WALTHAM FOREST: 20mph cameras could be installed next year

East London and West Essex Guardian Series: WALTHAM FOREST: 20mph cameras could be installed next year WALTHAM FOREST: 20mph cameras could be installed next year

A TRIAL of hi-tech speed cameras in one of the borough's 20mph zones could begin next year.

Transport for London (TfL) have proposed testing the devices, which would digitally monitor the average speed of a vehicle, as a way of tackling road casualties and providing an alternative to speed humps.

Last Christmas it was revealed that Hale End Road in Highams Park was one location being considered for the trial, which may also operate in Camden, Hackney and Southwark, but this is the first time a possible timescale has been announced.

TfL have also this month started to approach firms that could supply the technology, although funding for the scheme hinges on the outcome of the Government's comprehensive spending review in October.

Road safety campaigners, such as 'Freewheeler' of the Crap Cycling and Walking in Waltham Forest website, have welcomed the proposals.

He said: "This is brilliant news.

"The traffic calming in 20mph zones is plainly failing to curb vehicle speeds in Waltham Forest, especially when they involve rubber speed cushions.

"I was recently in a minicab and the driver was doing 40mph in the Church Hill 20mph zone."

A TfL spokesman said: “Across London, we have seen the number of collisions more than halve at locations where speed cameras have been installed.

"This has helped contribute to a 52 per cent decrease in the number of people killed or seriously injured on the capital’s roads since the mid to late nineties.

“TfL is working with a number of London boroughs on a potential trial of average speed camera technology, in order to reduce road casualties in residential areas. As part of this, we have recently published a pre-qualification questionnaire to find out which companies could deliver this technology.

"Average speed camera technology could help reduce the number of accidents on roads with high numbers of speed-related collisions, and act an alternative to road humps."

He added: “As with many of TfL’s projects, the delivery of this is dependent on the outcome of the Government’s spending review in October. Subject to this, our intention would be to start installing this technology next year."

A council spokesman said: "TfL has recently gone out to tender on four sites, one of which one is Hale End Road. We are currently awaiting the outcome, as it is not guaranteed that all four sites will go ahead."

Waltham Forest’s Cabinet Member for Environment, Cllr Clyde Loakes, said: “The Council has been working extremely hard to reduce the number of road accidents on the borough’s streets, and in the last financial year has managed to reduce the number of accidents [in which people are killed or seriously injured] from 88 to 58.

“While we’re extremely proud of this reduction, we also know that one injury is one too many and that we have to explore new ideas if we’re to ensure pedestrians and motorists are as safe as possible.

"We think that average speed cameras could help us reduce the number of accidents even further, and hope that TfL decide to trial this scheme in Waltham Forest.”

What do you think? Leave your comments below or contact reporter Daniel Binns on 0779 547 6625 or via email at dbinns@london.newsquest.co.uk

Click here to follow the Waltham Forest Guardian on Twitter

Comments (16)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

3:24pm Thu 19 Aug 10

Earle Martin says...

How great that this paper is now getting comments on the news from Freewheeler. About time the bloke got some recognition. Anyway, prepare for incoming comment storm in 3, 2, 1...
How great that this paper is now getting comments on the news from Freewheeler. About time the bloke got some recognition. Anyway, prepare for incoming comment storm in 3, 2, 1... Earle Martin
  • Score: 0

3:46pm Thu 19 Aug 10

Dreadster says...

Great, I'd agree to these cameras on condition that they remove ALL of the speed bumps and sleeping policemen (no pun intended) from the borough. Also that a proper consultation is held with road users and residents about where they place these limits and restrictions. Otherwise they need to expect Dutch style opposition to their new technology.

The vast majority of drivers do not drive badly or irresponsibly. A tiny un-policed minority are the ones causing the problems for us all. I suspect this scheme like many before it may be more about tax collection than road safety. Its about time that money wasted on speed cameras was spent on under bonnet technology that prevents cars from being driven over the limit in restricted areas! This technology could also be linked to drivers licences and insurance databases so that problem drivers can be controlled or restricted even further.
Great, I'd agree to these cameras on condition that they remove ALL of the speed bumps and sleeping policemen (no pun intended) from the borough. Also that a proper consultation is held with road users and residents about where they place these limits and restrictions. Otherwise they need to expect Dutch style opposition to their new technology. The vast majority of drivers do not drive badly or irresponsibly. A tiny un-policed minority are the ones causing the problems for us all. I suspect this scheme like many before it may be more about tax collection than road safety. Its about time that money wasted on speed cameras was spent on under bonnet technology that prevents cars from being driven over the limit in restricted areas! This technology could also be linked to drivers licences and insurance databases so that problem drivers can be controlled or restricted even further. Dreadster
  • Score: 0

3:51pm Thu 19 Aug 10

andychurchill says...

