A57(M) speed limit to be reduced to 30 mph

[Bryn666]

The speed limit signage is now permanent, meaning this is officially the lowest speed limit on a UK motorway. There are no repeaters because of the high mast lighting and as expected compliance is nil.

Just to clarify - the lack of repeaters is a mistake, isn’t it? The limit on a motorway won’t default to 30 because the rules about lighting don’t apply.

Interestingly it also won’t default to 70, because the legislation that establishes the 70mph motorway limit specifically lists the A57(M) as an exception and gives it a separate 50 limit.

1. That length of motorway known as Mancunian Way A57(M) in the City and County Borough of Manchester which extends from its junction with Chester Road Roundabout in a general north easterly direction to its junction with Downing Street Roundabout, a distance of approximately 2010 yards.

That's interesting - I wonder whether the SI overrides a Speed Limit Order (or whatever Manchester CC has used)? The SI does state that it has the power of an Act as well, so it's kind of a super-SI.

Though let's not mention that neither the Downing Street Roundabout nor Manchester County Borough now exist...

I think some FOIs are needed. This is the same Manchester City Council that tried telling some friends of mine changing yellow lines needed an Act of Parliament...

[AndyB]

I can’t remember if there is a hierarchy of SIs - are Orders further up the hierarchy than Regulations? I would have thought in any case that the 1974 Regulations would have to be amended centrally rather than by a local Order.

[Bomag]

I can’t remember if there is a hierarchy of SIs - are Orders further up the hierarchy than Regulations? I would have thought in any case that the 1974 Regulations would have to be amended centrally rather than by a local Order.

Regulations are S.I. and secondary legislation - see TSRGD - so are orders. You can amend a S.I. with another S.I. What you cannot do is use an S.I. to amend primary legislation (i.e. an Act).

In terms of repeaters, in England they are prohibited on a streetlight road subject to a 30 MPH limit. An S.I. would need to amend the TSRGD to permit repeaters. As mentioned in TSM Chapter 8 the lowest enforceable limit using fixed plate signs on a Motorway is 40 mph.

[Chris5156]

In terms of repeaters, in England they are prohibited on a streetlight road subject to a 30 MPH limit. An S.I. would need to amend the TSRGD to permit repeaters. As mentioned in TSM Chapter 8 the lowest enforceable limit using fixed plate signs on a Motorway is 40 mph.

TSM Chapter 8 relates to roadworks and temporary signage, doesn’t it? The 30 limit on the A57(M) is permanent.

[AndyB]

TSM is only guidance. There’s nothing in law to stop an authority ignoring the guidance and imposing a temporary 30mph limit which then has to be signed.

Repeaters for a permanent 30, even on a motorway, could presumably be done under special authorisation as no authorised sign exists which can repeat the restriction

[SouthWest Philip]

Wouldn't it be easier just to revoke motorway status? What was the rationale for applying it to the A57(M) in the first place? I gather it didn't open with motorway status.

[nowster]

Wouldn't it be easier just to revoke motorway status? What was the rationale for applying it to the A57(M) in the first place? I gather it didn't open with motorway status.

It's a Special Road with part of a slip road in a different Special Road classification. The flyover over London Road is legally a different number to that which is signed. Legislative corner cases abound for this road.

[Bomag]

TSM is only guidance. There’s nothing in law to stop an authority ignoring the guidance and imposing a temporary 30mph limit which then has to be signed.

Repeaters for a permanent 30, even on a motorway, could presumably be done under special authorisation as no authorised sign exists which can repeat the restriction

TSM defines what is enforceable under RTRA 1984 Section 85. Its not one of those wiggly things, repeaters are prohibited. Any speed limit on a motorway lower than NSL must have repeaters to be enforceable QED 30 mph speed limits using fixed signs is not enforceable as it cannot be consistently signed. Doesn't matter where its temp or perm. It was in TSM Chapter 8 Part 3 as some idiots wanted 30 mph scheme wide, to get away with an unsafe design. Its not in Chapter 3 as nobody thought that an authority would be daft enough.

While the Highways Agency had a get out on Directions prior to 1st April 2015, the limitations on an authorisation could not override something in TSRGD, it could only cover something not specified in the regulations (See Section 64(1)) . So you would need to amend the TSRGD, at the Welsh attempted to do, to permit repeaters.

[AndyB]

TSM is only guidance. There’s nothing in law to stop an authority ignoring the guidance and imposing a temporary 30mph limit which then has to be signed.

Repeaters for a permanent 30, even on a motorway, could presumably be done under special authorisation as no authorised sign exists which can repeat the restriction

TSM defines what is enforceable under RTRA 1984 Section 85. Its not one of those wiggly things, repeaters are prohibited.

TSM doesn’t actually define what is enforceable under RTRA.

As with all guidance, it sets out requirements that, if you comply with them, should mean that you have given adequate notice for the purposes of Section 85, although there is a rider on the guidance that there is no guarantee.

With guidance such as TSM, the local authority is at liberty to comply with Section 85 in its own way. It’s a good deal less strong than an Approved Code of Practice where they could have to explain why they didn’t comply with the approved process.

You might feel that this is teaching granny to suck eggs, and I apologise in advance, but the difference between legislation, ACOPs and guidance and the obligations which come with each level is a subject Safety Representatives have coming out of our ears because it’s one of the first things we learn when we do our Health and Safety Rep training.

The prohibition on 30 repeaters is actually in the General Directions of TSRGD.

[Bryn666]

Wouldn't it be easier just to revoke motorway status? What was the rationale for applying it to the A57(M) in the first place? I gather it didn't open with motorway status.

It opened as an A road but had "advisory" motorway regulations from day one - there were issues with the legal orders as I understand it and took until about 1972/3 before it became a special road.

It originally came with a 40 limit, which was raised to 50 when it became a motorway. The original lighting was central reservation mounted but this was all taken down in the 1990s and replaced with masts.

It's never been well managed as a road, and the 30 limit debacle we currently have is another classic of its genre. There are currently faster urban single carriageways in Manchester than this.

[fras]

I wondered what you were all talking about, then had a look on GSV and realised this was Mancunian Way, or used to be. I think I've only driven along it once. Very closely spaced junctions like the Coventry Ring Road, so I would think 40 as an absolute maximum. 30mph does seem to be a bit slow. No doubt it's all to do with "emissions" !

[Helvellyn]

I wondered what you were all talking about, then had a look on GSV and realised this was Mancunian Way, or used to be. I think I've only driven along it once. Very closely spaced junctions like the Coventry Ring Road, so I would think 40 as an absolute maximum. 30mph does seem to be a bit slow. No doubt it's all to do with "emissions" !

Agreed, don't think too many people would complain about 40, but 30 seems a bit much (little?)

[RichardA35]

Agreed, don't think too many people would complain about 40, but 30 seems a bit much (little?)

I'd suggest that people need to look elsewhere about why they're in such a hurry all the time, and would be rather better off trying to slow down their pace of life.

[Chris Bertram]

Agreed, don't think too many people would complain about 40, but 30 seems a bit much (little?)

I'd suggest that people need to look elsewhere about why they're in such a hurry all the time, and would be rather better off trying to slow down their pace of life.

Not everyone has that option. Or would want to anyway. If it suits you, fine, but don't presume to dictate to others.

[Helvellyn]

Agreed, don't think too many people would complain about 40, but 30 seems a bit much (little?)

I'd suggest that people need to look elsewhere about why they're in such a hurry all the time, and would be rather better off trying to slow down their pace of life.

I agree that slowing down the pace of life would be overall very beneficial, and I have little patience (yes, I'm aware of the irony!) for demands for things to get faster. But it is not a good defence for a speed limit reduction. I'll quite happily say that I don't want this or that road that'll make journeys faster, and sneer at the "faster journey" argument, but if said road is built (yes, I know this isn't a new road, I'm just making a point) it should have an appropriate limit for the road. Whilst I would love life to slow down contrived slowness just results in grinding of teeth.

Like all change a good case needs to be made for it. Attacking people who disagree with a change doesn't do that (neither does "why not?" for that matter).

[Bryn666]

Agreed, don't think too many people would complain about 40, but 30 seems a bit much (little?)

I'd suggest that people need to look elsewhere about why they're in such a hurry all the time, and would be rather better off trying to slow down their pace of life.

The speed limit isn't my issue, it's the cack handed incompetent way it's come about, the reasoning being;

1. a rise in collisions almost certainly caused by planning decisions to turn most of the elevated section into an illuminated advert hoarding which has had a huge distraction factor,

2. the failure to adequately maintain vehicle restraint infrastructure,

3. the general lack of political acumen that implementation of a temporary speed limit at 9pm on a Sunday night to disguise the managerial incompetence of 1 and 2 above and then quietly making it permanent 18 months later does not inspire confidence in the highway management department, especially not when they have a proven track record of saying one thing and doing another as other safety schemes have demonstrated.

[Helvellyn]

1. a rise in collisions almost certainly caused by planning decisions to turn most of the elevated section into an illuminated advert hoarding which has had a huge distraction factor,

I'm not keen at all on the way these are appearing everywhere, and I completely agree with them being a serious distraction, in the way that a conventional hoarding isn't, and even they have restrictions.

[Chris Bertram]

So are we concluding that the 30mph limit is either illegal or unenforceable under present conditions, both or neither?

[nowster]

So are we concluding that the 30mph limit is either illegal or unenforceable under present conditions, both or neither?

Certainly you could contest a ticket if you got one. The legal costs would probably dwarf any potential fine.

[RichardA35]

I'd just take the few seconds extra for the distance and it'll be fine - 1.5 miles at 40mph is hardly something to die in a ditch for.