IMAGES NOW POSTED Speed bumps on upper Kirkdale

[marymck]

I have just discovered a notice on a lamppost near Otto Close, stating that Lewisham plan to install speed tables and cushions all along upper Kirkdale. There are no details on Lewisham's website, but I believe they're talking about four or five sets of these (if memory serves - it was raining when I read the notice!)

Every couple of years I've asked Lewisham to install speed cameras on this part of Kirkdale. They've always said there was no call for them, as they were not justified due to lack of accidents.

Having spent the last couple of winters watching motorists struggling to get up a steep hill, I'm concerned that these humps and bumps will only make matters a lot, lot worse. Earlier this year, a speed table was installed outside number 46 (near Panmure Road and Mount Ash Road). I think at the very least Lewisham should wait to see how cars cope with this table in the snow.

Buses in particular will find it hard. If we lose our 356 because the hill becomes impassable because of the bumps (the only bus we have on upper Kirkdale) it will be a real problem, especially for the elderly and disabled and those carrying shopping.

Unfortunately, the Otto Close notice gives 28 days for comments, starting 7th December. I've asked for an extension, because of Christmas, so that local residents can see the plans and lodge their comments.

I'd be very interested to know what the Emergency Services think of these plans. This part of Kirkdale is regularly used by ambulances and other blues and twos. I understand patients, particularly those with spinal injuries, have been severely injured by speed tables and cushions in the past.

They've also proven very hazardous for bikers - especially in the snow and ice.

On a different note, I know the Noise Abatement Society don't like these sort of measures, not only because of the noise going over the bumps, but because of the engine noise as cars speed up again afterwards.

There have also been issues with shock waves causing subsidence. Something this part of Kirkdale already suffers from!

Bottom line: why can't we have speed cameras instead of these humps and bumps? Cameras seem to be working for Westwood Hill.

[marymck]

Just been told there are also big changes planned for the junction of Thorpewood Avenue with Kirkdale. Rumour is this includes narrowing the roadway and widening the pavement. The neighbour who told me about this was very concerned about the loss of overnight parking and also about problems during the school run.

Anyone know any more?

[Robin Orton]

The junction with Kirkdale is a very awkward one for drivers turning out of Thorpewood Avenue. There is often restricted visibility; my wife had a collision there with a motor cycle a year or so ago. I hope that if there are to be changes to the road layout they are being designed to make the junction safer.

[marymck]

Sorry to hear about your wife's accident, Robin. I hope she and the biker were unhurt.

I think making the two "Thorpewood" sides of the triangle one way could allieviate a lot of the problems. I think narrowing the road by extending the pavements (which is what my neighbour thinks Lewisham may be planning) could just make it worse. But hopefully Lewisham will cough up some drawings before it's actually a fait accompli.

[stuart]

concerned about the loss of overnight parking and also about problems during the school run

Aren't these things that are dangerous and we should be trying to diminish?

Stuart

[marymck]

Yes, Stuart. But my neighbour (who doesn't live within the conservation area) wanted to apply to turn part of her garden into parking and was advised she needed to submit drawings, pay £150 and it was unlikely to be allowed.

She doesn't park around that junction. She parks in her own cul-de-sac road, which is often blocked by the cars of people who don't live there.

I think making the two Thorpewood sides of the triangle one way, would still leave room for parking, while making it a lot, lot safer.

Once the speed humps and bumps are in place on Kirkdale hill I really do believe things will get a lot more dangerous.

(BTW terrible problems with builders' trucks and mud at the top of the hill at the moment ... I had platform shoes by the time I walked home the other night! Plus, you now often have to drive on the wrong side of the road, just before the mini roundabout, to get past the trucks. V. scary!)

[stuart]

Yes, Stuart. But my neighbour (who doesn't live within the conservation area) wanted to apply to turn part of her garden into parking and was advised she needed to submit drawings, pay £150 and it was unlikely to be allowed.

That is sad. I wonder if one of the councilors might wish to comment on any such policy?

I can understand that paving over gardens is not a good thing but there are ways of getting around this eg: http://ritter-technik.co.uk/grass.html. And if she did get permission the cost of around 2 grand for the council to put in a dropped kerb is not a great incentive.

However, returning our streets to public use: by cars to actually travel with less hindrance, cyclists, pedestrians and future footballers would, I thought, take precedence over the ugly and dangerous colonisation by unused cars. Or am I alone?

Stuart

[Robin Orton]

No, thankfully, nobody was seriously hurt in my wife's accident, Mary.

Having discussed further with her, I think the problem with the Thorpewood/Kirkdale junction for those coming from Thorpewood is a combination of (1) the narrow angle at which both sides of the Thorpewood triangle intersect with the main road, which means it's awkward looking both ways, particularly given (2) the steep hill, (3) the speed of the traffic on Kirkdale and (4) the fact that there are often cars parked near the junction, on Kirkdale and sometimes on the triangle itself, which can obstruct the view.

