Islington council: Crouch Hill improvements/ Hanley Road 20mph zone

underscore_cue

Looks like they're planning to dig up loads of roads and cover this area in crazy paving.

<a href="http://www.fileden.com/files/2009/7/8/2502292/crouch_hill0001.pdf">Scan of the consultation document</a>

andy

<img src="http://www.andymartin.net/img/crouchhill.jpg" width=400>

Good spot. I bet the Noble are delighted that the Council are building them a loading bay.

Do they fancy coming round and building me a loft conversion?

poxy

Not to mention that The Noble also gets increased pavement space on Sparsholt Road.

The consultation process seems overkill for what is in the scheme of things a fairly minor amount of work. It's hardly contentious, I can't think of any reason why anyone would want to object.

I also wonder how many folk got a copy of the document through their letterboxes. I got one and I'm off the map.

Reg

Didn't get one about this but did get one about the proposed 20mph zone and speed bumps in the area between Tollington, Hanley, SGR and Hornsey. I am so completely against it all. LB Barnet actually scrapped all traffic calming a few years ago and with no difference to casualties. I think they actually continued to fall. I wish LBI would just finish the resurfacing and let it be. But no, more jobs for the boys, more noise from the trucks crashing over them and more pollution as the cars speed up and slow down...

andy

@reg - I got that one too.

Cllr Watts trailled it on this site a few months back

Having been resurfaced, Tollington is smooth and pretty quiet.

It all just feels like makework to me.

Ali

Twenty is Plenty!
It is a good idea which would not be needed if drivers didn’t speed so much. If you or you kids get hid with a car that is doing twenty or so you chances of less injury is huge compared to thirty !
If you hits at 20 you have 95% chance of survival at 30 or so 50%.
For 9 other reasons see http://www.roadpeace.org/index.asp?PageID=135

underscore_cue

This is it. It looks uncontrovesial on paper, but there's going to be a hell of a lot of disruption.

They did this repaving in highbury around where I work and for a very long time the roads were a nightmare for traffic and people on foot.

Then after the resurfacing the yellow lines weren't painted for a while afterwards, so people could quite reasonably park on corners blocking the view etc. during the day and not get a ticket.

The shops on Crouch Hill are going to be hard to get in and out of when they replace the pavement all the way down to Hanley.

The loading bay at the Noble is the only good part of this imho. Jobs for the boys sums this up, someone in the council has been driving around in the islington smart car looking for parts of the borough that need 'doing', rather than local people asking for this sort of thing to be done.

Reg

@Ali, I don't doubt that a stationary vehicle will cause less harm than a speeding one. However, I am not aware of any incidents or collisions in the last year, for example, and that statistic has not been tabled as a reason for this Grand Project. As I said, in Barnet the lack of 'traffic calming' has seen no increase in incidents and is saving a heap of cash. I have asked LBI for the statistics that lead to this expensive requirement and will be sure to let you all know what the horrendous figure is. It is pathetic enough that you see two gormless *operatives* sitting in the smart car at the top of Evershot making sure people don't turn right on to Hanley. It always makes me laugh to see people turn left and immediately spin the car in the wide road and continue east. Its as if there is a whole department trying to come up with new and interesting ways to spend our money. Why not give the *hundreds* of parking wardens a speed gun each and get them to monitor the traffic? There is one on almost every corner anyway. They could do it quite easliy. I just want them to spare my car's suspension and the sanity of me and my neighbours.

andy

*It is pathetic enough that you see two gormless operatives sitting in the smart car at the top of Evershot* That's hilarious. One of the guys who sits in the tiny SMART car must weigh 17 stone. He wears it like a waistcoat. @Ali - it's interesting. Whilst that fact is true, putting speedbumps in probably won't help matters and there are nearly no incidents on that road anyway.

markpack

@Ali: Barnet's road safety record after removing speed humps is far from good. In the first year they dropped more sharply than the decline across the rest of outer London, but in subsequent years they have dropped much less than across the rest of outer London. Indeed, across the years since the policy change in Barnet, the number of road accident casualties has been higher in Barnet than it would have been if the borough had simply matched the changes in the rest of outer London.

