others have rightly said, the money could and should be put towards more essential stuff. TheTruthHurts
  • Score: -50

12:17pm Thu 3 Apr 14

skateboarding simon says...

this is what she sent me when i accused her of being corrupt. If you didn't write in and object you got put down as being in favour.
cleverly only asked people in southbank, one of the only places in york that needs 20 mph on residential streets.

''Let me first respond on 20's Plenty which is default residential and not blanket policy in York.
The funding comes from DfT Local Transport Plan funding and can only be spent on capital projects in Transport not front line revenue services.
This spending is therefore not causing cut to other services as you presume.


This was Labour party in York's policy before I joined the party and before I was elected.


It is National Labour Policy too as stated in Angela Eagle MPs speach to Labour National conference.


It is a policy that the World Health Organisation favour as do the Dept for Transport, NHS and the authorities of 12.6m people in the UK including Cambridge, Oxford, Brighton, Birmingham, Portsmouth, Bath, Liverpool, Newcastle, Bristol, Lancashire, Islington, Camden, Hackney, City of London, Middlesbrough and many more.


It is also normal in much of Northern Europe to drice at 30kmph or 18.6mph.


I do not benefit finacially from York going 20mph. All my campaigning in York is and always has been voluntary and unpaid.


Yes I work for the National Campaign and this has always been declared openly and transparently. There is no direct financial benefit to me from York going 20mph on side streets.


The survey you talk about was a traffic regulation order which specifically asked for objections not letters of support. Nationally support for 20mph limits is at 72% for and 11% against in British Socual Attitudes survey.

A strong level of support was found in South Bank for limits with 70-80% approval.

York people do want 20mph limits and voted for York Labours manifesto which included them.


I am happy to talk you through the benefits which include safer, quieter, cleaner streets. The biggest economic benefit is from stimulating more exercise.


Anna Semlyen, 20's Plenty for Us Campaign Manager 07572120439 anna.s@20splentyforu
s.org.uk Www.20splentyforus.o
rg @AnnaSemlyen1''
this is what she sent me when i accused her of being corrupt. If you didn't write in and object you got put down as being in favour. cleverly only asked people in southbank, one of the only places in york that needs 20 mph on residential streets. ''Let me first respond on 20's Plenty which is default residential and not blanket policy in York. The funding comes from DfT Local Transport Plan funding and can only be spent on capital projects in Transport not front line revenue services. This spending is therefore not causing cut to other services as you presume. This was Labour party in York's policy before I joined the party and before I was elected. It is National Labour Policy too as stated in Angela Eagle MPs speach to Labour National conference. It is a policy that the World Health Organisation favour as do the Dept for Transport, NHS and the authorities of 12.6m people in the UK including Cambridge, Oxford, Brighton, Birmingham, Portsmouth, Bath, Liverpool, Newcastle, Bristol, Lancashire, Islington, Camden, Hackney, City of London, Middlesbrough and many more. It is also normal in much of Northern Europe to drice at 30kmph or 18.6mph. I do not benefit finacially from York going 20mph. All my campaigning in York is and always has been voluntary and unpaid. Yes I work for the National Campaign and this has always been declared openly and transparently. There is no direct financial benefit to me from York going 20mph on side streets. The survey you talk about was a traffic regulation order which specifically asked for objections not letters of support. Nationally support for 20mph limits is at 72% for and 11% against in British Socual Attitudes survey. A strong level of support was found in South Bank for limits with 70-80% approval. York people do want 20mph limits and voted for York Labours manifesto which included them. I am happy to talk you through the benefits which include safer, quieter, cleaner streets. The biggest economic benefit is from stimulating more exercise. Anna Semlyen, 20's Plenty for Us Campaign Manager 07572120439 anna.s@20splentyforu s.org.uk Www.20splentyforus.o rg @AnnaSemlyen1'' skateboarding simon
  • Score: -71

12:29pm Thu 3 Apr 14

cynic3 says...

That £500,000 would pay for the compensation and legal costs on the Lendal Bridge fiasco.
That £500,000 would pay for the compensation and legal costs on the Lendal Bridge fiasco. cynic3
  • Score: -22

12:30pm Thu 3 Apr 14

pbrowne2009@live.co.uk says...

Great - now even MORE old people will take to the streets knowing that driving at 20mph is acceptable.

One pet hate is old people who plod along on an empty road at 20mph when its CLEARLY a 30mph zone. The same people who drive at 50mph on a 60mph road, yet when they enter a country road village that states 40mph, they continue to drive at 50mph. Living in a bubble of their own ignoring speed regulations and not being considerate to other road users who want to drive at the LEGAL speed limit. 30 means 30, 40 means 40 ect ect ect.

This 20mph scheme is a complete waste of time, I can bet anything that 9/10 drivers that enter the 20mph section between Heworth roundabout and Heworth church (that goes past Heworth primary school) never slow down to 20mph despite the flashing light that tells them its a 20 \zone. The same for the 20 zone near Nunnery Lane/Bishopthorpe Road. What a joke.
Great - now even MORE old people will take to the streets knowing that driving at 20mph is acceptable. One pet hate is old people who plod along on an empty road at 20mph when its CLEARLY a 30mph zone. The same people who drive at 50mph on a 60mph road, yet when they enter a country road village that states 40mph, they continue to drive at 50mph. Living in a bubble of their own ignoring speed regulations and not being considerate to other road users who want to drive at the LEGAL speed limit. 30 means 30, 40 means 40 ect ect ect. This 20mph scheme is a complete waste of time, I can bet anything that 9/10 drivers that enter the 20mph section between Heworth roundabout and Heworth church (that goes past Heworth primary school) never slow down to 20mph despite the flashing light that tells them its a 20 \zone. The same for the 20 zone near Nunnery Lane/Bishopthorpe Road. What a joke. pbrowne2009@live.co.uk
  • Score: -36

12:41pm Thu 3 Apr 14

dementia says...

I believe that the 20 mph limit has no widespread support. Removal of Huntington Road chicanes and speed bumps would on the other hand be welcomed
I believe that the 20 mph limit has no widespread support. Removal of Huntington Road chicanes and speed bumps would on the other hand be welcomed dementia
  • Score: -35

1:04pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Buzzz Light-year says...

I am against anything that Anna Semlyen supports.
She should have resigned ages ago when she decided consultation wasn't necessary.
I am against anything that Anna Semlyen supports. She should have resigned ages ago when she decided consultation wasn't necessary. Buzzz Light-year
  • Score: -14

1:23pm Thu 3 Apr 14

MorkofYork says...

This is the hatred shining through past disasters. Everything they do seems to have hated of the car at it's core.
This is the hatred shining through past disasters. Everything they do seems to have hated of the car at it's core. MorkofYork
  • Score: -37

1:33pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Archiebold the 1st says...

"We've reached the point where it makes no sense to retain 30mph as the default limit in built-up areas. and Brake wholeheartedly supports York's plan to implement more 20mph limits."

Ok what point is that? and please clarify the warped logic of this? Its like me saying now its 2014 there it doesnt make sense to have breaks in a car.
"We've reached the point where it makes no sense to retain 30mph as the default limit in built-up areas. and Brake wholeheartedly supports York's plan to implement more 20mph limits." Ok what point is that? and please clarify the warped logic of this? Its like me saying now its 2014 there it doesnt make sense to have breaks in a car. Archiebold the 1st
  • Score: -29

1:38pm Thu 3 Apr 14

AGuyFromStrensall says...

Archiebold the 1st wrote:
"We've reached the point where it makes no sense to retain 30mph as the default limit in built-up areas. and Brake wholeheartedly supports York's plan to implement more 20mph limits."

Ok what point is that? and please clarify the warped logic of this? Its like me saying now its 2014 there it doesnt make sense to have breaks in a car.
An anti-speed (read anti-car) charity supports the reduction of speed limits.

In other news the pope is still Catholic.
[quote][p][bold]Archiebold the 1st[/bold] wrote: "We've reached the point where it makes no sense to retain 30mph as the default limit in built-up areas. and Brake wholeheartedly supports York's plan to implement more 20mph limits." Ok what point is that? and please clarify the warped logic of this? Its like me saying now its 2014 there it doesnt make sense to have breaks in a car.[/p][/quote]An anti-speed (read anti-car) charity supports the reduction of speed limits. In other news the pope is still Catholic. AGuyFromStrensall
  • Score: -18

2:09pm Thu 3 Apr 14

JHardacre says...

