Snazy, the Scooby boys trying to slow things down. Now I have seen everything

lol I am a recently removed Scooby Boy thank you very much, and I still have inconsiderate speeders

We are all human right

Earlier in this thread Shzl400 said that

Is there more detailed information available about what is proposed than is included in the consultation document?

I rang Lewisham Council and spoke to Keith Gasson on the number printed on the back of the leaflet 8314 2564. That's what he told me. I guess if you need to know more, you could call him again.

The response from the Forest Hill Society can be read at http://www.foresthillsociety.com/2009/09...-hill.html

In general we have to oppose the implementation of the 20mph zone across this area in the way that has been proposed.

One of the most interesting statistics we were able to find out is that approximately 10% of cars on Manor Mount are going in the wrong direction. This will not be solved by speed humps but needs action taken to enforce the no entry sign (as well as the changes to traffic light phasing that we were able to get implemented a few weeks ago).

10% , this is an amazing figure of criminal action. I had no idea it was so high.
Something needs to be done before there is a fatal accident.
I agree speed humps will not solve and seems Police have not got the personpower .

I am sure I have seen and read about devices you can build into the road that only let a vehicle travel the way intended ?

The precise figures reported by the Council were 3445 vehicles travelling northbound on Manor Mount with 85% travelling at less than 23 mph and 398 travelling southbound with 85% at less than 30.9 mph. Perhaps no surprise that those going the wrong way are also travelling faster - perhaps because they are the ones who are in a hurry to get somewhere at any cost.

The figures will include a number of Manor Mount Residents who have done U turns but have not actually driven through the No Entry sign (but are still driving the wrong way down a one-way street). The count covers a period of one week.

I suspect that speed cushions and / or kerb build outs in Manor Mount would simply encourage the illegal drivers to weave all over the road with even less capacity to avoid other road users.

At ?60 a time, a mobile camera could raise over ?20,000 a week, which should surely be enough to justify its existence - although I suspect the revenue might drop off quite quickly as repeat offenders learn it's not such a good idea to ignore the one way! They might get some for speeding as well as going the wrong way since at least 15% are doing more than 30 mph which I presume would be 6 points for one hit.

At a meeting attended by myself, Darien Goodwin, several councillors etc a few months ago it was revealed that a mobile camera would in fact be in place as a matter of urgency. We were shown the vehicle and how it works. The difficulty since has been actually finding out if and when it started being used and how many times the vehicle has been/will be placed on Manor Mount. The Council now have new powers to monitor and apprehend offenders and do not yet have many vehicles so its likely that it could be spread very thinly across the borough before long. I would imagine these figures about traffic volume have only been made possible from the siting of a camera which suggests that it is in place. I will chase again for a more definitive answer from Darien et al re times and frequency. I know Cllr Russell has also been trying to establish this information so if hes reading this perhaps he could update either way!

Roz
The traffic figures were the result of traffic counters laid on most of the roads in the 20mph zone some months ago. I remember seeing them at the time and wondered why they were doing such an intensive survey - now we know! Lewisham's (one) mobile camera unit was mentioned at the Lewisham Transport Operational meeting this week by Darien Goodwin. I'm fairly sure he said that it hadn't yet been used for real but I wouldn't swear to it.

I presume that the mobile camera unit is like those used by the Police and has to be manned - so there is an additional operational cost compared to a fixed camera[/b]. However, you don't have to raise many ?60 fines per hour to pay the wages of the operators!

If Darien Goodwin has definitely said that then I for one want some answers, not least why they are paying the wages and set up costs for the mobile unit team for months before deployment. It also does not concur with what he announced at our onsite meeting.

andrewr, in response to your earlier message about Netherby road, I totally agree - those and the ones on Canonbie are ridiculously high, and deteriorating rapidly. I have a small car, and even driving over the humps at less than 15mph I regularly scrape the underside of the front bumper - the additional bump in addition to the gradient on the hills is just too much for my small wheelbase!

If they are going to implement the 20 mph zone, I think they need to improve existing humps by lowering/levelling them out. I'm not sure, but some of those on Netherby/Canonbie must be getting on for 20 years old.

Living opposite the end of Netherby road too, I get headlight glare into my house every time a car comes up the hill at night and goes over the bumps. This is an issue that won't be affected by speed - but would be much improved with lowered humps.

I have a friend in north London who gets all repairs to his Lotus paid for by Brent council as their speed humps are slightly higher than is legally allowed and do great damage to small expensive sports cars.

I wonder if anybody has measured the humps on Westwood Park, Canonbie, Netherby to see if they are legal?

There are loads of "questionable" humps and cushions. Even one over the Valentine Court side of Church Rise is a lot higher than the rest, and the damage to is supports that too.

I have never seen anyone actually measure them when making them, so am guessing its all done by eye.

In reality any hump with substantial damage, is clearly higher than average, and maybe too high.

There used to be a vicious hump on Sunderland Road, going down towards the 205. If you didn't spot it fast enough in the dark, it would send your car flying through the air, Streets of San Francisco style. They've now lowered that particular bump, I guess I wasn't the only one feeling like Steve Mc Queen every time I went over it.

Was that the one at the top near South Road?
If so, the issue was more the road had dropped away just before it, which caused the car to nose dive just before smashing into the hump, regardless of speed.

I have received recently a leaflet from Lewisham Council regarding the 20mph limit zone. I think it was yet another example of money waste from Lewisham Council.
7 pages in thick colour paper with photos just to ask what we think about the zone, which in 5 seconds flat ended up in the recycling bin (like the equally disgraceful Lewisham Homes magazine...).
What's wrong with sending 1 page in black and white or even better just an email? Or is it too much to ask in 2010?

I understand that the results of the survey are in and that the Tewkesbury Lodge Estate will not be included in the 20 MPH zone. However, the area to the east of Honor Oak Road will be included in a new 20 MPH zone, with speed humps.

The pamphlets are sitting on the relevant persons desk in the council, waiting to be delivered.

HI NF, any news on the abovementioned mobile camera for Manor Mount?

I have seen the mobile camera lurking near the P4 bus stop opposite Fairlawn School on a couple of occasions recently.

re: Londondrz

The council told us at a recent meeting that they were shocked by the number of vehicles abusing the one way system at Manor Mount. The mobile unit is still undergoing trials (learning how to use it?), but once those are finished Manor Mount and Sydenham Hill/upper Kirkdale will be at the top of the list for enforcement action; they know when to target each area from the recent traffic data they collected.

The camera is expected to be in use before the end of this financial year.