Speed bump objections help

hwalkerh

Hello

I have just received a letter from the council about(about 1 mile) proposed 14 speed bumps and crossing and 20mph speed limit on the road by us . There is a school on the road. I know that the council will do what they like whatever people say but wondering if anyone has any advise.

I am happy with a crossing my the school and maybe 4 humps by it but 14 in 1 mile!

• My main objections are the one near the island at the end of the road
• one on a cross road (raised table top hump) where in the last 2 years about 3 cars have had crashed and ended up in the front garden of the house. i think that the hump will slow cars but if there are any crashes then the house stands no chance with out a curb to try and stop the cars.
• one (raised table top hump) at the bottom of a hill, on slight corner, again i think a car could end up hitting it at the wrong angle and going flying.

Any ideas of good point to argue would be great as i need valid arguements as dont want to sound like someone moaning that they can ignore.

thanks

thescouselander

I'm not sure whats best to argue but all I can say is that you should stop them being put in at all costs. Having lived on a road with speed bumps for 3 years I can safely say I will never buy another house on a road with speed bumps.

They bring nothing but misery including:

Additional wear to your car - early failure of suspension bushes and tyres
Noise as people accelerate after going over the speed bumps
People sounding their horn as they go over the bumps
Dangerous conditions when riding a bike down the road
Speed bumps disintegrating (if you are on a busy road)

We are winning the battle here and the council has decided the speed bumps are inappropriate but they claim they don't have the money to get them removed. Once they are in you will not get rid of them.

Pew_Pew_Pew_Lasers!

Ask yourself, whenever you're driving over speed bumps, where are you looking?

If you're like the majority of people, you're looking at the bump. If its a cushion, you're looking at the cushion, to position your wheels on either side of it.

Ask the council what they'd rather have - motorists watching the road and keeping an eye on the pavement, or motorists watching the tarmac and speed bumps, and paying little attention to the pavement.

Also, you should ask them how many deaths or serious injuries have occurred on this road, and why they feel the speed bumps and speed limit are required. Ask them what expert advice (not idiots from BRAKE) has been gathered as part of this consultation.

tandraig

there is actually a legal requirement for the speed bumps to be a certain distance apart. does the proposal meet this requirement?
the twenty mile an hour limit doesnt usually bother people - but speed bumps do! how do local people think?
is it a route that police and ambulance or fire services take?
I hate speed bumps and cushions with a passion! I have degenerative back problem and since the local council have peppered the area with these things - the jolting i recieve just on a simple errand to local shops can mean i am in pain for hours after!

hwalkerh

The advise i read says speed bumps should not be more then 100m a part so people dont speed up in between so i think that they have met that so we can have 14 in one mile.

having looked at the plans in more detail i do wonder how close a pedestrian crossing should be to speed bump and junction. Also as the crossing is going to be about 20 meters after a bus stop which i don't think gives enough required viewing space and strikes me as being stupid, as people will try and pass the bus and could end up wiping out people crossing.

Also i don't think they have noted the speed bumps in relation to the bus stops one the bus stop starts at about the place the speed bump will end.

i live just of the road in question and there are often ambulances coming on our road as there are a lot of elderly people so i think that it is bad that they will have 4 speed bumps to go over and the only alternative is an extra mile around.

tomstickland

A friend of mine lived in an area where some local morons used to speed through a 30 limit. The majority of people went through at 30, and with parked cars it didn't feel safe to go any faster.

About a year ago they totally wrecked the whole road with really steep bolt-on ramps, islands and 20 signs all over the place. Instead of just rolling along at 25-30 indicated it became a series of spurts of acceleration as I used to go over the bumps at 5mph.

I was so pleased when he moved.

Of course, the cars that used to exceed the limit continue to do so.

dampdaveski

The name speed bumps is absolutely ridiculous, if anything they slow you down.

14 humps in a mile does sound a lot, might well be a case of 'bobbing' down the local authority planning office and having a chat with the relevant council waller, and asking him to talk you through their scheme with the reasons and legislation why theyare proposing what they are

hope this helps
DD

hwalkerh

Found some documents online that shows that people have petitioned for a crossing. They assessed three sites, all show low accidents like one slight non pedestrian, short times to cross road (10sec max), low numbers of people and only one site is slightly suitable with cutting down a tree!

However to justify the safety of a crossing they need to put in speed bumps down the whole mile of road and then 20mph traffic calm just to justify the crossing.

Council consultation on thrusday so i think i will be there!

tomstickland

You can probably blame the government. They'll give money to local councils for traffic schemes like this, but basic maintenance budgets have clearly been insuffient.

verybigchris

I'd keep any objections as specific as possible - there's no point arguing the general point about how dangerous speed bumps are, because the council will have already made their minds up on that.

BTW, a lot of the speed bumps I've seen recently have disintegrated during the cold weather, so they are now sharp lumps of tarmac surrounded by potholes and loose gravel. I shudder to think how much the council is going to have to spend on "fixing" them, or paying compensation for all the cars they'll ruin.

flyingscotno1

If you are dealing with council on a matter like this you need to get the local councillor on-side. If they are against or don't agree with plans too it is a big plus. That is the first port of call, the council will consult with the 'local member' and if they are hardly positive the scheme may get watered down.

Also you need to get neighbours and other residents to respond. Sadly the UK often has an lethargy to getting involved in things until it has happened or too late! Don't let them be silent, if you want the council/councillor to take notice you need them to speak up too!

You need to be concise and persuasive. The major hurdle you have to cross is that largely speed humps are largely effective at slowing traffic and cutting accidents. What you have to do is lay down what you think is inappropriate, why and suggest a couple of feasible alternatives. It needs to be logical and rational, and not just completely negative or too I don't want humps. I'm sure you know this but it cannot be stated enough! In a previous life I read complaint letters and you wouldn't believe the nonsense people put down, some of it could have won prizes for writing they way they dramatised- too many to list!

Similarly be careful with stuff like people loosing control at speed humps and hitting houses and don't get tempted to stuff like 'property value'. They don't work against councils and they will have ready made answers! The locals around here tried to object to something once, and the planning decision came back answering their points with 'not relevant' or 'out with planning authority' on 7 or 8 of the 12 points. Things like that waste your time, annoy them and show why you need to be careful.

For example I would state by agreeing need for crossing outside school is positive, agree that you like road safety measures and do not oppose making roads safer but some measures are disproportionate to the issue- money could be split more fairly with other areas rather than all here (ask about value engineering;)). State you think the hump at bottom of hill is poorly location, suggest is is removed as other humps will keep speeds down, and a hump at a hill could cause issues with winter maintenance and people hitting a higher than usual speeds. You can even perhaps even ask if they considered other measures chicanes rather than humps, mini-roundabouts instead of tables, 'Twenty's Plenty' Zone, speed shame boards, raised zebra crossings and markings to slow folk- anything you think is more appropriate.

If you are logical and rational, get into a sensible discussion with the council officers and with a bit of support from a councillor and other residents, you should stand the best chance of getting things changed in your favour.