Put brakes on

ROAD safety charity Brake (Argus, April 2) has revealed great support for 20mph speed limits around schools and on residential streets.

The Welsh Assembly has announced a £5 million fund for safe routes, including cycle lanes, footpaths, 20mph zones and traffic-calming measures.

Nineteen councils in Wales have secured a slice of the fund, some up to £500,000. Hopefully, Newport City Council will receive a hefty slice of the money to replace the unfit-for-purpose speed humps on many of our residential streets and stricter traffic controls (signposting, etc) by Gwent Police and Newport City Council Streetscene.

I have witnessed numerous near misses on Caerleon Road and St Julian’s side streets. and unfortunately a fatal collision, thankfully not a pedestrian, but a poor low-flying pigeon!

A housing development for 248 homes is planned by our Labour council in the near vicinity (Glebelands, contaminated site), increasing traffic congestion and poisonous air pollution in the heavily populated St Julian’s area.

It would be interesting to know if the Welsh Labour Assembly, especially Transport Minister Edwina Hart, approves of this flawed plan.

Brian Donovan Darlington Court Newport

Comments (5)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

3:54pm Thu 10 Apr 14

varteg1 says...

As I have said elsewhere, someone in them highways authorities do not know what they are on about.

Most modern cars are optimised to the best efficiency, and to emit the lowest exhaust fumes between 30 and 45 mph.

These silly 'protect the public'. measures have designed into them the very opposite of what most governments are calling for, reduced emissions, to be part of the climate change priority.

Going along roads in second gear, as the 20 limit will almost certainly mean will be the case, added which are the constant gear changing through negotiating speed humps and slaloms along with those dratted parts where one has to come to a dead stop to allow prioritised oncoming traffic to drive through, simply adds more fuel consumption and emitted fumes.
If the State is so concerned about schools and such, maybe it would better to attend to why school entrances are set at points where the kids and parents are at most danger, i.e..... the road side.

Pedestrian traffic is no longer a subject for 'such protective measures, the days are long gone when pedestrians were accorded priority, the time has also long gone since pedestrians need to take their own personal safety measures to prevent them being involved in road accidents.

I have had quite a few near misses where adults, and children, have stepped into, or run across, the road causing me to take avoiding action.

One incident on a 40 limit road which was quite clear allowing me to drive at 40, suddenly became a near death scene as a youth, using a mobile device ran across in front of me, causing me to swerve to the left to avoid him which almost had me run into an oncoming vehicle.

When I remonstrated with that youth, as did the other driver, all we got was a mouthful of abuse starting with and ending with

...."you can both get F*cked. pedestrians have right of way"

"Not to jaywalk", I told him, which evoked the single finger as he walked away.

Far too much attention given to failings by pedestrians, it's about time peds and traffic were separated by fenced roads, with suitable controlled crossing points.
As I have said elsewhere, someone in them highways authorities do not know what they are on about. Most modern cars are optimised to the best efficiency, and to emit the lowest exhaust fumes between 30 and 45 mph. These silly 'protect the public'. measures have designed into them the very opposite of what most governments are calling for, reduced emissions, to be part of the climate change priority. Going along roads in second gear, as the 20 limit will almost certainly mean will be the case, added which are the constant gear changing through negotiating speed humps and slaloms along with those dratted parts where one has to come to a dead stop to allow prioritised oncoming traffic to drive through, simply adds more fuel consumption and emitted fumes. If the State is so concerned about schools and such, maybe it would better to attend to why school entrances are set at points where the kids and parents are at most danger, i.e..... the road side. Pedestrian traffic is no longer a subject for 'such protective measures, the days are long gone when pedestrians were accorded priority, the time has also long gone since pedestrians need to take their own personal safety measures to prevent them being involved in road accidents. I have had quite a few near misses where adults, and children, have stepped into, or run across, the road causing me to take avoiding action. One incident on a 40 limit road which was quite clear allowing me to drive at 40, suddenly became a near death scene as a youth, using a mobile device ran across in front of me, causing me to swerve to the left to avoid him which almost had me run into an oncoming vehicle. When I remonstrated with that youth, as did the other driver, all we got was a mouthful of abuse starting with and ending with ...."you can both get F*cked. pedestrians have right of way" "Not to jaywalk", I told him, which evoked the single finger as he walked away. Far too much attention given to failings by pedestrians, it's about time peds and traffic were separated by fenced roads, with suitable controlled crossing points. varteg1
  • Score: 0

11:06am Fri 11 Apr 14

jerymp says...

varteg1 wrote:
As I have said elsewhere, someone in them highways authorities do not know what they are on about.

Most modern cars are optimised to the best efficiency, and to emit the lowest exhaust fumes between 30 and 45 mph.

These silly 'protect the public'. measures have designed into them the very opposite of what most governments are calling for, reduced emissions, to be part of the climate change priority.

Going along roads in second gear, as the 20 limit will almost certainly mean will be the case, added which are the constant gear changing through negotiating speed humps and slaloms along with those dratted parts where one has to come to a dead stop to allow prioritised oncoming traffic to drive through, simply adds more fuel consumption and emitted fumes.
If the State is so concerned about schools and such, maybe it would better to attend to why school entrances are set at points where the kids and parents are at most danger, i.e..... the road side.

Pedestrian traffic is no longer a subject for 'such protective measures, the days are long gone when pedestrians were accorded priority, the time has also long gone since pedestrians need to take their own personal safety measures to prevent them being involved in road accidents.

I have had quite a few near misses where adults, and children, have stepped into, or run across, the road causing me to take avoiding action.

One incident on a 40 limit road which was quite clear allowing me to drive at 40, suddenly became a near death scene as a youth, using a mobile device ran across in front of me, causing me to swerve to the left to avoid him which almost had me run into an oncoming vehicle.

When I remonstrated with that youth, as did the other driver, all we got was a mouthful of abuse starting with and ending with

...."you can both get F*cked. pedestrians have right of way"

"Not to jaywalk", I told him, which evoked the single finger as he walked away.

Far too much attention given to failings by pedestrians, it's about time peds and traffic were separated by fenced roads, with suitable controlled crossing points.
So to sum up you think that the death of a pedestrian is worth it for you to get from A to B just a bit sooner without too many gear changes and it would be even better if you could go even faster than 30 mph.
[quote][p][bold]varteg1[/bold] wrote: As I have said elsewhere, someone in them highways authorities do not know what they are on about. Most modern cars are optimised to the best efficiency, and to emit the lowest exhaust fumes between 30 and 45 mph. These silly 'protect the public'. measures have designed into them the very opposite of what most governments are calling for, reduced emissions, to be part of the climate change priority. Going along roads in second gear, as the 20 limit will almost certainly mean will be the case, added which are the constant gear changing through negotiating speed humps and slaloms along with those dratted parts where one has to come to a dead stop to allow prioritised oncoming traffic to drive through, simply adds more fuel consumption and emitted fumes. If the State is so concerned about schools and such, maybe it would better to attend to why school entrances are set at points where the kids and parents are at most danger, i.e..... the road side. Pedestrian traffic is no longer a subject for 'such protective measures, the days are long gone when pedestrians were accorded priority, the time has also long gone since pedestrians need to take their own personal safety measures to prevent them being involved in road accidents. I have had quite a few near misses where adults, and children, have stepped into, or run across, the road causing me to take avoiding action. One incident on a 40 limit road which was quite clear allowing me to drive at 40, suddenly became a near death scene as a youth, using a mobile device ran across in front of me, causing me to swerve to the left to avoid him which almost had me run into an oncoming vehicle. When I remonstrated with that youth, as did the other driver, all we got was a mouthful of abuse starting with and ending with ...."you can both get F*cked. pedestrians have right of way" "Not to jaywalk", I told him, which evoked the single finger as he walked away. Far too much attention given to failings by pedestrians, it's about time peds and traffic were separated by fenced roads, with suitable controlled crossing points.[/p][/quote]So to sum up you think that the death of a pedestrian is worth it for you to get from A to B just a bit sooner without too many gear changes and it would be even better if you could go even faster than 30 mph. jerymp
  • Score: 0

2:17pm Fri 11 Apr 14

-trigg- says...