(More detailed numbers are towards the end of a blog post I wrote <a href="http://www.libdemvoice.org/brian-coleman-road-humps-7344.html">here</a>.)

Ali

I guess this depends on whether the road concerned goes anywhere. I have had a couple of very near misses with speeding cars with my kids in Victoria Road on the way home from school.

Once it was a David Philips 4 by 4 doing at least 40 while on a mobile phone at the junction of Marquis Rd the second time it was at the top of Albert Rd.

In both cases if the driver had been doing nearer 20 they would have had more control.

I also don’t understand why London Police seem to do nothing when people use mobile phones while driving.

If on the Islington side your all unhappy get a campaign going and make it very obvious to the LibDems that they will loose seats on the council If you can’t get a campaign going it is ether an irritant or most people are indifferent.

The ginger monkey

I was just about to start a thread saying the 20mph consultation is open, only to find this one. @andy - totally agree about the bloke "wearing" the "no right turn" smart car. My kids think it's hilarious...

Anyway, the 20mph consultation is now live on the council site. I must say I'm all for it (partly because my kids remain better at the theory of road-crossing than the practicalities) but also partly because Corbyn and Thorpedale already attract the rat-runners. I would have no problems with a few speed bumps on there and the roads around them - not quite convinced on Hanley Road, but it does make sense to do what we can to direct as much through traffic as possible onto Hanley Road, no?

Anyway the 20mph consultation is <a href="http://www.islington.gov.uk/Council/CouncilNews/Consultation/feedbackfinder2/consultations/2009/hanleyrd_20mph2.asp">here if you want to add your voice.</a>

Reg

Democracy in action! Hanley Road area 20mph scheme; 3000 consultation documents issued, 1003 back (31%, not bad). 74% in favour of a 20mph scheme - of which I am one. Only 38% want calming, 68% just want a speed limit (1% don't know). SO, in the face of what in a national vote would be a landslide, Islington has approved a scheme involving humps anyway - the length of Corbyn, Thorpedale, Marriott, Evershot and Regina. Good that we all got to have our say?? Smacks of Ken and the congestion charge extension to me...

andy

Really? How depressing. Like Reg, I'm with you (20 zone, but no bumps). And politicians wonder why people are cynical and apathetic. btw: 68%+1%+38% = 107%...? What's the source for the numbers?

andy

@RichardWatts - any comments?

andy

and as an aside, it seems that almost none of the pdf files on the Islington Council website work: <http://www.islington.gov.uk/democracy/reports/reportdetail.asp?ReportID=7801&intSectionID=6&intSubSectionID=2>;

andy

OK. I've just got my copy of the letter with the results on it.

Do you support a 20mph scheme?
- Yes - 740 (74%)
- No - 257 (26%)
- No response 2 (0%)

If you do support the 20 mph scheme, which option
- Traffic Calming 284 (38%)
- Speed Limits 448 (61%)
- No response 8 (1%)

61% wanted option 2. Which option do we get? Option 1.

Comparing the two maps, the "redesigned" scheme simply removes the bumps from Turle Road, Wray Crescent and Pine Grove. Which are all cul-de-sacs anyway - hardly rat run material.

So why bother asking? If you're going to ignore a turnout comparable to a local election and far clearer answer than you get in most elections, why bother?

I find being asked and ignored far worse than not being asked in the first place.

poxy

<i>Send your letters to: The Letters Editor, Islington Tribune, 40 Camden Road, London, NW1 9DR or email to <a href="mailto:letters@islingtontribune.co.uk">letters@islingtontribune.co.uk</a>. Deadline for letters is midday Wednesday. The editor regrets that anonymous letters cannot be published, although names and addresses can be withheld . Please include a full name, postal address and telephone number.</i>

Go on, you know you should.

Cllr Richard Watts

Andy's derscription of what was agreed is essentially spot-on: a hybrid system between optison 1 and 2, with bumps on the more major roads and not on the smaller ones. Aside from the consultation results (which I'll get onto in a minute) there is some logic to this as size of the small road automatically limits speed, while the longer roads (e.g. Corbyn, Thorpedale, Evershot, Regina etc.) need some kind of enforcement to keep speeds down to 20.