I don't see how making the triangle 'giratory' (each side one way) would help. In fact, I suspect it would make things worse, by giving vehicles which wanted to turn the 'wrong' way out of Thorpewood or out of Kirkdale a much more difficult manoeuvre to execute than at present.

[marymck]

Hi Robin - glad to hear your wife and the biker were OK.

What if the left hand side of the triangle (when coming out of Thorpewood) i.e. the downhill side, were one-way "out", with two arrowed lanes marked - one to turn left & one to turn right? And the uphill (right hand out of Thorpewood side) were the "in" to Thorpewood? Angles and sightlines might have to be changed on the inner, pedestrian triangle (currently not available to pedestrians, due to construction company's clobber).

All a bit working blind, as we don't know what the Council are proposing. My neighbour says they were planning to start work on this at the beginning of December and she thinks there are speed bumps involved in this one too. Odd that they haven't had a consultation process. She also tells me she's kept awake by the thumps the cars make bumping over the recently installed raised table just below Mount Ash Road. It's the sound of crunching gear changes and acceleration that I hear in the night.

I'd love to know how the Council can justify (and the taxpayers afford) these dodgy and expensive schemes, when we're not allowed to have the safer, self-financing and more effective speed cameras.

[leenewham]

Glad your wife and the biker were ok Robin.

The speed bumps in Kirkdale sound daft, they encourage people to speed up in between bumps or drive in the middle of the road if they are the lump versions. Slightly raised crossing tables work well (if they are designated unlike the ones around the back of Forest Hill station where they are just raised bits of road with no markings and cars and pedestrians both think it's their right of way).

I agree Mary, what a waste of money, just like the amendments to the roundabout at the top of
Kirkdale which still hasn't been finished. This is one of the problems with councils (and business) where individual departments have to spend their budgets otherwise they get cut the next year.

The most effective form of traffic calming for residential areas are the digital faces that smile when you are on or under the speed limits.

[JoeM]

Living just off Kirkdale I welcome well planned traffic calming measures. Cars often speed up and down the hill in excess of 50mph and many children / parents have to take risks crossing the road to get to Eliot Bank school . However are random speed bumps the answer ? I'm not sure. The one Near Mt Ash rd is often treated as a take off ramp! I would prefer either proper ( higher) ramps that will actually slow traffic down or a couple of pedestrian/ pelican crossings that will enable us and children to cross safely in the busy rush hour. Failing that a well positioned speed camera would do!

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[michael]

I haven't seen details of the scheme that would make a single entrance and exit from Thorpewood (like a normal road). If this is positioned on a speed table with good sight lines then it could be an improvement. The speed table on Perry Vale outside the school is quite effective, the one outside the station is slightly worse than useless.

What if the left hand side of the triangle (when coming out of Thorpewood) i.e. the downhill side, were one-way "out", with two arrowed lanes marked - one to turn left & one to turn right? And the uphill (right hand out of Thorpewood side) were the "in" to Thorpewood?

That is a terrible idea if you ever turn right out of Thorpewood. The sharp angle and the hill would make this very difficult to negotiate even with slower traffic. Delivery vans and school buses would be particularly badly impacted and in snowy conditions it would be impossible.

Speed tables or even humps are not really a problem in snow, especially if gritted. With a small amount of grit down I was able to drive up and down Westwood Park with the humps even when the road was officially closed (Horniman Drive with the sharp corners and no humps was much harder in the snow). There were no problems on Perry Vale or Honor Oak Road during the snow because they were gritted, as I assume was Kirkdale.

I find the speed tables do the job very nicely although people do accelerate between them (better than going above 50mph all the way down Kirkdale). The humps are either ineffective at reducing speeds or they damage cars with low undercarriages. My exhaust system is being replaced as I type.

[Rachael]

I saw somebody defeated by one of the humps on Mayow Road in the snow last year on the very gentle incline up from the dip by the park. The road had been gritted, but there was plenty of slushy snow and traffic was moving very slowly, so that the car could get neither enough traction nor momentum to get over a small hump on a nearly flat road.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[michael]

I saw somebody defeated by one of the humps on Mayow Road in the snow last year on the very gentle incline up from the dip by the park. The road had been gritted, but there was plenty of slushy snow and traffic was moving very slowly, so that the car could get neither enough traction nor momentum to get over a small hump on a nearly flat road.

Probably back wheel drive. When I had such a car I could not even get it out of a parking space after the lightest snow.

[Rachael]

That's what I thought - but no, 'twas a Vauxhall Astra.

I traded in my nice low-slung rear-wheel drive car this year because I couldn't, as you say, so much as get it out of the drive if it snowed. So now I have an all-wheel drive Volvo. Which is the reason why it hasn't snowed this year.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[marymck]

marymck wrote:What if the left hand side of the triangle (when coming out of Thorpewood) i.e. the downhill side, were one-way "out", with two arrowed lanes marked - one to turn left & one to turn right? And the uphill (right hand out of Thorpewood side) were the "in" to Thorpewood?


