Friday 11th December 2009

20mph Zones Cut Injuries By 40 Per Cent

Study finds that residential 20mph zones dramatically reduce road casualties

---

Areas with 20mph speed limits cut road casualties by more than 40 per cent, a study has found.

The report by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (no, we can't work out what tropical diseases have to do with road deaths either) has found that, after adjusting for a general reduction in road injuries, the use of 20mph zones uin urban areas cut casualties by 41.9 per cent.

The data, which compared road collisions, injuries and deaths in London between 1986 and 2006 with speed limits on roads, also showed that the biggest drop in casualties came from children below the age of 11.

Study leader Chris Grundy says that the report backs up the government's plans to introduce blanket 20mph zones for residential areas in some London boroughs.

"This evidence supports the rationale for 20mph zones, not just in major cities in Britain, but also in similar metropolitan areas elsewhere," says Grundy. "Indeed, even within London there is a case for extending the currently limited provision of such zones to other high casualty roads."

[jamesson]

I agree with 20mph zones in certain areas and at certain times (in the vicinity of schools is the obvious one) but dread the day it's a blanket limit in urban areas, as is mooted.

[wab172uk]

Teaching the Green Cross Code to kids would surely save 100% lifes, as they'd know to Stop, Look, and listen.

Or am I been a bit thick?

Tackle the cause of pedestrian deaths, rather than blame the car driver.

Edited by wab172uk on Friday 11th December 13:27

[jamesson]

wab172uk said:

Teaching the Green Cross Code to kids would surely save 100% lifes, as they'd know to Stop, Look, and listen.

Or am I been a bit thick?

You're not, but children often are.

[Tony*T3]

jamesson said:

I agree with 20mph zones in certain areas and at certain times (in the vicinity of schools is the obvious one) but dread the day it's a blanket limit in urban areas, as is mooted.

The problem with the 30mph limit is most people exceed it by at least 10-20%. Its almost like its a reverse limit - 30mph is the minimum speed. Anyone doing 25mph in a 30 limit is treated like an idiot by all other drivers. Yet it seems absolutly acceptable to be doing 35mph in a 30 zone. Only one of these examples is agaianst the law, yet its that one that seems the accepted.

Most cars go through our village at around 40mph. Is being 25% over the maximum speed limit actually acceptable? Seems to be. Rarely even see the police enforce these limits.

I think if people treated the 30mph limit with bit more respect, there wouldnt be a need to impose a 20mph limit. Even lorries and buses seem to exceed the 30 with little thought.

[the Fantom]

jamesson said:

I agree with 20mph zones in certain areas and at certain times (in the vicinity of schools is the obvious one) but dread the day it's a blanket limit in urban areas, as is mooted.

Yes, quite agree. If everyone would drive appropriately and observe 20mph in these zones and 30mph in the appropriate zones then there would be no need for a blanket reduction in limit to 30mph. Unfortunately idiots who don't drive responsibly curse the rest of us with increasingly draconian speed limits, speed-limit enforcement and traffic-calming measures.

[Road Pest]

0 mph would stop 100% of accidents.

[Ed]

Tony*T3 said:

Most cars go through our village at around 40mph. Is being 25% over the maximum speed limit actually acceptable? Seems to be. Rarely even see the police enforce these limits. I think if people treated the 30mph limit with bit more respect, there wouldnt be a need to impose a 20mph limit. Even lorries and buses seem to exceed the 30 with little thought.

Depends on context...threading between narrow streets, outside the pub at boozing time, or running through the expanse of open high visability moorland on the village outskirts? This is the problem with arbitrary limits.


When the local council impose limits on roads formerly designated at twice that speed, is it any surprise the locals drive to the conditions not the limits.

Earl Spencer didn't like the noise from the NSL road outside his Althorpe estate (must have really affected him while he lived in South Africa) so he leant on the local council who compliantly banged in about 5 miles of 40mph limit overnight. If you do 40mph on that road you are at considerably higher risk of being back-ended.

Edited by Ed on Friday 11th December 13:47

[OatSy]

Stop the under 11 year olds from playing in the street!

[DanGT]

The speed limit is set be the amount of complants the local council get. Some are ok and some are just wrong. What is done is set by how much it costs, paint and road sighns being less expensive. Old people with money seem to have the lowest speed limits? I can go past a school at 40mph then down a country road with the same limit.

[phlea]

OatSy said:

Stop the under 11 year olds from playing in the street!

Interesting point that, perhaps today's parental paranoia and consequent reduction in the numbers of under 11s allowed out unsupervised these days could account for some of the data variation?

[jazzyjeff]

So the number of injuries is cut? So what? - Tell us something we don't know

What the report doesn't give is the statistics for the number of INCIDENTS. I bet they haven't fallen at all. All this report gives is pedestrians the confidence that they can wilfully wander into the road in front of traffic and cause mayhem, but probably won't get hurt (much)

Three words - GREEN CROSS CODE

JJ

[Johnpidge]

wab172uk said:

Teaching the Green Cross Code to kids would surely save 100% lifes, as they'd know to Stop, Look, and listen.

Or am I been a bit thick?

Tackle the cause of pedestrian deaths, rather than blame the car driver.

Edited by wab172uk on Friday 11th December 13:27

Spot on - how many times have I had to stop with some spotty urchin walking accross the Road infront of me with a mobile phone superglued to their ear looking the wrong way - with a pedestrian crossing twenty feet away. Drivers not using mobiles - pedestrians could be a little more aware much of the time - and then you get pedestrianised areas pushing people and cars together in "raised" areas - we were taught the Green Cross Code at School and some common sense! Oh I've got an idea lets all drive round at 5mph with a person waving a red flag infront of the car to warn pedestrians - oh we did that over a hundred years ago - progress!

[dandarez]

PH quote
'The report by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (no, we can't work out what tropical diseases have to do with road deaths either)'

It's reported in the BMJ (British 'Medical' Journal)
...get it?

'What' is that illustration under the 20 sign, is it a snail?
Oh my god, HOW much did the council pay for that!?

Simpletons.

Edited by dandarez on Friday 11th December 14:49

[RichB]

the Fantom said:

jamesson said:

I agree with 20mph zones in certain areas and at certain times (in the vicinity of schools is the obvious one) but dread the day it's a blanket limit in urban areas, as is mooted.

Yes, quite agree. If everyone would drive appropriately and observe 20mph in these zones and 30mph in the appropriate zones then there would be no need for a blanket reduction in limit to 30mph. Unfortunately idiots who don't drive responsibly curse the rest of us with increasingly draconian speed limits, speed-limit enforcement and traffic-calming measures.

Indeed, someone mentioned buses and lorries but in my area there's a road with a 30 limit which even the police cars consistently drive along at 35...

[ScoobieWRX]

Baring in mind all UKGOV's technical advisors have refused to work for them any longer in case they get sacked for not bending over it may as well have been the London School of Origami and Thai Massage that came up with this report.

What a pile of poo!!

[LukeBird]

Road Pest said:

0 mph would stop 100% of accidents.

Indeed.

Conversely, I wonder what the (if any?) change in emissions there is?

[itiejim]

What is this place coming to

[anonymous-user]

dandarez said:

PH quote
'The report by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (no, we can't work out what tropical diseases have to do with road deaths either)'

It's reported in the BMJ (British 'Medical' Journal)
...get it?

'What' is that illustration under the 20 sign, is it a snail?
Oh my god, HOW much did the council pay for that!?

Simpletons.

Edited by dandarez on Friday 11th December 14:49

Those signs designed by children cost thousands.

Edited by DR10 on Friday 11th December 16:47

[rogerg]

I think we are forgetting a simple rule.... 20mph speed limits are in force because of drivers who don't care about the way they drive or the speed they drive at. We are playing into the hands of the Government and groups that care nothing for driving. My question is this.............. we need to concentrate on BAD DRIVING.... nothing more. This will never happen because there are too many people that think that a drivers licence is all they need and that casualties are something that is a fact of life. WRONG!!!!!!!!!! The Government and other groups are trying to stop motoring by way of targetting the minority of drivers who think that the law is for somebody else and not them.. WAKE UP PEOPLE.... the law DOES apply to you and the more it is flouted, the more restrictions will be applied, so WAKE UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Police think this is marvellous....I'm sure you've met one... don't pleay into their hands....... Drive in a sensible manner in a built up area...........Lads......... put it back in your pants!!......... points make prizes....and points make a BAN!!!!!!!!

[benweston]

some of you lot need to get a grip, driving at 20mph around built up areas makes how much difference to your day? none thats how much. i work for a local council and as a result i drive around the city center and housing estates all day and driving at 20mph makes no difference to travel times at all in the end.

of course driving at 20mph is safer than driving at 30mph, shorter stopping distances, shorter thinking distances and simply more time to see whats going on and what coming.

to all of you saying that we should teach the green cross code etc instead, your trying to tell me that not a single person got run over when your were a child? obviously they did and nowadays less people are hit aswell as those that are hit are far less likely to suffer severe injuries thanks to safer cars, lower speed limits and better planned roads and crossings.