Why do non car owners/drivers who live in city streets have a say in whether there should be a 20mph limit but the actual users of said facility (ie road) have no say.

Guess that's democracy CYC style.

Perhaps we could interest the clowns to a (self-funded) visit to North Korea to see how they further improve their democratic skills.
Why do non car owners/drivers who live in city streets have a say in whether there should be a 20mph limit but the actual users of said facility (ie road) have no say. Guess that's democracy CYC style. Perhaps we could interest the clowns to a (self-funded) visit to North Korea to see how they further improve their democratic skills. JHardacre
  • Score: -12

2:12pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Waspie says...

Another waste of money concentrate on educating cyclists and pedestrians on the dangers of the road make then attend the Tufty Club. I would like to also decry the plethora of signs that now seem to inhabit the ring road. When I am in Queue 50 yards from a roundabout I see a sign changing the speed limit to 30 and I will be lucky to be doing 10mph. What a waste.

Remember Anna you represent the people of this city and I suggest you involve them. Public opinion does not mean your own or cronies half-witted ideas being pushed through on a whim. Wake up and smell the coffee if the COYC was a business it would be bankrupt by now.
Recession in progress so cut the spending not have more stupid cash devouring projects
Another waste of money concentrate on educating cyclists and pedestrians on the dangers of the road make then attend the Tufty Club. I would like to also decry the plethora of signs that now seem to inhabit the ring road. When I am in Queue 50 yards from a roundabout I see a sign changing the speed limit to 30 and I will be lucky to be doing 10mph. What a waste. Remember Anna you represent the people of this city and I suggest you involve them. Public opinion does not mean your own or cronies half-witted ideas being pushed through on a whim. Wake up and smell the coffee if the COYC was a business it would be bankrupt by now. Recession in progress so cut the spending not have more stupid cash devouring projects Waspie
  • Score: -11

2:51pm Thu 3 Apr 14

andy fowler says...

Merrett, Alexander and co plumb the depths of stupidity ever more as each day goes past.
If only they could be impeached.
Merrett, Alexander and co plumb the depths of stupidity ever more as each day goes past. If only they could be impeached. andy fowler
  • Score: 6

3:00pm Thu 3 Apr 14

the original Homer says...

This council need to learn (quickly) to listen to public opinion. They could learn a lot from reading the posts on this site.

The onky way the 20MPH limits will stick is if drivers are aware of them and generally obey them.

This will only happen , if they are widespead, enforceable, and cheap to implement.

For once, BRAKE may have got this right. A National reduction of the default built-up area minimum speed from 30 to 20 might actually make sense.

The Council should campaign for that, and wait for it to happen Nationally, rather than waste money on piecemeal areas where they will be ignored and can't be enforced.
This council need to learn (quickly) to listen to public opinion. They could learn a lot from reading the posts on this site. The onky way the 20MPH limits will stick is if drivers are aware of them and generally obey them. This will only happen , if they are widespead, enforceable, and cheap to implement. For once, BRAKE may have got this right. A National reduction of the default built-up area minimum speed from 30 to 20 might actually make sense. The Council should campaign for that, and wait for it to happen Nationally, rather than waste money on piecemeal areas where they will be ignored and can't be enforced. the original Homer
  • Score: -32

3:29pm Thu 3 Apr 14

dribblur says...

I greatly commend York Council for bringing in 20mph zones, any public safety measure that reduces motorists slaying children, cannot be rationally criticised. Those who vandalised the 20mph limit signs in Acomb should be dealt with in the severest possible way. In the U.S a man was imprisoned for life for removing a road safety sign on a motorway. Public safety is more important than getting about.

And if you can't see a horse on the road you're either driving too fast, went to specsavers or should not be driving. Absolute disgrace removing Traveler's cultural rights, they should be given a reward for keeping the verges down.
I greatly commend York Council for bringing in 20mph zones, any public safety measure that reduces motorists slaying children, cannot be rationally criticised. Those who vandalised the 20mph limit signs in Acomb should be dealt with in the severest possible way. In the U.S a man was imprisoned for life for removing a road safety sign on a motorway. Public safety is more important than getting about. And if you can't see a horse on the road you're either driving too fast, went to specsavers or should not be driving. Absolute disgrace removing Traveler's cultural rights, they should be given a reward for keeping the verges down. dribblur
  • Score: -41

3:31pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Daisy75 says...

Why not extend this further and ban motorcycles and scooters? By the same logic as Twenty's Plenty, we would be saving the drivers from umpteen spinal injuries and deaths- in fact it would save the country money as the spinal injury units around the country are largely filled with motorcyclists, or 'organ donors' as they are known to medics! Given the statistics show 70-80% of accidents involving motorcycles are the MCs fault, there is a much better rationale than for 20mph. Or make rural roads 20mph- that's where three quarters of road deaths happen.

But no, the Council will ignore proper evidence about the real places road deaths happen and make another poor decision. (And no, I'm not seriously suggesting motorbikes etc are banned, but there's better evidence behind it than for 20mph)
Why not extend this further and ban motorcycles and scooters? By the same logic as Twenty's Plenty, we would be saving the drivers from umpteen spinal injuries and deaths- in fact it would save the country money as the spinal injury units around the country are largely filled with motorcyclists, or 'organ donors' as they are known to medics! Given the statistics show 70-80% of accidents involving motorcycles are the MCs fault, there is a much better rationale than for 20mph. Or make rural roads 20mph- that's where three quarters of road deaths happen. But no, the Council will ignore proper evidence about the real places road deaths happen and make another poor decision. (And no, I'm not seriously suggesting motorbikes etc are banned, but there's better evidence behind it than for 20mph) Daisy75
  • Score: -5

3:36pm Thu 3 Apr 14

JHardacre says...

dribblur wrote:
I greatly commend York Council for bringing in 20mph zones, any public safety measure that reduces motorists slaying children, cannot be rationally criticised. Those who vandalised the 20mph limit signs in Acomb should be dealt with in the severest possible way. In the U.S a man was imprisoned for life for removing a road safety sign on a motorway. Public safety is more important than getting about.

And if you can't see a horse on the road you're either driving too fast, went to specsavers or should not be driving. Absolute disgrace removing Traveler's cultural rights, they should be given a reward for keeping the verges down.
As you know so much about this subject please tell us all how many children were slain by motor cars travelling at more than 20mph on the roads currently and proposed to be 20 mph limited.

We're all waiting your reply with interest.
[quote][p][bold]dribblur[/bold] wrote: I greatly commend York Council for bringing in 20mph zones, any public safety measure that reduces motorists slaying children, cannot be rationally criticised. Those who vandalised the 20mph limit signs in Acomb should be dealt with in the severest possible way. In the U.S a man was imprisoned for life for removing a road safety sign on a motorway. Public safety is more important than getting about. And if you can't see a horse on the road you're either driving too fast, went to specsavers or should not be driving. Absolute disgrace removing Traveler's cultural rights, they should be given a reward for keeping the verges down.[/p][/quote]As you know so much about this subject please tell us all how many children were slain by motor cars travelling at more than 20mph on the roads currently and proposed to be 20 mph limited. We're all waiting your reply with interest. JHardacre
  • Score: 2

3:40pm Thu 3 Apr 14

jay, york says...

I am in total agreement with the 20mph speed limit CYC want to impose - but NOT acroass the whole of inner and outer York.A prime example of where this is justified is the narrow busy streets of South Bank and it is also appropriate in the vicinity of schools, busy shopping areas and the hospital. It is designed to make these types of areas safer for all..
But the whole of York?? You have got to be joking.How can the costings be justified (I'm assuming here that costings have been done?)
Wonder when the new bus timetables will be coming out - after all, bus journeys are going to take longer too - will be very intersting to see them all obeying a 20mph limit on Yorks main roads.
I am in total agreement with the 20mph speed limit CYC want to impose - but NOT acroass the whole of inner and outer York.A prime example of where this is justified is the narrow busy streets of South Bank and it is also appropriate in the vicinity of schools, busy shopping areas and the hospital. It is designed to make these types of areas safer for all.. But the whole of York?? You have got to be joking.How can the costings be justified (I'm assuming here that costings have been done?) Wonder when the new bus timetables will be coming out - after all, bus journeys are going to take longer too - will be very intersting to see them all obeying a 20mph limit on Yorks main roads. jay, york
  • Score: -22

4:06pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Woody G Mellor says...

skateboarding simon wrote:
this is what she sent me when i accused her of being corrupt. If you didn't write in and object you got put down as being in favour.
cleverly only asked people in southbank, one of the only places in york that needs 20 mph on residential streets.

