|
Publications |
|
Government speeding penalties consultation announcement 9 November 2007 |
|
|
|
|
The Slower Speeds Initiative welcomes the news that the Government proposes to raise speeding penalties for very excessive speeding. |
|
Read more...
|
|
|
20's Plenty Useful resources |
|
|
|
New guidance from the Department for Transport and the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (now Department of Communities and Local Government), the 'Manual for Streets' makes the case for 20mph limits for all streets where people should have priority over traffic. The Manual for Streets attempts to redress the balance in urban design, restoring 'place' over 'traffic'. While it is aimed primarily at lightly trafficked roads in new developments, it is also intended to guide highway authorities in reworking existing streets. It's a good introduction to essential principles, good practice and design, as well as issues your local authority has to address in managing streets.
The updated guidance to local authorities on Setting Local Speed limits (circular 1/06) is less helpful, but still states that 'local speed limits of 20 mph are, however, encouraged in situations where there is a particular risk to vulnerable road users' (paragraph 68). This is an improvement on the consultation draft. (See our response to the 2005 consultation with further arguments for a default 20mph limit, pp7-8 and pp16-18 of the full response.)
The Department for Transport also publishes Traffic Advisory Leaflets, technical guidance to highway engineers, including on traffic calming.
A February 2000 Panorama programme on speed provides a compelling introduction to the origins of the 20's Plenty campaign. It shows the impact of road death and why vehicle design is critical to creating civilised streets.
See also our links to useful references sites.
|
|
|
Our work: sustainable speed limits |
|
|
|
SPEED MANAGEMENT AND SPEED LIMITS - SSI response to Government consultation on updated Circular Roads 1/93 Setting Local Speed Limits
The Government has recently consulted on new guidance for setting speed limits, following on from a promise in the 2000 Road Safety Strategy to provide new guidance taking all road users into account. The proposed speed assessment framework has the possibility of opening a new era of evidence-based speed limits, but the logic of the approach is not followed through. The new guidance will not make the network significantly safer for pedestrians and cyclists or improve quality of life for communities. Communities should have a voice in determining appropriate speed limits. For more about the response, click here.
SPEED AND SUSTAINABILITY — EVIDENCED-BASED SPEED LIMITS
None of our speed limits have an empirical basis, despite the importance of speed to the overall efficiency of our transport system and its range of impacts. Speed directly affects the frequency and severity of crashes, journey times, fuel consumption and emissions, noise, vehicle operating costs, highway capacity and the amount of land needed for roads. Indirectly it affects transport mode choice by introducing danger and by encouraging dispersed development. Visit our Sustainable Speed Limits Introduction page.
Back
20's Plenty |
|
|
Getting the Genie Back in the Bottle |
|
|
|
|
Slower Speeds Initiative research shows speed reduction the single most effective measure to cut carbon emissions from road transport now.
Joint research undertaken by the Slower Speeds Initiative and the UK Energy Research Centre shows that a lower top speed limit would be the most ‘significant, certain, immediate, equitable and cost-effective’ way to reduce carbon emissions from road transport.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Speed cameras work: 4th year report on the National Safety Camera Partnerships |
|
|
|
|
JOINT PRESS RELEASE FROM THE SLOWER SPEEDS INITIATIVE AND ROADPEACE 14 December 2005
IT COULD BE YOU: SAFETY CAMERAS PREVENT HUNDREDS OF DEATHS AND SERIOUS INJURIES FOR THE FOURTH YEAR IN A ROW.
The Slower Speeds Initiative (1) and RoadPeace (2) today welcomed today's news that at least 1745 deaths and serious injuries have been prevented by speed limit enforcement. They also welcomed lower thresholds for enforcement and the promise of new funds for local road safety but criticised the Government for still requiring casualties as a prerequisite for law enforcement (3). Four years of enforcement action by Safety Camera Partnerships have shown that speed cameras could be used to prevent as well as reduce casualties.
Far from a reduction in the number of speed cameras, the organisations are confident that local accountability and the introduction of a value for money approach will ensure that cameras will remain a top option for roads with speed limits above 30mph. The new system should also allow authorities to use cameras to enforce 20mph limits for roads where humps are not practical.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
20's Plenty Campaign Rationale |
|
|
|
Over half of road deaths and serious injuries occur in 30mph limits. A properly enforced 20mph speed limit on built up roads could reduce these casualties by over 50%, and reduce the national road toll by over a quarter. It would reduce the current very great injustice in access to our road network where pedestrians and cyclists — road users who pose no serious harm to others — are nearly 20 times more likely to be killed per mile travelled than car occupants.
A 20mph speed limit would reduce social exclusion. The disproportionate threat of death and injury for pedestrians and cyclists is compounded by poverty and age. Poorer neighbourhoods disproportionately bear the brunt of road danger. Child pedestrians from poorer households are five times more likely to become road casualties than their richer counterparts.
A 20mph speed limit would restore the balance between motor traffic and communities. It would reduce noise and severance. By encouraging walking and chatting, it would help to increase social interaction.
By enabling more walking and cycling, a 20mph speed limit would help to cut our greenhouse gas emissions, reduce fossil fuel dependence and buffer the country against the shocks of a rising and unstable oil price.
By enabling more walking and cycling, especially by children, a 20mph speed limit would do more than any other single measure to defuse the health time bomb of obesity, diabetes and coronary heart disease caused by sedentary lifestyles.
|
|
|
20's Plenty Letter to MPs |
|
|
|
Dear [Your MP*]
20's Plenty!
I support the call by the Slower Speeds Initiative, RoadPeace, Living Streets and the Safer Streets Coalition for 20mph to become the maximum traffic speed on streets where people live, work, shop and play.
