Killing Speed: A Good Practice Guide to Speed
Management
© Slower Speeds Initiative 2001
SECTION 1
SPEED MATTERS
Speed management is central to road safety. Controlling speeds at appropriate levels is the most
significant action local authorities can take to meet national targets for reducing road traffic
casualties. In order to be effective, speed management requires active partnership between highway
authorities, the police and local communities. Only through such collaboration can the four Es of
speed management – Engineering, Enforcement, Education and Evaluation– deliver real road safety
gains.
This Guide aims to support local authorities in their responsibility for reducing road traffic
casualties and improving road safety. It brings together examples of effective speed management
schemes which have already been introduced by local authorities. It also provides guidance in
creating environments which reduce the danger caused to vulnerable road users by motor traffic, in
both urban and rural areas.
The majority of examples in the Guide come from within Britain, where the ‘transferability’ of
schemes is relatively unproblematic. There are also some examples of good practice from other
countries, in order to illustrate the potential benefits of particular approaches to speed management.
The Guide takes account of relevant national policies and policy guidance documents, including:
A New Deal for Transport – Better for Everyone: The Government’s White Paper on the Future of
Transport (DETR, 1998)
Modern Local Government: In Touch with the People (DETR, 1998)
Independent Inquiry into Inequalities in Health (Stationery Office, 1998)
Rural Safety Management (Institution of Highways and Transportation, 1999)
Places, Streets and Movement: A Companion Guide to Design Bulletin 32 (Residential Roads and
Footpaths) (DETR, 1998)
Saving Lives: Our Healthier Nation (Department of Health, 1999)
Tomorrow’s Roads – Safer for Everyone: The Government’s Road Safety Strategy and Casualty
Reduction Targets for 2010 (DETR, 2000)
New Directions in Speed Management: A Review of Policy (DETR, 2000)
Guidance on Full Local Transport Plans (DETR, 2000)
Transport 2010: The 10 Year Plan (DETR, 2000)
1.1 BENEFITS OF LOWER SPEEDS
Casualty reduction
There is overwhelming evidence that lower speeds result both in fewer collisions and in reduced
severity of collisions (Finch et al, 1994; MASTER Project, 1999). One of the most powerful
research findings of recent years has been that an increase in average speed of 1mph results in an
average 5% increase in the total number of crashes. Correspondingly, a 1mph reduction in average
speed results in an average 5% reduction in crashes. This means that even marginal reductions in
average speeds can result in major road safety gains.
Research by the Transport Research Laboratory shows that the reduction varies by road type, as
follows:
around 6% for urban roads with low average speeds
around 4% for medium speed urban roads and lower speed rural main roads
around 3% for higher speed urban roads and rural main roads
Furthermore, a reduction of just 2mph in average speeds could result in an annual saving of around
23,000 casualties nationally, including more than 200 deaths and around 3,500 serious casualties
(Taylor et al, 2000). The cost benefit to society from such a reduction in casualties would be over
£830 million per year (DETR, 2000a).
Fatality rates also increase sharply with speed. A recent government road safety message warns
drivers that they are twice as likely to kill someone when travelling at 35mph as they are at 30mph.
Yet already 90% of pedestrians hit by a car travelling at 30mph will be seriously injured. Nearly
half of them will be killed (DETR, 2000b).
There is also a distributional effect across society. The impact of vehicle speed is felt more by
children and young people and those living in poorer communities; child pedestrian fatalities in
socio-economic classes IV and V are five times those in class I. Moreover, reductions in speeds
driven result not only in fewer physically harmed children (over 60% reduction in casualties in
20mph zones) but also in fewer psychological problems too. This is often overlooked. Children
involved in road crashes appear to suffer more post-traumatic stress than adults, and girls slightly
more so than boys. Research suggests that over one third of children involved in such crashes suffer
post-traumatic stress, as opposed to one fifth of adults (Stallard et al, 1998).
The Independent Inquiry into Inequalities in Health (1998) made specific reference to the need to
address inequalities arising from traffic speed. It recommended:
"further measures to reduce traffic speed, by environmental design and modification of roads, lower
speeds in built up areas, and stricter enforcement of speed limits." (Independent Inquiry into
Inequalities in Health, 1998, p61)
Benefits to children and young people
Slower traffic speed is of immediate relevance to children and young people as they are major users
of the outdoor environment, through play, school travel, leisure activities and employment. Walking
and cycling are important for long-term health and well-being, and establishing a habit of physical
activity early in life helps to foster an active lifestyle in adulthood. Walking and cycling can help
children to learn about their local environment, acquire and develop road sense, assess risk and
learn to rely more upon themselves (Moore, 1986).
In addition, being physically active can help children build a strong sense of identity, make creative
use of their own minds and develop the capacity to take responsibility for themselves (Kegerreis,
1993). Speed management initiatives such as 20mph zones can significantly reduce parental fears
about traffic safety and traffic danger, at the same time as they promote children’s health.
Restoring freedoms to communities
There is an inverse relation between motor traffic volume and street level non-traffic activity: the
more traffic there is, the less streets are used by people (Appleyard, 1981). Neighbourhoods which
are dominated by high traffic volumes and speed are indicative of communities stripped of their
‘social capital’ (Kawachi et al, 1997), and quality of life declines. Cyclists and pedestrians find it
harder to get around. Older people and families with young children report that high road traffic
volumes result in insecurity (Kaeboe, 1992; Copenhagen Healthy City Project, 1994).
The severance effect of motor traffic reduces access for those travelling on foot or by bicycle to
health promoting facilities, including shops, health facilities, parks and friends. The latter is
important because of the health protective function of social support networks (Fox, 1988; Glass et
al, 1999) and the evidence that lack of social support can increase mortality from coronary heart
disease by up to four times (Greenwood et al, 1996). Good social support networks are most
important for vulnerable groups, such as children and the elderly.
Economic benefits
The government has stated that speed is the major factor in one third of all road crashes (DETR,
2000c). This figure is widely believed to be too low. Evidence from projects to reduce traffic speeds
indicates that speed is the major factor in up to 50% of all road crashes, and a contributory factor in
many more.
Yet applying even the government’s one third figure indicates the scale of economic impact caused
by speed-related crashes and casualties. DETR puts the total value of prevention for all crashes and
casualties in Britain during 1999 at an estimated £16.3 billion (DETR, 2000a). On these figures,
preventing the one third of road crashes in which the government identifies speed to be the major
factor would bring society a cost benefit of over £5 billion per year.
In addition, if reduced speeds help to reduce perceived and actual road danger, more people will
choose to make journeys by alternative modes to the car. Aside from providing increased
opportunities for people to be physically active (in itself a Department of Health recommendation in
order to help reduce the incidence of heart disease and stroke), such a change in travel behaviour
could also help to improve air quality.
This would be especially important in towns and cities, and could lead to a reduction in the demand
for health services. The Department of Health’s Committee on the Medical Effects of Air Pollution
(COMEAP) has estimated that periods of high air pollution may hasten up to 24,100 deaths each
year in Britain, mainly among older and less healthy people. A further 23,900 hospital admissions
are brought forward, in addition to extra admissions. This does not include chronic effects. It is
likely that long-term exposure to air pollutants also damages health, although this is currently not
quantifiable (Department of Health, 1998). Correlations between neighbourhood traffic volumes
and child respiratory symptoms have also been reported (Duhme et al, 1996; Oosterlee et al, 1996;
Boezen et al, 1999), including hospital admissions for asthma (Edwards et al, 1994; Weiland et al,
1994).
In suburban and rural areas there are likely to be comparable but so far unexamined problems of
health and social exclusion brought about by unsuitable traffic conditions on minor roads (which
constitute 60% of the overall road network in Britain). The Greenways and Quiet Roads projects
initiated by a number of local authorities, including Kent and Norfolk, attempt to tackle precisely
this issue.
Wider environmental benefits
Many additional benefits would result from drivers choosing appropriate speeds on all classes of
roads. On high speed roads and those in urban areas where smoother driving styles are achieved
through speed management, both fuel consumption and air pollution can be reduced through
lowering speeds. Driving at 50mph instead of 70mph can reduce fuel consumption by 30%.
Interurban road journeys thus offer immediate scope for reductions in CO2 emissions.
Half of all journeys made in Britain are less than two miles in length. When driven from a cold
start, these journeys produce disproportionate amounts of CO2. A road environment which
encourages more people to make these shorter journeys on foot or by bicycle should be a priority in
the quest for CO2 reductions.
Road traffic is the most important source of noise nuisance, and noise increases with speed. In
addition, lower and better enforced speed limits would reduce the pressure for road building by
increasing the capacity of the existing highway network. Lower speeds can also help to reduce the
damage done by heavy goods vehicles, and thus reduce road maintenance costs (Plowden and
Hillman, 1996).
1.2 GOVERNMENT POLICIES
Transport 2010: The 10 Year Plan
In July 2000 the government published its 10-year strategy for transport expenditure. A total of
£180 billion is to be invested in road and rail over the next 10 years. Of this, £59 billion is to be
spent on local transport, out of which £30 billion is allocated to highway maintenance. The
remainder amounts to a doubling of the funds available to highway authorities in 2000-01. There
are therefore unprecedented opportunities to fund environmentally sustainable programmes, such
as:
safer walking and cycling routes
more 20mph and home zones, particularly around schools
the extension of Rural Bus Subsidy Grants to cover more journeys serving market towns
a one third increase in the proportion of rural households living within 10 minutes’ walk of an
hourly (or better) bus service
Review of Speed Policy and Road Safety Strategy
The government set up a review of speed policy as an outcome of its Transport White Paper
(DETR, 1998). The review was:
"to develop a speed policy that takes account of the contribution of reduced speeds to environmental
and social objectives as well as to road safety." (DETR, 2000b, p7)
The findings of the review are reflected in the government’s Road Safety Strategy (DETR, 2000c);
both reports were published in March 2000.
At its launch, the Prime Minister affirmed that controlling speed lies at the heart of the Road Safety
Strategy (UK Government, 2000). Yet the Strategy focuses principally on compliance with existing
speed limits rather than on reducing them to more appropriate levels. It should therefore provide the
starting point for more ambitious local speed management strategies drawn up in conjunction with
local communities.
The Road Safety Strategy states that DETR will revise its guidance to local authorities "on the
setting of local speed limits to achieve appropriate and consistent national standards to reflect, as far
as possible, the needs of all road users on different classes of roads" (p49). In addition, it identifies
the need to:
develop new hierarchies of rural and urban roads defined by their function and quality, which would
combine flexibility at the local level with consistency nationally
provide better information to help drivers choose appropriate speeds, including more effective
speed limit signing, speed-activated signs at hazards, and additional signing for speed cameras
target enforcement (including use of speed cameras) to improve compliance and safety
make changes to simplify the making of speed limit orders by highway authorities.
The Road Safety Strategy encourages local authorities to use the increased powers they have to
introduce 20mph zones and speed limits in residential areas. It suggests that this should be a priority
in areas with large numbers of children, such as near schools. It also sets casualty reduction targets
for road traffic collisions by the year 2010 (against an average for 1994-98). These are:
a 40% reduction in the number of people killed or seriously injured
a 50% reduction in the number of children killed or seriously injured
a 10% reduction in the slight casualty rate
The government’s Guidance on Full Local Transport Plans (DETR, 2000d, para 186) repeats the
Road Safety Strategy’s call for local authorities to take action on speed management:
"local safety strategies should include speed management to achieve safe vehicle speeds on all
roads and ensure that the speed limits set are appropriate, consistent and enforceable (agreed with
the police), especially where children are about. Traffic calming measures should be employed to
encourage both speed reduction and compliance with limits... Self-enforcing 20mph zones have
proved very effective at reducing both the likelihood and severity of accidents."