''Let me first respond on 20's Plenty which is default residential and not blanket policy in York.
The funding comes from DfT Local Transport Plan funding and can only be spent on capital projects in Transport not front line revenue services.
This spending is therefore not causing cut to other services as you presume.


This was Labour party in York's policy before I joined the party and before I was elected.


It is National Labour Policy too as stated in Angela Eagle MPs speach to Labour National conference.


It is a policy that the World Health Organisation favour as do the Dept for Transport, NHS and the authorities of 12.6m people in the UK including Cambridge, Oxford, Brighton, Birmingham, Portsmouth, Bath, Liverpool, Newcastle, Bristol, Lancashire, Islington, Camden, Hackney, City of London, Middlesbrough and many more.


It is also normal in much of Northern Europe to drice at 30kmph or 18.6mph.


I do not benefit finacially from York going 20mph. All my campaigning in York is and always has been voluntary and unpaid.


Yes I work for the National Campaign and this has always been declared openly and transparently. There is no direct financial benefit to me from York going 20mph on side streets.


The survey you talk about was a traffic regulation order which specifically asked for objections not letters of support. Nationally support for 20mph limits is at 72% for and 11% against in British Socual Attitudes survey.

A strong level of support was found in South Bank for limits with 70-80% approval.

York people do want 20mph limits and voted for York Labours manifesto which included them.


I am happy to talk you through the benefits which include safer, quieter, cleaner streets. The biggest economic benefit is from stimulating more exercise.


Anna Semlyen, 20's Plenty for Us Campaign Manager 07572120439 anna.s@20splentyforu

s.org.uk Www.20splentyforus.o

rg @AnnaSemlyen1''
Drivel. I live ON Bishopthorpe Road, not a side street off it, ON it. So, I see and drive in the traffic here day in day out. I've lived here for the best part of 30 years. The majority of us did not want the 20mph limit here, and if you could be bothered to come and take a look, you'll see for yourself that we/no one takes any notice of it. Why? Because we don't need it! You are wasting more of our money for your own personal reasons.
I'm sorry that you had a nasty incident with an automobile some years back and I'm happy that you seem to have made a full physical recovery, you just need to get over the mental issues you have with cars.
Now please RESIGN!
[quote][p][bold]skateboarding simon[/bold] wrote: this is what she sent me when i accused her of being corrupt. If you didn't write in and object you got put down as being in favour. cleverly only asked people in southbank, one of the only places in york that needs 20 mph on residential streets. ''Let me first respond on 20's Plenty which is default residential and not blanket policy in York. The funding comes from DfT Local Transport Plan funding and can only be spent on capital projects in Transport not front line revenue services. This spending is therefore not causing cut to other services as you presume. This was Labour party in York's policy before I joined the party and before I was elected. It is National Labour Policy too as stated in Angela Eagle MPs speach to Labour National conference. It is a policy that the World Health Organisation favour as do the Dept for Transport, NHS and the authorities of 12.6m people in the UK including Cambridge, Oxford, Brighton, Birmingham, Portsmouth, Bath, Liverpool, Newcastle, Bristol, Lancashire, Islington, Camden, Hackney, City of London, Middlesbrough and many more. It is also normal in much of Northern Europe to drice at 30kmph or 18.6mph. I do not benefit finacially from York going 20mph. All my campaigning in York is and always has been voluntary and unpaid. Yes I work for the National Campaign and this has always been declared openly and transparently. There is no direct financial benefit to me from York going 20mph on side streets. The survey you talk about was a traffic regulation order which specifically asked for objections not letters of support. Nationally support for 20mph limits is at 72% for and 11% against in British Socual Attitudes survey. A strong level of support was found in South Bank for limits with 70-80% approval. York people do want 20mph limits and voted for York Labours manifesto which included them. I am happy to talk you through the benefits which include safer, quieter, cleaner streets. The biggest economic benefit is from stimulating more exercise. Anna Semlyen, 20's Plenty for Us Campaign Manager 07572120439 anna.s@20splentyforu s.org.uk Www.20splentyforus.o rg @AnnaSemlyen1''[/p][/quote]Drivel. I live ON Bishopthorpe Road, not a side street off it, ON it. So, I see and drive in the traffic here day in day out. I've lived here for the best part of 30 years. The majority of us did not want the 20mph limit here, and if you could be bothered to come and take a look, you'll see for yourself that we/no one takes any notice of it. Why? Because we don't need it! You are wasting more of our money for your own personal reasons. I'm sorry that you had a nasty incident with an automobile some years back and I'm happy that you seem to have made a full physical recovery, you just need to get over the mental issues you have with cars. Now please RESIGN! Woody G Mellor
  • Score: -6

4:40pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Archiebold the 1st says...

skateboarding simon wrote:
this is what she sent me when i accused her of being corrupt. If you didn't write in and object you got put down as being in favour. cleverly only asked people in southbank, one of the only places in york that needs 20 mph on residential streets. ''Let me first respond on 20's Plenty which is default residential and not blanket policy in York. The funding comes from DfT Local Transport Plan funding and can only be spent on capital projects in Transport not front line revenue services. This spending is therefore not causing cut to other services as you presume. This was Labour party in York's policy before I joined the party and before I was elected. It is National Labour Policy too as stated in Angela Eagle MPs speach to Labour National conference. It is a policy that the World Health Organisation favour as do the Dept for Transport, NHS and the authorities of 12.6m people in the UK including Cambridge, Oxford, Brighton, Birmingham, Portsmouth, Bath, Liverpool, Newcastle, Bristol, Lancashire, Islington, Camden, Hackney, City of London, Middlesbrough and many more. It is also normal in much of Northern Europe to drice at 30kmph or 18.6mph. I do not benefit finacially from York going 20mph. All my campaigning in York is and always has been voluntary and unpaid. Yes I work for the National Campaign and this has always been declared openly and transparently. There is no direct financial benefit to me from York going 20mph on side streets. The survey you talk about was a traffic regulation order which specifically asked for objections not letters of support. Nationally support for 20mph limits is at 72% for and 11% against in British Socual Attitudes survey. A strong level of support was found in South Bank for limits with 70-80% approval. York people do want 20mph limits and voted for York Labours manifesto which included them. I am happy to talk you through the benefits which include safer, quieter, cleaner streets. The biggest economic benefit is from stimulating more exercise. Anna Semlyen, 20's Plenty for Us Campaign Manager 07572120439 anna.s@20splentyforu s.org.uk Www.20splentyforus.o rg @AnnaSemlyen1''
I have read all of this and none of it actually makes any points? Also as a south bank resident i didnt get any form of survey to respond to. Had i got one it would have been covered in childish drawings to demonstrate how childish this scheme is! just like your video clip showing how 20mph is faster or the same speed then 30mph... yeh if you constantly block the car doing 30mph! bit biased dont you think?

National approval (lets be honest most people will have ignored a survey due to busy lives and those that did respond clearly only did as they wer ein favour) does not represent local opinion. where in fact it was 7% in approval?

There is no benefit? it can not be enforced? you are simply wasting money that could have been put to a good use? how do you justify a 20mph sign on trentholme drive?? you can not reach 20mph!

So overtaking people at 20mph is safer? and don’t say I’d be breaking the law as its not enforced! Also if you hit someone at 20mph or even 30mph you have the reaction timings of a slough!

Quieter? 20mph in most cars is 2nd gear as third is too low? so that’s a lie.

cleaner streets? no you have put signs everywhere they are in fact more messy! do people who drive at 30mph throw things? but if they were driving at 20mph they don’t?

And how is this exercise related?? its a attempt at reducing car speed? it doesn’t work you out when driving slower? or are you thinking the same as me that at that speed i could be bicep curling a dun bell it is that slow and inappropriate?

