Today's most viewed
FIND A DATE
 Use our Two's Company section to find a date or maybe something more permanent
| ON ME HEAD
 Into your sport then check out the Sport Editor's blog
| KNOW YOUR FATE
 Want to know what life has in store? Check out our horoscopes
| ON YER BIKE
 Get the view from the gutter with cycling group Cyclox in Oxfordshire
|
|
|
|
20 is plenty, estate tells drivers
 |
| Campaigners outside Wood Farm School |
Campaigners on an Oxford estate have said "20 is plenty" when it comes to speeding motorists outside their local primary school and nursery.
Parents and residents living around Titup Hall Drive in Wood Farm want the speed limit on the road reduced from 30mph to 20mph.
Wood Farm Primary School, Slade Day Nursery and the Wood Farm Community Centre are all beside the road.
Campaigners, including Oxford East MP Andrew Smith, gathered outside the school to make their message clear to passing drivers.
Mark Lygo, of nearby Valentia Road, said the road was a danger for his children, Samuel, seven, and Emily, four.
He said: "You have lots of kids crossing over, and too many cars speeding down there.
"It is not just the school - there's the community centre and nursery along there. Personally, I think every residential road like that should be 20mph.
"The parents, teachers and governors - anyone who has known that road - have all said it should be 20mph.
"Lots of people have said they will sign a petition, which we are hoping to start next week, so hopefully the council will take notice."
Barton and Churchill county councillor Liz Brighouse hopes action will be taken quickly to reduce the speed limit.
She said: "We have been deeply concerned about this stretch of road all along Titup Hall Drive for some time.
"The council is now looking at changing speed humps to speed cushions - which will make people drive even faster. The fact is, people simply drive too fast for a road which has a school, a neighbourhood nursery and lots of small children on it. The traffic just goes too fast.
"I am hoping that we can get a 20mph limit. The parents and the governors of the school have been really supportive. The county council is looking at a number of schemes and hopefully they will take notice.
"There are quite a lot of roads around here that should be 20mph. Quarry Road, for instance, is used as a cut-through to the Churchill Hospital and people just drive like lunatics down there."
3:17pm Tuesday 25th March 2008
Print 
Email this 
CommentPosted by: James Styring, the middle of the road on 3:31pm Tue 25 Mar 08
Hear, hear. Only 20 years ago, car ownership was, incredibly, half what it is today. Roads were places where people lived, walked, cycled, talked, shopped - and drove.
Today, roads are thoroughfares where motorised traffic is king. Comfort and speed are everything, which would be fine were it not for the problems this causes.
Feeling intimidated by traffic is one of the commonest reasons given for not cycling. Dense traffic, especially if it's speeding, poses a danger and deters thousands from cycling, especially those with children.
Ironically, it's those with children in their cars at school run times who tend to be the least aware and hence the most dangerous drivers.
A 20mph speed limit would be the single most effective measure in making the roads safer and encouraging cycling.
Increased cycling benefits everyone: statistically, the more cyclists there are, the safer it is to cycle. Critical mass in action. More cyclists equals fewer car journeys, freeing up road space for those who still need to drive and for buses. With a 20mph limit, cycle lanes wouldn't be needed. Pavement cycle-paths could be given back to the pedestrians because even novice cyclists wouldn't need them.
Cars circulating a city at 20mph wouldn't require as many signalled junctions, so a lot of traffic lights would go. The civilising effect of lower speeds makes streets pleasanter places. It's easy to hold a conversation in a street in which speeds are under 20mph.
Travelling slowly, you engage with the environment through which you are passing. By walking or cycling in the street, you are a part of it rather than riding roughshod over it. It is astonishing how differently people behave from within the insulation of their car.
At 20mph, drivers make eye contact with and engage with the people in the street. Cyclists and pedestrians know they've been seen. It also makes the driver less inclined to bully his way along "his" road, and more inclined to share the space.
At speeds over 30mph, drivers begin to become dissociated from the area they are passing through. They see less and care less. Cars, especially speeding cars, destroy communities.
In many side roads, cars ignore what would be a safe speed and drive at the 30mph limit as of right. That's why it's high time communities reclaimed their streets - their spaces - by recording the speeds that cars do, and using this evidence to get the limits reduced.
So, when the city council's speed guns become available, borrow one and make good use of it.
