In order to access my house, I must first navigate a one mile long single track lane with passing places.
On this lane, there are 7 quite harsh speed ramps, which require you to almost stop to negotiate them properly.
On a typical day, I'll go out of the house and back again twice. That's 28 speed ramps a day - almost 10,000 a year.
What effect is this having on my car, and more to the point, my fuel economy?
|
When you put it like that, it's completely insane - makes you wonder if the planners have thought this through...
A friend in the next village actually objected to the speed humps outside his house - he had less of a problem with people doing 40 in the 30 limit than he does now with the clattering of HGVs over the humps and the acceleration/deceleration of cars. The wear and tear on vehicles, and the diversion of traffic to other residential roads is further unplanned cost.
If the game is to enforce speed limits, the technology's there - just do it with cameras and at least we know where we are.
|
Road humps are fine if used very selectively, for instance to deter through traffic in residential areas, or where it would be unsafe to drive at anything other than a crawl.
The problem is that humps have become so ubiquitous that drivers are hardened and the people the planners would most like to slow down ignore them. Once humps reach a critical mass the case for them is strengthened by the fear that the lack of them in a particular road would encourage fast through traffic. My own road has them. They may have deterred the odd lorry and fire engine but speeding traffic was never really a problem here.
|
You make my point Welliesorter - When the road hump boom was at its peak here I discovered that many of the roads being lined up to receive them either didn't meet the criteria for receiving them or were further down the priority list than others whose more severe traffic problems were being ignored. A quick look at the map gave a very good isnight into why - was it just co-incidence that the roads getting the humps seemed to be in the more affluent areas, the residents of which were largely of the right political persuasion ? We made use of this fact to severely embarrass those responsible with the result that the schemes finally implemented were much reduced and far more fairly distributed.
We also used the traffic diversion argument to very good effect too, leafleting nearby streets who were likely to get the extra traffic. These things aren't usually well publicised until it's too late and councils can usually rely on a combination of public ignorance and apathy to 'sneak' through such schemes.
Of course, the fact that resources are now much more of a problem has a major bearing on how keen councils are to implement the sort of grand schemes we used to see. How long that remains the case who knows but I'm sick of seeing people who've demanded standards for their own streets which they refuse to apply when driving down other people's.
|
One of the problem with road humps is simply the design of them. There are so many different types around. If the councils simply used a appropriate hump then they's eliminate a lot of problems.
For example one set of humps I regularly drive over consists of a low ramp approximatly a car length long (painted red) with a smooth slope on either side. You can go over it at 20 without bouncing all over the place (40 however is a different matter). Another Hump consists of a very narrow high lump of concrete in the road with very steep sides. Even at 5mph the bump is dramatic and because it's so steep and high several people have lost exhasts and some cars cannot even get over it and have to take the long way around. Once again a little common sense would work wonders.
|
|
|
>>... was it just co-incidence that the roadsgetting the humps seemed to be in the more affluent areas, the residents of which were largely of the right political persuasion...
Odd that you should have found that. Where I live the first road to get humps was the main one through the red light district. I wonder how the police can clamp down on kerb crawlers in this area. The more affluent parts of town took much longer to get humps and they're still a rarity there. I'd always assumed that residents in the humped areas were less likely to protest against them.
|
Not quite sure I understand all of your post W (I'm a bit slow this morning :-)) but the bit about residents objecting is quite interesting. What happened in a number of cases here was that well connected and articulate people in certain exclusive roads quite liked the idea of removing through traffic. They were not interested in just slowing it and therefore demanded the most severe gradient of road humps to maximise the inconvenience to drivers and ensure the greatest possible degree of traffic diversion. At one point they actually succeeded in getting much of their area closed off with barriers and I believe they were effectively trying to create a private estate at public expense. After my group (and others we helped set up) started making noises about the traffic/accident figures, vast cost and knock on effects of the plans, they were heavily revised - much to the annoyance of those who'd planned their own little traffic free environment.
Ironically in the busiest road where there was at least some argument for traffic calming and no easy alternative route for traffic to use, humps, speed tables and speed cushions were put down with the result that noise levels and disturbance to the residents increased greatly. They now live with cars, vans etc. grinding along in 2nd gear, banging and clattering over the humps virtually night and day. It appears also that the properties closest to the humps do seem to come on the market more often now than ever before.
|
Not quite sure I understand all of your post W (I'm a bit slow this morning :-)) but the bit about residents objecting is quite interesting.
Sorry, I realised afterwards that what I said was slightly ambiguous. What I meant was I'd assumed (rightly or wrongly) that no-one would really want humps, but articulate middle-class people were more likely to protest so their areas would be some way down the list. This is the opposite of what you've found in your area.
Round here the sort of 'traffic calming' measures you mention are characteristic of poor inner city districts that have had large amounts of money pumped in to 'improve' them. They're almost unknown in the up-market areas.
|
I see now W - warmed up a bit now you see :-)
I think it has a lot to do with the political 'colour' of the council you happen to be run by.
Around here that is traditionally very 'blue' indeed - hence some bias towards the sort of people I described at the expense of those of a more 'red' persuasion. As I said, IMO it was far more about creating exclusivity than road safety. They perceived that the disadvantages of humps were far outweighed by the advantage of much reduced through traffic. I should say that within just a mile or two of here, there are a number of very exclusive (often gated) estates comprised of private roads nearly all of which are humped.
|
|
|
|
These things aren't usually well publicised until it's too late and councils can usually rely on a combination of public ignorance and apathy to 'sneak' through such schemes.
We found that around here - I believe I posted on this a few months back. The problem we had was that the people who did found out and objected were told their objections weren't going to be considered as they did not actually live on the street in question and so the council considered their opinion didn't count.
