Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Hewitt Road - oil slick - update
Residents asked me to follow up the issue with the speed hump/service cover and resulting loss of oil from vehicles which (having driven too fast over it) leave a trail of oil.
Here is the response. The replacement cover should fix the issue but of course the larger problem of cars speeding down our roads continues. Its an issue I will continue to address with the council.
----------------------------
Your enquiry about the Statutory Undertakers service cover in Hewitt Road outside no’40 LBH/2953114
Thank you for your enquiry.
A site inspection has confirmed that the speed hump has been constructed to the correct specification and conforms to the Highways (Road Hump) Regulations 1996, which is laid down by the Department for Transport. The speed at which you approach the hump should take account of the roads layout. The Highway Code states that 'the speed limit is the absolute maximum and does not mean it is safe to drive at that speed irrespective of conditions. Driving at speeds that are inappropriate for the road and traffic conditions can be dangerous'.
However, it would appear that the cause of the problem is likely to be the protruding sewer inspection chamber near the speed hump outside no’40.
We will therefore ascertain who is responsible for this cover and request that they arrange replacement for a more modern style cover that will be flush with the carriageway when installed.
Engineering Projects Team
Project Engineer
Sustainable Transport Group
London Borough of Haringey
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by pipplypig on
-
I have had a similar response from Haringey on more than one occasion. The water company have previously denied responsibility too when I spoke to some men who came out to look at the inspection cover but they did then send people out to improve the dip immediately before the cover. Things did seem to improve for a while but it has not resolved it as there is still a dip in the road between the speed bump and the manhole cover but Haringey continue to deny responsibility or do anything to resolve the issue.
The fire brigade have to come out every time an oil tank is cracked to lay down sand. This happens at a rate of about once every two months (sometimes more or less often) and it takes time for several firemen to brush the sand in to absorb the oil. It seems like a terrible waste of time and resources for the fire brigade to have to deal with this all the time.
As well as the danger to drivers that the oil slicks cause, the continual noise of vehicles crashing over the bump, into the dip and back onto the manhole cover is really bad. Especially when lorries go down our road in the early hours of the morning. I know this has been discussed on this forum before.
I'm not really sure who to email next. I'm getting nowhere with Haringey.
-
Permalink Reply by Karen Alexander on
-
I'll keep on top of Haringey Council to make sure this is sorted.
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on
-
Karen, this appears to be a Haringey variation of the traditional "Lieber Heinrich" children's song.
Have I got this right? They appear to know there's a repeated problem. But in the 101 borough it's always too difficult/someone else's responsibility/due to a lack of straw or whatever is needed to fix the hole in the bucket. (Or in the this case the protruding sewer chamber.)
This might be unfair. But purely out of curiosity, do you know, Karen, or has anyone else a record of when someone first reported this? Recently? Last month? Last year? And when Henry and Liza (Heinrich und Liese - Haringey & Thames Water? ) got going on apparently deciding how it wasn't solvable?
(Tottenham Hale ward councillor)
-
-
It seems another spill has happened. Fresh oil this morning on top of the sand from the last spill. I think there is now a bit of a hole immediately before the man hole which is new and could be making the speed bump / dip issue even worse.
-
-
Thanks. I will get on to the council today advise two more spills over the last few days and to request this is treated as a matter of urgency.
-
Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on
-
THIS morning, I performed my own independent 'site inspection' of the hump and the ironwork cover.
The council appears to want to place the blame on the "protruding" sewer inspection chamber. However, this protrudes only slightly and the immediate surrounding road surface is only slightly lower – IMO, not enough by themselves to cause the oil-slick hazard (I suspect some vehicles have badly damaged oil sumps).
I'd accept that the cars scraping their sumps may well be going too fast. However, the Council's comments – like the public statements of many big institutions – are true, bald and in respect of the problem in hand, not hugely helpful, if not useless.The council's "correct specification" for humps probably assume a flat road, and separation by some distance from other "carriageway" items. Any conformity with of the hump regulation ignores some relevant factors:
- the hump is on a relatively steep hill (meaning vehicles tend to land more heavily on the down side
- the hump is (only) three paces from the (probably long-in-place) ironwork on the lower side (catching the landing cars)
- the "carriageway" on either side of the ironwork has a pronounced camber
I would guess that here, the road camber is of a greater curvature than normal, causing cars to straddle the ironwork too low. The nearness of the hump-on-a-hill contributes to the oil-sump-scrapping. Alternatively, it is the middle of the road that is sticking up too far, not the inspection chamber cover.
I have no qualifications as a Road Engineer – yet nor is this rocket science. IMO, the council's proposed solution is unlikely to make enough of a difference. I believe that it is the significant camber (not conforming with regulation?) is the main cause of the problem. Short of a significant road re-surfacing, the best interim answer may be warning sign.
Disclosure:
am a prospective councillor candidate
Highgate Ward | Liberal Democrat Party
-
Permalink Reply by Gordon T on
-
Another aggravating factor: a vehicle under braking tends to be 'nose down', thus further reducing the clearance between the sump and the road. It's the perfect storm.....
Even without schlepping over to Hewitt, you can see clearly on Google Street View (dated June 2012) the many, deep, scars on the road surface immediately in front of the manhole cover.
Move the road hump further away from the manhole cover?
-
-
We will therefore ascertain who is responsible for this cover and request that they arrange replacement for a more modern style cover that will be flush with the carriageway when installed
I'm not sure that a flush-mounted, "more modern style cover" would fix the problem. If it's a light weight product, it could be that it is the cover that gets damaged, rather than oil sumps. More thought needs to go in.
---
Also visible in the 2012 Google Street View – about 10 paces on from the ironwork – is the beginning of an oil slick that continues on down the center line of the road. The slick I saw yesterday, partly covered with sand, is perhaps 100 metres long.
This clearly chronic problem is surely a hazard for cyclists and motorcyclists and for any vehicle braking suddenly with its tires on the oil slick.
Over the years, the cost of repairs to damaged oil sumps must be significant.
And if someone drove on for some distance not realising their engine sump was haemorrhaging oil, then a seized engine might be on the cards (oil to engines being as blood to humans).
All of the £6,000,000 annual profit the Council generates from The Parking Account is supposedly "ring fenced" for road and transport improvements.
Disclosure:
am a prospective councillor candidate
Highgate Ward | Liberal Democrat Party
-
-
Also had a proper look today: between the lower end of the hump and the rim of the sewer inspection chamber cover, the road surface isn't a straight plane: it does dip, particularly to the offside of a passing vehicle, confirming pipplypig's thought. It's particularly unfortunate that this wasn't properly resolved during the resurfacing work - or perhaps the impact of hundreds of thousands of vehicles a year is just beating it down, slowly.
A fourth aggravating factor.
-
-
Also had a proper look today
and yet Gordon, the Project Engineer of the Engineering Project Team (Sustainable Transport of Local Government), who performed a professional "Site Inspection" ... probably regards us as mere amateurs!
I would like to hear from the professionals on this matter and learn how us residents have got it wrong.
The council's main concern seems to be to pin responsibility onto another organisation rather than to fix it and find a sustainable transport solution.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
