I agree with Colin Clarke (Letters, November 5) that mobile speed cameras would be a far more sensible alternative to speed humps and cushions.
Most drivers seem to adopt a driving style of acceleration between humps and then braking at them which, coupled with the gear changing involved, wastes fuel and consequently causes more pollution than driving at a constant speed in one gear.
The humps are particularly bad for drivers of older vehicles with less advanced suspension than the more modern ones. I have been told that in some modern cars, the faster the car is travelling the less affected the ride is over humps.
I feel that it is unfair that humps affect all drivers, not just ones who are driving over the speed limit.
Cameras would identify the cars which are speeding and those of us who observe speed limits would be unaffected by them - unlike speed humps.
It has been said that cameras are more expensive than humps. However, humps require constant maintenance and therefore constant expense.
Colin Clarke is right to call for a report on the pros, cons and costs of each system so the public can be fully informed.
Richard Hemingway,
Custance Walk,
York.
Converted for the new archive on 30 June 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article