this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2023
578 points (94.5% liked)
Asklemmy
43945 readers
794 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
All roads in the UK that are currently 30mph limits should be lowered to 20mph, and those at 40 lowered to 30. There should be a systematic review of those at 50 whether they should be 40. National speed limit should be lowered by 10mph.
What's the logic behind this? I'm all for making cities more walkable but when it comes to highway roads I think we should be addressing why a faster speed isn't possible.
Risks increasing road fatalities due to fatigue since it takes 20+% longer to get places.
Still doesn't address the issue of bad or poorly managed roads.
Still doesn't meaningfully decrease car usage, since walkability and public transport ubiquity should be the goal.
3a. I want drivers licenses to be harder to attain so that it's basically a formal qualification that is renewed every 3-5 years. Major penalties for poor driving, speeding and phone usage.
The increased journey time is to encourage people to find alternatives. It needs to be alongside improving public transport. If it it currently takes 6 by train from London to Edinburgh but 7 by car, you're more tempted to drive than if the train to 4 hours and car took 10 hours.
less cars in the roads reduce their wear. Plus dedicated cycle paths narrowing them also do this. I also don't think I even raised this as a point.
yes. You attack from both sides. But this is meant to be a controversial opinion so I just talked about the stick part of a carrot and stick approach.
yes. That's the point.
I'm all for cheaper train travel but reducing the speed limit to achieve that is fucking stupid. How on earth did you come to that conclusion? Are you 6 years old?
Part of it is co2. Cars are more efficient at 60 than 70
Agree but I empathise a bunch of people need to carry stuff or use the car when they get to the destination. Hence still necessary and possible for those qualified to drive.
Wear on an unused car occurs still. Better just have as few as possible.
I don't actually think we're disagreeing on the need for change or the mechanism of getting there. I just want to be clear that speeds need to drop in towns especially on the narrow streets.
As an Australian I feel the same about my city. Needs to be walking, taxis and public transport only. Keep cars out of the central city.
As a tourist that recently drove around in England for two weeks, I wholly agree. The roads are way too narrow to justify the speed limits outside of the motorways.
Edit: also, why do you guys use half of the road for parking everywhere in towns?
To your edit, because land is too expensive in a lot of places to have dedicated parking
So a ten mph speed limit in London?
Isn't the old joke that the average speed of traffic London has been about 15mph since the 1800's. (ie you're not going any faster now than when horses were the main means of transport)