ADUK Archive

http://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/20limits

This has been live in Oxford city for a few days now. Thoughts, anyone?

Custom24 wrote:www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/20limits

This has been live in Oxford city for a few days now. Thoughts, anyone?

Is this the link?

Here?

Great idea
Not that most will stick to it
I wish they would do it in my area
Apart from roads without house frontages
Most housing estates would like this but would need to be careful on some through routes as 20 would be innapropriate

They've done this in Salisbury (another town full of car haters ) and it seems to work well, although the 20mph limit itself is largely enforced by narrow roads, hundreds of unsighted junctions and pedestrians wandering into the road. Whether it's money well spent is another matter...

Chris

@Horse - yes thanks, I've updated the original link.

@ROG - can you expand on "great idea"? Do you think a 20 limit is appropriate? It is on all the minor roads in Oxford. Only the major radial routes out of the city retain their 30 status.

My associate at the weekend also thought "great idea", but then was consistently unable/unwilling to keep to the 20 limit. He too said he would like the 20 limit where he lives, which makes me wonder if people want just other people to stick to 20 while driving on their road....

The other thing which strikes as unusual is the following paragraph from their blurb;

What about enforcement?
...the speed limit is designed to be self enforcing given limited police resources. Compliance being largely achieved by the natural environment ... and a change in behavioural patterns over time as drivers recognise the safety and other benefits that come from lower speeds.

Custom24 wrote:@ROG - can you expand on "great idea"? Do you think a 20 limit is appropriate? It is on all the minor roads in Oxford. Only the major radial routes out of the city retain their 30 status.

Great idea for housing estates - as a blanket idea, a one size fits all, no matter what the circumstances, not good

Custom24 wrote:He too said he would like the 20 limit where he lives, which makes me wonder if people want just other people to stick to 20 while driving on their road....

Well yes, haven't we already had this discussion before about 30s in Villages? ISTR Soren posting about enforcing the limit and then the majority caught were villagers. I'm sure the majority want the 20 enforced on everyone other than themselves, because most of the time it's a ridiculously slow speed - and when you really need to slow down it still might be too fast. It's reinforcing the message that you can choose a safe speed just by numbers

We're also back to the point about most people thinking they are good drivers, it's just everyone else that needs controlling

Jont
Yes - spot on, and I think this is how this 20 thing has been allowed to happen in the first place.

Are the people getting caught speeding the ones who supported the reduced speed limit in the first place? If 70% of the locals want a speed limit reduction that might persuade the LA to do reduce the limit but that leaves 30% of the local population who didn't support it. It is among this group we may find the offenders.

As for 20 limits I find myself driving at around this speed or even less in many residential streets. The biggest factor being parked cars on both sides of the road. Of course there are other roads where 20 plus speeds are fine but if the limit is 'self-enforcing' then there doesn't seem to be too much to worry about.

A 20 mph limit also encourages the carriageway to be shared space between pedestrians and vehicles. Again, in many situations this can be appropriate.

Unfotunately blanket limits undermine the case for varying one's speed according to the conditions. 30 mph is, in my view a perfectly resonable blanket maximum in urban areas with 40s and 20s where appropriate.

MGF wrote:As for 20 limits I find myself driving at around this speed or even less in many residential streets. The biggest factor being parked cars on both sides of the road. Of course there are other roads where 20 plus speeds are fine but if the limit is 'self-enforcing' then there doesn't seem to be too much to worry about.

If the correct speed for the hazard was self-enforcing, we wouldn't need 20 limits to be brought in. While some drivers might reduce speeds to that which is appropriate, the number doing so must be insufficient otherwise why else would a speed limit change be needed? The focus is wrong, because again, all the stories are about the number on the stick and blindly obeying that, not driving at an appropriate speed for the hazards and conditions. Sadly the ever growing number of low limits only seems to encourage the line of thinking that you can produce safe driving by blind compliance with said number.

MGF wrote:....blanket limits undermine the case for varying one's speed according to the conditions. 30 mph is, in my view a perfectly reAsonable blanket maximum in urban areas with 40s and 20s where appropriate.

I agree completely with that, but would add that so far as 'undermining the case' is concerned, the NSL is the worst culprit.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

jont wrote:

MGF wrote:As for 20 limits I find myself driving at around this speed or even less in many residential streets. The biggest factor being parked cars on both sides of the road. Of course there are other roads where 20 plus speeds are fine but if the limit is 'self-enforcing' then there doesn't seem to be too much to worry about.

If the correct speed for the hazard was self-enforcing, we wouldn't need 20 limits to be brought in.

My point about 'self-enforcing' is that one shouldn't need to worry about hidden speed traps. I would rather not have to break the speed limit to overtake but must confess to have done it on occassions.

Having said that overtaking in 30 mph areas is quite unusual. Drivers appear to prefer to sit on the tail of the driver in front when they do get the chance to overtake. So long as some people obey the 20 mph limt most others will follow suit.

Custom24 wrote:@Horse - yes thanks, I've updated the original link.

I suppose I could take that as a compliment.....

crr003 wrote:

Custom24 wrote:@Horse - yes thanks, I've updated the original link.

I suppose I could take that as a compliment.....

D'oh! Sorry...

jont wrote,

[quote]If the correct speed for the hazard was self-enforcing, we wouldn't need 20 limits to be brought in. While some drivers might reduce speeds to that which is appropriate, the number doing so must be insufficient otherwise why else would a speed limit change be needed? The focus is wrong, because again, all the stories are about the number on the stick and blindly obeying that, not driving at an appropriate speed for the hazards and conditions. Sadly the ever growing number of low limits only seems to encourage the line of thinking that you can produce safe driving by blind compliance with said number.[/quote]

I couldn't agree more. You cannot trust your life, or anyone elses to a rule. I think this just about sums up the politicaly correct attitude towards road safety that seems so prevelant nowadays.

Take roundabouts for instance. Although it's aesthetically pleasing to have shrubbery and flowers planted on roundabouts, from a safety point of view, it's definitely not. I'm sure that the idea is that making visibility poor drivers will slow down. It's simply not the case.

In Bournemouth they have bus stops positioned just four or five yards from junctions. This makes the sight lines from the junction extremely poor. If the authorities were concerned about safety they would not allow a bus stop so near to a hazard such as a junction.

Nigel ADI
IAM observer