Why 20mph limit is ‘totally stupid’...
I WOULD like to give my reasons why I think a 20mph speed limit in Worthing’s residential roads is totally stupid.
First, may I give an example. There is more risk of an accident on the A259 between Steyne Gardens and the Old Half Brick pub, which will remain at 30mph than here where I live in Alinora Crescent.
Secondly, drivers not being used to driving at such a slow speed will have their eyes more on the speedo than on the road.
The government are planning to increase the 70mph limit on motorways to 80mph and the reasons they have given is that modern cars are more sophisticated so can stop that much quicker than they could 20 or 30 years ago; surely that must apply to town driving also?
I think if this 20mph is passed, there will be more accidents because people will take more chances crossing the road at unauthorised areas instead of using pedestrian crossings.
Stan Mayle
Alinora Crecent
Goring
Email to a friend
Print this page
Looking for...
Featured advertisers
Jobs
Search for a job
Motors
Search for a car
Property
Search for a house
Weather for Worthing
Saturday 26 May 2012
Today
Sunny
Temperature: 13 C to 23 C
Wind Speed: 23 mph
Wind direction: East
Tomorrow
Sunny
Temperature: 11 C to 20 C
Wind Speed: 14 mph
Wind direction: South east
Comments
There are 13 comments to this article
Page 1 of 1
20splenty
Saturday, February 11, 2012 at 07:22 PM@12 Ban mobile phone use for pedestrians?? And people are complaining that 20mph limits would be difficult to enforce!!! What people seem to be forgetting when complaining about pedestrians not concentrating is that, unlike a driver, they are not in charge of over a tonne of metal in a public place with ten times the kinetic energy of a machine gun bullet. Someone making a journey by foot or by bike poses no significant risk to others and (generally!) emits no harmful pollution or noise. And why should cyclists be called idiots for daring to change lanes or join a roundabout without stopping? - things all road users do all the time! As for obesity - more than one in four of our children are overweight basically because they're cooped up indoors or driven round in cars all the time. Children need safe spaces to run, cycle, and play with friends everyday - just like most of the older adults reading this did when they grew up. Instead most have to wait till the weekend just to be driven to a playground for an hour or two.
frankly
Saturday, February 11, 2012 at 03:57 PMThink we should ban the use of mobile phones for both pedestrians,and of course drivers. I will concede 20s Plenty`s point @6 regarding thicker pillars that impair vision,I often have to shift position in the seat whilst negotiating roundabouts in my old Zaffira, just to spot the idiot cyclists that fail to stop at roundabouts, or who fail to stay in their lane?. Also @6 I querry the mention of obesity 20s Plenty? If you are not Bob he must be closely allied to this campaign?
20splenty
Saturday, February 11, 2012 at 11:09 AMPS OEM = Original Equipment Manufacturer - as it happens in this instance, Ford. And the 2012 Ford Fiesta is 1150kg, versus the 2002 Ford Fiesta at 1100kg. So rather than "plummeting down" in the last ten years, weight has stayed pretty much constant and uses much the same amount of steel alloy etc.
20splenty
Friday, February 10, 2012 at 07:43 PM@8 Yes, I have some experience of the "motor trade" - Sixteen years working in R&D for a major OEM. "please pull up the stats for the Ford Fiesta, over 10 years the weight has come plummeting down". OK then: 1978 Fiesta: 715kg; 1998 Fiesta: 920kg; 2002 Fiesta: 1100kg. Check the plot at the end of this link for other models' weight increase: http:www.thatcham.orgresearchpdfsrepfin1.3.pdf - As you yourself said "Please please please stop using factually incorrect statements to try and sway your argument"!
JimDavis
Friday, February 10, 2012 at 02:30 PMPending Moderation
Scrittipollitti
Friday, February 10, 2012 at 02:03 PM@6 - Have much experience of the motor building trade do we, it appears not. "Modern cars certainly have better brakes and crumple zones (I would debate visibility - they have much thicker pillars in order to protect their occupants and often have worse blind spots than older designs)." Not true, you will actually find that all modern motor vehicles have wider viewing angles and better overall visibility for the driver over all previous models (its part and parcel of the regs they must follow in designing and building a road worthy car that they cannot reduce overall viewing angles for the driver). " braking later, leaving less stopping distance (have you never heard of risk compensation?)" I have, please take note of the highway code in which stopping distances are still the same as they were 10 or 20 years ago, what is required here is enforcement of current rules, rather than spending money on new rules. "modern cars are much bigger and heavier", again, not true, please pull up the stats for the Ford Fiesta, over 10 years the weight has come plummeting down due to new alloy usage, big cars are bigger, but if you compare like for like, weights have actually reduced across the board. Please please please stop using factually incorrect statements to try and sway your argument, your stats can be manipulated to show whatever you want them to and your statements regarding modern motor vehicles appear to have no factual basis.
