Readers' letters
Cut rural speeds
The article "Stop using road as a race track" sounds quite typical for many country roads.
The UK has a general 60mph limit for minor roads, not really giving a message to drivers to slow down on country lanes and minor roads when leaving A-roads.
A 50 mph general limit for minor roads could be step in the right direction.
Trunk roads, A-roads and motorways would not be affected by a lower limit.
Some countries already have the metric equilvalent of a 50mph limit, 80km/hr - the Netherlands, Denmark and Switzerland.
Some of the benefits of having a 50mph limit on country roads are:
* Improved safety, especially for pedestrians, cyclists and horse
riders, without highway authorites having to approve individual
roads for lower speed limits
* Accidents and injury severity could reduce
* Assist in protecting the character of the countryside and rural life from high traffic speeds
* Introducing quiet lanes with lower speed limits of 40mph will be made easier by having a lower speed differential
* National parks could benefit because they often have stone walls, narrow roads with sheep, and walkers in groups
* Traffic in a hurry, HGVs and speeding drivers may tend to avoid minor roads and national parks
* Reduced emissions.
Could MPs support an Early Day Motion on this topic, I wonder?
Colin Clarke,
The Crescent,
Stamford Bridge.
11:28am Friday 9th May 2008
Print 
Email this 
CommentPosted by: BL on 1:06pm Fri 9 May 08
[quote]The UK has a general 60mph limit for minor roads, not really giving a message to drivers to slow down on country lanes and minor roads when leaving A-roads.[/quote]
There is no need to give a message to slow down - the majority of people drive at a speed sensible to the conditions. I drive on many B and un-named roads and there is no reason to reduce the speed limit on any of them.
[quote]Assist in protecting the character of the countryside and rural life from high traffic speeds[/quote]
How long exactly have the speed limits been in place? How come it wasn't considered a problem for the last 30+ years (that I know about).
[quote]Introducing quiet lanes with lower speed limits of 40mph will be made easier by having a lower speed differential[/quote]
I don't actually consider this to be a good thing! I have to drive on some roads that have been changed the 30 / 40 zones most days. These areas are on wide open straight b-roads where there is no obvious reason for the restrictions (they used to be 60 zones).
[quote]Traffic in a hurry, HGVs and speeding drivers may tend to avoid minor roads and national parks[/quote]
Speeding drivers would speed regardless of the speed limit - that's what they do. HGV's tend to follow their Sat Navs, so wouldn't care as long as it worked out the shortest or fastest route for them. Traffic in a hurry would not necessarily be affected if (for example) they were trying to avoid the A64 near the hopgrove roundabout on bank holiday then ANY route is faster!
The UK has a general 60mph limit for minor roads, not really giving a message to drivers to slow down on country lanes and minor roads when leaving A-roads.
There is no need to give a message to slow down - the majority of people drive at a speed sensible to the conditions. I drive on many B and un-named roads and there is no reason to reduce the speed limit on any of them.
Assist in protecting the character of the countryside and rural life from high traffic speeds
How long exactly have the speed limits been in place? How come it wasn't considered a problem for the last 30+ years (that I know about).
Introducing quiet lanes with lower speed limits of 40mph will be made easier by having a lower speed differential
I don't actually consider this to be a good thing! I have to drive on some roads that have been changed the 30 / 40 zones most days. These areas are on wide open straight b-roads where there is no obvious reason for the restrictions (they used to be 60 zones).
Traffic in a hurry, HGVs and speeding drivers may tend to avoid minor roads and national parks
Speeding drivers would speed regardless of the speed limit - that's what they do. HGV's tend to follow their Sat Navs, so wouldn't care as long as it worked out the shortest or fastest route for them. Traffic in a hurry would not necessarily be affected if (for example) they were trying to avoid the A64 near the hopgrove roundabout on bank holiday then ANY route is faster!
Posted by: Stevie in Selby, Selby on 1:21pm Fri 9 May 08
It's a nice idea, but I can think of plenty of reasons why it would be impractical, unnecessary and even counter-productive.
1- Most drivers don't go much over 50mph on country roads, even where 60mph is safe. Those that do exceed a safe speed are the same drivers who are unlikely to pay any attention to a lower speed limit. On many rural roads, 50 would still be too fast. As such, this change would make very little difference to the speed of traffic.
2- The cost of assessing roads and signposting them would be colossal. It can't be as simple as "A-road = 60mph, B-road/unclassified = 50mph", because the road type so often doesn't match up with the standard of the road. There are some A-roads where 50mph is a sensible maximum, but there are some B-roads and unclassified roads where it is safe to do 60 or even more.
I've driven in Ireland, where they have a similar system of differential speed limits, and there is no consistency at all in terms of the standard of roads where you can drive at 100km/h or 80km/h. Roads that would be safe for 120km/h have an 80 limit because they are R-roads; other roads where 80 is at the high end of safe have a limit of 100 because they are N-roads. Blanket limits like that just don't work, they are confusing, they are morally inappropriate, and they don't solve the problem.
3- The more different speed limits there are, the more likely drivers are to be confused about what the actual speed limit is. At the moment, we manage perfectly well with the Ø sign meaning 60, and no need for repeater signs. This change would mean that all rural roads would have to have regular repeater signs, whether 50 or 60 limits, which would be very expensive and would be visually obtrusive, spoiling the look of the countryside that we're trying so hard to preserve.
4- Studies have repeatedly shown that the more tightly you control what drivers do, the more they will drive like mindless automata. Drivers know the current NSL limit of 60mph means no more than "this is a rural road", and certainly doesn't mean that 60mph is safe, sensible or even possible. Most of the time, they won't get near 60. By explicitly saying "50mph", drivers assume that it will be safe to drive at 50mph, and are more likely to drive at 50 even where it is not safe to do so.
It's a nice idea, but I can think of plenty of reasons why it would be impractical, unnecessary and even counter-productive.
1- Most drivers don't go much over 50mph on country roads, even where 60mph is safe. Those that do exceed a safe speed are the same drivers who are unlikely to pay any attention to a lower speed limit. On many rural roads, 50 would still be too fast. As such, this change would make very little difference to the speed of traffic.
2- The cost of assessing roads and signposting them would be colossal. It can't be as simple as "A-road = 60mph, B-road/unclassified = 50mph", because the road type so often doesn't match up with the standard of the road. There are some A-roads where 50mph is a sensible maximum, but there are some B-roads and unclassified roads where it is safe to do 60 or even more.
I've driven in Ireland, where they have a similar system of differential speed limits, and there is no consistency at all in terms of the standard of roads where you can drive at 100km/h or 80km/h. Roads that would be safe for 120km/h have an 80 limit because they are R-roads; other roads where 80 is at the high end of safe have a limit of 100 because they are N-roads. Blanket limits like that just don't work, they are confusing, they are morally inappropriate, and they don't solve the problem.
3- The more different speed limits there are, the more likely drivers are to be confused about what the actual speed limit is. At the moment, we manage perfectly well with the Ø sign meaning 60, and no need for repeater signs. This change would mean that all rural roads would have to have regular repeater signs, whether 50 or 60 limits, which would be very expensive and would be visually obtrusive, spoiling the look of the countryside that we're trying so hard to preserve.
4- Studies have repeatedly shown that the more tightly you control what drivers do, the more they will drive like mindless automata. Drivers know the current NSL limit of 60mph means no more than "this is a rural road", and certainly doesn't mean that 60mph is safe, sensible or even possible. Most of the time, they won't get near 60. By explicitly saying "50mph", drivers assume that it will be safe to drive at 50mph, and are more likely to drive at 50 even where it is not safe to do so.
What are these links for?
If you liked this article and would like to share it with others on the web who might be searching for good content we've made it easy for you to do it.
At the bottom of all articles, you'll see links to six sites. These sites - commonly called 'social bookmark' or 'social news' sites - have large communities of web users who share and rate interesting, useful and fun things on the web.
Clicking the links will automatically add the address of the story you are reading to one of these sites, letting you share it with others. Each site will ask you to register to share stories. Registration is free and once a member, you can store, recommend and search for stories that interest you.
More on Digg
More on del.icio.us
More on Furl
More on reddit
More on NowPublic/
More on Yahoo!