You're deluded!

ps you had my previous post removed as it floored every logic of this waste of money scheme! go do something constructive! we have a licence to drive! we passed tests! we dont need a busy body putting signs up every 100m!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!
[quote][p][bold]skateboarding simon[/bold] wrote: this is what she sent me when i accused her of being corrupt. If you didn't write in and object you got put down as being in favour. cleverly only asked people in southbank, one of the only places in york that needs 20 mph on residential streets. ''Let me first respond on 20's Plenty which is default residential and not blanket policy in York. The funding comes from DfT Local Transport Plan funding and can only be spent on capital projects in Transport not front line revenue services. This spending is therefore not causing cut to other services as you presume. This was Labour party in York's policy before I joined the party and before I was elected. It is National Labour Policy too as stated in Angela Eagle MPs speach to Labour National conference. It is a policy that the World Health Organisation favour as do the Dept for Transport, NHS and the authorities of 12.6m people in the UK including Cambridge, Oxford, Brighton, Birmingham, Portsmouth, Bath, Liverpool, Newcastle, Bristol, Lancashire, Islington, Camden, Hackney, City of London, Middlesbrough and many more. It is also normal in much of Northern Europe to drice at 30kmph or 18.6mph. I do not benefit finacially from York going 20mph. All my campaigning in York is and always has been voluntary and unpaid. Yes I work for the National Campaign and this has always been declared openly and transparently. There is no direct financial benefit to me from York going 20mph on side streets. The survey you talk about was a traffic regulation order which specifically asked for objections not letters of support. Nationally support for 20mph limits is at 72% for and 11% against in British Socual Attitudes survey. A strong level of support was found in South Bank for limits with 70-80% approval. York people do want 20mph limits and voted for York Labours manifesto which included them. I am happy to talk you through the benefits which include safer, quieter, cleaner streets. The biggest economic benefit is from stimulating more exercise. Anna Semlyen, 20's Plenty for Us Campaign Manager 07572120439 anna.s@20splentyforu s.org.uk Www.20splentyforus.o rg @AnnaSemlyen1''[/p][/quote]I have read all of this and none of it actually makes any points? Also as a south bank resident i didnt get any form of survey to respond to. Had i got one it would have been covered in childish drawings to demonstrate how childish this scheme is! just like your video clip showing how 20mph is faster or the same speed then 30mph... yeh if you constantly block the car doing 30mph! bit biased dont you think? National approval (lets be honest most people will have ignored a survey due to busy lives and those that did respond clearly only did as they wer ein favour) does not represent local opinion. where in fact it was 7% in approval? There is no benefit? it can not be enforced? you are simply wasting money that could have been put to a good use? how do you justify a 20mph sign on trentholme drive?? you can not reach 20mph! So overtaking people at 20mph is safer? and don’t say I’d be breaking the law as its not enforced! Also if you hit someone at 20mph or even 30mph you have the reaction timings of a slough! Quieter? 20mph in most cars is 2nd gear as third is too low? so that’s a lie. cleaner streets? no you have put signs everywhere they are in fact more messy! do people who drive at 30mph throw things? but if they were driving at 20mph they don’t? And how is this exercise related?? its a attempt at reducing car speed? it doesn’t work you out when driving slower? or are you thinking the same as me that at that speed i could be bicep curling a dun bell it is that slow and inappropriate? You're deluded! ps you had my previous post removed as it floored every logic of this waste of money scheme! go do something constructive! we have a licence to drive! we passed tests! we dont need a busy body putting signs up every 100m!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!! Archiebold the 1st
  • Score: -29

4:51pm Thu 3 Apr 14

york_chap says...

My earlier comment was deleted, so I shall try again. The most infuritating thing, aside from the sheer pointlesness of this scheme, is that the root of this half a million pound spending spree on nonsense - is ultimately the anti-motorist crusade/fixation shared by literally a couple of councillors.

I'm aware that one of them was previously in collision with a car whilst riding a bicycle, but that one individual's unfortunate mishap shouldn't be influencing vast public expenditure. I once got hit by a football whilst walking across the park - however, I don't now go round demanding that people must only kick footballs very lightly. Accidents do occasionally happen; it's a fact of life.

Perhaps, as has been said before, a return to better pedestrian safety education and the green cross code would better serve in reducing the number of road causalties than half a million pounds-worth of garish metal circles.

I also suggest (my evidence here being anecdotal - much like the supposed support for 20mph limits in York) that the flashing signs like those in Heworth might actually encourage people to drive above the speed limit just to make the lights flash.
My earlier comment was deleted, so I shall try again. The most infuritating thing, aside from the sheer pointlesness of this scheme, is that the root of this half a million pound spending spree on nonsense - is ultimately the anti-motorist crusade/fixation shared by literally a couple of councillors. I'm aware that one of them was previously in collision with a car whilst riding a bicycle, but that one individual's unfortunate mishap shouldn't be influencing vast public expenditure. I once got hit by a football whilst walking across the park - however, I don't now go round demanding that people must only kick footballs very lightly. Accidents do occasionally happen; it's a fact of life. Perhaps, as has been said before, a return to better pedestrian safety education and the green cross code would better serve in reducing the number of road causalties than half a million pounds-worth of garish metal circles. I also suggest (my evidence here being anecdotal - much like the supposed support for 20mph limits in York) that the flashing signs like those in Heworth might actually encourage people to drive above the speed limit just to make the lights flash. york_chap
  • Score: -32

5:14pm Thu 3 Apr 14

wallman says...

I drive between 200/400 miles a week around York but my average speed is just 14mph now so why do we need this stupid scheme from 3or 4 deluded so-called councillors
I drive between 200/400 miles a week around York but my average speed is just 14mph now so why do we need this stupid scheme from 3or 4 deluded so-called councillors wallman
  • Score: -25

6:11pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Daname says...

Does anyone actually heed the 20mph speed limit? Can anyone actually drive over 20mph in this congested city? Maybe in the middle of the night I suppose.... And as for the narrow, residential streets it's not possible to drive at 30mph. There's not enough room because of the parked cars (unless, of course, you're on a motorbike or scooter). As responsible car drivers, can we not be trusted to judge the road conditions ourselves? Surely most car drivers know to slow down when necessary, like when driving past a primary school at the start or end of the school day. And anyway, when was a child last 'slain' by a car on the streets of York???
Does anyone actually heed the 20mph speed limit? Can anyone actually drive over 20mph in this congested city? Maybe in the middle of the night I suppose.... And as for the narrow, residential streets it's not possible to drive at 30mph. There's not enough room because of the parked cars (unless, of course, you're on a motorbike or scooter). As responsible car drivers, can we not be trusted to judge the road conditions ourselves? Surely most car drivers know to slow down when necessary, like when driving past a primary school at the start or end of the school day. And anyway, when was a child last 'slain' by a car on the streets of York??? Daname
  • Score: -33

6:46pm Thu 3 Apr 14

harrygilmore says...

Woody G Mellor wrote:
skateboarding simon wrote:
this is what she sent me when i accused her of being corrupt. If you didn't write in and object you got put down as being in favour.
cleverly only asked people in southbank, one of the only places in york that needs 20 mph on residential streets.

''Let me first respond on 20's Plenty which is default residential and not blanket policy in York.
The funding comes from DfT Local Transport Plan funding and can only be spent on capital projects in Transport not front line revenue services.
This spending is therefore not causing cut to other services as you presume.


This was Labour party in York's policy before I joined the party and before I was elected.


It is National Labour Policy too as stated in Angela Eagle MPs speach to Labour National conference.


It is a policy that the World Health Organisation favour as do the Dept for Transport, NHS and the authorities of 12.6m people in the UK including Cambridge, Oxford, Brighton, Birmingham, Portsmouth, Bath, Liverpool, Newcastle, Bristol, Lancashire, Islington, Camden, Hackney, City of London, Middlesbrough and many more.


It is also normal in much of Northern Europe to drice at 30kmph or 18.6mph.


I do not benefit finacially from York going 20mph. All my campaigning in York is and always has been voluntary and unpaid.


Yes I work for the National Campaign and this has always been declared openly and transparently. There is no direct financial benefit to me from York going 20mph on side streets.


The survey you talk about was a traffic regulation order which specifically asked for objections not letters of support. Nationally support for 20mph limits is at 72% for and 11% against in British Socual Attitudes survey.

A strong level of support was found in South Bank for limits with 70-80% approval.

York people do want 20mph limits and voted for York Labours manifesto which included them.


I am happy to talk you through the benefits which include safer, quieter, cleaner streets. The biggest economic benefit is from stimulating more exercise.


