Half of drivers against more speed restrictions, according to poll

Study shows drivers against 20mph zones

Study shows drivers against 20mph zones

First published in News Daily Echo: Photograph of the Author by , Senior Reporter

DRIVERS are against the idea of blanket 20mph speed limits on urban roads, according to new research.

The study by the Institute of Advanced Motorists (IAM) found half of drivers from the UK are against imposing the restrictions.

It comes as 20mph zones are being increasingly introduced in Hampshire.

For the past six years, most of Portsmouth residential areas have had 20mph zones, with speed charity Brake claiming casualty rates have fallen by 22 per cent as a result.

In Southampton, Labour city council bosses introduced a pilot 20mph area in Maybush– and there are calls from the Tories to introduce them across the city.

Elsewhere, regeneration plans are under way which include introducing zones in some roads in Woolston.

Across Hampshire, pilot schemes are being introduced in Cherbourg Road in Eastleigh, Wallington village near Fareham, Hythe and Stanmore.

The IAM research found under a third of motorists are willing to embrace the idea and a fifth are undecided – while male drivers are more likely to be against the idea than female.

Fifty-five per cent of young drivers were against 20mph zones as a speed limit for towns while 34 per cent of older drivers were in favour.

Drivers are very supportive of lower speed limits outside schools though, with ninety-four per cent of respondents agreeing that this would be a good idea.

Areas with high numbers of pedestrians such as parks record 34 per cent in favour, hospitals and shops were the next most popular with 21 per cent of drivers agreeing.

But only eight per cent of respondents opted for 20mph zones near cycle lanes.

Meanwhile, more than three quarters of drivers believe that 20mph speed limits help to increase safety for pedestrians, although only a fifth saw it as a positive advantage for cyclists.

Pollution and noise were not seen as serious benefits.

Comments (26)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

3:12pm Sat 17 May 14

fishter says...

In other blindingly obvious news, prisoners found not in favour of cell doors.
In other blindingly obvious news, prisoners found not in favour of cell doors. fishter
  • Score: 6

3:51pm Sat 17 May 14

freefinker says...

.. must be a good idea then.
Implement with all possible speed (intended)
.. must be a good idea then. Implement with all possible speed (intended) freefinker
  • Score: 0

3:53pm Sat 17 May 14

Forest Resident says...

Motorists in the main simply do not adhere to the twenty mph limits in my experience http://youtu.be/KnVN
l3O9eWk
Motorists in the main simply do not adhere to the twenty mph limits in my experience http://youtu.be/KnVN l3O9eWk Forest Resident
  • Score: 1

4:03pm Sat 17 May 14

elvisimo says...

If proven to work. Do it
If proven to work. Do it elvisimo
  • Score: 0

4:22pm Sat 17 May 14

userds5050 says...

No sh** sherlck. Seriously, how much did the IAM spend coming up with this crap? The only stat of any note is does reducing the speed limit to 20mph reduce deaths on the road.
No sh** sherlck. Seriously, how much did the IAM spend coming up with this crap? The only stat of any note is does reducing the speed limit to 20mph reduce deaths on the road. userds5050
  • Score: 3

4:47pm Sat 17 May 14

sotonbusdriver says...