It would cost just £300,000 to create a 20mph limit in Oxford. And further good news is that speed reduction needn't mean unpopular humps and ugly Gatso cameras.
Lower speeds are best encouraged by creating environments which look like the sort of place where drivers would not want to drive quickly. Lower speeds are achieved by removing barriers between drivers and other road users.
Lowering speeds means turning streets back into the places they once were, rather than the monuments to motoring convenience that they have become.
from http://www.oxfordmai
l.net/news/columns/d
isplay.var.2144690.0
.on_yer_bike.php
Hear, hear. Only 20 years ago, car ownership was, incredibly, half what it is today. Roads were places where people lived, walked, cycled, talked, shopped - and drove.
Today, roads are thoroughfares where motorised traffic is king. Comfort and speed are everything, which would be fine were it not for the problems this causes.
Feeling intimidated by traffic is one of the commonest reasons given for not cycling. Dense traffic, especially if it's speeding, poses a danger and deters thousands from cycling, especially those with children.
Ironically, it's those with children in their cars at school run times who tend to be the least aware and hence the most dangerous drivers.
A 20mph speed limit would be the single most effective measure in making the roads safer and encouraging cycling.
Increased cycling benefits everyone: statistically, the more cyclists there are, the safer it is to cycle. Critical mass in action. More cyclists equals fewer car journeys, freeing up road space for those who still need to drive and for buses. With a 20mph limit, cycle lanes wouldn't be needed. Pavement cycle-paths could be given back to the pedestrians because even novice cyclists wouldn't need them.
Cars circulating a city at 20mph wouldn't require as many signalled junctions, so a lot of traffic lights would go. The civilising effect of lower speeds makes streets pleasanter places. It's easy to hold a conversation in a street in which speeds are under 20mph.
Travelling slowly, you engage with the environment through which you are passing. By walking or cycling in the street, you are a part of it rather than riding roughshod over it. It is astonishing how differently people behave from within the insulation of their car.
At 20mph, drivers make eye contact with and engage with the people in the street. Cyclists and pedestrians know they've been seen. It also makes the driver less inclined to bully his way along "his" road, and more inclined to share the space.
At speeds over 30mph, drivers begin to become dissociated from the area they are passing through. They see less and care less. Cars, especially speeding cars, destroy communities.
In many side roads, cars ignore what would be a safe speed and drive at the 30mph limit as of right. That's why it's high time communities reclaimed their streets - their spaces - by recording the speeds that cars do, and using this evidence to get the limits reduced.
So, when the city council's speed guns become available, borrow one and make good use of it.
It would cost just £300,000 to create a 20mph limit in Oxford. And further good news is that speed reduction needn't mean unpopular humps and ugly Gatso cameras.
Lower speeds are best encouraged by creating environments which look like the sort of place where drivers would not want to drive quickly. Lower speeds are achieved by removing barriers between drivers and other road users.
Lowering speeds means turning streets back into the places they once were, rather than the monuments to motoring convenience that they have become.
from http://www.oxfordmai
l.net/news/columns/d
isplay.var.2144690.0
.on_yer_bike.php
Posted by: car man, oxford on 3:59pm Tue 25 Mar 08
[quote][bold]James Styring[/bold] wrote:
Hear, hear. Only 20 years ago, car ownership was, incredibly, half what it is today. Roads were places where people lived, walked, cycled, talked, shopped - and drove. Today, roads are thoroughfares where motorised traffic is king. Comfort and speed are everything, which would be fine were it not for the problems this causes. Feeling intimidated by traffic is one of the commonest reasons given for not cycling. Dense traffic, especially if it\'s speeding, poses a danger and deters thousands from cycling, especially those with children. Ironically, it\'s those with children in their cars at school run times who tend to be the least aware and hence the most dangerous drivers. A 20mph speed limit would be the single most effective measure in making the roads safer and encouraging cycling. Increased cycling benefits everyone: statistically, the more cyclists there are, the safer it is to cycle. Critical mass in action. More cyclists equals fewer car journeys, freeing up road space for those who still need to drive and for buses. With a 20mph limit, cycle lanes wouldn\'t be needed. Pavement cycle-paths could be given back to the pedestrians because even novice cyclists wouldn\'t need them. Cars circulating a city at 20mph wouldn\'t require as many signalled junctions, so a lot of traffic lights would go. The civilising effect of lower speeds makes streets pleasanter