Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Is our new 20mph zone working?
Haringey Council have just spent £100,000 on the new traffic calming scheme for the Harringay Ladder. I'm keen both as a resident and as a ratepayer to be satisfied that the new scheme is working as well as possible.
Ideally this could be judged by measuring levels of reduction in traffic and in traffic speed. Sadly, however, Haringey Council set no targets for the scheme, so we'll have to develop our own criteria.
Perhaps for speed we could simply say the success criterion would be that traffic is adhering to the 20mph limit. As for levels of traffic, I can only think of, does it feel like there's less traffic. Unsatisfactory, I know, but in the absence of proper data collected by the Council, it's about all we got.
I came to thinking about this a couple of weeks ago when I was being beeped by cars behind me on Wightman Road because I was driving at 20mph.
"It is 20 now..........isn't it?", I wondered. But I wasn't sure. And I'm not surprised I wasn't sure. There's not a lot of signposting. There's one roundel sign on Wightman just before Sydney Road together with the limit painted on the road at the same point. Then nothing till just before Hewitt when once again the 20 mph limit is painted on the road.
The red faced fuming motorist behind me could be forgiven for not being aware that he was in a 20mph zone.
Something similar happened today on my way home. So I found myself wondering what's best practice signposting in 20mph zones.
Here's what I found. Apparently there are two legally defined ways to introduce a 20mph limit. One is through the creation of a 20mph zone; the other is by introducing a simple 20 mph limit.
20 mph zones
The purpose of 20 mph zones is to "create conditions where drivers naturally drive at 20 mph because of the general nature of the location, or as a result of traffic calming measures".
Department for Transport Guidance says:
According to the Traffic Signs regulations and General Directions 2002 (TSRGD) an area is legally a 20mph zone when 20mph zone signs are used. This comes with certain legal obligations. In particular Direction 16 of the TSRGD stipulates that no point within the zone must be further than 50 metres from a traffic calming feature (unless in a cul-de-sac less than 80 meters long). Direction 16 also gives full details of what is a traffic calming feature.
The zone sign at the zone entrances is only required to be erected on one side of the entry road where the road is less than 5 metres wide. However, it is recommended that even in these situations signs should be placed on both sides of the road. This helps to accentuate the gateway effect and the feeling for the driver of entering an area which is "different".
Apparently in 20mph zones no other indication of the speed limit is required other than at EVERY exit and entry point. I presume this is because the traffic calming measures should mean there is no need.
20mph limits
A 20mph speed limit can be introduced using standard speed limit signs without the word Zone. Direction 16 of the TSRGD does not apply and traffic calming features are not necessary. However, 20mph limits are really intended to be used only on roads where the traffic speed is already below 24 mph and where physical enforcing measures are not therefore required. However, if a 20 limit is ordered the Road Traffic Act requires 20 mph repeater signs to enable the speed limit to be enforced.
So a few questions for me:
1. Does our area have "an urban safety strategy... involving measures to discourage through traffic from using the proposed zone"?
2.Does our 20 mph zone "create conditions where drivers naturally drive at 20 mph because of the general nature of the location, or as a result of traffic calming measures."
3. Is it legally set up, that is a) entry & exit signs b) traffic calming every 50 metres.
4. Following DfT best practice recommendations, are our zone signs placed on both sides of the road to create a gateway effect?
4. Is it being effective at keeping speeds to 20 mph.
My view is that there's something amiss with the signposting. I'm not sure if we have them at every entrance and exit, but even if we do, I think we need repeater signs to drive home the point. In Camden they've experimented successfully with speed activated flashing signs. OK, expensive, so perhaps just some more repeater roundels.
I'd also like to see some enforcement which I think is, or is about to become a Harringay Policing priority.
So, I'd welcome views from other people. But ultimately, I'd like to agree what we think is a sensible course of action. It may be that people feel that no action is required.
Ideally this could be judged by measuring levels of reduction in traffic and in traffic speed. Sadly, however, Haringey Council set no targets for the scheme, so we'll have to develop our own criteria.
Perhaps for speed we could simply say the success criterion would be that traffic is adhering to the 20mph limit. As for levels of traffic, I can only think of, does it feel like there's less traffic. Unsatisfactory, I know, but in the absence of proper data collected by the Council, it's about all we got.
