Hertfordshire County Council to look at plans for 20mph limit in town

3:20pm Tuesday 19th March 2013 in News Photograph of the Author By Mike Wright, Chief Reporter

Watford politicians press for 20mph limit in town Watford politicians press for 20mph limit in town

Ambitions to turn Watford into a 20mph town have been given a jump start as county politicians are set to look at the proposals.

Hertfordshire County Council will examine the possibility of implementing blanket 20mph zones on Thursday.

Thus far the ruling Conservative administration at county hall has rejected proposals to cut the speed limit in all no major roads in Watford, describing the scheme as "not appropriate" for the town.

However in December when North Herts District Council voted for a town-wide 20mph scheme in Hitchin, the county council explored the feasibility of such a scheme.

The move has triggered a special meeting of the county’s overview and scrutiny committee, which will hear from campaigners for the Watford scheme including borough councillor Peter Jeffree and Kevin Ambrose from 20’s Plenty Watford.

Politicians in Watford have been pressing for a town-wide scheme since all four borough council parties voted for in March last year.

Comments(14)

LSC says...
3:52pm Tue 19 Mar 13

Look at the story below. The roads are in a terrible state and they want to spend money on something new?
Signage and enforcement alone of a 20mph limit could pay to fix 1,000 potholes.

We keep getting told WE ARE SKINT. Why waste money on a scheme that nobody knows will make any difference to anything anyway?

Idiots.

Report this post »

Mohandas says...
4:42pm Tue 19 Mar 13

I'm all for safety but let's think what urgently needs doing before embarking on new signage and abandon what should be done.

Could we not do the basics eg get rid of all the unwanted, discarded, irrelevant, bent, damaged, unmaintained, street signs or abandoned poles?

What about potholes, cracked pavements, deep cleaning of drains, clearing the tons of litter from streets, alleyways, etc?

Can we not prosecute those that damage the pavements usually because of building work?

Do we need to focus on what is in front of us before our litter strewn roads resemble a third world country.

Report this post »

LSC says...
5:02pm Tue 19 Mar 13

Agreed. Outside my house, there is a signpost, and one on the other side of the road. 20 odd years ago, this was a two-way street, and one side of the signpost said 'Give way' and the other was double arrows, if I remember.

But when the road changed, the double arrows were replaced with a 'No Entry' and the Give Way was simply removed.
But the lights that illuminated both sides were not. For 20 YEARS the grey back of the No Entry signs have been lit up every night. 20 years. They have even replaced the bulbs when they failed.
The streetlights go off quite early here, but the back of the signs are illuminated all night, every night.

And these people want me to believe they know what they are doing?

Report this post »

MarsLander says...
5:29pm Tue 19 Mar 13

LSC wrote:
Look at the story below. The roads are in a terrible state and they want to spend money on something new?
Signage and enforcement alone of a 20mph limit could pay to fix 1,000 potholes.

We keep getting told WE ARE SKINT. Why waste money on a scheme that nobody knows will make any difference to anything anyway?

Idiots.
This is what happens, particularly around election time, when the need to be seen to be doing something outweighs the need to do the right thing.

Idiots? Yes, that about sums them up.

Report this post »

Wacko Jacko says...
5:48pm Tue 19 Mar 13

On the contrary dear commentators, what could be more important than improving the safety of our residential streets and improving the quality of life for all residents? 20's Plenty for me.

Report this post »

gusgreen says...
6:04pm Tue 19 Mar 13

Wacko Jacko wrote:
On the contrary dear commentators, what could be more important than improving the safety of our residential streets and improving the quality of life for all residents? 20's Plenty for me.
Improve the safety of the streets by Fixing them that's more important than a silly PC stunt that has not proved to be safer but in a lot of cases has lead to more accidents!

Report this post »

Nick Lincoln says...
7:21pm Tue 19 Mar 13

Wacko Jacko wrote:
On the contrary dear commentators, what could be more important than improving the safety of our residential streets and improving the quality of life for all residents? 20's Plenty for me.
Let's take your condescension to it's ultimate destination: no cars on the road, at any time. What could be safer? What, by your logic, could improve "the quality of life for all residents" more than having no vehicles moving on the roads?

Show me the crashes, injuries and fatalities that occur in Watford at speeds between 20 mph and 30 mph and I'll show you a campaign that has no empirical evidence to support it. Show me the widespread popular support for this that exists OUTSIDE of Town Hall and I'll show you a bunch of third-rate nannies who simply can't resist the siren call of "something must be done" when the reality screams "Sod off, and leave us alone."

BTW the chance of doing 30 mph in most parts of Watford remains a forlorn pipe dream, thanks to potholes, bus lanes, traffic lights at every conceivable junction or roundabout and sheer traffic volume.

Nick Lincoln
UKIP Watford

Report this post »

mrn_wfc says...
8:37pm Tue 19 Mar 13

Nick Lincoln wrote:
Wacko Jacko wrote:
On the contrary dear commentators, what could be more important than improving the safety of our residential streets and improving the quality of life for all residents? 20's Plenty for me.
Let's take your condescension to it's ultimate destination: no cars on the road, at any time. What could be safer? What, by your logic, could improve "the quality of life for all residents" more than having no vehicles moving on the roads?

Show me the crashes, injuries and fatalities that occur in Watford at speeds between 20 mph and 30 mph and I'll show you a campaign that has no empirical evidence to support it. Show me the widespread popular support for this that exists OUTSIDE of Town Hall and I'll show you a bunch of third-rate nannies who simply can't resist the siren call of "something must be done" when the reality screams "Sod off, and leave us alone."

BTW the chance of doing 30 mph in most parts of Watford remains a forlorn pipe dream, thanks to potholes, bus lanes, traffic lights at every conceivable junction or roundabout and sheer traffic volume.

Nick Lincoln
UKIP Watford
UKIP are making sense. May need to see the manifesto of the party.

Report this post »

Hornets number 12 fan says...
10:17pm Tue 19 Mar 13

Wacko Jacko wrote:
On the contrary dear commentators, what could be more important than improving the safety of our residential streets and improving the quality of life for all residents? 20's Plenty for me.
You sure do have an apt name there!

Report this post »

Andrew1963 says...
11:01pm Tue 19 Mar 13

20mph on Hempstead Road;stephenson Way? 20 mph for buses and taxis? What happens at the boundaries? 20mph upto Haydon Road on London and then 30mph beyond? What about M1 Link Road 20mph and then upto 70mph once you hit the Hertsmere boundary -Seems like manna from heaven for county Highways engineers ( ie Engineers not talented enough to make things)

Report this post »

MarsLander says...
7:38am Wed 20 Mar 13

Wacko Jacko wrote:
On the contrary dear commentators, what could be more important than improving the safety of our residential streets and improving the quality of life for all residents? 20's Plenty for me.
Yes, I can see how this would appeal to those who find it difficult to look beyond the cover of a book.

Report this post »

johnhornet says...
8:37am Wed 20 Mar 13

+1 for fix the potholes first.

There is a new policy of not doing temporary repairs to potholes, so they are fixed permanently instead. What this means in practice is that the potholes stay/get worse as it takes much longer to schedule permanent repairs.

Report this post »

garston tony says...
11:07am Wed 20 Mar 13

Firstly when driving around Watford on a lot of the roads its often not possible to even do 20mph due to the amount of traffic or unsafe to do so due to roads being narrowed by parked cars. So for a fair chunk of the town introducing a lower limit isnt actually going to actually mean a change in driving habits (unless you drive like an idiot of course).

Secondly whilst I dont know how many accidents occur in Watford but it has ben proven that if a pedestrian is hit at 20mph they have a far higher chance of being less injured than being hit at 30mph. I would say that whilst the cost of putting up new speed signs etc may be the same as fixing 1000 potholes the cost saved in reduced accident rates and injuries incurred when they do happen would probably pay for far far more potholes to be fixed.

Sometimes investing money in something can actually save more money elsewhere.

I'm not swayed either way on the actual need but just thought i'd put the above two points out there

Report this post »

garston tony says...
11:13am Wed 20 Mar 13

Id also add as well as the monetary savings, i'm sure the people involved in accidents would also appreciate the higher survival rates and decrease in severity of injuries sustained

Report this post »

click2find

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