Thousands join campaign to ditch new 40mph limit on Wessex Way (From Thisisdorset)
When news happens send us your pictures, video and views. Text BE to 80360 or contact us by email
Thousands join Facebook campaign to ditch new 40mph limit on Bournemouth's Wessex Way
12:00pm Wednesday 3rd February 2010 in Latest By Jane Reader
A FACEBOOK group protesting about new speed limits on Bournemouth’s Wessex Way has attracted 3,300 members in less than a week.
The 40mph stretch between the County Gates and St Paul’s roundabouts has attracted widespread criticism from drivers who claim the experimental limit is unnecessary.
Now they are planning to stage a protest in a bid to convince Bournemouth council to put the speed limit back up to 50mph.
Comments include: “The Wessex Way was far safer when it was, in general, a 70mph limit – all we get now is gridlock at busy times as people try to avoid it.”
Another said: “What a joke. I’m now finding people are going at 30mph just so they know for sure they won’t get snapped by the stupid camera.”
And a third said: “This is just another way of getting more tax by imposing ridiculous speed limits.”
The new limit will be evaluated after six months and the council hopes it will reduce the accident rate.
A total of 198 people were injured between 2004 and 2008.
Comments(53)
jobsworthwatch
says...
12:27pm Wed 3 Feb 10
ben111
says...
12:47pm Wed 3 Feb 10
ben111
says...
12:51pm Wed 3 Feb 10
John Peek
says...
1:15pm Wed 3 Feb 10
A number of the slip roads also are short, and the way some drivers (probably the 3,000) race out on to the dual carriageway is very dangerous. If you want a 70mph limit, get ready to count the death toll.
verwoodbadger
says...
1:57pm Wed 3 Feb 10
John Peek wrote:Another poor fool blindly following the governments 'speed kills' mantra. John Peek, it wouldn't matter if we drove at 50, 60 or 70mph along the Wessex Way: What counts is HOW we drive!
This stretch of road is badly designed, quite dangerous in places and there have been many accidents - ergo the new speed limit makes complete sense A number of the slip roads also are short, and the way some drivers (probably the 3,000) race out on to the dual carriageway is very dangerous. If you want a 70mph limit, get ready to count the death toll.
What really makes the difference is that far too many drivers tail-gate the vehicle in front (on all roads) which prevents those wanting to join the dual carriageway from doing so safely, as there is no space for them to filter into. So drivers ‘race’ out onto the road into whatever gap they can find. If everyone left at least a 2 second gap (preferable 6 seconds on fast roads) then we could filter on (& off) these roads without accidents or delay.
So, leaving insufficient distance between vehicles and the generally poor standard of driving is what makes that road dangerous, and reducing speed limits will not prevent that; in fact it will probably make it worse as research in this and other countries has clearly shown that reducing speed limits at apparent accident black-spots is very likely to make things worse because of the 'bunching-up' phenomena.
P.S. I have not & do not intend joining the facebook group dedicated to reinstating the 50mph limit, mainly as I see this as yet another symptom of central government meddling to raise taxes. I’ll wait for May 6th to show how I feel about this and other issues!!
mikey2gorgeous
says...
1:59pm Wed 3 Feb 10
.
The Richmond Hill slip roads are a nightmare to use. Why can't people just be a little patient?
.
BTW - you can only post comments on the facebook group 'discussion' if you join the group. No dissension there then!
dartguru
says...
1:59pm Wed 3 Feb 10
"... and there have been many accidents"
More than there was before?
Are you sure?
The inadequate - and short - sliproads and the inability of drivers to follow common sense are the problem, not the speed limit.
Why Wessex Way drivers insist on driving in the inside lane at all times is beyond me.
Rally
says...
2:00pm Wed 3 Feb 10
That's 3,300 very impatient and remarkably stupid drivers who think that they should be allowed to drive at a speed that suits them individually and to heck with everybody else.
The worrying thing is that the list is growing!!!!
mikey2gorgeous
says...
2:03pm Wed 3 Feb 10
.
WHAT research exactly? Can you point us to some? Careful what you listen to down the pub!
benjamin
says...
2:09pm Wed 3 Feb 10
grumps999
says...
