Objecting to Oxon lower limits
Discussion
Oxfordshire County Council plan to lower a range of speed limits in the coming year – the first of these is the A415 between Witney and Abingdon. This road has a poor accident record, but out of 70 accidents, only 13 have “excessive speed” as a contributory factor – and “excessive speed” includes speeds below the limit, but too fast for the conditions.
If you're likely to be affected, please e-mail me at:
mark(AT)freemanchristie.co.uk
head your mail "Oxon 50" and I'll send you a short briefing note.
The deadline is Friday 21 January, so there’s not long.
Bluntly, this is a numbers game, and the more people who object, the more likely we are to get the limit overturned.
Thanks
MMC
If you're likely to be affected, please e-mail me at:
mark(AT)freemanchristie.co.uk
head your mail "Oxon 50" and I'll send you a short briefing note.
The deadline is Friday 21 January, so there’s not long.
Bluntly, this is a numbers game, and the more people who object, the more likely we are to get the limit overturned.
Thanks
MMC
Lets be honest writing letters of complaint gets people absolutely nowhere.
The problem with the emotive subject of speeding is that at some point the anti speed lobby always drag some family out who has suffered a family death as a result of speeding.
At a stroke you are on the back foot.
Every driver in the UK breaks the posted speed limit every single day - if we break that limit by more so what? We all know its a joke - and the first politician who defends this nonsense is always the next one to get caught speeding.
The problem with the emotive subject of speeding is that at some point the anti speed lobby always drag some family out who has suffered a family death as a result of speeding.
At a stroke you are on the back foot.
Every driver in the UK breaks the posted speed limit every single day - if we break that limit by more so what? We all know its a joke - and the first politician who defends this nonsense is always the next one to get caught speeding.
p490kvp said:
Every driver in the UK breaks the posted speed limit every single day - if we break that limit by more so what? We all know its a joke - and the first politician who defends this nonsense is always the next one to get caught speeding.
I don't!, I drive everywhere at 10 MPH below the limit, ( just to be on the safe side!) as I am too scared of losing my Licence (and job), so I am the one who holds you all up every morning/evening coming and going to work!
MMC - no doubt you received the same e-mail as I did from Geoff Barrell. In fact I know you did, because Barrell sent us all the complete list of private e-mail addresses of everyone who had written in objecting to their stupid proposal...
We have been invited to "address the Transport Implementation Committee when they meet at 10 am on Thursday 20 January in County Hall, Oxford." I am intending to do so and hope that others will as well!
My letter in response to the absurd headline in the Witney Gazette was recently published; yes, there might be a need to prevent idiots from killing themselves near Cokethorpe, but here is no need to inflict a blanket limit on the entire road. Particularly since, because it is currently closed as a through road due to sewer repairs, most people will only find out about this proposal after it is too late....
As for the A44, the ludicrous limit beyond Enstone (which itself has a cunningly placed revenue scamera) is set to be extended all the way to the county boundary. WHY? It is a perfectly good highway...??
>> Edited by nickwilcock on Tuesday 11th January 22:02
We have been invited to "address the Transport Implementation Committee when they meet at 10 am on Thursday 20 January in County Hall, Oxford." I am intending to do so and hope that others will as well!
My letter in response to the absurd headline in the Witney Gazette was recently published; yes, there might be a need to prevent idiots from killing themselves near Cokethorpe, but here is no need to inflict a blanket limit on the entire road. Particularly since, because it is currently closed as a through road due to sewer repairs, most people will only find out about this proposal after it is too late....
As for the A44, the ludicrous limit beyond Enstone (which itself has a cunningly placed revenue scamera) is set to be extended all the way to the county boundary. WHY? It is a perfectly good highway...??
>> Edited by nickwilcock on Tuesday 11th January 22:02
james_j said:
All good stuff but when you attend and the person starts talking about road deaths - maybe a family member - what can you say?
You can probably quite safely say, statistically, that the death had nothing to do with speed.
Given our PH type feelings about enthusiastic/high speed driving, it is bound to be extremely difficult to cope in a debating situation when an anti-speed type of person has lost a loved one in a road accident.
Any such individual needs a large measure of understanding and compassion, as emotions will naturally be playing a large part in their functioning.
Even so, one must try to identify the true reasons for their loss, and not allow emotionally charged attitudes to distort a rational understanding of how such tragedies are best avoided in the future.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
Hey don't get me wrong I'm with you on this but it would seem that answering isn't so easy is it?
I mean lots of people have danced around the edges but lets face it when confronted with someone who is obviously going to be emotional about the loss of a loved one saying - "Actually speed probably had nothing to do with it statistically" - isn't really going to win friends..
If we take the speed tinted specs off and accept that, for the majority of the general public, driving a car is a necessary evil I can't see the point in troubling one's self with the speed issue.
As an example - the road we are talking about here during the summer quite frankly when you're at 80, 90 or maybe 140mph on your performance bike - whether the speed limit is 50mph or 60mph does it make a difference??
I mean lots of people have danced around the edges but lets face it when confronted with someone who is obviously going to be emotional about the loss of a loved one saying - "Actually speed probably had nothing to do with it statistically" - isn't really going to win friends..
If we take the speed tinted specs off and accept that, for the majority of the general public, driving a car is a necessary evil I can't see the point in troubling one's self with the speed issue.
As an example - the road we are talking about here during the summer quite frankly when you're at 80, 90 or maybe 140mph on your performance bike - whether the speed limit is 50mph or 60mph does it make a difference??
On a clear road, yes it makes no difference. The problem arises when you get stuck behind the average driver who might have driven at the NSL before, but now drives at 50 because the sign says so. Then you get long queues of traffic driving slower than really necessary, and people getting frustrated. That's when idiots try dodgy overtakes, making the road more dangerous than it was before they lowered the limit! 
Well, predictably they have recommended the blanket speed limit. Virtually all objections have been brushed aside with the comment made in response to one objector:
"Writer is a high-profile and prolific correspondent who continues to object to many speed limit proposals.
These objections are similar in principle to those initially expressed in 2003 to the originally proposed 14 new speed limits. New limits have been restricted to 4 / 5 per year specifically in response to such concerns.
Monitoring of 50 mph speed limits in Oxfordshire indicates, contrary to the views of the objectors, that such limits, especially when supported by additional calming, can be shown to reduce accidents.
National guidelines support our policy of considering 50 limits as route treatments rather than measures to address an unduly local problem. 50 mph limits are proposed only where the residual accidents are diverse and not conducive to more targeted solutions.
Each route has been driven by Taskforce members and representatives from local communities. While unduly open alignments are not suitable for 50 mph limits their ability to reduce speeds in appropriate locations where the alignment cannot be relied upon to do so is a key benefit.
Many of the objections expressed below are worded very similarly to those of Mr MC and many quote OCC data supplied to Mr MC. Responses are from across the UK and all received by email at a similar time so possibly prompted by Mr MC."
So, the main body of objection is seemingly alleged to result from collusion between those who have bothered to respond.
I note the OCC comment "While unduly open alignments are not suitable for 50 mph limits their ability to reduce speeds in appropriate locations where the alignment cannot be relied upon to do so is a key benefit." Clearly they recognise that part of the route is indeed not suitable for their nannying limit; nevertheless they plan to go ahead with this choking of the main route bewteen Witney and Abingdon.
Anyway, thanks to Barrell's clumsiness in informing everyone of the e-mail addresses of their co-objectors, it has become an easier task to co-ordinate response to this report. I urge all objectors to e-mail Barrell as soon as possible if this proposal is to be contested.
>> Edited by nickwilcock on Thursday 13th January 09:25
"Writer is a high-profile and prolific correspondent who continues to object to many speed limit proposals.
These objections are similar in principle to those initially expressed in 2003 to the originally proposed 14 new speed limits. New limits have been restricted to 4 / 5 per year specifically in response to such concerns.
Monitoring of 50 mph speed limits in Oxfordshire indicates, contrary to the views of the objectors, that such limits, especially when supported by additional calming, can be shown to reduce accidents.
National guidelines support our policy of considering 50 limits as route treatments rather than measures to address an unduly local problem. 50 mph limits are proposed only where the residual accidents are diverse and not conducive to more targeted solutions.
Each route has been driven by Taskforce members and representatives from local communities. While unduly open alignments are not suitable for 50 mph limits their ability to reduce speeds in appropriate locations where the alignment cannot be relied upon to do so is a key benefit.
Many of the objections expressed below are worded very similarly to those of Mr MC and many quote OCC data supplied to Mr MC. Responses are from across the UK and all received by email at a similar time so possibly prompted by Mr MC."
So, the main body of objection is seemingly alleged to result from collusion between those who have bothered to respond.
I note the OCC comment "While unduly open alignments are not suitable for 50 mph limits their ability to reduce speeds in appropriate locations where the alignment cannot be relied upon to do so is a key benefit." Clearly they recognise that part of the route is indeed not suitable for their nannying limit; nevertheless they plan to go ahead with this choking of the main route bewteen Witney and Abingdon.
Anyway, thanks to Barrell's clumsiness in informing everyone of the e-mail addresses of their co-objectors, it has become an easier task to co-ordinate response to this report. I urge all objectors to e-mail Barrell as soon as possible if this proposal is to be contested.
>> Edited by nickwilcock on Thursday 13th January 09:25
There seems little doubt that OCC plan to go ahead no matter what - despite the fact that the Executive member for Transport (who calls the shots here) drives a Jag. Perhaps he has a radar detector too...
I can't make the meeting next week as I have a pitch that day, but I have some other ideas up my sleeve.
It appears to me that County has had a bloody nose over their attempts to reduce the county limit (with 14 roads scheduled for 50s last year) and now plans to introduce the whole thing by stealth.
On the A415 the two main blackspots have both been removed by engineering methods, but you know and I know exactly which of the 3Es will get the credit for it.
Anyone up for a "Red Flag Drive" in Oxon soon?
I can't make the meeting next week as I have a pitch that day, but I have some other ideas up my sleeve.
It appears to me that County has had a bloody nose over their attempts to reduce the county limit (with 14 roads scheduled for 50s last year) and now plans to introduce the whole thing by stealth.
On the A415 the two main blackspots have both been removed by engineering methods, but you know and I know exactly which of the 3Es will get the credit for it.
Anyone up for a "Red Flag Drive" in Oxon soon?
We could all meet in the Maybush/Rose Revived 
Not sure whether the rather permanent looking 30 mph limit between the lights being installed at the Yelford cross-roads and Cokethorpe are actually temporary, but shall ring Barrell tomorrow to find out.
Interestingly, there are no road signs near Cokethorpe to indicate any hazard other than a school and a bend. No 'maximum speed advisory' signs or anything else.
So why not try those first, idiot councillors?
Interestingly, there are no road signs near Cokethorpe to indicate any hazard other than a school and a bend. No 'maximum speed advisory' signs or anything else.
So why not try those first, idiot councillors?
It seems to me that one way or another this country is heading for regular gridlocks and extended journey times.
Now that families are so often multi-vehicle mobile and living further and further apart, working further and further from where they live, often with little real hope of controlling that requirement, we have the likelihood of ever greater traffic volumes moving at ever lower average speeds. Predicting a journey time now is far, far more difficult than it was even 10 years ago.
The days when a day visit to the folks at a weekend was likely to be a predictable journey time and 2 hours on the road each way seemed acceptable are disappearing. Journeys that once took 2 hours are now nearer 3 hours on a good day. On an average day, perhaps 3+ hours. On a bad day - well you probably don't get there at all.
But of course people will not wake up to this until the powers-that-be have fully implemented their plans to bring everyone to submission in a life micro-managed by local and national government.
Perhaps we need to demonstrate to those who swallow the official line the reality of what the future is likely to hold. Full numpty mode from a large number of committed people could cause some serious and regular problems - just not sure how to get the message accross as to why such actions are being undertaken.
MMC's Red Flag idea is good BUT I would like to see something (if we have the collective patience!) that regularly extends this over a longer period.
The motorways are almost covered already - the trucks pretty much see to that. I suppose we could go for a 45 or 50mph crawl to make a point.
Dual carriageways should certainly be constrained to 50.
A roads 30. B roads 30 but 15 or less on every bend.
At traffic lights it would be appropriate to slow to 10mph well before reaching the lights if they are on green just in case they change. When waiting on red there is no harm on planning to wait an extra 5 to 10 seconds after the green light to make doubly sure that all other traffic has cleared the junction (or whatever has required the lights to be in place).
Taking a leaf from the manual of our local council, I heartily endorse the idea of concentrating the efferts of various groups into a small geographic area if possible in order to cause maximum inconvenience. Our local council are very adept at that with road maintenance schemes - none for years and then suddenly a rash of them (pot holes left from last time must be big enough now that they cannot be ignored) that will, once again, almost make it impossible to get in and out of the village in any direction.
Now, for us to achieve that level of chaos might require some very careful planning. Our local council, being masters at the game, seem to manage it with no planning at all. Wonder if I could recruit a few of them to the cause?
It would be nice to come up with a way to create maximum inconvenience for the councils themselves but other than 'capturing' any travelling council workers and officers in a rolling traffic calming exercise I am not sure how that might be achieved. Are there any regular Limo routes that could be targeted?
Villages are clearly exposed to unreasonable dangers by through traffic. I think 10-15mph in a suitably low gear would represent a balance between making some progress and being able to stop almost instantaneously without needing hair-trigger reaction times to get to the brake pedal. Likewise audible warnings should be given before any bends which offer any potential for short lines of sight.
One benefit of these activities might be a large reduction in takings for the shaftey camera people. Indeed they would be redundant unless they could rapidly deploy the much hyped tailgating cameras. Of course if they managed to introduce such devices travelling at the front of a queue would be a clear advantage for licence retention purposes.
In the extreme it might be interesting to push for even lower limits than are being suggested - providing they are accompanied by the latest automated cameras of course, so the the locals most regularly using the roads can experience the full benefits that will be accrueing to them.
A policy of short term pain for potentially long term gain. If we don't get the gains then it's bad news but we will be in that state of vehicular rigor soon enough anyway, so little to lose.
IMO.
>> Edited by LongQ on Thursday 13th January 23:26
Now that families are so often multi-vehicle mobile and living further and further apart, working further and further from where they live, often with little real hope of controlling that requirement, we have the likelihood of ever greater traffic volumes moving at ever lower average speeds. Predicting a journey time now is far, far more difficult than it was even 10 years ago.
The days when a day visit to the folks at a weekend was likely to be a predictable journey time and 2 hours on the road each way seemed acceptable are disappearing. Journeys that once took 2 hours are now nearer 3 hours on a good day. On an average day, perhaps 3+ hours. On a bad day - well you probably don't get there at all.
But of course people will not wake up to this until the powers-that-be have fully implemented their plans to bring everyone to submission in a life micro-managed by local and national government.
Perhaps we need to demonstrate to those who swallow the official line the reality of what the future is likely to hold. Full numpty mode from a large number of committed people could cause some serious and regular problems - just not sure how to get the message accross as to why such actions are being undertaken.
MMC's Red Flag idea is good BUT I would like to see something (if we have the collective patience!) that regularly extends this over a longer period.
The motorways are almost covered already - the trucks pretty much see to that. I suppose we could go for a 45 or 50mph crawl to make a point.
Dual carriageways should certainly be constrained to 50.
A roads 30. B roads 30 but 15 or less on every bend.
At traffic lights it would be appropriate to slow to 10mph well before reaching the lights if they are on green just in case they change. When waiting on red there is no harm on planning to wait an extra 5 to 10 seconds after the green light to make doubly sure that all other traffic has cleared the junction (or whatever has required the lights to be in place).
Taking a leaf from the manual of our local council, I heartily endorse the idea of concentrating the efferts of various groups into a small geographic area if possible in order to cause maximum inconvenience. Our local council are very adept at that with road maintenance schemes - none for years and then suddenly a rash of them (pot holes left from last time must be big enough now that they cannot be ignored) that will, once again, almost make it impossible to get in and out of the village in any direction.
Now, for us to achieve that level of chaos might require some very careful planning. Our local council, being masters at the game, seem to manage it with no planning at all. Wonder if I could recruit a few of them to the cause?
It would be nice to come up with a way to create maximum inconvenience for the councils themselves but other than 'capturing' any travelling council workers and officers in a rolling traffic calming exercise I am not sure how that might be achieved. Are there any regular Limo routes that could be targeted?
Villages are clearly exposed to unreasonable dangers by through traffic. I think 10-15mph in a suitably low gear would represent a balance between making some progress and being able to stop almost instantaneously without needing hair-trigger reaction times to get to the brake pedal. Likewise audible warnings should be given before any bends which offer any potential for short lines of sight.
One benefit of these activities might be a large reduction in takings for the shaftey camera people. Indeed they would be redundant unless they could rapidly deploy the much hyped tailgating cameras. Of course if they managed to introduce such devices travelling at the front of a queue would be a clear advantage for licence retention purposes.
In the extreme it might be interesting to push for even lower limits than are being suggested - providing they are accompanied by the latest automated cameras of course, so the the locals most regularly using the roads can experience the full benefits that will be accrueing to them.
A policy of short term pain for potentially long term gain. If we don't get the gains then it's bad news but we will be in that state of vehicular rigor soon enough anyway, so little to lose.
IMO.
>> Edited by LongQ on Thursday 13th January 23:26
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff