Oxfordshire are at it again - 7 new 50mph limits
Discussion
Well, no surprises here chaps. The Oxon 50 limit bandwagon rolls on - but not too fast, 'cos speed kills. There are now plans for seven new 50mph limits on these roads:
B4027 – A40 at Forest Hill to Islip
A329 – Milton Common to the A418 at Thame
B4012 – Thame to the A40 Tetsworth
B4011 – Ambrosden junction to the county boundary with Bucks
B4437 – Charlbury to Grims Dyke Farm near the A44
A361 – Bradwell Grove to Lechlade
A417 – Faringdon to East Challow
It's a little naughty in my view that the period for objections runs over Christmas and finishes on January 12th...
These limits will, in my view, increase tailgating, frustration overtakes and aggression. They will do nothing to lower speeds either (Circular Roads 1/80 and 1/93). Also, on roads where 50s have been imposed, crashes have not fallen...
If anyone wants to help me object and you live in Oxon or drive here regularly, please get in touch. You can e-mail me through the ABD website or at mark (at) freemanchristie (dot) co (dot) uk and I'll send you more details. Failing that, drop a note to:
Principal Engineer
Road Safety / Traffic Engineering
Oxfordshire County Council
Speedwell House
Speedwell Street
Oxford OX1 1NE
Ideally, copy David Robertson, Executive Member for Transport in at the same address.
Ah, the irony of that address... but it's real, promise.
I started writing a letter to the Oxford Times on Sunday night. I was writing about these plans for seven new 50mph limits. Since I started writing another three people have died on the county's roads - one on the A420 last evening, and then two on the A40 between Burford and Minster Lovell. Oxon is now running at 64 fatalities this year - 24 higher than last. This is despite more 20, 30, 40 and 50 mph limits, more cameras, more calming, more signs.
In my view, there needs to be an enquiry about these deaths and why there are so many this year. I'd say 24 in a year is a bit more than a 'blip'...
B4027 – A40 at Forest Hill to Islip
A329 – Milton Common to the A418 at Thame
B4012 – Thame to the A40 Tetsworth
B4011 – Ambrosden junction to the county boundary with Bucks
B4437 – Charlbury to Grims Dyke Farm near the A44
A361 – Bradwell Grove to Lechlade
A417 – Faringdon to East Challow
It's a little naughty in my view that the period for objections runs over Christmas and finishes on January 12th...
These limits will, in my view, increase tailgating, frustration overtakes and aggression. They will do nothing to lower speeds either (Circular Roads 1/80 and 1/93). Also, on roads where 50s have been imposed, crashes have not fallen...
If anyone wants to help me object and you live in Oxon or drive here regularly, please get in touch. You can e-mail me through the ABD website or at mark (at) freemanchristie (dot) co (dot) uk and I'll send you more details. Failing that, drop a note to:
Principal Engineer
Road Safety / Traffic Engineering
Oxfordshire County Council
Speedwell House
Speedwell Street
Oxford OX1 1NE
Ideally, copy David Robertson, Executive Member for Transport in at the same address.
Ah, the irony of that address... but it's real, promise.
I started writing a letter to the Oxford Times on Sunday night. I was writing about these plans for seven new 50mph limits. Since I started writing another three people have died on the county's roads - one on the A420 last evening, and then two on the A40 between Burford and Minster Lovell. Oxon is now running at 64 fatalities this year - 24 higher than last. This is despite more 20, 30, 40 and 50 mph limits, more cameras, more calming, more signs.
In my view, there needs to be an enquiry about these deaths and why there are so many this year. I'd say 24 in a year is a bit more than a 'blip'...
turbobloke said:
Amazed to read that Gatspoxfordshire has seen any rise at all in road fataities, shirley the large number of cameras confers countywide protection? They should claim a refund (and share it between local motorists and those travelling through).
Letter will be sent.
Letter will be sent.
Nice one Turboster. You'd think that with the new calming schemes, the new 50s, 40s 30s and 20s that it would be safe for toddlers everywhere, wouldn't you? But it certainly doesn't look that way this year - 24 more deaths than 2005, and in 2005 40 people died. What the hell is going on?
