Ecclesfield Road (Woolley Wood Bottom) speed limit/closures

[Scutts]

....Six, now you explain to me why the speed limit should stay at 70mph when you can do the same at 50mph as you can at 70mph. and using caps in words in exasperation in a conversation is not nice, this is suppose to be a friendly conversation.

 

Sorry to interrupt but the old limit was the National Speed Limit which is 60mph for this type of road.

[GhostRiders]

One, I am not a bike rider and to me I would thing that to try and read a speedo on a bike traveling at speed is awkward looking through a helmets visor while you are balancing on two wheels with wind and rain blowing in your face I have never see wipers on a bikers helmet, I would think you have to move your head up and down to see the speedo taking your eye off the road for more than when you’re in your car, where in a car you only have to glance down, and no one is suggesting that your ability to do so is in question and as I have already said “ proper bikers, like yourself, have more road sense than most car drivers because of the hazards they face from wet man hole covers to cars pulling out in front of them “

 

I never suggested you were questioning my ability, I asked why you thought it might be difficult riding a bike, you answered. As it happens in good conditions there is no difference (on my bike at least) with glancing at the speedo. When it is wet I adjust my speed accordingly to account for the road conditions.

 

Two, why should a reduction in a speed limit increase the possibility of an accident when you over take you speed up and then slow to the speed limit you do this whether it 30, 40, 100mph so the law of average is the same

 

Because on that road it is exceptionally dangerous to overtake anywhere in the 50 zone, you simply cannot see far enough ahead to ensure no traffic is coming in the opposite direction.

 

This means that everyone going 10mph slower (the old speed limit was 60, not 70, I'm not sure (and am slightly concerned) why you thought it was 70) is frustrating those idiots who will attempt to overtake anyway even more. If (and they did) they were up your bum at 60 they sure as hell will be at 50.

 

Three, an increase of people wanting to overtake due to the speed limit being reduced no don’t agree to that, on the days I have travelled on there every one was content to stick to the speed limit if they over took then they over took, you must have had be on when there were sales on at Meadow Hell

 

I travel on there at least four times a day, six days a week, I can promise you I've had more people trying to overtake since the reduction than before.

 

I'm not sure I've EVER (there I go being rude again) been on that road are seen everyone content to stick to the limit. At busy times people seem desperate to overtake, at quiet times they just zoom along at whatever speed they feel like.

 

Four, not given a reason why 50mph is better, thought I had, look at it this way then, it makes people of my age, 65 and retired with reactions not quite as quick as a 40 year old, feel more in control instead of following like sheep others who must travel at light speed right up your back bumper so keep 70 for the motor ways, and in your own admission “My bike is big, and heavy, and I tend to go a bit slower on the bike on Woolly wood than in the car” so why does it have to be 70mph

 

In your case that's a fair reason. However (and if you've read my earlier posts you'll know this) I've never suggested people drive exclusively right up to the limit. My objection was people driving over the limit and people driving far too slow. I think I suggested 45-60 was adequate when it was a 60 (not 70, still worrying) road in good conditions.

 

However, do you think it reasonable that because you're more comfortable going a bit slower than the maximum that the speed limit, which was perfectly adequate at 60mph for the road in good conditions should be lowered for everyone? This is an important point. If you aren't comfortable driving on a 60mph road (within the reasonable limits I suggested) should you consider not driving on those roads and finding an alternative route.

 

Five, “When I referred to the road having a constant speed limit I meant the stretch that has been lowered” but it has a constant speed limit of 50mph

 

I know, I misunderstood your post, I've already pointed out my mistake.

 

Six, now you explain to me why the speed limit should stay at 70mph when you can do the same at 50mph as you can at 70mph. and using caps in words in exasperation in a conversation is not nice, this is suppose to be a friendly conversation.

 

It wasn't 70, it was 60, and the reason it was 60 was that it was perfectly reasonable for it to be 60. I thought (and my experience, as well it seems as the experience of another poster, though apparently not yours seems to bear this out) that a reduction would only encourage those idiots determined to break the speed limit and dangerously overtake to do so more often, making the road more dangerous.

