Westwood Hill Speed Camera

[GemStone]

20 ain't plenty, come on!
How did we get lumbered with this piece of crap set at 20 down this Westwood Hill? Today I saw someone brake and another car went into the back of it.
Why there on that hill?
Which crazy idiot sanctioned this??

[parker]

20 ain't plenty, come on!
How did we get lumbered with this piece of crap set at 20 down this Westwood Hill? Today I saw someone brake and another car went into the back of it.
Why there on that hill?
Which crazy idiot sanctioned this??

An oblivious overpaid asshole at the council that's paid a fortune of tax payer's money to f**k over said tax payers? Highly likely.

[monkeyarms]

What's most irritating to me is not the 20mph speed limit, it's that the speed cameras don't appear to be adjusted to it. I know this because I accidentally have gone past the cameras at 30 on tons of occasions. I suspect other regular motorists on that hill are aware of this, because plenty of cars make no attempt to slow down, and I've invariably got some git right on my bumper behind me. And I've been overtaken on that stretch many times, not that that really matters. The council could at least fix the cameras so they do actually register people driving at over 20mph: if they're going to have this rule, they may as well get some revenue out of it.

[monkeyarms]

Why there on that hill?

Because of the primary school and secondary school on it?

[shibbycribby]

Why there on that hill?

Because of the primary school and secondary school on it?

But then how many kids died when it was a 30 limit on that hill? Kids managed to live with the 30 limit just fine for years.

[monkeyarms]

well, I was googling around out of curiosity and a post came up from a local resident back in 2005 on this very forum:

"If there was one place I would put a camera in Sydenham - it would be down Westwood Hill just after the school. Lots of vehicles have been deceived by the bend, lost it and piled into the back brick walls of the Beaulieu Avenue houses opposite."

So clearly it's not completely out of the blue for some locals and there's some history there.

I don't personally have an issue with having to drive at 20; especially given you don't gain anything going down that road at 30 (or over) anyway, as there is always a queue at the bottom by the roundabout. How fast are you expecting to go once you get to Sydenham High St? It's not like you're being prohibited from zooming down a three-lane motorway. It's mildly annoying to have to concentrate on the speedometer so rigidly, but it wouldn't be so much of an effort if everyone else was too. If someone had to really brake so hard to get to 20 that someone went into the back of them, then they were probably doing over 30 to begin with.

[stuart]

I don't know how many of you lived here before the cameras were installed. The wall on the bend downhill was regularly demolished by cars speeding and losing it. So dangerous it wasn't safe to walk. I don't recall a crash since so they appear to be achieving their objective

Sydenham was still a dangerous place @ 30mph with numerous fatalities It is also extremely dangerous there when you have 4x4s scattered all over the place at set down/collection time.

20mph - if enforced - has been shown to dramatically reduce KSIs. Can anybody suggest a better way to reduce the carnage? The OP gives a brilliant example of what happens when people aren't paying attention. But if we can slow the traffic by 10mph and it is enforced and people are prepared to play along then mistakes and inattention will be much less costly.

Please don't condone criminal and dangerous behaviour and attack and ridicule those who are trying their best to control it.

Stuart

[prince]

20 ain't plenty, come on!
How did we get lumbered with this piece of crap set at 20 down this Westwood Hill? Today I saw someone brake and another car went into the back of it.
Why there on that hill?
Which crazy idiot sanctioned this??

An oblivious overpaid asshole at the council that's paid a fortune of tax payer's money to f**k over said tax payers? Highly likely.

With all due respect that is absolute crap. They are there to save lives and are not to generate money or to annoy people.

[JRobinson]

....
Which crazy idiot sanctioned this??

An oblivious overpaid asshole at the council that's paid a fortune of tax payer's money to f**k over said tax payers? Highly likely.

As a council employee, and a highways engineer, albeit a different borough, I find you post incredibly naive, ignorant, ill informed and offensive. Lewisham might do things differently but I highly doubt that they are overpaid, they are certainly highly qualified. assholes - well they might be, that's debatable. And this 20 mph across the entire borough, is certainly not done to f with people, nor is it revenue producing, if it was meant to be, there would be cameras everywhere, and enforced, which it clearly isn't. Council budgets are very tight they don't have money to throw around wastefully. The one main reason for this reduced speed limit is to reduce the numbers of KSI (killed or seriously injured). That's it.

[broken_shaman]

Would be interesting to find out how many fines this camera generates to assess whether it actually does its job of reducing speed. If it isn't effective, perhaps physical measures, such as chicanes, gates or humps would be better at managing speed, if a little less profitable?

The 20mph blanket limit is a complete farce. Nobody is going slower. I'll be looking out for the inevitable reports of success from the council, after noting they like to position their monitoring strips by junctions or speedhumps. Anything but measuring traffic at the speed it usually travels at. Which is about 35-40mph up Perry Rise.

It's a shame, because I think the end result will be vehicles travelling faster outside schools etc... as drivers become immune to 20mph signage.

[Sydenham]

@broken_sharman - number of fines is not an indicator of success. It does not take into account those who changed their behaviour as a result of the signage and other information about. It also depends on how much money spent on active enforcement.

It will be interesting to understand the impact though - and from previous posts @Stuart has pointed us towards a number of surveys that have helped to show why a 20 mph limit might be useful in preventing deaths and serious injuries on roads in London

[JRobinson]

the council are currently doing speed checks (those places where two rubber wires are stretched across the road in parallel) - these capture details of passing vehicles, including data/time, speed, and weight of vehicle. This data can be used to determine the average traffic speed, and the quartiles (eg 25% of the traffic is above x mph).

I'm sure if you contact Lewisham you could use the FOI act to obtain results of previous automatic traffic count surveys.

[stuart]

he 20mph blanket limit is a complete farce. Nobody is going slower.

I am. So are the cars behind me

What speed do you drive on 20mph roads when I'm not in front? And have you read the research on 20mph effects on KSIs in London?

(Its been referenced several times before on previous threads on this topic). If not, please do. I would be interested in your response.

Stuart

[LisaCummins]

I don't understand why people simply accept that 20 will save lives. Why not all drive a 10, we can all save many more lives!!
Meanwhile while we are all saving lives.
Gemstone was right to refer the cameras as a piece of crap. It's all a money making farce. When have you ever seen a camera placed in such a stupid place on a trunk road at 20? Yes, there are 2 types of idiots here. The council and the coffers who simply accept it and say, that's ok, I will drive a 20 and save lives.....in fact I will drive even slower. People's brains work as fast as they drive. That is probably why council officials drive so damn slow!!

[stuart]

I don't understand why people simply accept that 20 will save lives. Why not all drive a 10, we can all save many more lives!!

The speed is irrelevant to this incident. The point is on Westwood Hill we have clearly marked yellow cameras, flashing warning signs, (now) correct speed repeaters, the road covered in white paint - and yet not one car but two didn't notice or one of the other and right outside a school it was meant to protect.

No it was not speed it was complete multiple inattention or contempt that was the fault here. It was inattention which may have been a fatality if a child had been in the way at any ignored speed limit.

I agree with you - we shouldn't be concentrating on fining them. We should, if they do not learn and repeat the offence, cancel their license and their vehicle crushed. Drivers who do this scare me, they are a real threat to my life and everybody else including you. Much more than other threats society deems unacceptable.

Stuart