News RSS Feed Send your news, pictures & videos


20mph restrictions in Worthing "could save £2 million a year"

Speeding campaigners claim a 20mph limit could save a town £2 million a year.

Members of the 20’s Plenty for Worthing campaign say the move would lead to an immediate reduction in the number of deaths and injuries on the roads.

The figures currently show an average of two people are killed and 267 injured on Worthing’s roads every year.

They say if the reduction in casualties matched the level seen in Portsmouth since the introduction of a 20mph limit there the savings in terms of public spending would be £2 million.

From today residents will start receiving surveys on whether they would welcome a 20mph limit in Worthing.

Campaigners say reducing the limit would cost about £245,000 and could be paid for from the money paid by property developers as part of planning agreements.

In the past five years, more than two-thirds of those killed or seriously injured on Worthing’s roads were pedestrians and cyclists and 83% of those have been on roads with 30mph limits.

Comments(11)

Abraham Gray says...
8:08am Mon 15 Aug 11

It COULD come from local business's and developers but it WILL come from your Council Tax and that Dear residents is a FACT.

BSmytherman says...
9:25am Mon 15 Aug 11

The 20's Plenty scheme will NOT be funded from Council tax.
It will come from s.106 Developer contributions

pfriis says...
9:35am Mon 15 Aug 11

Wherever it comes from, if we don't spend it on this then we've got £245,000 more to spend on something else.

And £245k sounds to me like a very low guess at what it will cost.

Thelnsider says...
9:44am Mon 15 Aug 11

pfriis wrote:
Wherever it comes from, if we don't spend it on this then we've got £245,000 more to spend on something else.

And £245k sounds to me like a very low guess at what it will cost.
Exactly, what a waste of money and resources. Worthing Pride I vote for!

rolivan says...
9:53am Mon 15 Aug 11

Does this involve putting chicanes and humps in the road to hinder Ambulances on the way to Hospitals like was suggested in lyndhurst road a few years ago and was quickly shelved when asked how will emergency vehicles cope?

Tailgaters Anonymous says...
12:09pm Mon 15 Aug 11

S 106 developers! Pull the other one! My experiences of those trying to get round sec 106 is that they will do anything to reduce costs rather than contribute 'pro bono'!
And on the key point Lewes over the years regretted including cobbled humps and 20 mph for trafffic calming as the measures actually increase pollution.

Morpheus says...
4:28pm Mon 15 Aug 11

If 83% of accidents are on roads with a 30 MPH limit, perhaps the answer is to increase the speed limit since there are obviously fewer accidents on those roads. The real issue is of course that accidents happen where there are more people and the speed limit has little to do with it.

enigmatix says...
5:39pm Mon 15 Aug 11

What will be the cost to local road users of the increased fuel consumption caused by cars, buses, vans, etc. travelling at this lower, less efficient speed (typically 2nd or 3rd gear, while 30mph is comfortable in 4th in many cars)? With this increased fuel consumption will come increased vehicle emissions, with their corresponding health and environment issues. Can we have a full debate that includes the cons as well as the pros, so that a fully informed decision can be made?

Thelnsider says...
8:04pm Mon 15 Aug 11

Morpheus wrote:
If 83% of accidents are on roads with a 30 MPH limit, perhaps the answer is to increase the speed limit since there are obviously fewer accidents on those roads. The real issue is of course that accidents happen where there are more people and the speed limit has little to do with it.
83% of accidents are indeed on roads with a 30 mph speed limit, 61% more of people struck by vehicles at 30 mph die or are seriously injured, 37% of Cyclists would use the road only if the pavement was full, 34% of crimes in Sussex are actually solved and 96% of all statistics are made up. I am 100% correct in this, and indeed, everything I say.

bill porter says...
8:07pm Mon 15 Aug 11

So, the council moan about not having enough money to carryout important community projects or improvements to the towns facilities but are happy to waste S106 contributions that could be used for this to implement a scheme that won't be enforced and isn't wanted by the majority of residents (as opposed to a vocal minority).

BSmytherman (Bob the ex-burger flipper and disgraced ex-libdem leader) should try asking the working residents of the town what they want rather than take a straw poll of party supporters who are all so old most have lost their licence anyway.

20splenty says...
5:22pm Thu 18 Aug 11

20mph limits don't increase fuel consumption. Department for Transport state "driving more slowly at a steady pace saves fuel and carbon dioxide emissions, unless an unnecessarily low gear is used”. see http://www.20splenty
forus.org.uk/polluti
on.htm

The majority of residents and indeed UK citizens think 20mph is the right speed limit on residential roads. 70-80% support every year from 2000-2009 in the British Social Attitudes Survey.

For more info see http://www.20splenty
forworthing.org.uk/

click2find

Most popular






About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree