Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
Newbury Today Forum _ Newbury News _ Speed Humps..
Posted by: Brad Feb 22 2011, 12:54 PM
It's not only potholes causing the motorists to spend out. Speed humps.. I drive up shaw hill almost every day in my classic mini and really annoy other motorist by having to go 2mph over the monster sized speed humps. Not only do I have to either drive in between 2 of then (Illegal) or 1 wheel over the middle which destroys the suspension, if i go through as I'm supposed to I scrape the standard exhaust even going at 1mph.
Maybe I should send repair costs through to the WBC and see how it goes? 
Actually selling the car now due to prices it costs to drive are ridiculous repairs/petrol/ tax/ins easily save myself a good £3000 a year by walking 2 hours a day!!
Oops should be in random rants..
Posted by: Rosewinelover Feb 22 2011, 02:08 PM
Maybe I should send repair costs through to the WBC and see how it goes?
Actually selling the car now due to prices it costs to drive are ridiculous repairs/petrol/ tax/ins easily save myself a good £3000 a year by walking 2 hours a day!!
Oops should be in random rants..
I also drive up Shaw hill every day and I must admit I hate them. BUT if it saves lifes then I am all for it. Not sure how it could be proved so I suppose were stuck with them.
What could be used properly up Shaw Hill though is cyclists using the cycle lane instead of being stuck behind them all the way, Grrr
Posted by: Brad Feb 22 2011, 02:41 PM
I actually got run over as a kid along that road, my fault as I wasn't looking properly. If there were speed humps back then it wouldn't have a made a difference I do not think. If there was another way to get to my job without going that way I would.. but no matter what way I go I am surrounded by speed humps!
Just annoyed at how much I am getting stung for repairs to my car that most likely wouldn't have been if it wasn't for those speed humps!
Posted by: NWNREADER Feb 22 2011, 03:18 PM
I am not against these traffic calming devices, but many do not conform to the design requirements. If one does not conform it needs to be reported to StreetCare quoting Traffic Advisory Leaflets 1/98, 4/94 and X/06, and detailing the feature that does not conform. As with not repairing reported potholes, the Council can be liable for damage caused as a result of failing to maintain the road surface
http://www.dft.gov.uk/adobepdf/165240/244921/244924/TAL_1-98
Posted by: Strafin Feb 22 2011, 05:19 PM
The thing is your car is not what I would consider "standard". You have an old classic which does not have decent suspension (for commuting) or shock absorbers and stupid tiny wheels. Therefore I think you have to accept a certain amount of discomfort when travelling around Newbury. Having said that I don't think the speed humps serve a purpose particularly and I don't think there is a need for them.
On the point of having to drive between them, as there is no double white line, I'm not sure that it is illegal.
Posted by: NWNREADER Feb 22 2011, 05:27 PM
On the point of having to drive between them, as there is no double white line, I'm not sure that it is illegal.
If the cushions comply then there shouldn't be a problem - unless your car has been lowered. The reason I don't buy a Ferrarri is the front valance catches on even legal humps/cushions.
Driving between the cushions is only likely to be trouble if there is another vehicle coming the other way.......
Posted by: Andy Capp Feb 22 2011, 05:39 PM
I wish that was my reason for not buying one!
Posted by: JeffG Feb 22 2011, 07:51 PM
If they are similar to the ones in Kiln Road, it's the positioning of the cushions that annoys me. If nothing is coming the other way, I can straddle them at a steady 30 and not feel anything. However they are positioned too far from the kerb, so if there is oncoming traffic I have to slow right down and take the hump with the offside wheels.
Posted by: gardeb Feb 23 2011, 10:19 AM
[
The thing is your car is not what I would consider "standard". You have an old classic which does not have decent suspension (for commuting) or shock absorbers and stupid tiny wheels. Therefore I think you have to accept a certain amount of discomfort when travelling around Newbury. Having said that I don't think the speed humps serve a purpose particularly and I don't think there is a need for them.
Just because a car is considered a classic it is not necessarily non-standard. An old mini is a standard car and has wheels that were designed for a purpose, they are not "stupid". The suspension may not have modern features but again it serves the purpose for which it was designed. Why should someone accept discomfort simply because modern planners fail to consider all users, just the vociferous groups.
Posted by: spartacus Feb 23 2011, 06:29 PM
hmm.. err.. so you have to slow 'right down'... So they are achieving the desired effect presumably? What are you complaining about..?
Actually they are an absolute pain but the problem is that many residents along roads that suffer from drivers speeding past their properties demand that 'something should be done about speeding' and want the things introduced. Once they're in, the other half of the road (and the motorist who was used to travelling along at an inappropriate speed) complain about them and demand they're whipped out...
What can you do though?
Asking drivers to slow down doesn't work...
The local plod are very selective on where they set up their speed traps (only where they're guaranteed to catch some motorists in a very short time so they can tick the box of 'speeding' from their monthly targets, rather than hang around residential roads all day with no prospect of catching speeders)
Buildouts aren't very effective at slowing traffic down if there's nothing coming the other way (and even if there IS something coming the other way drivers often speed up to beat the other one through so these can make the problem worse)
If speed hump don't conform to spec report them. If they conform to spec but you don't like them then use a different road...
Posted by: JeffG Feb 23 2011, 07:39 PM
There is no need to roll your eyes at me. I am complaining that I am unable to proceed at 30mph, which is the speed limit along there. What is your point?
Posted by: Strafin Feb 23 2011, 08:31 PM
Just because a car is considered a classic it is not necessarily non-standard. An old mini is a standard car and has wheels that were designed for a purpose, they are not "stupid". The suspension may not have modern features but again it serves the purpose for which it was designed. Why should someone accept discomfort simply because modern planners fail to consider all users, just the vociferous groups.
It served a purpose 25 years ago, now it is very much a specialist vehicle. I know there are plenty about still and it is not rare, but planners can hardly start considering cars from a byegone era as usual vehicles likely to be using the local roads. By your logic they should be considering non pneumatic tyres and model T fords!
Posted by: Strafin Feb 23 2011, 08:32 PM
Exactly - it's a limit, not a target.
Posted by: JeffG Feb 23 2011, 10:01 PM
I don't understand your point. If 30mph was not a safe speed for that road, the limit would (and should) be lower. Are you saying that the speed humps are designed to make traffic travel at less than the speed limit?
Posted by: Andy Capp Feb 23 2011, 10:03 PM
I hate them as well, but I would imagine they are there to reduce the average speed, rather than 'limit' the driver to 30 mph.
Posted by: Rosewinelover Feb 23 2011, 10:13 PM
Totally agree
Posted by: Andy Capp Feb 23 2011, 10:17 PM
I can't speak for anyone else, but I would avoid buying a used car from someone who lived in an area with speed humps like those in Thatcham and Turnpike.
Posted by: Rosewinelover Feb 23 2011, 10:20 PM
Oh no.....I live near Turnpike and Thatcham! Thankfully I have a company car
Posted by: Andy Capp Feb 23 2011, 10:31 PM
That helps!
I remember a while back, some estate - possibly in Greenham, but I am not sure - who complained of speeding and it was discovered that the majority of the speeders were from the same estate!
I suspect speed humps are a 'necessary evil', but they come at a cost. I prefer the speed awareness signs that flash on when you are going too fast.
Posted by: Rosewinelover Feb 23 2011, 10:33 PM
I suspect speed humps are a 'necessary evil', but they come at a cost. I prefer the speed awareness signs that flash on when you are going too fast.
I always make the one past Lakeside flash up when I am doing the speed limit!!
Posted by: gardeb Feb 23 2011, 10:39 PM
Surely that is just the point, planners should consider all potential road users or the plan fails, otherwise only two wheeled user will get throughthe minefield.
It was also the condescending tone of another quote reply that annoyed.
Posted by: spartacus Feb 23 2011, 10:56 PM
jeesh.... gimme strength.... 
Posted by: spartacus Feb 23 2011, 11:15 PM
I suspect many motorists who pay lip service to speed limits (ie 30mph means 35-37mph dunnit?) prefer the flashing signs coz they have absolutely no impact on said motorist... Flashing sign? Big deal... it doesn't slow the majority down.. This sort of speed management tool has no effect on this motorist.. No nasty bump to negotiate, no recording of registration plate for Mr Plod.. ignore.... Carry on... (A bit pointless really)
Speed humps are a bit of a blunt tool but they can be effective in lowering average speeds.... at a cost... They're often introduced following political pressure from local Councillors who whip up a storm with local residents saying that the 'magic bumps' will result in every car going past their house at snail's pace.. The reality isn't quite like that.
Problems with them are noise (cars, buses and lorries bumping over them day and night) and repetitive strain injuries to vehicle suspensions.... The 'cushion' types are the default hump these days so that bus drivers don't get sore backs and so that ambulances aren't slowed, but they have no effect on motorbikes/scooters. And.. if you have a Lambo (or a Corsa wiv lowered suspension) you may find that your backside drags across the top of the humps...
The ONLY really effective traffic calmer is a PC with a speed gun...
Posted by: dannyboy Feb 23 2011, 11:25 PM
I have no problem in the 4X4.
Posted by: spartacus Feb 23 2011, 11:28 PM
My son has no problems when he's delivering pizzas on his motorised toothbrush.... (I assume rolling eyes is permitted? He's so talented, my son.... <shakes head and sighs..> ) He can easily whizz along at 50mph on Kiln Road he tells me..
Posted by: Biker1 Feb 23 2011, 11:30 PM
(I assume rolling eyes is permitted? He's so talented, my son.... <shakes head and sighs..> ) He can easily whizz along at 50mph on Kiln Road he tells me..Is he a learner?
Has he come off or had a prang yet?
Posted by: spartacus Feb 23 2011, 11:46 PM
All part of the learning process.... He's come off the pizza putt-putt a few times (and made a mess of the pizzas in the box) but he's got a 125 Aprilla (they never had bikes like that in my day for kids to play on....).. and he's very careful with that... Much like people ragging hire cars, I suppose you wouldn't be advised to buy a second hand Pizza Hut moped..
Posted by: Biker1 Feb 23 2011, 11:50 PM
Exactly - that's why I asked.
At least he has learned his limits now and got away with it.
Hope he takes it easy and doesn't get too carried away. Those 125's can go some these days!
Posted by: Iommi Feb 23 2011, 11:50 PM
I had a Suzuki GT250 back in 1980. Many years later (1994) my Honda NS125F, was just as powerful.
Posted by: gardeb Feb 24 2011, 07:58 AM
jeesh.... gimme strength.... My point exactly.
Posted by: Brad Feb 24 2011, 08:33 AM
But the sad face that flashes...
Hurts the heart!Posted by: JeffG Feb 24 2011, 09:51 AM
Or you could omit the "speed" bit there - even more effective!
Hope you registered your disapproval.
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)