With modern cars it is much harder to maintain a 20mph speed than it is at just under the 30mph.
Cars travelling at to slower speed are forced into driving in 2nd or 3rd gear rather than 4th, in some small cars even 5th at 30mph. More petrol and diesel is needed to drive in 2nd/3rd, causing more pollution than in higher gears.
But the biggest questionable argument is, when people expect vehicles to be travelling slower, they take more risks in crossing roads.... Although at 20mph, assuming the same required thinking distance you can stop 35 feet quicker than at 30mph, but in reality, peoples thinking isn't usually that responsive or better at slower speeds.
The likelihood to survive at 20, is not much greater than at 30, but with the increase in pollution is this the right move, as residential areas will have great exhaust emission in the areas.
Accidents I have witnessed in residential areas wouldn't have been avoided by slower traffic. Those come from older people who misjudge crossing the road and don't leave enough space, thinking they are faster at walking than they area, or children darting out in the road, between cars without even looking.... Slower speeds wouldn't stop this happening.
The police love 20mph areas as motorists have difficulties in driving at 20mph in clear roads, a kind of optical illusion, so gives the Government an open licence to get more money out of motorists. The Police wouldn't do an education of talking to drivers over 20 mph, and leave it at that.. A nice fixed fine, points on your licence and a few more points towards the officer getting promoted for catching so many drivers in one go...
If 20mph ZONES are to be implemented, then at 30/40 foot distances HUGE 20mph signs need to be painted on the roads, to keep the drivers aware they are in the slower zones.... We have been so use to them being 30mph...
Just like when you come off a motorway after many miles at 70mph, most drivers find it hard to then adhere to perhaps 40mph...
With modern cars it is much harder to maintain a 20mph speed than it is at just under the 30mph. Cars travelling at to slower speed are forced into driving in 2nd or 3rd gear rather than 4th, in some small cars even 5th at 30mph. More petrol and diesel is needed to drive in 2nd/3rd, causing more pollution than in higher gears. But the biggest questionable argument is, when people expect vehicles to be travelling slower, they take more risks in crossing roads.... Although at 20mph, assuming the same required thinking distance you can stop 35 feet quicker than at 30mph, but in reality, peoples thinking isn't usually that responsive or better at slower speeds. The likelihood to survive at 20, is not much greater than at 30, but with the increase in pollution is this the right move, as residential areas will have great exhaust emission in the areas. Accidents I have witnessed in residential areas wouldn't have been avoided by slower traffic. Those come from older people who misjudge crossing the road and don't leave enough space, thinking they are faster at walking than they area, or children darting out in the road, between cars without even looking.... Slower speeds wouldn't stop this happening. The police love 20mph areas as motorists have difficulties in driving at 20mph in clear roads, a kind of optical illusion, so gives the Government an open licence to get more money out of motorists. The Police wouldn't do an education of talking to drivers over 20 mph, and leave it at that.. A nice fixed fine, points on your licence and a few more points towards the officer getting promoted for catching so many drivers in one go... If 20mph ZONES are to be implemented, then at 30/40 foot distances HUGE 20mph signs need to be painted on the roads, to keep the drivers aware they are in the slower zones.... We have been so use to them being 30mph... Just like when you come off a motorway after many miles at 70mph, most drivers find it hard to then adhere to perhaps 40mph... sotonbusdriver
  • Score: 3

6:01pm Sat 17 May 14

downfader says...

Modern cars do have options that do make 20mph easier/safer.. cruise control, even go automatic for city driving.

By the way.. cough! ;-)
I
I
V

https://docs.google.
com/forms/d/1SEmFAWO
BfdnjeIVrg31uhSGvP6X
LrWM8GUiaZAWfn84/vie
wform
Modern cars do have options that do make 20mph easier/safer.. cruise control, even go automatic for city driving. By the way.. cough! ;-) I I V https://docs.google. com/forms/d/1SEmFAWO BfdnjeIVrg31uhSGvP6X LrWM8GUiaZAWfn84/vie wform downfader
  • Score: -3

6:13pm Sat 17 May 14

Crazywolf says...

No one minds speed restrictions where they are necessary - outside schools at school run time for example, but the dumb idiots in power would just put a blanket 20 zone, even for midnight! That would increase motorists frustration, and add hugely to emissions. It would have no effect on those that already ignore the speed limits so, all in all, be extremely counter-productive. Already South Hampshire has suffered extreme pollution this year - mostly due to stationary cars, either stuck in traffic or waiting at empty traffic lights with no cars coming the other way!!!
No one minds speed restrictions where they are necessary - outside schools at school run time for example, but the dumb idiots in power would just put a blanket 20 zone, even for midnight! That would increase motorists frustration, and add hugely to emissions. It would have no effect on those that already ignore the speed limits so, all in all, be extremely counter-productive. Already South Hampshire has suffered extreme pollution this year - mostly due to stationary cars, either stuck in traffic or waiting at empty traffic lights with no cars coming the other way!!! Crazywolf
  • Score: 3

6:32pm Sat 17 May 14

southy says...

