Speed Camera Westwood Hill - Which speed???

[Eagle]

If you MUST drive stick to the speed limit and stop moaning.

Unless handicapped local journies can be done by foot.

[Tadpole]

Reducing the speed limit is going to make naff all difference to the cars flooring it and then breaking sharply in my road and others around here. I've had 3 do that in the last 25 mins and will probably continue 'till the early hours.
It's not the law abiding citizens that cause accidents, it's the di*k heads who don't care. They don't stick to 30 so what makes people think they're going to stick to 20. It's a total waste of council tax money.
And who is going to police it? the police aren't, I'm sure they have more important things to do and the council can't put speed cameras on every road. It really seems one of the council's worse decisions for ages.
It's going to increase pollution for those walking, reduce courier deliveries to the area, and increase bus waiting times.
I fail to see anything positive from this at all.

[marymck]

Thus proving it has nothing to do with road safety and it's all about revenue raising and ticking the electoral box to claim to have "done something" about road safety.

Have you read the research paper on which these decisions have been mainly based? It has been referenced on previous 20mph threads several times.

Could you also provide a source for your claim that ALL vehicles will produce more pollution when accelerating/de-accelerating to or from 20mph instead of 30mph. As for running continuously at 30mph (pretty rare on Lewisham's roads) that is mainly a matter of gearing of legacy vehicles. So overall how do you substantiate your claim that this is detrimental in aggregate?

Your comment about it reducing buses from 3 an hour to 2 can only be true if they maintain a steady speed of 30mph and don't stop (which would make them pretty pointless). That's impossible even under the 30 mph limit. Again have you a source which indicates the actual effect?

Stuart

I fear you misunderstand, Stuart. It is not for me to supply the studies that Lewisham rely on and the comparative studies. Nor am I asking you to supply any evidence you rely on to back you assertions. That is not the point. Yes, I have seen the studies to which I refer. But I have been calling on our Council to make them widely available. No doubt this would have happened had the blanket 20mph proposal been debated in the Council Chamber. But it wasn't and the only answer forthcoming can be paraphrased as: We the Lewisham Labour Party said in our election manifesto we would introduce 20mph throughout the borough. You the electorate voted us in in such numbers that we don't need to discuss it. Done deal. End of story.

Except that it won't be. In years to come LBL will be held to account and will have to show they took account of all available evidence. But wouldn't it be better if they did that now?

[marymck]

Reducing the speed limit is going to make naff all difference to the cars flooring it and then breaking sharply in my road and others around here. I've had 3 do that in the last 25 mins and will probably continue 'till the early hours.
It's not the law abiding citizens that cause accidents, it's the di*k heads who don't care. They don't stick to 30 so what makes people think they're going to stick to 20. It's a total waste of council tax money.
And who is going to police it? the police aren't, I'm sure they have more important things to do and the council can't put speed cameras on every road. It really seems one of the council's worse decisions for ages.
It's going to increase pollution for those walking, reduce courier deliveries to the area, and increase bus waiting times.
I fail to see anything positive from this at all.

Hear, hear Tadpole.

Some could be forgiven for thinking it all goes back to the simplistic "Oh look we're a 20mph borough. Ain't we good. We're being seen to be doing something for road safety. Re-elect us. But just don't look too close. Oh and by the way, we don't drive, so we don't see the problem."

Shall we try to get this on the agenda for all our local assemblies? We'd need sufficient time allocated to have presentations from Environmental Health and the Police as well as Highways Dept, with air quality stats, contour maps and the various studies that Lewisham are relying on, and time for a meaningful Q&A. We can't get it debated or have a Q&A in the Chamber and this forum has no power, it's just a useful safety valve for letting off steam. But maybe if enough of us write to our individual ward councillors we can get them to agree to airtime at our various ward assemblies.

