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 
North Kirkdale 20 mph zone
Author Message
robin orton


Posts: 716
Joined: Feb 2009
Post: #1
23-08-2010 09:47 AM

I have just had a leaflet through the door inviting comments on the council proposal for introducing a 20mph zone in the area bounded by Derby Hill, Derby Hill Crescent, Featherstone Avenue, Thorpewood Avenue, Kirkdale and Dartmouth Road. (The area straddles SE23 and SE26, so I've put a similar posting on the SE26 forum.) This would be enforced by installing speedhumps in Derby Hill, Derby Hill Crescent, Featherstone Avene, Radlet Avenue (which the council still don't know how to spell) and Round Hill.(There are already speedhumps on Thorpewood Avenue, where there is of course a potential road safety issue around Eliot Bank and Holy Trinity schools.)

No special reason (e.g. incidence of accidents in the area) is given for this proposal, other than that the council has 'a programme to introduce 20mph zones, wherever practical, throughout the borough's residential areas.'

I'm not convinced. I certainly don't see the need for speedhumps in Radlet Avenue and Round Hill, both of which are cul-de-sacs. My inclination is to suggest to the council that they don't proceed with this, and offset the saving against proposed cuts in other areas. But I'd be interested to know what others feel.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Londondrz


Posts: 1,538
Joined: Apr 2006
Post: #2
23-08-2010 10:11 AM

When speedhumps and the 20mph zone was introduced to Waldenshaw Road I was pleased as it is a regular rat run . Initially it worked but although it has slowed some people down the minority who do speed seem to take pleasure in going as fast as they can whilst using the speedhumps as a slalom course. The 20mph signs are also so high up that the are difficult to see. There is also the factor that if there is no-one to enforce the speed limit then there is no incenticve for speeders to slow down. The police (as stated in another post) are not going to enforce the speed limit so it is all just a waste of time.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Snazy


Posts: 1,495
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #3
23-08-2010 12:56 PM

Humps or cushions?
Cushions in my mind are ineffective and actually cause accidents with the slalom they create. Just look at the number of accidents on Mayow Road, by Adamsrill, most recently going through the park fencing.

Certainly no point putting them in in the suggested roads.

Find all posts by this user Reply
robin orton


Posts: 716
Joined: Feb 2009
Post: #4
23-08-2010 01:32 PM

Humps, but 'constructed to a sinusoidal profile' which apparently has 'a shallower initial rise' than 'the more commonly used round top hump.'

Find all posts by this user Reply
michael


Posts: 3,198
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #5
23-08-2010 02:08 PM

Cllr Alex Feakes has put the leaflet online: http://www.alexfeakes.org/foresthill/Nor...proof3.pdf

Proposing a speed hump at the bottom of Round Hill is particularly stupid since there are currently bollards there to block the road (and I do not expect there are any plans to change this).

The map does not show the speed cushions on Dartmouth Road but it also does not propose any solution to the speeding problem on Kirkdale. Perhaps they should compare the accident rate on Round Hill to Kirkdale before deciding which needs slower traffic.

Find all posts by this user Reply
DerbyHillTop


Posts: 120
Joined: Aug 2008
Post: #6
23-08-2010 07:46 PM

As a resident of Derby Hill Crescent with 2 toddlers one would assume I would be for the proposal. But I see NO point. The speeds on the Derby Hill / Derby Hill Crescent are less than 20 mph already. These are steep hills in part and if there is a vehicle on the opposite side, one needs to stop (almost park) to pass through. The speed humps would be completely ineffective as passing cars can not possibly go faster than 20 mph. And if you get to be driving behind me on Thorpewood Avenue, you would not go faster again.

My biggest gripe is with the hump by the Library. It is so high and no matter how slowly you go over it the ride is rather uncomfortable. With both of my pregnancies in the latter stages this was avoided at all cost. Imagine a journey in an ambulance and when in pain. Those humps just hurt even more.

Lastly this is proposed to increase cycling in the area. You need to be pretty fit to walk up the Derby Hill, let alone try to cycle up it.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Jane


Posts: 52
Joined: Jan 2007
Post: #7
24-08-2010 11:55 AM

I agree with the views expressed so far and will fill in the form to oppose humps and also make reference to the awful hump at bottom of Thorpewood referrd to by DerbyHillTop. No matter how slowly or at what angle you take it, it throws you all over the place. Nightmare for ambulances...

