please see below a response from Nick Whelan at Stockport Highways, in relation to his thoughts on removal of speed humps. my comments back to him are those shown in blue.
Schemes of traffic calming are generally introduced in response to problems of excess speed by vehicles. They are usually instigated by residents raising a petition or at the request of local Councillors. Of course they are! What resident isn’t going to want less traffic on their own local road?I’d like less traffic on Stockport Road in Marple as I’m sure would many local residents). They are introduced following consultation (but seemingly only with local residents; WHY? the very people who have asked for the scheme in the first instance, NOT the commuting public who might regularly use the road in question) Chester Road in Hazel Grove a case in point here, a petition by the residents, that the local councillor took to consultation and ultimately implemented, but then lost the original petition and not consulting anyone other than the people who’d asked for it in the first place, hardly democratic! The post scheme consultation also concluding that the road was considered less safe after the scheme was implemented... now there's a result!), democratic approval, legal advertising and consideration of objections. The removal of a traffic calming scheme requires the same procedure, with consultation, approval, legal advertising and consideration of objections to the removal. This process is perfectly possible to carry out and costs of scheme removal could indeed be minimised if this were to take place at the same time as a road is re-surfaced. If there is a particular scheme which someone would like to be considered for removal we would invite them to raise a petition of residents of that street (Why only the residents of the Street?) requesting that we do so. If we receive such a petition we will approach the local Councillors to see if they wish us to undertake a formal consultation process. This consultation would need to include consideration of the likely impact on vehicle speeds if a scheme were removed. It may also need to consider the possible need to revoke any accompanying 20mph speed limit which may not be considered feasible to enforce following removal of the scheme. Whilst there may be possible benefit from reduced emissions from vehicles no longer speeding up and slowing down the residents of any one street (why are local residents again the only ones considered) may also consider that the removal of the humps could lead to an increase in traffic on their street, so negating the benefits from possible emission reduction from individual vehicles. (Does Mr Whelan think that people simply look for streets to drive down for fun, that don’t have speed humps, thereby increasing traffic levels? Removing them might simply allow people more options for their morning commute that aren’t hindered by speed humps; it won’t increase the number of cars on the road, it will simply improve the regular flow of traffic within a highly congested and increasingly “humped” network of roads). Whilst we have had requests from individuals about removal of particular traffic calming features (generally the one outside their house), (I thought you said that most schemes were requested BY local residents) we have yet to receive a petition requesting removal of a complete scheme. (you have now!!! ... Please remove the scheme on Chester Road, it was undemocratically implemented and the road is now considered less safe than before. Please make sure you consult road users as well as local residents when conducting consultation to this request). Please note that in respect of individual features these generally cannot be removed in isolation as this will lead to excessive spacing of features. Where this has occurred (e.g. to accommodate a new development access) then it has been necessary to replace the feature with one or more new ones to retain an acceptable spacing.
