Views stay mixed on 20mph limits (From York Press)
Get in touch: send your photos, videos, news & views by texting YORK to 80360 or send an email»
Views stay mixed on 20mph limits
9:54am Wednesday 5th September 2012 in Letters By Readers' letters
I WONDER where the “Twenty’s Plenty” campaigner gets her statistics from?
She claims that you use less fuel at 20mph than 30mph (The Press, August 31), but every article that I have ever read on economical driving recommends changing up to a higher gear as quickly as possible to save fuel.
Congestion and pollution will certainly increase, with every journey taking longer at the lower speed.
Road safety is a matter of concern to us all, but is it really fair to put the onus on the motorist to avoid accidents? We have all seen small children wobbling along the road on cycles, older children weaving all over the road and countless children scooting along with neither a look to left or right as they approach roads, let alone pedestrians.
Then there are the parents walking along chatting while their small children run or scoot along many yards ahead of, or even behind them. Most motorists will see the potential danger and drive accordingly, but surely parents should take responsibility for the safety of their children.
C Page, Gale Lane, Acomb , York.
• QUESTION... If the council has £600,000 to spend on 20mph zones for Bishopthorpe road area of York, how can it afford to do this as it has overspent on its budget by more than a million pounds?
Most people agree 20 mph zones are too slow and can cause some problems, as do 30mph zones. Yes we blame each other road user for our everyday problems but, let’s get a grip on things and stop wasting money.
Make shopping and schools areas 20mph zones, housing estate areas with roads less than 20 foot wide become up to 25mph. These still give you time to deal with any hazard that could occur. Roads that are wider than 20 feet should be kept as 30mph zones because your view around is betters and you have more vision to see what is happening.
However if you are planning well ahead you should not get yourself into any dangerous situation anyway (use three simple rules while you drive: see it, plan for it and act on it; this should be enough to keep everyone safe on our roads).
James Clarkson, Garnet Lane, Tadcaster .
• EVERY man and his dog will have an opinion about the proposed city-wide 20mph speed limit for York’s streets.
For me, there is only one question. Who would you trust to know best what to do – a councillor with their own agenda or a road safety expert with nearly 30 years experience with North Yorkshire’s Police traffic department?
Geoff Robb, Hunters Close, Dunnington .
• I HESITATE to join the discussion about the 20mph limit; after all I travel on a disabled scooter at 6.5mph, with insurance. But I would like to comment on the piece by Coun Anna Semlyen for 20mph and the opposite view by Mike Natt.
I thought Coun Semlyen put forward a very good reason for establishing gradually a 20mph limit in York; her facts and figures were easy to understand.
I then read the item against by Mike Natt, a professional in the field, who I expected to give a good account of the opposite point of view. I was disappointed that Mr Natt’s assertion that pedestrians take less care in a 20mph zone has no statistics in support.
As an accident investigator Mr Natt puts forwards the results of accidents at different speeds, but they must vary with type of car and driver.
I have to agree with Mr Natt that many people do not stick to the green cross code as one can see at York Rail Station, people running across the road rather than using either of the two pedestrian crossings available.
Dennis Barton, Woodthorpe , York.
• IT IS unfortunate that former police officer Mike Natt fails look at the complete picture and recognise all the evidence from across the UK and Europe that 20mph limits work.
He mentions that being thrown over the top of a car at 40mph means that you will more likely survive than being hit forward by a car travelling at 20mph. What he fails to note is that a vehicle travelling at 20mph is many times more likely to stop before it reaches a person. Lower speeds also lead to quieter streets and this is why many Acomb residents over recent years asked for 20mph in their streets. As a result of requests a second phase of 20mph is taking place to the streets off Beckfield Lane.
Readers may query why this publication seeks the views of an ex-councillor, Steve Galloway , whose own views are at odds with both the Lib Dems and their coalition partners the Conservatives nationally, who both support 20mph limits.
Coun Tracey Simpson-Laing , Labour, Acomb ward, City of York Council .
