BOROUGH council chiefs have agreed the principle of a long-term roll-out of 20mph speed limits across Warrington – but are to carry out further consultation first.
Officers have been authorised to progress a consultation exercise on individual schemes in three areas where temporary pilot schemes were carried out earlier this year.
Area Boards will be included in the consultation.
Analysis of the trials has shown that the number of injury collisions fell by 25.5 per cent, with an average of 2,678 fewer vehicles using the affected roads each week. The average reduction in speed was 1.45mph.
But there was evidence that towards the end of the trial period, in August, average speeds could be increasing again.
The three areas where consultation is to be carried out are Orford, Great Sankey and the town centre.
But two key distributor roads included in the 18-month trial period will not be progressed following advice from the police that a 30mph limit would be more appropriate and because of a likely impact on bus services.
Cost of a roll-out of 20mph restrictions across the borough is put at about £740,000, which means any such proposal is likely to be delayed because of the economic situation.
The cost of implementing the scheme in the three pilot areas is around £19,000, plus £1,500 for sending letters to people in the affected areas.
Warrington has consulted widely among other authorities which have introduced 20mph bans.
Portsmouth was the first to introduce a blanket ban and experienced varying degrees of success. While there was a 13 per cent reduction in collisions and a 15 per cent reduction in casualties, the number of accidents where people were killed or seriously injured rose by two per cent.
BOROUGH council chiefs have agreed the principle of a long-term roll-out
of 20mph speed limits across Warrington - but are to carry out further
consultation first.
20mph speed limits agreed in principle
66 Comments
Share.
About Author
Gary Skentelbery
Experienced journalist for more than 40 years. Managing Director of magazine publishing group with three in-house titles and on-line daily newspaper for Warrington. Experienced writer, photographer, PR consultant and media expert having written for local, regional and national newspapers. Specialties: PR, media, social networking, photographer, networking, advertising, sales, media crisis management. Chair of Warrington Healthwatch Director Warrington Chamber of Commerce Patron Tim Parry Johnathan Ball Foundation for Peace. Trustee Warrington Disability Partnership. Former Chairman of Warrington Town FC.
6 Comments
The cyclist’s champion has been plugging away at this telling the world what a safer environment we would have with the 20mph limit, using Portsmouth as an example. Now we find that in Portsmouth there has been an increase in accidents, yet WBC still go ahead with it.
You couldn’t make it up. Sounds like an episode from Fawlty Towers.
So which roads did the 2,678 vehicles use each week instead then?…… and were there any increases in the number of accidents on those roads ??
This has been plugged away at by such cycling groups as the Association of Firectors of Public Health, Dept for Transport, BRAKE, RoadPeace, The Audit Commission, the Sustainable Transport Commission, the London Assembly, the Parliamentary Advisory Committee on Transport Safety, the Transport Select Committee of MPs and 20’s Plenty for Us!
In Portsmouth there was achange in the small number of Killed or Sreriously Injured from 18.3 to 19.9. This number is so low as to be statistically insignificant. The total casualties fell from 163.7 to 129.4, a 22% reduction.
In terms of road user type, then cars were involved in 23% fewer accidents, and hence were a major beneficiary from the scheme.
Warrington is doing what they are also doing in Portsmouth, Oxford, Bristol, Leicester, Newcastle and Edinburgh and many more.
For more info the see http://www.20splentyforus.org.uk
Well the WBC report said that :-
“Overall the data collected would indicate that the presence of the 20mph speed limits on thethree key areas has not encouraged drivers to divert onto the network surrounding the trial roads.”
Regards
Rod
So why does the infromation above state an ‘average of 2,678 fewer vehicles using the affected roads each week’. Are there two sets of data depending on what issues are questioned? I cant find the actual coucil report on their web site so can someone please point me in the right direction so I can read it ??
Looking at the towns mentioned, it is possibly a good idea there because of the population size and number of pedestrians and cyclists. When assessing a situation, it should be like for like. We should only be copying others if it is good for the majority. The effort and energy pursuing this would be better used in educating those people on common sense and awareness. THEN the accidents might be reduced.