Glad to see a few did take note on what i said a few years ago about slower speeds and pollution
Glad to see a few did take note on what i said a few years ago about slower speeds and pollution southy
  • Score: -5

8:00pm Sat 17 May 14

cmth40 says...

elvisimo wrote:
If proven to work. Do it
its a known fact that if a car hits someone travelling at 20 they will go UNDER THE CAR and MAYBE UNDER A WHEEL at 30 they will go either to right/left and miss going under ask any minister of transport that as gone into speeds
[quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: If proven to work. Do it[/p][/quote]its a known fact that if a car hits someone travelling at 20 they will go UNDER THE CAR and MAYBE UNDER A WHEEL at 30 they will go either to right/left and miss going under ask any minister of transport that as gone into speeds cmth40
  • Score: -2

8:08pm Sat 17 May 14

Torchie1 says...

southy wrote:
Glad to see a few did take note on what i said a few years ago about slower speeds and pollution
Perhaps others have also found the same Google page?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Glad to see a few did take note on what i said a few years ago about slower speeds and pollution[/p][/quote]Perhaps others have also found the same Google page? Torchie1
  • Score: 3

8:33pm Sat 17 May 14

Huffter says...

Just wondering how pollution and noise could ever be seen as any kind of benefits, let alone serious ones?
Just wondering how pollution and noise could ever be seen as any kind of benefits, let alone serious ones? Huffter
  • Score: 1

12:00am Sun 18 May 14

southy says...

Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Glad to see a few did take note on what i said a few years ago about slower speeds and pollution
Perhaps others have also found the same Google page?
Torchie you was one of those who said it was rubbish
A car will kick out the lest amount of pollution in top gear and at the lowest possible revs to keep the car moving over an equal distance with out putting the engine under strain.
You might have to google it, but its is common sense to any driver, but then common sense is not your strong point.
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Glad to see a few did take note on what i said a few years ago about slower speeds and pollution[/p][/quote]Perhaps others have also found the same Google page?[/p][/quote]Torchie you was one of those who said it was rubbish A car will kick out the lest amount of pollution in top gear and at the lowest possible revs to keep the car moving over an equal distance with out putting the engine under strain. You might have to google it, but its is common sense to any driver, but then common sense is not your strong point. southy
  • Score: 2

12:05am Sun 18 May 14

southy says...

cmth40 wrote:
elvisimo wrote:
If proven to work. Do it
its a known fact that if a car hits someone travelling at 20 they will go UNDER THE CAR and MAYBE UNDER A WHEEL at 30 they will go either to right/left and miss going under ask any minister of transport that as gone into speeds
That is very true it is the slower speeds where a person is hit will end up going under its happen to often with buses.
At 30 more likely to be held in the one spot and as the car slows down the body dont slow down as fast
[quote][p][bold]cmth40[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: If proven to work. Do it[/p][/quote]its a known fact that if a car hits someone travelling at 20 they will go UNDER THE CAR and MAYBE UNDER A WHEEL at 30 they will go either to right/left and miss going under ask any minister of transport that as gone into speeds[/p][/quote]That is very true it is the slower speeds where a person is hit will end up going under its happen to often with buses. At 30 more likely to be held in the one spot and as the car slows down the body dont slow down as fast southy
  • Score: 0

12:10am Sun 18 May 14

Positively4thStreet says...

