New 20mph speed limits

[Annie Bynnol 611]

 

 

The cost of enforcement should be paid for by the offender. That means the full cost including wages and legal costs.

For example if it costs £100 000 to run the enforcement team to observe and collect 1 000 offenders they should pay £100 each. 

 

Many will not re offend,  so in the second year there may be  500 offenders and each will pay £200.

Some will to continue to offend until they too will find the risk unacceptable, these few will  also have the undivided attention of the enforcement team. 

This will cost the victims of this anti social behaviour nothing and most of the offenders will be given the opportunity to modify their behaviour without points and at a reasonable cost.

[Planner1 428]

5 hours ago, max said:

My point being, if the wise majority stick to the limit then the selfish few may get the message.

I think the major issue with this line of thinking is that the vast majority of drivers don’t want to stick to 20 limits. I see very few who do.

[Planner1 428]

38 minutes ago, Annie Bynnol said:

 

 

The cost of enforcement should be paid for by the offender. That means the full cost including wages and legal costs.

For example if it costs £100 000 to run the enforcement team to observe and collect 1 000 offenders they should pay £100 each. 

 

Many will not re offend,  so in the second year there may be  500 offenders and each will pay £200.

Some will to continue to offend until they too will find the risk unacceptable, these few will  also have the undivided attention of the enforcement team. 

This will cost the victims of this anti social behaviour nothing and most of the offenders will be given the opportunity to modify their behaviour without points and at a reasonable cost.

This is rather predicated on the enforcing authorities having the means and the will to enforce the restriction. They have neither. 
 

The general view of the police across the country is that 20 zones should be self enforcing by their layout and incorporating traffic calming features. Also it is only in the last few years that equipment has become available  that can enforce 20 limits.

 

A very high percentage of drivers ignore signing only 20 limits and there’s plenty of evidence to show that they have an extremely small effect on average speeds and the numbers of injuries from collisions.

[Baron99 776]

This might be news to people in the Riverdale Rd, Endcliffe Vale Road & Hillsborough area? 

 

https://www.leeds-live.co.uk/news/sheffield-neighbourhoods-set-double-yellow-19711623

[Bargepole23 337]

14 hours ago, Baron99 said:

This might be news to people in the Riverdale Rd, Endcliffe Vale Road & Hillsborough area? 

 

https://www.leeds-live.co.uk/news/sheffield-neighbourhoods-set-double-yellow-19711623

There are notices on lampposts on Riverdale and Endcliffe Vale Roads, detailing the proposals. Dunno about Hillsborough.

[Pyrotequila 401]

So the residents who complained about the commuters and visitors taking up all the spaces will get screwed over too?
Or are they issuing residents parking permits?

[Resident 1,185]

2 hours ago, Pyrotequila said:

So the residents who complained about the commuters and visitors taking up all the spaces will get screwed over too?
Or are they issuing residents parking permits?

Can't have your cake and eat it. 

You can't Complain about people LEGALLY parking on a road without restrictions then moan when the council listens and puts in restrictions.  Clearly the residents used a 'safety' angle when registering complaints hence the council decision to double yellow it. If it's not safe for commuters to park there then it's not safe for residents.

[Pyrotequila 401]

I bet they wished they'd kept quiet now!

Instead of an occasional annoyance, it'll now be a permanent inconvenice 🤦‍♀️

[Bargepole23 337]

22 hours ago, Resident said:

Can't have your cake and eat it. 

You can't Complain about people LEGALLY parking on a road without restrictions then moan when the council listens and puts in restrictions.  Clearly the residents used a 'safety' angle when registering complaints hence the council decision to double yellow it. If it's not safe for commuters to park there then it's not safe for residents.

All true, although pretty much every house on there has more than enough driveway space to fit multiple cars on.

[Baron99 776]

SCC are no longer going to install actual speed humps as they cost too much money. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-60288668

 

Additionally, there appears to be misleading claims by a SCC planner as to who pays for such schemes?   

 

"In a letter to residents, transport planner Lisa Blakemore said the council could "no longer afford such schemes".

The government said the council claim was "misleading" as its funding came via a Private Finance Initiative (PFI). "

 

It also turns out that the police don't enforce the 20mph areas anyway.  

 

" In response to a Freedom of Information request in 2019, South Yorkshire Police said it would not enforce 20mph speed zones and confirmed no drivers had been prosecuted for exceeding those limits." 

Edited February 8, 2022 by Baron99

[Planner1 428]

8 hours ago, Baron99 said:

SCC are no longer going to install actual speed humps as they cost too much money. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-60288668

 

Additionally, there appears to be misleading claims by a SCC planner as to who pays for such schemes?   

 

"In a letter to residents, transport planner Lisa Blakemore said the council could "no longer afford such schemes".

The government said the council claim was "misleading" as its funding came via a Private Finance Initiative (PFI). "

 

It also turns out that the police don't enforce the 20mph areas anyway.  

 

" In response to a Freedom of Information request in 2019, South Yorkshire Police said it would not enforce 20mph speed zones and confirmed no drivers had been prosecuted for exceeding those limits." 

The claims aren’t misleading at all.

 

The government spokesperson is correct in saying that SCC’s highway maintenance funding comes via the PFI deal.

 

However, funding for new infrastructure spending, like a new 20mph zone with physical features like humps etc, normally comes from government grant. Those schemes are expensive, so the Council can only do limited numbers of them. The signs and roadmarkings only schemes are much cheaper.

 

It isn’t exactly a new revelation that the Police don’t enforce the 20 zones. They have always held the opinion that 20 zones should be self enforcing ie they should have physical features like humps etc that make drivers slow down. Also it is only very recently that enforcement equipment has become available that is approved for use in 20 zones.

 

The Council are well aware that the Police won’t enforce the 20 zones. The Council officers have briefed the Councillors that the signs and road markings only 20 zones are not generally effective in reducing vehicle speeds and therefore don’t generally reduce casualties. But the Councillors want to roll them out across the city because people ask for them.