Wales to introduce widespread 20mph zones

[AndyB]

Where is an example of a WAG blanket 20mph speed limit?

I put forward Penderyn in Rhondda Cynon Taf.

See it here: https://youtu.be/GGpTxeSsVlo

It will be interesting if you think this is a well thought out 20mph limit or it it was created by the default (blanket) .

I will put up an example in Wales soon where there is no 20mph limit to compare .

Reasonable for the tight section at the beginning, up to about 1'15". Unreasonable thereafter, should be 30/40

I wonder if there is a certain amount of grubby politics going on, where local councils who don't like the idea of the 20 limits are not applying for derogations so as to cause more opposition?

"Pulling a Chris Christie" would be tantamount to misconduct in public office, squandering public money on political spite like that should be extremely frowned upon.

The other argument is that it is substantially cheaper to replace all terminal signs than to erect 30mph repeaters at appropriate intervals, let alone pay for site-specific reviews and put admin time into applying for derogations.

[RichardA35]

Driving through Penderyn at quiet times at 30 mph seemed too slow. After the first cluster of houses in the video, there's a section from the quarry entrance to the distillery with no properties and 20 mph here is totally unreasonable. There is often a camera van in the layby covering this section, so if it continues to monitor speeds along here, it'll be rich pickings.

If Penderyn is 20 mph, why is it OK for the B4601 out of Brecon to be 40 mph when there are houses along one side of the road?
https://maps.app.goo.gl/mvmLnpF8MZAWhMpp8

It all appears to be a question of applying the policy questions and that the answers may not always be immediately palatable to people passing through communities as opposed to those living there:

<<2.1.3..Question A: Are there significant numbers (or potential numbers, if speeds were lower) of pedestrians and cyclists travelling along or across the road?
If the answer to A is ‘no’ then an exception for a 30mph speed limit may be appropriate.>>

<<2.2.8 The following ‘Place’ criteria have been developed to guide highway authorities to determine, in a consistent way across Wales, which sections of roads may have significant demands for people walking and cycling:

Within a 100m walk of any educational setting (e.g. primary, secondary, further education and higher education)
Within 100m walk of any community centre
Within 100m walk of any hospital
Where the number of residential and/or retail premises fronting a road exceeds 20 properties per km.
2.2.9 Sections of road which meet any of these Place criteria should be considered to positively answer principal question A as set out above in 2.1.3.>>

[orudge]

On the subject of 20 mph areas Derbyshire's backed down on a couple:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-d ... e-67654368

Meanwhile the Scottish Government is intending to drop the speed limit on most of Scotland's urban roads to 20mph by 2025. It's not yet clear whether that will be done in the same way as Wales (reducing the limit on restricted roads), or something more piecemeal.

[Octaviadriver]

Driving through Penderyn at quiet times at 30 mph seemed too slow. After the first cluster of houses in the video, there's a section from the quarry entrance to the distillery with no properties and 20 mph here is totally unreasonable. There is often a camera van in the layby covering this section, so if it continues to monitor speeds along here, it'll be rich pickings.

If Penderyn is 20 mph, why is it OK for the B4601 out of Brecon to be 40 mph when there are houses along one side of the road?
https://maps.app.goo.gl/mvmLnpF8MZAWhMpp8

It all appears to be a question of applying the policy questions and that the answers may not always be immediately palatable to people passing through communities as opposed to those living there:

<<2.1.3..Question A: Are there significant numbers (or potential numbers, if speeds were lower) of pedestrians and cyclists travelling along or across the road?
If the answer to A is ‘no’ then an exception for a 30mph speed limit may be appropriate.>>

<<2.2.8 The following ‘Place’ criteria have been developed to guide highway authorities to determine, in a consistent way across Wales, which sections of roads may have significant demands for people walking and cycling:

Within a 100m walk of any educational setting (e.g. primary, secondary, further education and higher education)
Within 100m walk of any community centre
Within 100m walk of any hospital
Where the number of residential and/or retail premises fronting a road exceeds 20 properties per km.
2.2.9 Sections of road which meet any of these Place criteria should be considered to positively answer principal question A as set out above in 2.1.3.>>

I would estimate on average I see quite a few more people walking alongside the road with a 40 mph limit in Brecon than I do in Penderyn with a 20 mph limit.

An interesting point is the BBC Wales series of programmes Crash Detectives that were, to date, all prior to the 20 mph limit being imposed. All crashes investigated that I can remember, apart from a lorry that killed a pedestrian in their blind spot, involved vehicles travelling over the speed limit or the driver had been drinking, had taken drugs or was on their phone. None involved cars travelling at 30 mph legally and responsibly in built up areas, so where are the reduction in accidents going to come from as I'm sure drivers of the standard shown in Crash Detectives aren't going to conform to any of the new lower limits or other regulations.

