It appears that there's approval for a significant boost to safety at our nearby village of Ansty*. The news story in our local rag is here. In my view a great improvement (no doubt the BC's et al of this world will have a say ). This is an awkward roundabout and the road has a poor accident record, including at least one cyclist fatality in the vicinity. I can't see how dropping to 30 over a few hundred yards, is going to significantly lengthen journey times, even in rush hour (especially in rush hour, when the road gets quite congested anyway...).
So: isn't it a pity that the police appear to object! I must say I don't follow the line of reasoning in this letter. The road already has a 40mph limit which they have a duty to enforce, why should 30 be more difficult to enforce than 40? The road safety criteria (and local campaigning) have pointed to the need for 30, for years now.
Perhaps someone could explain.
*pronounced: rhyme with "untie".
So: isn't it a pity that the police appear to object! I must say I don't follow the line of reasoning in this letter. The road already has a 40mph limit which they have a duty to enforce, why should 30 be more difficult to enforce than 40? The road safety criteria (and local campaigning) have pointed to the need for 30, for years now.
Perhaps someone could explain.
*pronounced: rhyme with "untie".