SPEED limits in built-up areas should be reduced to 20mph, says the government's road safety advisors.
A reduction in town and city centres would help halve the number of road deaths over the next decade, they say.
It comes four years after the M.E.N. launched a campaign calling for a 20mph limit outside schools.
Figures showed the chances of a child being killed or injured by a car in Greater Manchester were higher than any other area outside London.
An M.E.N investigation found drivers breaking the speed limits near schools in every one of Greater Manchester's ten districts - one driver was doing 71mph past the school gates.
Many roads around schools have now been made 20mph zones.
Today's report by the Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety also calls for a new generation of `average speed' cameras to enforce the 20mph limit. The cameras measure a driver's speed over a set distance.
It follows a study by the Transport Research Laboratory of 20mph zones in Britain and across Europe. It found the number of road accidents involving children in such areas fell by 67 per cent and cyclist accidents by 29 per cent. Traffic flow was also reduced, by 27 per cent.
Coun Neil Swannick, of Manchester council, said they would be in favour of more 20mph speed limits - but traffic calming measures are too expensive.
He said: "We are definitely in support of sensible measures to reduce speeding in Manchester and have had a speed reduction strategy in place for some time now.
"In the short term, we've introduced 20mph zones around schools to improve pedestrian safety. We've established which roads where 30mph or 40mph limits are appropriate, and on other roads we'd be in favour of a 20mph limit.
"But, currently, in order to enforce 20mph areas we have to put in expensive traffic calming measures."
The report, called Beyond 2010 - a holistic approach to road safety in Great Britain, aims to reduce the number of road deaths, currently down to around 3,200 a year from 7,000 in the 1960s.
It says overweight, young and elderly drivers also pose a challenge to road safety organisations, and that the government must also tackle poverty in an effort to reduce road deaths. Children from poor areas are five times more likely to be killed in road accidents than those from wealthy areas.
The report recommends all new residential developments should be subject to a `pint of milk test'. This is that residents can reach a shop to buy milk within ten minutes without using a car.
Paul Smith, founder of SafeSpeed.org.uk, said: "Pacts had a golden opportunity to place `driver quality' at the heart of the road safety debate where it belongs, but that opportunity has been tragically missed. "We don't need more regulation. We don't need more speed management. These policies have failed in spades. We need better drivers through education, information, and above all improved road safety culture."
Should the speed limit be cut to 20mph in towns? Have your say.
Tweet
Comments
Login or Register to comment
How about leaving the speed limit as it is.But start to charge people with "jaywalking" And stop maing the motorist the scapegoat for p[edestrians who are not educated in using the pavements/roads who just walk out in between cars and walk across moving traffic and cyclists who dont give a toss about the highway code until they get hurt in a accident.Im sick to death of the driver being the butt of everybodys problems.When we start to educate children to use bikes properly and teach predestrians to act properly even driving at twenty miles per hour wont stop the accidents.Start to Enforce laws concerning cycles and pedestrians..Then maybe you could put traffic police back on the roads like we used to have rather than keep relying on technology (cameras)
by cutting the speed, you increase the pollution.
so even though you are saving the lives of a few children, you are killing more adults and children through pollution
No point unless enforcement is taken over by the police rather than being "self enforcing" through traffic calming. Unless they do go for average distance speed cameras I suppose.
who is going to enforce these speed restrictions? more cameras? i don't mind myself id rather be late in this life than early in the next
Cut speed to 20mph, increase pollution, congestion, journey time and frustration. This constant interference is no different to ceaselessly building more roads - the users will adapt to the new environment and the problems will not change. Its like making something idiot-proof - someone will always make a better idiot.
Surely 10 mph is even safer.
Oh to be paid as an advisor?
There are not many 20mph speed limits around schools, and none in the Bury MBC where I live.
I support 20mph round schools, in town centres streets to help old people cross and in housing estates so that children can come out to play again. It's one of the reasons children have the lowest quality of life in this country. Also cyclists feel safer where there are 20mph speed limits. How can traffic calming be expensive, a speed bump is a strip of cheap tarmac. They can't cost much to put down and 20 signposts.
By the way, I also drive but I don't belly ache about slowing down for pedestrians and children. Traffic calming is the only way to slow down the minority of selfish thugs who speed in housing estates and near schools.
Every time I get in my car nowadays, I feel like there is a giant finger pointing at me telling me off.
After reading some of these comments it reminds me of why I moved to Fife where ALL the estate roads are 20mph, they all have speed bumps and if you hit them at over 20 you smash your springs. Main roads are still 30 but the comments listed make me remember no one sticks to 30 down there.
Life is for living, give it a chance.
Statistically there were more casualties in 20 mph limits then there were in 30 limits last year
In some areas this makes sense as has already been pointed out, but it can't work everywhere. There's lots of places you're lucky if you can get upto 10mph at the moment, thanks to the decision to dig everywhere up at the same time!
And as for the cost??? If they continue to charge anywhere upto £3000 to erect a sign then no wonder they can't afford it.
Drivers are already persecuted enough, leave things as they are and stuff the roadsafety dogooders who want this!
Motorists should be made to push their cars rather than drive them. Think about the advantages:
- immediate reduction in green house emissions
- immediate reduction in road accidents (slightly offset by increase in hernias)
- immediate increase in the populations health and well-being due to increase in aerobic activity.
Driver who aren't capable of pushing their vehicle could perhaps rent a horse to tow it. This would immediately increase the availability of organic fertilizer.
I simply can't see a down side to my idea.
Perhaps we should start teaching kids about road safety - how many times do you see kids running out from behind parked cars, cycling with no lights on or just not looking where they are going (probably because they've got their hoodies on in the middle of the day).
My personal favourite is 'the 14 year old hard man' who saunters out and the crosses the road at a snails pace while staring menacingly at you (with his hoodie on of course).
I think we should all club toghether and sue the councils for all the damage that all our cars suffer each year because of badly designed road humps,We dont need these terrible humps everywhere in manchester its a disgrace that we as motorists put up with all this regulation ,that is unessary.
Call me Dave, Manchester: “Statistically there were more casualties in 20 mph limits then there were in 30 limits last year”
Given that information, we can conclude that it has occurred for one of three reasons:
1 - The lower speed limit could be making people more complacent, causing them to take less care on the road and therefore increasing the number of accidents.
2 – The areas chosen to have their limits reduced from 30mph to 20mph are chosen because they have a higher risk of accidents; therefore, we would expect them to have higher casualty rates, but by reducing the speed limit, we would expect them to be less serious.
3 – It could be total co-incidence.
So, with the available information, we can conclude that the lower speed limits are making things worse, making things better or making no difference whatsoever!
Bobelsque. Your proposals sound great!
You don't have a seat on Manchester City Council do you? If you did, you could enforce your ideas on the rest of us, and not have to subject yourself to them.