Make it a mandatory £1000 fine for any driver caught doing more than one mile an hour over 30mph in a 30 limit.Everyone will be doing 20 mph in built up areas overnight.No need to spend money on new signs or anything.
Make it a mandatory £1000 fine for any driver caught doing more than one mile an hour over 30mph in a 30 limit.Everyone will be doing 20 mph in built up areas overnight.No need to spend money on new signs or anything. Positively4thStreet
  • Score: -2

1:59am Sun 18 May 14

Eric_Cartman says...

sotonbusdriver wrote:
With modern cars it is much harder to maintain a 20mph speed than it is at just under the 30mph. Cars travelling at to slower speed are forced into driving in 2nd or 3rd gear rather than 4th, in some small cars even 5th at 30mph. More petrol and diesel is needed to drive in 2nd/3rd, causing more pollution than in higher gears. But the biggest questionable argument is, when people expect vehicles to be travelling slower, they take more risks in crossing roads.... Although at 20mph, assuming the same required thinking distance you can stop 35 feet quicker than at 30mph, but in reality, peoples thinking isn't usually that responsive or better at slower speeds. The likelihood to survive at 20, is not much greater than at 30, but with the increase in pollution is this the right move, as residential areas will have great exhaust emission in the areas. Accidents I have witnessed in residential areas wouldn't have been avoided by slower traffic. Those come from older people who misjudge crossing the road and don't leave enough space, thinking they are faster at walking than they area, or children darting out in the road, between cars without even looking.... Slower speeds wouldn't stop this happening. The police love 20mph areas as motorists have difficulties in driving at 20mph in clear roads, a kind of optical illusion, so gives the Government an open licence to get more money out of motorists. The Police wouldn't do an education of talking to drivers over 20 mph, and leave it at that.. A nice fixed fine, points on your licence and a few more points towards the officer getting promoted for catching so many drivers in one go... If 20mph ZONES are to be implemented, then at 30/40 foot distances HUGE 20mph signs need to be painted on the roads, to keep the drivers aware they are in the slower zones.... We have been so use to them being 30mph... Just like when you come off a motorway after many miles at 70mph, most drivers find it hard to then adhere to perhaps 40mph...
The chances of dying after being hit at 20 is 1 in 10. At thirty, it is 5/10 and at 40 it is 9/10. You can find this info on AA and RoSPA websites.
[quote][p][bold]sotonbusdriver[/bold] wrote: With modern cars it is much harder to maintain a 20mph speed than it is at just under the 30mph. Cars travelling at to slower speed are forced into driving in 2nd or 3rd gear rather than 4th, in some small cars even 5th at 30mph. More petrol and diesel is needed to drive in 2nd/3rd, causing more pollution than in higher gears. But the biggest questionable argument is, when people expect vehicles to be travelling slower, they take more risks in crossing roads.... Although at 20mph, assuming the same required thinking distance you can stop 35 feet quicker than at 30mph, but in reality, peoples thinking isn't usually that responsive or better at slower speeds. The likelihood to survive at 20, is not much greater than at 30, but with the increase in pollution is this the right move, as residential areas will have great exhaust emission in the areas. Accidents I have witnessed in residential areas wouldn't have been avoided by slower traffic. Those come from older people who misjudge crossing the road and don't leave enough space, thinking they are faster at walking than they area, or children darting out in the road, between cars without even looking.... Slower speeds wouldn't stop this happening. The police love 20mph areas as motorists have difficulties in driving at 20mph in clear roads, a kind of optical illusion, so gives the Government an open licence to get more money out of motorists. The Police wouldn't do an education of talking to drivers over 20 mph, and leave it at that.. A nice fixed fine, points on your licence and a few more points towards the officer getting promoted for catching so many drivers in one go... If 20mph ZONES are to be implemented, then at 30/40 foot distances HUGE 20mph signs need to be painted on the roads, to keep the drivers aware they are in the slower zones.... We have been so use to them being 30mph... Just like when you come off a motorway after many miles at 70mph, most drivers find it hard to then adhere to perhaps 40mph...[/p][/quote]The chances of dying after being hit at 20 is 1 in 10. At thirty, it is 5/10 and at 40 it is 9/10. You can find this info on AA and RoSPA websites. Eric_Cartman
  • Score: 1

9:27am Sun 18 May 14

richard57 says...

I say bring in 20 mph limit and do away with speed humps cos they dont work in millbrook/maybush
I say bring in 20 mph limit and do away with speed humps cos they dont work in millbrook/maybush richard57
  • Score: 0

10:06am Sun 18 May 14

Positively4thStreet says...