It made me chuckle when someone claimed that the 20mph zones were self policing and that they didn't need additional cameras. They also wondered why they were being proposed when other counties were scraping them.

I've heard about these average speed cameras previously and wondered when they would get around to trialling them. It will prevent drivers from cheating and breaking at the last minute, and force them to abide by a limit that is there for a reason.

And yes, it probably will bring in more revenue for the councils, but it will also save lives - those who are against them are clearly selfish, speed-obsessed, or perpetually tardy, and find themselves having to rush around from A to B all the time, none of which is an excuse not to curb their behaviour behind the wheel. If they have an issue with having to cough up fines every time then there is a simple solution - drive slower.

Can anyone tell me if repeat offenders caught speeding get points on their licence as well as fines?
It made me chuckle when someone claimed that the 20mph zones were self policing and that they didn't need additional cameras. They also wondered why they were being proposed when other counties were scraping them. I've heard about these average speed cameras previously and wondered when they would get around to trialling them. It will prevent drivers from cheating and breaking at the last minute, and force them to abide by a limit that is there for a reason. And yes, it probably will bring in more revenue for the councils, but it will also save lives - those who are against them are clearly selfish, speed-obsessed, or perpetually tardy, and find themselves having to rush around from A to B all the time, none of which is an excuse not to curb their behaviour behind the wheel. If they have an issue with having to cough up fines every time then there is a simple solution - drive slower. Can anyone tell me if repeat offenders caught speeding get points on their licence as well as fines? andychurchill
  • Score: 0

5:05pm Thu 19 Aug 10

Walthamstow noob says...

As far as I understand it, anyone caught speeding is automatically due 3 points unless they agree to a 'driver awareness course'. Those are only offered where people haven't gone over the limit by excessive amounts, and you can only go on one in 3 years. Plenty of info here:
https://www.askthe.p
olice.uk
As far as I understand it, anyone caught speeding is automatically due 3 points unless they agree to a 'driver awareness course'. Those are only offered where people haven't gone over the limit by excessive amounts, and you can only go on one in 3 years. Plenty of info here: https://www.askthe.p olice.uk Walthamstow noob
  • Score: 0

8:21pm Thu 19 Aug 10

Phillipa on a bike says...

I can't see why anyone would object to this proposal. They will make drivers obey the speed limit and they will benefit everyone by getting rid of speed humps.
Average speed cameras are much better than fixed ones, where drivers just slam on the brakes, then accelerate once they are past.
I can't see why anyone would object to this proposal. They will make drivers obey the speed limit and they will benefit everyone by getting rid of speed humps. Average speed cameras are much better than fixed ones, where drivers just slam on the brakes, then accelerate once they are past. Phillipa on a bike
  • Score: 0

9:16pm Thu 19 Aug 10

hotredman says...

Another money making cash cow scam from tfL, when does it stop; they would be soon charging people for passing wind, claiming its damaging the environment.
I hope they get damaged, these thing are never a trial, they are PERMANENT, they say its a trial or test not to get much of an outcry from the public.
These cameras would also prove useless if the person has to stop after entering the camera i.e. say someone crosses the road or let antoehr car out. You can then rip it up to 40mph and your average would possibly be less than 20mph; what a dopey waste of money.

One thing I want to see done is seriously prosecute people driving on the phone. At least every day I am driving I see at least on average 5-10 people on their phone. I am sure some of these people contribute to accidents and get away with it.