Anna Semlyen, 20's Plenty for Us Campaign Manager 07572120439 anna.s@20splentyforu


s.org.uk Www.20splentyforus.o


rg @AnnaSemlyen1''
Drivel. I live ON Bishopthorpe Road, not a side street off it, ON it. So, I see and drive in the traffic here day in day out. I've lived here for the best part of 30 years. The majority of us did not want the 20mph limit here, and if you could be bothered to come and take a look, you'll see for yourself that we/no one takes any notice of it. Why? Because we don't need it! You are wasting more of our money for your own personal reasons.
I'm sorry that you had a nasty incident with an automobile some years back and I'm happy that you seem to have made a full physical recovery, you just need to get over the mental issues you have with cars.
Now please RESIGN!
If you use Microsoft word there is a spell check facility that will prevent you looking uneducated.
[quote][p][bold]Woody G Mellor[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]skateboarding simon[/bold] wrote: this is what she sent me when i accused her of being corrupt. If you didn't write in and object you got put down as being in favour. cleverly only asked people in southbank, one of the only places in york that needs 20 mph on residential streets. ''Let me first respond on 20's Plenty which is default residential and not blanket policy in York. The funding comes from DfT Local Transport Plan funding and can only be spent on capital projects in Transport not front line revenue services. This spending is therefore not causing cut to other services as you presume. This was Labour party in York's policy before I joined the party and before I was elected. It is National Labour Policy too as stated in Angela Eagle MPs speach to Labour National conference. It is a policy that the World Health Organisation favour as do the Dept for Transport, NHS and the authorities of 12.6m people in the UK including Cambridge, Oxford, Brighton, Birmingham, Portsmouth, Bath, Liverpool, Newcastle, Bristol, Lancashire, Islington, Camden, Hackney, City of London, Middlesbrough and many more. It is also normal in much of Northern Europe to drice at 30kmph or 18.6mph. I do not benefit finacially from York going 20mph. All my campaigning in York is and always has been voluntary and unpaid. Yes I work for the National Campaign and this has always been declared openly and transparently. There is no direct financial benefit to me from York going 20mph on side streets. The survey you talk about was a traffic regulation order which specifically asked for objections not letters of support. Nationally support for 20mph limits is at 72% for and 11% against in British Socual Attitudes survey. A strong level of support was found in South Bank for limits with 70-80% approval. York people do want 20mph limits and voted for York Labours manifesto which included them. I am happy to talk you through the benefits which include safer, quieter, cleaner streets. The biggest economic benefit is from stimulating more exercise. Anna Semlyen, 20's Plenty for Us Campaign Manager 07572120439 anna.s@20splentyforu s.org.uk Www.20splentyforus.o rg @AnnaSemlyen1''[/p][/quote]Drivel. I live ON Bishopthorpe Road, not a side street off it, ON it. So, I see and drive in the traffic here day in day out. I've lived here for the best part of 30 years. The majority of us did not want the 20mph limit here, and if you could be bothered to come and take a look, you'll see for yourself that we/no one takes any notice of it. Why? Because we don't need it! You are wasting more of our money for your own personal reasons. I'm sorry that you had a nasty incident with an automobile some years back and I'm happy that you seem to have made a full physical recovery, you just need to get over the mental issues you have with cars. Now please RESIGN![/p][/quote]If you use Microsoft word there is a spell check facility that will prevent you looking uneducated. harrygilmore
  • Score: -39

6:57pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Ichabod76 says...

Can someone please explain how you can be a national campaigner but do York for free ?
Can someone please explain how you can be a national campaigner but do York for free ? Ichabod76
  • Score: -14

7:28pm Thu 3 Apr 14

mack says...

"York people do want 20mph limits and voted for York Labours manifesto which included them." ( A Semlyn)
I think peope were more desperate to vote out the Lib dems. To achieve this left them little choice but to vote Labour. it isn't good for democracy when voters have to vote against parties rather than for policies.
And who do you vote for this time to get Labour out?
"York people do want 20mph limits and voted for York Labours manifesto which included them." ( A Semlyn) I think peope were more desperate to vote out the Lib dems. To achieve this left them little choice but to vote Labour. it isn't good for democracy when voters have to vote against parties rather than for policies. And who do you vote for this time to get Labour out? mack
  • Score: -13

7:45pm Thu 3 Apr 14

yorkshirelad says...

JHardacre wrote:
Why do non car owners/drivers who live in city streets have a say in whether there should be a 20mph limit but the actual users of said facility (ie road) have no say.

Guess that's democracy CYC style.

Perhaps we could interest the clowns to a (self-funded) visit to North Korea to see how they further improve their democratic skills.
Actually, democracy is a council elected in a free vote implementing their policies isn't it?
[quote][p][bold]JHardacre[/bold] wrote: Why do non car owners/drivers who live in city streets have a say in whether there should be a 20mph limit but the actual users of said facility (ie road) have no say. Guess that's democracy CYC style. Perhaps we could interest the clowns to a (self-funded) visit to North Korea to see how they further improve their democratic skills.[/p][/quote]Actually, democracy is a council elected in a free vote implementing their policies isn't it? yorkshirelad
  • Score: -40

7:47pm Thu 3 Apr 14

yorkshirelad says...

mack wrote:
"York people do want 20mph limits and voted for York Labours manifesto which included them." ( A Semlyn)
I think peope were more desperate to vote out the Lib dems. To achieve this left them little choice but to vote Labour. it isn't good for democracy when voters have to vote against parties rather than for policies.
And who do you vote for this time to get Labour out?
At the end of the day only a fool votes on a single issue. Clever people realise that most parties have some policies they agree with, some they don't and they vote for the one that generally does the things they believe most often.
[quote][p][bold]mack[/bold] wrote: "York people do want 20mph limits and voted for York Labours manifesto which included them." ( A Semlyn) I think peope were more desperate to vote out the Lib dems. To achieve this left them little choice but to vote Labour. it isn't good for democracy when voters have to vote against parties rather than for policies. And who do you vote for this time to get Labour out?[/p][/quote]At the end of the day only a fool votes on a single issue. Clever people realise that most parties have some policies they agree with, some they don't and they vote for the one that generally does the things they believe most often. yorkshirelad
  • Score: -40

7:55pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Whis1962 says...

This council is **** in the wind and will get covered in their own foolishness. They need to put this on hold until they can claw back the 700.00 from the Lendal fiasco.
This council is **** in the wind and will get covered in their own foolishness. They need to put this on hold until they can claw back the 700.00 from the Lendal fiasco. Whis1962
  • Score: -125

7:55pm Thu 3 Apr 14

yorkshirelad says...

Daname wrote:
Does anyone actually heed the 20mph speed limit? Can anyone actually drive over 20mph in this congested city? Maybe in the middle of the night I suppose.... And as for the narrow, residential streets it's not possible to drive at 30mph. There's not enough room because of the parked cars (unless, of course, you're on a motorbike or scooter). As responsible car drivers, can we not be trusted to judge the road conditions ourselves? Surely most car drivers know to slow down when necessary, like when driving past a primary school at the start or end of the school day. And anyway, when was a child last 'slain' by a car on the streets of York???
'As responsible car drivers, can we not be trusted to judge the road conditions ourselves?'

Two points here....

1) If so, should we abolish all speed limits? ...In fact why not abolish all laws...after all as responsible citizens, can we not be trusted to obey the law ourselves?

2) Er...have you looked at the North Yorkshire Police safety camera figures (on their website)... it rather suggests that we can't be trusted I would suggest...

As several other people have said signed 20mph zones are now the norm in residential areas all over the country...what a fuss about nothing.
[quote][p][bold]Daname[/bold] wrote: Does anyone actually heed the 20mph speed limit? Can anyone actually drive over 20mph in this congested city? Maybe in the middle of the night I suppose.... And as for the narrow, residential streets it's not possible to drive at 30mph. There's not enough room because of the parked cars (unless, of course, you're on a motorbike or scooter). As responsible car drivers, can we not be trusted to judge the road conditions ourselves? Surely most car drivers know to slow down when necessary, like when driving past a primary school at the start or end of the school day. And anyway, when was a child last 'slain' by a car on the streets of York???[/p][/quote]'As responsible car drivers, can we not be trusted to judge the road conditions ourselves?' Two points here.... 1) If so, should we abolish all speed limits? ...In fact why not abolish all laws...after all as responsible citizens, can we not be trusted to obey the law ourselves? 2) Er...have you looked at the North Yorkshire Police safety camera figures (on their website)... it rather suggests that we can't be trusted I would suggest... As several other people have said signed 20mph zones are now the norm in residential areas all over the country...what a fuss about nothing. yorkshirelad
  • Score: -81

7:57pm Thu 3 Apr 14

terry_nyorks says...

