What is a resonable traffic speed limit on residential roads.?
I live on a private totally residential estate with roads going nowhere other than to peoples homes. The residents group are concerned about traffic safety in view of kids, pedestrians, pets etc and have been considering posting traffic speed limits in the hope of slowing vehicles down to a safe limit. What do you think the best posted speed limit should be? The furthest any driver would have to travel from the main highway to a house on the estate is less than 1 kilometer.
As someone that's learning to drive, I was told by my instructor to stay at or 5 mph below the speed limit. Most drivers get annoyed stuck behind Learners when they're stalling etc it's even worse if they're on a 60 mph road only doing 40 mph. Slow speeds in areas where they're not needed are more dangerous, not for pedestrians but for drivers. More drivers will get annoyed with slow drivers and look for places to overtake and will overtake in stupid and inconvenient places, sometimes even dangerous places. I was recently over taken on a single carriageway, I was doing 55mph and following a lorry, I moved out to see if I could overtake, saw a car and moved back in, the person behind me, watched me do this, and should have had enough common sense to realise that if a driving instructor isn't going to let a learner driver overtake the lorry because there's not enough time or space, there isn't enough time or space to overtake my car and the lorry. He didn't realise this, and had it not be for the lorry slowing down immensely when he saw how close the car was getting to an oncoming lorry that man would be dead. I'm all for 20 mph outside schools, library's etc, but it's not just the drivers, kids need to be educated on the green cross code a little bit more than just two hedgehogs on the TV singing. In fact even though outside most schools round here it is a 20, I slow down to 10 if I can, to be extra safe, my driving instructor doesn't like it, but I refuse to hit a child or anyone else. The saying is hit me at 40, there's an 80% chance I'll die, hit me at 30, there's an 80% chance I'll live. I can't see 20 making a huge difference. The drivers that are hitting pedestrians are the ones that either a) aren't paying attention to the speed limits anyway or b) aren't paying attention to the road, because their mobile phone or the radio station etc is more important. Speed isn't the killer for pedestrians, impact and the effect impact has on the body is the killer. Being thrown into the middle of the road with any sort of force behind you is going to cause serious damage, even a bike is enough to do that sort of damage. If I trusted the government enough to think this wasn't just another money making scheme then I would be completely for anything that makes roads safer, but before they make car journeys longer, and therefore increase CO2 emissions (something they're apparently trying to cut, but yet they're still talking) they should think about better education, not only for drivers but for pedestrians as well. It's all very well saying, the drivers are the ones that have to do the stopping and the ones that hit the pedestrians, but if pedestrians use crossings and follow simple safety tips like don't cross between two parked cars or on a bend, or don't follow a toy if it goes into the road, lots of collisions could be avoided. Many deaths could also be avoided, if some proper basic first-aid was incorporated into the theory test, more than just what do you do if you hit a motorcyclist? But actual questions concerning what you can do to help before the paramedics or first-responders get there. The quicker treatment is started the better the chance of survival is and if the driver is unscathed and not in shock, there is no reason why they shouldn't be able to use basic first-aid to help the victim of a collision.
between 30 and 35 in the inner city its 30 ressidential its 20 but out of city it gets up to 40 i say it depends on on the pedestrians also the traffic that you all get out there