Wharfdale Road not 20mph

The following was submitted by local resident Andrew Long regarding a current Council Consultation about speed limits in the area.

As this was of special interest to the folks who live along Wharfdale Road, I felt it would be worth posting it here.

Please add your comments below as I'm sure our Councillors will be interested in what local people have to say as compared to just "ticking" the boxes of the questionnaire.

Islington Council is proposing to reduce the speed limit in the west Islington area, which includes many of the streets around King's Cross.  They are seeking public feedback through a questionnaire recently distributed to residents as well as through an online survey (link below).  They have also deployed a team to travel door to door asking residents for their opinion.
 
It should be noted several roads are not included in the 20mph zone including Wharfdale Road and Caledonian Road as an aim of this proposal is to drive more traffic on to these roads which will result in an even more unpleasant roading system for cyclists, pedestrians and residents.  The questions posed by Islington in their questionnaire does not reflect this and does not give an option for the speed on all roads to be reduced.  This has been typical of recent Islington questionnaires with simple yes/no responses (see http://www.kingscrossenvironment.com/2009/04/do-you-or-do-you-not-want-more-tall-buildings-in-the-borough.html)
 
Local resident John Ashwell has identified a number of options to making these busy roads safer - pinch points in the road to force the traffic to slow down, a proper hard edge to cycle lanes instead just painted areas that have all but worn away, and cameras to capture speeding drivers. 
 
If you would like a blanket 20mph zone throughout the area, please make note of this when you respond to the survey.
http://www.islington.gov.uk/Council/CouncilNews/Consultation/feedbackfinder2/consultations/2009/boroughwest_20mph2.asp
 
Best regards,
Andrew

Please comment below...

Comments

[John Ashwell]

I too would like to support the points raised by Andrew regarding the survey. It is absolutely obvious that these results cannot be relied upon given the flawed information provided by those undertaking the survey. Public money (our taxes!) continue to be spent on flawed surveys that do not provide adequate information for people to make an informed choice. Clearly a 20MPH speed limit on all roads EXCEPT those in the Kings Cross Gyratory is not in the interests of Kings Cross as a whole - not just for those of us living on Wharfdale and the Cally, as it will make this appalling bit of 1960's road design yet more of a racetrack than it currently is as motorists are encouraged off the surrounding roads.

[Stephan Schulte]

Regardless of these consultations, is anything really going to change? The real issue is SPEEDERS, NOT THEIR SPEED. I don't believe the issue of 20 or 30 mph on Wharfdale or frankly any other roads is the problem. I believe that ENFORCEMENT is the problem.

Currently motorists SPEED down Wharfdale Road at 40 mph - hitting the gas as soon as they turn onto Whardale from York Way. Let see some mechanism to focus on the lawbreakers rather then change the speed limit - or does anyone really believe that someone is going to go slower just because a new speed sign has been posted!

Frankly, I would like to see the Council start to use the type of signs pictured in the posting throughout the Borough - stating that "Hidden cameras are in operation." This would deter excessive speed, anything else is a joke. And yes I should mention that I AM A MOTORIST.

I challange the Council to try this approach on Wharfdale Road and see if this gets the desired result!

[william perrin]

the tfl position seems to be that because the kings cross gyratory is an arterial route there shoudl not be a 20mph limit, lower than the prevailing 30mph. tfl have some sort of general policy on this. on a big high capapity road you can just about see their point - 30 mph is 50% faster than 20 mph, increasing traffic flow.

on the kings cross gyratory though this argument doesn't hold. the gyratory north of pentonville road is very short about 700 metres - along this distance the difference between 20 mph and 30 mph is only 25 seconds if you go flat out at those two speeds and don't allow for any acceleration or corners or traffic lights.

however one has to factor in the traffic lights. a speed reduction in a journey around the one way system only makes a difference to journey times if the speed changes are greater than the amount of time spent sitting at traffic lights. my hunch is that the light phasing on the gyratory makes it nearly impossible to get around in one movement without hitting a light somewhere. as the time spent sitting at lights by simple observation is far more than 25 seconds a reduction in speed to 20 mph on this short system. even if you assign a probability of only say 0.75 to sitting at traffic lights the calculation still holds.

if one factors in congestion and the sharp corners of the gyratory which require slowing down and accelerating then the calaculations become stronger to supprot the case that a reduction in speed limits won't make a differnece net to traffic flow on this short, awkward loop.

the same holds also for the gyratory system as is continues south of pentonville road. tfl should demonstrate their calulations and use that to ease their overarchign poilicy in this area for the good of the community. the first article fo te highway code is that pedestrians have right of way - tfl should act accordingly.

will post up my maths in due course

[Ian]

Once again, we are patronised with 'initiatives' designed to sound nice, but in reality changing very little. The problem is not speeding in the small roads outside of Wharfdale and Caledonian Roads - which of these little streets is long enough for anybody to speed? - the problem, as frequently mentioned here, is the whole 70's design of this ludicrous 'gyratory'. It cuts through two residential areas in Wharfdale and Caledonian Road, where the council is obviously happy to disrupt and pollute. The regeneration of KX was the ideal time to rethink the whole bodged traffic routing here, but, predictably, they haven't bothered to think about it, instead rushing to supplicate themselves to developers who couldn't give a monkey's about the people who live here (as we saw with the bridge scheme). Fannying about with speed limits is about the limit of the ambition and concern of the council for local people. Really pathetic and trivial attempt at looking like they are 'doing something'. Do they think there are votes in it?

[Andrew]

Ian - interestingly TfL is in the final stages of completing a study into the junctions of Euston Road/Pentonville Road/York Way which also included a review of making the bottom end of York Way two way and thereby relieving much of the traffic from Wharfdale Road and lower Caledonian Road. This change is, in my mind, the first step of "fixing" the awful King's Cross Gyratory.

However I understand the result of this report will be that it isn't feasible to make this change.

I also understand that while Camden and Islington and have been involved in this study, they are not responsible for it and from what I can see TfL can do what they like without any consideration for the residents or any non-car users in this area. There are so many disconnected studies that joined up thinking across council boundaries when TfL is involved is non-existent resulting in an awful, noisy, polluted area to live.

Camden also seem to be pro-car and anti-pedestrian, anti-bicycle at the moment so I don't think they are going to be supportive of removing the gyratory (this is based on observation, others may take a different view on this).

[Sophie Talbot]

Couple of things:

1. I am sick and tired of the number of studies and consultations going on here see:
http://www.kingscrossenvironment.com/2009/03/chaos-and-complexity-rule-for-traffic-in-kings-cross.html. We need action, we certainly do not need any further studies.

2. I'm also very frustrated that the surveys and consultations being carried out appear to be invalid and unreliable - breaking two of the three fundamental rules of such research (the third being parsimony, I can't comment on that cos I don't how how much we are being charged). That council officers and contractors/consultants can continually get away serving up such crap is astounding. I've replied to Andrew Long's email about the latest slapdash consultation as follows:

"Well spotted Andrew. This fault in survey technique makes the entire piece of work invalid from a very basic research perspective. To use any of the responses gained when we know interviewers have unwittingly been giving incorrect information, even if just on this one issue, invalidates the lot. Should LB Islington choose to continue with any part of it they would be on extremely shakey ground. Again, you are quite right, the whole exercise now needs to be binned, properly redesigned, interviewers properly briefed, and restarted. It is of increasing concern that LB Islington consulations in this area seem to be of such poor quality."

I copied this to LBI, local councillors and Emily Thornberry. No response as yet.

Cheers!

Sophie
www.cookie.org.uk

[Andrew]

Perhaps these signs would help....
http://www.fubiz.net/2009/08/05/slower-is-better/