 

Let me tell you when you're on a motorbike and come round a blind bend to see some numpty on the wrong side of the road heading straight for you your heart misses a beat or two.

 

That's exactly why the speed limit should have stayed at 60. Either that or go the whole hog and make it 30 or 40 with enforced monitoring. Reducing it to 50, in my opinion, has just made it a more dangerous road.

 

...and I wasn't using caps in exasperation, I was using them for emphasis, as far as I'm aware this is a friendly conversation.

[martin6]

Why don't scc just change it to 20mph, there seems to be no budget limitation on doing this!

[Allen]

Just to clarify...I haven't spoken to the council about it.

I've just expressed my views on here.

Speed cameras I would welcome.

Cutting trees down..why?

Remove parking areas...a definite no from me.

 

 

Perhaps if you used the other, already adequate parking facilities I've already pointed out to you this wouldn't be a problem?

 

Herein lies the problem.

I perhaps should have mentioned I drive a medium sized motorcaravan.

The rear view isn't the best in the world (even with the help of a rear view/reversing camera).

The wing mirrors give adequate view for normal driving, but I would never use a car park near a children's playground or park/play area. Children have no sense of danger from a reversing vehicle.

 

Just to add.....I have on occasions seen lorry drivers parked up in the lay-bys, presumably taking a required driving break ( or maybe a leek in the woods).

Surely you don't suggest they also park near the children's playground?

[GhostRiders]

Herein lies the problem.

I perhaps should have mentioned I drive a medium sized motorcaravan.

The rear view isn't the best in the world (even with the help of a rear view/reversing camera).

The wing mirrors give adequate view for normal driving, but I would never use a car park near a children's playground or park/play area. Children have no sense of danger from a reversing vehicle.

 

Just to add.....I have on occasions seen lorry drivers parked up in the lay-bys, presumably taking a required driving break ( or maybe a leek in the woods).

Surely you don't suggest they also park near the children's playground?

 

Well of course I don't but as I'm trying to have a sensible conversation and you deemed fit to leave out the information about your vehicle I can hardly be held responsible for that.

 

I can, after all only go on the information that I am provided with when making a judgement.

[Hambeast]

Why don't scc just change it to 20mph, there seems to be no budget limitation on doing this!

 

Twenty miles an hour? You are joking, right?

[MEC176]

Do you know I only came on this topic because I was curious having travelled on this road for fourteen years to and fro to work through all weather conditions at 30mph or the National Speed Limit of 70mph, sorry 60mph it was 70mph when I passed my test that was what the sign meant 70mph then and after the recent events, sad loss of another life and the flooding getting worse I wondered what the issue or other peoples thoughts are, I thought my pennies worth may be of interest but now I think I was wrong, the council were lobbied after resent events to make changes to the B6082 Woolly Wood Bottom area and other changers may be on the cards, Yorkshire Water may be redoing the main drains if you look as you flash past there are markings on the road and pathway because it was not just water after heavy rain that washed down it was also raw sewage from the housing estates in Wincobank that flooded the road the cut outs on the left had side in the curb stones are only to ease the problem until the drains are looked at, so you could be down to 10mph and traffic cueing, whether the speed limit is 40mph or 100mph some idiot will always try and go faster over take on the blind bends, thats why it needs double white lines, and not follow the rules of the road or the weather conditions, some person who is a new driver or not too sure of themselves will go slower some will be late for work some may not get there, so you will never have a perfect constant speed to suite you, me or everyone, me I’m happy at 30mph, 70mph, there I go again 60mph and regarding not driving on the B6082 over the fourteen years I have travelled on there if there was a problem with that particular road I know every conceivable route around that area to get me from Carlisle street to Ecclesfield while people are still stood in traffic looking at their speedo’s at the minimum on a good day I could do it in just over ten minutes so I don’t stand still, so I will let you have the final say on our conversation, please don't shout. Happy Motoring to you.