I came to thinking about this a couple of weeks ago when I was being beeped by cars behind me on Wightman Road because I was driving at 20mph.
"It is 20 now..........isn't it?", I wondered. But I wasn't sure. And I'm not surprised I wasn't sure. There's not a lot of signposting. There's one roundel sign on Wightman just before Sydney Road together with the limit painted on the road at the same point. Then nothing till just before Hewitt when once again the 20 mph limit is painted on the road.
The red faced fuming motorist behind me could be forgiven for not being aware that he was in a 20mph zone.
Something similar happened today on my way home. So I found myself wondering what's best practice signposting in 20mph zones.
Here's what I found. Apparently there are two legally defined ways to introduce a 20mph limit. One is through the creation of a 20mph zone; the other is by introducing a simple 20 mph limit.
20 mph zones
The purpose of 20 mph zones is to "create conditions where drivers naturally drive at 20 mph because of the general nature of the location, or as a result of traffic calming measures".
Department for Transport Guidance says:
20mph zones are most appropriate in areas where an urban safety strategy has been developed, involving measures to discourage through traffic from using the proposed zone. the zone itself will normally be residential in character, although other areas such as shopping streets may also be appropriate. The road network within the zone should generally consist of access roads, but the inclusion of some local distributor roads may be acceptable. In order that zones do not become too large, no road within the zone may be more than 1km from the boundary of the zone.
According to the Traffic Signs regulations and General Directions 2002 (TSRGD) an area is legally a 20mph zone when 20mph zone signs are used. This comes with certain legal obligations. In particular Direction 16 of the TSRGD stipulates that no point within the zone must be further than 50 metres from a traffic calming feature (unless in a cul-de-sac less than 80 meters long). Direction 16 also gives full details of what is a traffic calming feature.
The zone sign at the zone entrances is only required to be erected on one side of the entry road where the road is less than 5 metres wide. However, it is recommended that even in these situations signs should be placed on both sides of the road. This helps to accentuate the gateway effect and the feeling for the driver of entering an area which is "different".
Apparently in 20mph zones no other indication of the speed limit is required other than at EVERY exit and entry point. I presume this is because the traffic calming measures should mean there is no need.
20mph limits
A 20mph speed limit can be introduced using standard speed limit signs without the word Zone. Direction 16 of the TSRGD does not apply and traffic calming features are not necessary. However, 20mph limits are really intended to be used only on roads where the traffic speed is already below 24 mph and where physical enforcing measures are not therefore required. However, if a 20 limit is ordered the Road Traffic Act requires 20 mph repeater signs to enable the speed limit to be enforced.
So a few questions for me:
1. Does our area have "an urban safety strategy... involving measures to discourage through traffic from using the proposed zone"?
2.Does our 20 mph zone "create conditions where drivers naturally drive at 20 mph because of the general nature of the location, or as a result of traffic calming measures."
3. Is it legally set up, that is a) entry & exit signs b) traffic calming every 50 metres.
4. Following DfT best practice recommendations, are our zone signs placed on both sides of the road to create a gateway effect?
4. Is it being effective at keeping speeds to 20 mph.
My view is that there's something amiss with the signposting. I'm not sure if we have them at every entrance and exit, but even if we do, I think we need repeater signs to drive home the point. In Camden they've experimented successfully with speed activated flashing signs. OK, expensive, so perhaps just some more repeater roundels.
I'd also like to see some enforcement which I think is, or is about to become a Harringay Policing priority.
So, I'd welcome views from other people. But ultimately, I'd like to agree what we think is a sensible course of action. It may be that people feel that no action is required.
Tags for Forum Posts: 20 mph, Wightman Road, Wightman traffic calming, traffic
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Maddy on
-
They should have written in English, since most Brits who live out there don't speak Spanish:)
-
Permalink Reply by Duguneek on
-
With all the discussion on this, there has been nothing I think on the continuous enforcement of speed limits. Met police have mentioned specific campaigns that seem intensive and I cannot think are sustainable. What we need is a revenue system to pay the council tax payers for the £100K laid out.
Were speed cameras / fining abolished quietly by the coalition government?
-
Permalink Reply by Angela on
-
It hasn't ever really worked on Falkland Road so it doesn't surprise me if it doesn't work on Wightman Road.
My main concern is that a number of drivers increase their speed just past the so called hump by the passage and then veer to the right, that is, over the yellow zig zags right by North Harringay Primary School, and continue to exceed the speed limit until they have to drive in the middle of the road again (ie, just by the last entrance to the school/opposite Fairland Park)
These speeding cars are very near to the pavement , just as young children are coming to and from school
-
Permalink Reply by John McMullan on
-
They veer to the right to avoid the pothole on the other side. Unlike the gardens which required just one little rising bollard we are a much more difficult problem. Personally I would like to see narrowings at either end of Wightman, that's the least they can do for us considering we didn't get our W1 bus.
-
Permalink Reply by John D on
-
This is the new SID (speed indicating device ) on Wightman. Is it working to reduce speeds ? NO!Depending on traffic density, between one third and two thirds of drivers are exceeding 20mph and, what is really worrying, make no attempt to slow down when SID lights up.
So, no, our new 20mph zone is NOT working.
-
Permalink Reply by Stuart on
-
And I think it's the only one the whole length of Wightman - they need to have 3 or 4 spread out and on each side before people start to get the message. Plus ordinary 20mph speed limit signs as constant reminders.
-
-
Alternatively, the Council could advertise for about two dozen sad-old-insomniacs-with-attitude to serve as 20mph Lolli-pop Persons. We could stand on traffic island soapboxes with our illuminated signs between, say, 6am and midnight for a modest emolumentum and gradually grind the buggers down.
-
Permalink Reply by Hugh on
-
There was also due to be one at the southern end of Wightman, but it fell victim to budget cuts.
Don't overlook the £1.2m Haringey is probably due to secure for the Green Lanes corridor. So far people have shown remarkably little interest. And that's a shame because it's really the only game in town to have a chance of improving our traffic - probably for a long time.
So, can I urge anyone with an interest in improving the situation with our traffic to get involved and get constructive around how that funding can be applied.
-
Permalink Reply by TTTH on
-
I sent some comments to "Statutory Consultation: Haringey’s 2nd Local Implementation Plan (Transport Strategy)":
"The strategy looks promising however I have a slight concern. For many years now I have asked for an improved road crossing at Alroy Road. I have written directly to the Transport and Planning dept's with little joy. I asked my local councillor to consider Alroy Road in the traffic calming measures which extended from Wightman road with some success. I also put in a suggestion for green links from Alroy Road to Finsbury Park, however this project or it's funding was abandoned in 08/09.
The traffic calming measures may have slowed some of the traffic down however it has not improved the ability for pedestrians to cross. In fact, in my experience (I cross it at least twice a day) cars are less inclined to stop as they might feel that they have been slowed down enough already.
Can you tell me, of the various other pots of money you have set aside for, e.g. road safety, could you consider something like a safer crossing at Alroy Road, even if it tied in with "green connections" to Finsbury Park? Lots of park users (joggers, etc) use Alroy Road and it's quite treacherous to cross.
Like I said the strategy is good but when was the consultation to discuss the prioritised areas? Like with the traffic calming on Wightman Road, the majority of input came from Councillors with limited input from actual residents. There needs to be more consultation which is "grass roots" level, at the initial stages, so that residents can influence the priorities rather than ask them to comment on the final proposals which have been drafted for them to comment. Arguably this is a little tokenistic and not really in line with best practice planning policy?
I look forward to your comments
And their response (14/10/10):
Dear Mr Bannon,
Sorry for the delay but we have had several simultaneous consultations to manage, so the mailbox has been very busy.
I will get a response to your questions about the Alroy Road crossing issue and will contact you again within the next couple of days with detailed responses to your other points.
Regards
Greville
Greville Percival
Senior Consultation Officer
Transport Policy & Projects
River Park House, 225 High Road,
Wood Green, London N22 8HQ
Tel: 0208 489 1326 M: 07803 714263
I guess that I am due to hear something soon, but I haven't got time to follow this up all the time. I am unsure how to do this more effectively. I hope this helps.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
