Al­ter­na­tive to speed cam­eras is needed

The Peterborough Evening Telegraph - - Your -

SPeed cam­eras don’t work. If an av­er­age of 1,000 mo­torists per day are be­ing caught by a speed cam­era then surely it is ob­vi­ous that the cam­era does not achieve its stated ob­jec­tive of re­duc­ing speed at the road­works.

ex­ten­sive re­search has shown that ve­hi­cle ac­ti­vated signs are both more ef­fec­tive at re­duc­ing speed in road­works and, crit­i­cally, re­sult in a lower level of ac­ci­dents in­volv­ing ve­hi­cles or road work­ers.

So why does Peter­bor­ough per­sist in us­ing fixed speed cam­eras at road­works ? Is it the rev­enue that at­tracts them – and if so is that enough to cover the high cost of pro­vid­ing a cam­era, generator, fuel tank etc?

Why not use the less ex­pen­sive and more ef­fec­tive ve­hi­cle ac­ti­vated sign op­tion? There’s no point in ask­ing Clin­ton Hale as he is the paid mouth­piece of an or­gan­i­sa­tion with a sin­gle mes­sage – a bit like some­one that only pos­sesses a ham­mer and hence pro­motes nails as the only vi­able means of fix­ing wood.

With re­gard to the limit on the frank Perkins and Pas­ton park­ways they are far too long and up to half a mile of 40mph limit with zero ob­struc­tions, work­ers or al­ter­ations to the car­riage­way just leaves the driver think­ing “what the hell is this about” and con­se­quently speed­ing up to a safe speed for the dual car­riage­way road.

As for the ar­gu­ment about the missing cen­tral reser­va­tion bar­rier – per­haps Mr Hale only trav­els on mo­tor­ways but last time I looked ev­ery sin­gle car­riage­way road with a 60mph limit seems to be ac­cept­able with­out a cen­tral crash bar­rier, so get real. The missing bar­rier is at the round­about where speeds would be low in any case. PHil THomP­son mill road,

yar­well

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from UK

© PressReader. All rights reserved.