Plan to cut peak time speed limit on motorways around Bolton

This Is Lancashire: The government plans to use variable speed limits on motorways around Bolton The government plans to use variable speed limits on motorways around Bolton

STRETCHES of the motorway network around Bolton may have their upper speed limits cut at peak times under a government scheme.

The Department of Transport’s “Controlled Motorways” initiative could see speed limits on sections of the M60, M6 and M62 cut to 40mph and 50mph at the busiest times.

The Highways Agency said its long-term aim was to use the hard shoulder on the M60. This would not necessarily mean the speed limit would be cut, but routinely lowering the speed limit to ease traffic flow at peak times was a plan for the motorway.

“Controlled Motorways” is set to be rolled out over the next five years, with the M6 between Birmingham and Manchester and the Manchester M60 ring road forming part of the plan.

A Highways Agency spokesman said: “On the M60, the only plan at the moment is to make traffic flow as smoothly as possible. People will be told to drive at a certain speed, say 50mph or 60mph, to get them through that particular area.

“We are not cutting speed limits for the sake of it — obviously the time of the day is important.

“Using the hard shoulder on the M60 and M62 will not necessarily mean the speed limit is cut.”

Cllr David Chadwick, Bolton Council’s cabinet member for Highways and Transport, said: “Not so long ago the government was talking about increasing the limit on motorways to 80mph. It is not a coherent policy and the government is sending out mixed messages.

“Our view is that, in Bolton, speed limits should sometimes be reduced for safety. On St Peter’s Way we cut the limit from 70mph to 50mph several years ago because there were so many accidents.”

Bolton Euro MP and UKIP deputy leader Paul Nuttall said the move would be a “huge step back” for motorists hoping to see limits increased to 80mph.

He added: “Our motorways are among the slowest in Europe. Increasing speed limits to 80mph would boost the economy by hundreds of millions of pounds. Slashing the speed limit would be nonsensical.”

Comments (25)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:26am Fri 17 Jan 14

aardwolf says...

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!

Variable speed just means more revenue from speeding fines. Speed limits at rush hour are self-regulating due to the VOLUME of traffic - not the high speed of the cars on the motorway at that time.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!! Variable speed just means more revenue from speeding fines. Speed limits at rush hour are self-regulating due to the VOLUME of traffic - not the high speed of the cars on the motorway at that time. aardwolf
  • Score: 5

7:38am Fri 17 Jan 14

oftbewildered2 says...

aardwolf wrote:
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

OOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!

Variable speed just means more revenue from speeding fines. Speed limits at rush hour are self-regulating due to the VOLUME of traffic - not the high speed of the cars on the motorway at that time.
thanks for that - I was thinking something similar but as I do not drive on motorways at peak times, felt that perhaps I might have been speaking through my elbow. Applied science really, plus common sense.
[quote][p][bold]aardwolf[/bold] wrote: NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!! Variable speed just means more revenue from speeding fines. Speed limits at rush hour are self-regulating due to the VOLUME of traffic - not the high speed of the cars on the motorway at that time.[/p][/quote]thanks for that - I was thinking something similar but as I do not drive on motorways at peak times, felt that perhaps I might have been speaking through my elbow. Applied science really, plus common sense. oftbewildered2
  • Score: 5

7:43am Fri 17 Jan 14

mililly says...

I think you will find at peak times your lucky if you get to 10mph traffic is that bad the m60 is really bad
I think you will find at peak times your lucky if you get to 10mph traffic is that bad the m60 is really bad mililly
  • Score: 11

8:09am Fri 17 Jan 14

JustBecause says...

Revenue generator, no more no less
Revenue generator, no more no less JustBecause
  • Score: 2

8:22am Fri 17 Jan 14

Cheeseware says...