As for vehicle speed limiters linked to GPS, they would never do it as it wont make them money.
Another money making cash cow scam from tfL, when does it stop; they would be soon charging people for passing wind, claiming its damaging the environment. I hope they get damaged, these thing are never a trial, they are PERMANENT, they say its a trial or test not to get much of an outcry from the public. These cameras would also prove useless if the person has to stop after entering the camera i.e. say someone crosses the road or let antoehr car out. You can then rip it up to 40mph and your average would possibly be less than 20mph; what a dopey waste of money. One thing I want to see done is seriously prosecute people driving on the phone. At least every day I am driving I see at least on average 5-10 people on their phone. I am sure some of these people contribute to accidents and get away with it. As for vehicle speed limiters linked to GPS, they would never do it as it wont make them money. hotredman
  • Score: 0

7:41am Fri 20 Aug 10

rubberneck says...

We do need these and even chicanes in every street to stop the speeding drivers.
We do need these and even chicanes in every street to stop the speeding drivers. rubberneck
  • Score: 0

10:06am Fri 20 Aug 10

Augustus says...

The speed at which some lunatics drive along residential streets, even where there are speed humps, is staggering. Something clearly needs to be done about it before a tragedy ensues.
The speed at which some lunatics drive along residential streets, even where there are speed humps, is staggering. Something clearly needs to be done about it before a tragedy ensues. Augustus
  • Score: 0

11:50am Fri 20 Aug 10

hotredman says...

hmmm, I guess that would make you claridger then; as you always was going on about chicanes, lol.

This is only going to fuel people to drive with dodgy plates even more.
hmmm, I guess that would make you claridger then; as you always was going on about chicanes, lol. This is only going to fuel people to drive with dodgy plates even more. hotredman
  • Score: 0

11:51am Fri 20 Aug 10

md-j says...

"20 years ago a LBWF highway engineer told me that the average cost of installing a road hump was £2000. Now they're admitting that they're of little use - and of course they don't collect revenue.
If revenue isn't the motivator, can someone explain why the cameras at Bakers Arms will nab you for stopping 20 seconds to put stuff in at the charity shop, but never seem to deter the bus drivers jumping red lights to turn right out of Hoe St into Lea bridge rd, to the danger, and sometimes stark terror, of motorists lawfully following a green light?

A much simpler way to reduce speed is for gov't to ban all vehicles with an acceleration greater than, say a Morris 1000. Just a stroke of the pen, no public infrastructure costs at all, and the burden on the maker to modify the vehicle. But how would the engineers raid our pockets if something so simple were in operation?
Can we not all think of countless cases where road schemes are brought in, then torn up a short while later, like a cjild bored with a new toy?
"20 years ago a LBWF highway engineer told me that the average cost of installing a road hump was £2000. Now they're admitting that they're of little use - and of course they don't collect revenue. If revenue isn't the motivator, can someone explain why the cameras at Bakers Arms will nab you for stopping 20 seconds to put stuff in at the charity shop, but never seem to deter the bus drivers jumping red lights to turn right out of Hoe St into Lea bridge rd, to the danger, and sometimes stark terror, of motorists lawfully following a green light? A much simpler way to reduce speed is for gov't to ban all vehicles with an acceleration greater than, say a Morris 1000. Just a stroke of the pen, no public infrastructure costs at all, and the burden on the maker to modify the vehicle. But how would the engineers raid our pockets if something so simple were in operation? Can we not all think of countless cases where road schemes are brought in, then torn up a short while later, like a cjild bored with a new toy? md-j
  • Score: 0

8:15pm Fri 20 Aug 10

fabster says...

The dependency this Council has on CCTV, Gatsos, Smart car traffic cameras, unmarked scanner vans, and now 20mph cameras... it all adds to creating a climate of being watched all the time.

On second thoughts, scrap the word dependency above and replace that with addiction.
The dependency this Council has on CCTV, Gatsos, Smart car traffic cameras, unmarked scanner vans, and now 20mph cameras... it all adds to creating a climate of being watched all the time. On second thoughts, scrap the word dependency above and replace that with addiction. fabster
  • Score: 0

11:27am Sat 21 Aug 10

Phillipa on a bike says...

The thing is 'fabster' none of this stops drivers jumping red lights or parking in cycle lanes. One reason is that this surveillance, which you are exeggerating out of all proportion, is not adequate to the scale of offending drivers.
The other reason is that even when drivers are caught the fines are far too low. Fine a driver £200 for every traffic offence and they would soon change their behaviour. A £30 ticket means nothing to someone who spends twenty or thirty thousand pounds on their gas guzzler.
The thing is 'fabster' none of this stops drivers jumping red lights or parking in cycle lanes. One reason is that this surveillance, which you are exeggerating out of all proportion, is not adequate to the scale of offending drivers. The other reason is that even when drivers are caught the fines are far too low. Fine a driver £200 for every traffic offence and they would soon change their behaviour. A £30 ticket means nothing to someone who spends twenty or thirty thousand pounds on their gas guzzler. Phillipa on a bike
  • Score: 0

2:45pm Sat 21 Aug 10

Augustus says...

Phillipa on a bike, when I questioned the driver of one of the 'up-periscope' cars why he wasn't nabbing cyclists riding along the pavement right next to him his reply was "they don't have numberplates mate", which at least had the merit of honesty. Not all traffic problems are caused by cars but we pedestrians get caught both ways.
Phillipa on a bike, when I questioned the driver of one of the 'up-periscope' cars why he wasn't nabbing cyclists riding along the pavement right next to him his reply was "they don't have numberplates mate", which at least had the merit of honesty. Not all traffic problems are caused by cars but we pedestrians get caught both ways. Augustus
  • Score: 0

5:11pm Sat 21 Aug 10

Phillipa on a bike says...

Augustus, the reason why people cycle on pavements is because of cars. Cars which are parked in cycle lanes. Cars which are parked in the cycle boxes at traffic lights. Cars which are driven dangerously.
Added to which everything is designed around making car travel as easy and convenient as possible. One-way streets are there for motorists, and inconvenience cyclists. Everything becomes an obstruction for cyclists, who naturally want the quickest, safest routes to wherever theyb are going.
Take a look at the news, Augustus. Who just ran down and seriously injured two pedestrians in Walthamstow? Not a cyclist but a car driver. Some cyclists may be a nuisance but you are very, very unlikely to be killed or injured by a cyclist in London.
I find it odd that people claim to be concerned about cyclists on pavements but never have a word to say about drivers on pavements or the council policy of allowing people to park their cars on pavements, like on Douglas Avenue to give just one of hundreds of examples.
Cyclists are in any case no worse than pedestrians. I always find it infuriating when the lights turn to green for me and when it is just me on my bike the pedestrians all surge across in front of me. Pedestrians also often don't look where they are going and step out in front of me, causing me to swerve out, just because they can't hear a car they assume no one is coming.
Augustus, the reason why people cycle on pavements is because of cars. Cars which are parked in cycle lanes. Cars which are parked in the cycle boxes at traffic lights. Cars which are driven dangerously. Added to which everything is designed around making car travel as easy and convenient as possible. One-way streets are there for motorists, and inconvenience cyclists. Everything becomes an obstruction for cyclists, who naturally want the quickest, safest routes to wherever theyb are going. Take a look at the news, Augustus. Who just ran down and seriously injured two pedestrians in Walthamstow? Not a cyclist but a car driver. Some cyclists may be a nuisance but you are very, very unlikely to be killed or injured by a cyclist in London. I find it odd that people claim to be concerned about cyclists on pavements but never have a word to say about drivers on pavements or the council policy of allowing people to park their cars on pavements, like on Douglas Avenue to give just one of hundreds of examples. Cyclists are in any case no worse than pedestrians. I always find it infuriating when the lights turn to green for me and when it is just me on my bike the pedestrians all surge across in front of me. Pedestrians also often don't look where they are going and step out in front of me, causing me to swerve out, just because they can't hear a car they assume no one is coming. Phillipa on a bike
  • Score: 0

12:57pm Mon 23 Aug 10

Aztext says...

I'll only agree to this if the advised speed limit is made to be 20mph which is shown on signs, but you have leeway up to 25mph. 26mph+ means a fine. Anything other than that is just a cash-in attempt imo. I have my driving test in November. With all these cameras I'm better off walking. Wait...is that the plan?
I'll only agree to this if the advised speed limit is made to be 20mph which is shown on signs, but you have leeway up to 25mph. 26mph+ means a fine. Anything other than that is just a cash-in attempt imo. I have my driving test in November. With all these cameras I'm better off walking. Wait...is that the plan? Aztext
  • Score: 0

12:59pm Mon 23 Aug 10

Aztext says...

Make that 23mph leeway. 25mph is a bit high. :D
Make that 23mph leeway. 25mph is a bit high. :D Aztext
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree