Battle of wills over speed cameras
A battle of wills appears to be brewing along a busy Shropshire road – between residents who want speed cameras and vandals intent on destroying them.
Holyhead Road – the former A5 trunk road – from Oakengates to Wellington has a 30mph speed limit, partly enforced by cameras operated by the West Mercia Safer Roads Partnership.
But a camera at Bennett’s Bank in Wellington was permanently removed in 2010 after it was repeatedly set on fire.
On January 4 this year arsonists attacked a camera on the Station Road stretch of the route, a short distance away in Ketley.
Then in the early hours of yesterday morning, a camera outside New College in King Street in Wellington, a short distance from the main road, was damaged after vandals set fire to it using an accelerant.
But the apparent public dislike of cameras contrasts sharply with calls for them to be introduced in areas where speeding traffic leaves residents in fear.
Wellington town councillors have now called for mobile cameras to be used at Bennett’s Bank, after claiming ‘boy racers’ have plagued the area since the camera was removed.
And last year Holyhead Road in Oakengates became a Community Concern site – an area where mobile speed cameras are set up in response to a series of complaints from members of the public.
Vicki Bristow, of the Safer Roads Partnership, said vandalism of speed cameras was not unique to Telford – and that the partnership also received requests daily from members of the public wanting to see them used.
She said: “Vandalism happens nationwide, but Telford is the area that suffers most in West Mercia, probably because it is the biggest urban area.
“Apart from minor damage to the casing, the camera set on fire in Wellington hasn’t been damaged at all so no offences have been lost.”
She said many people were under the impression that speed cameras were being turned off nationally – but that is not true.
She said: “We have some sites that drop off then new ones come up.
“And on a daily basis we get contacted by local residents asking: “Can we have speed enforcement?”
Comments for: "Battle of wills over speed cameras"
bob
Where there is a genuine need for road calming measures there is a clear practical consideration in what is the best and most cost effective way of reducing traffic speeds. Cameras are inherently expensive and require constant maintenance often not producing an effective revenue to warrant their cost. In areas of known accident or of high density pedestrian use schools colleges ect the objective should surely be to instigate obstructive road calming measures by use of narrower roads bollards and prioritised traffic direction. After all isn't safety the real issue ?
Telford Steve
I'd rather have cops and not cameras, but then I'd rather have cameras than bloody speed bumps.
roadrunner
In all my years of travelling that road, the only accidents I have ever seen (and there used to be quite a few at one time) were always on the Arleston Traffic lights/crossroads. Unfortunately they are allowed to put a speed camera within a mile (I believe) of an accident spot, so they put it not where it is likely to stop accidents but where it is most likely to make money...such is road safety in the UK.
Kingyamamoto
If I recall correctly a freedom of information request disclosed that most of the accidents used to justify the siting of the Bennets Bank camera were actually on Ketley Brook roundabout. Furthermore the causation factors for each individual accident were on the whole, rear end shunts with whiplash as the predominent injury.
Strange really when the former head of the West Mercia Safety Camera Partnership was regularly using the pages of this paper to spread his propaganda. I recall his favourite phrase well "I make no apology for saving lives"
Well perhaps the Shropshire Star could do another Freedom of Information Act request and find out how many lives have been lost along Bennets Bank since the camera was removed. Or indeed obtain before and after accident rates.
Personally I'm all in favour of reducing casualties on the roads but it must be proportionate and effective and must be done by public consent.
The public always have and always will see speed cameras as revenue collecting devices.
What the public want is a combination of visible road policing, traffic calming and driver education. Not indiscriminate machines hated by the majority of the tax paying public who pay for their upkeep and the wages of those who maintain them.
Whilst any law abiding person would not condone criminal behaviour surely the time has come when the truth has to out and these despised objects are removed unless solid justification for their existance in any given location can be demonstrated beyond doubt.
Sarah W
They need to move that further down the road near the junction with Vineyard Road and King Street, they'd make a mint!!
Bill
Better still, traffic lights and a right turn lane.....
roadrunner
I hope you are joking, Bill. There's nothing wrong with the junction of King Street and Vineyard road. I use it 7 days a week at all hours and never found a problem with it, apart from the fact that people turning right out of it don't always get far enough over to the right, to allow people turning left to get past. We have far too many traffic lights in Telford as it is thank you.
salopian-sparky
Why are people willing to commit a criminal offence,and risk a prison term?
shurley the simple option is to keep to the speed limmits
Roger
People’s perception of Speed Cameras is that they are money making ventures and located to maximise income. The best example is, or was, the speed cameras on the approach to the Royal Shrewsbury Hospital. Speeding vehicles are a fact of life there because people are being rushed to Hospital for good reasons. Relatives are driving at perhaps higher speeds because of the anxiety for the conditions of their kin having been taken into hospital or calls for the final vigil. The ambulances are forgiven but the private cars are not. It seems very unfair to profit from the vulnerable in potentially tragic circumstances.
That's the problem with cameras, they are unforgiving. Even in the wee small hours of the morning without another vehicle or pedestrian in sight enforcement and fines continue relentlessly.
Applying 20MPH speed limits and cameras in accident black spots and outside schools, in school hours, may be justified. Traffic calming it not an effective tool. In this part of Shrewsbury they tend to cause drivers to speed up to "get the gap" in the bottlenecks and the speed bumps are a distraction which interferes with steering and diverts the attention of the driver away from the danger they are placed to protect.
I see nothing wrong with random hand held speed checks carried out at accident black spots and sites of particular danger. These can be carried out by enforcement offices and do not need the expense of policemen. In extremely risky situations the use of automated "slow down" or actual speed display signs are effective. For minor breaches I see nothing wrong with an informal warning letter pointing out the impact on drivers point collections and cost of insurance rises if caught again but I would reserve the use of fines and points to speeding in excess of 25% over the limit or repeated minor offences or involvement in an incident. A code of practice approach.
The impersonal, no consideration of circumstances cliff edge projected by cameras just seems unfair.
Bill Telford
In my opinion most Telford streets should have the speed limit reduced to 20 mph due to the sheer volume of traffic (cars and pedestrians) and the "Wild West" approach of some drivers; driving through lights long after they have changed (Hadley Manor Heights lights one of the worst) drivers using bus/taxi lanes (Haybridge Road Fire station) and drivers irresponsibly double parked. Add to this boy racers (Teford centre ring road and Wrekin Retail Park), the lack of speed cameras, speed bumps, traffic wardens and police presence and it,s little wonder that some drivers push their approach to driving in a considerate manner to levels of anarchy. Some drivers will never self regulate so let,s see some robust enforcement with the relevant authority using every means at their disposal.
Bill
Part of the problem along this stretch of roads (from Wellington via King Street and the Holyhead Road all the way to Oakengates) is incredible driver frustration because there is
1) no coherent traffic management plan,
2) uncontrolled parking creating obstructions without any management or penalties applied (especially on Mill Bank)
3) an intensive bus service so large vehicles are constantly manoeuvring round obstructions
4) poorly designed and positioned bus stops with either no or undersized lay-bys
The worst part is Holyhead Road from The Cock traffic lights to Ketley Dingle - the Whitehouse Hotel was allowed to be built too close to the road (some questions should be answered by the planners and councillors responsible) , then a cycle lane was inserted on the pavement (why?) so there are no bus laybys at this point, meaning intense traffic queuing when the students are moving in or out of TCAT. Next problem is the right turn into Regent Street, which stacks westbound traffic back to the Bucks Head lights and beyond. Then you have the narrow sections through Bennetts Bank with residents parking and undersized bus laybys (built when buses were 30 feet long and 6 feet wide, not over 40 feet by 8 feet as they are now).
How you sort this out without making compulsory purchases on the south side of Holyhead Road to create a wider road, bus laybys and a right turn lane for Regent Street goodness only knows. Re-routing all the buses through Haybridge Road so they stop outside TCAT and not outside the Whitehouse might help
Ziggy
Does any one know what the accident stats are regarding Bennetts Bank now that notorious camera has been removed ?