SE23.com - The Official Forum for Forest Hill & Honor Oak, London SE23
Online since 2002  -  10,000+ members

Home | SE23 Topics | Shops & Services | Wider Topics | Offered/Wanted/Lost/Found | Advertising | Contact
Geddes Hairdressing & Barbering Studio One Armstrong & Co Solicitors Adult Learning Lewisham


Post Reply  Post Topic 
Pages (6): « First [1] 2 3 4 5 Next > Last »
Forest Hill 20 MPH Zone
Author Message
NewForester


Posts: 377
Joined: Feb 2008
Post: #1
20-08-2009 01:45 PM

From Manor Mount - Abuse of One-Way System

shzl400 Wrote:
I suspect a 20 mph zone being planned. I would not be in favour, unless they removed all the road humps as a quid pro quo (which will never happen!)

There is indeed. I believe that the whole of Forest Hill ward north of the South Circular (with the exception of Honor Oak Road) is due to be adopted as a 20 MPH zone, with [in]appropriate traffic calming measures.

I don't have full details at the moment, but residents should shortly receive a consultation document - make sure to fill yours in and let the council know your views.

Find all posts by this user Reply
michael


Posts: 3,196
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #2
20-08-2009 04:12 PM

Very few of these roads are not already humped, so I am not sure what difference this will actually make. I suspect about as much as the 20 mph zone in Perry Vale North except most of the humps are already in place.

Lewisham are only doing this so they can say that more of their roads are 20mph with the clearly stated aim to make all non-Red Routes 20mph zones.

Find all posts by this user Reply
brian


Posts: 2,002
Joined: Apr 2005
Post: #3
21-08-2009 12:34 PM

I am all for 20mph limits if they are strictly enforced and severe penalties imposed. Just puting signs up with no enforcement makes a joke of the whole thing.

They should also impose 20mph on Perry Vale side of the tracks, I know we are the poor relations but why should we miss out

Find all posts by this user Reply
ChrisR


Posts: 76
Joined: Nov 2007
Post: #4
21-08-2009 02:24 PM

Quote:
Brian said:
They should also impose 20mph on Perry Vale side of the tracks

There already is a 20mph limit on many of the residential roads In Perry Vale ward, not that many motorists take any notice of it! And I never see any police checking speeds.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Snazy


Posts: 1,495
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #5
21-08-2009 04:43 PM

To be honest a well enforced 30mph rule would be suffice.
20mph should be reserved for roads with poor visibility, and narrow passing areas.

Sadly the police cant win, enforce the law and they get moaned about, dont do it, they get moaned about.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Perryman


Posts: 809
Joined: Dec 2006
Post: #6
21-08-2009 11:03 PM

A road with primary schools and/or shops should have a 20mph limit imo, maybe lower.
So Honor oak rd and Perry vale are key roads that need this limit but of course these are the very roads that will not be included.

They might get a couple of traffic alignment cushions though.
Helps with wind resistance apparently. Va-va-voom.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Snazy


Posts: 1,495
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #7
23-08-2009 05:35 PM

20mph maybe lower ?
Seriously? Unsure

20 yes, im all for that, especially during term times, but lower... It would be far safer to close the road completely.

Im honestly not sure people know what a real 20mph looks like.

Personally I would start making school zones safer by not allowing parents to ignore the zig zags, double park, park on corners, or other selfish behaviour.
Take the school run cars off the road, and suddenly there is a lot less traffic, a lot less rushing about, and the roads feel safer.

Summer holidays at the moment.... do you see much queuing traffic at the moment.

The school run mentality needs to end. Children should be going to local school or using public transport to get to them. OR a decent school bus system needs to be put in place.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Perryman


Posts: 809
Joined: Dec 2006
Post: #8
23-08-2009 06:59 PM

I can't say I disagree with a lot of that.

People will travel 25-30 in 20mph zone just like they travel at 35-40mph in a 30 zone if PV is anything to go by.
That is why I suggested 20mph or lower.

Some parents do not take much notice of the zigzags outside the primary school in PV - even when the police are right there. The no parking should be enforced at the key times and on both sides of the road.
Why only one side is zigzagged is anyone's guess.

We probably have the technology now to have more flexible speed limits - 20mph is silly in the evenings or when the schools and shops are shut, but until all the cars and roads are suitably chipped to convey this information, we are stuck with old fashioned inflexible road signs.

Or we could get rid of the limits and rely on people driving responsibly, safely, considerately and courteously.......
.....backed up with the death penalty for offenders. Brian, surely you are with me on this last point?Wink

Find all posts by this user Reply
Snazy


Posts: 1,495
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #9
23-08-2009 08:12 PM

lol @ the death penalty!

Sadly whatever the limit, unless enforced, drivers will drive at what speed they think appropriate. Some sensible, others complete *****.

What we need re the speed limits near schools is what they have in the USA. If the signs are flashing, the lower limit is in force and double fines/penalties are in place.
AND
Sensible parents that dont risk the lives of all the other kids, just so they can drop their kiddie off closer.... WALK !!! you lazy...grrrrrrrr!

Zig zags are usually only ever on the side of the school. But again, the flashing lights could also impose double fines for parking/stopping illegally. Im sure the local authorities could make a killing with camera enforced parking. Cha--ching!

Finally though, just like with the crossing up by the subway/FH central... where many hundreds have now been killed by the poor crossing facilities.... Pedestrians need to learn to cross a bloody road. I am a 99% pedestrian now, have not driven for months. Yes I still respect those large metal objects that travel up and down the strips of tarmac between the pavements.

I do agree car drivers need to slow down in certain places... But it takes 2 to tango (usually) and without the pedestrian being in the road in the first place.. there is less chance of an accident.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Perryman


Posts: 809
Joined: Dec 2006
Post: #10
23-08-2009 11:20 PM

Quote:
Finally though, just like with the crossing up by the subway/FH central... where many hundreds have now been killed by the poor crossing facilities


Wow! That is an eye opener. Where are these figures available?

Find all posts by this user Reply
AMFM


Posts: 306
Joined: Oct 2007
Post: #11
24-08-2009 09:26 AM

It's not just in the US that they have those flashing signals outside schools Snazy - On holiday in a pretty remote part of the Highlands last November, the primary school in the nearest village had flashing speed limits - think it was 20mph during school hours and 30 at all other times.

Find all posts by this user Reply
SophieBee


Posts: 46
Joined: Oct 2007
Post: #12
24-08-2009 09:36 AM

One of the most effective traffic calming measures I saw was on holiday a few years ago in Portugal. There was a set of traffic lights on either side of a local school which automatically changed to red if the driver was travelling above the speed limit. There was a sensor a bit further back down the road which triggered the change and allowed plenty of time to slow down and respond to the red light. It seemed to work very well and I have often wondered if that might work in the UK.

Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Reply
Snazy


Posts: 1,495
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #13
24-08-2009 09:48 AM

AMFM, there you go then. Now all we need to do is enforce them like the US (then sit back and wait for the complaints about the police wasting their time)

Find all posts by this user Reply
NewForester


Posts: 377
Joined: Feb 2008
Post: #14
24-08-2009 01:39 PM

However, the police don't have the resources to enforce them.
From Lewisham's FAQ

Quote:
How does the council enforce the speed limit in 20mph zones?

Under current legislation the Council has no powers to enforce against moving traffic offences. Enforcement against offences such as speeding and contravention of banned turns is a matter for the Police.

The Police have however stated that they could not make any commitment to carry out routine enforcement of 20mph zones. This is because there is in law no fixed penalty (as there is for other speed limits) that can be issued to drivers breaking the speed limit in a 20mph zone.

The Police would be forced to arrest, charge and prosecute offenders, and this would take up a disproportionate amount of Police time and resources.


Under Government guidance when a 20mph zone is introduced it must be supported by physical measures (humps etc). The recommendations make it clear that the aim should be to ensure that vehicle speeds are maintained at or below 20mph by the use of physical measures.

In an urban environment however, allowances often have to be made for access by emergency service vehicles and buses. It is not always possible to ?engineer out? all irresponsible driver behaviour.

However, whilst the measures in certain locations may not reduce vehicle speeds to 20mph or below, the initial evidence indicates that 20mph zones have a beneficial effect in reducing speeds generally. There is also a general environmental improvement and a significant safety benefit in the areas treated.


While I can see the benefits of cautious driving down residential streets, is this the best way to spend ?100,000 (plus extra for reviews including an additional ?50,000 this year reviewing the Perry Vale implementation)? There seems to be little justification for a new zone in Forest Hill

M&C March 2009 Wrote:
Council officers are coming under scrutiny to justify decisions to install speed humps in roads where the number of accident reductions is likely to be small. The current numbers of recorded accidents in the remaining untreated areas, are such that they are unlikely to receive funding approval through the Transport for London 20mph zone programme.

These zones are meant to be self enforcing, which means that speed reduction will achieved by a combination of 'vertical and horizontal vehicle deflection'. From other research I have done recently, average speed reductions which can be achieved are:

Chicane: 12 MPH
Speed Humps / Cushions: 10 MPH
Carriageway narrowing: 7 MPH
Speed Camera: 5 MPH
Flashing sign: 4 MPH
Rumble Strips: 0.2 MPH

I am personally strongly against speed humps/cushions; I live in a Victorian building which shakes enough when lorries go over a bump in the road; I don't want any extra vibrations from speed humps. Speed humps are unpopular with the emergency services, particularly ambulance crews, because they can create delays and, in some circumstances, cause discomfort for passengers. Humps can also increase vehicle exhaust emissions and engine noise. The speed humps down Dartmouth Rd seem to be totally ineffective and any design is compromised by the need for emergency access; the sensible majority are inconvenienced by the inconsiderate minority.

Other 20 MPH zones have gone ahead in Lewisham with consultation response rates as low as 6%; the Telegraph Hill zone went ahead on the views of 60 people. Don't complain after the fact .

