Speed re­stric­tion sign should not be hid­den from view

The Peterborough Evening Telegraph - - Your - SPENCER ROLLINGS Peter­bor­ough

I WAS read­ing the ar­ti­cle about the thou­sands of mo­torists caught out by a speed cam­era in the E.T on Satur­day May 29th.

I agree that speed cam­eras should be put into place to pro­tect the work force in the road. Many driv­ers are un­aware of the dangers of speed and that the road lay­out might have changed. I use this part of the park­way daily and would like to point out that in the photo on the front cover you can clearly see the 40mph but this has not been the case over the past week. The sign was ob­structed by the bushes that are on the verge. This in course has made it very un­clear as to what the speed limit is on this sec­tion or works.

On the road works at Bret­ton the sign is clear and no­tice­able and clearly states 50mph.

I feel this is a very un­der­hand way of catch­ing mo­torist un­aware of the speed limit and that ac­tion should have been taken by three par­ties. 1 High­ways agency 2 The main con­trac­tor who are car­ry­ing out the works. 3 The po­lice as in the ar­ti­cle it states that they set the limit to 46 mph.

I would not be sur­prised that other mo­torists pre­sumed that the limit was 50mph and it would be of in­ter­est to find out what the av­er­age speed of these fines are. IF the story about the speed cam­era on the Frank Perkins Park­way is cor­rect, then all tick­ets is­sued be­fore the ad­di­tion of sig­nage should be re­funded and if not yet paid, queried. Here is an ad­mis­sion by the po­lice that the sig­nage was an is­sue. This would seem like a good de­fence to me.

KEITH PEAT East Mid­lands Re­gional

Co­or­di­na­tor As­so­ci­a­tion of Bri­tish

Driv­ers Lin­colnshire Driv­ers’ Char­ter

Mem­ber ABD Be­longs to Na­tional As­so­ci­a­tion of Vol­un­tary

Or­gan­i­sa­tions http://www.ab­dlin­colnshire.


Newspapers in English

Newspapers from UK

© PressReader. All rights reserved.