Plea to slash speed limit rejected (From Daily Echo)

A very sensible decision by the Highways Agency considering the vast majority of these incidents occur in slow moving traffic and caused solely by driver inattention/incompet
ence. There is a proposed road widening scheme between the Ringwood and Verwood which will alleviate the bottleneck caused by slow moving traffic exiting Ringwood westbound. Reducing the speed limit is not a solution, it will only ever cause traffic to back up even more causing further congestion and potentially more collisions through driver error.

I drive from Christchurch to the M27 on the road every day. The problem with this stretch of the A31 at Ringwood is not excessive speed but the junctions for Poulner, Christchurch/Fording
bridge, by the Fish Inn/Texaco and Matchams/Verwood before you get to Ashley Heath.

At peak times every day including weekends this stretch is virtually stationary for long periods.

Why permission was given to expand the Co-op/Texaco and increase the dangers in accessing and exiting at this junction is beyond me.

Reducing the speed limit to 50mph may, though I remain to be convinced, have a beneficial effect but what is really needed is improvements to the four junctions.

I am in favour of a 50mph speed limit with average speed cameras, even at 70mph you are overtaken by many and even a small shunt causes horrendous problems it would be better if it took a little longer (a matter of minutes) than to get held up for ages because of an accident, surely it would make sense to have a 50mph limit on a trial basis. I agree there are problems with junctions caused mainly by the people using them but even that would be safer with a 50mph limit, just to say no on the basis of their crazy statistics is lunacy.

Outside of grockle season it's the millionaire 'road owner' lemmings commuting, whilst phoning/texting all too often, that seems to cause a fair number of the problems, that and older drivers who don't drive fast enough on their local trips. 30mph baulking LGV's on a delivery schedule always leads to problems...
What is needed is the whole road at the Ringwood end being by-passed with a motorway, the other end at Cadnam also suffers, again not just during grockle season.
Extend the M27 across the forest along the very wide, but mostly unused existing route path, past Verwood and Wimbourne, build to leave 'slow local roads' for local use, the intermixing of long distance 'fast' traffic and 'slow' local traffic is the root cause of most of the problem, so keep them apart!

It's not a motorway, it's an A road, a glorified DUAL CARRIAGEWAY, which means that it should be at most, the appropriate national speed limit for dual carriageways of 60mph.

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
It's not a motorway, it's an A road, a glorified DUAL CARRIAGEWAY, which means that it should be at most, the appropriate national speed limit for dual carriageways of 60mph.

https://www.gov.uk/s
peed-limits

ta-da! Speed limit on dual carriageway: 70mph

Took me 3 seconds to confirm.

So the Highways think there have not been enough injuries, do fatalies like the one two weeks ago near Ashley heath junction not count?

And yes the national speed limit on a duel carriageway is 70mph which is the same as a mortorway.

There is nothing wrong with the road it is the drivers.

Ginger To55er strikes again doesn't know his speed limits. 70 for cars motorbikes and cyclists (if they can get that fast) 60 for white van man who never sticks to it. Anyway it will all slow down when the "Shed dragging" season starts at Easter.

Niel wrote:
Outside of grockle season it's the millionaire 'road owner' lemmings commuting, whilst phoning/texting all too often, that seems to cause a fair number of the problems, that and older drivers who don't drive fast enough on their local trips. 30mph baulking LGV's on a delivery schedule always leads to problems...
What is needed is the whole road at the Ringwood end being by-passed with a motorway, the other end at Cadnam also suffers, again not just during grockle season.
Extend the M27 across the forest along the very wide, but mostly unused existing route path, past Verwood and Wimbourne, build to leave 'slow local roads' for local use, the intermixing of long distance 'fast' traffic and 'slow' local traffic is the root cause of most of the problem, so keep them apart!

I'm a 64 yo Mercedes driver, not rich, who has hands free telephony installed in the car(s).

Which part of this ungrammatical mis-spelt diatribe should annoy me?

Hmm? what a prat!

Georgem wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
It's not a motorway, it's an A road, a glorified DUAL CARRIAGEWAY, which means that it should be at most, the appropriate national speed limit for dual carriageways of 60mph.

https://www.gov.uk/s

peed-limits

ta-da! Speed limit on dual carriageway: 70mph

Took me 3 seconds to confirm.

