Speed Humps regs

50Twuncle

I live in a quiet southern town - the council have gone way over the top, with speed humps - wasting tax payers money...

Some of them, cause cars to brake heavily at the last minute and unless you start the ascent at virtually zero speed, the car feels as if it will disintegrate - And I drive a 1 year old car...

I did some investigations and discovered that the following rules apply....

From The Highways (Road Humps) Regulations 1999:
(a) each face of it across the carriageway of the highway in which it is constructed is at right angles to an imaginary line along the centre of that carriageway;
(b) it has a minimum length of 900 millimetres measured parallel to an imaginary line along the centre of that carriageway from the point where one face meets the surface of that carriageway to the point where the other face meets the surface of that carriageway;
(c) the highest point on it is not less than 25 millimetres nor more than 100 millimetres higher than an imaginary line parallel to the centre line of that carriageway connecting the surface of that carriageway on one side of the road hump to the surface of that carriageway on the other side of the road hump and passing vertically below that point; and,
(d) no vertical face of any material forming part of that road hump exceeds 6 millimetres measured vertically from top to bottom of that face.

NB) There appears to be no regulations on the height of the approach cliff face - with respect to the angle !!
ie) They say maximum 6mm vertical face - but what about a virtually vertical face ?

sistafromanothermista

I have the same problem here!
It feels as if you will leave the underside of your car behind!

bod1467

21Twinkle wrote: »

NB) There appears to be no regulations on the height of the approach cliff face - with respect to the angle !!
ie) They say maximum 6mm vertical face - but what about a virtually vertical face ?

Yes there are - read b) and c) again.

Worst case is a gradient of 94mm in 450mm, or about 1 in 5. (6mm vertical, then maximum 100-6mm [94mm] rise over 900/2mm [450mm]. Remember that d) says that no vertical face can be more than 6mm).

arcon5

It's not the humps that make drivers slam their brakes on at last minute - it's bad driving.

50Twuncle

bod1467 wrote: »

Yes there are - read b) and c) again.

Worst case is a gradient of 94mm in 450mm, or about 1 in 5. (6mm vertical, then maximum 100-6mm [94mm] rise over 900/2mm [450mm]. Remember that d) says that no vertical face can be more than 6mm).

Well - I need to actually measure them - but they are at least 8cm high and have a 1 in 2 angle to climb them !!

50Twuncle

arcon5 wrote: »

It's not the humps that make drivers slam their brakes on at last minute - it's bad driving.

bollards! !

scotsbob

Surprising how councils have so much money to spend on humps but none to spend filling in potholes.

Reason is councils get some sort of funding to put in humps and they can put them in for less than the cost of the funding they get. Therefore every hump is profit for the council.

50Twuncle

scotsbob wrote: »

Surprising how councils have so much money to spend on humps but none to spend filling in potholes.

Reason is councils get some sort of funding to put in humps and they can put them in for less than the cost of the funding they get. Therefore every hump is profit for the council.[/QUOTE

Typicall - how do they get away with it ?

Strider590

Speed humps are usually in response to residents whining about speeding or (most of the time) loud cars. Once they're in, it means the council can tell them to get lost and stop complaining, because the next thing they complain about is how noisey they are, with trucks crashing over them and cars accelerating after each one.

As for the maximum height, there's a trick my local council use.... They create a dip in the road before they put the speed hump in, so it's height is correct by the book, but actually in practice MUCH higher.

GAZ237

Strider590 wrote: »

As for the maximum height, there's a trick my local council use.... They create a dip in the road before they put the speed hump in, so it's height is correct by the book, but actually in practice MUCH higher.

I hardly think the council create a dip in the road.

Do you think they dig the road up, create a dip, then resurface the road before putting a speed hump in?:eek:

alastairq

Speed humps are usually in response to residents whining about speeding or (most of the time) loud cars.

Are you suggesting that anybody who happens to live right alongside any sort of public highway should be prepared to tolerate whatever intrusions on their quality of life you, or any other person driving a motor vehicle, cares to inflict on them?


The appearance of traffic-calming measures on any urban road is as a direct result of the unwillingness of drivers as a whole to exercise self-discipline, and consideration for others.

Those drivers may be a minority...or they may not, I don't know or care.

What I do know is that as a career driver, and as someone who takes the greatest pleasure in the art of driving, I myself am seriously considering an active campaign to get the local council to install not only speed humps, but other measures that will seriously impact on the smooth passage of a huge number and variety of vehicles, where I live.

And that will be on a main road!

I have reached the stage where the quantity of inconsiderate drivers passing through has reached a level where I myself am considering taking 'inconsiderate' action.

So for those who have sustained damage or inconvenience I say, blame the driver in front, or the one behind? Not the Local Authority....who are publicly accountable to those who live there!

If a driver finds speed humps a nuisance, then either change the style of driving, or drive a vehicle more suitably adapted to less-than-snooker-table-smooth road surfaces. [why should my taxes have to pay to make roads suitable for cars of minimal ground clearance and silly, low-profile wheel tyre combinations, anyway?]