Find all posts by this user Reply
Perryman


Posts: 809
Joined: Dec 2006
Post: #15
25-08-2009 02:06 PM

The 20mph zone in PV north does little.
There wasnt a speeding problem in the first place and the short cuts already had speed bumps. I suppose it re-enforces the idea of a quiet residential area for those selling.

Perry Vale itself has the speeding problem, with cars hurtling off the edges at regular intervals. It has a primary school, 2 sharp bends and it is the main route to FH boys school.

Another 20 mph zone in FH would no doubt deliberately miss the problem roads as well.

Find all posts by this user Reply
AMFM


Posts: 306
Joined: Oct 2007
Post: #16
25-08-2009 04:31 PM

Some of the driving on Perry Vale itself is absolutely shocking. I was driving along on Sunday night at about 9pm, heading east toward the mini roundabout with Mayow Road when a car coming in the other direction, overtook the car in fornt of him (I assume it was a man...) at great speed and came hurtling toward me. I had to stop on my own side of the road to ensure he got past the car in front and didn't hit me. More than a little terrifying.

Find all posts by this user Reply
shzl400


Posts: 729
Joined: Oct 2007
Post: #17
26-08-2009 06:51 PM

Just had the consultation document through my door. Needless to say I shall be putting my tick firmly in the NO box. Staggered to read that 60% of Lewisham is already in 20 mph zone. Blimey!

And of course, it's accompanied by a rash of road humps - aaargh!!! ***** to cyclists and their more comfy sinusoidal humps! Worst agony of my life was having to go to Lewisham Hospital in labour over humps all the way. Streets are for cars and pedestrians should stay on the pavement (and that includes kids playing in the street!) Grrrr.Cursing

And one more thing ... I note the mention of taffic calming in Fairlie Gardens in the list in the main text, but it's not detailed on the map. FG is a small cul-de-sac, usually heavily parked on both sides. You'd have to be going some, even to get to 20, much less 30. No calming measures are required. CursingCursing

Yours, outraged of Fairlie Gardens (is it Lewisham's revenge for opposing the Tyson Road development?)

%@&$?%&*!!!!! Grrrrrr! (Sorry, just got a bit steamed up there....)

Find all posts by this user Reply
Davidsroadperson


Posts: 8
Joined: Jun 2009
Post: #18
26-08-2009 07:04 PM

I was surprised to see criticism of this. Certainly in David's Road and Manor Mount we need whatever help we can get. Currently there are no humps of any kind and it's a free-for-all.

People drive down from the top of Manor Mount illegally, often speeding, which is dangerous in itself, and particularly so when they reach the intersection with Waldenshaw Road because people turn right into Manor Mount without expecting anyone to hurtle towards them from the left. Of course they should look anyway, but...

They also speed through Waldenshaw, Manor Mount and David's Road (to avoid the lights on the London Road), which is a nasty accident waiting to happen.

And they also take the corner at the bottom of Manor Mount into David's Road as if they're at a racetrack. Not good for anyone crossing David's Road if they make the corner, even worse for the parked cars if they don't. We've had so many accidents there it's become routine.

I think the council plans should help with all these problems, so I must say I'm all for them.

Find all posts by this user Reply
roz


Posts: 1,790
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #19
26-08-2009 07:18 PM

Personally, as a parent with a young child and one who is fully aware of the difference to injuries caused and survival rates when one travels at 20 as opposed to 30/35mph, I'm keen to get all the help we can in reducing traffic speeds; I think safety especially that of the young, old and infirm is what it all should be about. However we need some means of enforcement if it is to work but I don't see that proposed anywhere. The comments in the report about HOR are laughable as rarely do people stay at 30 unless there is a traffic jam. I've seen cars travel at what must be 50 at least along this road.

Anyway its a start and despite the general loathing of yet more controls I hope the outcome will be a yes vote.

Find all posts by this user Reply
michael


Posts: 3,196
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #20
26-08-2009 08:32 PM

Putting humps on Manor Mount and Davids Road is not the solution to stopping people coming down the hill illegally. I don't care if they do put humps in the road as I won't have to listen to the lorries shaking my house as the go over them. But if you live in Davids Road you might want to visit people in Honor Oak Road or Perry Vale who have lorries shaking their houses at regular intervals.

I had thought that these roads had not been humped to allow faster access for ambulances. But otherwise I am certainly in favour of some traffic calming on Waldenshaw Road.

I'm still not sure what the point of an unenforcable 20mph zone is on roads that are already humped. If this was really about road safety then the first thing to do is to remove Chelsea tractors which have greater mass and will inflict more serious injuries on pedestrians and occupants of other cars. Then we could sort out the pedestrian crossings on road such as Perry Vale, London Road/Dartmouth Road, Kirkdale, Sydenham Rise, etc

Find all posts by this user Reply
Pages (6): « First [1] 2 3 4 5 Next > Last »

Friends of Blythe Hill Fields


Possibly Related Topics ...
Topic: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  Consultation on Controlled Parking Zone in Forest Hill P1971 127 40,515 14-10-2016 10:22 PM
Last Post: michael
  Why is HOP and Forest Hill in zone 3 and not zone 2 Redalways 3 3,820 13-11-2011 03:31 PM
Last Post: brian