All About The Bike RSS Feed Send your news, pictures & videos


All About the Bike

Wessex Way speed limit and Slades Farm: It's all good news for cyclists!


I'VE been reading a couple of stories and their associated comments with great interest over the last couple of weeks. Both are fairly controversial for their own reasons and by giving my own opinion on these two topics I realise that I will get some people agreeing with me and some disagreeing.

First of all I want to ask a question: Why is the new 40mph speed limit on the final section of the Wessex Way a bad thing? There seem to be lots of people who are very against the new speed limit and I can't understand why. Personally I am in complete support of the reduced speed limit.

The dual carriageway section of this road, used to be a 70mph limit, I remember this from when I passed my driving test over 20 years ago. In those days the road was much quieter and as a young man I was quite happy to drive at this speed on this section of road. Now that the road is so much busier and looking at the general decline of manners and driving standards on our roads, I think that the reduced limit can only be a good thing.

The arguments that say speed does not cause accidents are interesting ones. Bad driving at speed is much more dangerous than bad driving at slower speeds! There is also plenty of evidence to suggest that speed is a contributing factor in plenty of accidents.

As a cyclist and a motorist, I prefer lower speeds. People will still break the speed limit along that section of road, but now they will probably be driving at 50mph instead of 60mph.

The second piece of good news has been the next hurdle towards getting a cycle track at Slades Farm being overcome. The team trying to get this off the ground have been working hard for a number of years and seem to have relentless resolve; I would have been put off a long time ago by the attitude of the Nimbys at the various proposed sites.

According to my memory this is the third proposed site for the cycle track, the first being a replacement to the existing athletics track in Winton and the second being somewhere in Kinson.

It was interesting to read one of the comments in the recent story by someone objecting to the proposals at Slades Farm; they suggested it get built at the Winton site. This was someone who had been following the whole story closely from the beginning! The Winton site was rejected years ago due to the outspoken local residents and their objections.

The Slades Farm site looks ideal to me, the current usage of the land appears to be fairly sparse and the access to the site is good. Assuming the cycle track and facilities doe get built there is still enough space for a large green area to remain. The construction of this facility would be a nice addition as there is already the skate park nearby; our nearest similar track is the indoor velodrome at Calshot.

With the amount of local cycling talent and the heightened interest in the sport following Team GB's success recently I hope that the work towards making this track a reality continues without too may further delays or objections.

Comments(8)

mikey2gorgeous says...
1:40pm Mon 22 Feb 10

Hi David, the fact that over 90% of accidents do not have speed as their root cause is often touted by the pro-motor brigade (Clarkson especially). It's said as if it means that speed is not an important factor.
Most accidents are caused by driver error - how fast you're going is a crucial factor when these errors occur determining whether an accident will happen and how serious it is.
A lot of the 'arguments' against the W/Way speed drop blame 'bad drivers' for the accidents as if the people writing are immune from making mistakes. We are all susceptible to these.
I suggest the Queen's Road to St Pauls stretch is reduced to one lane in both directions. Most of the traffic along there is going towards (or coming from) Frizzell anyway and that is a single lane road. This will give the planners plenty of room to make the slip road safe and provide room for a cross-town cycle lane!
What d'ya think?? :D

Roginthesouth says...
2:31pm Mon 22 Feb 10

Having just read the forum comments relating to the conga "protest", I was just about to log off in despair. Then I came accross your refreshing article supporting both the 40 mph reduction, and the new Slades Farm track I have also been following.
Totally agree with all your views, so I can now log off a happy person..:-)

TheDoc357 says...
9:53pm Mon 22 Feb 10

So where does it end? Now authorities have abandoned 85th percentile guidance they have carte blanche to set limits as they please. If they reduce it to 30 in 5 years time will you take the same view? There are plenty of fatalities on the motorways - do we reduce those to 40 too? I'm sorry but at some point you have to draw a line in the sand and hopefully this will become a national feeling against the obvious stealth taxation of motorists that is being implemented by central government through imposition if ridiculous targets that local councils feel duty bound to meet.

mikey2gorgeous says...
4:12pm Tue 23 Feb 10

Why do people have so much trouble believing that this trial is a real attempt to cut accidents.
.
I would imagine the traffic planning department (who spend their working lives to alleviating the problem of traffic ease vs accidents) have suggested it in which case why is it such a bad thing?
.
Why have there never been protests at speed limits elsewhere?