A properly enforced 20mph limit on these streets has the potential to reduce death and serious injuries by over 50% and create a road environment that would encourage a significant increase in walking and cycling. The health and environmental benefits would be enormous.
To achieve this, more resources should be devoted to local safety schemes which prevent as well as reduce casualties and to innovative traffic calming schemes which improve the local environment. There should also be appropriate resources for enforcing a 20mph speed limit. In the long run, cars should be designed to make it easier for drivers to comply with speed limits that reflect the needs of communities and all road users.
Yours sincerely
*You can find out how to contact your MP by visiting They Work For You.
|
|
20’s Plenty — for a fairer road network and better environments for communities
A step change is needed in the daily conditions experienced by pedestrians and cyclists of all ages if we are to reduce the impacts of traffic on communities and the environment. That step change is a lower, fairer speed limit. ‘20’s Plenty’ is the campaign for a new, properly enforced 20mph default speed limit for streets where people and motorised traffic mix.
Campaign rationale
Further information helpful to your campaign for a 20mph limit
Suggested letter to your MP
Let friends and colleagues know about this campaign by emailing them the url: http://www.slower-speeds.org.uk/20s-plenty
Visit Living Streets for more information about their '20's Plenty' campaigns.
Visit The Campaign for Better Transport for an online guide to campaigning for slower speeds.
Visit 20s Plenty for Us, a new and lively grassroots campaign helping to increase the momentum for area-wide 20mph limits.
|
|
|
How Cameras Reduce Speeding |
|
|
|
|
HOW CAMERAS CAN HELP REDUCE SPEEDING -
the leading contributory factor in fatal crashes and the most common type of anti-social behaviour
SUMMARY
The Problem
• Speeding is endemic in our society, not just a problem at a few sites.
• On 30 mph roads, where the majority of people killed or seriously injured, over half of drivers
speed (53%).
• Speeding is the leading factor in fatal crashes and reported in 28-30% of fatal crashes.
Camera Operations
• Fixed speed cameras can only be located at sites where
1) there have been four or more fatal or serious injury collisions in the past three years
2) 20% of drivers exceed the speed limit
3) there is no practical alternative measure
• Government requires drivers to be forewarned that safety cameras are being used and fixed speed cameras must be painted bright yellow.
• Two- thirds of safety cameras are located on 30 mph roads.
• Less than 1% of the road network has its speed limit enforced by active cameras
• For every safety camera, there are 400 CCTV cameras. These are not restricted to sites of repeated death and injury, nor even burglaries. Why are the criteria for casualty prevention so much stricter than those for property protection?
Camera Revenue
• Of the £120 million collected in speeding fines last year, only £20 million (less than the equivalent of VAT) went into the Treasury, with £100 million invested in camera operations and safety measures.
• Benefits to society from the crashes avoided (£221 million) outweighed the 'excess' revenue earned from cameras by 11:1.
• Total camera revenue is equal to 10% of total Department for Transport spend on road safety (£1.2 billion or 11% of its total £11 billion budget) and less than 1% of the estimated total cost of crashes (over £18 billion).
Penalties
• Set at £60, the fine for camera detected speeding is less than that proposed for littering or graffiti.
• Fines are not recommended to those exceeding the speed limit by less than 5 mph and speed awareness courses are available to many first time offenders found speeding 5-9 mph over the limit. They pay for the course and in return do not receive any penalty points.
Camera Effectiveness
• The most recent camera evaluation reviewed 2300 sites in 24 Safety Camera Partnerships. It estimated that 770 people had escaped death and serious injury, including at least 100 road
deaths avoided.
• Fixed speed cameras are more effective than mobile cameras and reduce speeding by 71%. Mobile cameras decrease speeding by 21%.
• Fixed speed cameras halve the number of killed and seriously injured (51%) at camera sites, while mobile cameras reduce fatalities and serious injuries by 28%.
• As with other road safety interventions which are chosen on the basis of high collision numbers, their impact may be affected by the regression to mean effect. However, casualty reduction has been documented with camera use after accounting for regression to mean.
• Speed cameras could be even more effective if they were allowed to be inconspicuous. In addition, there is concern, and emerging evidence, that the rules on publicising the locations of cameras and making the cameras conspicuous are encouraging drivers and motorcyclists to take greater risks on roads where there are no cameras.
Public Support
• Public support for safety cameras has been consistently high, over 67%.
• Demand for cameras is also high and the current rules deny communities the protection they seek from speeding drivers.
• Speeding traffic was the leading anti-social behaviour identified by a recent British Crime Survey.
• Public support is useful but not necessary for governments to do the right thing.
Countering Criticism
• Speed is the leading contributory factor in fatal road crashes, and accounts for twice as many deaths as does drink driving.
• Speed will aggravate the outcome, including the severity, of all crashes. By enforcing speed limit the Government saves much more from avoided death and injury than it receives in fines.
• Automated speed limit enforcement frees police for other road traffic duties. It is the low priority placed on traffic law inforcement which has led to a reduction in traffic police. Cameras have helped compensate, not cause, this problem.
• The real question is how many crashes and casualties would be avoided if we reduced speed, rather than how many are ‘caused’ by speed. The controversy around cameras is leading to deaths and injuries which could be prevented if speed limits were more widely enforced.
What is Needed
• The Department for Transport's casualty quota for safety cameras should be dropped. Cameras should be used more widely to prevent casualties, especially at sites of community concern.
• Covert cameras should be used and evaluated. Even the Motorists’ Forum has acknowledged the need for covert cameras on road stretches where speeding is persistent.
• Greater priority and investment should be given to tackling speeding – the most common contributing factor in violent death and top anti-social behaviour concern.
To read the complete briefing, please visit the RoadPeace website.
| |
|
|
