Safe Speed Forums

Mainly as a result of a misunderstanding, I've been landed with the responsibility of writing a 3,000 word article about speed humps. The thrust will be to question the net benefit of humps. This isn't something I'm getting paid for, but it still has to be finished by 28th May.

The bottom line is I've done no research on the net effects of speed humps and I could maybe use a bit of help.

The starting point for the outline case is this list below of potential benefits and potential disbenefits:

Benefits and potential benefits

Slower traffic might lead to fewer accidents
Slower traffic might lead to accidents of lower severity
Humps might divert traffic to other roads that might be more suitable


Disbenefits and Side effects

Noise and vibration
Effects on drivers? attitudes
Damage to vehicles and goods in transit
Tyre damage
Discomfort or even injury to vehicle passengers
Delays to emergency services vehicles
Distraction of drivers
?Artificial hazards?
Pollution
Unpleasant environment for drivers
Traffic delays and congestion
Might contribute to an illusion of a safe environment
Drivers of stolen cars sometimes treat traffic calming measures as a challenge
Influences on vehicle choice - more humps mean more folk choose 4x4 monsters
Actual cost of installing humps and supporting signage

Has anyone got any comments on:

1) Further items for the lists?
2) Links to specific items of research that have found problems with humps schemes?
3) Links to recent newspaper reports that detail problems with schemes of humps?
4) Any general comments?

Thanks, everyone, for any assistance.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

I take it for granted that you're familiar with the ABD page on humps - http://www.abd.org.uk/speed_humps.htm - at the foot of this page is a list of links which could help you. And I know that PeterE has an illuminating page on humps as well on his SpeedLimit site: http://speedlimit.dreamwater.org/hump.html. I've quoted this (with permission) in a thread on the Birmingham City Council forum where I'm arguing with the troglodytes.

Thanks CJB,

I haven't done any web rersearch yet and although I was aware of both those pages I hadn't remembered to go and look at them. So that's very helpful. Thanks again.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

I've actually got a paper copy of that page which was distributed as a "flyer" with OTR about 12 months ago. It's on 2 pages of A4 and looks very comprehensive and compelling presented that way.

It would be very good to hand round at any presentation or whatever.

Another item for the lists SafeSpeed. If a benefit of humps is that they might divert traffic to more suitable roads, a disadvantage is that they might also divert traffic to less suitable roads. It must cut both ways surely.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

Quite so. Thanks.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Paul,

I wish to comment on my experiences with speed humps.

the main thing about them is that they physically annoy me and make more aggressive when driving. I think councils do not plan very well on their siting and the majority of knee jerk reactions that councils use to install them are not well founded. THe only time I think they should be use is when vehicles are moving in a pedestrian area such as in work and school grounds not major thoroughfares. Even other traffic calming in heavily built up areas would be fine such as traffic islands and out-building as long as speed bumps are not there.

there is a campaign on the BBCican website about some residents down south against them, they might have some useful info.

Andrew

Another perceived benefit is that slower vehicle speeds will lead to a subjective improvement in "quality of life". I feel this is rather questionable, but it is often claimed. Residents tend to overestimate the speed of vehicles in their streets, and I would also suggest there is a disbenefit from vehicles driving very slowly, i.e. kerb-crawling speeds. Yes, quality of life would be adversely affected if vehicles were regularly driving at 50 mph down residential streets, but in practice they don't.

Road humps also prevent boy-racers letting rip in residential streets, but on the other hand this is not in general a major problem, and if it is, it should be addressed by targeted police enforcement rather than by inconveniencing the majority.

The article by Tom Utley on road humps quoted on my web page is well worth reading.

It includes:

"All this, of course, helps to explain the strong attraction that they hold for a certain kind of mean-spirited local politician. For just as the private car is the embodiment of the concept of freedom, in metal and rubber, so the speed bump represents in tarmac the essence of regulation, nannying and political interference.

"The sort of politician I have in mind stands for election swearing that he wants to make the world a better place. He will say that he is desperately concerned about the environment, and anxious above all to keep the public safe. But actually, he is in it only to boss us all around and to make our lives insufferable."

Excellent stuff!

Regards,

Peter

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

I could list plenty of reasons why they should be scraped.. but one main point on safety is the fact no thought goes into them, or the effect on road users.

Our local council seems to have too much tarmac on it's hands and is installing them everywhere, most worring is that one of the humps is being laid just before a junction to our street, having just been made a one-way system i'll be unable to avoid it and so face possably slipping on it as i turn into the juction... considering most of these stupid things have "painted arrows" on them as well makes it even more dangourous!

It's bad enough having your suspension upset when going straight, but when you've just pulled out of one junction and about to turn into another within a few feet the last thing anyone wants is a stupid inverted "POTHOLE"

Suffering from back problems i find them extremly uncomfortable going over them on a bike although on the whole i can avoid the worst of the hump by going along the side... but this isn't too "safe" either as i'm sure some idiot will one day either try to overtake me

Not sure if you've seen the post regarding an area of london (i think) where they were ripping them up because they were causing more deaths as a result of emergency delays?

Personally i don't think you'll have problems writing 3000 words about them

Restriction of use.

My week end car cannot get over them, i cannot use roads with humps. Despite paying tax for the maintenance of them.

It is a nightmare on my road bike as well, humps are dangerouse and do not improve safety.

They are however good fun, when i am on my on/off road bike as they make an effective launch pad.

They cause thousands of £'s of damage per year to my loads in the back of my truck.

They somehow give pedestrians a feeling that they have right of way on them. The amount of times STUPID pedestrians have stepped out in front of me on them.

_________________
Steve

Sadly, this is too late, however there may be a couple of other points or three:

1. The bumps don’t allow you to drive at the speed limit.
2. Normal traffic finds other routes, thus the only people who have to use the speed bumps … are the residents who actually asked for them to be installed.
3. Then there’s the gits like myself who “punish” the residents for putting the humps in the first place. I drive a very low, very loud, very hard sprung car that hates bumps, and I am also of a very lazy nature anyway, so I don’t bother to change gear going between bumps. The outcome? I drive between one bump and another in first gear, the car revs raising up to 4 – 5000 rpm with noisy induction, exhaust with over-run, before braking ( … race brakes so very squeaky!) – and I go *oh so slowly* over them, which rather amusingly ends up with a whole string of traffic forming behind me.

Shame.

If they are going to punish me – then I will punish them.


Simon.