Why not ask Oxfordshire Scamera Pratnerships?
You could ask them to confirm that they have been deploying this year..... As clearly with accidents on the increase there must be something wrong. Then ask them to confirm how many more times they deployed last year than this year.......
You could ask them to confirm that they have been deploying this year..... As clearly with accidents on the increase there must be something wrong. Then ask them to confirm how many more times they deployed last year than this year.......
Yes I'd object to this as the A417 is on my commute. Though to be honest it's rare to actually drive along at more than 50 due to the number of slow drivers that seem to populate it 
The A361 from Lechlade to Burford is wide and open in places, and I can't see any reason for that to have a 50 limit
All this just makes less people respect speed limits in general, including the more sensible limits. It'll also lead to more 'autopilot' driving as people begin to switch off while being forced to drive at an unnatural speed on an otherwise open road.
The A361 from Lechlade to Burford is wide and open in places, and I can't see any reason for that to have a 50 limit
All this just makes less people respect speed limits in general, including the more sensible limits. It'll also lead to more 'autopilot' driving as people begin to switch off while being forced to drive at an unnatural speed on an otherwise open road.
That bit of the B4012 is a popular biking road, and most cars don't manage 60 down it today as it's narrow and twisty. But at least there's very few places to hide a van where you wouldn't see it, so in practice that limit won't make much difference.
Isn't that Burford/Lechlade section of the A417 really, really wide and safe though ?
Just noticed the B4011 in there as well- how much of that is affected, as that's another very popular road...
Isn't that Burford/Lechlade section of the A417 really, really wide and safe though ?
Just noticed the B4011 in there as well- how much of that is affected, as that's another very popular road...
Edited by outnumbered on Tuesday 19th December 18:31
puggit said:
I live within 1/2 mile of Oxon borders - so I'm happy to object 
Excellent! Address as above. If you drop me an e-mail address I can send you the briefing notes from last time this happened, but it's VITAL that you write in your own words or the council will dismiss the objection:
This is what the Councillors concerned recevied:
"4. There have been 19 objections, most were to proposals for the A415 except for 2 who objected to all the proposals. It is likely that all except 3 of these objections have been prompted by a driver’s national lobby group as at least 8 respondees, and probably several more, are from outside Oxfordshire with many of the comments following an identical or very similar pattern. The content and pattern of objections are comparable to those received to the original proposals which resulted in the number of new 50 mph limits being restricted to 4 or 5 per year."
MMC said:
puggit said:
I live within 1/2 mile of Oxon borders - so I'm happy to object
Excellent! Address as above. If you drop me an e-mail address I can send you the briefing notes from last time this happened, but it's VITAL that you write in your own words or the council will dismiss the objection:
This is what the Councillors concerned recevied:
"4. There have been 19 objections, most were to proposals for the A415 except for 2 who objected to all the proposals. It is likely that all except 3 of these objections have been prompted by a driver’s national lobby group as at least 8 respondees, and probably several more, are from outside Oxfordshire with many of the comments following an identical or very similar pattern. The content and pattern of objections are comparable to those received to the original proposals which resulted in the number of new 50 mph limits being restricted to 4 or 5 per year."
Objection not sustained. WTF should it matter where or who the objections come from? The essential validity (or lack of it) of the objectors' points, as expounded through the rational arguments in their communications, is ALL that should concern these secondraters and all that should be considered.
This is a clear enough sign - if one was needed - that they have NO RATIONAL BASIS for dismissing the objections, and so effectively resort to ad hominem attacks on the objectors and complainants, their modes of communication and their source of information.
So drivers' groups object - big surprise - and organise a mass objection. If there's a mass voting campaign AGAINST these councillors at the next local elections, orchestrated by drivers' groups, will that not be a valid democratic ejection of muppetry? Can they claim immunity from organised block voting then? Is it any less valid or effective? Therefore is organised objection writing any less valid? Nope. Of course not.
What a weak ineffectual paragraph that is, a clear self-condemnation of gross wnakerism in poxfordshire councilloration.
Edited by turbobloke on Tuesday 19th December 19:31
Feck that.
Ask them on what basis they have determined that all the letters have come from one source. If not from one source then under what rules have they determined they are to be discounted. Then remind them that a Judicial Review can be obtained in terms of their procedures to ensure they correctly make a decision.
Ask them on what basis they have determined that all the letters have come from one source. If not from one source then under what rules have they determined they are to be discounted. Then remind them that a Judicial Review can be obtained in terms of their procedures to ensure they correctly make a decision.
MMC said:
I started writing a letter to the Oxford Times on Sunday night. I was writing about these plans for seven new 50mph limits. Since I started writing another three people have died on the county's roads - one on the A420 last evening, and then two on the A40 between Burford and Minster Lovell. Oxon is now running at 64 fatalities this year - 24 higher than last. This is despite more 20, 30, 40 and 50 mph limits, more cameras, more calming, more signs.
In my view, there needs to be an enquiry about these deaths and why there are so many this year. I'd say 24 in a year is a bit more than a 'blip'...
In my view, there needs to be an enquiry about these deaths and why there are so many this year. I'd say 24 in a year is a bit more than a 'blip'...
I travel the A40 from Cheltenham to Witney occasionally and have noticed alot of white Gatso markings, so presumably there used to be alot of Gatsos along that stretch. If I recall correctly though, there is still a Gatso between Burford and Minster Lovell? I wonder why it didn't prevent the two fatalities?
I think the problem with lowering the limits is that it has nothing to do with the problem! I wonder how many of those fatalities happened at T junctions where a waiting driver pulled out without taking sufficient observation, particularly when turning left but only looking right, then straight out into the path of a car overtaking a driver that's causing a tailback.
To lower the limits and exasperate the situation is lunacy. A short solid white line and single traffic island would prevent cars overtaking across the face of junctions, and perhaps a "look both ways" sign would help educate those pulling out. I'm sure that would achieve at least something positive, unlike lowering the limit.
1) Do the Councillors drive?
2) Do they drive over the roads in question?
3) Have they expressed any view regarding speed on those roads or speeding generally?
If the answer to the last question is "yes" then complain to the Standards Board for England on the (previously well upheld by them) basis that councillors who have expressed a view on any issue must be excluded from the council chamber when that issue is discussed, or that, under the Common Law (as the SBfE's chairman, Sir Anthony Holland, and his chief executive, David Prince have tried to argue), they have committed the offence of "predetermination".
If you get short thrift from the SBfE, write to Christopher Booker at the Sunday Telegraph ... he'll be very pleased to hear from you. Actually, write to him regardless of the reply you receive.
Streaky
2) Do they drive over the roads in question?
3) Have they expressed any view regarding speed on those roads or speeding generally?
If the answer to the last question is "yes" then complain to the Standards Board for England on the (previously well upheld by them) basis that councillors who have expressed a view on any issue must be excluded from the council chamber when that issue is discussed, or that, under the Common Law (as the SBfE's chairman, Sir Anthony Holland, and his chief executive, David Prince have tried to argue), they have committed the offence of "predetermination".
If you get short thrift from the SBfE, write to Christopher Booker at the Sunday Telegraph ... he'll be very pleased to hear from you. Actually, write to him regardless of the reply you receive.
Streaky
Just as a complete aside but illustrative of this lunacy, weekend or two back we had multiple fatalities in a single vehicle incident against a tree, very messy, oh dear very messy. :yeeuuch:
It was in the approach to one of the local scamp enforcement sites.
Still under investigation but regardless of cause the speed of impact was :expletive deleted: quick.
And the location was the first bend in a DC double bend which can be taken comfortably at NSL. I'll not say how fast it can be taken obviously.
The scamp location is after the second bend, first point the van comes into view is just at the moment the vehicle is most unsettled in the change from first to second bend.
