SPEED HUMPS

The controversial speed humps in Sinfin and Boulton have been branded a "waste of money" after it emerged that it will cost £76,000 to tear them up. Derby City Council is set to approve a move which will see the digging up and replacement of speed humps, which cost £236,000 to install less than three years ago. The council is expected to rubber-stamp the proposal at a cabinet meeting. It follows a survey which revealed that 59 per cent of people never wanted the humps in the first place. Work will begin in April to remove the humps from Grampian Way, Sinfin, and from Boulton Lane between the junctions with Chellaston Road and Bracken's Lane.

They may be replaced by speed cameras, in co-operation with the Derbyshire Safety Camera Partnership, depending on the outcome of police speed surveys. In the meantime, the road will be narrowed where humps are taken out. The rest of Boulton Lane will have the existing humps replaced with ones that span the entire width of the road, while humps in Holbrook Road will have their sides rounded off so that they are easier to negotiate. These would be trial measures and the council will seek the views of members of the public.

Councillor Sara Bolton, cabinet member for planning and prosperity, said that the latest development was in response to public concerns. She said, "We have gone to great lengths to find out what people think about these traffic-calming measures and have listened to their concerns. I am confident the different proposals for selected roads will satisfy the majority of people."

Thelma Bradshaw, of Faversham Close, is secretary of the Community Road Users' Independent Steering Executive, which was set up by people in Alvaston calling for speed humps to be removed from all areas of Derby. She said, "Right at the beginning they were so adamant there was nothing we could do about it, but public pressure has made them yield."

Depending upon the vehicle and the hump design, going over a hump at a higher speed may cause less discomfort than a lower speed and accelerating after negotiating a hump generates more pollution than if the hump hadn't been there. The Transport Research Laboratory in the United Kingdom conducted emissions tests on roads with a 75 metre hump spacing and found CO emissions increased by 70-80%, HC by 70-100%, and CO2 by 50-60%.

Contrary to popular belief, speed humps increase noise levels. Braking may generate noise, especially with larger vehicles, traversing the hump may create noise, especially with goods vehicles and accelerating after the hump generates more noise than a vehicle travelling at a constant speed. Repeatedly traversing humps causes long-term damage to vehicle components, especially the suspension; and humps can cause damage to the bodywork of large vehicles such as buses, and to the underside of cars with low ground clearance.

The impact of vehicles traversing a speed hump sends shock waves through the ground. Depending upon the nature of the soil, the proximity and construction of buildings, the weight of vehicles, and the frequency of traffic, these shock waves may cause structural damage to nearby properties. If you don't believe that, read the official UK regulations stating where humps can be installed - they specifically exclude anywhere within 25m of bridges, subways, or tunnels.

Drivers watching out for humps are distracted from watching out for more serious hazards. Humps may cause traffic to divert from a good road to one which is far less capable of carrying the traffic safely, this increases overall accident risk. At night, humps cause headlight beams to rise. This dazzles oncoming traffic, and in residential areas causes annoyance to occupants of houses ahead of the vehicle. Humps cause unnecessary discomfort to passengers.

Contractors were ordered to remove speed humps that cost £150,000 to install because they were found to be too steep. Council chiefs in Edinburgh spent thousands of pounds on the humps in 2004, but inspections found that almost one in ten was too steep. Inspectors want the humps to be replaced in case they cause injuries to people in vehicles, resulting in lawsuits. The city council asked Land Engineering, the contractor, to replace almost 100 humps which they laid.

Council call centres received thousands of complaints about the traffic-calming measures, which motorists claim damage to their cars and aggravate back injuries. Almost 100 of the 1,500 humps, which were installed to enforce a 20mph speed limit on various streets in the capital, were found to break regulations by being too steep. Workers at Land Engineering, based in Ayrshire, installed 39 speed humps along Duddingston Road, all of which were later found to have been laid incorrectly.

Mechanics had reported a rise in the number of cars with damaged exhausts since the humps were installed. Keith Rimmer, head of transport at Edinburgh City Council, said that the height of the humps was correct but that they had been built too steeply. “Generally the cushions are to the correct height but not to an acceptable quality,” he explained. “The side gradients, finished surface and rideability are not acceptable, and I have instructed that they are redone."

He added, "Residents and the public in general understand the need for these measures, although the arrangement at present often makes it uncomfortable to manoeuvre over. This will be significantly improved when the work is redone.” Edinburgh’s local authority has one of the best records for accident prevention in Britain. No child has been killed on the capital’s streets for nearly three years.

Gordon Ferguson, a mechanic and assistant manager of Farmer’s Autocare on Piersfield Terrace, said, “We have seen a lot of people recently with steering and exhaust problems. The speed bumps are clearly too steep, and people are having their exhausts knocked when they drive over them, or they find they have problems with their steering alignment.”

A council spokeswoman said, “If we are not satisfied that the installation of traffic-calming measures was carried out to the required standard, we will ask the contractor to rectify this at no additional cost to the council.” A spokesman for Land Engineering declined to comment. (Source: Times Online)

Next >>>