Edited March 29, 2016 by MEC176

[sgtkate]

One, I am not a bike rider and to me I would thing that to try and read a speedo on a bike traveling at speed is awkward looking through a helmets visor while you are balancing on two wheels with wind and rain blowing in your face I have never see wipers on a bikers helmet, I would think you have to move your head up and down to see the speedo taking your eye off the road for more than when you’re in your car, where in a car you only have to glance down, and no one is suggesting that your ability to do so is in question and as I have already said “ proper bikers, like yourself, have more road sense than most car drivers because of the hazards they face from wet man hole covers to cars pulling out in front of them “.

 

Two, why should a reduction in a speed limit increase the possibility of an accident when you over take you speed up and then slow to the speed limit you do this whether it 30, 40, 100mph so the law of average is the same.

 

Three, an increase of people wanting to overtake due to the speed limit being reduced no don’t agree to that, on the days I have travelled on there every one was content to stick to the speed limit if they over took then they over took, you must have had be on when there were sales on at Meadow Hell.

 

Four, not given a reason why 50mph is better, thought I had, look at it this way then, it makes people of my age, 65 and retired with reactions not quite as quick as a 40 year old, feel more in control instead of following like sheep others who must travel at light speed right up your back bumper so keep 70 for the motor ways, and in your own admission “My bike is big, and heavy, and I tend to go a bit slower on the bike on Woolly wood than in the car” so why does it have to be 70mph.

 

Five, “When I referred to the road having a constant speed limit I meant the stretch that has been lowered” but it has a constant speed limit of 50mph.

 

Six, now you explain to me why the speed limit should stay at 70mph when you can do the same at 50mph as you can at 70mph. and using caps in words in exasperation in a conversation is not nice, this is suppose to be a friendly conversation.

 

If you can't drive at the speed limit safely allowing for the road conditions then you shouldn't be driving. It's not down to other drivers to accommodate your driving inability and be slowed down simply because in your own words: 'it makes people of my age, 65 and retired with reactions not quite as quick as a 40 year old, feel more in control'.

 

---------- Post added 29-03-2016 at 13:09 ----------

 

Herein lies the problem.

I perhaps should have mentioned I drive a medium sized motorcaravan.

The rear view isn't the best in the world (even with the help of a rear view/reversing camera).

The wing mirrors give adequate view for normal driving, but I would never use a car park near a children's playground or park/play area. Children have no sense of danger from a reversing vehicle.

 

Just to add.....I have on occasions seen lorry drivers parked up in the lay-bys, presumably taking a required driving break ( or maybe a leek in the woods).

Surely you don't suggest they also park near the children's playground?

 

Again, yet another driver trying to get rules changed to suit them when the issue is entirely with them or their vehicle. If your rear view mirrors aren't good enough then a) get off the road and stay off it or b) get better rear view mirrors.

 

There are many roads where the speed limit is quite possibly too high (around schools are start and end times should always be 20 for example), but reductions should be based on factual evidence around accident reduction directly linked to reduced speed and not just some knee jerk response as so often happens. You do also have to take in account people making due progress. It's obvious that having a speed limit of 1mph will reduce accidents (if it can be enforced) but I doubt anyone is going to argue for that, so why is a 10mph speed reduction seen as acceptable based on nothing more than anecdotes and conjecture?

Edited March 29, 2016 by sgtkate

[GhostRiders]

Do you know I only came on this topic because I was curious having travelled on this road for fourteen years to and fro to work through all weather conditions at 30mph or the National Speed Limit of 70mph, sorry 60mph it was 70mph when I passed my test that was what the sign meant 70mph then and after the recent events, sad loss of another life and the flooding getting worse I wondered what the issue or other peoples thoughts are, I thought my pennies worth may be of interest but now I think I was wrong, the council were lobbied after resent events to make changes to the B6082 Woolly Wood Bottom area and other changers may be on the cards, Yorkshire Water may be redoing the main drains if you look as you flash past there are markings on the road and pathway because it was not just water after heavy rain that washed down it was also raw sewage from the housing estates in Wincobank that flooded the road the cut outs on the left had side in the curb stones are only to ease the problem until the drains are looked at, so you could be down to 10mph and traffic cueing, whether the speed limit is 40mph or 100mph some idiot will always try and go faster over take on the blind bends, thats why it needs double white lines, and not follow the rules of the road or the weather conditions, some person who is a new driver or not too sure of themselves will go slower some will be late for work some may not get there, so you will never have a perfect constant speed to suite you, me or everyone, me I’m happy at 30mph, 70mph, there I go again 60mph and regarding not driving on the B6082 over the fourteen years I have travelled on there if there was a problem with that particular road I know every conceivable route around that area to get me from Carlisle street to Ecclesfield while people are still stood in traffic looking at their speedo’s at the minimum on a good day I could do it in just over ten minutes so I don’t stand still, so I will let you have the final say on our conversation, please don't shout. Happy Motoring to you.

 

OK, I'll take you up on that last word.

 

I've been discussing this with yourself and another poster over the last few days, both of you applauded the change in speed limit.

 

When I have asked specifically why you both think this will make the road safer I've had one who tells me that it's because he wants to cross the road and another tell me they prefer driving at the lower speed.

 

Given that none of these issues address my question I will assume, until I receive an actual answer that there is no logical reason, other than bowing to lobbying from people who clearly have their own motives, rather than the safety of the road as a whole in mind, for the council to have made this change.

 

I hope my hunch that this will actually increase the risk of an accident on this road doesn't bear fruit, and that other changes the council make will indeed improve the safety of the road rather than just appeasing a bunch of people that, to my mind, really don't know how these changes will potentially increase, not decrease the risk of an accident on this stretch of road.

 

---------- Post added 29-03-2016 at 13:51 ----------

 

If you can't drive at the speed limit safely allowing for the road conditions then you shouldn't be driving. It's not down to other drivers to accommodate your driving inability and be slowed down simply because in your own words: 'it makes people of my age, 65 and retired with reactions not quite as quick as a 40 year old, feel more in control'.

 

---------- Post added 29-03-2016 at 13:09 ----------

 

 

Again, yet another driver trying to get rules changed to suit them when the issue is entirely with them or their vehicle. If your rear view mirrors aren't good enough then a) get off the road and stay off it or b) get better rear view mirrors.

 

There are many roads where the speed limit is quite possibly too high (around schools are start and end times should always be 20 for example), but reductions should be based on factual evidence around accident reduction directly linked to reduced speed and not just some knee jerk response as so often happens. You do also have to take in account people making due progress. It's obvious that having a speed limit of 1mph will reduce accidents (if it can be enforced) but I doubt anyone is going to argue for that, so why is a 10mph speed reduction seen as acceptable based on nothing more than anecdotes and conjecture?

 

Quite, at last a common sense post on the subject.

[sgtkate]

OK, I'll take you up on that last word.

 

I've been discussing this with yourself and another poster over the last few days, both of you applauded the change in speed limit.

 

When I have asked specifically why you both think this will make the road safer I've had one who tells me that it's because he wants to cross the road and another tell me they prefer driving at the lower speed.

 

Given that none of these issues address my question I will assume, until I receive an actual answer that there is no logical reason, other than bowing to lobbying from people who clearly have their own motives, rather than the safety of the road as a whole in mind, for the council to have made this change.

 

I hope my hunch that this will actually increase the risk of an accident on this road doesn't bear fruit, and that other changes the council make will indeed improve the safety of the road rather than just appeasing a bunch of people that, to my mind, really don't know how these changes will potentially increase, not decrease the risk of an accident on this stretch of road.

 

Totally agree with you. I honestly think some people are incapable of logical and rational thought when it comes to speed limits. They refuse to accept human nature that some people will speed and will potentially cause more accidents by attempting to overtake simply because they now regard the speed limit as too low. A far more evidence based holistic view needs to be taken, and people need to stop assuming that because some people are against lowering the speed limit based on a hunch that somehow we are the awful drivers who speed and so on or that we condone the killing of children by speeding cars and other such rubbish.