The whole site was resurfaced with a compound SMA which is actually MORE slippery than the surface it replaced.
And of course it happened in the dark and in conditions when the scamps don't operate.
Of course there now will be calls to reduce the limit, despite witness evidence suggesting that the earlier 50 limits hadn't done anything to dissuade the driving like a prat element in this occasion.
Sadly therefore I conclude, safety? My arse.
It was in the approach to one of the local scamp enforcement sites.
Still under investigation but regardless of cause the speed of impact was :expletive deleted: quick.
And the location was the first bend in a DC double bend which can be taken comfortably at NSL. I'll not say how fast it can be taken obviously.
The scamp location is after the second bend, first point the van comes into view is just at the moment the vehicle is most unsettled in the change from first to second bend.
The whole site was resurfaced with a compound SMA which is actually MORE slippery than the surface it replaced.
And of course it happened in the dark and in conditions when the scamps don't operate.
Of course there now will be calls to reduce the limit, despite witness evidence suggesting that the earlier 50 limits hadn't done anything to dissuade the driving like a prat element in this occasion.
Sadly therefore I conclude, safety? My arse.
Flat in Fifth said:
Just as a complete aside but illustrative of this lunacy, weekend or two back we had multiple fatalities in a single vehicle incident against a tree, very messy, oh dear very messy. :yeeuuch:
It was in the approach to one of the local scamp enforcement sites.
Still under investigation but regardless of cause the speed of impact was :expletive deleted: quick.
And the location was the first bend in a DC double bend which can be taken comfortably at NSL. I'll not say how fast it can be taken obviously.
The scamp location is after the second bend, first point the van comes into view is just at the moment the vehicle is most unsettled in the change from first to second bend.
The whole site was resurfaced with a compound SMA which is actually MORE slippery than the surface it replaced.
And of course it happened in the dark and in conditions when the scamps don't operate.
Of course there now will be calls to reduce the limit, despite witness evidence suggesting that the earlier 50 limits hadn't done anything to dissuade the driving like a prat element in this occasion.
Sadly therefore I conclude, safety? My arse.
It was in the approach to one of the local scamp enforcement sites.
Still under investigation but regardless of cause the speed of impact was :expletive deleted: quick.
And the location was the first bend in a DC double bend which can be taken comfortably at NSL. I'll not say how fast it can be taken obviously.
The scamp location is after the second bend, first point the van comes into view is just at the moment the vehicle is most unsettled in the change from first to second bend.
The whole site was resurfaced with a compound SMA which is actually MORE slippery than the surface it replaced.
And of course it happened in the dark and in conditions when the scamps don't operate.
Of course there now will be calls to reduce the limit, despite witness evidence suggesting that the earlier 50 limits hadn't done anything to dissuade the driving like a prat element in this occasion.
Sadly therefore I conclude, safety? My arse.
The thing that I find odd about the reduction in limits from 60 to 50 is that this can only, by definition, address the KSIs that were caused by driving between 50 and 60. Anyone exceeding the 60 limit will continue to exceed the 50 limit. Yet I don't recall ever seeing any analysis of accidents that demonstrates an understanding of this logic.
OK, I realise that NSL still has a subtly different meaning to 50. Some may bend the 60 limit but a 50 limit is usually adhered to by the majority. Even so, changing a limit does not change attitudes. So how many KSIs in Oxon were caused by driving at a speed between 50 and 60? None? So the speed limits will have no effect. Oh, is that what we've seen in this year's KSIs figures? Ostrich time again by the council, then. Or more like $$$$$ blinding them from the truth.
MMC said:
Just a gentle bump, hoping that a few of you kind gentlemen and ladies will have a few minutes spare over Christmas/New Year. You could always spend ten of 'em knocking out a quick e-mail to Oxfordshire County Council... 
And a reminder that when the council elections come up: who to campaign against! Remember that independent councillors are not unheard of: if any pistonhead thinks they can do a better job (and I bet they can!!). Just imagine what a majority pistonhead council could achieve in Oxfordshire - you get to instruct the chief constable.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff