Killing Speed: a good Practice Guide to Speed Management

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: [phone])

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: [phone])

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’, [e-mail]
Thames Valley Police (2000b) News and Information, ‘Reckless drivers run the risk of speed’, Safer Roads Campaign, [e-mail]
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 driver-operated 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