Parish Council Proposes Speed Limits

A speed limit of 20mph through Long Wittenham and 30mph between the village and the Barley Mow are proposed as part of a package of suggestions sent to the County Council to help make roads safer for cyclists and pedestrians.

The Department for Transport has given the County Council £2.5m as part of a nationwide sum of £2b to implement a series of measures to improve safety for cyclists and pedestrians when the lock-down is eased.  The Parish Council has sent its ideas for consideration by the county.

The Parish Council’s proposals also recommend putting in “advance cyclist stop lines” at both ends of the bridge and at the main junction of the A415 in Clifton Hampden.  Another idea is to provide a cycle parking area close to the post office or doctors’ surgery.

Sam Casey-Rerhaye, District Councillor for the Wittenhams, has welcomed the Parish Council’s proposals.  She said it would “accelerate existing and long-term transport ambitions” from South Oxfordshire District Council (SODC).

She added: “The road network is first and foremost for cars and as such it is not ambitious enough for healthy, safe and active travel and good public transport.”

The Parish Council also supports the new strategic cycling route linking the Harwell campus, Milton Park, Dicot and Culham Science Centre, but the final leg between Didcot and Culham is so far unresolved.  One idea is a cycle-path running alongside the road between Long Wittenham and the Barley Mow, but this is likely to be ruled out on the grounds of cost and difficulty of land acquisition.

All the proposed measures fit neatly into the green agenda.  Since the lock-down was introduced there has been a significant improvement in air quality, and other studies show that cycling and walking help reduce levels of cancer and heart disease.

This entry was posted in OCC, Parish Council, SODC and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Parish Council Proposes Speed Limits

  1. Robert Calcutt says:

    All sounds very sensible & reasonable until the “advanced cyclist stop lines” at both ends of the bridge. Generally, where these are used there is a room for cyclists to move into these zones using either the gutter side of the road or outside of the cars – this is not the case at the bridge, and most definitely not on the Long Wittenham side.This particular aspect of the proposal needs to be rethought. If this is implemented as it stands, there will be traffic jams and arguments at the bridge.

  2. Ann Tomline says:

    A good idea but as the flashing 30signs are already ignored,who will monitor the speed may be money better spent on the police service enabling them to monitor more!
    The motor bikes that speed through the village reaving their engines and producing excessive pollution often late at night and early morning are a big problem and I don’t think more signage will help.

  3. Sue Tucker says:

    Good idea. Need to get a cycle path from Long Wittenham and beyond via Barley Mow as it is unsafe to take children cycling or adults for that matter.

  4. David Haylett says:

    The existing 30mph limit is largely ignored, especially by traffic heading for Didcot once it has passed the chicane. I frequently indicate right and slow down more than I need to when turning into Saxons Heath just to slow the speed merchants down. Even so I was once overtaken as I did that!!!

  5. les Ormonde says:

    I suggest that any solution should include first and foremost, better enforcement. Speeders are as likely to ignore a 20mph limit as they are a 30mph limit.

    The chicanes should be removed as they help add to air pollution and encourage dangerous driving. I am open minded about the speed bumps, but with proper enforcement, they shouldn’t be necessary. Also I have never seen a cyclist use the side lane on a chicane.

    If a cycle path + footpath to Clifton is to be put in, it should be done properly i.e. made sufficiently wide, It would mean a lot of expense so it should also be demonstrated that the benefits are tangible (not recreational or ideology driven).

  6. Debra Steele says:

    There should be a path/cycle track between Long Wittenham & the Barley Mow. We were promised this years & years ago & nothing ever happens. Don’t think 30 mph will work between Wittenham & The Barley Mow. It does not even exist in Long Wittenham. I live on the main Didcot Road & it is a VERY fast stretch of road. The people that make these decisions should come & sit outside my house for a while rather than making them from behind a desk. Pathetic. We need paths for safety and a speed camera. Also cancel the ridiculous new houses planned on this road. Wrong place completely. Another thing before I go, could the field, opposite me, please be put back to how it was rather than looking like an unfinished/dug up grave yard. Should never be allowed to have been left like this.

  7. Edward Byard says:

    A cycle path is needed. Traffic and cyclists do not mix.

    • Chris Waites says:

      There are plenty of examples where cyclists and traffic do mix, but it would rely on changes to the road that stop it simply being prioritised as part of a cut through between Didcot and Oxford.

      I remember when I moved to the village making the mistake of walking along the road – so much abuse for holding people up for a few seconds. In the end it’s an unclassified country road. If pedestrians and cyclists can’t safely use these roads, the drivers are going to be massively inconvenienced post-lockdown when bus & train passengers jump in their cars and queues are twice as long. Without action traffic will be queuing from the bridge to LW at 8am every morning.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.