Comments(8)
Indigi
says...
11:18am Wed 5 Sep 12
More likely to question why Cllr TSL thinks anyone is remotely interested in her opinion on anthing. Health, Housing and Social are all in your remit and you fail on each of them. Time to step down. Delivering leaflets is all you're good for TSL
Ichabod76
says...
11:38am Wed 5 Sep 12
Indigi wrote:I don't even think I would take a leaflet from her !
"Readers may query why this publication seeks the views of an ex-councillor, Steve Galloway , whose own views are at odds with both the Lib Dems and their coalition partners the Conservatives nationally, who both support 20mph limits"
More likely to question why Cllr TSL thinks anyone is remotely interested in her opinion on anthing. Health, Housing and Social are all in your remit and you fail on each of them. Time to step down. Delivering leaflets is all you're good for TSL
Buzz Light-year
says...
12:57pm Wed 5 Sep 12
but is it really fair to put the onus on the motorist to avoid accidents? We have all seen small children wobbling along the road on cycles, older children weaving all over the road and countless children scooting along with neither a look to left or right as they approach roads, let alone pedestrians.
Yes. Totally fair. You wouldn't pass a driving test with that attitude.
I agree that we should all be looking out for each other and responsibility should be shared.
But cars can kill. A little kid isn't going to kill a car if he runs into one.
Is it fair to put the onus on chainsaw operators?
How different would your attitude be if you were walking down the road with a running chainsaw?
Ichabod76
says...
3:12pm Wed 5 Sep 12
Buzz Light-year wrote:If a child runs out onto the road it doesn't make it the drivers fault
but is it really fair to put the onus on the motorist to avoid accidents? We have all seen small children wobbling along the road on cycles, older children weaving all over the road and countless children scooting along with neither a look to left or right as they approach roads, let alone pedestrians.
Yes. Totally fair. You wouldn't pass a driving test with that attitude.
I agree that we should all be looking out for each other and responsibility should be shared.
But cars can kill. A little kid isn't going to kill a car if he runs into one.
Is it fair to put the onus on chainsaw operators?
How different would your attitude be if you were walking down the road with a running chainsaw?
its called an accident
The driving test should be much tougher in my opinion
yorkshirelad
says...
4:16pm Wed 5 Sep 12
I agree with Buzz Light-year... Yes it clearly is. The onus is on the more powerful, more dangerous.
Of course children and sometimes adults will run in front of vehicles and the consequences cannot always be avoided.
The question is how much we should compromise speed to try and avoid hitting the child...personally, in residential streets, I think 20mph is a reasonable compromise. 30mph is also a compromise (after all it could be 70!)...but in general, for me, 30mph on main roads and 20mph on side roads or on main roads or near schools seems reasonable. I've seen 20mph (or 30kph) zones around Europe and they seem very widely accepted (and also produce very pleasant neighbourhoods).
It shouldn't be a death sentance for a child to make 'one false move'. We are all subject to human error and speed limits try and reduce the consequences of human error.
Even AndyD
says...
5:19pm Wed 5 Sep 12
Residential streets at 20mph seems reasonable to me.
Scarlet Pimpernel
says...
12:15am Thu 6 Sep 12
Indigi wrote:Totally agree. All she does is play political games; using York as pawn in a 'blame the coalition for the cuts' agenda. She should go, as she does nothing useful for York and it's residents.
"Readers may query why this publication seeks the views of an ex-councillor, Steve Galloway , whose own views are at odds with both the Lib Dems and their coalition partners the Conservatives nationally, who both support 20mph limits" More likely to question why Cllr TSL thinks anyone is remotely interested in her opinion on anthing. Health, Housing and Social are all in your remit and you fail on each of them. Time to step down. Delivering leaflets is all you're good for TSL
Hopefully the government's affordable housing holiday initiative (to be announced tomorrow) will give her an excuse to resign the housing portfolio.
lis0r says...
10:31am Wed 5 Sep 12
I don't think it counts as ones own if someone else buys it.