jerymp wrote:
varteg1 wrote: As I have said elsewhere, someone in them highways authorities do not know what they are on about. Most modern cars are optimised to the best efficiency, and to emit the lowest exhaust fumes between 30 and 45 mph. These silly 'protect the public'. measures have designed into them the very opposite of what most governments are calling for, reduced emissions, to be part of the climate change priority. Going along roads in second gear, as the 20 limit will almost certainly mean will be the case, added which are the constant gear changing through negotiating speed humps and slaloms along with those dratted parts where one has to come to a dead stop to allow prioritised oncoming traffic to drive through, simply adds more fuel consumption and emitted fumes. If the State is so concerned about schools and such, maybe it would better to attend to why school entrances are set at points where the kids and parents are at most danger, i.e..... the road side. Pedestrian traffic is no longer a subject for 'such protective measures, the days are long gone when pedestrians were accorded priority, the time has also long gone since pedestrians need to take their own personal safety measures to prevent them being involved in road accidents. I have had quite a few near misses where adults, and children, have stepped into, or run across, the road causing me to take avoiding action. One incident on a 40 limit road which was quite clear allowing me to drive at 40, suddenly became a near death scene as a youth, using a mobile device ran across in front of me, causing me to swerve to the left to avoid him which almost had me run into an oncoming vehicle. When I remonstrated with that youth, as did the other driver, all we got was a mouthful of abuse starting with and ending with ...."you can both get F*cked. pedestrians have right of way" "Not to jaywalk", I told him, which evoked the single finger as he walked away. Far too much attention given to failings by pedestrians, it's about time peds and traffic were separated by fenced roads, with suitable controlled crossing points.
So to sum up you think that the death of a pedestrian is worth it for you to get from A to B just a bit sooner without too many gear changes and it would be even better if you could go even faster than 30 mph.
It seems that you have taken something from the previous comment which simply wasn't there. At no point did he state that he was in favour of an increase in the number of pedestrian deaths.

Modern vehicles are designed to run most efficiently at speeds slightly in excess of 30mph. They also have highly advanced safety features that were not available when the original 30mph limit was set. A modern car travelling at 45mph along an urban road presents far less risk to pedestrians than would a car travelling along the same road at 30 mph 25 years ago.

Whilst there may be justification for a reduced speed limit of 20 mph in areas with an increased risk of pedestrians stepping into the road such as near the entrances to schools and parks, there is no need for a further reduction in residential streets and this may even prove counter-productive.
[quote][p][bold]jerymp[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]varteg1[/bold] wrote: As I have said elsewhere, someone in them highways authorities do not know what they are on about. Most modern cars are optimised to the best efficiency, and to emit the lowest exhaust fumes between 30 and 45 mph. These silly 'protect the public'. measures have designed into them the very opposite of what most governments are calling for, reduced emissions, to be part of the climate change priority. Going along roads in second gear, as the 20 limit will almost certainly mean will be the case, added which are the constant gear changing through negotiating speed humps and slaloms along with those dratted parts where one has to come to a dead stop to allow prioritised oncoming traffic to drive through, simply adds more fuel consumption and emitted fumes. If the State is so concerned about schools and such, maybe it would better to attend to why school entrances are set at points where the kids and parents are at most danger, i.e..... the road side. Pedestrian traffic is no longer a subject for 'such protective measures, the days are long gone when pedestrians were accorded priority, the time has also long gone since pedestrians need to take their own personal safety measures to prevent them being involved in road accidents. I have had quite a few near misses where adults, and children, have stepped into, or run across, the road causing me to take avoiding action. One incident on a 40 limit road which was quite clear allowing me to drive at 40, suddenly became a near death scene as a youth, using a mobile device ran across in front of me, causing me to swerve to the left to avoid him which almost had me run into an oncoming vehicle. When I remonstrated with that youth, as did the other driver, all we got was a mouthful of abuse starting with and ending with ...."you can both get F*cked. pedestrians have right of way" "Not to jaywalk", I told him, which evoked the single finger as he walked away. Far too much attention given to failings by pedestrians, it's about time peds and traffic were separated by fenced roads, with suitable controlled crossing points.[/p][/quote]So to sum up you think that the death of a pedestrian is worth it for you to get from A to B just a bit sooner without too many gear changes and it would be even better if you could go even faster than 30 mph.[/p][/quote]It seems that you have taken something from the previous comment which simply wasn't there. At no point did he state that he was in favour of an increase in the number of pedestrian deaths. Modern vehicles are designed to run most efficiently at speeds slightly in excess of 30mph. They also have highly advanced safety features that were not available when the original 30mph limit was set. A modern car travelling at 45mph along an urban road presents far less risk to pedestrians than would a car travelling along the same road at 30 mph 25 years ago. Whilst there may be justification for a reduced speed limit of 20 mph in areas with an increased risk of pedestrians stepping into the road such as near the entrances to schools and parks, there is no need for a further reduction in residential streets and this may even prove counter-productive. -trigg-
  • Score: 1

6:37pm Sun 13 Apr 14

varteg1 says...

jerymp wrote:
varteg1 wrote:
As I have said elsewhere, someone in them highways authorities do not know what they are on about.

Most modern cars are optimised to the best efficiency, and to emit the lowest exhaust fumes between 30 and 45 mph.

These silly 'protect the public'. measures have designed into them the very opposite of what most governments are calling for, reduced emissions, to be part of the climate change priority.

Going along roads in second gear, as the 20 limit will almost certainly mean will be the case, added which are the constant gear changing through negotiating speed humps and slaloms along with those dratted parts where one has to come to a dead stop to allow prioritised oncoming traffic to drive through, simply adds more fuel consumption and emitted fumes.
If the State is so concerned about schools and such, maybe it would better to attend to why school entrances are set at points where the kids and parents are at most danger, i.e..... the road side.

Pedestrian traffic is no longer a subject for 'such protective measures, the days are long gone when pedestrians were accorded priority, the time has also long gone since pedestrians need to take their own personal safety measures to prevent them being involved in road accidents.

I have had quite a few near misses where adults, and children, have stepped into, or run across, the road causing me to take avoiding action.

One incident on a 40 limit road which was quite clear allowing me to drive at 40, suddenly became a near death scene as a youth, using a mobile device ran across in front of me, causing me to swerve to the left to avoid him which almost had me run into an oncoming vehicle.

When I remonstrated with that youth, as did the other driver, all we got was a mouthful of abuse starting with and ending with

...."you can both get F*cked. pedestrians have right of way"

"Not to jaywalk", I told him, which evoked the single finger as he walked away.

Far too much attention given to failings by pedestrians, it's about time peds and traffic were separated by fenced roads, with suitable controlled crossing points.
So to sum up you think that the death of a pedestrian is worth it for you to get from A to B just a bit sooner without too many gear changes and it would be even better if you could go even faster than 30 mph.
Do me a favour My jerymp, let me know where you live, and when you are likely to be in the road environment and I will oblige you by deliberately
knocking you down....just to prove your idiotic comment.
[quote][p][bold]jerymp[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]varteg1[/bold] wrote: As I have said elsewhere, someone in them highways authorities do not know what they are on about. Most modern cars are optimised to the best efficiency, and to emit the lowest exhaust fumes between 30 and 45 mph. These silly 'protect the public'. measures have designed into them the very opposite of what most governments are calling for, reduced emissions, to be part of the climate change priority. Going along roads in second gear, as the 20 limit will almost certainly mean will be the case, added which are the constant gear changing through negotiating speed humps and slaloms along with those dratted parts where one has to come to a dead stop to allow prioritised oncoming traffic to drive through, simply adds more fuel consumption and emitted fumes. If the State is so concerned about schools and such, maybe it would better to attend to why school entrances are set at points where the kids and parents are at most danger, i.e..... the road side. Pedestrian traffic is no longer a subject for 'such protective measures, the days are long gone when pedestrians were accorded priority, the time has also long gone since pedestrians need to take their own personal safety measures to prevent them being involved in road accidents. I have had quite a few near misses where adults, and children, have stepped into, or run across, the road causing me to take avoiding action. One incident on a 40 limit road which was quite clear allowing me to drive at 40, suddenly became a near death scene as a youth, using a mobile device ran across in front of me, causing me to swerve to the left to avoid him which almost had me run into an oncoming vehicle. When I remonstrated with that youth, as did the other driver, all we got was a mouthful of abuse starting with and ending with ...."you can both get F*cked. pedestrians have right of way" "Not to jaywalk", I told him, which evoked the single finger as he walked away. Far too much attention given to failings by pedestrians, it's about time peds and traffic were separated by fenced roads, with suitable controlled crossing points.[/p][/quote]So to sum up you think that the death of a pedestrian is worth it for you to get from A to B just a bit sooner without too many gear changes and it would be even better if you could go even faster than 30 mph.[/p][/quote]Do me a favour My jerymp, let me know where you live, and when you are likely to be in the road environment and I will oblige you by deliberately knocking you down....just to prove your idiotic comment. varteg1
  • Score: 1

7:48pm Mon 21 Apr 14

westender says...

The biggest danger to children in the vicinity of a school is the parents who deliver their children the short distance from home in a car, then, parking it in the most dangerous spot they can find they stand around gossiping glaring and shouting abuse at anyone with the temerity to question the intelligence of their actions, when they have eventually caught up on the days news they get in their cars and drive off mostly while using their mobiles or applying their makeup in the driving mirror.
does this description ring a bell with anyone else fed up with the lazy people?
The biggest danger to children in the vicinity of a school is the parents who deliver their children the short distance from home in a car, then, parking it in the most dangerous spot they can find they stand around gossiping glaring and shouting abuse at anyone with the temerity to question the intelligence of their actions, when they have eventually caught up on the days news they get in their cars and drive off mostly while using their mobiles or applying their makeup in the driving mirror. does this description ring a bell with anyone else fed up with the lazy people? westender
  • Score: 1

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