Governments could prevent thousands of deaths on British roads,by simply introducing massive fines and retests for offences like speeding or mobile phone use,and there is no reason they shouldn't, because we are talking about peoples lives here.
It won't happen of course,because it would be a vote loser,and after all,politics is all about personal power isn't it,not the safety and welfare of the British people?
Governments could prevent thousands of deaths on British roads,by simply introducing massive fines and retests for offences like speeding or mobile phone use,and there is no reason they shouldn't, because we are talking about peoples lives here. It won't happen of course,because it would be a vote loser,and after all,politics is all about personal power isn't it,not the safety and welfare of the British people? Positively4thStreet
  • Score: -2

10:59am Sun 18 May 14

andysaints007 says...

downfader wrote:
Modern cars do have options that do make 20mph easier/safer.. cruise control, even go automatic for city driving.

By the way.. cough! ;-)
I
I
V

https://docs.google.

com/forms/d/1SEmFAWO

BfdnjeIVrg31uhSGvP6X

LrWM8GUiaZAWfn84/vie

wform
I would like to see you try using cruise control at 20mph !
[quote][p][bold]downfader[/bold] wrote: Modern cars do have options that do make 20mph easier/safer.. cruise control, even go automatic for city driving. By the way.. cough! ;-) I I V https://docs.google. com/forms/d/1SEmFAWO BfdnjeIVrg31uhSGvP6X LrWM8GUiaZAWfn84/vie wform[/p][/quote]I would like to see you try using cruise control at 20mph ! andysaints007
  • Score: 4

11:37am Sun 18 May 14

redsnapper says...

In the USA they have had 15/20 mph and enforced no parking zones outside schools in nearly every state. Why can't we do it here, quite simply because councils are totally incompetent and councillors are more interested in their expenses than saving lives..and this is the same throughout every county. Forget blanket urban speed limits--sort the schools out first.
In the USA they have had 15/20 mph and enforced no parking zones outside schools in nearly every state. Why can't we do it here, quite simply because councils are totally incompetent and councillors are more interested in their expenses than saving lives..and this is the same throughout every county. Forget blanket urban speed limits--sort the schools out first. redsnapper
  • Score: 0

1:50pm Sun 18 May 14

Turtlebay says...

Why stop at 20 mph? Why not make it 4 mph and force a man with a red flag to walk in front of each car!
Why stop at 20 mph? Why not make it 4 mph and force a man with a red flag to walk in front of each car! Turtlebay
  • Score: 4

7:03pm Sun 18 May 14

FoysCornerBoy says...

I'd be interested in a robust analysis of the statistics that show how a blanket 20 mph zone in Portsmouth may have contributed to reduced rates of people killed or seriously injured on their roads. If a clear causal relationship exists then the case for introducing a similar measure in Southampton becomes compelling.

I've read somewhere that the costs associated with bringing in a City-wide scheme are anywhere between £350,000 and £1.3 million (before factoring in any enforcement costs). It will be interesting to hear from those people advocating a 20 mph policy (especially the politicians) where they think the money for this will come from.
I'd be interested in a robust analysis of the statistics that show how a blanket 20 mph zone in Portsmouth may have contributed to reduced rates of people killed or seriously injured on their roads. If a clear causal relationship exists then the case for introducing a similar measure in Southampton becomes compelling. I've read somewhere that the costs associated with bringing in a City-wide scheme are anywhere between £350,000 and £1.3 million (before factoring in any enforcement costs). It will be interesting to hear from those people advocating a 20 mph policy (especially the politicians) where they think the money for this will come from. FoysCornerBoy
  • Score: 1

9:26am Mon 19 May 14

grampsw says...

The 20 mph has made no difference in Green Lane Maybush, they need to put restrictions on Romsey road and fine those that ignore the traffic signage at 3 junctions.
The 20 mph has made no difference in Green Lane Maybush, they need to put restrictions on Romsey road and fine those that ignore the traffic signage at 3 junctions. grampsw
  • Score: 0

9:58am Mon 19 May 14

Carpe Diem says...

grampsw wrote:
The 20 mph has made no difference in Green Lane Maybush, they need to put restrictions on Romsey road and fine those that ignore the traffic signage at 3 junctions.
The 20 mph restrictions around Maybush (including Green Lane) are the most pointless I have ever seen. I would be very interested to find know if anybody has stats that show a high occurrence of accidents in this area. I've live in the area for over 50 years and cannot remember any serious accident.