I tried entering discussion with the chap in charge at the council but he hasn't bothered replying to recent emails, including one that asked him to provide evidence the correct procedures were followed when advertising this scheme as despite living about 20 yards from the road in question I haven't seen one single notice regarding it.
As with many other schemes mentioned here, it simply was not necessary as there was no problem. All it has done it made it harder and potentially more dangerous to use the street at they also changed the parking arrangements from being sensible, all down one side, to down both sides alternating. Also, the humps are the 'wheels either side' type but not one set has been put in so that you can actually achieve that. About the only effect it has had is to annoy the residents and cause some bus drivers to give up trying to negotiate the street when lots of cars are parked.
I seem to have run out of luck getting a sensible answer from the council so I think it may be time to get my councillor on to this although I can't see much hope that sense will prevail.
|
|
Steve - remember that council officers (engineers in this case) are paid employees of the council. Councillors on the other hand are elected and respond far better to pressure from residents for that reason. At one point in our campaign the officers refused to answer our questions or respond directly to our letters so we simply addressed all our queries through our local councillors. If you can kick up enough of a stink amongst your fellow residents and get them to complain to your councillors (you will have several for your area) you will have a much better chance of getting a result. Knowing full well that most people would agree but probably wouldn't get around to writing letters I even drew up and circulated a standard letter for people to sign and send. It all worked very well indeed. Good luck.
|
|
|
|
|
|
> The road humps consisted of three seperate humps across the road that, if lined up properly, you drive over with no need to slow down (kind of defeating the object). However there is a group of drivers that feel the need to brake sharply and line their wheels up with the bumps and proceed to bounce over them before accelerating to the next one and slamming their brakes on again!!
Jane,
the day that one of these humps puts a hole in your oil sump is the day that you will start to line up your wheels with the bumps to make sure your sump has enought clearance.
Happened to me 18 months ago. I gave up on persuing the council for compensation.
|
- Where I live the first road to get humps was the main one through the red light district.
I can think of a few reason why the council members may do this, but most of them are not appropriate for a family discussion board such as this :)
|
There is quite an interesting article here www.seered.co.uk/roadhumps.htm
I would recommend reading the rest of the site if you have time, particularly the bits about ID cards (as it pops up time and time again in threads) and RFID tags (which again pop up in the occasional thread here)
|
For a country that loves speed cameras so much, i am amazed that they do not position more of these in traffic calming areas instead of bumps.
Personally, i detest speed cameras as revenue raising devices, but as safetycameras (did i escape the swear filter there?) they do have valid uses.
The Pros:
Will ACTUALLY slow the traffic down - my dads company mondeo can and does go over speed humps well over the legal limit
Reduces the noise/pollution/damage aspect
Current rumours of average speed reading prevent many drivers from slowing purely for a camera, then speeding up again (as happens with humps)
The Cons:
None that i can think of, except cost - however, DO they cost more? Say two cameras on a 1 1/2 mile stretch of road, compared to ~20 speed humps at a cost of £4000 per hump - anyone know the cost of a camera?
|
anyone know the cost of a camera?
>>
According to our local paper this evening c.£30k.
Lucky us, we're getting another 9 of them.....
Cockle
|
|
A year ago they put humps in our road after years of campaigning. Yes there's more noise with vans etc thumping over them and with acceleration and slowing down. And yes there's probably more pollution and wear on the cars. But the road is safer, you can cross now easily and most people in the street are happy. The humps are not the problem, if people didn't speed they wouldn't be needed.
|
Road-crossing devices for pedestrians: brain, road-craft education (Highway Code), zebra crossings, mid-road islands.
Speed-inhibiting devices for motorists: brain, road-craft education (Highway Code), electronic warning signs, passive warning signs, pinch-point barriers in extreme cases, frequent police speed-checks, repeater speed-limit signs, cameras at accident blackspots, mini-roundabouts at more junctions.
Devices that damage vehicles: speed humps.
Devices that damage the environment: speed humps.
Devices that damage then environment of neighbouring roads: speed humps.
Devices that damage the comfort bus passengers: speed humps.
Devices that kill, when emergency services are delayed by seconds and even minutes on longer journeys: speed humps.
God forbid that the ease of crossing a particular road should engender complacency in the young about an intrinsically hazardous activity. Of the collisions between vehicle and pedestrian, I wonder how many are caused as much by careless pedestrians as by speeding drivers.
Don't get me wrong: I adhere to speed limits. But the speed hump is but one manifestation of a highways engineering safety culture that spends before engaging the brain.
|
|
|
Big Cat - you're quite right about the root of the problem but has traffic been diverted from your road i.e. is there an alternative route which is now being used instead? If so, what do you think the people who live there feel about it?
IMO this is one of the main problems with humps.
Of course if/when, eventually, whole areas are humped, drivers tend to revert back to their original 'first choice' route.
Another problem is drivers who insist on speeding up once they've cleared the humps in order to make up for the time they perceive they've lost.
What's really ironic is that we still see residents of the roads that were humped speeding down other people's streets. Having campaigned to solve their own 'road safety' problem you'd have thought they'd happily practice what they preach but evidently not!
What's really required is for drivers to act more responsibly and considerately. Until we all start doing that I'm afraid we're just going to get more and more humps, lumps, bumps and cameras for that matter.
|
So a camera costs £30k?
My local highways engineer bloke told me each hump cost £2000, so my two cameras or 20 humps in 1 1/2 miles scenario actually comes in as:
Humps = £80k plus roadworks while putting in
Cameras = £60k plus revenue from idiots still doing 50+ through housing estates
|
"My local highways engineer bloke told me each hump cost £2000"
Ooops i meant £4000 before someone corrects my maths!
|
|
|
|
|