The right bit of ther Council website seems to be down so I can't double check, but my reccolection is that that bumps were more popular on the longer roads for obvious reasons.

Personally I think there are much better ways than bumps to control speed but Transport for London seem to insist on them if they are goin to pay for the 20 MPH zone. Islington Council has also tended to be over zelous about putting bmups in and this is the first time we, as opposition councillors,have managed to get a hybrid scheme agreed - and this took more of a fight than it should have.

The big issue outstanding is what happens on Hanley Road. I don't think there sjhould be bumps on Hanley Road - it is wide and so much safer for cars to travel at 30. Putting bumps on Hanley would also drive traffic into smaller and more residential streets. Sadly Lib Dem coucnillors from other wards asked officers to go back and re-look at their origional proposal to leave Hanley Rd bumpless - we should find out the results of their thinking soon. Do email greg.foxsmith@islington.gov.uk (Cllr Foxsmith is the Lib Dem Executive councillor in charge of speed bumps) if you want to keep Hanley Road without speed bumps.

Cllr Richard Watts

I've asked the Council umpteen times to stop the CCTV car just sitting at the end of Regina Road and Evershot Street, enforcing pointless no-right-turn rules. I think the practice simply raises too much money!

A friend who lives on Regina Road once found the car's occupants fast asleep.

Irritating enough as it is, but even more irritating when you consider there are some problems with anti-social behaviour at the other end fo Regina Road that some extra CCTV would really help to solve!

David

Everyone and his dog knows cars and lorries _(end even rubbish trucks now and then)_ just Bo and Luke Duke it over the speed bumps. It doesn't slow speed, fucks the neighbourhoods foundations and has now actually been voted against yet still will be installed? Do they really work for us?

andy

Thanks Richard. I have written a very polite note to Cllr Foxsmith.

Islington gazette, not so much.

Reg

Apologies for my earlier balls-up with the figures. Could hardly see the keys for the red mist. Have e-mailed the named officer on the 'newsletter' to ask why we were not consulted before this went up to vote and how we can appeal. SURELY if the majority don't want it, we don't have to have it?? Cllr Watts?

Reg

@David/Andy/Home Any chance of a "Dump the Bumps" range of clothing/household goods?

Cllr Richard Watts

@Reg

You should have recieved the Council's consultation doucment about this some time ago. You should complain to the officer you've already contacted if this did not happen.

The legal position is that consultations aren't binding but any politicians would be daft if they ignored the results. So your ultimate weapon is voting against the Council administration which pushes ahead with these schemes in the face of local opposition.

In the meantime please do email Cllr Foxsmith about Hanley Road.

Papa

I can't download the documents but do I take it from this that we are getting speed bumps on Regina Road? If so, that is ludicrous. The road is so narrow that you can't do more than 20mph down it and hardly anyone ever does, thus negating the whole size of road thing Cllr Watts mentions. (Nevermind the potholes that mean its rarely wise to do more than 15mph) Those who speed down it will continue to do so but just accelerate and brake heavily between bumps paying less attention to where a pedestrian or child could walk out from. Speed bumps will be a waste of money, time and damage the rest of the road as they inevitably disintegrate, and harm the foundations of the houses. (And really annoying on a bicycle) This whole thing is madness, a complete waste of money and a blatant example of flawed consultation.

andy

Here is the speed bump map, from the letter through my door this morning. 

Reg

@cllr watts, yes I received a document asking for my views. My views were in the negative (as per the majority of local residents) and since the council is promoting a scheme AGAINST the wishes of the majority we should have been notified before the members voted on it. Whats wrong with saving money for the time being and marking the roads up as 20mph and get the Smart Car Monkeys on Evershot to turn the camera to face the other way now and again. Spend the difference on finishing the resurfacing round there.

Reg

@Andy, what does the X mark? The start of the riot?

poxy

Andy: What do the green boxes indicate?

Also, looking at that map... Were Wray Crescent & Turle Wray Close / Turle Road ever linked? If so, how recently were they spearated?

Reg

@Poxy, WWII bomb damage. Turned in to the park