The road that runs past my house is the main road, north-south, to-from Evesham town centre: leaving Evesham, heading south, it is the last bit of that entire road before entering into the greenery of Worcestershire. This road gets its fair share of traffic, but traffic not entering Evesham goes around the A46 Evesham by-pass - so it doesn't travel on this road past my house.
From the junction of that road / start of the bypass, heading north, to where a set of traffic lights are, is about 1,000 yards. 150 yards before those traffic lights is a speed camera. What I fail to understand is why that camera was put at that particular place, where it is so close to the traffic lights, when it would be far more effective as a 'speed-controlling device' if was placed further away from those traffic lights.
On this section of that road, the speed limit is 30 m.p.h.; the 'powers-that-be' are planning on changing it to 40 m.p.h. Now what I don't understand about that is since if anyone driving through that speed camera at speeds in excess of 33 m.p.h. is going to trip the camera - because 30 m.p.h. is deemed as the safe maximum speed for that road - how come it is now considered that 40 m.p.h is a 'safe' speed? Nothing in the 'environment' has changed. Admittedly, whilst it remains at 30 m.p.h., many vehicles hurtle down that road doing well over 30 m.p.h., only to slam on the anchors when they are near to the camera: hence my earlier point about that camera's location. Are the 'powers-that-be' simply 'giving in' to 'popular demand'? And if so, where the sense in that? Isn't that then self-defeating the whole object of road safety? Hence, why the camera's existence?
Moreover, the other side of that road (heading out of town) has no speed camera at all! So presumably, it is considered necessary to enforce the speed limit on one side of the road . . . . but not the other. Seems ridiculous, unless the 'assessment' is that more vehicles break the speed limit going one way than the other - which I know to be quite untrue. And there is no substantial difference in the volume of traffic going one way or the other on that stretch of road, either.
All of which leads me to one conclusion. Speed cameras do have a useful function to play in keeping vehicle speeds to within the speed limit, but they perform the equally vital function of raising revenue: hence, they are not there for the former reason alone.
Al. / March 9, 2013.
From the junction of that road / start of the bypass, heading north, to where a set of traffic lights are, is about 1,000 yards. 150 yards before those traffic lights is a speed camera. What I fail to understand is why that camera was put at that particular place, where it is so close to the traffic lights, when it would be far more effective as a 'speed-controlling device' if was placed further away from those traffic lights.
On this section of that road, the speed limit is 30 m.p.h.; the 'powers-that-be' are planning on changing it to 40 m.p.h. Now what I don't understand about that is since if anyone driving through that speed camera at speeds in excess of 33 m.p.h. is going to trip the camera - because 30 m.p.h. is deemed as the safe maximum speed for that road - how come it is now considered that 40 m.p.h is a 'safe' speed? Nothing in the 'environment' has changed. Admittedly, whilst it remains at 30 m.p.h., many vehicles hurtle down that road doing well over 30 m.p.h., only to slam on the anchors when they are near to the camera: hence my earlier point about that camera's location. Are the 'powers-that-be' simply 'giving in' to 'popular demand'? And if so, where the sense in that? Isn't that then self-defeating the whole object of road safety? Hence, why the camera's existence?
Moreover, the other side of that road (heading out of town) has no speed camera at all! So presumably, it is considered necessary to enforce the speed limit on one side of the road . . . . but not the other. Seems ridiculous, unless the 'assessment' is that more vehicles break the speed limit going one way than the other - which I know to be quite untrue. And there is no substantial difference in the volume of traffic going one way or the other on that stretch of road, either.
All of which leads me to one conclusion. Speed cameras do have a useful function to play in keeping vehicle speeds to within the speed limit, but they perform the equally vital function of raising revenue: hence, they are not there for the former reason alone.
Al. / March 9, 2013.