As a public response, safety and environmental groups have advocated stronger action on speed,
and specifically more efforts targeted at speed reduction. For example, the national coordinating
group Transport 2000 has especially called for a speed limit reduction to 20mph on built-up roads,
in order to halve child deaths and serious injuries. Transport 2000 has also called for a Safe Streets
Fund to pay for more traffic calming. At present the British government and local authorities spend
around 10p per head per year on traffic calming. Their Dutch equivalents spend £1.60 (Transport
2000, 2000).
The Society of Chief Officers of Transportation in Scotland has proposed a ‘zero tolerance’
approach to breaking speed limits. This has included the introduction of ‘speed wardens’ to issue
routine fines for everyday offences, thus freeing up police resources and "increasing the likelihood
of being ‘done’ for speeding so much that nearly everyone sticks to the limits" (Society of Chief
Officers of Transportation in Scotland, 1999).
The government’s Review of Speed Policy and Road Safety Strategy remain wedded to an ethos of
casualty reduction rather than a wider ethos of danger reduction. Communities and local authorities
need to take this further in order to achieve the wider road safety benefits which speed reduction
offers.
Nonetheless, the Road Safety Strategy can still stimulate positive changes in street design, road user
attitudes and behaviour and a more effective use of enforcement technology. Speed management
can in turn support other recent national policy initiatives to increase levels of walking and cycling.
Guidance on Full Local Transport Plans states that national government will be looking to local
authorities to demonstrate that they will implement policies to promote walking and cycling (paras
120-128). Local authorities are expected to make their contribution to the national target of
quadrupling the number of cycle trips by 2012 from the 1996 baseline, and Local Transport Plan
funding in subsequent years will be determined, in part, by the progress which local authorities
make on such issues. Without effective road speed management, these targets for non-motorised
travel are unlikely to be met.
1.3 NATIONAL ROAD SAFETY POLICIES IN OTHER EUROPEAN STATES
It is inspirational to learn of the ambitious goals set in other European countries and the
philosophies which underpin them. In both Sweden and the Netherlands, as elsewhere, the national
governments have had to consider competing political demands, such as the balance between
economic prosperity, environment and safety. They have concluded that stronger action needs to be
taken to reduce deaths and injuries arising from transport activity. They take account of the
fundamental vulnerability of the human body and the consequent need to reduce the potential for
collisions at speeds which threaten life and limb.
This means that the safety of the most vulnerable is the litmus test for the safety of their overall
road transport system. Such an approach reflects the knowledge that a pedestrian struck by a vehicle
at 20mph or less will most likely receive only a minor injury, but that a pedestrian struck by a
vehicle at 30mph or above will most likely be seriously injured, and very possibly killed (Ashton
and Mackay, 1979; Kallberg, 1999). This leads to the conclusion that speeds in mixed use sections
of the road network must be reduced.
Sweden: Vision Zero
The Swedish parliament’s decision of 9 October 1997 to pursue a policy goal of no fatal or serious
injuries is probably the most ambitious road safety policy of any Western government (Carlsson,
1998). The parliament has stated that:
"The long term goal is that no one should be killed or seriously injured within the Swedish road
transport system, and the structure and the function of the road transport system must be brought
into line with the demands this goal entails."
Within this goal, the most important measure is to reduce current traffic speeds. The transport
system will always create a substantial number of crashes, but it is possible to limit the effect on the
human body by reducing speeds to a level which will almost eliminate fatalities and prevent most
serious injuries. Vision Zero requires that the needs of vulnerable road users determine the safety
demands on the system. For example, on streets where pedestrians and cyclists cannot be effectively
separated from cars, the speed of the cars must be reduced to below 30kph in order almost to
guarantee that no one is killed in a crash. Calculations show that investments in a safer road
environment of around £7-10 billion can reduce the number of fatalities by 80-90% per year. The
socio-economic cost of the crashes and casualties is an estimated £3.3 billion per year (Carlsson,
1998).
The Swedish government has established a target for the minimum pace of improvement, stating
that the national total of fatalities should not exceed 400 in the year 2000 and 250 by 2007. In order
to achieve this, every fatality – and later on every serious injury – will have to be investigated with
the aim of finding out what could have been done to prevent it. To advance Vision Zero further, the
Swedish government introduced an 11-point programme in 2000. The most important aspects of
this were more efficient speed enforcement using speed cameras, and the lowering of speed limits
(Carlsson, 2000).
The Netherlands: Sustainable Safety Programme
The Netherlands instigated its Sustainable Safety Programme in 1997 (Wegman, 1997; Ministry of
Transport, Public Works and Water Management, 1997; Talens, 1999). The demands of the
programme for traffic and transport are:
infrastructure adapted to the limitations of human capabilities
vehicles equipped to simplify the tasks of drivers and constructed to protect vulnerable road users
adequate education and information for road users
Measures taken as part of the start-up programme for Sustainable Safety since 1997 include:
a road classification (road hierarchy) programme for the complete Dutch road network, which
enables the roads to fulfil their functions satisfactorily and forms a basis for solving problems of
contradictory requirements
a low-cost introduction of 30kph zones inside built-up areas so that 50% of the possible zones are
implemented by 2000 (excluding roads with a ‘flow function’, enabling high speeds for long
distance traffic and high traffic volumes, and those with a ‘distributor function’, serving scattered
destinations)
implementing 60kph zones for minor rural roads, with some 3,000km to be achieved by 2000
a public information campaign to support the introduction of Sustainable Safety, as well as better
police enforcement and education programmes
Both the Swedish and Dutch policies are equity-based in that they recognise that speed has
distributional effects in the way that different road users (and residents) are affected.
1.4 ISSUES FOR SPEED MANAGEMENT
Speeding is endemic
The majority of drivers regularly break speed limits. This is true for all classes of roads, all times of
day and all days of the week (DETR, 1999). It is testimony to the fact that speeding is not confined
to a deviant minority. Indeed, many drivers treat posted speed limits as minimums rather than
maximums, and fail to recognise the risks they pose to themselves, their passengers and those
outside their vehicles (McKenna, 1994).
A key finding of the European MASTER project (Managing Speeds of Traffic on European Roads)
is that just having speed limits by themselves is insufficient for managing speeds at a desired level.
For example, 90% of pedestrian and cyclist fatalities in London (roughly 150 per year) occur on
30mph roads. A Metropolitan Police survey found that 63% of all drivers on such roads exceed the
speed limit – that is, two million drivers driving over 30mph in London alone. The survey, carried
out during June and July 1999 on 10 roads in London with 30mph limits, found that of those drivers
breaking the speed limit, 10% were driving at over 50mph and a very small percentage (but still
hundreds of drivers) exceeded 70mph.
Motorists choosing to drive at the highest speeds pose the greatest risk to vulnerable road users. Yet
all speeding traffic imposes costs on society beyond the tragedies of road crashes. In the words of
Chief Inspector Brooks of the Metropolitan Police:
"When traffic speeds up it becomes much more difficult for pedestrians, for instance, and in
particular the elderly and the young, to actually cross roads because the opportunities are reduced.
You could call it road theft – it is about road exclusion for significant sectors of road users."
(Traffic Engineering and Control, 2000)
Breaking the speed limit is one form of excess speed. Another is inappropriate speed: driving within
the speed limit but too fast for the conditions. On 27 November 2000 the High Court awarded £3.5
million damages to a schoolboy hit by a car travelling within the 30mph speed limit in west
London. Insurers for the driver – who had been warned by local residents on several occasions to
drive more carefully – accepted that he had been negligent. Residents had long campaigned for a
reduction of the speed limit in the area, which they had covered with ‘Kill Your Speed’ posters.
Attitudes to speed
Research in the UK suggests that motorists justify speeding on a range of counts, including the
perception that breaking a speed limit is not a ‘real’ crime. (Silcock et al, 1999). Reasons given
include:
It was unintentional
I was in a hurry
The limit is wrong
My modern car can stop more quickly than those which were around when the limit was set
The same limit does not apply at all times (eg at night, on an empty road)
The limit does not apply to me because I am an ‘above average’ driver
It was not a lot over the limit and others abuse the limit more flagrantly
Importantly, factors which influence a speed ‘feeling right’ to a car driver are:
self-image as a driver
the vehicle
the road environment
cultural factors
presence of passengers
perceived risk of detection and prosecution
This shows that a range of cultural, psychological, environmental and technological factors
influence the speeds at which people choose to drive, often above the legal limits.
While most motorists continue to flout speed limits, the general public are becoming more
concerned about danger from motor traffic and the need to control it. In the Village Speed Control
(VISP) study and in another study of village schemes on trunk roads, residents strongly supported
efforts to reduce speed, as well as the volume of traffic (IHT, 1999).
The majority of drivers themselves think that the 30mph and 70mph limits are ‘about right’ (Silcock
et al, 1999). Moreover, 36% of self-confessed speeders favour a three month ban for people driving
at 10mph over the speed limit in residential areas (Lex Motoring Services, 1997). Anecdotal
evidence also suggests that drivers who break local limits are among those calling for action to
control speeds (see Devon County Council Speed Management Strategy in Section 3, below).
Evidence of success in speed management
There have been a number of successful interventions to reduce speed in situations across the world.
One of the clearest examples came at the time of the oil crisis in 1974, when a number of countries
introduced lower speed limits. This included the USA, where the fatality rate on interstate highways
declined by 32% when speeds limits were reduced from 65 to 55mph (Hakim et al, 1991). When 40
states later raised their limits to 65mph, there was an increase in fatalities on these roads of between
20 and 25%.
Another example has been the Road Safety Strategy implemented in Victoria, Australia. This
strategy targeted speeding and drink driving, and was suppported by sustained media coverage. The
strategy included a reduction in the maximum speed limit in 1973, and the introduction of random
breath testing in 1976, with mandatory periods of licence suspension (depending on blood alcohol
concentrations) introduced in 1978. Death rates fell steadily through the 1970s but began to rise
again in the 1980s.
In response, Victoria launched a £2.5 million media campaign in December 1989. This employed
five 60-second television advertisements, which were designed to be shocking and fully realistic.
The mass media campaign included the theme ‘Don’t fool yourself, speed kills’. Speed camera
records showed that around 11% of drivers exceeded the speed limit after the campaign, compared
with 20% before it (Powles and Gifford, 1993).
The police enforcement programme in Victoria included sustained speed measurement and
enforcement of speed limits. It has been calculated that the combined effect of this multi-pronged
approach resulted in an average 26% reduction in serious casualty crashes over the period 1990-93.
Monash University has estimated that the programme produced social cost savings worth over 20
times the total cost of the programme. Between mid-1989 and 1997 the programme also saved
130,000 hospital bed days which would have been needed to deal with road traffic casualties
(Lancashire County Council, 1998).
These results offer an indication of what can be achieved through local speed management
programmes. Back in Britain, Lancashire County Council now aims to replicate the Road Safety
Strategy implemented in Victoria, working in conjunction with Lancashire Constabulary.