[Micro The Maniac]

An interesting point is the BBC Wales series of programmes Crash Detectives that were, to date, all prior to the 20 mph limit being imposed. All crashes investigated that I can remember, apart from a lorry that killed a pedestrian in their blind spot, involved vehicles travelling over the speed limit or the driver had been drinking, had taken drugs or was on their phone. None involved cars travelling at 30 mph legally and responsibly in built up areas, so where are the reduction in accidents going to come from as I'm sure drivers of the standard shown in Crash Detectives aren't going to conform to any of the new lower limits or other regulations.

It is a constant refrain from "safety campaigners" that "something must be done" to stop speeding drivers - and the solution invariably involves lowering the speed limit further.

[AAndy]

My next example is the A40 through Trecastle in South Western Powys. Here houses are a few feet from the narrowish main trunk road. It is a 40mph limit zone.

This 1st video is westbound: https://youtu.be/gFEqOHXjXaw and driven at 20mph.

This 2nd video I have begun a mile & a quarter before the village to give context to the quality and likely speed driven on the approach. In fact many motorists have been caught exceeding 100mph here so the local press reports, top one being 148mph. This is also driven though the 40mph zone at 20mph. https://youtu.be/bvpUr-JXRmI

Part of the context is safety & consistency. (Penderyn's 20mph enforcement https://youtu.be/GGpTxeSsVlo ) Or does the blanket approach argument apply, no individual site appraisal, just all 30 to 20... If it was 40mph before so be it after, nobody in WAG cares?

[RichardA35]

I'll say again, the criteria to satisfy to obtain an exception to the default 20mph are listed in the exception policy that is linked to above.
On the face of it it is a very high threshold to overcome to obtain an exception to the 20mph default.
e.g. fewer than 20 properties per km is properties spaced more than 100m apart (10 per side of the road per km) and most built up areas will not fall within the exception criteria.

All the videos and examples in the world mean nothing without analysing the area against the policy. If there is a school, and a modicum of housing or retail as in the policy then an exception to the 20mph default would be against the policy and not be granted.

[Bryn666]

An interesting point is the BBC Wales series of programmes Crash Detectives that were, to date, all prior to the 20 mph limit being imposed. All crashes investigated that I can remember, apart from a lorry that killed a pedestrian in their blind spot, involved vehicles travelling over the speed limit or the driver had been drinking, had taken drugs or was on their phone. None involved cars travelling at 30 mph legally and responsibly in built up areas, so where are the reduction in accidents going to come from as I'm sure drivers of the standard shown in Crash Detectives aren't going to conform to any of the new lower limits or other regulations.

It is a constant refrain from "safety campaigners" that "something must be done" to stop speeding drivers - and the solution invariably involves lowering the speed limit further.

Tell the group you don't know how road safety engineering works without saying you don't know how road safety engineering works. Speed limits don't get reduced (or raised) just because someone with a bee in their bonnet jumps up and down about it. There's a lot more to it than that, even if you don't believe there is.

[Helvellyn]

Tell the group you don't know how road safety engineering works without saying you don't know how road safety engineering works. Speed limits don't get reduced (or raised) just because someone with a bee in their bonnet jumps up and down about it. There's a lot more to it than that, even if you don't believe there is.

Where something is a government policy how much do you really think it's about expert opinion? I'm sure you won't have to look far to find examples of government policies you think are nonsense!

[Big L]

Be interesting to see what happens in the coming months since Drakeford announced his resignation* yesterday.

*Staying until a successor is appointed I believe.

[AAndy]

I'll say again, the criteria to satisfy to obtain an exception to the default 20mph are listed in the exception policy that is linked to above.
On the face of it it is a very high threshold to overcome to obtain an exception to the 20mph default.
e.g. fewer than 20 properties per km is properties spaced more than 100m apart (10 per side of the road per km) and most built up areas will not fall within the exception criteria.

All the videos and examples in the world mean nothing without analysing the area against the policy. If there is a school, and a modicum of housing or retail as in the policy then an exception to the 20mph default would be against the policy and not be granted.

Examples are good. I would like to think they may show or illustrate something that the viewer isn't already aware of, and may change their viewpoint. Certainly some of the comments here since I have posted the 4 videos so far (don't forget my video of Aberthin & Cowbridge 20mph limit which is another type of example & was recently featured on the BBC News ) have changed the way I look at them.