[Pat Trembath]

Apologies for joining in a trifle late but anyone wanting to see the council traffic order dated 29 July please see below (cut and pasted from the South London Press dated 29 July):

LONDON BOROUGH OF LEWISHAM
The Lewisham (20 mph Speed Limit) Traffic Order 2016
1. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Lewisham Borough Council on 27th July 2016 made the above-mentioned Order under sections 84(1)(a) and (2) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. The Order will come into operation on 5th September 2016.
2. The general effect of the Order will be to introduce a 20 mph speed limit on all roads and parts of roads in the London Borough of Lewisham which are not currently so restricted. This will have the effect of making the whole of the London Borough of Lewisham, except GLA Roads and Side Roads and certain boundary streets specified in Schedule 2 to this Notice, subject to 20 mph controls for all motor vehicles. Certain parts of the boundary streets specified in Schedule 1 to this Notice have been included in the scheme with the respective agreement of either the Council of the Royal Borough of Greenwich or the Council of the London Borough of Southwark.
3. The 20 mph speed limit will not apply to any vehicle being used - (a) by Special Forces whilst responding, or making preparations to respond, to a national security emergency; or (b) for emergency service purposes if staying within the speed limit would compromise response times.
4. A copy of the Order, together with other documents giving more detailed particulars of it, can be inspected during normal office hours on Mondays to Fridays until the last day of a period of six weeks beginning with the date on which the Order is made at the office of Lewisham Transport Policy & Development, 4th Floor Laurence House,1Catford Road, London, SE6 4RU. For telephone queries please call Liz Brooker on 020 8314 2254.
5. Any person desiring to question the validity of the Order or of any provision provided therein on the grounds that it is not within the relevant powers of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, or that any of the relevant requirements thereof or any relevant regulations made thereunder have not been complied with in relation to the Order, may within six weeks of the date on which the Order is made, make application for the purpose to the High Court.
Dated 29th July 2016 S. MOSS Policy and Development Manager, Transport 4th Floor Laurence House, 1 Catford Road SE6 4RU

SCHEDULE 1 [Additional list of boundary roads shared with the Royal Borough of Greenwich to be subject to 20 miles per hour speed limits] Conington Road (north-east to south-west arm), from Morden Hill to the south-western, north-west to south-east arm of Conington Road; Creek Road, from Watergate Street to Deptford Church Street; Deptford Church Street, from Creek Road to Berthon Street; Guibal Road, from Corona Road to Winn Road; Horncastle Road, from the borough boundary (adjacent to the eastern wall of No. 111) to Alnwick Road; Lee Road, from Lee Terrace to Eltham Road/Lee High Road; Lewisham Road, from Sparta Street to Morden Hill; Morden Hill, from Lewisham Road to Conington Road; Morden Road, from outside No. 15 The Paragon to the borough boundary; South Row, from The Paragon to Pond Road; Sparta Street, from Lewisham Road to the borough boundary (eastern boundary wall of No. 4); Upwood Road, from the borough boundary (adjacent to the eastern wall of No. 93) to Horn Park Lane; and Winn Road, from Guibal Road to Mottingham Lane. [Additional list of boundary roads shared with the London Borough of Southwark to be subject to 20 miles per hour speed limits] Evelyn Street, from Croft Street to Bestwood Street; and Honor Oak Park, from Devonshire Road to the borough boundary (railway bridge).

SCHEDULE 2

• Conington Road (south-western, north-west to south-east arm), from Coldbath Street/Ravensbourne Place to No. 55 Connington Road; Pond Road, from the borough boundary (Birchmere Row) to South Row; and Watergate Street, its entire length. [List of boundary roads shared with the London Borough of Southwark NOT to be subject to 20 miles per hour speed limits] Bestwood Street, its entire length; Bush Road, from Bestwood Street to the southern wall of Nos. 1 to 34 Bush Road; Chilton Grove, from Yeoman Street to Croft Street; Croft Street, from Chilton Grove to Evelyn Street; Forest Hill Road, from Honor Oak Road to Wood Vale; Honor Oak Park, from Devonshire Road to Forest Hill Road; Plough Way, from Calypso Way to Yeoman Street; Sydenham Hill, its entire length; Yeoman Street, from Plough Way to Chilton Grove; and Wood Vale, its entire length.
  • Avondale Road, from the south-western corner of No. 120 Avondale Road to its junction with London Road; Beckenham Hill Road, from the south-eastern wall of No. 182 to the southwestern wall of No. 69.; Bell Green Lane, from the northeastern boundary of No. 37 to the north-eastern boundary wall of No.95; Border Road, from its junction with Sydenham Avenue to its junction with Lawrie Park Road; Boyland Road from its junction with Valeswood Road to its junction with Pontefract Road; Calmont Road, from its junction with Hillbrow Road to the southern boundary of No. 81 Calmont Road; Crystal Palace Park Road, from the north-western boundary of No. 65 to its junction with Westwood Hill; Hillbrow Road, its entire length; Kangley Bridge Road, from a point 36m north of its junction with Westerley Crescent to its junction with Westerley Crescent; Kent House Road, from the southern boundary of No. 70 to the northern boundary wall of No. 81a; Meadowview Road, from Worsley Bridge Road to outside No. 113/115; Newlands Park, from its junction with Tredown Road to its junction with Tannsfeld Road; Pontefract Road, from its junction with Boyland Road to its junction with Headcorn Road; StationApproach, its entire length; Tannsfeld Road, from its junction with Newlands Park to the northern boundary of No. 101 Tannsfeld Road; Tredown Road, from its junction with Venner Road to its junction with Newlands Park; Valeswood Road, from its junction with Boyland Road to the northern boundary of No. 82 Valeswood Road; Venner Road, from its junction with Tredown Road to the southern boundary of No. 79 Venner Road; Westerley Crescent, its entire length; and Worsley Bridge Road, from its junction with Meadowview Road to its junction with Montana Gardens.
    
    As you can see in Schedule Two I've picked out Sydenham Hill and other Lewisham/Southwark roads as well as Lewisham/Bromley Roads which get the 30 mph treatment. There are one or two weird anomalies here as readers will no doubt notice....
    
    Living on Westwood Hill and anticipating problems driving at 20 mph up the hill in particular it does seem strange that the parallel road, Crystal Palace Park Road, retains its 30 mph limit. So it looks as though between the Sydenham Hill mini-roundabout and the junction between between Westwood Hill and CP Pk Rd there will be a 20mph limit with a split between 20mph and 30mph at the traffic lights?

[Eagle]

Tadpole

If it does reduce courier deliveries to the area , then wonderful news.

Continued delivered to flats , being asked to take parcels in for others. I use local shops and do not buy on internet. I try to save local jobs .

Less Vans making deliveries great great great.

[Pat Trembath]

I took some time bolding up the information in the council's traffic order of 29 July so I make no apologies for re-posting my last post.

Apologies for joining in a trifle late but anyone wanting to see the council traffic order dated 29 July please see below (cut and pasted from the South London Press dated 29 July):

LONDON BOROUGH OF LEWISHAM
The Lewisham (20 mph Speed Limit) Traffic Order 2016
1. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Lewisham Borough Council on 27th July 2016 made the above-mentioned Order under sections 84(1)(a) and (2) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. The Order will come into operation on 5th September 2016.
2. The general effect of the Order will be to introduce a 20 mph speed limit on all roads and parts of roads in the London Borough of Lewisham which are not currently so restricted. This will have the effect of making the whole of the London Borough of Lewisham, except GLA Roads and Side Roads and certain boundary streets specified in Schedule 2 to this Notice, subject to 20 mph controls for all motor vehicles. Certain parts of the boundary streets specified in Schedule 1 to this Notice have been included in the scheme with the respective agreement of either the Council of the Royal Borough of Greenwich or the Council of the London Borough of Southwark.
3. The 20 mph speed limit will not apply to any vehicle being used - (a) by Special Forces whilst responding, or making preparations to respond, to a national security emergency; or (b) for emergency service purposes if staying within the speed limit would compromise response times.
4. A copy of the Order, together with other documents giving more detailed particulars of it, can be inspected during normal office hours on Mondays to Fridays until the last day of a period of six weeks beginning with the date on which the Order is made at the office of Lewisham Transport Policy & Development, 4th Floor Laurence House,1Catford Road, London, SE6 4RU. For telephone queries please call Liz Brooker on 020 8314 2254.
5. Any person desiring to question the validity of the Order or of any provision provided therein on the grounds that it is not within the relevant powers of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, or that any of the relevant requirements thereof or any relevant regulations made thereunder have not been complied with in relation to the Order, may within six weeks of the date on which the Order is made, make application for the purpose to the High Court.
Dated 29th July 2016 S. MOSS Policy and Development Manager, Transport 4th Floor Laurence House, 1 Catford Road SE6 4RU