SonofKinson says...
5:13pm Sat 27 Feb 10

Mr. Brown, had you read all the comments made by myself and many you would have known that I too have followed this project from the beginning. So you are well out of order to state otherwise. The reason I suggested Winton Rec was because it was the original open space for the Bournemouth Cycle club, so why could it not remain there. My second arguement was towards the fact that people like yourself are happy for it to be at Slades FArm, but do not permit others to give their idea of where it should be. The reason it was turned down at Winton Rec was because of the Nimbys who reside there, and the fact that the Cllrs for that area live close by therefore had some stance in stopping this project. As they did at Kinson and Redhill. With Slades Farm we were not given the choice. Lies of voting slips sent out to all residents, I know of many residents on Slades Farm who deny this. Cllrs who do not live near the area, and were basically cohersed into agreeing with the go ahead. There was also lies told to those existing sports that are played on the fields would be removed if Slades FArm had achieved the Town and Village Green application. This was unfounded, and if anyone cared to read the Town and Village Green Act 2006, would have seen for themselves that this was not the case. LIes, lies and more lies throughout.
.
Regarding any green space left. Again you obviously do not keep up with matters yourself. If the Velodrome goes ahead, there will be no green space. Check for yourself and see how much is taken up with sport, how much is taken up with schools, and now the Velodrome on the last piece of land, which until this project came about belonged to the University.
.
I was born in this area, and have lived here again for a number of years. I appreciate fully what Slades Farm has, and what has been done for it. But to use the analogy of one team winning an Olympic award, should suffice a build of such a project is beyond me. Where have these cyclists been since other than advertising Branflakes.
.
Believe it or not, and I have mentioned it on many occasions, I do support the Velodrome, but I do not feel that the last open space at Slades FArm should be used for it. Kings Park would be the ideal place amongst all the other stadiums. Slades Farm does not have the infrastructure for more traffic, or for parking without taking more space away. Incidentally, where is the skate track. There is a skateboard area. Oh, and why not go to Calshot, where did they go before to get a 280m 15 degree banked track.

rodoftruth says...
1:20pm Mon 1 Mar 10

The main objection to the unilateral cut from 50 to 40. Why? Where is the evidence in detail? Why is it not published for everyone to read?
Is it because we cannot read?
Then obscene cameras- is it because we cannot drive? And those that get trapped by being slightly over the limit - they are fined and given points in the interest of road safety? Even if they have never been involved in an accident and are the most courteous of drivers? Do speed cameras catch the dangerous drivers? Are we too stupid to know when to go a bit faster or very slow? Curiously the 1.4 million tickets a year issued and 120 million pounds raised are not reducing accidents. There is a psychological aspect to self responsibility and we have gone too far with these speed cameras - we spend most of our time just trying to spot them and it diverts attention and comfort from driving safely. Of course no police or transport department person dare say what he thinks, he might lose his job - so they are all nodding donkeys. The majority don't care, they do not want to rock the boat, many are just gullible and always a minority have looked into it and try to do something. Same in politics - the dumbing down of debate and sense in the last 20 years is incredible.

rodoftruth says...
1:21pm Mon 1 Mar 10

The main objection to the unilateral cut from 50 to 40. Why? Where is the evidence in detail? Why is it not published for everyone to read?
Is it because we cannot read?
Then obscene cameras- is it because we cannot drive? And those that get trapped by being slightly over the limit - they are fined and given points in the interest of road safety? Even if they have never been involved in an accident and are the most courteous of drivers? Do speed cameras catch the dangerous drivers? Are we too stupid to know when to go a bit faster or very slow? Curiously the 1.4 million tickets a year issued and 120 million pounds raised are not reducing accidents. There is a psychological aspect to self responsibility and we have gone too far with these speed cameras - we spend most of our time just trying to spot them and it diverts attention and comfort from driving safely. Of course no police or transport department person dare say what he thinks, he might lose his job - so they are all nodding donkeys. The majority don't care, they do not want to rock the boat, many are just gullible and always a minority have looked into it and try to do something. Same in politics - the dumbing down of debate and sense in the last 20 years is incredible.

rodoftruth says...
1:22pm Mon 1 Mar 10

The main objection to the unilateral cut from 50 to 40. Why? Where is the evidence in detail? Why is it not published for everyone to read?
Is it because we cannot read?
Then obscene cameras- is it because we cannot drive? And those that get trapped by being slightly over the limit - they are fined and given points in the interest of road safety? Even if they have never been involved in an accident and are the most courteous of drivers? Do speed cameras catch the dangerous drivers? Are we too stupid to know when to go a bit faster or very slow? Curiously the 1.4 million tickets a year issued and 120 million pounds raised are not reducing accidents. There is a psychological aspect to self responsibility and we have gone too far with these speed cameras - we spend most of our time just trying to spot them and it diverts attention and comfort from driving safely. Of course no police or transport department person dare say what he thinks, he might lose his job - so they are all nodding donkeys. The majority don't care, they do not want to rock the boat, many are just gullible and always a minority have looked into it and try to do something. Same in politics - the dumbing down of debate and sense in the last 20 years is incredible.


Most popular






Local Information

Enter your postcode, town or place name

House prices »   Schools »   Crime »   Hospitals »

Local Businesses