Yes yes, admittedly I made a mistake but it doesn't change the fact that the speed limits on roads that are well known to be dangerous should be reduced.

biggus2 wrote:
Ginger To55er strikes again doesn't know his speed limits. 70 for cars motorbikes and cyclists (if they can get that fast) 60 for white van man who never sticks to it. Anyway it will all slow down when the "Shed dragging" season starts at Easter.

Keep the childish name calling in the playground and yes, some cyclists are able to hit 70mph, there's quite a few videos of cyclists doing so.

Burton Saint wrote:

Niel wrote:
Outside of grockle season it's the millionaire 'road owner' lemmings commuting, whilst phoning/texting all too often, that seems to cause a fair number of the problems, that and older drivers who don't drive fast enough on their local trips. 30mph baulking LGV's on a delivery schedule always leads to problems...
What is needed is the whole road at the Ringwood end being by-passed with a motorway, the other end at Cadnam also suffers, again not just during grockle season.
Extend the M27 across the forest along the very wide, but mostly unused existing route path, past Verwood and Wimbourne, build to leave 'slow local roads' for local use, the intermixing of long distance 'fast' traffic and 'slow' local traffic is the root cause of most of the problem, so keep them apart!

I'm a 64 yo Mercedes driver, not rich, who has hands free telephony installed in the car(s).

Which part of this ungrammatical mis-spelt diatribe should annoy me?

Hmm? what a prat!

But isn't it still recommended to not even use hands free as it can still distract you as much as a hand held phone?

I use this road alot and only today, travelling from Poulner to Wimborne, I said to my daughter in the car:-'' If only they could impose a speed limit here, near bridge/garage, Ringwood, it would make this road safer''!! At least if cars are moving more slowly, there is a chance to avoid a collision!! The road/junction is a DEATH TRAP, with mad devils racing! It is a mad race track! Then, on my way home travelling the other way, past the same junction, I SEE a serious accident has happened, with MORE flashing blue lights!! Yet another serious accident has taken place! It's SPEED that KILLS!! Please take note! I'm fearful of this road everytime I drive on it! I have driven right through the centre of London and out the other side in a brand new car without fear, but this road is a killer and frightens me to death...Something has to be done! I am fed up of being distressed by so many accidents here and MAD speeding maniacs! A lower speed limit would be very welcome indeed, unless you can think of an alternative road layout...Both would be brilliant,,,Please, let's have some action on this...We pay our road taxes, so let's have some real value for our money, so cutting out these distressing accident scenes/statistics!!

Last evening's RTC which is causing serious problems this morning was at the Fish Inn/Texaco garage junction at Ringwood. Whether or not excessive speed was a contributing factor will come out during the investigation but a major contribution will be the exit points onto the A31.

In response to Ginger Cyclist's comment about the recommendation not to use hands free in cars whilst driving, it is just that, a recommendation and not obligatory yet. It is also recommended that cyclists wear hi-viz clothes, helmets and observe the HIghway Code at all times including not riding two or more breast. How many do not do so?

Drive the Ringwood - Christchurch road early morning and spot the cyclists wearing dark clothing, no helmets and no lights. You won't be disappointed. But then in any RTC involving a cyclist or motorcyclist it's always 'car hits bike' isn't it.

Burton Saint wrote:
Last evening's RTC which is causing serious problems this morning was at the Fish Inn/Texaco garage junction at Ringwood. Whether or not excessive speed was a contributing factor will come out during the investigation but a major contribution will be the exit points onto the A31.

In response to Ginger Cyclist's comment about the recommendation not to use hands free in cars whilst driving, it is just that, a recommendation and not obligatory yet. It is also recommended that cyclists wear hi-viz clothes, helmets and observe the HIghway Code at all times including not riding two or more breast. How many do not do so?

Drive the Ringwood - Christchurch road early morning and spot the cyclists wearing dark clothing, no helmets and no lights. You won't be disappointed. But then in any RTC involving a cyclist or motorcyclist it's always 'car hits bike' isn't it.

You make the same observations as other motorists but from two wheels these concerns are totally invisible.

I support the local council to reduce the speed to 50 (I'd prefer 40). It's a road with inbuilt 'accidents' & the designers should be shot & those who sanctioned it. I avoid the area as much as possible.
Pity about all the name-calling here.....most unedifying & impossible for conversation.......

I know that the use of handsfree in vehicles seem to be blamed for situations occuring, I cannot see that handfree is any different than having a passenger jibber jabbering in the vehicle or one or two screaming /fighting kids in the back, are they going to ban passengers and design cars for one person only which then has an eco problem?
the latest accident has claimed the life of a 16 year old Girl. Perhaps now the speed limit will be reviewed.

Tenderhearts wife wrote:
I know that the use of handsfree in vehicles seem to be blamed for situations occuring, I cannot see that handfree is any different than having a passenger jibber jabbering in the vehicle or one or two screaming /fighting kids in the back, are they going to ban passengers and design cars for one person only which then has an eco problem?
the latest accident has claimed the life of a 16 year old Girl. Perhaps now the speed limit will be reviewed.

Hands-free is quite different from passenger noise, for starters you can tell a passenger to shut the **** up and why is clearly visible to them, unlike a 'customer' or colleague on the phone who wants not just a civil response, but in-depth details too all too often...

Having driven (crawled) through Ringwood before the current 'by-pass' was built, the increase in traffic volume it has enable is huge, but as then I still contend, local road systems are required, to keep local traffic away from long distance traffic. The M27 also suffers greatly from the local road user mentality, because there are no viable alternatives. Travelling in Europe you find local systems, often in parallel with main trunk routes at times, but with effective segregation keeping locals safe.

As far as the 16 year old who was killed, may she rest in peace, is concerned, did she have a safe and viable alternative route? Riding a machine limited to 28 MPH on a road where the traffic travels at 70 MPH (and more) is never a good thing.

The “highway chiefs”, on this occasion, seem to be talking some sense. As much as we would all prefer otherwise, wherever there are roads, there will be casualties. Just look at this interactive online casualty map: http://map.itoworld.
com/
Any road safety policy that thinks that “something has to be done” as a result of any accident is acting on emotion after the event, and if we allow emotion to determine policies, we will end up with more road deaths than if we use science, data, evidence, balance and consistency. Before we kneejerk with “there’s been a death so the limit has to go down” we should at the very least be asking for an understanding of the circumstances. Was speed a significant factor? What are the typical speeds there so would a reduction make much difference? Would it result in further erosion of speed limit respect and therefore increase speeds and danger? Could such a limit on such a length of dual carriageway be sensibly enforced? Would normal safe drivers be brought into conflict with the law? Would a driver bored to tears sitting on a deserted dual carriageway for miles in the middle of the night put his foot down to try to make up for lost time and annoyance when he gets into the country and cause more danger elsewhere?
These (and many others) are very good reasons why speed limits should be right, not simply reduced until we have no deaths – we’ve already gone too far with that and it hasn’t worked and it won’t work.
We must start doing more to target appalling driving standards, that will certainly have an effect on accident reduction. Simple driver error is by far the biggest factor in all serious accidents – 65%.
Councillor Michael Thierry may be acting in good faith, but what are his qualifications? Road safety is a complex issue, and we can only do a small amount of what we would like to do. So, again, we should not call for one solution unless we are sure that we would not achieve better safety efficiency with another. Where is the evidence from Mr Thierry, that he has carefully considered all potential solutions, and has determined that the most cost effective of all is a speed limit reduction?
Perhaps Mr Thierry should leave road safety planning to the experts.

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

Georgem wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
It's not a motorway, it's an A road, a glorified DUAL CARRIAGEWAY, which means that it should be at most, the appropriate national speed limit for dual carriageways of 60mph.

https://www.gov.uk/s


peed-limits

ta-da! Speed limit on dual carriageway: 70mph

Took me 3 seconds to confirm.

Yes yes, admittedly I made a mistake but it doesn't change the fact that the speed limits on roads that are well known to be dangerous should be reduced.

Please prove to me beyond reasonable doubt that all speed limits on all roads are dangerous and should be reduced.

Maybe it's time you stopped citing your opinions as "fact".