SCHEDULE 1 [Additional list of boundary roads shared with the Royal Borough of Greenwich to be subject to 20 miles per hour speed limits] Conington Road (north-east to south-west arm), from Morden Hill to the south-western, north-west to south-east arm of Conington Road; Creek Road, from Watergate Street to Deptford Church Street; Deptford Church Street, from Creek Road to Berthon Street; Guibal Road, from Corona Road to Winn Road; Horncastle Road, from the borough boundary (adjacent to the eastern wall of No. 111) to Alnwick Road; Lee Road, from Lee Terrace to Eltham Road/Lee High Road; Lewisham Road, from Sparta Street to Morden Hill; Morden Hill, from Lewisham Road to Conington Road; Morden Road, from outside No. 15 The Paragon to the borough boundary; South Row, from The Paragon to Pond Road; Sparta Street, from Lewisham Road to the borough boundary (eastern boundary wall of No. 4); Upwood Road, from the borough boundary (adjacent to the eastern wall of No. 93) to Horn Park Lane; and Winn Road, from Guibal Road to Mottingham Lane. [Additional list of boundary roads shared with the London Borough of Southwark to be subject to 20 miles per hour speed limits] Evelyn Street, from Croft Street to Bestwood Street; and Honor Oak Park, from Devonshire Road to the borough boundary (railway bridge).

SCHEDULE 2

• Conington Road (south-western, north-west to south-east arm), from Coldbath Street/Ravensbourne Place to No. 55 Connington Road; Pond Road, from the borough boundary (Birchmere Row) to South Row; and Watergate Street, its entire length.
  • Bestwood Street, its entire length; Bush Road, from Bestwood Street to the southern wall of Nos. 1 to 34 Bush Road; Chilton Grove, from Yeoman Street to Croft Street; Croft Street, from Chilton Grove to Evelyn Street; Forest Hill Road, from Honor Oak Road to Wood Vale; Honor Oak Park, from Devonshire Road to Forest Hill Road; Plough Way, from Calypso Way to Yeoman Street; Sydenham Hill, its entire length; Yeoman Street, from Plough Way to Chilton Grove; and Wood Vale, its entire length.
    • Avondale Road, from the south-western corner of No. 120 Avondale Road to its junction with London Road; Beckenham Hill Road, from the south-eastern wall of No. 182 to the southwestern wall of No. 69.; Bell Green Lane, from the northeastern boundary of No. 37 to the north-eastern boundary wall of No.95; Border Road, from its junction with Sydenham Avenue to its junction with Lawrie Park Road; Boyland Road from its junction with Valeswood Road to its junction with Pontefract Road; Calmont Road, from its junction with Hillbrow Road to the southern boundary of No. 81 Calmont Road; Crystal Palace Park Road, from the north-western boundary of No. 65 to its junction with Westwood Hill; Hillbrow Road, its entire length; Kangley Bridge Road, from a point 36m north of its junction with Westerley Crescent to its junction with Westerley Crescent; Kent House Road, from the southern boundary of No. 70 to the northern boundary wall of No. 81a; Meadowview Road, from Worsley Bridge Road to outside No. 113/115; Newlands Park, from its junction with Tredown Road to its junction with Tannsfeld Road; Pontefract Road, from its junction with Boyland Road to its junction with Headcorn Road; StationApproach, its entire length; Tannsfeld Road, from its junction with Newlands Park to the northern boundary of No. 101 Tannsfeld Road; Tredown Road, from its junction with Venner Road to its junction with Newlands Park; Valeswood Road, from its junction with Boyland Road to the northern boundary of No. 82 Valeswood Road; Venner Road, from its junction with Tredown Road to the southern boundary of No. 79 Venner Road; Westerley Crescent, its entire length; and Worsley Bridge Road, from its junction with Meadowview Road to its junction with Montana Gardens.
      
