Harringay online

Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!

As you probably know. Warham has been one of the roads closed for resurfacing this week.

The quiet and carlessness has been a treat, made all the better as far as my three year is concerned by the diggers and lorries that make periodic trips up and down the road. .

Yesterday, my neighbour who has lived on Warham for 20 years came to the garden gate for a chat. He mentioned how since they put the speed bump outside his house, he has noticed the plaster cracking in his house and the increased noise of cars/lorries going over the bump. He fervently wished they would not put the bump back.

So what if they didn't put the bumps back. Would we miss them?
Warham sans voituresTime Travel

Tags for Forum Posts: Ladder traffic solutions, Wightman Road, speed humps

Views: 380

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I would not miss them. Yes, cracks in plaster, noise... if someone is determined to speed they don't care about the bumps. Hell put them back to two-way and we'd not get trucks using us as a short cut anymore either.

But as StroudGreen.ORG have reminded us, this site does not influence council policy.
I live near a bump as well - but I really wouldn't want to go back to having my attention being taken up with worrying about just how fast was that going??? as drivers tested just how fast they could go down (or up) the road. Or the fear of knowing that one of my children straying off the pavement edge was such a dangerous thing.
This is the contemporary thought, and has been for the last 6 years, that two way is more beneficial, there is more courtesy, and cars can't speed because of the possibility of collision, one car pulls over to one side to allow for the other to pass. It will be another 5 years before the council catch on. I'll have a conversation with
Planning and highways to see what their views and attitude is and get back.
The problem is that this may be contemporary thought but doesn't necessarily reflect reality. My experience here when the two way system was in operation was that for every X courteous encounters there would also be the meeting of two people who would not move their cars for anyone, no sirree. Their testosterone-crazed rage (sorry, I generalise - but was usually men) would be a wonder to behold, but was usually pretty annoying for those behind them and the residents and witnesses all around.
I agree Alison, as long as the two vehicles in question were Smart cars with courteous drivers, this doesn't take into account wider vehicles, vans, rubbish trucks etc. The one way system is far better, slightly inconvenient sometimes, but I would imagine Insurance premiums have dramatically declined, especially for replacement wing mirrors and side panels.

I spent many an evening with my popcorn twitching out of the front window watching the aggressive stand offs between two drivers and the traffic backing up in both directions, something had to change - thankfully it did.
I don't suppose they thought of doing anything like toss a coin or paper-scissors-stone? And I bet they liked the audience too.
This is thought provoking Matt. Though sometimes it seems that today's (or this decade's) current thinking doesn't always work in practice - or perhaps not in a particular location.

The overwhelming majority of people may indeed be careful and courteous. But it only takes two stubborn idiots to create gridlock by refusing to move, with their cars nose-to-nose. And one driver can cause a serious accident, by deciding that, yes, they can speed.

This is not just theoretical. In 2001 the Council prevented parking on one side of Park View Road N17 (alongside Down Lane Park). Before then:
● Parked cars were damaged by vehicles passing too close.
● There were disputes and even violent fights between drivers.
● Emergency vehicles had trouble getting through. (One resident was stuck in the ambulance on her way to hospital.)

Aren't our streets part of our 'commons'? With increasing car use in residential streets an example of the Tragedy of the Commons? I'm not suggesting there's a single correct 'solution'. But that conflicting interests can be balanced and problems managed. With the ideal being an ongoing dialogue between the professionals - traffic engineers, urban planners, emergency services etc - and local residents.

(Councillor Tottenham Hale ward)
So residents suffer with speed humps outside their homes because some of the people using the road as a cut through were idiots.
The humps are not the problem per se, the idiots are. There's no point making it easier for inconsiderate and illegal road users, if you can reduce or eliminate them, then the goal has been reached.
You might not miss them, but speeds of vehicles on Warham would increase considerably.

I took video on Fairfax before the humps were installed - it was a (narrow) racetrack

It will be interesting to see if they build the humps in the old style or in the new best practice (and adopted by Haringey) 'sinusoidal' version which are round top humps with a significant radius at the bottom of the ramp

I don't know.

I remember when they weren't there - they were introduced just after the one way system and to me the one way system was the thing that made the driving safer in the area. But one downside of one way streets is that people can bomb down them without slowing down for people coming the other way - hence (I guess) the bumps.

I was just marvelling at the wondrously smooth road that is now Hewitt the other day. Does anyone know what the intentions are as regards the humps?

Enjoy Warham while it lasts, must be lovely!

I wouldn't miss them either.

RSS

Advertising

© 2020   Created by Hugh.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service