References for Section 1
Appleyard, D (1981) Livable streets, Berkeley: University of California Press
Ashton, S and Mackay, G (1979) ‘Some characteristics of the population who suffer trauma as
pedestrians when hit by cars and some resulting implications’, 4th IRCOBI International
Conference, Gothenborg
Boezen, M et al (1999) ‘Effects of ambient air pollution on upper and lower respiratory systems and
peak expiratory flow in children’, Lancet, 353, (9156), pp874-878
Carlsson, G (1998) ‘Vision Zero’ in perspective of global generalization, paper to 8th La Prévention
Routiãre Internationale, World Congress, Lisbon: Portugal
Carlsson, G (2000) Personal communication with Adrian Davis, 18 August 2000
Copenhagen Healthy City Project (1994) City of Copenhagen Healthy City Plan 1994-97,
Copenhagen: Copenhagen Health Services
DETR (1998) A New Deal for Transport: Better for Everyone, London: Stationery Office
DETR (1999) Vehicle Speeds Great Britain: 1998, London: Stationery Office
DETR (2000a) 1999 Valuation of the benefits of prevention of road accidents and casualties,
DETR Highways Economics Note No 1: 1999, London: DETR
DETR (2000b) New Directions in Speed Management: A Review of Policy, London: DETR
DETR (2000c) Tomorrow’s Roads – Safer for Everyone, London: DETR
DETR (2000d) Guidance on Full Local Transport Plans, London: DETR
Department of Health (1998) Quantification of the effects of air pollution on health in the United
Kingdom, London: Stationery Office
Duhme, H, Weiland, S, Keil, U, Kraemer, B, Schmid, M, Stender, M and Chambless, L (1996) ‘The
association between self-reported symptoms of asthma and allergic rhinitis and self-reported traffic
density on street of residence in adolescents’, Epidemiology, 7(6), pp578-582
Edwards, J, Walters, S and Griffiths, R (1994) ‘Hospital Admissions for Asthma in Preschool
Children: Relationship to Major Roads in Birmingham, United Kingdom’, Archives of
Environmental Health, 49 (4), pp223-227
Finch, D, Kompfner, P, Lockwood, C, and Maycock, G (1994) Speed, speed limits and accidents,
TRL Project Report 58, Crowthorne: TRL
Fox, J (1988) ‘Social network interaction: new jargon in health inequalities’, British Medical
Journal, 297, pp373-374
Glass, T, de Leon, C, Marottoli, R and Berkman, L (1999) ‘Population based study of social and
productive activities as predicators of survival among elderly Americans’, British Medical Journal,
319, pp478-483
Greenwood, D, Muir, K, Packham, C and Madeley, R (1996) ‘Coronary heart disease: a review of
the role of psychosocial stress and social support’, Journal of Public Health Medicine, 18, pp221231
Hakim, S, Sheffer, D, Heckert, A, and Hockerman, I (1991) ‘A critical review of macro models for
road accidents’, Accident Analysis and Prevention, 23(5), pp379-400
Independent Inquiry into Inequalities in Health (1998) Independent Inquiry into Inequalities in
Health Report, London: Stationery Office
Institution of Highways and Transportation (1999) Guidelines for rural safety management,
London: IHT
Kallberg, V and Toivanen, S (1998) Framework for assessing the impacts of speed in road
transport, Contract No RO-96-SC202, for the European Commission
Kallberg, V (1999) Implications of Vision Zero for speed management, Espoo: VTT Communities
and Infrastructure
Kawachi, I, Kennedy, B, Lochner, K and Prothrow-Stith, D (1997) ‘Social capital, income
inequality, and mortality’, American Journal of Public Health, 87(9), pp1491-1498
Kegerreis, S (1993) ‘Independent mobility and
child mental and emotional development’,
in Hillman, M (ed) Children, Transport and
the Quality of Life, London: Policy Studies
Institute
Klaeboe, R (1992) ‘Measuring the Environmental Impact of Road Traffic in Town Areas’, paper to
PTRC Summer Annual Meeting, Seminar B, pp81-88, London, PTRC
Lancashire County Council (1998) Lancashire Police – Lancashire County Council Project
Initiative, Highways Committee Report, April
Lex Motoring Services (1997) Lex report on motoring: Driving for safety, London: Lex Service
MASTER Project (1999) Managing speeds of traffic on European roads, Transport Research,
Fourth Framework Programme Road Transport, Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of
the European Communities
McKenna, F (1994) ‘It won’t happen to me: A partial explanation for our great enthusiasm for
speed
and little enthusiasm for safety’, paper to 59th RoSPA Road Safety Congress – Speed: a Limited
Future?, York
Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management (1997) At the start: Start up
programme, Sustainable Road Safety 1997-2000, The Hague: MVW
Moore, R (1986) Children’s domain: Play and place in child development, London: Croom Helm
Oosterlee, A, Drijver, M, Lebret, E, and Brunekreef, B (1996) ‘Chronic Respiratory Symptoms in
Children and Adults Living along Streets with High Traffic Density’ Occupational and
Environmental Medicine, 53, pp241-247
Plowden, S and Hillman, M (1996) Speed control and transport policy, London: Policy Studies
Institute
Powles, J and Gifford, S (1993) ‘Health of nations: lessons from Victoria, Australia’, British
Medical Journal, 306, 9 January, pp125-127
Silcock, D, Smith, K, Know, D and Beuret, K (1999) What limits speed?: Factors that affect how
fast we drive, Interim Report, Basingstoke: AA Foundation for Road Safety Research
Society of Chief Officers of Transportation in
Scotland (1999) Speed policy, Linlithgow: West Lothian Council
Stallard, P, Velleman, R and Baldwin, S (1998) ‘Prospective study of post-traumatic stress disorder
in children involved in road traffic accidents’, British Medical Journal, 317, pp1619-1623
Talens, H (1999) Road design for sustainable traffic safety, paper to Swedish Road Safety
Conference, Stockholm
Taylor, M, Lynam, D and Baruya, A (2000) The effects of drivers’ speed on the frequency of road
accidents, TRL Report 421, Crowthorne: TRL
Traffic Engineering and Control (2000) ‘Disregard for 30mph limit is widespread’, June, pp216-217
Transport 2000 (2000) Road safety strategy and speed policy review: A briefing from Transport
2000, London: Transport 2000
UK Government (2000) Press Notice, Speech by the Prime Minister on the Government’s Road
Safety Strategy, 1 March 2000
SECTION 2
LEGISLATION
2.1 Local Government and Rating Act 1997
Many communities concerned about the impact of high vehicle speeds are frustrated when highway
authorities claim they cannot introduce the schemes called for. Prioritisation of speed management
schemes according to volumes of traffic and history of casualties does not deal with the perceived
problems (especially the ‘accident waiting to happen’) or the suppression of trips by pedestrians,
cyclists and equestrians.
It is not surprising, therefore, that many parish councils have taken the opportunity to fund schemes
through the Local Government and Rating Act 1997. This legislation enables town and parish
councils to fund the introduction or removal of traffic calming measures. Section 30 of the Local
Government and Rating Act 1997 states:
"A parish council or community council may contribute towards any expenses incurred or to be
incurred by a highway authority in constructing, removing or maintaining: (a) traffic calming
works, or (b) other works (including signs or lighting) required in connection with traffic calming
works, if in the opinion of the council the expenditure is or will be of benefit to their area."
Hampshire County Council has adopted a partnership approach and provides matching funding for
town and parish councils for traffic calming schemes. In the year 2000/01 a total of 30 schemes
have been allocated funds from the County Council’s Rural Traffic Calming capital budget, a
significant increase over the 17 awarded funding in 1999/2000. Allocations range from £1,000 to
£10,000, but are typically between £2,000 and £3,000. In a number of cases a multi-year
programme is evolving.
There is considerable pressure for this type of action from parish councils and residents, particularly
in villages. Benefits are to be found not only in casualty reduction but also in improved quality of
life for communities. Additionally, Hampshire County Council is seen to take action in response to
local demand, and many council members are keen to respond in this way to pressure from villages
in their divisions (Hampshire County Council, 1998).
Leominster Town Council, Herefordshire, has contributed in a similar way to a number of traffic
calming schemes. In 1998 it made a £6,000 contribution which was matched by both the District
and County Councils, and in 2000 it made a £2,000 contribution towards a scheme proposed by a
local resident to stop rat-running.
Buckinghamshire County Council has agreed a protocol with the Association of Local Councils
whereby it will help parish councils use their powers to promote the introduction of traffic calming
schemes, with costs to the parish councils spread over three financial years (Buckinghamshire
County Council, 1999).
Because the budgets available are small, low-cost schemes are often adopted which may not
achieve the desired changes in driver behaviour (Bellefontaine, 2000). Indeed, local funding of this
sort has in the past been an option only for relatively rich towns and parishes.
However, the Rural White Paper 'Our Countryside: the Future' published by the government in
November 2000 announced the creation of a new Parish Fund of £15 million over three years to
support small-scale transport projects identified by parishes. Under this proposal, parish councils
will now be able to apply to the Countryside Agency for grants of up to £10,000 to fund schemes
which meet local transport needs (DETR, 2000a).
2.2 Crime and Disorder Act 1998
Fear of crime was identified by the government as a key component for community safety strategies
under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 (sections 5-7 and 17). The Act, which came into force in
September 1998, promotes public consultation and the development of local partnerships to identify
problems and set targeted priorities for action. Where local people express concerns over road
safety in crime and disorder audits, those concerns are regarded as legitimate areas for police
activity in partnership with local authorities. The Act thus provides an opportunity for significant
expansion of speed management and speed limit enforcement.
The Home Office has informed the Slower Speeds Initiative that 60% of the 259 audit documents
sent to them by police and local authority partnerships in England and Wales included discussion of
road safety issues in some form. Those partnerships which did raise the issue of road safety in their
consultations found it to be a high priority in their local communities. A review conducted by the
Association of Chief Police Officers revealed that when audits asked local people about road safety,
86% of partnership areas rated it as an issue of concern to rank alongside burglaries and muggings.
As for the crime and disorder strategies themselves, 37% of strategies in England and Wales listed
‘road safety/dangerous driving’ as a priority for action (Phillips et al, 2000).
As part of research for its crime and disorder strategy, North Yorkshire Constabulary conducted a
postal questionnaire attitude survey which asked ‘Do you feel your neighbourhood is a safe place
for children?’. A total 41% of the 6,747 who answered the question said ‘No’. Of those who said
‘No’, 81% stated that this was due to speeding or other road safety reasons.
Similarly, community safety audits undertaken in Surrey as a result of the Crime and Disorder Act
showed fear of traffic, especially speed, at the top of rural residents’ concerns. This has led the
police to introduce a Community Speed Management Unit. The Unit is influenced not only by
crashes themselves but also by community pressure, and so includes sites where residents perceive
there is danger. Surrey County Council is also developing formal partnerships to deliver multiagency solutions. For example, the County Council is taking on responsibility for parking control to
free up police resources for rural speed enforcement (Bertauche, 2000). A speed management
strategy has been developed, the object of which is to define the appropriate speed for any given
location and identify the most appropriate technique to ensure compliance. This work seeks to move
away from the car-dominated evaluation methods of the past and to focus on the needs of all road
users, particularly the more vulnerable. Government forecasts that traffic in rural areas is likely to
increase by almost 50% by 2031 has provided a major stimulus to this work (Surrey County
Council, undated).
2.3 Local Government Act 1999 (Best Value)
The Local Government Act 1999 required local authorities to apply Best Value assessment across
their services from 1 April 2000. National Best Value performance indicators will be set each year
by the Secretary of State. In addition, local authorities will be able to set local performance
indicators which reflect ‘local priorities and uniqueness’. Local Transport Plan indicators and
targets are given as an example of such local performance indicators, to be included in Local
Performance Plans. Some Best Value user satisfaction surveys have already indicated support for
traffic calming and speed management.
The four key principles of Best Value in relation to delivering community-focused services require
local authorities to:
challenge existing service delivery
compare own performance with that of other service providers
consult with local people and businesses to determine needs and priorities
compete by identifying cost-effective and innovative ways of delivering high quality services
There is now scope for speed management and other aspects of transport to be considered within
Best Value assessments. Traffic calming and other speed management measures may feature
favourably in public consultations on Best Value. Kingston Upon Hull, for example, is carrying out
perception and attitude surveys of 20mph zones implemented in recent years as part of a Best Value
study.
Results of a Best Value review of community safety in West Sussex in autumn 1999 revealed that
the top priority identified for road safety was slowing down vehicles. The second priority was more
traffic calming. The results of the survey become even more significant for speed management if
respondents’ concerns about ‘Better police enforcement of speed’ are added. This makes speed
issues the top priority for over 50% of respondents (given that traffic calming is strongly related to
speed reduction), as shown in Table 1. This mirrors the findings of an earlier crime audit carried out
under the Crime and Disorder Act, where speeding also emerged as a major issue (Makin, 2000).