I travel the M61 and M60 getting to and from work. I would love to be able to get out of second gear. Like mililly says you are lucky to get over 10mph so lowering the speed limit would have absolutely no effect apart from costing taxpayers for all the new signage and speed cameras. The biggest problem is whoever decided to put the biggest shopping complex in the NW right next to the busiest motorway section in the NW. Absolutely moronic idea that was. Obviously Peel Holdings greased more than a few palms to get that one through.
I travel the M61 and M60 getting to and from work. I would love to be able to get out of second gear. Like mililly says you are lucky to get over 10mph so lowering the speed limit would have absolutely no effect apart from costing taxpayers for all the new signage and speed cameras. The biggest problem is whoever decided to put the biggest shopping complex in the NW right next to the busiest motorway section in the NW. Absolutely moronic idea that was. Obviously Peel Holdings greased more than a few palms to get that one through. Cheeseware
  • Score: 11

8:25am Fri 17 Jan 14

Gomacadeshez says...

this isn't a revenue generator because it's impossible to speed at peak times on those Motorways anyway.

Variable speed limits are proven to keep traffic moving.
this isn't a revenue generator because it's impossible to speed at peak times on those Motorways anyway. Variable speed limits are proven to keep traffic moving. Gomacadeshez
  • Score: 2

8:42am Fri 17 Jan 14

nomore352 says...

60 mph at peak times..great, bring it on. It's much better than the current 5 mph we suffer every morning!
I suppose it will be ratified by the same balloons who designed dangerous bottlenecks at the Kearsley roundabout,the indudtrial estate a666 junction,moses gate junction...the list goes on!
The volume of traffic limits the speed already but obviously with parking fines down they will be challenged with thinking of new ways to screw the motorist.
60 mph at peak times..great, bring it on. It's much better than the current 5 mph we suffer every morning! I suppose it will be ratified by the same balloons who designed dangerous bottlenecks at the Kearsley roundabout,the indudtrial estate a666 junction,moses gate junction...the list goes on! The volume of traffic limits the speed already but obviously with parking fines down they will be challenged with thinking of new ways to screw the motorist. nomore352
  • Score: 5

8:50am Fri 17 Jan 14

Don Kiddick says...

Cheeseware wrote:
I travel the M61 and M60 getting to and from work. I would love to be able to get out of second gear. Like mililly says you are lucky to get over 10mph so lowering the speed limit would have absolutely no effect apart from costing taxpayers for all the new signage and speed cameras. The biggest problem is whoever decided to put the biggest shopping complex in the NW right next to the busiest motorway section in the NW. Absolutely moronic idea that was. Obviously Peel Holdings greased more than a few palms to get that one through.
Well you're going to have fun when Airport City construction begins to take hold.

I only travel that way occaisionally but yeh, M61/M60 junction is terrible. My view is that it is indeed caused by speed; drivers barrel down the M61 and the inevitable consequence is bottle-necking at the intersection (I gather it's largely Audi drivers).

Controlling speed on the M61 should help this. That, and banning middle-management Audi numpties from our roads.
[quote][p][bold]Cheeseware[/bold] wrote: I travel the M61 and M60 getting to and from work. I would love to be able to get out of second gear. Like mililly says you are lucky to get over 10mph so lowering the speed limit would have absolutely no effect apart from costing taxpayers for all the new signage and speed cameras. The biggest problem is whoever decided to put the biggest shopping complex in the NW right next to the busiest motorway section in the NW. Absolutely moronic idea that was. Obviously Peel Holdings greased more than a few palms to get that one through.[/p][/quote]Well you're going to have fun when Airport City construction begins to take hold. I only travel that way occaisionally but yeh, M61/M60 junction is terrible. My view is that it is indeed caused by speed; drivers barrel down the M61 and the inevitable consequence is bottle-necking at the intersection (I gather it's largely Audi drivers). Controlling speed on the M61 should help this. That, and banning middle-management Audi numpties from our roads. Don Kiddick
  • Score: 3

8:54am Fri 17 Jan 14

AndrewMartinS says...

This was announced last year and does not involve any changes to the M61.
This was announced last year and does not involve any changes to the M61. AndrewMartinS
  • Score: 0

9:03am Fri 17 Jan 14

stereo_world says...

At first I thought this would be a detrimental, but to be fair, there'll be no difference. From Farnworth up until you join the M60, you'd be lucky to get up to 15mph.

I do see their point though. If everyone kept a constant slow speed, there'd be less braking and hence less traffic jams.

Now if only everyone kept at least 2 car lengths infront of them, we'd be onto a winner.
At first I thought this would be a detrimental, but to be fair, there'll be no difference. From Farnworth up until you join the M60, you'd be lucky to get up to 15mph. I do see their point though. If everyone kept a constant slow speed, there'd be less braking and hence less traffic jams. Now if only everyone kept at least 2 car lengths infront of them, we'd be onto a winner. stereo_world
  • Score: 1

9:37am Fri 17 Jan 14

Jim271 says...