Bad policy by the WAG, and it is possible that this speed limit reduction has many elements that could be defined as such, along with many good elements too which also get highlighted, and that the policy is changed for the better.

[RichardA35]

I'll say again, the criteria to satisfy to obtain an exception to the default 20mph are listed in the exception policy that is linked to above.
On the face of it it is a very high threshold to overcome to obtain an exception to the 20mph default.
e.g. fewer than 20 properties per km is properties spaced more than 100m apart (10 per side of the road per km) and most built up areas will not fall within the exception criteria.

All the videos and examples in the world mean nothing without analysing the area against the policy. If there is a school, and a modicum of housing or retail as in the policy then an exception to the 20mph default would be against the policy and not be granted.

Examples are good. I would like to think they may show or illustrate something that the viewer isn't already aware of, and may change their viewpoint. Certainly some of the comments here since I have posted the 4 videos so far (don't forget my video of Aberthin & Cowbridge 20mph limit which is another type of example & was recently featured on the BBC News ) have changed the way I look at them.

Bad policy by the WAG, and it is possible that this speed limit reduction has many elements that could be defined as such, along with many good elements too which also get highlighted, and that the policy is changed for the better.

I suppose they do illustrate the issue but a hard analysis of the stretch of road against the criteria will carry more weight with the officers of WAG or whichever authority controls the speed limit policy although the decisions behind the policy and which criteria carry more weight are political in nature.
In Wales it looks like the policies related to "place", that is, the static environment surrounding where people live, are educated or work, carry more weight with the WAG than policies related to "transport" of people or goods between places.
There has probably been a high level assessment carried out that air quality, health benefits from safety (and perception of safety that allows more independent active travel) carry more weight with the authority than the slight detriment to journey times through settlements due to a lower speed limit.
There can be arguments over whether area 1 or settlement 2 complies fully, but any change would only come from political pressure via local elected representatives and these representatives would have to weigh up whether the views of people travelling through areas (who may or may not be local) should carry more weight than the opinions of those who live in these places (that also elect them).

[FosseWay]

Tell the group you don't know how road safety engineering works without saying you don't know how road safety engineering works. Speed limits don't get reduced (or raised) just because someone with a bee in their bonnet jumps up and down about it. There's a lot more to it than that, even if you don't believe there is.

Where something is a government policy how much do you really think it's about expert opinion? I'm sure you won't have to look far to find examples of government policies you think are nonsense!

The problem isn't with the policy as such, though, which I imagine is arrived at after consulting expert opinion. The problem is with the implementation of any given instance of the measure. "We need to do X because the policy says so" is getting things the wrong way round. "We have a policy of X when risk Y is more than a given value, and on road Z that value is exceeded, so we will implement policy X" is the more desirable approach.

In the cases where you've got dwellings spaced at around the cut-off Richard mentioned above (20 per km) I would expect the authorities to do one of two things, depending on the *actual* risk assessment at that point, not on a catch-all policy. Either accept that sightlines, pavement provision, actual measured usage etc. mean that risk is acceptable at 30 mph and sign the road as such, or establish that 20 mph is indeed the maximum sensible speed there and take concrete steps to making sure that people slow down there. Just changing the limit doesn't cut it.

If I'm a pedestrian or cyclist put at risk by someone driving too fast, it is of scant consolation to learn that the driver "shouldn't" have been going that fast and was breaking the law. I'm interested only in the actual risk posed. If you stick up lower limit signs and leave it at that, with the result that drivers continue to drive at higher speeds, you have achieved absolutely nothing.

[AndyB]

My next example is the A40 through Trecastle in South Western Powys. Here houses are a few feet from the narrowish main trunk road. It is a 40mph limit zone.

This 1st video is westbound: https://youtu.be/gFEqOHXjXaw and driven at 20mph.

This 2nd video I have begun a mile & a quarter before the village to give context to the quality and likely speed driven on the approach. In fact many motorists have been caught exceeding 100mph here so the local press reports, top one being 148mph. This is also driven though the 40mph zone at 20mph. https://youtu.be/bvpUr-JXRmI

Part of the context is safety & consistency. (Penderyn's 20mph enforcement https://youtu.be/GGpTxeSsVlo ) Or does the blanket approach argument apply, no individual site appraisal, just all 30 to 20... If it was 40mph before so be it after, nobody in WAG cares?

All that means is that at the time the 40mph speed limit was introduced, it was in accordance with guidance, whether that meant reducing a non-restricted road to 40mph or increasing a restricted road to 40mph.

As I’ve already pointed out, individual site appraisal costs money. A local council might take the view that they were better letting the Welsh Government do the blanket approach and spending their money on potholes.

[ForestChav]

Be interesting to see what happens in the coming months since Drakeford announced his resignation* yesterday.

*Staying until a successor is appointed I believe.

The more interesting question would be whether someone campaigning on a ticket of reversing it would get traction from doing so.

I'm also going to assume at this stage that it would actually cost a fair amount of money to change all the 20 signs back to 30.

[Big L]

Be interesting to see what happens in the coming months since Drakeford announced his resignation* yesterday.

*Staying until a successor is appointed I believe.

The more interesting question would be whether someone campaigning on a ticket of reversing it would get traction from doing so…

Exactly what I was thinking.

[DB617]

Be interesting to see what happens in the coming months since Drakeford announced his resignation* yesterday.

*Staying until a successor is appointed I believe.

I'm in equal parts concerned that this might be seen as an admission of defeat on 20mph as it was his last major policy, and that it may get rolled back altogether. Clearly the policy needs work but that was inevitable as it was expected that limits would be kept under review in many cases. Personally I don't mind this, as it is better to have overly low limits in places where it should be higher than vice versa, if we are adopting Vision Zero. Perhaps it would have been good for the WG (Point of order Mr Speaker, it's not WAG, it no longer exists per their own declaration some years ago - they even changed the signs to 'Senedd Cymru' on the M4 so it's official!) to put out some PR pieces about vision zero and what it means for road users and society at large, rather than just saying, we're the government and when we say jump, you say how high.

It's supremely irritating when governments, especially by executive order, put out policies that are well-meaning but lose the support of many through patronising them and not trying to actually sell it to them. It was bound to get opposition and they didn't do enough to fight it. Hopefully the leadership challenge is short lived and respectful and does not cause internal turmoil as that will just prevent any further work on the policy, or anything else for that matter.

[Chris5156]

Be interesting to see what happens in the coming months since Drakeford announced his resignation* yesterday.

*Staying until a successor is appointed I believe.

The more interesting question would be whether someone campaigning on a ticket of reversing it would get traction from doing so.

I'm also going to assume at this stage that it would actually cost a fair amount of money to change all the 20 signs back to 30.

If he's known he was going to step down for a while now, he may have been doing his successor a favour by pushing through a controversial change and taking the reputational hit for it, at a time when he knew his reputation wouldn't matter for long. Whoever follows him can inherit a fait accompli.

[Helvellyn]

Clearly the policy needs work but that was inevitable as it was expected that limits would be kept under review in many cases. Personally I don't mind this, as it is better to have overly low limits in places where it should be higher than vice versa, if we are adopting Vision Zero.

I disagree with this quite strongly. As has often been pointed out limits are limits, and whilst there's need for consistency there should absolutely be a reasonable effort to avoid penalising behaviour that's perfectly safe, and overly low limits will do that. As well as being undesirable in its own right it's the sort of thing that leads to increasing contempt of the law in general.

The idea that you can reduce anything to zero doesn't align with reality, and push it too far and you end up descending into absurdity.

[DB617]

Clearly the policy needs work but that was inevitable as it was expected that limits would be kept under review in many cases. Personally I don't mind this, as it is better to have overly low limits in places where it should be higher than vice versa, if we are adopting Vision Zero.

I disagree with this quite strongly. As has often been pointed out limits are limits, and whilst there's need for consistency there should absolutely be a reasonable effort to avoid penalising behaviour that's perfectly safe, and overly low limits will do that. As well as being undesirable in its own right it's the sort of thing that leads to increasing contempt of the law in general.

The idea that you can reduce anything to zero doesn't align with reality, and push it too far and you end up descending into absurdity.

Though there is a risk of it becoming this way, I have never yet seen Vision Zero explained as meaning something insane like 'we tighten the rules until nobody dies anymore'. It's more of a challenge to policymakers to say, there is not an 'acceptable number of road deaths' or a 'cost to death ratio' - engineers must be empowered to fix the built-in risks that have caused deaths from road collisions. Key to that is not having people and vehicles mixing above 20mph and the accepting of the small cost to that - drivers must drive slightly more slowly for mixed traffic portions of their journey. The irony of the furore in Wales is that the majority of journeys outside the few cities are made in areas without mixed traffic. This would not necessarily be the case in England, and yet London, Bristol, and probably more cities have widely adopted 20s.

Part of it in the UK was the establishing of a road collision investigation branch, but unsurprisingly as it is a relatively new government policy that is not Rwanda, it has not gone anywhere really yet. But I totally support investigating every fatal accident and finding out what went wrong, what lessons could be learnt for engineering and for road users both at that location and nationwide. Sounds like a very good way to address the abhorrent level of road violence.