Linving 15 miles out in North Yorkshire, I use York suburbab roads fairly regularly. However, for 'strangers' - after all York is a tourist town often hiring a car, using York as a base before going elsewhere - how do they feel. Having just driven as an occasional visitor through a 20mph tone in West Yorkshire the suburban signs were so inadequate I had no idea whether the limit was 20 or 30. Please can we have adequate signage, and speed bumps and tables clearly painted
Linving 15 miles out in North Yorkshire, I use York suburbab roads fairly regularly. However, for 'strangers' - after all York is a tourist town often hiring a car, using York as a base before going elsewhere - how do they feel. Having just driven as an occasional visitor through a 20mph tone in West Yorkshire the suburban signs were so inadequate I had no idea whether the limit was 20 or 30. Please can we have adequate signage, and speed bumps and tables clearly painted terry_nyorks
  • Score: -24

8:15pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Mizi123 says...

I live in Strensall and on many occasion I have been behind a driver who does 20mph in a 30 zone will these drivers now go down to 10mph in a 20 zone? It takes us long enough to get from Strensall to the outer ring road because of the amount of traffic without this stupid council introducing the 20 zone. I wonder how all the cyclists will feel when they cant get passed us because we have to stick to the limits, boot on the other foot comes to mind,lol.
I live in Strensall and on many occasion I have been behind a driver who does 20mph in a 30 zone will these drivers now go down to 10mph in a 20 zone? It takes us long enough to get from Strensall to the outer ring road because of the amount of traffic without this stupid council introducing the 20 zone. I wonder how all the cyclists will feel when they cant get passed us because we have to stick to the limits, boot on the other foot comes to mind,lol. Mizi123
  • Score: -15

8:15pm Thu 3 Apr 14

AlwaysMike says...

Next there will be traffic lights every 500 yards... oh wait, Monks Cross is already going that way!

No point in this. They're better off looking at making the Hopgrove danger junction and the Stockton on Forest / A64 junction safer and preventing the Monks Cross roundabout from bottlenecking every time the traffic lights turn red near Aldi.

Oh, and the last time I checked, 20 mph was fast than walking... encouraged my rear end.
Next there will be traffic lights every 500 yards... oh wait, Monks Cross is already going that way! No point in this. They're better off looking at making the Hopgrove danger junction and the Stockton on Forest / A64 junction safer and preventing the Monks Cross roundabout from bottlenecking every time the traffic lights turn red near Aldi. Oh, and the last time I checked, 20 mph was fast than walking... encouraged my rear end. AlwaysMike
  • Score: -102

8:37pm Thu 3 Apr 14

MorkofYork says...

Daname wrote:
Does anyone actually heed the 20mph speed limit? Can anyone actually drive over 20mph in this congested city? Maybe in the middle of the night I suppose.... And as for the narrow, residential streets it's not possible to drive at 30mph. There's not enough room because of the parked cars (unless, of course, you're on a motorbike or scooter). As responsible car drivers, can we not be trusted to judge the road conditions ourselves? Surely most car drivers know to slow down when necessary, like when driving past a primary school at the start or end of the school day. And anyway, when was a child last 'slain' by a car on the streets of York???
This is it. 20's plenty is a driving comprehension failure touted by a bunch of non driving busybodies.

If there's wide support where are these people on the roads ? What a load of bull.
[quote][p][bold]Daname[/bold] wrote: Does anyone actually heed the 20mph speed limit? Can anyone actually drive over 20mph in this congested city? Maybe in the middle of the night I suppose.... And as for the narrow, residential streets it's not possible to drive at 30mph. There's not enough room because of the parked cars (unless, of course, you're on a motorbike or scooter). As responsible car drivers, can we not be trusted to judge the road conditions ourselves? Surely most car drivers know to slow down when necessary, like when driving past a primary school at the start or end of the school day. And anyway, when was a child last 'slain' by a car on the streets of York???[/p][/quote]This is it. 20's plenty is a driving comprehension failure touted by a bunch of non driving busybodies. If there's wide support where are these people on the roads ? What a load of bull. MorkofYork
  • Score: -46

9:10pm Thu 3 Apr 14

AnotherPointofView says...

harrygilmore wrote:
Woody G Mellor wrote:
skateboarding simon wrote:
this is what she sent me when i accused her of being corrupt. If you didn't write in and object you got put down as being in favour.
cleverly only asked people in southbank, one of the only places in york that needs 20 mph on residential streets.

''Let me first respond on 20's Plenty which is default residential and not blanket policy in York.
The funding comes from DfT Local Transport Plan funding and can only be spent on capital projects in Transport not front line revenue services.
This spending is therefore not causing cut to other services as you presume.


This was Labour party in York's policy before I joined the party and before I was elected.


It is National Labour Policy too as stated in Angela Eagle MPs speach to Labour National conference.


It is a policy that the World Health Organisation favour as do the Dept for Transport, NHS and the authorities of 12.6m people in the UK including Cambridge, Oxford, Brighton, Birmingham, Portsmouth, Bath, Liverpool, Newcastle, Bristol, Lancashire, Islington, Camden, Hackney, City of London, Middlesbrough and many more.


It is also normal in much of Northern Europe to drice at 30kmph or 18.6mph.


I do not benefit finacially from York going 20mph. All my campaigning in York is and always has been voluntary and unpaid.


Yes I work for the National Campaign and this has always been declared openly and transparently. There is no direct financial benefit to me from York going 20mph on side streets.


The survey you talk about was a traffic regulation order which specifically asked for objections not letters of support. Nationally support for 20mph limits is at 72% for and 11% against in British Socual Attitudes survey.

A strong level of support was found in South Bank for limits with 70-80% approval.

York people do want 20mph limits and voted for York Labours manifesto which included them.


I am happy to talk you through the benefits which include safer, quieter, cleaner streets. The biggest economic benefit is from stimulating more exercise.


Anna Semlyen, 20's Plenty for Us Campaign Manager 07572120439 anna.s@20splentyforu



s.org.uk Www.20splentyforus.o



rg @AnnaSemlyen1''
Drivel. I live ON Bishopthorpe Road, not a side street off it, ON it. So, I see and drive in the traffic here day in day out. I've lived here for the best part of 30 years. The majority of us did not want the 20mph limit here, and if you could be bothered to come and take a look, you'll see for yourself that we/no one takes any notice of it. Why? Because we don't need it! You are wasting more of our money for your own personal reasons.
I'm sorry that you had a nasty incident with an automobile some years back and I'm happy that you seem to have made a full physical recovery, you just need to get over the mental issues you have with cars.
Now please RESIGN!
If you use Microsoft word there is a spell check facility that will prevent you looking uneducated.
Is that the best you can come up with? It is the educated amongst us that can understand someone's message without having to correct every spelling mistake or every grammatical error.

As for Semlyn, of course she should resign, along with Alexander and Merrit.

There is no merit in the 20 speed limit. I drive every day around the streets of York. I have NEVER been behind any driver who has voluntarily been keeping to 20 in those areas where 20 is the speed limit. The limits are a waste of time and money.
[quote][p][bold]harrygilmore[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Woody G Mellor[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]skateboarding simon[/bold] wrote: this is what she sent me when i accused her of being corrupt. If you didn't write in and object you got put down as being in favour. cleverly only asked people in southbank, one of the only places in york that needs 20 mph on residential streets. ''Let me first respond on 20's Plenty which is default residential and not blanket policy in York. The funding comes from DfT Local Transport Plan funding and can only be spent on capital projects in Transport not front line revenue services. This spending is therefore not causing cut to other services as you presume. This was Labour party in York's policy before I joined the party and before I was elected. It is National Labour Policy too as stated in Angela Eagle MPs speach to Labour National conference. It is a policy that the World Health Organisation favour as do the Dept for Transport, NHS and the authorities of 12.6m people in the UK including Cambridge, Oxford, Brighton, Birmingham, Portsmouth, Bath, Liverpool, Newcastle, Bristol, Lancashire, Islington, Camden, Hackney, City of London, Middlesbrough and many more. It is also normal in much of Northern Europe to drice at 30kmph or 18.6mph. I do not benefit finacially from York going 20mph. All my campaigning in York is and always has been voluntary and unpaid. Yes I work for the National Campaign and this has always been declared openly and transparently. There is no direct financial benefit to me from York going 20mph on side streets. The survey you talk about was a traffic regulation order which specifically asked for objections not letters of support. Nationally support for 20mph limits is at 72% for and 11% against in British Socual Attitudes survey. A strong level of support was found in South Bank for limits with 70-80% approval. York people do want 20mph limits and voted for York Labours manifesto which included them. I am happy to talk you through the benefits which include safer, quieter, cleaner streets. The biggest economic benefit is from stimulating more exercise. Anna Semlyen, 20's Plenty for Us Campaign Manager 07572120439 anna.s@20splentyforu s.org.uk Www.20splentyforus.o rg @AnnaSemlyen1''[/p][/quote]Drivel. I live ON Bishopthorpe Road, not a side street off it, ON it. So, I see and drive in the traffic here day in day out. I've lived here for the best part of 30 years. The majority of us did not want the 20mph limit here, and if you could be bothered to come and take a look, you'll see for yourself that we/no one takes any notice of it. Why? Because we don't need it! You are wasting more of our money for your own personal reasons. I'm sorry that you had a nasty incident with an automobile some years back and I'm happy that you seem to have made a full physical recovery, you just need to get over the mental issues you have with cars. Now please RESIGN![/p][/quote]If you use Microsoft word there is a spell check facility that will prevent you looking uneducated.[/p][/quote]Is that the best you can come up with? It is the educated amongst us that can understand someone's message without having to correct every spelling mistake or every grammatical error. As for Semlyn, of course she should resign, along with Alexander and Merrit. There is no merit in the 20 speed limit. I drive every day around the streets of York. I have NEVER been behind any driver who has voluntarily been keeping to 20 in those areas where 20 is the speed limit. The limits are a waste of time and money. AnotherPointofView
  • Score: -41

11:15pm Thu 3 Apr 14

jayeskaycee says...

The thing is, it's not always necessary to drive slowly as if one has fallen asleep at the wheel. There are many roads in the area where, if you can get up to 20, you've done very well. Also many roads where travelling at 20mph could be extremely dangerous. The majority of people drive to the situation in which they find themselves; 30mph on a clear road, slower when necessary, and most also stick to the rules of the road. Pity the same can't be said of many of the cycling fraternity who ignore red lights, weave in and out of traffic waiting in an orderly queue, use the footpaths as their own personal road, use a mobile phone and/or have earphones in whilst riding. Some of them make me ashamed to admit a bike was once my sole means of transport!.
Pity this council and its members haven't yet realised that they are not supposed to be dictators or owners of the city and surrounds, but custodians, public servants, elected to follow the wishes of the electorate .

Instead of wasting OUR money on their vanity projects, they should be properly repairing the roads - not just throwing a shovelful of tarmac into a pothole and patting it down -, making footpaths fit for purpose, which is more than can be said for themselves. Instead of making the centre more of a barren wilderness than they have already done, there should be more seats, floral displays, a working fountain, the provision of more toilet facilities, cleaned up empty buildings. Now things like that would make York and surrounds more attractive that a stupid 20mph that will benefit absolutely no-one.
They put up our council tax when there is free money to be had then waste what we have all worked hard for or scraped together from our pensions.
As the song goes....Time to say goodbye....
The thing is, it's not always necessary to drive slowly as if one has fallen asleep at the wheel. There are many roads in the area where, if you can get up to 20, you've done very well. Also many roads where travelling at 20mph could be extremely dangerous. The majority of people drive to the situation in which they find themselves; 30mph on a clear road, slower when necessary, and most also stick to the rules of the road. Pity the same can't be said of many of the cycling fraternity who ignore red lights, weave in and out of traffic waiting in an orderly queue, use the footpaths as their own personal road, use a mobile phone and/or have earphones in whilst riding. Some of them make me ashamed to admit a bike was once my sole means of transport!. Pity this council and its members haven't yet realised that they are not supposed to be dictators or owners of the city and surrounds, but custodians, public servants, elected to follow the wishes of the electorate [not customers!]. Instead of wasting OUR money on their vanity projects, they should be properly repairing the roads - not just throwing a shovelful of tarmac into a pothole and patting it down -, making footpaths fit for purpose, which is more than can be said for themselves. Instead of making the centre more of a barren wilderness than they have already done, there should be more seats, floral displays, a working fountain, the provision of more toilet facilities, cleaned up empty buildings. Now things like that would make York and surrounds more attractive that a stupid 20mph that will benefit absolutely no-one. They put up our council tax when there is free money to be had then waste what we have all worked hard for or scraped together from our pensions. As the song goes....Time to say goodbye.... jayeskaycee
  • Score: -41

2:41am Fri 4 Apr 14

Magicman! says...

20mph should be only used at focused zones, such as outside schools and playing fields... the signage then alters drivers to the fact there may be extra hazards in the area to look out for.

a blanket 20mph limit around the entire neighbourhoods simply means the 20mph limit loses all significance. and it is THIS which means I disagree with it, nothing else.
20mph should be only used at focused zones, such as outside schools and playing fields... the signage then alters drivers to the fact there may be extra hazards in the area to look out for. a blanket 20mph limit around the entire neighbourhoods simply means the 20mph limit loses all significance. and it is THIS which means I disagree with it, nothing else. Magicman!
  • Score: 10

2:44am Fri 4 Apr 14

Magicman! says...

Magicman! wrote:
20mph should be only used at focused zones, such as outside schools and playing fields... the signage then alters drivers to the fact there may be extra hazards in the area to look out for.

a blanket 20mph limit around the entire neighbourhoods simply means the 20mph limit loses all significance. and it is THIS which means I disagree with it, nothing else.
Oops... not "alters", but "Alerts"... 'the signage alerts drivers...'
[quote][p][bold]Magicman![/bold] wrote: 20mph should be only used at focused zones, such as outside schools and playing fields... the signage then alters drivers to the fact there may be extra hazards in the area to look out for. a blanket 20mph limit around the entire neighbourhoods simply means the 20mph limit loses all significance. and it is THIS which means I disagree with it, nothing else.[/p][/quote]Oops... not "alters", but "Alerts"... 'the signage alerts drivers...' Magicman!
  • Score: 2

3:09am Fri 4 Apr 14

anistasia says...

What's the cost to the tax payer to change road markings and street signs again this would after be done because the highway code states built up areas 30mph unless otherwise stated so again outsiders would get caught out if the signs are not changed and who's going to police this.
What's the cost to the tax payer to change road markings and street signs again this would after be done because the highway code states built up areas 30mph unless otherwise stated so again outsiders would get caught out if the signs are not changed and who's going to police this. anistasia
  • Score: 4

8:23am Fri 4 Apr 14

Happytoliveinyork says...

Do you think the York Labour Party really have any idea on how they are alienating their core supporters??

I was out last night with a group of friends who have been staunch Labour supporters all their lives..............e
very single one of them, including me, would rather vote con, lib or even green to get this patronising shambles of an administration out.
Do you think the York Labour Party really have any idea on how they are alienating their core supporters?? I was out last night with a group of friends who have been staunch Labour supporters all their lives..............e very single one of them, including me, would rather vote con, lib or even green to get this patronising shambles of an administration out. Happytoliveinyork
  • Score: 8

9:52am Fri 4 Apr 14

MorkofYork says...

Magicman! wrote:
20mph should be only used at focused zones, such as outside schools and playing fields... the signage then alters drivers to the fact there may be extra hazards in the area to look out for.

a blanket 20mph limit around the entire neighbourhoods simply means the 20mph limit loses all significance. and it is THIS which means I disagree with it, nothing else.
If we don't need them away from schools why do we need them around them ? Do you think people stick to them around schools now ?? Or do they just drive depending on the road conditions ? Under 20 when it's busy, over when it's not.

They're a pointless dud where ever you put them.
[quote][p][bold]Magicman![/bold] wrote: 20mph should be only used at focused zones, such as outside schools and playing fields... the signage then alters drivers to the fact there may be extra hazards in the area to look out for. a blanket 20mph limit around the entire neighbourhoods simply means the 20mph limit loses all significance. and it is THIS which means I disagree with it, nothing else.[/p][/quote]If we don't need them away from schools why do we need them around them ? Do you think people stick to them around schools now ?? Or do they just drive depending on the road conditions ? Under 20 when it's busy, over when it's not. They're a pointless dud where ever you put them. MorkofYork
  • Score: 2

11:35am Fri 4 Apr 14

pedalling paul says...

The Council are not elected to do everything that some of the electorate want.....Councillors are guided by local, regional and national legislation as well, and receive advice on these areas from their Officers. That weighs heavily in the balance when making decisions.
The Council are not elected to do everything that some of the electorate want.....Councillors are guided by local, regional and national legislation as well, and receive advice on these areas from their Officers. That weighs heavily in the balance when making decisions. pedalling paul
  • Score: -8

11:40am Fri 4 Apr 14

andy fowler says...

The negative boy in the press office been busy again on here.

As for pedalling prat take it he models himself on Putin
The negative boy in the press office been busy again on here. As for pedalling prat take it he models himself on Putin andy fowler
  • Score: 0

1:28pm Fri 4 Apr 14

sheps lad says...

pedalling paul wrote:
The Council are not elected to do everything that some of the electorate want.....Councillors are guided by local, regional and national legislation as well, and receive advice on these areas from their Officers. That weighs heavily in the balance when making decisions.
Ah so! it;s not the councilors who are to blame for the Lendal fiasco it's the officers!
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: The Council are not elected to do everything that some of the electorate want.....Councillors are guided by local, regional and national legislation as well, and receive advice on these areas from their Officers. That weighs heavily in the balance when making decisions.[/p][/quote]Ah so! it;s not the councilors who are to blame for the Lendal fiasco it's the officers! sheps lad
  • Score: 3

3:05pm Fri 4 Apr 14

UsernameNotAvailable says...

Daisy75 wrote:
Why not extend this further and ban motorcycles and scooters? By the same logic as Twenty's Plenty, we would be saving the drivers from umpteen spinal injuries and deaths- in fact it would save the country money as the spinal injury units around the country are largely filled with motorcyclists, or 'organ donors' as they are known to medics! Given the statistics show 70-80% of accidents involving motorcycles are the MCs fault, there is a much better rationale than for 20mph. Or make rural roads 20mph- that's where three quarters of road deaths happen.

But no, the Council will ignore proper evidence about the real places road deaths happen and make another poor decision. (And no, I'm not seriously suggesting motorbikes etc are banned, but there's better evidence behind it than for 20mph)
" Given the statistics show 70-80% of accidents involving motorcycles are the MCs fault..."

What a downright lie. https://www.gov.uk/g
overnment/uploads/sy
stem/uploads/attachm
ent_data/file/9277/r
rcgb2011-04.pdf

48% of car/motorcyle collisions are 'SMIDSYs' (Sorry Mate, I Didn't See You) where the car driver failed to look properly with 10 percent where the rider didn't look properly.

Undoubtable there are accidents caused by the motorcyclist going too fast or behaving recklessly, but as well as the SMIDSY's there are things like spilt diesel (horrendous to encounter on two-wheels), potholes etc.

I think you made your figure up to bolster your apparant hatred of motorcyclists.

Please feel free to provide your source of figures to prove me wrong.
[quote][p][bold]Daisy75[/bold] wrote: Why not extend this further and ban motorcycles and scooters? By the same logic as Twenty's Plenty, we would be saving the drivers from umpteen spinal injuries and deaths- in fact it would save the country money as the spinal injury units around the country are largely filled with motorcyclists, or 'organ donors' as they are known to medics! Given the statistics show 70-80% of accidents involving motorcycles are the MCs fault, there is a much better rationale than for 20mph. Or make rural roads 20mph- that's where three quarters of road deaths happen. But no, the Council will ignore proper evidence about the real places road deaths happen and make another poor decision. (And no, I'm not seriously suggesting motorbikes etc are banned, but there's better evidence behind it than for 20mph)[/p][/quote]" Given the statistics show 70-80% of accidents involving motorcycles are the MCs fault..." What a downright lie. https://www.gov.uk/g overnment/uploads/sy stem/uploads/attachm ent_data/file/9277/r rcgb2011-04.pdf 48% of car/motorcyle collisions are 'SMIDSYs' (Sorry Mate, I Didn't See You) where the car driver failed to look properly with 10 percent where the rider didn't look properly. Undoubtable there are accidents caused by the motorcyclist going too fast or behaving recklessly, but as well as the SMIDSY's there are things like spilt diesel (horrendous to encounter on two-wheels), potholes etc. I think you made your figure up to bolster your apparant hatred of motorcyclists. Please feel free to provide your source of figures to prove me wrong. UsernameNotAvailable
  • Score: 0

7:53pm Fri 4 Apr 14

Igiveinthen says...

Von_Dutch wrote:
JHardacre wrote:
How daft is this. At 20mph cars will take 50% longer to traverse any given stretch - that's at least 50% MORE pollution given that at 20 cars will have to change down a gear, possibly two. Maybe fine on cul-de-sacs and PURELY residential streets but not on through routes. Here's hoping the next council will repeal this stupidity.
Isn't this the point though? It IS only being done on purely residential roads (where you really shouldn't be going 30mph in the first place), so the journey-times and pollution argument doesn't hold any water. (With the obvious exception of the stupid 20mph section of Bishy Road and Nunnery Lane of course...)
.........(With the obvious exception of the stupid 20mph section of Bishy Road and Nunnery Lane of course...) And nobody takes any notice along those two anyway.
[quote][p][bold]Von_Dutch[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JHardacre[/bold] wrote: How daft is this. At 20mph cars will take 50% longer to traverse any given stretch - that's at least 50% MORE pollution given that at 20 cars will have to change down a gear, possibly two. Maybe fine on cul-de-sacs and PURELY residential streets but not on through routes. Here's hoping the next council will repeal this stupidity.[/p][/quote]Isn't this the point though? It IS only being done on purely residential roads (where you really shouldn't be going 30mph in the first place), so the journey-times and pollution argument doesn't hold any water. (With the obvious exception of the stupid 20mph section of Bishy Road and Nunnery Lane of course...)[/p][/quote].........(With the obvious exception of the stupid 20mph section of Bishy Road and Nunnery Lane of course...) And nobody takes any notice along those two anyway. Igiveinthen
  • Score: 2

3:13am Sat 5 Apr 14

Magicman! says...

MorkofYork wrote:
Magicman! wrote:
20mph should be only used at focused zones, such as outside schools and playing fields... the signage then alters drivers to the fact there may be extra hazards in the area to look out for.

a blanket 20mph limit around the entire neighbourhoods simply means the 20mph limit loses all significance. and it is THIS which means I disagree with it, nothing else.
If we don't need them away from schools why do we need them around them ? Do you think people stick to them around schools now ?? Or do they just drive depending on the road conditions ? Under 20 when it's busy, over when it's not.

They're a pointless dud where ever you put them.
Doing more than 20 outside schools at 8pm is fine by me, for example, not like there's going to be any kids around! 20mph should be used in a targeted and managed application - only in small areas where careful driving is needed, with the reduced speed limit highlighted (possibly by amber flashers) at the times it is most important.
...if it was legal, maybe even have VMS's fitted, so that at the times schoolkids are around (or whatever the hazard might be depending on where the 20mph limited zone is) the sign states "20", but outside of those times, the sign flips around and is either blank or shows a "30" repeater.
[quote][p][bold]MorkofYork[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Magicman![/bold] wrote: 20mph should be only used at focused zones, such as outside schools and playing fields... the signage then alters drivers to the fact there may be extra hazards in the area to look out for. a blanket 20mph limit around the entire neighbourhoods simply means the 20mph limit loses all significance. and it is THIS which means I disagree with it, nothing else.[/p][/quote]If we don't need them away from schools why do we need them around them ? Do you think people stick to them around schools now ?? Or do they just drive depending on the road conditions ? Under 20 when it's busy, over when it's not. They're a pointless dud where ever you put them.[/p][/quote]Doing more than 20 outside schools at 8pm is fine by me, for example, not like there's going to be any kids around! 20mph should be used in a targeted and managed application - only in small areas where careful driving is needed, with the reduced speed limit highlighted (possibly by amber flashers) at the times it is most important. ...if it was legal, maybe even have VMS's fitted, so that at the times schoolkids are around (or whatever the hazard might be depending on where the 20mph limited zone is) the sign states "20", but outside of those times, the sign flips around and is either blank or shows a "30" repeater. Magicman!
  • Score: 2

9:07am Sat 5 Apr 14

JV1966 says...

Waste of time and money. Nobody drives at 20mph in existing 20mph zones
Waste of time and money. Nobody drives at 20mph in existing 20mph zones JV1966
  • Score: 1

4:50pm Tue 8 Apr 14

CaroleBaines says...

JV1966 wrote:
Waste of time and money. Nobody drives at 20mph in existing 20mph zones
Agreed. Am not against the idea in principle, but it is unenforceable and therefore largely pointless. As such, a waste of money, I'm afraid.
[quote][p][bold]JV1966[/bold] wrote: Waste of time and money. Nobody drives at 20mph in existing 20mph zones[/p][/quote]Agreed. Am not against the idea in principle, but it is unenforceable and therefore largely pointless. As such, a waste of money, I'm afraid. CaroleBaines
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

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