Find all posts by this user Reply
sacha


Posts: 4
Joined: Aug 2010
Post: #8
24-08-2010 10:11 PM

I agree with DerbyHillTop especially - there are enough lumps, bumps and incline on Thorpewood pavements & roads as it is (for pedestrians-great for cardio-vascular workout though!!?)

In my belief, sorry sensible drivers, more humps are required in Dartmouth Road and from the top of Sydenham Hill down towards Kirkdale. My personal favourite option would be to have speed cameras put in (although we all know there is lack of funding everywhere) to at least try and capture the late evening/early morning drivers, who seem so ecstatic that the road is clear, they feel the need to have to 'put their foot down', come hell or high water.

Find all posts by this user Reply
ehegarty


Posts: 8
Joined: Dec 2007
Post: #9
06-09-2010 02:46 PM

Hurrah for the speed humps! Not only from a pedestrian safety angle, but also to try and stop the constant revving-up and speeding of vehicles up and down Derby Hill late at night. Invariably, this is when the local night spots close, and added to the amount of noise the customers make EVERY Friday evening at 2am as they finish an evening out.

All we need now is resident permit parking; to stop commuters blocking driveways and taking spaces, then hopping on the tube into town. All because they are too lazy/selfish to either to walk to the station, or to pay a parking charge. It's not good when residents of Derby Hill and Derby Hill Crescent have to park streets away, and can't access their garages/driveways.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Jane


Posts: 52
Joined: Jan 2007
Post: #10
06-09-2010 04:54 PM

Do you not think that in general there are better ways of getting cars to slow down other than just speed humps? Maybe they would cost more, but what about chicanes? However slowly you go over some humps (e.g. bottom of Thorpewood) you can hear your suspension groaning. Agree that speed cameras might help but it appears that many of them are not working (e.g. Brenchley Gardens) and drivers get to know this and ignore them.
I have great sympathy for those around Derby Hill and it sounds as if residents parking might be a good idea as well, but that can also be a nuisance when you have visitors/workmen and have to sort out visitors passes.

Find all posts by this user Reply
DerbyHillTop


Posts: 120
Joined: Aug 2008
Post: #11
11-10-2010 01:54 PM

Does anyone know if results from the 2 traffic monitoring stations are awailable and how one can get them. The two that were in Derby Hill and Derby Hill Crescent have now been taken away. I am interested in what the findings are: how many cars passed and what was their average speed.

Find all posts by this user Reply
borderpaul


Posts: 87
Joined: Oct 2007
Post: #12
12-01-2011 09:38 PM

The results are out and the council are putting in traffic calming west of Thorpewood Avenue on Derby Hill, Derby Crescent and leaving those east of the Avenue, Round Hill and Radlet as they are.

It looks like the council did take into consideration the requirements of individual roads rather than the majority of the overall vote which was in favour and excluded the roads where the majority of people on those roads were not in favour.

Let's hope they are so understanding when they consult us about a CPZ after the swimming pool opens.

Find all posts by this user Reply
DerbyHillTop


Posts: 120
Joined: Aug 2008
Post: #13
12-01-2011 11:08 PM

52 people for
48 against
out of 425 leaflets distributed.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Londondrz


Posts: 1,538
Joined: Apr 2006
Post: #14
13-01-2011 08:15 AM

I welcomed traffic calming on Waldenshaw Road when introduced only to find no-one would enforce it.

Bit of a waste of money.

Find all posts by this user Reply
DerbyHillTop


Posts: 120
Joined: Aug 2008
Post: #15
13-01-2011 09:48 AM

Just spoke to Keith Gasson (Lewisham Council) and he said that one of the speed meters had average speed of 21-22mph - I expect that was on Derby Hill and other one had lower speeds. And those lower speeds will still need 3 humps as 20pmh zones require humps on certain distances.

Waste of money if you ask me. Can't understand why humps are not placed strategically where cars can build up speeds to slow them and allow natural road curve/hill/ narrowness to slow speeds at other places.

I am all for putting 20mph sign at boundaries to remind the post van that these are residential roads.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Londondrz


Posts: 1,538
Joined: Apr 2006
Post: #16
13-01-2011 10:09 AM

We have 20mph signs on Waldenshaw Road and speed humps but some drivers just try to make it even faster. The tattoed post van driver doesnt speed down our road but does like driving the wrong way down Manor Mount.

Find all posts by this user Reply

Friends of Blythe Hill Fields


Possibly Related Topics ...
Topic: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  Why is HOP and Forest Hill in zone 3 and not zone 2 Redalways 3 3,901 13-11-2011 03:31 PM
Last Post: brian