Table 1: Top 10 road safety improvements identified as first priority in West Sussex according to
residents (1999)
No of respondents % of top ten
Slowing down vehicles 155 31
More traffic calming 100 20
More junction improvements 51 10
Better police enforcement of speed 48 9
Better enforcement of parking 36 7
More pedestrian crossings 29 6
Better signing 26 5
Better highways maintenance 23 5
More cycle paths/crossings 20 4
New road construction 16 3
2.4 Local Government Act 2000
The passing of the Local Government Act 2000 in July 2000 provides further opportunities for
communities to play a stronger role in partnership with local authorities on transport issues. Part 1
of the Act, ‘Community well-being’, gives local authorities new powers to promote the economic,
social and environmental well-being of their areas in order to respond to the needs of their local
communities, along with a duty to prepare community strategies in partnership with other local
service providers. The strategies are to be based on an assessment of local needs, involving local
communities in establishing priorities for action (DETR, 2000b). Government guidance on
preparing community strategies was published in December 2000 (DETR, 2000c).
2.5 Transport Act 2000
Enacted on 30 November 2000, the Transport Act 2000 offers a further opportunity to take action
on lowering speed limits. Section 268 of the Act gives local authorities the power to designate any
road under their authority a quiet lane or a home zone, with speeds as low as 10mph. Furthermore,
section 269 of the Act calls on the Secretary of State to review speed limits on rural roads, giving
particular consideration to the possible institution of rural road hierarchies. In addition to those
mechanisms already available for introducing lower speed limits on rural roads, the introduction of
rural road hierarchies would enable local authorities to categorise rural roads according to use and
fit speed limits to each category accordingly. The review must publish its findings by the end of
November 2001.
2.6 References for Section 2
Bellefontaine, P (2000) ‘Transportation policy – Local Transport Plans and Package Bids’, in
Design issues for rural traffic management: Conference Proceedings, Landscape Design Associates
and Ross Silcock Ltd, Cheltenham: Countryside Agency
Bertauche, P (2000) in Design issues for rural traffic management – Conference Proceedings,
Landscape Design Associates and Ross Silcock Ltd, Cheltenham: Countryside Agency
Buckinghamshire County Council (1999) Local Transport Plan 2000-2005, Aylesbury: BCC
DETR and Audit Commission (1999) Performance Indicators for 2000/2001: A joint consultation
document produced by DETR and the Audit Commission on Best Value and local authority
performance indicators for 2000/2001, London: DETR
DETR (2000a) Our Countryside: The Future; A Fair Deal for Rural England, London: DETR
DETR (2000b) News Release 514, ‘New Act delivers local leadership and local choice – Local
Government Act gets Royal Assent’, 28 July 2000
DETR (2000c) Preparing community strategies: Government guidance to local authorities, London:
DETR
Hampshire County Council (1998) Roads and Development Sub-Committee, Traffic calming in
rural areas, 26 January 1998, Winchester: HCC
Makin, G (2000) ‘Stop, look, listen’, Surveyor, 6 April 2000, pp14-17
Phillips C, Considine, M and Lewis, R (2000) A Review of Audits and Strategies Produced by
Crime and Disorder Partnerships in 1999, Briefing Note 8/00, London: Home Office Policing and
Reducing Crime Unit
Surrey County Council (undated) Strategic traffic action in rural areas: Traffic demand management
initiative 1997 to 1999, unpublished
SECTION 3
SPEED MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES
3.1 City of York Speed Management Plan
York City Council has pioneered a danger reduction approach to speed management since the
1980s, and as a result has met national casualty reduction targets well in advance of target dates.
The Road Danger Reduction Charter is the basis of its Road Safety Strategy. The Charter pledges
the Council to:
Seek a genuine reduction in danger for all road users by identifying and controlling the principal
sources of threat.
Find new measures to define the level of danger on our roads. These would more accurately
monitor the use of and threat to benign modes.
Discourage the unnecessary use of private motor transport where alternative benign modes or public
transport are equally or more viable.
Pursue a transport strategy for environmentally sustainable travel based on developing efficient,
integrated public transport systems. This recognises that current levels of motor traffic should not
increase.
Actively promote cycling and walking, which pose little threat to other road users, by taking
positive and coordinated action to increase the safety and mobility of these benign modes.
Promote the adoption of this charter as the basis of both national and international transport policy.
The Council recognises that: "Slowing traffic down is the best way to stop accidents and make the
roads feel safer for all road users." Their Speed Management Plan, adopted in 1997, aims to reduce
traffic speeds in a way that is acceptable to the public. At its heart are three road categories, each
with a target speed and an indication of the measures which could be used to achieve the target of
greater compliance with the speed limit:
(a) Traffic routes
Defined as: the busy main roads important for getting about the city and also the main bus and
emergency vehicle routes; target speed 40mph and above.
Measures to achieve the target: ‘soft traffic calming’ such as pedestrian crossings and cycle lanes.
This network is generally free from vertical measures (eg road humps).
(b) Mixed priority routes
Defined as: also important for getting around but which go through villages and past schools, where
slower speeds are appropriate; target speed 30mph.
Measures to achieve the target: some vertical measures (speed cushions, road humps) targeted at
areas where there are concerns.
(c) Residential areas
Defined as: all the other roads on the plan, where the needs of residents will generally have priority
over traffic; target speed 20mph. Measures to achieve the target: a full range of traffic calming
measures could be applied (road humps, chicanes, mini-roundabouts etc) where there are casualty
problems and residents support the measures.
The Council consulted widely on a draft plan, which was then amended in the light of comments
from the emergency services, parish councils and groups representing the mobility impaired. The
consultation involved:
a mobile exhibition
a survey of the views of 1,500 residents
parish councils and neighbourhood forums
emergency services and road user organisations
direct contact by the public with officers drafting the plan
Since implementation, the Speed Management Plan has proved to be useful in discussion with
residents, by providing an understandable framework for what types of measure are likely to be
appropriate for each type of road. The Council has specific speed-related indicators and targets to
measure success in achieving Local Transport Plan objectives:
Indicators
proportion of residential areas which are home zones or 20mph zones
compliance with speed limits in urban areas
Target
all of York’s 60 primary schools and 12 secondary schools to have 20mph school safety zones (at a
rate of about 12 per year)
The Council has also adopted the target of completing road safety studies for all the villages within
the district during the life of the first Local Transport Plan.
York City Council also works in partnership with North Yorkshire Police in an anti-speeding
campaign to highlight that speeding is not likely to save motorists time, since they often just reach
the next traffic queue sooner and have to wait longer. They may, on the other hand, be caught for
speeding.
Contact:
Ken Spence
Road Safety Team
Environment and Development Services
City of York Council
9 St Leonard’s Place
York YO1 7ET
(tel: 01904 613 161)
3.2 Devon County Council Speed Management Strategy
The Devon and Cornwall Constabulary report speeding to be the prime contributory factor in a third
of all crashes involving injury in Devon. As part of its strategy to address road safety, Devon
County Council has produced its own definition of speed management:
"an overall and focused approach by highway and police authorities, working together, to manage
the speed of all, or various classes of, road users for specified purposes, especially the prevention of
speed related crashes." (Devon County Council, 1999, p2)
The Devon strategy adopts a holistic approach to reducing vehicle speeds in order that a modified
driving culture begins to emerge. Importantly, Devon County Council’s approach takes a standpoint
that a crash and casualty problem is not the most central issue for many people. Instead, danger and
fear of speed have a powerful and detrimental effect on the quality of life for many Devon
communities, as the Council has found through community safety audits and work with parishes.
There are nine objectives for the implementation of the strategy. These are divided into three
headings focused on (a) driver awareness and attitudes, (b) designing for lower speeds, and (c)
improving compliance with speed limits:
(a) Influencing the awareness and attitudes of the driving community
Objective 1: To enhance the understanding of young people regarding vehicle speed
Objective 2: To create widespread awareness of speed choices and speed issues among existing
drivers
Objective 3: To achieve successful partnerships for speed reductions
Objective 4: To implement special measures for the at-risk drivers
Objective 5: To work in partnership with the police in order to strengthen deterrence
Objective 6: To offer support to employers to manage the speeds of their drivers
(b) Designing roads for lower speeds
Objective 7: To undertake community-wide reviews of the impact of vehicle speeds, and adjust
road layouts and speed limits where appropriate to match local circumstances, in partnership with
police and local communities
(c) Improving levels of compliance with speed limits
Objective 8: To develop the scope of the automatic speed detection programme and test the
effectiveness of other technologies
Objective 9: To support the police in their intelligence-led and targeted programmes
The headline indicator for measuring success is changes in casualties coded by the police.
Contributory indicators include changes in speed, reported behaviour, attitude and awareness, as
well as the number of new measures implemented.
Devon County Council has also developed a community-based campaign with video and action
packs, entitled Driving Speeds Down in Devon. The campaign seeks not only to reduce the number
of casualties but also to improve the quality of life in communities throughout the county by
reducing the impact that excessive vehicle speeds have upon them. The campaign gives support and
resources to local communities to play an active role in driving down speeds – for example, by
establishing local traffic groups, getting residents who are motorists to sign a pledge committing
them to ‘drive at a safe speed, treating the speed limit as an ABSOLUTE MAXIMUM’.
The initial assumption is that every community is as much perpetrator as it is victim – in other
words, that speed problems are generated by the very communities which suffer from them.
According to the County Council, this is not a moral judgement but a practical one. The approach
recognises that there is a need to get beyond the arguments that others are to blame, that the
community is defenceless against the faceless, inconsiderate drivers who destroy the quality of life
of a locality simply by passing through it – and also that the community can do nothing without the
assistance of the local authority and the police (Phillips, 2000).
Contact:
Road Safety Group
Environment Directorate
Lucombe House
County Hall
Exeter EX2 4QW
(tel: 01392 382 118)
3. 3 Gloucester Safer City: City-wide demonstration project
The Gloucester Safer City project is a city-wide demonstration project running from April 1996 to
March 2001, the only one of its kind in the UK. Over £5 million of road safety improvements in the
city, funded through DETR, have been planned (equivalent to 30 years’ worth of road safety work
in the space of five years). The project is based on a comprehensive approach to speed management,
with the following key ingredients:
working within the framework set by Gloucestershire’s Sustainable Transport Plan
extensive education and awareness campaigning, consultation and partnership, including the
involvement of emergency services, bus operators and the police
analysis of traffic flows and speeds, crash casualty records for the entire city and existing land uses
a new road hierarchy for the city
The consultation revealed that 68% of people were concerned about speeding. Furthermore,
analysis showed that inappropriate speed was the most common cause of road crashes in the city.
The new road hierarchy (outer bypass, main roads, mixed
use roads, residential access roads and pedestrian routes) creates a virtuous circle in which speed
reduction becomes an important demand management tool.
Area-wide traffic calming measures on mixed use and residential roads (which now cover 70% of
the city) lengthen journey times and encourage commuter traffic to use the main roads. Traffic
volumes on the sensitive roads are thereby reduced, allowing reallocation of road space to
pedestrians, cyclists and public transport. Facilities which give greater priority to non-car modes are
managed so that they also contribute to speed reduction. For example, pedestrian delays at signalcontrolled crossings have been cut by 50%, reducing risk-taking by pedestrians while slowing
traffic with minimal complaint from motorists.
On main roads, high-profile enforcement of speed limits is used as a speed control tool. The aim is
to achieve wholesale reductions in speed by raising driver awareness of issues such as the
consequences of speeding, and thus changing behaviour. This is achieved by convincing drivers that
there is an active speed reduction campaign in place throughout the city.
In particular, Gloucester Safer City has recognised that the majority of drivers perceive the risk of
getting caught for speeding as low, as typically it is only the worst offenders who are prosecuted.
To ensure better compliance with speed limits, Safer City and the police established a partnership to
develop a comprehensive programme of enforcement, both mobile and at fixed locations.
A service level agreement with the police sets out terms and conditions for the use of in-car video
and recording equipment purchased by Gloucester County Council, including a requirement that the
police provide the Council with quarterly records of successful prosecutions brought through use of
the equipment. The agreement also requires the police to take part in publicity campaigns and to
provide video footage of offending behaviour for use in such campaigns.