places. It\'s easy to hold a conversation in a street in which speeds are under 20mph. Travelling slowly, you engage with the environment through which you are passing. By walking or cycling in the street, you are a part of it rather than riding roughshod over it. It is astonishing how differently people behave from within the insulation of their car. At 20mph, drivers make eye contact with and engage with the people in the street. Cyclists and pedestrians know they\'ve been seen. It also makes the driver less inclined to bully his way along \"his\" road, and more inclined to share the space. At speeds over 30mph, drivers begin to become dissociated from the area they are passing through. They see less and care less. Cars, especially speeding cars, destroy communities. In many side roads, cars ignore what would be a safe speed and drive at the 30mph limit as of right. That\'s why it\'s high time communities reclaimed their streets - their spaces - by recording the speeds that cars do, and using this evidence to get the limits reduced. So, when the city council\'s speed guns become available, borrow one and make good use of it. It would cost just £300,000 to create a 20mph limit in Oxford. And further good news is that speed reduction needn\'t mean unpopular humps and ugly Gatso cameras. Lower speeds are best encouraged by creating environments which look like the sort of place where drivers would not want to drive quickly. Lower speeds are achieved by removing barriers between drivers and other road users. Lowering speeds means turning streets back into the places they once were, rather than the monuments to motoring convenience that they have become. from http://www.oxfordmai l.net/news/columns/d isplay.var.2144690.0 .on_yer_bike.php [/quote] not to mention the increase in pollution due to car engines running at an inefficient level that your suggestions would make them do.. Idiot.
James Styring wrote:
Hear, hear. Only 20 years ago, car ownership was, incredibly, half what it is today. Roads were places where people lived, walked, cycled, talked, shopped - and drove. Today, roads are thoroughfares where motorised traffic is king. Comfort and speed are everything, which would be fine were it not for the problems this causes. Feeling intimidated by traffic is one of the commonest reasons given for not cycling. Dense traffic, especially if it\'s speeding, poses a danger and deters thousands from cycling, especially those with children. Ironically, it\'s those with children in their cars at school run times who tend to be the least aware and hence the most dangerous drivers. A 20mph speed limit would be the single most effective measure in making the roads safer and encouraging cycling. Increased cycling benefits everyone: statistically, the more cyclists there are, the safer it is to cycle. Critical mass in action. More cyclists equals fewer car journeys, freeing up road space for those who still need to drive and for buses. With a 20mph limit, cycle lanes wouldn\'t be needed. Pavement cycle-paths could be given back to the pedestrians because even novice cyclists wouldn\'t need them. Cars circulating a city at 20mph wouldn\'t require as many signalled junctions, so a lot of traffic lights would go. The civilising effect of lower speeds makes streets pleasanter places. It\'s easy to hold a conversation in a street in which speeds are under 20mph. Travelling slowly, you engage with the environment through which you are passing. By walking or cycling in the street, you are a part of it rather than riding roughshod over it. It is astonishing how differently people behave from within the insulation of their car. At 20mph, drivers make eye contact with and engage with the people in the street. Cyclists and pedestrians know they\'ve been seen. It also makes the driver less inclined to bully his way along \"his\" road, and more inclined to share the space. At speeds over 30mph, drivers begin to become dissociated from the area they are passing through. They see less and care less. Cars, especially speeding cars, destroy communities. In many side roads, cars ignore what would be a safe speed and drive at the 30mph limit as of right. That\'s why it\'s high time communities reclaimed their streets - their spaces - by recording the speeds that cars do, and using this evidence to get the limits reduced. So, when the city council\'s speed guns become available, borrow one and make good use of it. It would cost just £300,000 to create a 20mph limit in Oxford. And further good news is that speed reduction needn\'t mean unpopular humps and ugly Gatso cameras. Lower speeds are best encouraged by creating environments which look like the sort of place where drivers would not want to drive quickly. Lower speeds are achieved by removing barriers between drivers and other road users. Lowering speeds means turning streets back into the places they once were, rather than the monuments to motoring convenience that they have become. from http://www.oxfordmai l.net/news/columns/d isplay.var.2144690.0 .on_yer_bike.php
not to mention the increase in pollution due to car engines running at an inefficient level that your suggestions would make them do.. Idiot.