JimDavis
Friday, February 10, 2012 at 01:35 PM30kmh (18mph) speed limits on resdiential roads has been the default in many European countries for years - the same European countries that have the safest roads [for all users] in the World and are very civilised places to walk and cycle. We have the worst road safety record for pedestrians and cyclists in Western Europe. I cannot believe we are still having this debate to curtail someones right to drive like an idiot where people are. Last November, a car flipped and trapped a girl on Loxwood Avenue (which certainly would become 20mph). That could only have been achieved with high speed and a blatant disregard for others. Of course, that didn't stop people commenting here that had the teachers not been on strike, the girl wouldn't have been there in the first place which is probably the most stupid thing ever written. If anything, 20mph should be put in place in line with cutting the rat runs such as Wiston Avenue so we don't have to witness the current situation of people driving around Worthing as if they are auditioning for the Dukes of Hazard. Where I live near the Dominion Road roundabout, the catastrophically bored teenagers doing skid turns in their 'hot hatches' is a real treat to the eye most evenings. frankly - We went wrong by creating a ridiculous situation where the car is regarded as essential for everything
20splenty
Friday, February 10, 2012 at 10:26 AM@Scrittipolitti Modern cars certainly have better brakes and crumple zones (I would debate visibility - they have much thicker pillars in order to protect their occupants and often have worse blind spots than older designs). You could have added road holding and cornering to your list of improvements. BUT modern drivers 'absorb' all these engineering improvements by driving faster, braking later, leaving less stopping distance (have you never heard of risk compensation?), and modern cars are much bigger and heavier. The end result for cyclists and pedestrians is the road environment is more dangerous than ever. Hence the most common external cause of death for children is being run down by a car. So we have a choice, either we lock our children away and scare pedestrians and cyclists off the road or into cars (and end up obese and gridlocked) OR we all slow down a bit, allow all those wonderful engineering improvements to do their job, and share our streets so that people are safe to walk cycle scoot skateboard play outside (and end up happier, healthier, and with less congestion).
jakiB
Friday, February 10, 2012 at 09:26 AMWell said Stan - speed limits are fine as they are.
Joby
Friday, February 10, 2012 at 09:01 AM@ 3 ....Ah yes ...old chap ! More or less two-way traffic in a straight line from the Railway Station to the Pier if I remember correctly. Damned scary walk for pedestrians though when those Southdown coaches and Hall and Co trucks had to pass each other in narrow spots.
frankly
Friday, February 10, 2012 at 01:16 AMI still repeat NOT enforcible,therefore meaningless regulation, As regard the current pedestrianised streets that permit limited vehicle access,absolutely asking for traffic accidents. Lets return to the Worthing of the 1960s. A nice peaceful sleepy little old seaside town,with a bustling, thriving Town Centre. No parking restrictions to speak of,and a policeman easily found walking on his beat. Where did it all go wrong?
Scrittipollitti
Thursday, February 9, 2012 at 12:32 PM@1 - Actually the letter is factually correct for both passengers and pedestrians, you will note that cars are no longer made of iron or girders, crumple zones not only offer better protection for the passengers of cars but for any unlucky pedestrian hit by them, alloys are softer, crumple zones absorb more of the energy of impact, anti lock brakes mean less (or no) skidding actually increasing the rate of deceleration therefore reducing the impact speed (20's plenty lot, take note please) and larger, more open windscreens and overall window sizes provide a much larger viewing angle and reduces the size of rear blind spots, so whilst our bodies have not got more sophisticated the build of automobiles nowadays actually improves the chances of survival for both passengers and pedestrians.
iloveworthing
Thursday, February 9, 2012 at 11:27 AMI fully support the campaign. Cars have got more sophisticated, protecting their occupants, but we as people are still as likely to be killed or seriously injured being hit at 30+ mph as we were 20 or 30 years ago. Our bodies have not got more sophisticated to withstand an impact. I walk with my children regularly all over Worthing, and most roads do not have pedestrian crossings on them, so we cross at a sensible place but I am often scared for my children's safety because of the speed and volume of traffic. If the traffic slowed down a bit, stopping distances would be increased and there would be more time to cross the road as well as less collisions.
Page 1 of 1
Your view
Please sign in to be able to comment on this story.