The turn off into Bolton from Kearsley Roundabout onto St Peters Way is a death trap, I use it every day and at least once a week you feel like your playing chicken with some of the reckless drivers who hog the inside lane then speed up rather than slowing down.

There was one recent fatality, I am surprised there are not more,
The turn off into Bolton from Kearsley Roundabout onto St Peters Way is a death trap, I use it every day and at least once a week you feel like your playing chicken with some of the reckless drivers who hog the inside lane then speed up rather than slowing down. There was one recent fatality, I am surprised there are not more, Jim271
  • Score: 0

9:52am Fri 17 Jan 14

Don Kiddick says...

Jim271 wrote:
The turn off into Bolton from Kearsley Roundabout onto St Peters Way is a death trap, I use it every day and at least once a week you feel like your playing chicken with some of the reckless drivers who hog the inside lane then speed up rather than slowing down. There was one recent fatality, I am surprised there are not more,
It's a "Give Way", traffic in the inside lane of A666 has right of way. The onus is on the person joining the road to join it safely.

If there's a requirement for someone already on a road to take action to allow someone else to join the flow, then the person joining is driving in an unsafe manner.

It's polite to move over, however the person moving over is also subject to the same bad driving you describe - so why should that driver take the risk instead of you?
[quote][p][bold]Jim271[/bold] wrote: The turn off into Bolton from Kearsley Roundabout onto St Peters Way is a death trap, I use it every day and at least once a week you feel like your playing chicken with some of the reckless drivers who hog the inside lane then speed up rather than slowing down. There was one recent fatality, I am surprised there are not more,[/p][/quote]It's a "Give Way", traffic in the inside lane of A666 has right of way. The onus is on the person joining the road to join it safely. If there's a requirement for someone already on a road to take action to allow someone else to join the flow, then the person joining is driving in an unsafe manner. It's polite to move over, however the person moving over is also subject to the same bad driving you describe - so why should that driver take the risk instead of you? Don Kiddick
  • Score: 7

11:09am Fri 17 Jan 14

BWFC71 says...

So that's going to be 2mph instead of 5mph?
So that's going to be 2mph instead of 5mph? BWFC71
  • Score: 0

11:13am Fri 17 Jan 14

why-do-councillors-never-listen says...

Why would councillors and Euro MP's disagree with a proven policy. Cutting speeds at busy times decreases journey time it works in other areas and will work here. Cars travelling too fast and too close together cause most of the jams with extra accidents and always braking. Everytime a break light comes on there is a knock on effect for hundreds of meters of traffic all slowing down because they are too close this slows all traffic down eventually sometimes to a standstill.
Why would councillors and Euro MP's disagree with a proven policy. Cutting speeds at busy times decreases journey time it works in other areas and will work here. Cars travelling too fast and too close together cause most of the jams with extra accidents and always braking. Everytime a break light comes on there is a knock on effect for hundreds of meters of traffic all slowing down because they are too close this slows all traffic down eventually sometimes to a standstill. why-do-councillors-never-listen
  • Score: 1

11:15am Fri 17 Jan 14

steverock6@sky.com says...

Another stupid idea this will just create more congestion and increase pollution cars create more emissions when they are slowing down and accelerating all the time. roads need to be improved motorists pay enough in taxes and should expect this governments have for to long used the money for other things they need to get a grip and sort things out properly
Another stupid idea this will just create more congestion and increase pollution cars create more emissions when they are slowing down and accelerating all the time. roads need to be improved motorists pay enough in taxes and should expect this governments have for to long used the money for other things they need to get a grip and sort things out properly steverock6@sky.com
  • Score: -3

12:22pm Fri 17 Jan 14

The Baron says...

Hopeless reporting. This is not about slowing traffic down, its about maintaining a constant flow. These scheme's have been put into place on the 62 at Leeds and also the M6 in Birmingham and in both cases has been proved to WORK.
Hopeless reporting. This is not about slowing traffic down, its about maintaining a constant flow. These scheme's have been put into place on the 62 at Leeds and also the M6 in Birmingham and in both cases has been proved to WORK. The Baron
  • Score: 2

1:10pm Fri 17 Jan 14

cliff4treasurer says...

Don Kiddick There is a requirement for someone on the motorway or st peters way etc to assist others joining, it's called road sense, common sense or courtesy. It sounds like you are short on one or more.
The reason they need to reduce the speed limit is because the volume of traffic needs it.How often do you see vehicle travelling at a safe speed when some numpty (not all audis) comes tearing along trying to use a non existent space to pass another vehicle then crashes which then is the cause of tailbacks.There are less accidents with cars travelling at the same speed hence less tailbacks .This will also work if driver get in the right lane early instead of slamming on to move over at the last minute viz the exit to the m62 off the m60
Don Kiddick There is a requirement for someone on the motorway or st peters way etc to assist others joining, it's called road sense, common sense or courtesy. It sounds like you are short on one or more. The reason they need to reduce the speed limit is because the volume of traffic needs it.How often do you see vehicle travelling at a safe speed when some numpty (not all audis) comes tearing along trying to use a non existent space to pass another vehicle then crashes which then is the cause of tailbacks.There are less accidents with cars travelling at the same speed hence less tailbacks .This will also work if driver get in the right lane early instead of slamming on to move over at the last minute viz the exit to the m62 off the m60 cliff4treasurer
  • Score: -1

1:11pm Fri 17 Jan 14

Citizen Cane says...

You'll find that ridiculously low speed limits are imposed at non-peak times even where traffic is relatively light and if you get it wrong : fine and points. Surprise, surprise! This what happens already on the motorways around Brum with well established fine generator systems.
You'll find that ridiculously low speed limits are imposed at non-peak times even where traffic is relatively light and if you get it wrong : fine and points. Surprise, surprise! This what happens already on the motorways around Brum with well established fine generator systems. Citizen Cane
  • Score: 0

5:27pm Fri 17 Jan 14

Don Kiddick says...

cliff4treasurer wrote:
Don Kiddick There is a requirement for someone on the motorway or st peters way etc to assist others joining, it's called road sense, common sense or courtesy. It sounds like you are short on one or more.
The reason they need to reduce the speed limit is because the volume of traffic needs it.How often do you see vehicle travelling at a safe speed when some numpty (not all audis) comes tearing along trying to use a non existent space to pass another vehicle then crashes which then is the cause of tailbacks.There are less accidents with cars travelling at the same speed hence less tailbacks .This will also work if driver get in the right lane early instead of slamming on to move over at the last minute viz the exit to the m62 off the m60
Audi Driver.
[quote][p][bold]cliff4treasurer[/bold] wrote: Don Kiddick There is a requirement for someone on the motorway or st peters way etc to assist others joining, it's called road sense, common sense or courtesy. It sounds like you are short on one or more. The reason they need to reduce the speed limit is because the volume of traffic needs it.How often do you see vehicle travelling at a safe speed when some numpty (not all audis) comes tearing along trying to use a non existent space to pass another vehicle then crashes which then is the cause of tailbacks.There are less accidents with cars travelling at the same speed hence less tailbacks .This will also work if driver get in the right lane early instead of slamming on to move over at the last minute viz the exit to the m62 off the m60[/p][/quote]Audi Driver. Don Kiddick
  • Score: 2

6:52pm Fri 17 Jan 14

Mick England says...

Another statute/act that will ultimately pay the bankers back for their kind loan!
Another statute/act that will ultimately pay the bankers back for their kind loan! Mick England
  • Score: 0

8:12pm Fri 17 Jan 14

BBBBBBXX says...

I travel M61/M60 every weekday. I'm sure opening the hard shoulder would help in peak times. Travelling when it's not so busy, people don't use the correct lanes anyway, the number of time I have seen people join an empty motorway and move straight into lane 2 is unbelievable Jeff! Middle lane hoggers should be shot in the head! Their should be a second test you need to pass to allow you to drive on the motorway!
I travel M61/M60 every weekday. I'm sure opening the hard shoulder would help in peak times. Travelling when it's not so busy, people don't use the correct lanes anyway, the number of time I have seen people join an empty motorway and move straight into lane 2 is unbelievable Jeff! Middle lane hoggers should be shot in the head! Their should be a second test you need to pass to allow you to drive on the motorway! BBBBBBXX
  • Score: 1

8:46pm Fri 17 Jan 14

aardwolf says...

The Baron wrote:
Hopeless reporting. This is not about slowing traffic down, its about maintaining a constant flow. These scheme's have been put into place on the 62 at Leeds and also the M6 in Birmingham and in both cases has been proved to WORK.
Do feel free to provide evidence.
Unfortunately few of the planners or commenters seem to speak from experience of the M60.
[quote][p][bold]The Baron[/bold] wrote: Hopeless reporting. This is not about slowing traffic down, its about maintaining a constant flow. These scheme's have been put into place on the 62 at Leeds and also the M6 in Birmingham and in both cases has been proved to WORK.[/p][/quote]Do feel free to provide evidence. Unfortunately few of the planners or commenters seem to speak from experience of the M60. aardwolf
  • Score: -1

9:03pm Fri 17 Jan 14

aardwolf says...

aardwolf wrote:
The Baron wrote:
Hopeless reporting. This is not about slowing traffic down, its about maintaining a constant flow. These scheme's have been put into place on the 62 at Leeds and also the M6 in Birmingham and in both cases has been proved to WORK.
Do feel free to provide evidence.
Unfortunately few of the planners or commenters seem to speak from experience of the M60.
In fact if you try and search Government documents they just mention "the well known benefits" or "it is a known fact". However they fail on actually citing the evidence. What is available is scientific evidence that there are NO benefits for traffic flow by imposing lower limits. Bad science from thos in charge yet again.
[quote][p][bold]aardwolf[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Baron[/bold] wrote: Hopeless reporting. This is not about slowing traffic down, its about maintaining a constant flow. These scheme's have been put into place on the 62 at Leeds and also the M6 in Birmingham and in both cases has been proved to WORK.[/p][/quote]Do feel free to provide evidence. Unfortunately few of the planners or commenters seem to speak from experience of the M60.[/p][/quote]In fact if you try and search Government documents they just mention "the well known benefits" or "it is a known fact". However they fail on actually citing the evidence. What is available is scientific evidence that there are NO benefits for traffic flow by imposing lower limits. Bad science from thos in charge yet again. aardwolf
  • Score: 0

3:42pm Sat 18 Jan 14

BWFC71 says...

Don Kiddick is actually spot on.

The law o the road is that anyone joining another road via the use of a slip-lane (such as joining a motorway or joining St Peters Way, the onus is on the driver on the slip-lane to slip into traffic and use the slip lane as a Give way.

It is not, I repeat not, the onus of the drivers already on the 2main" part of the road o slow down and allow drivers in.

Another perfect example are drivers that come off St Peters Way at Moses Gate and join Manchester Road (towards Farnworth) many expect those on Manchester Road to give way - NO!!! It is the other way - especially as just at the end of the slip road is a junction for Darcy Lever!

I is about time some drivers re-read the Highway Code and realise the errors of some of their diving!
Don Kiddick is actually spot on. The law o the road is that anyone joining another road via the use of a slip-lane (such as joining a motorway or joining St Peters Way, the onus is on the driver on the slip-lane to slip into traffic and use the slip lane as a Give way. It is not, I repeat not, the onus of the drivers already on the 2main" part of the road o slow down and allow drivers in. Another perfect example are drivers that come off St Peters Way at Moses Gate and join Manchester Road (towards Farnworth) many expect those on Manchester Road to give way - NO!!! It is the other way - especially as just at the end of the slip road is a junction for Darcy Lever! I is about time some drivers re-read the Highway Code and realise the errors of some of their diving! BWFC71
  • Score: 1

3:45pm Mon 20 Jan 14

Jim271 says...

Don Kaddick,

Being in the right whilst on the road is little compensation when the fire brigade are cutting you out of your vehicle.

The Highway Code is not LAW, its only there to advise.

You have to use common sense, if a vehicle was to pull out in front of you would you crash into it on the grounds you have "right of way".
Don Kaddick, Being in the right whilst on the road is little compensation when the fire brigade are cutting you out of your vehicle. The Highway Code is not LAW, its only there to advise. You have to use common sense, if a vehicle was to pull out in front of you would you crash into it on the grounds you have "right of way". Jim271
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree