20mph limits effective

Sir – The context of the debate about the 20mph speed limits is that more than 5,000 pedestrians are killed or seriously injured in Britain each year while the speed limit in residential areas is routinely exceeded on some roads.

The use of 20mph limits has been found to be effective — for example in a 2010 Department for Transport report on a scheme in Portsmouth — and a majority of drivers are in favour of them.

Clearly, the level of compliance of a scheme is determined by public acceptance, and this, in turn, is influenced by the presentation of the schemes in the media.

A few decades ago when drink-driving laws were tightened, there was vocal opposition motivated by commercial concerns, worries about individual liberty and self-interest. Looking back, it is hard to understand how some in the community expected their “one for the road” to be paid for in the misery of victims and their families.

Bearing in mind the evidence, it is also equally hard to understand the opposition of some to the 20mph limits expressed in recent weeks.

Paul Moore, Oxford

Comments(3)

Oxford Stone says...
2:55pm Mon 16 Apr 12

20 limits effective? Very debatable depending on how you want to analyse the stats and the official report. (I'm ignoring newspaper reports; Mail and Telegraph predictably anti...)
Drivers in favour? Not convinced. Which drivers?
Comparison with drink driving? Flawed logic.
How many road fatalities in Oxford in recent years have been caused by high speed? And how many by inattention?
The Council would have had much the same effect by posting signs saying something like "Please Drive Carefully - you share our streets with cyclists and pedestrians". The effect of 20 limits where they are really necessary, eg past shops and restaurants (Summertown, S Parade, Cowley Rd etc) is diluted. There are other, better ways to make Oxford's streets safer.

Sophia says...
7:22am Wed 18 Apr 12

Disgusted by this letter which argues that cars should be allowed to go as fast as 20 mph in built up residential areas, near schools etc. Plainly, fewer people will be hurt in accidents if cars are limited to 10 mph than at 20 mph. Thats basic common sense. So, this writer is suggesting that the convenience of motorists anxious to get somewhere should be treated as more important than the safety of little kiddies, the disabled, the blind. 20mph is way too fast. Save lives and cut it to 10mph and ignore pro speed maniacs like the writer of this letter

Oxford Stone says...
11:40am Wed 18 Apr 12

A painfully emotive response, deliberately misconstruing what I (parent of a "little kiddie" myself) wrote.

A quote from ROSPA sums up my feelings well: "20mph limits are much less effective than 20mph zones and do rely on visual and environmental cues to encourage drivers to adopt lower speeds."

So - yes to 20 mph zones such as I mentioned above and past ALL schools. Yes to more pedestrian crossings and well-designed traffic calming measures. No to a blanket limit that is sadly ignored by bad drivers just as the 30 limit was. If people drive (and ride their bikes!) with common sense, which sadly is a big ask, then they won't be going at more than 20 in most of these places (I'm thinking of the narrow streets between the main arteries out of Oxford) anyway.

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