2:22pm Wed 3 Feb 10
dartguru wrote:I agree, it’s down to driver etiquette and good lane discipline, and using those 2 little things in your head called EYES and the big thing in your head called a BRAIN, and concentrate.
John Peek wrote:- "... and there have been many accidents" More than there was before? Are you sure? The inadequate - and short - sliproads and the inability of drivers to follow common sense are the problem, not the speed limit. Why Wessex Way drivers insist on driving in the inside lane at all times is beyond me.
TheDoc357
says...
2:24pm Wed 3 Feb 10
John Peek wrote:Who said anything about 70? The Facebook campaign is about stopping the move to 40mph.
This stretch of road is badly designed, quite dangerous in places and there have been many accidents - ergo the new speed limit makes complete sense A number of the slip roads also are short, and the way some drivers (probably the 3,000) race out on to the dual carriageway is very dangerous. If you want a 70mph limit, get ready to count the death toll.
pd7
says...
2:35pm Wed 3 Feb 10
Keep it up drop the limit to 30
Account Suspended
says...
2:46pm Wed 3 Feb 10
Your car is most efficient at 45-55mph.
Cutting the speed limit below 45mph increases the fuel usage.
Cutting it to 30mph would increase it further.
TinyLegacy
says...
2:50pm Wed 3 Feb 10
Account Suspended wrote:It totally depends on the car, engine size, aspiration etc. But yes, 30mph would be stupid.
Don't be stupid. Your car is most efficient at 45-55mph. Cutting the speed limit below 45mph increases the fuel usage. Cutting it to 30mph would increase it further.
Jonkers
says...
3:10pm Wed 3 Feb 10
It is definately worse, with people driving at 30-35 (WHY???), more lane changing as people get round these people and then block the overtaking lane and causing a block that others are then forcing themselves through to exit. At times it's chaos and in my opinion dangerous, especially at night around the slip roads.
Not safer at all in my opinion.
thewave
says...
3:13pm Wed 3 Feb 10
Tig
says...
3:16pm Wed 3 Feb 10
mikey2gorgeous wrote:Having to join to post comments is commonplace on the internet. After all, you had to join the Echo site to post your comment!
Work it out - the drop in speed will cause a 45 second delay through the 40 zone. . The Richmond Hill slip roads are a nightmare to use. Why can't people just be a little patient? . BTW - you can only post comments on the facebook group 'discussion' if you join the group. No dissension there then!
It's partly to do with being traceable (defamatory / offensive comments). Also, it's about being able to be held resonsible for your own actions.
You are, of course, free to join the FB group and you can't expect to be able to post if you don't. It's nothing to do with the members of that group avoiding negative comments, it's simply a Facebook/internet standard.
Jonkers
says...
3:19pm Wed 3 Feb 10
Its a shame that the main cause of accidents are not documented, unless anyone has knowledge that this is available?
Square Old Codger
says...
3:58pm Wed 3 Feb 10
verwoodbadger wrote:The real problem is that the standard of driving and discipline shewn by far too many drivers is abysmal, perhaps the test should be far harder and accompanied by an intelligence test. As it is in a very small and overcrowded Country the amount of space that can be given to roads is limited and whilst there are Countries with more cars per head of the population we use ours more. The changes proposed incidentally are the responsibilty of Local and not National Government though they have to respond to a high level of death and injury on any stretch of road. Be thankful that you are not in France, where petrol costs more than here now and a new 10% tax has been levied on all fuel, with the exception of electricity ( a State Molopoly) This takes total taxes to over 50% of their GDP as against 37% here. But their roads are far better.
John Peek wrote: This stretch of road is badly designed, quite dangerous in places and there have been many accidents - ergo the new speed limit makes complete sense A number of the slip roads also are short, and the way some drivers (probably the 3,000) race out on to the dual carriageway is very dangerous. If you want a 70mph limit, get ready to count the death toll.Another poor fool blindly following the governments 'speed kills' mantra. John Peek, it wouldn't matter if we drove at 50, 60 or 70mph along the Wessex Way: What counts is HOW we drive! What really makes the difference is that far too many drivers tail-gate the vehicle in front (on all roads) which prevents those wanting to join the dual carriageway from doing so safely, as there is no space for them to filter into. So drivers ‘race’ out onto the road into whatever gap they can find. If everyone left at least a 2 second gap (preferable 6 seconds on fast roads) then we could filter on (& off) these roads without accidents or delay. So, leaving insufficient distance between vehicles and the generally poor standard of driving is what makes that road dangerous, and reducing speed limits will not prevent that; in fact it will probably make it worse as research in this and other countries has clearly shown that reducing speed limits at apparent accident black-spots is very likely to make things worse because of the 'bunching-up' phenomena. P.S. I have not & do not intend joining the facebook group dedicated to reinstating the 50mph limit, mainly as I see this as yet another symptom of central government meddling to raise taxes. I’ll wait for May 6th to show how I feel about this and other issues!!