      As you can see in Schedule Two I've picked out Sydenham Hill and other Lewisham/Southwark roads as well as Lewisham/Bromley Roads which get the 30 mph treatment. There are one or two weird anomalies here as readers will no doubt notice....
      
      Living on Westwood Hill and anticipating problems driving at 20 mph up the hill in particular it does seem strange that the parallel road, Crystal Palace Park Road, retains its 30 mph limit. So it looks as though between the Sydenham Hill mini-roundabout and the junction between between Westwood Hill and CP Pk Rd there will be a 20mph limit with a split between 20mph and 30mph at the traffic lights?

[Tadpole]

Tadpole

If it does reduce courier deliveries to the area , then wonderful news.

Continued delivered to flats , being asked to take parcels in for others. I use local shops and do not buy on internet. I try to save local jobs .

Less Vans making deliveries great great great.

Deliveries include to the local shops you use too. There are local people who are delivery drivers and local people who work in the warehouses who pick the orders that get delivered. Everyone's job is as important as the next person.

I walk to the local shops for lightweight things that I can carry back probably every other day and walk to the local parks with my baby grandson but drive if what I need is too much for my Rheumatoid arthritic hands to carry.
I'm unable to ride a bike anymore due to health.

I do wonder if local cab journeys will cost more as it will take longer to get from A to B as they won't be able to do as money fares per hour as previously. It would be a pay cut otherwise for them and there aren't many people today who can afford that I would have thought.

Eagle if you get asked a lot to take parcels for others you could put a sign on your door saying that you don't do that.
Just a thought.

[Pally]

Like Lois I don't have a problem with 20mph on residential streets but not at the closed end of cul de sacs ...waste of money! Why aren't the 20mph painted at the start of a road rather than the end?

[stuart]

I fear you misunderstand, Stuart. It is not for me to supply the studies that Lewisham rely on and the comparative studies. Nor am I asking you to supply any evidence you rely on to back you assertions. That is not the point. Yes, I have seen the studies to which I refer.

You misunderstood me. I was saying this was the groundbreaking paper that underpins the 20 plenty campaign and is used to justify councils introducing the lower limit.

If you have read it you will doubtless have been shocked or impressed at the concept that 20 - if enforced has the potential to reduced pedestrian casualties by 40%. Its compelling and any political party surely has the obligation to try and enact it if it has any humanity?

Well unless the evidence is flawed/wrong. What I was asking is what evidence are you saying should have convinced Lewisham (and me) that this was the wrong decision?

Stuart

[Eagle]

I too back the lower limit. Unfortunately , as we know , enforcement is the real problem.

In an inner city area like Sydenham 20 mph quite fast enough.

Stop complaining and stick to the law.

[Suzee]

Fully support this on residential roads. Most of our roads are too narrow to safely do more than 20 but sadly we fall into Bromley so are not included. Am often surprised at the speed at which cars travel along Tredown. Lewisham, can we re-join you please?

[Tadpole]

It's not going to stop speeding cars. As I said earlier it's not normal people who speed it's the d**k heads who do and don't care. My son aged 12, many moons ago, was hit by a speeding car in our road as he crossed. Dropping the speed limit isn't going to stop that sort of thing happening.

From the council website:

A large part of the borough already has many 20mph zones and this scheme simply extends the limit to the remaining borough roads. The borough-wide limit is expected to bring about a culture change over time where it becomes ‘socially unacceptable’ to drive more than 20mph in Lewisham, in the same way as drink driving or not wearing a seat belt currently is.

Why introduce a 20mph borough-wide speed limit?

