20 MPH speed limit in town

[fionajohn]

i have ordered a large roll of red material and wood so i will be producing red flags shortly nice to see the council trying to create jobs   

[Ghostrider]

When was someone last killed in an accident on the Esplanade, last one I can remember was around 1978. When was somebody injured in an accident on the Esplanade. When was anyone last killed, or there was a "serious" accident anywhere in da toon for that matter. Maybe senility has really set in and my memory died, but its a good few years since there's been anything I can recall. Even then, this so-called "notorious" Esplanade behaviour played no obvious part.

 

Thinking back 30-40 years, somebody getting killed or badly brukkit in a prang in da toon happened every few months - seems whatever changed since then has worked brawly weel. So why the hellbent notion by the SIC to fix what ain't broke.

 

As long as "young men" (and everybody else for that matter) have wheels, you will never eradicate every so often somebody flooring it or taking off in a bit of a mad spree, squeeze it out of one place and it'll just relocate. I seriously doubt that this alleged Esplanade "issue" coming up now is wholly coincidental, given that blocking off going up by the Clydesdale also blocked off what was always part of one of the "circuits" too. Can't loop there, can loop via the pier, its not rocket science.

[Ian_H]

I think the 50mph claim is a red herring and not at all helpful. Having now read the report, it gives speeds actually recorded and says that the majority of vehicles are below 30mph, and along the Esplanade during the day speeds are quite a bit lower. The reason given for bringing the report forward is a steady and continuing number of accidents. Not just bumps and scrapes, but accidents where people are actually injured. I notice that Ghostrider thinks we shouldn’t worry unless folk are seriously mangled or killed; I don’t agree.

 

Interestingly, the report points out that there aren’t particular concentrated locations for these accidents; they are spread out from the Bus Station to the foot of Church Road. They include a lot of pedestrian accidents and happen at all hours of the day; it’s not just a boy racer evening issue. So a police presence at the head of the pier for a couple of hours every now and again isn’t really going to do very much.

So how bad is it? To quote from the report:-

3.10 - Of the 22 accidents on file 16 have involved pedestrians and 4 of the remaining 6 involved rear end shunts. These are accident types where vehicle speeds are particularly relevant to the severity of the accident. It should be noted that none of these shunt accidents occurred at any of the pedestrian crossing points and only one of the pedestrian accidents occurred at an existing crossing location.

 

So why is it suggested that speed is particularly relevant? Well let’s go back to stopping distances from the Highway Code you had to learn for your driving test. I’ll make up a fictional example to consider. Let’s say young lad, a drunk, or a little old lady steps out in the road 15m in front of you. Approaching at 20mph, you brake; the Highway Code says you stop in 12m; great, 3m to spare. But if instead of 20mph you are doing 30mph, still paying attention, still very alert; you immediately stand on the brakes. Not so good, you need 23m you stop, so that means taking the poor pedestrian 8m down the road with you on the bonnet. Oh, and speed at the moment of impact would still have been pretty significant.

 

Okay, that is a gross oversimplification of real life, but if a 20mph speed limit and associated measures could reduce actual speeds by 3 or 4mph from what they are just now, that could be the difference between a slight injury and no injury for a pedestrian, or between a serious injury and a slight one. So to me a reduced speed limit is a good idea, to address the whole length of road 24 hours a day.

 

If you decide to have a look at the report, I suggest you look at the appendices (second link) first, particularly accident locations from appendix 8 onwards. If I can get links to work, here is the report and appendices:-

 

http://www.shetland.gov.uk/coins/viewSelectedDocument.asp?c=e%97%9Dc%96r%82%88

http://www.shetland.gov.uk/coins/viewSelectedDocument.asp?c=e%97%9Dc%96r%82%89

[owre-weel]

The report and accident statistics only cover the area in ower, are you telling me that there have not been any accidents oot ower or any where else in the town. Why leave oot ower at 30 mph

 

I agree that less speed could mean less injury, but I think this is more about getting zebra crossings rather than reducing accidents. It seems they are shuffling around looking for reasons to introduce this.

[Ghostrider]

@ Ian_H

 

Ghostrider would be supporting the Council's initiative *if* there was killing and mangling going on, that could be at least linked to excessive speeds. You cannot legislate for stupid, and so far this has more signs of being something attempting the latter that addressing a problem with the former.

 

There comes a point where the majority are being disproportionately put upon and inconvenienced to accomodate the careless, the aspiring Darwin Awards candidates and those who really shouldn't venture out in to pubic unaccompanied.

 

Some people's driving is an accident waiting to happen, just as some pedestrains road sense is begging someone to iron them on to the tar, and no amount of "safety" measures are going to change that. The only thing in doubt is where and when people like that are going to end up coming a cropper, and I'm not seeing the proposed measures making the Esplanade any less likely to be the "where" than anywhere else, but they certainly will annoy and frustrate numerous drivers and pedestrians who were never going to be a problem to themselves or anyone else.