Mobile detection
A laser gun (similar to a radar gun but more sophisticated) is in daily use by dedicated police
enforcement officers. Mobile speed detection routinely takes place at agreed sites that have a
history of speed-related crashes. As the project progresses and more speed reduction improvements
are installed, the police will be able to focus more attention on the remainder of the road network.
During 1999 a total of 1,920 drivers were caught for speeding from mobile detection sites in
Gloucester. In addition, in-car video cameras have been installed in two patrol cars. Both cars travel
approximately 800 miles a week and the video camera continuously records the behaviour of
drivers (Gloucester Safer City, 1998).
Fixed detection
Speed cameras have been installed at sites with a history of speed-related crashes. An automatic
film processor has been in use since May 1997 to deal with red light running and speeding offences.
In just over a year, nearly 15,000 offenders have been caught in the county of Gloucestershire, with
offences being processed within 24 hours. Since April 1997 a conditional offer system has been in
operation whereby motorists not contesting the offence are given a fixed penalty rather than being
taken to court. During 1999 a total of 1,477 drivers were caught for speeding from fixed detection
sites in Gloucester.
The seven permanent speed camera sites are visible and prominent to drivers, and alert them to the
high profile given to camera-based enforcement in the city. Together with signs warning drivers to
slow down when entering Gloucester and posters stating the total of fines paid and driving licence
points issued, the message conveyed is that if drivers choose to speed, then it is only a matter of
time before they get caught. The implication of speeding and its routine enforcement is also a
frequent subject in Safer City’s monthly advertisements in a local newspaper.
Results
The results indicate that the project has already been a success. By July 1999 Gloucester Safer City
had achieved:
47% reduction in personal injury casualties
5mph reduction in speeds on treated main roads and 10mph reduction on mixed use and residential
roads
a significant (1.2mph) reduction in speeds on 49 roads in the city
15% reduction in motor traffic on mixed used and residential roads
evidence of traffic evaporation and modal shift for journeys to work through increased cycling and
use of public transport
60% of people surveyed feeling safer than they did five years ago
Contact:
Paul Bellotti
Safer City Project
Herbert Warehouse
The Docks
Gloucester GL1 2EQ
(tel: 01452 396 873)
3.4 References for Section 3
Bellotti, P (2000) Safer City Project – Gloucester, paper presented at Aston University conference,
Reducing Traffic Impacts on Local Communities, November 2000
City of York Council (1996) Killing Speed – Saving Lives: Speed Management Plan
City of York Council (1997) Planning and Transport Committee, Speed Management Plan –
Consultation Results, 19 June 1997
City of York Council (1999) Safely Together – Road Safety in York
City of York Council (1999) What’s the point of speeding?
City of York Council (2000) Local Transport Plan 2000, Executive Summary
City of York Council (2000) Road Safety Strategy 2000
Devon County Council (undated) Driving Speeds Down in Devon: Community Action Pack
Devon County Council (undated) Driving Speeds Down in Devon: Business Action Pack
Devon County Council (1999) Speed Management Strategy for Devon
Devon County Council (1999) Driving Speeds Down in Devon: Community Action Video
Gloucester Safer City (1998) A mid term report, Gloucester: Gloucester Safer City
Phillips, J (2000) Speed management in rural communities: A local authority approach, IHT
Southwest seminar, 12 July 2000
SECTION 4
SIGNING AND DESIGN FOR LOWER SPEEDS
Speed choice is affected by the look and feel of the road environment. Road signs play an important
part in ‘explaining’ aspects of the road environment to drivers, especially maximum safe speeds.
Two contrasting approaches are illustrated in this section. The first (as shown in Dorrington and
Craven Arms, and in West Lothian) adapts traditional traffic calming measures by using visually
striking signs and road markings. The second approach (Norfolk County Council, Starston and
Poundbury) has been developed where landscape values are high and clutter or intrusion unwanted.
Where clutter is unwanted, signing can be designed so that it causes minimal intrusion and
degrading of the environment. Visual design criteria are fundamental to the basic nature of speed
management schemes and should be considered from the earliest stages. According to Derbyshire
County Council (Derbyshire County Council, 2000), the most important consideration when
positioning a sign is to set it against a backdrop so that it:
hides the back of the sign
diminishes the visibility of the support structure
does not break the skyline in the countryside
makes rural and urban areas appear less cluttered
4.1 Dorrington and Craven Arms, Shropshire – countdowns and cushions on a trunk road
At Dorrington and Craven Arms, both straddling the A49 in Shropshire, ‘countdown’ signs
specially authorised by DETR have been installed in advance of 30mph speed limits at both ends of
the villages. In addition, there are ‘dragon’s teeth’ markings on the approaches to the 30mph limit
signs (17 pairs in Dorrington, nine in Craven Arms), plus red patches with 30mph repeater roundels
or signs at intervals through the villages (five in Dorrington, six in Craven Arms).
Although speed cushions had not previously been used on a trunk road, they were used in Craven
Arms because they seemed appropriate to control speeds in the centre of the village. Four miniroundabouts were installed as a speed reducing measure in order to comply with the Highways
(Road Humps) Regulations 1990 in force at that time (subsequently superseded by the 1996
Regulations). Speeds at the Dorrington and Craven Arms gateways were reduced by between 7 and
10mph (see Table 2). The use of repeater roundels in Craven Arms also reduced speeds in the centre
of the village by around 4-5mph.
Table 2: Mean and 85th percentile speeds at Dorrington and Craven Arms gateways before and one
year after scheme installation (speed limit in both villages 30mph)
N/W gateway (inbound) S/E gateway (inbound) cost
before after before after
mean 85th %ile mean 85th %ile mean 85th %ile mean 85th %ile
Dorrington 41 48 33 39 39 46 32 37 £24,800
Craven Arms 41 49 33 40 42 49 33 41 £80,000
A public opinion survey carried out at Craven Arms found that around 67% of people thought the
countdown signs, gateway markings and repeated red patches were useful. The mini-roundabouts
were, however, criticised (DETR, 1997).
Contact:
Charging and Local Transport Division
DTLR
3/24 Great Minster House
76 Marsham Street
London SW1P 4DR
(tel: 020 7944 2954)
4.2 West Lothian Council gateway treatments and road narrowings
West Lothian Council has carried out a series of traffic calming schemes which have used gateway
treatments, road markings and road narrowings on main roads. The results from the three villages of
Dechmont, West Calder and Pumpherston indicate an average 4.5mph reduction in speed, with even
larger reductions (averaging 6mph) at two of the three sites studied. Table 3 shows the 85th
percentile speeds, the posted speed limit being 40mph.
Table 3: West Lothian 85th percentile speeds before and after scheme installation (speed limit at all
locations 40mph)
location before after cost £
Dechmont (shop) 41 35 96,000 (for both Dechmont schemes)
Dechmont (east gateway) 42 38.5
A71 West Calder (Burngrange) 43.5 40.5 36,000 (for both A71 schemes)
A71 West Calder (cemetery) 48 43
Pumpherston (south village) 41.5 35.5 84,000 (for both Pumpherston schemes)
Pumpherston (primary school) 38.5 33.5
The Council notes that:
"in terms of speed reduction, potential of accident reduction and reduction in severity of any
accident, these results are very encouraging." (West Lothian Council, 1998)
Contact:
David Jarman
Head of Strategic Planning and Transportation
West Lothian Council
County Buildings
Linlithgow EH49 7EZ
(tel: 01506 775 269)
4.3 Norfolk County Council interactive speed limit signs
Since 1992 Norfolk County Council has trialled the use of interactive fibre optic speed limit signs
in a number of villages. The County Council has pioneered techniques of signing to elicit desired
responses from motorists while conserving the rural environment. These techniques include the
development of interactive speed limit signs, redesigning the road environment to make drivers
think more and designating a network of ‘Quiet Lanes’ which are signed in such a way as to
discourage use by motorists.
The first trial of interactive fibre optic signs, in the village of Scole, was to reinforce the existing
30mph speed limit, and was assessed through observation of speeds before and after installation. A
year after installation the mean vehicle speed had been reduced by nearly 6mph, and the 85th
percentile speed had been reduced by 8mph. Interactive speed limit signs have since been trialled in
other locations in Norfolk (Traffic Engineering and Control, 2000).
The sign legend is a 30/40mph roundel consisting of a pictogram formed by an illuminated redcoloured circle and white numbers on a black background, matched in size as nearly as possible to a
300mm roundel. The device is activated by any vehicle that exceeds a pre-set speed threshold,
detected by a radar speed discrimination detector which is mounted on top of a pole carrying the
sign. This threshold is set at 35mph for the sites with a 30mph limit and 45mph for the sites with a
40mph limit. When activated, the fibre optic roundels light up from within and two pairs of amber
lights are illuminated alternately above and below the sign legend.
The mean inbound speeds at all signs fell below the speed limit in all villages. There was some
evidence of speed reductions in the 40mph speed limited village centres, but little evidence of any
significant effect of the sign in the centres of the 30mph speed limited villages (although speeds
here remained below the limit). The results from trials in six villages are illustrated in Table 4.
Table 4: Norfolk villages: mean speeds before and after interactive sign installation
by interactive sign in centre of village
30mph villages before after before after
Acle 34.7 28.2 25.1 25.3
Horstead 33.5 28.9 21.2 21.6
Wells 31.4 28.2 25.2 24.4
Wroxham 31.4 29.4 30.2 29.1
40mph villages
Carbrooke 40.7 37.6 40.3 37.7
Swaffham 39.7 35.5 33.4 31.5
The percentage of inbound vehicles exceeding the respective trigger speeds of 35mph and 45mph at
the signs decreased considerably. The largest change was at Acle, from 55% before installation of
the sign to 7% one year after. For the 30mph sites, the overall percentage of inbound vehicles
exceeding the trigger speed at the signs changed from 36% to 7% one year after. (The latter figure
compares very favourably with the national average of 36% of vehicles exceeding 35mph in 30mph
restricted areas.)
The corresponding results for the two 40mph sites were that an average of 20% of vehicles
exceeded the trigger speed before, whereas only 6% did so one year later. (In comparison, the
national average for vehicles exceeding 45mph in a 40mph area is 12%.)
Similar results from further trials have led Norfolk County Council to conclude that interactive fibre
optic signs are most effective for inbound vehicles in the vicinity of the sign. A year after the
installation of the ‘six village’ trial signs, statistically significant average reductions in the mean
speed (-4.3mph) and 85th percentile speed (-5.9mph) of inbound vehicles were achieved, and there
was a statistically significant reduction in the level of non-compliance with the speed limit. It
appears that most drivers are embarrassed to trigger the sign (Farmer et al, 1998).
The effectiveness of these vehicle-activated signs is acknowledged in the government’s Review of
Speed Policy. Costing £6,000 each, they are also in high demand. So far Norfolk County Council
has installed 80 of them.
Contact:
Norfolk County Council
Planning and Transportation
County Hall
Norwich NR1 2SG
(tel: 01603 222 143)
4.4 STARSTON, NORFOLK: SPEED REDUCTION THROUGH DESIGN
English Heritage urges local authorities to consider the extent to which different kinds of traffic
calming measures require signs. It suggests that signs should be kept to the absolute minimum
required in size and number to ensure safety and comply with legal requirements, and be integrated
carefully with the surrounding environment. A sign audit carried out by Devon County Council in
Dartmoor National Park after the introduction of a speed management strategy and a 40mph speed
limit resulted in the removal of 121 signs.
Starston is a village in Norfolk which had identified speed management as part of an overall scheme
to improve non-car access to the nearby town, particularly for journeys to school. Residents were
therefore campaigning for a 30mph speed limit through the village.
However, the Council considered the road through the village was too short to get the desired
response: "The road environment wasn’t going to convey the right messages for that ‘urban’ speed
limit." The introduction of a 30mph limit would have required 26 signs, leading to clutter.
Instead, a scheme was devised to achieve speed reduction without a new speed limit. Natural traffic
calming features, such as a right-angled bend approaching a bridge, were augmented. Signing and
markings were reduced: 11 warning signs were removed, including one motorway standard chevron
(another chevron was kept). The centre white line was removed, except at the bend. The road
surface was dressed in an attractive brown stone chosen by local people, who also commissioned a
village gateway sign from a local artist. The measures achieved the desired results, as speeds
through the village were indeed reduced to around 30mph.
Contact:
Norfolk County Council
Planning and Transportation
County Hall
Norwich NR1 2SG
(tel: 01603 222 143)
4.5 Poundbury, Dorset : designing new urban spaces with a human scale
Many new towns have been designed around the car, and many existing communities have been
overwhelmed by the car. In recent housing schemes, roads have taken their form from the
requirements to achieve movement of motor traffic. Buildings have been arranged around the car,
which has inevitably led to an unnatural and inhuman environment.
At Poundbury, a new-build development which is part of the Duchy of Cornwall, a different
approach has been taken. To begin with, designers have focused on creating pleasing urban spaces.
Buildings have then been placed around the spaces so as to produce an overall design with a human
scale.
Pavements and roads have then been fitted informally into the urban spaces so that movement of
vehicles and pedestrians is safe and easy. In some places roads have greater width, providing onstreet car parking. Pavement widths also vary and are particularly generous at road junctions, in
order to maximise visibility for drivers.
The layout provides effective speed control without the need for additional constraints. Junctions
generally reduce vehicle speeds considerably. More frequent junctions mean slower movement
throughout Poundbury. Vehicle speeds are also contained by changes of surface at the entrance to
squares where pedestrians have priority. Vehicles have full access, but priority is given to the
creation of coherent, attractive neighbourhoods. The network of spaces at Poundbury gives a clear
identity to each part of the development.
Section 17 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 imposes a duty on local planning authorities to
exercise their function with due regard to preventing crime and disorder. There is considerable
scope to meet the road safety elements of this requirement at no extra cost by designing low speeds
into new-build developments from the earliest design stage, exactly as has been achieved at
Poundbury.
Contact:
Ian Madgwick
Environmental Services Department
Dorset County Council
Dorchester
Dorset DT1 1XJ
(tel: 01305 224 265)
4.6 References for Section 4
Department of Transport (1997) Traffic Advisory Leaflet 2/97: Traffic Calming on Major Roads –
A49, Craven Arms, Shropshire, London: DoT
Derbyshire County Council (2000) Highway signs: Environmental code of Practice, Matlock: DCC
Department of the Environment/Department of Transport (1992) Design Bulletin 32, Residential
roads and footpaths – Layout considerations (2nd edition), London: Stationery Office
DETR (1998) Places, Streets and Movement: A Companion Guide to Design Bulletin 32
(Residential Roads and Footpaths), London: DETR
DETR (2000) Traffic Advisory Leaflet 1/00: Traffic Calming on Major Roads, London: DETR
English Heritage (2000) Streets for All: A guide to the management of London’s streets, London:
English Heritage
Farmer, S, Barker, J and Mayhew, N (1998) ‘A trial in Norfolk of interactive speed limit signs’,
Traffic Engineering and Control, May, pp287-292
Traffic Engineering and Control (2000) ‘Fibre optic signs show excellent driver response’, pp81-82
West Lothian Council (1998) Strategic Services Committee, 17 November 1998, Traffic Calming
Measures
SECTION 5
INTRODUCING LOWER SPEEDS LIMITS
5.1 Suffolk County Council village speed limit initiative
In 1994 Suffolk County Council set up a Speed Management Panel of council members to consider
a speed management strategy for the County. The question addressed by the Panel was: ‘What can
the County Council do to bring about a change in attitudes about speed?’ The Panel agreed that the
needs and expectations of the local community were of paramount importance, rather than those of
passing motorists (Suffolk County Council, 1997).
The County Council introduced its village speed limit initiative between November 1994 and
December 1996. The Council rejected the advice of the Department of Transport’s Circular 1/93 on
existing driver speed and set out with the presumption that each village or location where groups of
people live should have a 30mph speed limit. The policy was to introduce a consistent speed limit
for all residential areas, even tiny hamlets. The Council hoped that the implementation of the policy
would lead to an improvement in safety and the quality of life of residents in the county.
By December 1996 an estimated 700km of 30mph limit had been introduced in Suffolk – probably
the largest recent implementation of new speed limits by any local authority in the UK. Over 450
new 30mph speed limits were installed within the two-year period, at a cost of approximately
£4,500 per speed limit. A total of 280 new speed restrictions were established, and 85 parishes
introduced significant extensions to already existing 30mph limits. A further 85 parishes had speed
limits reduced from 40 to 30mph. The overall cost was £1.2 million, averaging £2,500 per village.
The initial estimate for the work had been £2 million, but economies of scale and geographic
grouping of the work programme managed to reduce the total by 40% (Jeanes, 1997).
There was poor awareness of the local speed limit before the installation of the new signs, but
almost total awareness after implementation, according to a survey of village residents carried out
by the Transport Research Laboratory (TRL, 1996a). The extent of the speed limits was agreed with
local people, overseen (and sometimes arbitrated) by the Speed Management Panel. The TRL
survey found that 66% of village residents were enthusiastic about the policy, although a further
quarter disapproved. Three quarters of all respondents had noticed changes to the speed limit in
Suffolk villages other than their own.
The major area of concern was danger to pedestrians and cyclists, especially child pedestrians, with
at least a third of respondents strongly agreeing that traffic was dangerous to these groups both
before and after the new speed limits were introduced. A fifth of respondents also believed their
quality of life had improved with the implementation of the new signs, although 77% felt it
remained the same as before.
Speed reductions within the new speed limit areas were found to have resulted in 20% fewer
crashes compared to Suffolk roads on which there had been no change of limit. Comparisons were
also made between unrestricted roads in Suffolk and Cambridgeshire, and it was found that there
were proportionately fewer crashes in Suffolk. The County Council has concluded, therefore, that
the 30mph restrictions did not lead to an increase in crashes on adjacent unrestricted roads.
The reduction in the number of crashes was estimated at 130 across all the speed limit areas in the
period since implementation of the new limits. This equates to a reduction of 45 crashes per year
across the speed limit areas. It was found that reductions in crashes were greater where the speed
limit was reduced from the national speed limit of 60 to 30mph than where the change was from 40
to 30mph. Where speed limits were reduced from 60 to 30mph there was an average speed
reduction of 6.2mph, while where speed limits were reduced from 40 to 30mph there was an
average speed reduction of 4mph. Suffolk County Council’s county-wide approach was
acknowledged in the government’s Review of Speed Policy for its success in reducing casualties.
Contact:Mike Jeanes
Environment and Transport Department
Suffolk County Council
St Edmund House
County Hall
Ipswich IP4 1LZ
(tel: 01473 583 145)
5.2 Oxfordshire County Council 30mph limits
In August 1997 Oxfordshire County Council resolved to introduce 30mph limits in most
Oxfordshire settlements, subject to agreement with parish and town councils. A settlement was
defined as a continuous built-up area of at least 20 houses, but schools and businesses generating
greater vehicular or pedestrian flows than an average house can compensate for fewer dwellings.
Starting in the Vale of the White Horse and West Oxfordshire, the County Council has
acknowledged the work undertaken by Suffolk County Council in its resolve to implement 30mph
speed limits across the county. It has also planned to monitor sites in order to provide ‘before’ and
‘after’ data.
Contact:
Geoff Barrell
Environmental Services
Oxfordshire County Council
Speedwell House
Speedwell Street
Oxford OX1 1NE
(tel: 01865 810 450)
5.3 20mph zones
The first three 20mph zones in the UK were implemented in January 1991. Five years later the
Transport Research Laboratory reviewed the results from 250 zones in England, Wales and
Scotland (TRL, 1996b), with the following major findings:
average speeds had fallen by 9mph
the annual total of crashes had fallen by 60%
the number of crashes involving children had fallen by 67%
crashes involving cyclists had fallen by 29%
Traffic flows in the zones had been reduced by 27%, but flows on the surrounding boundary roads
had increased by 12%. There had been little crash migration to surrounding roads.
There are now around 500 such zones across the UK. Since June 1999 local authorities in England
(Circular 05/99), Wales (Circular 28/99) and Scotland (Circular 13/99) no longer need consent from
the Secretary of State before implementing 20mph speed limits. There are two different means of
implementing 20mph speed limits: (a) where speed limits are indicated by entrance and repeater
signs alone; (b) where a combination of signs and traffic calming measures provide selfenforcement. The vast majority of schemes consist of self-enforcing traffic calming schemes, partly
because the police cannot guarantee sufficient resources to enforce ‘signs only’ 20mph limits.
5.4 Scottish trial programme of advisory 20mph speed limits
Indications to date suggest that schemes with fewer physical measures have a lesser impact on
speed than schemes with more physical restrictions, both in urban and rural locations (DETR, 1999;
Silcock, 2000). In Scotland, however, the Society of Chief Officers of Transportation in Scotland
(SCOTS) invited councils to participate in a trial of advisory 20mph speed limits, using 20mph
signs and markings in areas where the official speed limit remains 30mph. The 18-month trial began
in spring 1998, and involved 75 sites from 27 councils. The Scottish Office (now Scottish
Executive) commissioned consultants to carry out research into the impact of the advisory speed
limits, including attitudinal surveys among residents.
Results show that even these ‘signs only’ measures have been successful in bringing or keeping
average speeds under 20mph. The advisory 20mph limits have been particularly effective where the
‘before’ speeds were in the upper range of the sample. Interim results from a sample of speed
surveys (see Table 5) show that at seven survey sites there were decreases in average speed, one site
recorded an increase, and five sites experienced no change. Final results seem to bear out the
interim findings, and to confirm that local residents are pleased with the overall drop in speeds.
Table 5: Average speed and severity factor changes in Scottish advisory 20mph limits trial (interim
results)
average speed severity factor
location before after change before after change
Lochside/Denmore Park, Aberdeen 29 17 -12 0.466 0.121 -0.345
Broomfield Road, Portlethen 21 17 -4 0.200 0.128 -0.072
Wallamhill Road, Dumfries & Galloway 16 16 0 0.076 0.081 +0.005
Buckstone Crescent, Edinburgh 26 25 -1 0.354 0.326 -0.018
Buckstone Loan, Edinburgh 26 26 0 0.360 0.338 -0.022
Buckstone Loan East, Edinburgh 22 20 -2 0.232 0.182 -0.050
Oliver Road, Falkirk 23 21 -2 0.267 0.191 -0.076
Moncks Road, Falkirk 21 20 -1 0.200 0.177 -0.023
Hawley Road, Falkirk 18 20 +2 0.147 0.204 +0.057
Cromwell Road, Falkirk 22 21 -1 0.241 0.219 -0.022
Marchburn Drive, Midlothian 19 19 0 0.156 0.152 -0.004
Milton Quadrant, Kilbirnie 24 24 0 0.285 0.265 -0.020
Stockbridge Cresc, Kilbirnie 21 21 0 0.212 0.185 -0.027
Table 5 also provides a calculation of the severity factor, calculated from the likely degree of
severity of injury to a pedestrian struck by a motor vehicle at various speeds. This is intended to
allow a comparison between sites and the effectiveness of the measures. As a benchmark, if all
vehicles travelled at 20mph then the severity factor would be 0.100.
Contact:
Janet Ruiz
Central Research Unit
Scottish Executive
Victoria Quay
Edinburgh EH6 6QQ
(tel: 0131 244 0377)
5.5 Kingston Upon Hull: 20mph zones programme
In the mid-1990s Hull City Council launched a programme of implementing 20mph speed limit
zones, and by summer 2000 a total of 80 zones had been established. One reason for their
widespread introduction was that the city has casualty rates for child pedestrians and cyclists well
above the national average. It also has a relatively high level of cycle use, with a modal share of
14% for the journey to work. In addition, 51% of households in Hull have no car, which is also well
above the national average.
Typical speed reductions in 20mph zones vary according to the types of measures applied. Schemes
using road humps only have been most effective, bringing down mean speeds to 17mph. Speed
cushions together with road narrowing have brought speeds down to 20mph, while schemes using
cushions only have brought speeds down to 22mph.
As the result of concerns expressed by the Ambulance Service, the City Council has agreed that
from 1999:
all vertical measures will be a maximum 75mm high
all cushions will be 2.1m wide with 550mm side slopes
all speed table ramps will be 1800mm long
all schemes will include the minimum number of measures to achieve objectives
bollards will be placed adjacent to humps/ cushions as markers on local distributor roads
the Council will revisit earlier schemes to make them ambulance-friendly
Since the introduction of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, all local schemes have also been subject
to a police crime and disorder audit. Public consultation has been conducted by leaflet and
questionnaire to all households on all schemes, together with public exhibitions and occasional
feedback sessions to update residents on progress, as well as presentations to ward forums and
residents associations.
Questionnaires have typically met with response rates of around 25-40%, of which:
80-90% are in favour of 20mph zones
70-80% are in favour of humps/cushions
60% are in favour of narrowings/priority workings
Three schemes to date have not received a majority mandate and so have not progressed. By
summer 2000 there were over 70 sites with petitions for traffic calming, as well as three requests for
home zones (one from an existing 20mph zone). The Council now considers home zones as possible
parts of all future traffic calming and 20mph zones.
The results of Kingston Upon Hull’s 20mph zone programme have been impressive, particularly in
13 zones installed in 1996/97. The total number of crashes within these zones has fallen by 56%,
while the number of people killed and seriously injured has fallen by 90%. The Council also saw a
first year economic rate of return from these schemes of 1,160%.
Contact:
Tony Kirby
Road Safety Unit, Traffic Services
Kingston Upon Hull City Council
Kingston House
Hull HU1 3ER
(tel: 01482 612 108)
5.6 City of Edinburgh Council: 20mph zones
Since August 1998 City of Edinburgh Council has primarily focused on converting existing traffic
calming schemes to self-enforcing 20mph speed limits. The first tranche of traffic calming schemes
approved for conversion required additional measures costing between £4,000 to £75,000 per
scheme, depending on the extent of the work required (City of Edinburgh, 2000):
Broomhouse £20,000
Calders £15,000
Devon Place £6,000
Duddingston Village £4,000
Dundee Street £6,000
Grange £24,000
Royston/Wardieburn £75,000
The Council has also consulted widely with interest groups in the different residential districts
affected by proposals to change traffic calming schemes into 20mph zones. In South East
Edinburgh, for example, 104 groups were consulted. Out of the 20 responses, only Lothian
Regional Transport objected to the proposals, whilst other groups sought extensions of the pilot area
(City of Edinburgh, 1999).
The provision of 20mph speed limits outside primary schools was agreed by the Council in 1998
and is being taken forward as part of the Safer Routes to Schools programme. Due to cost
implications, the progress of the programme will be dependent on future capital budget allocations
(City of Edinburgh, 1999). The budget for implementation of 20mph zones in Edinburgh is
£510,000 between 2000 and 2003.
By March 2003 roughly 10% of the city’s road network in built-up areas will be covered by 20mph
zones.
Contact:
Phil Noble
City Development Department
City of Edinburgh Council
1 Cockburn Street
Edinburgh EH1 1BL
(tel: 0131 469 3803)
5.7 Buxtehude, Germany:speed reduction through area-wide Tempo 30
Buxtehude is a town of 32,000 inhabitants in the north of Germany, 34km south-west of Hamburg.
It was one of six locations selected to take part in the national traffic calming demonstration project
of the former West Germany. In this context Buxtehude developed one of the most comprehensive
examples of area-wide traffic calming and Tempo 30 zones, and became one of the models for the
Tempo 30 programme extended across Germany during the 1990s.
Specifically, 30kph limits have been established in the centre and northern districts of the town,
where around 11,000 inhabitants live. The Council has used an extensive public relations
programme to explain the plans in order to win support from residents.
The measures have been implemented in two main phases. During 1983 two main Tempo 30 areas
were established, with narrowing of entrances to the areas. The second stage began in 1986 and was
completed in 1987. It included the renewal and part conversion of distributor roads, conversion of a
main street into a ‘shopping boulevard’, and conversion of some streets into pedestrian zones in the
oldest part of Buxtehude.
A five-tier road hierarchy is used in Buxtehude, as in many other areas of Germany, to provide a
guide to the types of measures appropriate in different parts of the network. This comprises:
pedestrian zones (Fussgängerzonen), usually shopping areas, where motor traffic is removed
residential streets (Wohnstrassen), where traffic calming is often widely applied and where all
through traffic is removed
collector roads (Sammelstrassen), where speed reduction is achieved by reducing space for motor
vehicles
main roads (Hauptstrassen), where there are possibilities for speed reduction measures, tempered by
the needs of through traffic, public transport and service vehicles
limited access roads (Autobahnen), which have speed limits in urban areas only
The results of Tempo 30 in Buxtehude have been impressive: the number of casualties in the 30kph
areas dropped by 60%. Nor has the introduction of lower speed limits been confined to residential
streets. Traffic calming measures and carriageway width reductions on main roads have also helped
to reduce both traffic casualties and speeds.
On residential roads 85th percentile speeds fell from 44 to 35kph on average, and on main roads
from 53 to 40kph. On the surrounding roads where there is no 30kph speed limit, speeds have fallen
from 54 to 51kph (see Table 6). These changes led to increases in pedestrian and cycle traffic in the
area of 17% and 27% respectively. Over the same period car traffic increased by only 2%.
Table 6: Mean and 85th percentile speeds in Buxtehude before and after Tempo 30 (all speeds in
kph)
before (1983) after (1988)
mean 85th %ile mean 85th %ile
Residential roads 35 44 32 35
Distributor roads 45 53 34 40
Surrounding traffic roads 54 64 51 60
The conversion of one of the main streets in the centre of Buxtehude, Bahnhofstrasse, into a
‘shopping boulevard’ was achieved by narrowing the road to 6.5 metres and raising all junctions.
Cycle paths were built in both directions. The mean speed declined from 42 to 33kph, while the
85th percentile speed fell from 48 to 41kph.
5.8 References for Section 5
City of Edinburgh (1999) City Development, Transportation Committee, 20mph speed limits:
statutory changes, 9 August 1999
City of Edinburgh (2000) City Development, Transportation Committee, 20mph speed limit zones
in existing traffic calmed areas, 10 April 2000
Danish Road Directorate (1993) An improved traffic environment: A catalogue of ideas, Denmark:
Herlev
DETR (1999) Traffic Advisory Leaflet 9/99: 20mph Speed Limits and Zones, London: DETR
Jeanes, M (1997) ‘Suffolk’s 30mph speed limit initiative’, (edited and updated version of 1996
PTRC paper), Suffolk County Council
Oxfordshire County Council (1999) Oxfordshire County Council’s 30mph speeds limit project –
West Oxfordshire, Oxford: OCC
Scottish Executive (1999) Evaluation of the 20mph speed reduction initiative: Interim report
(unpublished)
Silcock, R (2000) ‘Design issues for rural traffic management’, in Design issues for rural traffic
management: Conference Proceedings, by Landscape Design Associates and Ross Silcock Limited,
Cheltenham: Countryside Agency
Suffolk County Council (1997) 30mph speed limit initiative: Speed monitoring, Ipswich: SCC
Transport 2000 (undated) A set of case study examples of good practice from German speaking
countries, unpublished report by Julia Rohrig
Transport Research Laboratory (1996a) Suffolk 30mph speed initiative independent survey, by
Farmer, S, unpublished Project Report PR/TT/129/96
Transport Research Laboratory (1996b) A review of traffic calming schemes in 20mph zones,
Report 215, by Webster, D and Mackie, A, Crowthorne: TRL
SECTION 6
ENFORCEMENT, EDUCATION AND TRAINING
6.1 Speed cameras
Section 23 of the Road Traffic Act 1991, which came into force on 1 July 1992, provides that in the
prosecution of drivers for exceeding speed limits photographs from an approved automatic speed
camera may be used as evidence without the corroboration of a police officer. Funding for start-up
purchasing costs of speed cameras is usually shared between local authorities and the police,
although it can also include the Highways Agency and Crown Prosecution Service and the courts
(DETR, 1999).
The first speed cameras in the UK were installed in West London in 1992. The demonstration
project, initiated by the Department of Transport and taken over by the Highways Agency, was
expanded to include red light cameras on the trunk road network in four London boroughs. Within
five years the number of fatal crashes had fallen by 70% and serious injuries by 28%. Pedestrian
casualties fell by 41%, casualties to pedal cyclists and motor cyclists by 13% and 20% respectively.
The cost benefit to society of preventing these crashes was calculated at £20m a year (Highways
Agency, 1997).
A 1996 study of the use of speed cameras in 10 police force areas provided further evidence of their
effectiveness. This analysis concluded that the benefits generated by cameras far outweighed the
costs of purchasing, installing and running them. Among the benefits, the report calculated that
casualties had fallen by an average of 28% at 174 sites covered, and that speeds had fallen by an
average 2.3mph per site (Hooke, Knox and Portas, 1996).
One constraint on expanding the use of speed cameras has been meeting the costs involved in their
installation and operation. A two-year pilot scheme that puts money raised from speed fines back
into buying and maintaining cameras began in April 2000 in eight police forces (including Thames
Valley Police – see below). The cameras are placed at locations with a crash history, and the funds
raised are spent only on scheme running costs.
The success of the pilot has encouraged hopes of an early national ‘roll-out’ to all police forces. An
annual increase of 300,000 tickets was originally expected (Bell, 2000). But in Northamptonshire
alone the expected increase in 2000 is 100,000 tickets, compared with 4,000 issued in 1999.
Average speeds of motorists in Northamptonshire have been cut by 13%. This has been
accompanied by a 40% fall in the numbers of people killed and seriously injured (Local Transport
Today, 2000). In all of the pilot areas 85th percentile speeds are much lower than had been
predicted (Bell, 2000).
6.2 Thames Valley Police: Safer Roads Partnership
The Safer Roads Partnership involves Thames Valley Police, local authorities, magistrates’ courts
and the Crown Prosecution Service in Oxfordshire, Berkshire and Buckinghamshire. The
Partnership was chosen as one of eight national bodies to run the speed camera pilot project
described above.
Under the project the police, local authorities and courts have been given the power to use funds
from red light and speed camera fixed penalty tickets to increase enforcement, both by using
existing roadside safety cameras and by raising public awareness about road safety. The move
follows increasing demand from the public for safer roads in the Thames Valley, as identified
through community safety audits (Thames Valley Police, 2000a).
One of the Partnership activities is a Safer Roads Campaign. This includes an initiative whereby
anyone caught speeding below a set threshold is offered the option of (a) a £¸60 fine and three
penalty points on their licence, or (b) a visit to a nearby exhibition to watch a safety video, hear
from road safety officers about the effects of speed and learn lessons on their driving behaviour
(Buckinghamshire County Council, 1999). Those caught driving above the threshold automatically
receive a fixed penalty ticket or have to go to court.
A month-long speed check in May 2000 resulted in more than 800 drivers being stopped at 19
separate Safer Roads checks across Oxfordshire, Buckinghamshire and Berkshire – sites chosen
because they have a history of injury collisions caused by speeding. Of those, 485 drivers were
given cautions for speeding and attended an exhibition staffed by road safety officers. A further 274
were given fixed penalty tickets, while 18 were reported to court for excessive speed and may be
banned from driving (Thames Valley Police, 2000b).
In 1998 Buckinghamshire County Council also sponsored two vehicles to be used by Thames
Valley Police to assist with speed enforcement and accident reduction in Buckinghamshire. The
vehicles are supplied for the exclusive use of Speed Reduction Officers in Buckinghamshire.
Details of the use of the two vehicles in the 18 months between 28 September 1998 and 31 March
1999 are provided in Table 7.
Table 7: Use of speed reduction vehicles in Buckinghamshire speed enforcement initiative,
September 1998 to March 1999
district total no of visits* offences detected
Aylesbury Vale 330 1,819
Chiltern 149 836
South Bucks 105 598
Wycombe 198 1,235
total 782 4,488
* some sites visited more than once
Contact:
Nikki Malin
MOPS HQ
Banbury Police Station
Warwick Road
Banbury OX16 2AE
(tel: 01295 754 722)
6.3 Sussex Police: Commercial Operators Safer Transport Scheme (COSTS)
In October 1999 Sussex Police launched an initiative aimed at improving standards among drivers
of commercial vehicles, the Commercial Operators Safer Transport Scheme (COSTS). The title has
been used to remind the fleet vehicle industry that road crashes make real cost impacts on their
businesses.
From 1 October 1999 letters have been sent to fleet operators whenever one of their vehicles is
stopped by the police for speeding, or any other offence where road users are put in danger and the
company is otherwise unaware of the actions of its employee. The scheme applies to all drivers and
riders in Sussex issued with a fixed penalty notice or reported for summons where the vehicle is
owned by or is being used on behalf of a commercial organisation. A standard letter is sent to the
registered keeper identifying the time, date and nature of the offence, as well as the make and
registration number of the vehicle involved. It does not name the offender.
The letter urges the company to ensure that people using its vehicles do so safely. It also invites
them to consider their own procedures – driver schedules, job requirements and incentives – in case
they put pressure on staff to take chances on the road. Further advice in the management of
occupational risk is also offered.
The principle of advising the registered keeper of an offence involving one of their vehicles has
been established by the use of automatic speed cameras, so the COSTS scheme is a logical
extension. The scheme is a one-year pilot which will be evaluated to assess whether companies
contacted have taken any action. Sussex Police would like to see the project extended across the
country; one problem highlighted by the pilot is that Sussex Police officers have no remit to chase
up drivers of company vehicles from outside Sussex.
Contact:
Inspector Steve Long
Traffic Division
Terminus Road
Bexhill-on-Sea
East Sussex TN39 3NR
(tel: 01424 456 084)
6.4 References for Section 6
Bell, I (2000), ‘Speed Enforcement Technology: Police Applications and the Role of Hypothecation
in Casualty Reduction’, Aston University Conference: Managing Vehicle Speed for Safety,
Birmingham, September 2000
Buckinghamshire County Council (1999) Local Transport Plan 2000-2005, Aylesbury: BCC
DETR (1999) The effects of speed cameras: how drivers respond, Road Safety Research Report No.
11, London: DETR
Highways Agency (1997) 'UK's first speed cameras cut road deaths by 70%'. Highways Agency
press release, 16 July 1997
Hooke, A, Knox, J and Portas, D (1996) Cost benefit analysis of traffic light and speed cameras,
Police Research Series Paper 20, Home Office: Police Research Group
Local Transport Today (2000). 'National roll-out for speed camera hypothecation after positive
results', 21 December 2000
Thames Valley Police (2000a) News and Information, ‘Safer Roads Campaign’,
saferroads@thamesvalley.police.uk
Thames Valley Police (2000b) News and Information, ‘Reckless drivers run the risk of speed’,
Safer Roads Campaign, saferroads@thamesvalley.police.uk
SECTION 7
COMMUNITY CONSULTATION
Consultation is a powerful tool for improving the quality and cost effectiveness of services, and for
ensuring that policy makers stay in touch with citizens. The government attaches a high priority to
effective public involvement in local transport policies, and this will be a key factor in its
consideration of Local Transport Plans. The need for genuinely inclusive approaches to consultation
is a requirement set out by DETR in its Guidance on Full Local Transport Plans (DETR, 2000).
The importance of community consultation as an aspect of speed management has been illustrated
through the examples of good practice described in previous sections. Specific examples have been
given from York, Kingston Upon Hull and Edinburgh, as well as from Devon, Surrey and West
Sussex County Councils. These have linked community consultation to recent legislative
requirements for regular public consultation under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, Local
Government Act 1999 (Best Value) and Local Government Act 2000.
7.1 Audit commission guidelines
The Audit Commission has published valuable guidance for local authorities on effective
consultation, much of which is available on its website (www.audit-commission.gov.uk). Key
issues identified in the Audit Commission’s Listen Up! guide to effective community consultation
(Audit Commission, 1998) include the following:
Many authorities are moving away from so-called traditional methods such as consultation
documents, opinion polls and public meetings, with growing numbers using panel surveys, citizens’
juries and interactive websites. The key to success, however, is matching the methods used to the
purpose of the exercise and the service in question.
Consultation exercises need to be inclusive, and minorities (including children) may have different
needs from those of the majority. If they are not consulted effectively, their views may remain
invisible.
Auditors reporting on Best Value performance plans will look for evidence of a strategic approach
to consultation. Inspectors reporting on specific services, such as transport planning, will be looking
for evidence that individual consultation exercises fit into a broader consultation framework, have
been carried out to a high standard using appropriate methods, and have been used to inform
relevant decisions.
7.2 Quiet Roads public engagement process
Quiet Roads is a new Countryside Agency initiative to enable shared use of minor rural roads by
cyclists, walkers, horse riders and motorists. The Quiet Roads concept includes road speed
reduction as well as environmental management. Acknowledging the importance of community
consultation to the success of the schemes, the Countryside Agency has developed a process of
public engagement which involves the community at each stage of the project.
The Quiet Roads public engagement process is based on the ‘community approach’ in which local
authority officers, local groups, key stakeholders, professionals and the community develop the
project together. Demonstration projects in Kent and Norfolk have developed a three-pronged
approach based on the separate stages of information, consultation and participation:
Information
Use techniques such as workshops and meetings to inform the whole community about:
the Quiet Roads concept
opportunities for public involvement
milestones achieved during the Quiet Roads network development
the network in use
Consultation
Encourage the public to contribute to:
the identification of problems and issues in their area
the type of measures they would like to see used to address those issues and problems
Find out:
levels of support for the Quiet Roads concept and the network locally
preference for the final network and strategy
Participation
Directly involve a smaller number of people in:
monitoring and review of strategy, design and implementation
monitoring of the network in use
evaluation of the network
The Quiet Roads public engagement process involves the largest number of people at the earliest
stage, where information is targeted to the widest possible audience. Consultation is targeted at
particular business groups, local residents, interest groups,
user groups and visitors. Participation is considered most effective when it involves key
representatives
of the public.
Full information on the Quiet Roads public engagement process is available on the Countryside
Agency’s dedicated Greenways and Quiet Roads website: www.greenways.gov.uk.
7.3 References for Section 7
Audit Commission (1998) Listen up! Effective community consultation, London: Audit
Commission
DETR (2000) Guidance on Full Local Transport Plans, London: DETR
Further reading
Transport 2000 (1996) Feet first: public attitudes and consultation in traffic calming schemes, by
Taylor, D and Tight, M, London: Transport 2000
SECTION 8
LOOKING AHEAD: SPEED LIMITERS
In-vehicle speed limiters have substantial potential for enforcing speed limits. One type has been in
use since March 1988, when British and European legislation made it compulsory for speed limiters
to be fitted to almost all coaches and to most heavy goods vehicles. Some lorries and most coaches
are limited to 60mph, but this only addresses top speeds and can therefore only enforce the speed
limit on motorways (Plowden and Hillman, 1996).
8.1 Variable speed limiters
With a variable speed limiter, however, the speed at which the limiter starts to take effect can be
altered. This makes it possible to use the limiter to enforce the speed limit on all classes of road.
Variable speed limiters can be either externally activated or operated by the driver. Externally
activated limiters are triggered by a radio signal which can be transmitted from equipment installed
at the roadside or under the road, or (the method favoured by DETR and the EU) from a satellite.
With a driver-operated limiter, the driver sets the limiter at or below the speed limit of the road on
which they are driving. Conspicuously positioned colour-coded lights, for example on the front and
rear windscreens, would indicate within which band the limiter had been set.
With externally activated speed limiters, speed limits would become entirely self-enforcing. For the
driver-operated speed limiter, the external lights would make enforcement much easier than at
present. Driver-operated limiters could, however, be introduced much more quickly than externally
activated speed limiters. Perfecting externally activated limiters may require years of research, but
driver-operated limiters rely on the same technology as cruise control, which is already thoroughly
established.
There is, indeed, no technical reason why speed limiters could not be included in all new cars as of
now, adding around £40 to the manufacturing cost. This compares to £2,000 estimated for the type
of variable speed limiter now being developed for the DETR by the Institute for Transport Studies
at Leeds University (a cost expected to fall to around £360 per vehicle by 2010, when the road maps
necessary for the satellite system to work should be standard in most cars). The advantage of an
externally activated limiter over a driver-operated one would have to be substantial in order to
justify a cost difference of £300 per vehicle and a delay of 10 years, given the thousands of deaths
and injuries which could be prevented during that time.
The Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety (PACTS) has recommended that DETR,
the Department of Trade and Industry and European authorities work together on the development
of variable speed limiters. They should, PACTS recommends, promote further research, including
field trials, into long-term behavioural changes as well as levels of public acceptability and concern
over speed limiters (PACTS, 1999).
8.2 European MASTER Project speed limiter field trials
As part of the European MASTER Project (Managing Speeds of Traffic on European Roads), field
trials were carried out in Sweden, Spain and the Netherlands using cars with on-board speed
limiters which ensured vehicles could not exceed the speed limits posted. The trials were carried out
in order to investigate driver reaction and acceptance of an in-car speed limiter. Between 20 and 24
drivers per country drove twice along a test route, once with the limiter off and once with the limiter
on. The length of test route was 20-30km, consisting of an urban street network, rural roads and a
length of motorway.
The speed limiter reduced mean speeds significantly on all types of urban roads with speed limits of
30, 40, 50 and 60kph speed limits. On rural roads the speed limiters were only effective in reducing
mean speeds on 70kph speed limit roads in Sweden. On other stretches of roads (with speed limits
of 80 and 90kph) no significant effect could be found. The researchers suggested this was due to
traffic volume on these roads, with frequent platooning of vehicles.
Having considered the results of this field trial and other research on speed limiters, the European
MASTER Project recommended: "Preparation for the introduction of compulsory adaptive speed
limiters should be started" (MASTER Project, 1999).
Most powers of vehicle regulation have now passed from individual countries to the European
Commission, and this poses a potential legal obstacle to the introduction of variable speed limiters.
However, EU member states have retained some powers to legislate independently on matters
affecting safety. This might enable the UK to introduce speed limiters independently, or to ask
leave to do so on the grounds that trials by one member state would be in the interests of all.
Legislation would set a date from which all new vehicles would have to be equipped with driveroperated variable speed limiters. A second date would be set from which all drivers with in-car
speed limiters would have to use them. Owners of cars already on the road could be encouraged to
retrofit speed limiters, for example through a temporary reduction in Vehicle Excise Duty
(experiments in Germany in the late 1980s suggest that retrofitting would cost around £250 per
vehicle).
There would eventually be a legal obligation on drivers to set limiters to the prevailing speed limit,
but control would remain in the driver’s hands. A driver-operated speed limiter would also allow
the driver to break the speed limit in an emergency.
8.3 References for Section 8
MASTER Project (1999) Managing speeds of traffic on European roads, Transport Research,
Fourth Framework Programme Road Transport, Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of
the European Communities
PACTS (1999) Road traffic law and enforcement: a driving force for casualty reduction (summary),
London: PACTS
Plowden, S and Hillman, M (1996) Speed control and transport policy, London: Policy Studies
Institute