Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
NEW 20 MPH TRAFFIC SIGNS
The labels are off and now it’s official: the speed limit in Haringey’s side roads is 20mph. There is no doubt that impacts at lower speeds greatly reduce the risk of serious injury. I have my doubts, however, whether this new limit with be observed. Driving regularly in the boroughs of Hackney and Islington, where the 20 mph limit is widespread, I am aware that 20mph speed limits are observed infrequently and then only 100 or so metres beyond the boroughs’ speed cameras. The speed limit through Alexandra Palace has been 20mph for a number of years and, despite this being a busy, public route, observance is extremely low. I wanted, therefore, to know how Haringey Council intended to enforce the new limit in our quiet side roads. In a response to an enquiry Cllr. Goldberg wrote:
“The council will be monitoring the speed limits in the borough... and consider the introduction of additional measures, such as traffic calming, where this was deemed necessary. The council will also work with Metropolitan Police who will take appropriate action where speeding problems are raised.” When the same limit was introduced in Islington, Scotland Yard’s traffic management unit wrote: “An unrealistically low speed limit in these roads will create an enforcement problem where one does not currently exist. We will not routinely enforce 20mph speed limits and zones”. (Islington Gazette.) Since then on the spot fines have been handed out but this form of enforcement is, by its nature, piecemeal. Cllr. Goldberg did not specify how the council will monitor the new limit.
The Transport Research Laboratory conducted a study for the DfT which brought together a series of findings from local authorities and international case studies of traffic calming measures. It found that the use of speed limit signs alone only had a small effect on the mean average speed, by around 1-2 mph, whereas more extensive traffic calming measures such as speed cameras produced greater speed reductions. Islington, Brighton and Bristol saw a decrease of only 1 mph the the year following the introduction of a 20mph limit.
So, in terms of reducing speed, signs have proven largely ineffective: but this is the preferred choice of Haringey Council. And the cost? A hefty £900,000. Given that the borough’s roads are in a parlous state, a patchwork quilt of repairs, I would have thought that this money could have been better spent protecting the safety of road users by repairing pavements and road surfaces: a view I imagine which would be shared by a colleague who required extensive dental reconstruction when his bike went into a pothole sending him over the handlebars.
At a time of government cuts, as Haringey representatives are constantly reminding us, it would be reassuring to think that funding was spent wisely: I fear our unsightly 20mph speed limit signs will prove, however, to be little more than a very expensive gesture.
Tags for Forum Posts: -, 000, 20, HARINGEY'S, MPH, SIGNS, SPEND., TRAFFIC, £900
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Gordon T on
-
I can't say I speak for most drivers. For me it's continuous risk assessment on many fronts, among which are:
Risk of getting speeding points which increase insurance premiums - parking/box junction tickets, though annoying, don't.
Risk of being caught speeding, points or not.
Risk of speed above a stated (even if thought arbitrary) limit leading to a collision.
Risk of being involved in a collision at any speed, given traffic volume, road conditions (etc etc - many more situations are described in 'Roadcraft' or the Highway Code - can be read online).
-
-
I can't help but agree. By analogy I see cars, lorries, and vans going well over 20 most days down ladder roads which are residential and where there is a high chance they will meet a person or animal if they lose control. It makes me a very defensive pedestrian (when crossing roads, even at traffic lights) and signals to everyone that streets are for vehicles not people. I for one wish they spent more on enforcement and less on signs which do little more than clutter our urban spaces.
-
-
I think the problem is that there's an army of lawyers waiting to find flaws in any prosecution for speeding, so if the sign rules aren't followed, prosecutions will fail.
I totally agree there should be a lot more enforcement on speed limits - and driving with a mobile.
It would also be good if all drivers realised that they are supposed to do mirror-signal-manoeuvre, rather than manoeuvre then signal during the manoeuvre if you're lucky. But that's probably too much to hope.
-
-
As a cyclist and pedestrian as well as an occasional driver, I am in favour of the new limits, but does anyone really think that the council is serious about this? There is no intention to enforce the existing limits, never mind the new ones, but the Council can be seen to be 'doing something'.
-
-
While agreeing that enforcement is crucial here I can't help but be reassured by the signs. As I tootle along white hart lane at 20mph I note that I am far from alone. If wvm is frustrated by my speed at least the signs tell him what the limit is.
-
-
I don't agree with the 20mph limit and am a much more regular cyclist than a driver. It's dangerous driving not speed (at least the difference between 20 and 30 mph) which is the problem in my experience. And the number of signs is just ridiculous and an awful waste of money. In a world where enforcement of the 30mph speed limit was almost non existent all that this is likely to achieve is to bring the speeds of the fastest drivers down to the low 30s (a sensible limit in my view if enforced) at the expense of forcing the law abiding majority to drive 10mph slower.
If there was a consultation I didn't see it. But anyone who lives near Finsbury Park knows consultation responses have no impact whatsoever on Haringey Councils decision making.
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Anderson on
-
Hello. Link below to the report back on the consultation. There were over 4,500 responses so pretty wide ranging.
http://www.haringey.gov.uk/sites/haringeygovuk/files/the_councils_c...
The number and frequency of signs are required by law so LBH don't really have much say in the matter.
-
Permalink Reply by matthew cuthbert on
-
Thank you for clarifying that. I wondered about insurance, and legal implications.
-
-
It's not just dangerous driving - it's can also be the fault of the pedestrian, as in this case
"The day I hit a child at 20mph - and realised the speed limit must ..."
- cutting speeds saves lives, and injuries.
-
-
I don't disagree that speed matters. A good driver doesn't just drive along at the speed limit regardless of the circumstances. If driving down a narrow road at a time and place when children are likely to be playing they ought to be going at a speed that allows them to stop almost immediately. That doesn't mean the speed limit in an entire borough should be set at 20mph. What we need is better education and enforcement around safe driving, not indiscriminate one size fits all regulation.
-
Permalink Reply by John McMullan on
-
The technology now exists to manage our "speeding" for us... It is the ACPOs who are stopping it being marketable with their reluctance to prosecute the majority of speeders.
-
-
ROSPA have a detailed analysis of 20mph zones & limits which is interesting:
http://www.rospa.com/rospaweb/docs/advice-services/road-safety/driv...
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