It's just another example of councils meddling for the sake of it and then using it as a 'shining example' as justification to introduce city wide restrictions.

30 mph has been fine for decades, why change it now.
[quote][p][bold]grampsw[/bold] wrote: The 20 mph has made no difference in Green Lane Maybush, they need to put restrictions on Romsey road and fine those that ignore the traffic signage at 3 junctions.[/p][/quote]The 20 mph restrictions around Maybush (including Green Lane) are the most pointless I have ever seen. I would be very interested to find know if anybody has stats that show a high occurrence of accidents in this area. I've live in the area for over 50 years and cannot remember any serious accident. It's just another example of councils meddling for the sake of it and then using it as a 'shining example' as justification to introduce city wide restrictions. 30 mph has been fine for decades, why change it now. Carpe Diem
  • Score: 2

6:17pm Tue 20 May 14

Dan Soton says...

Who'd take any notice of the Institute of Advanced Motorists when Southampton's average car journey speed is below 17.8mph.?

My road is nearly as bad as it was before they spent £Millions totally rebuilding it.. little over 6 years ago..

One culprit.. Speeding Lorries

One solution.. Labour are trialing it all others are backing it.. Citywide 20 mph speed limit.




,,
Who'd take any notice of the Institute of Advanced Motorists when Southampton's average car journey speed is below 17.8mph.? My road is nearly as bad as it was before they spent £Millions totally rebuilding it.. little over 6 years ago.. One culprit.. Speeding Lorries One solution.. Labour are trialing it all others are backing it.. Citywide 20 mph speed limit. ,, Dan Soton
  • Score: -1

6:45pm Tue 20 May 14

Dan Soton says...

Dan Soton wrote:
Who'd take any notice of the Institute of Advanced Motorists when Southampton's average car journey speed is below 17.8mph.?

My road is nearly as bad as it was before they spent £Millions totally rebuilding it.. little over 6 years ago..

One culprit.. Speeding Lorries

One solution.. Labour are trialing it all others are backing it.. Citywide 20 mph speed limit.




,,
,,

Citywide 20 mph speed limit to reduce Car pollution...


We are told by et al that going slower increases car exhaust pollution, it may well do so.. but the most dangerous pollutants aren't all expelled out of a cars exhaust system..


Fine metal (iron, copper, manganese) particulate matter originating from DISC BRAKE WEAR CONTRIBUTES UP TO 20% OF THE TOTAL TRAFFIC EMISSIONS, the particles damage tight junctions with a mechanism involving oxidative stress, disc brake wear particles also increase proinflammatory cytokine responses.

http://www.biomedcen
tral.com/content/pdf
/1743-8977-6-30.pdf



,,
[quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: Who'd take any notice of the Institute of Advanced Motorists when Southampton's average car journey speed is below 17.8mph.? My road is nearly as bad as it was before they spent £Millions totally rebuilding it.. little over 6 years ago.. One culprit.. Speeding Lorries One solution.. Labour are trialing it all others are backing it.. Citywide 20 mph speed limit. ,,[/p][/quote],, Citywide 20 mph speed limit to reduce Car pollution... We are told by et al that going slower increases car exhaust pollution, it may well do so.. but the most dangerous pollutants aren't all expelled out of a cars exhaust system.. Fine metal (iron, copper, manganese) particulate matter originating from DISC BRAKE WEAR CONTRIBUTES UP TO 20% OF THE TOTAL TRAFFIC EMISSIONS, the particles damage tight junctions with a mechanism involving oxidative stress, disc brake wear particles also increase proinflammatory cytokine responses. http://www.biomedcen tral.com/content/pdf /1743-8977-6-30.pdf ,, Dan Soton
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

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