Slower speeds are safer for all road users. 20mph speed limits encourage more considerate driving, leading to safer streets for cyclists, motorcyclists and pedestrians. Analysis has shown that lower speeds reduce the risk and severity of road collisions for drivers and their passengers too.

Reducing traffic speed also helps people feel more confident about being on their local streets. This results in more children walking to school and elderly people feeling more able to travel independently and safely.

On the whole, calmer road speeds help to make walking and cycling more attractive leading to less traffic congestion, better health, less noise, more social interaction and stronger communities.

Will all roads in Lewisham be included?

No. Roads that are managed by Transport for London (red routes) will not be included at this time. These are primarily the South Circular (A205), New Cross Road (A202), Bromley Road leading to Lewisham High Street (A21) and Lewisham Way leading to Lee High Road (A20). Private roads or those on housing estates are not included in the borough-wide limit.

How will I know I am in a 20mph zone?

At the entrance to all borough roads 20mph signs will be in place. On roads that border red routes there will again to be clear signs informing drivers of the speed change limit. Smaller '20' repeater signs are proposed to be placed at regular intervals on either side of the road. There may also be 20mph flashing Vehicle Activated Signs (VAS) to remind drivers to keep to the new lower speed limit on certain roads if required.

When will it be introduced?

The process of introducing a borough wide 20 mph speed limit was launched in May 2014 and the programme of work has already started. The next step is to take speed audits on a number of roads for 'before and after' speed surveys.

​Programme timetable ​Start ​Finish
​Planning/inception stage ​ ​
​Data collection and analysis ​May 2014 ​June 2015
​Key stakeholder consultation ​June 2015 ​Sep 2015
​Review design guidelines, sign audits and design ​Sep 2015 ​Mar 2016
​Consultation and campaign messages ​Jan 2015 ​Mar 2018
​Delivery stage ​ ​
​Traffic order applications ​Mar 2016 July 2016​
​Implementation ​Sep 2016 ​
​Monitoring ​Sep 2016 ​Mar 2018
​Design options for roads with low compliance ​Oct 2016 ​Oct 2017
​Implementation of remedial measures Jan 2017​ ​Mar 2018
Will it be permanent?

It is intended that the new speed limit will be permanent and thorough monitoring will be carried out.

How will it be enforced?

The police have responsibility to enforce all speed limits. The police have said the 20mph speed restrictions will be treated in the same way as any other speed limit. We do not expect everyone to drive within the 20mph limit from the outset, but over time, we expect compliance to increase.

There will also be a package of measures to help manage speeds which include engineering, visible interventions and landscaping standards that respect the needs of all road users and raise the driver's awareness of their environment, together with education, driver information, training and publicity.

Does it apply to cyclists?

The introduction of the speed limit is intended to make the roads safer for all road users. Although at the moment there are no speed limits for cyclists alone, people on bikes are expected to ride in a safe manner especially in shared areas. A cyclist can be prosecuted for riding with undue care.

Will it clutter the area with signs?

Larger signs (600mm diameter) are needed at the entrance points to the borough and smaller repeater signs (300mm diameter) are required at regular intervals, approximately every 150 to 200 metres. We will design the scheme to put signs on existing poles or lampposts where possible and to keep the number of signs to a minimum. Existing signs in affected areas will be reviewed and indications are that we can often remove many redundant signs.



So after having read that I did some door knocking on my road of people I know.
Having asked 8 families in my road with children under 12 they said; It's not going to make more people walk their kids to school as many don't go to their local school any more, or because they have to get kids to school breakfast club or child minders early then get to work themselves and simply don't want to start walking at 6.30-7am to do so.
If they could be stay at home mums and their children were in local schools then they would walk them to school but felt the council are living in a different era.
And having asked 5 older people in my road aged 70 to 85 they said things that would make them feel safer when out and about is less teenagers hanging around, no drunk people, police back on the street corners, more lighting on residential streets and no dogs being walked off the lead. They also said the council had never asked them what they would like and if they'd rather have the money spent on reducing speeds or cuts to meals on wheels, and home care.