Posted by: Andy on 4:10pm Tue 25 Mar 08
There are already speed humps on that road. Cars can not go over 20mph over them hills. What is the point of 20mph zone for 1 hour a day ie going and leving school. whats is the point of a 20mph zone at midnight or during the school holidays????
There are already speed humps on that road. Cars can not go over 20mph over them hills. What is the point of 20mph zone for 1 hour a day ie going and leving school. whats is the point of a 20mph zone at midnight or during the school holidays????
Posted by: jamie, cumnor on 4:24pm Tue 25 Mar 08
You cant disinvent the car!!!Do you really want us all to go back to the dark ages with a horse and cart?Teach the kids some road sense or is that too difficult?
You cant disinvent the car!!!Do you really want us all to go back to the dark ages with a horse and cart?Teach the kids some road sense or is that too difficult?
Posted by: Jeremy McKenzie, Oxford on 4:43pm Tue 25 Mar 08
[quote][bold]jamie[/bold] wrote:
You cant disinvent the car!!!Do you really want us all to go back to the dark ages with a horse and cart?Teach the kids some road sense or is that too difficult?[/quote] I don't think anyone wants to go back to the dark ages but going back to the slightly more sensible ages would be nice.
How many people make idiotically pathetic small journeys every day rather than walk to the shop for a paper or refuse to 'car share' because they are too selfish.
jamie wrote:
You cant disinvent the car!!!Do you really want us all to go back to the dark ages with a horse and cart?Teach the kids some road sense or is that too difficult?
I don't think anyone wants to go back to the dark ages but going back to the slightly more sensible ages would be nice.
How many people make idiotically pathetic small journeys every day rather than walk to the shop for a paper or refuse to 'car share' because they are too selfish.
Posted by: Phil, Oxford on 5:05pm Tue 25 Mar 08
Car Man. Glad to hear you are so concerned about pollution caused by traffic. However sure you understand that if you really want to reduce pollution from near our schools better not drive there in the first place.
I also thought that it was acceleration and breaking that used up most fuel and that a constant 30 is not achievable in urban areas. But I guess I must also be an idiot to giving a rational response to your ill thought out comment.
Car Man. Glad to hear you are so concerned about pollution caused by traffic. However sure you understand that if you really want to reduce pollution from near our schools better not drive there in the first place.
I also thought that it was acceleration and breaking that used up most fuel and that a constant 30 is not achievable in urban areas. But I guess I must also be an idiot to giving a rational response to your ill thought out comment.
Posted by: oxman, oxford on 5:30pm Tue 25 Mar 08
Dis-invent the car??
Teach kids road sense??
It's relativally easy to teach kids road sense, what is more difficult is to get them to appreciate differences in speeds. I walk my son to and from school along and across a road that has speed humps and am trying to teach him how to cross the road but it is very trying when half the cars are going 40+. Funny thing is, when I am on my own and deliberately step out into the road when I can see a car travelling way in excess of 30 and force them to slow, the drivers, usually young males, tend to get very agitated and angry that they are being forced to slow down. It's not the pedestrians that need to be educated, it's the drivers. The only way to do this is to have heavy fines (none of this attending an educational film rubbish). Make them pay £500 for driving at more then 5 mph over the speed limit. We all know the rules so what is the problem with that?
Dis-invent the car??
Teach kids road sense??
It's relativally easy to teach kids road sense, what is more difficult is to get them to appreciate differences in speeds. I walk my son to and from school along and across a road that has speed humps and am trying to teach him how to cross the road but it is very trying when half the cars are going 40+. Funny thing is, when I am on my own and deliberately step out into the road when I can see a car travelling way in excess of 30 and force them to slow, the drivers, usually young males, tend to get very agitated and angry that they are being forced to slow down. It's not the pedestrians that need to be educated, it's the drivers. The only way to do this is to have heavy fines (none of this attending an educational film rubbish). Make them pay £500 for driving at more then 5 mph over the speed limit. We all know the rules so what is the problem with that?
Posted by: DanOxford on 5:50pm Tue 25 Mar 08
There's always something distasteful about involving children in political campaigns like this.
A proper feasability survey should be carried out and any recommendations implemented.
In the meantime, I'm off to round up some toddlers to wear: 'B*llocks to you anti- democratic busy bodies!' T- shirts.
There's always something distasteful about involving children in political campaigns like this.
A proper feasability survey should be carried out and any recommendations implemented.
In the meantime, I'm off to round up some toddlers to wear: 'B*llocks to you anti- democratic busy bodies!' T- shirts.
Posted by: DanOxford on 5:55pm Tue 25 Mar 08
Oxman wrote:
[italic]Funny thing is, when I am on my own and deliberately step out into the road when I can see a car travelling way in excess of 30 and force them to slow, the drivers, usually young males, tend to get very agitated and angry that they are being forced to slow down.[/italic]
I'd just run you over. Presumably you do not have suitably calibrated speed sensing equipment and are not a traffic officer so you stepping into the carriageway in front of oncoming traffic could simply be put down to Darwinsim in action.
It's self- rightuos interfering busy bodies like yourself who think you have a God given right to 'reclaim' the streets and who view drivers as some sort of collective social and environmental menace (rather than people simply trying to go about their daily life) over whom you have some sort of moral superiority who completely undermine any real efforts to improve matters for [bold]ALL[/bold] road users.
Oxman wrote:
Funny thing is, when I am on my own and deliberately step out into the road when I can see a car travelling way in excess of 30 and force them to slow, the drivers, usually young males, tend to get very agitated and angry that they are being forced to slow down.
I'd just run you over. Presumably you do not have suitably calibrated speed sensing equipment and are not a traffic officer so you stepping into the carriageway in front of oncoming traffic could simply be put down to Darwinsim in action.
It's self- rightuos interfering busy bodies like yourself who think you have a God given right to 'reclaim' the streets and who view drivers as some sort of collective social and environmental menace (rather than people simply trying to go about their daily life) over whom you have some sort of moral superiority who completely undermine any real efforts to improve matters for
ALL road users.
Posted by: DanOxford on 6:07pm Tue 25 Mar 08
[quote][bold]jamie[/bold] wrote:
You cant disinvent the car!!!Do you really want us all to go back to the dark ages with a horse and cart?Teach the kids some road sense or is that too difficult?[/quote] Yes- they do. The Utopia inisgaed by a good deal of the 'Green' lobby is a backward communist agricultural based economy where no-one goes anywhere and no-one owns anything.
NuLabour's 'eco towns' (yes- that's right- build houses on a greenfield site and call it 'eco') are to have 15mph limits.
If all goes to plan, the residents won't need cars as they will spend their days foraging for nuts and berries and painting pictures on the side of their caves.
Of course we wouldn't [bold]NEED[/bold] new housing and wouldn't have so many cars if the government had a population policy and wasn't overseeing the biggest explosion of immigration and UK births to foreign parents in history, but that's another story...
jamie wrote:
You cant disinvent the car!!!Do you really want us all to go back to the dark ages with a horse and cart?Teach the kids some road sense or is that too difficult?
Yes- they do. The Utopia inisgaed by a good deal of the 'Green' lobby is a backward communist agricultural based economy where no-one goes anywhere and no-one owns anything.
NuLabour's 'eco towns' (yes- that's right- build houses on a greenfield site and call it 'eco') are to have 15mph limits.
If all goes to plan, the residents won't need cars as they will spend their days foraging for nuts and berries and painting pictures on the side of their caves.
Of course we wouldn't
NEED new housing and wouldn't have so many cars if the government had a population policy and wasn't overseeing the biggest explosion of immigration and UK births to foreign parents in history, but that's another story...
Posted by: DanOxford on 6:07pm Tue 25 Mar 08
*envisaged- typo
Posted by: OxMan, 4 m behind you at 90 mph on 6:22pm Tue 25 Mar 08
Drivers ARE a collective social disease and an environmental menace! Nuisances the lot of them. Boo hiss.
Drivers ARE a collective social disease and an environmental menace! Nuisances the lot of them. Boo hiss.
Posted by: C on 11:13pm Tue 25 Mar 08
Sorry, tired of hearing it; Oxford's "war on motorists" is getting old.
Not interested in what's good for cyclists either, since they're such a menace to pedestrians. Get off and walk, you self-righteous gits.
Sorry, tired of hearing it; Oxford's "war on motorists" is getting old.
Not interested in what's good for cyclists either, since they're such a menace to pedestrians. Get off and walk, you self-righteous gits.
Posted by: Oxman, Oxford on 11:19pm Tue 25 Mar 08
Dan, you seem to think you are above the law. I assume then that if you see someone commit a crime then you will look the other way?
Oh, and plenty of drivers have tried to run me down. Funnily enough, they don't stop after the brick I throw has hit their car. That's ok though isn't it? because, by your standards, it's ok to commit a crime isn't it?
Dan, you seem to think you are above the law. I assume then that if you see someone commit a crime then you will look the other way?
Oh, and plenty of drivers have tried to run me down. Funnily enough, they don't stop after the brick I throw has hit their car. That's ok though isn't it? because, by your standards, it's ok to commit a crime isn't it?
Posted by: DanOxford on 11:53pm Tue 25 Mar 08
Oxman- you're just another stereotypical anti- car bore.
My views on the law is that I leave it's enforcement to the Police- unlike you- I don't use my personal views and judgements to take it into my own hands to 'teach people a lesson'.
You've already admitted to wilfully obstructing traffic and criminal damage, which rather undermines any point you had about obeying the law- or road safety.
Oxman- you're just another stereotypical anti- car bore.
My views on the law is that I leave it's enforcement to the Police- unlike you- I don't use my personal views and judgements to take it into my own hands to 'teach people a lesson'.
You've already admitted to wilfully obstructing traffic and criminal damage, which rather undermines any point you had about obeying the law- or road safety.
Posted by: outspoken, oxon on 9:47am Wed 26 Mar 08
the majority of cyclists are students with no common sense, the other group of cyclists are 'proper' cyclists who insist on cycling in the middle of the road, avoiding all cycle lanes which have been created at great cost to the tax payer, holding all of the traffic up. Both groups need to understand that in an argument with a car, for example when the cyclist runs a red light or rides at night with no lights, they are probably going to loose, badly.
the majority of cyclists are students with no common sense, the other group of cyclists are 'proper' cyclists who insist on cycling in the middle of the road, avoiding all cycle lanes which have been created at great cost to the tax payer, holding all of the traffic up. Both groups need to understand that in an argument with a car, for example when the cyclist runs a red light or rides at night with no lights, they are probably going to loose, badly.
Posted by: oxman, oxford on 1:00pm Wed 26 Mar 08
Dan....It's a pretty safe assumption that you do not have children as their safety is of no consequence to you. Come back when you've grown up and stopped extolling the virtues of being able to act like a boy racer. (Oh, you mentioned that you leave criminal matters to the police....what police???)
Dan....It's a pretty safe assumption that you do not have children as their safety is of no consequence to you. Come back when you've grown up and stopped extolling the virtues of being able to act like a boy racer. (Oh, you mentioned that you leave criminal matters to the police....what police???)
Posted by: alan page on 6:32pm Wed 26 Mar 08
I think they should raise it to 40mph who cares if a kids gets run over I need to get from a-z fast end of.
I think they should raise it to 40mph who cares if a kids gets run over I need to get from a-z fast end of.
Posted by: C, Oxford on 12:13am Thu 27 Mar 08
No, Dan just thinks this website is his personal blog space where he can say what he wants without reprisal.
If he ever turned his considerable energies to a useful project he would be unstoppable.
Deep down, Dan, you know it's not a good idea to speed in residential areas, don't you? You just can't help responding provocatively...
No, Dan just thinks this website is his personal blog space where he can say what he wants without reprisal.
If he ever turned his considerable energies to a useful project he would be unstoppable.
Deep down, Dan, you know it's not a good idea to speed in residential areas, don't you? You just can't help responding provocatively...
What are these links for?
If you liked this article and would like to share it with others on the web who might be searching for good content we've made it easy for you to do it.
At the bottom of all articles, you'll see links to six sites. These sites - commonly called 'social bookmark' or 'social news' sites - have large communities of web users who share and rate interesting, useful and fun things on the web.
Clicking the links will automatically add the address of the story you are reading to one of these sites, letting you share it with others. Each site will ask you to register to share stories. Registration is free and once a member, you can store, recommend and search for stories that interest you.
More on Digg
More on del.icio.us
More on Furl
More on reddit
More on NowPublic/
More on Yahoo!
