"Roland Perry" wrote in message
news:1108899955.8c6742684f85a5f7a4b62860409ce80e@t eranews...
In message , at 11:22:21
on Sun, 20 Feb 2005, Richard J. remarked:
A road is a "restricted
road", and therefore subject to a 30 mph limit, if it has street lamps
not more than 200 yards apart.

I think there's a minimum length too, something like half a mile;
streetlights for less than that don't count.

So you could be driving through a
village with, say, 3 street lamps at 200-yard intervals.

Or indeed one with lamps at 205yd intervals

Exactly: signposting should be explicit, not subtle.


This would be
automatically subject to a 30 mph limit,

Which wouldn't. You need to carry a tape measure when driving at night!

but it would be illegal for the
highway authority to clarify the situation by putting repeater 30 mph
signs, which are banned on restricted roads with street lighting.
(Unless there's been a change in the law recently. I've seen plates in
Reading containing a repeater 30 and a camera logo.)

How absurd that signs which would clarify the limit should be deemed to be
illegal. What a pathetic situtation :-(

Essex has several villages with 30mph repeaters (the small round ones).

"Mrs Redboots" wrote in message
...
Peter Sumner wrote to uk.transport.london on Sun, 20 Feb 2005:

On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 19:19:06 -0000, "Martin Underwood"
wrote:

"Mrs Redboots" wrote in message
...
Yeah, or perfectly good roads into Brighton, quite safe at 40 mph,
suddenly turning into 30 mph without even telling you until you get
flashed & penalty points (this one's a very sore point in our family!).

Presumably there must be 30 signs to make the speed limit enforceable,
but
they may not be very obvious.

No the speed limit on roads with streetlights is 30mph unless there
are signs to indicate otherwise, I'd expect advanced drivers to know
that :-}

http://www.highwaycode.gov.uk/09.shtml#103


In this particular case, there *had* been 40 mph signs.... which petered
out, and as far as I am aware (and, of course, we might have just missed
it) there wasn't a large sign warning one that we were entering a 30 mph
zone - first we realised was when the cameras flashed.....

Very unfair. Being caught doing 40 when you knew the limit was 30 is fair
enough (unless the 30 limit is absurd for the degree of hazards on the road,
but that's another story). But being caught when you didn't see an explicit
sign (and preferably repeaters) smacks of a piggy-bank speed-camera :-(

In message , at 12:21:32 on Sun,
20 Feb 2005, Brimstone remarked:
The Highway code is the document to which drivers are referred by HM
Government and other bodies.

Bit it cannot, and does not, go into the full details of every offence.

In this case it fudges it by saying:

"Street lights usually mean that there is a 30 mph speed limit
unless there are signs showing another limit."

Note the "usually".

It's obvious there has to be *some* limit, otherwise a street lamp in
one village, followed by another a mile away in the next village,
could be construed to make the entire stretch between the two
villages a 30mph zone.

Sensible people would realise that a gap such as you suggest is a break
in the limit. Even if they don't they are "failing safe".

I would suggest that if you are driving in open countryside on a 60pmh
road, and jam on the brakes when you get to a 400yds lit section where a
side-road joins, that you'd be anything but "safe".
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
news:1108905962.fda3e664afabb66344e4a09aaa06fb1b@t eranews...
In message , at 12:21:32 on Sun,
20 Feb 2005, Brimstone remarked:
The Highway code is the document to which drivers are referred by HM
Government and other bodies.

Bit it cannot, and does not, go into the full details of every offence.

In this case it fudges it by saying:

"Street lights usually mean that there is a 30 mph speed limit
unless there are signs showing another limit."

Note the "usually".

It's obvious there has to be *some* limit, otherwise a street lamp in
one village, followed by another a mile away in the next village,
could be construed to make the entire stretch between the two
villages a 30mph zone.

Sensible people would realise that a gap such as you suggest is a break
in the limit. Even if they don't they are "failing safe".

I would suggest that if you are driving in open countryside on a 60pmh
road, and jam on the brakes when you get to a 400yds lit section where a
side-road joins, that you'd be anything but "safe".

Ah. A voice of common sense! Restrictions need to be signposted in advance
to allow you to take appropriate action *gradually*. Explicit signs and
signals are much better than requiring drivers to infer: that's why I'm in
favour of an explicit headlamp-flash (or better still, another less
ambiguous signal) if you are going to let someone pull out in front of you,
rather than having the other driver think "is he or isn't he letting me
go?" - indecision and two people thinking differently is what leads to
accidents.

Another think that there should be more use of is those speed limint
reminder signs that only light up if you're exceeding the limit. There's a
bugegr of a 50 limit on an otherwise 70 mph dual carriageway west of Oxford
and they recently fitted two of these signs at each end, one just before the
fixed sign and one just after. Seeing a "50" in a big red circle that's only
there if you're exceeding the limit is an excellent way of reminding you
that you're over the limit.

Whenver I come across a speed limit that seems to be absurdly low (eg 30 on
a road that I'd judge to be safe up to 50 or 60) I always do two things:
firstly I keep repeating to myself "this is a 30 limit, this is a 30 limit"
to help me avoid gradually drifting back up to 60; secondly I look all
around me to see if I can spot the hazard that I might initially have missed
which justifies such a low limit. Sadly there are some 30 limits which have
me baffled and can only have been "justified" by residents' dislike of fast
traffic rather than for any road-safety reasons.

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 12:21:32 on Sun,
20 Feb 2005, Brimstone remarked:
The Highway code is the document to which drivers are referred by HM
Government and other bodies.

Bit it cannot, and does not, go into the full details of every
offence.

In this case it fudges it by saying:

"Street lights usually mean that there is a 30 mph speed limit
unless there are signs showing another limit."

Note the "usually".

It's obvious there has to be *some* limit, otherwise a street lamp
in one village, followed by another a mile away in the next village,
could be construed to make the entire stretch between the two
villages a 30mph zone.

Sensible people would realise that a gap such as you suggest is a
break in the limit. Even if they don't they are "failing safe".

I would suggest that if you are driving in open countryside on a 60pmh
road, and jam on the brakes when you get to a 400yds lit section
where a side-road joins, that you'd be anything but "safe".

I quite agree, which is the whole point of drivers being ancouraged to read
the road ahead so that they can slow down as they approach hazards rather
than "jam on the brakes".

Martin Underwood wrote:

Whenver I come across a speed limit that seems to be absurdly low (eg
30 on a road that I'd judge to be safe up to 50 or 60) I always do
two things: firstly I keep repeating to myself "this is a 30 limit,
this is a 30 limit" to help me avoid gradually drifting back up to
60; secondly I look all around me to see if I can spot the hazard
that I might initially have missed which justifies such a low limit.
Sadly there are some 30 limits which have me baffled and can only
have been "justified" by residents' dislike of fast traffic rather
than for any road-safety reasons.

You don't consider the safety of residents and their wish for a quiet(ish)
life along a stretch of road to be worthy of consideration in reducing your
headlong flight then?

On Sun, 20 Feb 2005 09:49 +0000 (GMT Standard Time),
(Paul Cummins) wrote:

In article ,
(Peter Sumner) wrote:

No the speed limit on roads with streetlights is 30mph unless there
are signs to indicate otherwise,
....

The Midlands Urban Motorway has streetlights every 100 metres, and no road
signs saying it's a 70 limit...

So that rule of thumb doesn't work.

That rule of thumb would be Traffic Signs Regulations and General
Directions 2002. Motorways don't have to have speed limit repeaters,
but do need to have a sign at the junctions where the 70 limit
starts. Maybe these have been liberated for use as Frisbees?

http://www.hmso.gov.uk/si/si2002/20023113.htm#sch19pII2

--
Peter Sumner

On Sun, 20 Feb 2005 13:17:16 +0000, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message , at 12:21:32 on Sun,
20 Feb 2005, Brimstone remarked:
The Highway code is the document to which drivers are referred by HM
Government and other bodies.

Bit it cannot, and does not, go into the full details of every offence.

In this case it fudges it by saying:

"Street lights usually mean that there is a 30 mph speed limit
unless there are signs showing another limit."

Note the "usually".

Agree that the highway code can not give full details of all of the
regulations, but it does refer you to them, and in this case it goes
on to clarify the "usually" with the quite explicit:

"The 30 mph limit applies to all traffic on all roads in England and
Wales (only Class C and unclassified roads in Scotland) with street
lighting unless signs show otherwise)"

http://www.highwaycode.gov.uk/09.shtml#103

--
Peter Sumner

In message , at 15:04:59 on
Sun, 20 Feb 2005, Peter Sumner
remarked:
Agree that the highway code can not give full details of all of the
regulations, but it does refer you to them, and in this case it goes
on to clarify the "usually" with the quite explicit:

"The 30 mph limit applies to all traffic on all roads in England and
Wales (only Class C and unclassified roads in Scotland) with street
lighting unless signs show otherwise)"

http://www.highwaycode.gov.uk/09.shtml#103

In that case, the "183m rule" must be embodied in the definition of
"street lighting".

In other words, "street lighting" must be defined as lights at least
every 183m.

Occasional lights, more than 183m apart, cannot therefore constitute
"Street lighting".

Remember, the 183m rule *does* exist. All I'm trying to do above is
square your view that "The Highway Code is infallible", with reality.
--
Roland Perry

"Brimstone" wrote in message
...
Martin Underwood wrote:

Whenver I come across a speed limit that seems to be absurdly low (eg
30 on a road that I'd judge to be safe up to 50 or 60) I always do
two things: firstly I keep repeating to myself "this is a 30 limit,
this is a 30 limit" to help me avoid gradually drifting back up to
60; secondly I look all around me to see if I can spot the hazard
that I might initially have missed which justifies such a low limit.
Sadly there are some 30 limits which have me baffled and can only
have been "justified" by residents' dislike of fast traffic rather
than for any road-safety reasons.

You don't consider the safety of residents and their wish for a quiet(ish)
life along a stretch of road to be worthy of consideration in reducing
your headlong flight then?

Well in the case I'm thinking of, the road has fields along one side and
occasional houses that are set back about 100 yards from the road, behind
high (noise absorbing) hedges and with ample see-and-be-seen visibility when
a car emerges from its drive. 30 seems a bit low in the circumstances. Maybe
40 or 50 would be more appropriate, given that there are plenty of roads
with far greater hazards (parked cars, houses with front doors directly on
the pavement, children playing on bikes, bends) that are also graded as 30.
I'm not advocating driving at the speed limit come-what-may, but that you
should be given the option of tailoring your speed to the sconditions as
they present themselves at that instant.

As an aside, why is the perceived difference between 30 and 40 much greater
than between 40 and 50? Keeping to 30 when you'd rather do 40 is much harder
than keeping to 40 when you'd rather do 50.