20 mph for Wightman Road - consultation agreed

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by John McMullan on October 20, 2009 at 14:19

Wightman Rd is residential, Green Lanes is not.

Still think it's tricky?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DavidJ on October 20, 2009 at 14:21

Judging by the speed of a skip lorry that recklessly whizzed past me yesterday on Green Lanes, speed certainly can be a problem.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dick Harris on November 24, 2009 at 22:39

I have received the consultation document (pushed through my letter box). I propose to send a letter that concludes as follows:

To summarise:
I strongly support the 20 mph speed limit but:
1. I object to the building of humps across Wightman Road, ie proposals 1 and 2. I would prefer other measures that discourage speed, such as roundabouts, changed priorities and enforcement cameras. I also favour banning all vehicles over 5 tons fully loaded except for access.
2. I have no objection in principle to proposals 3 and 6 but I would caution against narrowing the exits from West bound ladder roads too much – they need to have two lanes for turning left and right. This could perhaps change if the junctions were made into roundabouts.
3. I support proposal 4 on refuge islands and advise that they should all be big enough for baby buggies/shopping trolleys.
4. I support proposal 5 for calming signs – but there should be speed cameras also.
5. Whatever the general conclusion on new humps, I strongly object to one being constructed near the New River culvert.
6. If there is no support for banning the practice of parking partly on the footway, I would propose that the rules for this should be clarified, the markings renewed and enforced and that footway obstructions (such as unruly hedges) should be removed.
7. I suggest that close attention be paid to the cyclists’ lobby about the future use of Wightman Road.

Any comments gratefully received.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by TTTH on November 24, 2009 at 23:16

I like your suggestion banning 5 ton vehicles Dick. I am in favour of the humps. It's better than nothing and I am so desperate for anything to slow down the traffic so that I can simply cross the road safely at least twice/ day. I am not sure that Wightman Road is wide enough accommodate roundabouts etc. I think the proposals are realistic with the budget available. Cameras are costly - £50K each I've heard. We have £100K I seem to remember.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dick Harris on November 25, 2009 at 15:56

Thanks Colin. The argument I propose to use in the letter is as follows:
"I have often thought that the best (and probably unplanned) feature of Wightman Road is that there are no large buses and very few large lorries. This is probably because of the weak railway bridge and the poor access at Endymion Road and it is to these that we owe the fact that the present dense traffic does not cause much vibration. Except for the trucks that go to and from Jewsons I see few heavy vehicles and the very few long ones have lost their way and tend to regret it. I would say therefore that in all of this the number 1 principle should be to avoid doing anything at all that might make it easier for heavy vehicles to use Wightman Road for any purpose other than access to local addresses. In particular, cement delivery lorries and similar short but heavy vehicles should be discouraged or prohibited from using Wightman Road and ladder roads. A loaded 8 cu metre cement lorry weighs well over 20 tons and it is this kind of vehicle (not cars and vans) that will shake and damage houses. Making such vehicles negotiate humps of any shape at any speed will make the shaking worse. They are also much noisier than light vehicles. Long vehicles entering from the North should be warned that they can only get out the way they came.
My first comment is: prohibit all through traffic over 5 tons (fully loaded) and don’t build any humps across Wightman Road."

As to the width needed for a roundabout, I was thinking of the kind that already exists at the Alroy/Endymion junction. That one works OK.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John McMullan on November 25, 2009 at 17:03

They get out via a Ladder Rd (yes they're not supposed to but they do).

I don't know when/where you're looking at Wightman Rd but it is blighted by large trucks up the north end. Anything heading east/west finds it much more convenient to use a ladder rung road coming across from Salisbury Rd or West Green Rd, including trucks.

How will the cement trucks get from the cement factory into the City for our skyscrapers if they're not allowed to use Wightman Rd? Surely you're not thinking that we can burden the people of Tottenham Lane with ALL the cement trucks?

Roundabouts are death traps for cyclists and not that great for pedestrians either.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dick Harris on November 25, 2009 at 18:45

I live about half way along Wightman Road. I suppose the heavier trucks don't so often venture down my way because there is already an 8 ton gross weight restriction where Wightman Road passes over the railway. This would prevent any loaded cement lorry. If is legal for them to use ladder rungs, the presence of the humps, even at 20mph, would produce shaking. That's why I am against any humps on Wightman Road.
Why do you say these vehicles are not supposed to use ladder rungs? Is there already a restriction?
So far as I know, all vehicles from the cement works will emerge on Tottenham Lane which is a one way street so they will all have to start by going towards Crouch End and then choose between carrying on south or veering north up Church Road.
I defer to you as to cyclists on roundabouts although I would like to understand why mini-roundabouts would be any worse than an ordinary junction.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John McMullan on November 25, 2009 at 19:12

Yes, the ladder rung roads (the humped ones) have a 7.5t access only restriction. Routinely broken.

It's hard to explain why roundabouts are bad for cyclists, I guess you have to try it (or try this google search)

I hadn't thought of the bridge restriction, as long as they follow the rules with regard to the ladder rung roads then I guess we shouldn't see one! We'll have to make sure that bridge is never "improved".

I wonder if the returning lorries will come up Green Lanes? More pedestrian deaths there?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by TTTH on November 25, 2009 at 19:19

I take your point about hump potentially creating shaking with a very heavy truck Dick, but I think the trade off against saving someone life while crossing the road is worth having, particularly at Alroy Road where we have no room for traffic islands, etc. I hope that you will still support having a "flat top speed table with uncontrolled crossing" at Alroy Road.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John D on November 25, 2009 at 7:50

@ Richard. There were a couple of accidents just outside the Greek Church recently ( this autumn ) when the Fire Brigade had to be called in to convert saloon cars into roadsters to get the injured occupants out.

Re the figure of £100 K - if the Council want to introduce a 20mph limit, they HAVE to make it self-policing by constructing speed tables etc.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page