Fourth Derby speed camera axed but decision on three more is delayed
A FOURTH speed camera is to be axed in Derby by the city council after councillors agreed it had failed to cut accidents.
The camera in Nottingham Road, Chaddesden, will be removed after a study showed that in each of two three-year periods – one before and one after the camera's installation – there were nine crashes.
-
A speed camera in Nottingham Road, Chaddesden, like the one above, is to become the fourth in Derby to be axed by the city council after a review of their impact.
Three of the city's 19 fixed cameras have already been axed – and more could follow.
A decision on whether to get rid of the devices in Osmaston Park Road, Harvey Road and Derby Road, near Asda, was deferred last night.
This was despite a review showing accidents had fallen by at least a third since the cameras were installed a decade ago.
Cabinet members Chris Poulter and Matthew Holmes – who will ultimately make the decision – said they were not satisfied that the cameras had led to the improved record.
They said they were "convinced" alternative measures could be found to "make the removal of the fixed cameras safe".
Speed cameras are being switched off across the country as councils cut spending.
At last night's council meeting, at Saxon House, Mr Holmes insisted authorities needed to "move away" from relying on fixed speed cameras to improve road safety.
He said: "Speed is not always a factor in accidents.
"It's about driver education, road layout and introducing other road-safety measures."
In Osmaston Park Road, Harvey Road and Derby Road, a trial period showed average speeds scarcely went up when cameras were covered up.
On a 40mph stretch of Osmaston Park Road, the average speed of motorists increased from 29.1mph to 29.9mph when the camera was not in use, suggesting it was ineffective.
However, the number of motorists caught speeding at 46mph or more soared from 10 to 54 per day, suggesting the camera was worthwhile.
Similar results were found at Harvey Road and Derby Road.
Mr Poulter said more studies were needed to determine whether speed was a factor in crashes at the three sites.
Mr Holmes said speeding was not generally a problem in the areas and, in any case, flashing signs – which warn drivers of their speed – would be "more efficient", he said.
Labour councillor Barbara Jackson said the cameras should not be axed. She said: "The cameras have reduced accidents and are stopping people from being seriously injured or killed."
Councillor Hardyal Dhindsa said: "There is clear evidence these cameras make a difference in terms of reducing casualties."
9 Comments
by SpeedyReidy
Tuesday, February 14 2012, 1:23PM
“Good riddance to the cameras - I hope they're all recycled into something more useful (which could be absolutely anything really). The accident figures prove that they don't improve road safety. Furthermore, the money wasted on running these and the "$afety Camera" partnerships could go towards employing extra traffic officers, who would no doubt make much more of a positive difference.”
by superacetrace
Friday, February 03 2012, 12:52AM
“@lawsie1 If the illuminated sign is a new one,then its been recently calibrated,i would presume.
And as long as your speedo definately said 30mph,then at least you know its working properly :D”
by DeVlaeminck
Thursday, February 02 2012, 11:29PM
“Another shameful decision by our local councillors. If you don't break the speed limit then you have absolutely nothing to fear from speed cameras.”
by itsmemarko
Thursday, February 02 2012, 4:07PM
“why do they have to make special covers when there not working and cover them up ? why not just leave them as they are......another waste of money going where it really isn't needed.”
by lawsie1
Thursday, February 02 2012, 4:05PM
“Yes, you may drive slower but unless there is a road condition that prevents it then why should you?
If 30mph is the posted speed limit and conditions permit then you should do your best to stick to the speed limit. I just find it odd that the signs are happy for you to go slower, angry for you to go faster but poker faced at bang on the correct speed.”
by fredbargate
Thursday, February 02 2012, 3:40PM
“by lawsie1
Thursday, February 02 2012, 1:54PM
" If you do 30mph (the actual speed that you're supposed to be travelling at assuming clear conditions) they're completely indifferent and say nothing. Odd."
30 is the maximum speed, you may drive slower”
by JulieFulep
Thursday, February 02 2012, 2:41PM
“Yes, I agree that they shouldn't publicise these cameras being switch off. Show's what numpties run our council.”
by lawsie1
Thursday, February 02 2012, 1:54PM
“I agree that keeping the shells may be a deterrent to speeding. Despite my love of driving and my history of performance cars I have absolutely no problem with speed cameras themselves. My only issue is that I feel the speed limit needs to be posted in a prominent position as you approach a speed camera as in many cases you drive towards the camera asking "what was the speed limit here?". I drove along the A6 though Darley Dale at the weekend towards the camera and realised I had no idea whether it was 30 or 40 down there (I was convinced it was 40 but stayed at 30 and as it turned out at some point since I last drove down there it has been lowered to 30. You can still see the 40mph markings on the road).
In any case I would much prefer a speed camera over traffic calming or speed bumps. I live just off Chaddesden Lane and have to put up with the deteriorating bumps that ensure I have to drive onto the other side of the road to prevent grounding my car's nose in one case, and then the ones up Morley Road (the awful prism ones) on which I've cracked two oil sumps on over the last few years.
Incidentally, on the subject, those illuminating signs that tell you your speed as you're approaching have a small fault. If you go 31mph and upwards you'll see them angrily flashing and rightly so. If you go 29mph and below then they thank you. If you do 30mph (the actual speed that you're supposed to be travelling at assuming clear conditions) they're completely indifferent and say nothing. Odd.”
by Russell2011
Thursday, February 02 2012, 12:34PM
“Surely instead of advertising their removal just quietly removing the monitoring systems but keeping the shell there would be a speed deterent as driver would not know if they were on or off. Also visiting drivers to the area who have a higher potential of incident purely on the lack of being familiar with the area would slow down.”