That is a terrible idea if you ever turn right out of Thorpewood. The sharp angle and the hill would make this very difficult to negotiate even with slower traffic. Delivery vans and school buses would be particularly badly impacted and in snowy conditions it would be impossible.

Yes, but the rest of the paragraph read ...

What if the left hand side of the triangle (when coming out of Thorpewood) i.e. the downhill side, were one-way "out", with two arrowed lanes marked - one to turn left & one to turn right? And the uphill (right hand out of Thorpewood side) were the "in" to Thorpewood? Angles and sightlines might have to be changed on the inner, pedestrian triangle (currently not available to pedestrians, due to construction company's clobber).

So there wouldn't be a sharp angle. The speed ramps will of course make the hill even steeper than it already is and would also restrict acceleration, when turning right out of Thorpewood, meaning you basically couldn't speedily get out of the way of traffic coming up or down Kirkdale.

But of course we still don't know what the Council are planning. I was just trying to think of an alternative to the narrower road that rumours have it they're planning.

There were no problems on Perry Vale or Honor Oak Road during the snow because they were gritted, as I assume was Kirkdale.

No - we didn't get gritted on upper Kirkdale. So that made it even more difficult for vehicles to get up the hill. Buses didn't try. BTW I filmed from my bedroom window and most cars were front wheel drive and they couldn't make it up the hill. Part of the problem with the tables and humps is that once you lose traction wheels will just spin.

Here is a letter from the London Ambulance Service that gives their view on speed humps. ("Cushions" are just split humps and "Tables" are basically wider humps). Interestingly, this letter doesn't specifically mention the effects on spinal injury patients, but there is other stuff on the internet about those problems.

http://www.bromleytransport.org.uk/LAS_Report.pdf

[leenewham]

That's what I thought - but no, 'twas a Vauxhall Astra.

I traded in my nice low-slung rear-wheel drive car this year because I couldn't, as you say, so much as get it out of the drive if it snowed. So now I have an all-wheel drive Volvo. Which is the reason why it hasn't snowed this year.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

I laughed out loud at that. Infact I do at quote a few of your posts both here and on se23.

[Robin Orton]

I wonder whether the issue of whether or not speed bumps make driving more difficult in icy conditions isn't a bit of a distraction. After all, that's only going to arise on, on average, a quite small number of days every year. Surely the key question is whether traffic is driving too fast for safety on Kirkdale on the other three hundred and sixty something days in the year (any accident data, I wonder?) , and, if so, what is the best way of preventing it from doing so is. Like Lee, I think the smiley/frowny faces are the most acceptable solution, but I'd rather have bumps than have people killed or maimed.

[marymck]

Still no word from Lewisham on what they are proposing for upper Kirkdale, so still no opportunity to lodge informed comment with them. Worryingly, there are roadworks paraphernalia near the Kirkdale Institute as well as the long standing stuff near the entrance to Thorpewood (which BTW means walking in the main road when coming down the hill on that side of the road).

However, here is a really interesting set of guidelines from the Department for Transport about "traffic calming" on bus routes.

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/ ... -final.pdf

It seems "vertical deflections" (i.e. bumps, humps, cushions and tables) are very much a last resort and only acceptable where nothing else is suitable. Cameras and vehicle operated signs are however judged fully acceptable "as required to improve safety".

There should also be a maximum of five of these vertical deflections on the whole of a bus route. So I fear that, with the one already installed on Kirkdale (which is worse than useless), plus the speed cushions and four or five sets of tables planned for this short stretch of road, we could well exceed the limit and the bus company will use this as an excuse to close the vital 356 bus route.

Bottom line if anyone from the Council reads this: upper Kirkdale is too steep a hill for vertical deflections. We need speed cameras and vehicle operated signs + traffic light controlled crossings near Kelvin Grove and Eliot Bank schools. And yellow lines either side of those crossings.

[marymck]

This is interesting ... from the news archive of this very site ...

Westwood Hill

Paul Sharp from Lewisham Traffic outlined the current proposals to reduce accidents on Westwood Hill. Initially Lewisham had planned to install speed bumps. However, the surprise arrival of two speed cameras (apparently there is no co-ordination between the gatso quango and local authorities!) caused them to reconsider their proposals. It was evident that although they are not due to be commissioned until January they had already made a significant impact on vehicle speeds.

The current plans are more modest. Clearer and more logical road markings, an extra traffic island outside Sydenham School were the most obvious changes. Full plans should be available on the council website shortly.

Back in 2006, when I tried to get speed cameras for upper Kirkdale (at the same time pointing out that speed bumps wouldn't be appropriate because of the steep hill) Tom Henry of Lewisham's Roads & Highways Department replied ...

Speed cameras are only considered for roads with 4 or more recorded killed or serious injury accident sites in the last 3 years. Fortunately Kirkdale does not meet this criteria.

Did Westwood Hill sadly meet the criteria? And does anyone know if the criteria for speed cameras differs from that for vertical deflections?

Maybe I should have written to this gatso quango Admin mentions instead of Lewisham? I'll try to find contact details, but if anyone knows where I can email them please can you post the details on here?

thanks.