charley farley west parley
says...
4:14pm Wed 3 Feb 10
tt52
says...
4:21pm Wed 3 Feb 10
Whats the point of building this dual carriagway years ago the help traffic move faster and then slowing it down, wont be long before we have a man with a red flag walking in front of every car.
cardomon
says...
5:42pm Wed 3 Feb 10
terry1965
says...
5:43pm Wed 3 Feb 10
And so as the "safety" camera robbers don't lose out, the national speed limit on every road will be reduced to 20mph.
Enforced by a £1,000 fine and 6 points on your license if you go 0.000001 mph over the limit.
You've been warned.
Fred Luton
says...
7:51pm Wed 3 Feb 10
Also, the 40 mph signs seem very small - is that just another way of trying to catch people out who dont know the area?
jlbscenic
says...
8:26pm Wed 3 Feb 10
TinyLegacy wrote:Also depends what gear you are using. You can probably drive fairly economically at 30mph in 3rd gear.
Account Suspended wrote: Don't be stupid. Your car is most efficient at 45-55mph. Cutting the speed limit below 45mph increases the fuel usage. Cutting it to 30mph would increase it further.It totally depends on the car, engine size, aspiration etc. But yes, 30mph would be stupid.
Bournemouthstorm
says...
10:03pm Wed 3 Feb 10
verwoodbadger wrote:You really think a change of government would have stopped the change is speed limit? How do you intend to make everyone drive as perfect as you obviously do? Maybe everyone can have a police escort so that there poor driving habits can be pointed out? Do you have any sensible ideas on how to reduce the accident rate? You are not going to get people to change there bad habits that have picked up over the years. A lower speed limit will increase driver reaction times and when accidents do occur then the impacts are going to be less severe due to the lower speed. Average speed cameras should also be installed to enforce the new speed limit.
John Peek wrote: This stretch of road is badly designed, quite dangerous in places and there have been many accidents - ergo the new speed limit makes complete sense A number of the slip roads also are short, and the way some drivers (probably the 3,000) race out on to the dual carriageway is very dangerous. If you want a 70mph limit, get ready to count the death toll.Another poor fool blindly following the governments 'speed kills' mantra. John Peek, it wouldn't matter if we drove at 50, 60 or 70mph along the Wessex Way: What counts is HOW we drive! What really makes the difference is that far too many drivers tail-gate the vehicle in front (on all roads) which prevents those wanting to join the dual carriageway from doing so safely, as there is no space for them to filter into. So drivers ‘race’ out onto the road into whatever gap they can find. If everyone left at least a 2 second gap (preferable 6 seconds on fast roads) then we could filter on (& off) these roads without accidents or delay. So, leaving insufficient distance between vehicles and the generally poor standard of driving is what makes that road dangerous, and reducing speed limits will not prevent that; in fact it will probably make it worse as research in this and other countries has clearly shown that reducing speed limits at apparent accident black-spots is very likely to make things worse because of the 'bunching-up' phenomena. P.S. I have not & do not intend joining the facebook group dedicated to reinstating the 50mph limit, mainly as I see this as yet another symptom of central government meddling to raise taxes. I’ll wait for May 6th to show how I feel about this and other issues!!
Tig
says...
10:22pm Wed 3 Feb 10
I'll say no more :-x
Globo
says...
7:43am Thu 4 Feb 10
rook
says...
9:06am Thu 4 Feb 10
I'd support an increase in motorway speed limit to 90 or 100, so no, I'm certainly not against speed. It always seems to be the worst drivers who don't understand that good driving gets you from A to B more comfortably and just as quick as driving at 50 between sets of lights then being stopped for half a minute waiting for the green to start the next race.