I would also like to know why you can continue to do 30 on council estates? is it because the council fear a backlash from the residents? Surely as the council say it improves communities, help the elderly and thinks more children will walk to school that is the place they should be doing it!

[stuart]

It's not going to stop speeding cars. As I said earlier it's not normal people who speed it's the d**k heads who do and don't care. My son aged 12, many moons ago, was hit by a speeding car in our road as he crossed. Dropping the speed limit isn't going to stop that sort of thing happening.

I'm afraid it is normal people who speed.

80% of drivers admitted in an RAC survey that they speeded regulary. The good news is that implies 20% do not. Overtaking is near to impossible for much of the time on Lewisham's roads so that 20% can effectively slowdown traffic to legal speeds whether they like it or not. This implies that there can be a culture of slower driving.

In the definitive study this showed a reduction of average speeds from 27mph in 30mph limits to around 17mph in matching 20mph streets. That is the magic 10mph with a casulty drop of around 40%. It would help, of course, if there was more police enforcement to protect the 20mph driver from the vicious bullying one gets from those who resist the limit - but there is so much to be gained from trying.

Casualties don't just come from d**k heads. The disproportionate drop in casualties to kids implies that when it is their fault running out into the road without looking - a fatality is reduced to an injury or an injury is avoided altogether because the driver has more time to see, react and brake so the impact is avoided or greatly lessened. There is a huge difference in the energy (or not) of an impact if the careful and attentive driver was doing 20mph rather than 30.

Stuart

[Tadpole]

80% of drivers admitted in an RAC survey that they speeded regulary.

The only reference I can find to that is 80% of company car driver on motorways.
http://www.rac.co.uk/press-centre#/pres ... ng-1241495

[stuart]

The only reference I can find to that is 80% of company car driver on motorways.
http://www.rac.co.uk/press-centre#/pres ... ng-1241495

You are right. My apologies for posting from memory instead of double-checking. What do you think the percentage of drivers in 30mph limits is?

The official DoT stats for 2012 https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... s-2012.pdf show:

* On motorways, 48 per cent of cars exceeded the 70 mph speed limit in 2012.
(As not all speeders speed all the time (or are able to) - this is compatible with the RAC's 80% figure of people WHO ADMIT doing it regulary).

* Between 2011 and 2012, the percentage of cars exceeding the 30 mph speed limit remained unchanged at 47 per cent.

Not a lot different? I am contesting your assertion that normal people don't speed. I find that remarkable in the face of the stats and personal experience. Indeed it worries me that many of us are blaming the few d***k for the carnage on our streets and not accepting that most of us drive too fast for safety. Not to mention that those that only drive to the legal limit are also a great danger to vulnerable road users leaving little room for error when that is 30mph.

And 100% of us make errors. No I don't have a statistical source for that

Stuart

[Lois]

I don't believe there are any studies that show how many collisions and/or casualties are avoided on roads of the type of Sydenham Hill or Westwood Hill by a 20mph speed limit. The studies cover the whole area of the blanket speed.

I totally disagree with the point about there not being the space to overtake on the roads of Lewisham.
I've had to brake to avoid a collision 4 times already on Westwood Hill! Twice whilst I was driving and twice whilst pupils were driving my car whilst attempting to turn right into Lawrie Park Avenue and with the right indicator already flashing, drivers have taken the opportunity of that gap to fly past on the right. In each case if I hadn't seen it coming and firmly applied the brake my car would have been hit. I think this happened once only in all the years it was a 30mph road.

One of the rules of the Highway Code is that you must not overtake by a side road.
The limit is now 20mph according to all the signs on display.
As soon as these drivers got passed my vehicle and a few others they were held up again at the roundabout and all roads off that roundabout are not fit for speed, so they are not even gaining anything for all that mindless risk.

This is what happens to your 47% of 'normal drivers' when they feel that the speed is ridiculously slow for the road. They take very dangerous risks out of frustration or anger and it is the drivers who adhere to the legal limits and the pedestrians who begin to have a greater sense of confidence from when they've crossed the road where a sensible driver has been able to slow the others down, who are the ones that are put at the greatly increased risk.
I personally would label these people something slightly stronger than d**k heads no matter how many of them there are!
Perhaps the word Tadpole was looking for was 'sensible' rather than 'normal' but I understood his point perfectly.

On Sydenham Hill, apart from the many, many near misses I've had whilst driving there at the prescribed speed limit since it has been 20mph, I've also witnessed pedestrians, including children, have to very quickly leap out of the way of people overtaking at a greatly increased speed. And I've now seen that on four separate occasions with my heart in my mouth.

And as I have to drive on Sydenham Hill so regularly, I started monitoring when I have a car in front of me and when I don't. I usually have a huge queue of cars behind me most of whom manage to overtake me, sometimes going the wrong sides of bollards and often having to slam on their brakes for the camera. Only 10% of the time am I behind a driver who is also doing 20mph. Doesn't feel like 53% are adhering to the limit to me!

To my knowledge, since I moved here in 1986, there has been only one fatality on Sydenham Hill and that was a motorcyclist who was travelling on the road alone in the early hours of the morning. And it is also a road on which I very rarely come across any evidence of minor accidents, unlike many other roads I regularly use.

I am afraid that if this road doesn't revert to 30mph this will no longer remain the case and also very worried that there will be a serious accident involving someone engaged in a dangerous overtaking manoeuvre. I really hope I am wrong.

Sadly I wasn't wrong when I lost my temper with the police officer who told me it was pointless putting a speed camera up on Crystal Palace Parade as the boy racers we had three nights a week driving at speeds in excess of 60mph and going round the mini roundabouts the wrong way, would simply find a way to put it out of action. I put it to him that it seems to be the policy to wait until there has been a fatality prior to putting in a camera. And sadly that is exactly what happened. Shortly after an innocent man lost his life the camera appeared, the tea hut disappeared and with it all the boy racers.

If you take that situation and also the fact that South Croxted Road, a road upon which I know of at least 5 fatalities since becoming a driving instructor in 1995, wasn't made a 20mph limit until months after Sydenham Hill was, and should have been a 20mph road decades ago, I fail to see how anyone can claim that these initiatives have anything to do with road safety at all.

[Pat Trembath]

Further to my post on 28 August.

Confusion with regard to the change of speed limit on Sydenham Hill and surrounding boundaries with Southwark is explained.

Lewisham confirms that it will not be changing any Southwark boundary roads from 20mph to 30mph.

"Schedule 2 in the Traffic Order published on 29 July contains a list of roads which are exempt from the provisions of the Traffic Management Order (TMO) – it does not mean that those roads will be 30mph limits, just that they will not be made into 20mph limits by virtue of the TMO. The actual order is more detailed and as a result much clearer:

3. The restrictions imposed by Article 2 of this Order shall not apply to –

(a) any road or part of a road specified in Schedule 2 to this Order, being currently subject to a separate 20 miles per hour speed limit by virtue of the Order stated in the heading to that particular road, part of road or area; or

The following boundary roads with the London Borough of Southwark – (in our area)

Forest Hill Road – from its junction with Honor Oak Road to its junction with Wood Vale.

Honor Oak Park – from its junction with Devonshire Road to its junction with Forest Hill Road.

Sydenham Hill – its entire length.

Wood Vale – its entire length."

So 20 mph rules along Sydenham Hill for its entire length along with others as detailed - OK?

[Suzee]

It is really disappointing that on leaving Homecroft onto Tredown Road there is now a 30mph sign. This feels like it's encouraging drivers to drive at 30 along the narrow roads of Tredown, Byne and Wiverton, simply because they have the misfortune of being in Bromley borough! And I was under the impression that Tredown, although the borough border, was actually managed by Lewisham, for road repairs etc.

[Eagle]

Suzee

Yes I also though Tredown came under Lewisham for road traffic.

Byne , Wiverton , Tredown are patently too narrow with too many parked cars for anything over 20 mph.

Bromley get moving. Try to save lives.