[Ian_H]

The report and accident statistics only cover the area in ower.....

Appendix 10 and 11 give injury accidents and pedestrian accidents for da whole toon. At the scale of the plan, it is just small dots on the map, but all accidents, and pedestrian accidents in particular appear to be mair on da in-ower  section covered in the report dan da rest o da toon.

[Ian_H]

.... some pedestrains road sense is begging someone to iron them on to the tar....

 

Aa body can mak a mistake fae time to time, it seems a bit harsh to say da result should be dem ironed into da tar.

[owre-weel]

 

The report and accident statistics only cover the area in ower.....

 

Appendix 10 and 11 give injury accidents and pedestrian accidents for da whole toon. At the scale of the plan, it is just small dots on the map, but all accidents, and pedestrian accidents in particular appear to be mair on da in-ower  section covered in the report dan da rest o da toon.

Thanks Ian_H, I'll have a look at the report.

[paulb]

graph 4.13. look at the timings 11am- 5pm then a bigger spike at 8pm - 2 am.   so are a lot of the accidents drink related. as the town is normally rather dead at that time. in fact it must be.

[Ghostrider]

 

The report and accident statistics only cover the area in ower.....

Appendix 10 and 11 give injury accidents and pedestrian accidents for da whole toon. At the scale of the plan, it is just small dots on the map, but all accidents, and pedestrian accidents in particular appear to be mair on da in-ower  section covered in the report dan da rest o da toon.

 

 

Not unexpected, but in and of itself its not proof of anything. As the area in question is also probably one of the locations, if not the location with the greatest concentration of both wheeled traffic and pedestrians for the greatest amount of time.

 

To prove anything, you need to quantify the accident rate as a percentage of total usage to compare like with like.

[Ghostrider]

 

.... some pedestrains road sense is begging someone to iron them on to the tar....

 

Aa body can mak a mistake fae time to time, it seems a bit harsh to say da result should be dem ironed into da tar.

 

 

An honest mistake is one thing, it wasn't them I was referring to. Rather the folk who take "go play in traffic" to a whole new level and treat the road like everybody has to avoid them whenever they choose to walk on it.

 

One mistake rarely creates a traffic accident involving innocent parties anyway, it usually takes the two parties both making mistakes and having the misfortune of both doing them at the same place at the same time.

[Ian_H]

No idea Paulb what accidents are drink related, you would need to ask the police – or the Council may know from info they get from the police. Probably a significant proportion.

 

Yes Ghostrider I see the point you are making, to compare how ‘bad’ one area is compared to another, proportions or percentages would give a better comparison.

 

But irrespective of comparative ‘badness’ of this part of the town, irrespective of the number that are drink related, there are typically two people a year getting injured, every year. A reduced speed limit is something that could improve that. Injury accidents won’t be eliminated, but numbers could be reduced. So is saving a half a minute or so going around da toon inside my warm cosy ton of steel a good enough reason to knock down the occasional pedestrian – even if it is their fault? I think not.

[Colin]

, there are typically two people a year getting injured, every year. A

Assuming Shetland's population is 20,000 (I know it's higher but, lets keep things tidy)

 

2 out of 20,000 = .01% of the population get injured in traffic accidents along the Esplanade.

 

I wonder how that compares with Aberdeen, Edinburgh, London etc.

 

If you want to play with 'statistics', do it properly and, don't quote a report that looks like it was designed to give somebody an 'agenda'.

 

I would argue that the main reason there are 'accidents' along the esplanade is because the council has 'mangled' the road with various schemes and, now that they have been exposed, want to 'hide' the problems by enforcing a speed restriction.

 

Bring back the Horse & Buggy....

[Muppet]

One factor which I know applies in some of the accident statistics along the esplanade is the number of foreign pedestrians crossing the road whose natural instinct is to look the wrong way for approaching traffic. It's something I'm always acutely aware of especially on busy cruise liner days and have had a number of close calls myself.

 

They are just as likely to look the wrong way at a zebra crossing, whereas a pelican crossing stops the traffic whichever side you expect it to come from.

 

Educating the public of that fact might be just as likely to bring the statistics to a normal level as much as imposing a reduced speed limit.

[owre-weel]

Numbers in statistics are one thing, but it would be interesting to have more detail about the accidents. For instance I can recal at least two accidents that were caused by cars reversing out of parking spaces and hitting pedestrians.

 

So if you were to remove all the accidents, which would still have happened regardless of a drop in the speed limit, then how many accidents are we now speaking about.

 

I'm not against making things safer, but feel unless we chalange some of these proposals, we will soon be living in a world where we have to ask permission to use our own toilet.

 

I'm just not convinced this is currently justified, but I am convinced there are likely to me more incidents with the return to Zebra crossings. Now ask yourself why with the proposal to introduce zebra crossing, do they want the speed limit reduced, kinda answers it's own question!