Here's a challenge - drive as fast as you can from the George roundabout in Poole to Lansdowne roundabout, then do the same journey sticking strictly to speed limits. Let me know how many minutes you save.
nbraeman
says...
10:07am Thu 4 Feb 10
Professor Zaroff
says...
11:35am Thu 4 Feb 10
nbraeman wrote:Accoding to my sums, the delay is nearer to 18 seconds (not taking time off you would wait at roundabouts anyway).
An extra 45 seconds is not insignificant if you look at it like this. 5K cars a day wasting .75 minutes. Average human lifespan 70 years. That extra 45 seconds wastes the duration of an entire human life every 26 years.
ekimnoslen
says...
12:51pm Thu 4 Feb 10
Seems that we have 3300 prtotesting boy racers here!
Afcbpete
says...
2:04pm Thu 4 Feb 10
ekimnoslen wrote:Firstly I don't consider myself to be a boyracer, certainly not at MY age, but I DO feel safer driving at say 50 - 70 mph, rather than 40 or less. Secondly, I was in a 7 car shunt a few years ago by the Cooper Dean flyover, NOT down to speed, but some idiot's VERY poor driving (to involved to really explain), but people braking hard to get WELL below 50 or 40 is more likely to cause accidents than not....
If you drive 20 miles at 40mph it takes 30 minutes and at 50mph 24 minutes. Wow - big deal - 6 minutes.
Seems that we have 3300 prtotesting boy racers here!
nbraeman
says...
2:07pm Thu 4 Feb 10
ekimnoslen wrote:I tell you what then; imagine you are the only person at the counter in the post office. The clerk ignores you, with no reason whatsoever, and only serves you after six minutes. I suppose that's OK too? Just because the motorist is occupied for the duration by driving does not make the time wasted any less valuable. If there really was a big safety improvement between 40 and 50 I wouldn't argue, but I expect 40 is actually going to make matters worse. In fact it only really needs a 40 limit (if it needs one at all) going eastbound because of the short on-ramp by Richmond Hill; yet I am certain it would be beyond the wit of anyone to have different speed limits in each direction. It's far easier just to waste everyone's time.
If you drive 20 miles at 40mph it takes 30 minutes and at 50mph 24 minutes. Wow - big deal - 6 minutes. Seems that we have 3300 prtotesting boy racers here!
broonale
says...
2:14pm Thu 4 Feb 10
Tig
says...
2:44pm Thu 4 Feb 10
You just have to accept that driving is risky and you will never take away ALL risk, just as you won't stop people falling off ladders, down stairs etc., etc. That said there has only been 1 fatality on the Wessex Way, yet around 100 people die every year falling down stairs! That should give some kind of perspective.
This is a democracy and we all have a right to our opinion AND to oppose what we see as another sign of creeping "Big Brotherism".
During my lifetime, as car technology has improved, I have had hundreds of hours of my life 'stolen' - stuck in traffic slowed down without good and proven reason.
mikey2gorgeous
says...
2:59pm Thu 4 Feb 10
.
Take 10mph off a road's limit and there are cries of 'it's making it more dangerous'! How absurd!
.
What a shame the Echo doesn't provide any decent reporting (with perhaps some comment from road safety experts?) that properly informs and educates.
BobbyPoole
says...
3:01pm Thu 4 Feb 10
mikey2gorgeous
says...
3:17pm Thu 4 Feb 10
Professor Zaroff
says...
4:41pm Thu 4 Feb 10
Looking at his post, the tailgater may very well be afcbpete.
grumps999
says...
5:43pm Thu 4 Feb 10
Globo wrote:Come on this is far too sensible an idea for Britain to use. But I support it all the way.
Why do we have to have speed limits 24 hrs a day 365 days a year. In Australia they have reduced limits at schools when children are around . Why not experiment and introduce rush hour speed limits, after all 40 mph at 10.00 AM on a nice bright sunny morning is stupid, just like 20MPH in school areas when children are in school or on holiday is stupid.
Afcbpete
says...
6:53pm Thu 4 Feb 10
grumps999 wrote:When driving home from work around 11pm, there I am driving at 40, 30, even 20 mph, because I'm sticking to the speed limt :), as I might knock over a drunk pedestrian, or possibly a sober fox!!!
Globo wrote:Come on this is far too sensible an idea for Britain to use. But I support it all the way.
Why do we have to have speed limits 24 hrs a day 365 days a year. In Australia they have reduced limits at schools when children are around . Why not experiment and introduce rush hour speed limits, after all 40 mph at 10.00 AM on a nice bright sunny morning is stupid, just like 20MPH in school areas when children are in school or on holiday is stupid.
mikey2gorgeous
says...
1:19pm Fri 5 Feb 10
.
The slip roads could then be extended with ease onto the main part and we'd have a valuable piece of cycling infrastructure for free!
.
Everybody wins!
PriestyUK
says...
6:24pm Fri 5 Feb 10
Rally
says...
11:29am Sat 6 Feb 10
If you run into the back of or nearly run into the back of a vehicle, then it is due to your poor judgement, PriestyUK, not the other driver's.
PriestyUK
says...
7:00pm Sat 6 Feb 10
Rally wrote:Your right Rally this would be the case in terms of the law/insurance but are we all meant to anticipate other peoples mistakes and poor judgement - YOU ARE MEANT TO GIVE WAY AT A ROUNDABOUT NOT STOP!!!!
PriestyUK wrote: "What else bothers me is the need for people to stop at the roundabouts when it is all clear, the amount of times I have nearly rear ended someone due to their poor judgement!!!"
If you run into the back of or nearly run into the back of a vehicle, then it is due to your poor judgement, PriestyUK, not the other driver's.
Rally
says...
1:11am Sun 7 Feb 10
PriestyUK wrote:The best way to avoid an accident is to avoid having to avoid it - which, amongst other things, means expecting the vehicle in front of you to slow down, stop, or change direction without warning.
Rally wrote: PriestyUK wrote: "What else bothers me is the need for people to stop at the roundabouts when it is all clear, the amount of times I have nearly rear ended someone due to their poor judgement!!!" If you run into the back of or nearly run into the back of a vehicle, then it is due to your poor judgement, PriestyUK, not the other driver's.Your right Rally this would be the case in terms of the law/insurance but are we all meant to anticipate other peoples mistakes and poor judgement - YOU ARE MEANT TO GIVE WAY AT A ROUNDABOUT NOT STOP!!!!
If you have to brake hard and or change direction abruptly to avoid running into it, then you are basically driving too fast and too close for the conditions.
And where is the law that says a driver CANNOT stop at a roundabout if the road to their right is clear?
Next time you are out driving just remember that your (apparent) impatience with other drivers could land you and somebody else in in-patients ...
weevie
says...
9:20am Sun 7 Feb 10
I love to drive fast - but 40mph just here is PERFECT.
The UK simply has a stupid bunch of angry, rude rubbish drivers - whose spacing, positioning and skills do not lend themselves to be TRUSTED with 50m.p.h. here.
Professor Zaroff
says...
11:53am Mon 8 Feb 10
PriestyUK wrote:It is very, very simple. You have to be prepared for the car in front to make an emergency stop at any time. I agree with the other posters - nearly rear ending cars stopping at junctions (which is what roundabouts are, lest we forget) is evidence of a worrying level of ability to drive.
Rally wrote: PriestyUK wrote: "What else bothers me is the need for people to stop at the roundabouts when it is all clear, the amount of times I have nearly rear ended someone due to their poor judgement!!!" If you run into the back of or nearly run into the back of a vehicle, then it is due to your poor judgement, PriestyUK, not the other driver's.Your right Rally this would be the case in terms of the law/insurance but are we all meant to anticipate other peoples mistakes and poor judgement - YOU ARE MEANT TO GIVE WAY AT A ROUNDABOUT NOT STOP!!!!
simonhumby
says...
3:39pm Mon 8 Feb 10
Cutting the speed from 50 to 40mph will increase congestion by 25% for little or no cost - where's the downside in that?
mikey2gorgeous
says...
11:54am Tue 9 Feb 10
.
To all those appalled at the extra 45 seconds on their journey time, how long do you think people were delayed by this one... http://www.bournemou
thecho.co.uk/news/49
95616.Badly_injured_
drivers_cut_free_at_
Parley_pile_up/
Tig says...
12:20pm Wed 3 Feb 10