WANSTEAD: Rat run campaign to continue despite council concessions

East London and West Essex Guardian Series: Campaigners on Wellington Road Campaigners on Wellington Road

PEOPLE living in two roads used as a commuter rat run say measures introduced to alleviate the problem do not go far enough.

More than 100 concerned neighbours signed a petition calling on the council to take action to reduce the speed and volume of traffic in Wellington and Nelson roads in Wanstead.

They say motorists are cutting down the road, often at speed, to avoid the traffic lights in Hermon Hill.

At a council committee meeting held on Monday, councillors agreed to pay £1,000 for new slow markings and flashing signs telling drivers to reduce their speed on the roads.

Councillors told residents that data collected on traffic flow at the site did not indicate the problem was serious enough to warrant any further action, but did agree to revisit the issue if residents continued to be concerned.

Neighbours say the council’s method of data collection is flawed because it averages out traffic over the course of the day.

Those at the meeting were also visibly unimpressed with councillors who admitted they had visited the roads outside the rush hour when traffic problems are at their worst.

Wellington Road spokesman Peter Hodgkinson said: “We got together on Thursday (March 22) to discuss the measures.

“We welcome the acknowledgment that there is a problem, but we feel these measures only address speed, not the volume of traffic.

“We also felt it was unfortunate that councillors did not visit during the rush hour.”

Mr Hodgkinson added that campaigners would go back to the council and ask them to consider ways to reduce the flow of traffic in the roads.

“We are not traffic engineers,” he said. “So we would like to have a consultation where the council suggests ways to us in which they can reduce the amount of traffic on the road.”

Cllr Peter Goody, who represents Snaresbrook ward, said: “We have been down there, not during the rush hour I do admit, and there was absolutely no problem at the time.”

And he added: “I’m prepared to be told there is more of a problem in the rush hour, although I think increased volume is unlikely to lead to increased speed.”

Click here to follow the Wanstead & Woodford Guardian on Twitter

Comments (3)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

4:32pm Sun 25 Mar 12

Claxon Foghorn says...

It is quite a handy cut through as the High Street gets so busy, it would be a shame to stop it. I always try and drive very slow as the streets are narrow
It is quite a handy cut through as the High Street gets so busy, it would be a shame to stop it. I always try and drive very slow as the streets are narrow Claxon Foghorn
  • Score: 0

4:41pm Sun 25 Mar 12

toms cross says...

They also do a fair clip down Cowley Rd. Councillor Goody's comments beggar belief especially as he is supposed to represent the residents involved.
They also do a fair clip down Cowley Rd. Councillor Goody's comments beggar belief especially as he is supposed to represent the residents involved. toms cross
  • Score: 0

1:02pm Tue 27 Mar 12

mdj says...

'..on Monday, councillors agreed to pay £1,000 for new slow markings and flashing signs telling drivers to reduce their speed..'
Wow, that's cheap! 20 years ago when campaigning for speed reductions in James Lane E10, we were told that each road hump cost £1500 to put in, once all overheads were allowed for. Do you think some reluctant official was just possibly spinning a line?
We got the scheme we asked for about three years later, by which time the Council could claim it as their own.
Have these good people done a traffic count at rush hour, and made comparisons with main roads? James Lane had an amazing 1500/hr before the new A102 opened, as much as the north side of Trafalgar Square before they closed it.
'..on Monday, councillors agreed to pay £1,000 for new slow markings and flashing signs telling drivers to reduce their speed..' Wow, that's cheap! 20 years ago when campaigning for speed reductions in James Lane E10, we were told that each road hump cost £1500 to put in, once all overheads were allowed for. Do you think some reluctant official was just possibly spinning a line? We got the scheme we asked for about three years later, by which time the Council could claim it as their own. Have these good people done a traffic count at rush hour, and made comparisons with main roads? James Lane had an amazing 1500/hr before the new A102 opened, as much as the north side of Trafalgar Square before they closed it. mdj
  • 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