Exeter HATOC | 19 April 2012 | Speed Enforcement

For  the Exeter HATOC meeting on 19 April 2012 I asked for the following item to be placed on the agenda.

5. Speed Enforcement/Speed Complaints Action Review Forum (SCARF) process

In accordance with Standing Order 23(2) Councillors Bull and Prowse have asked that

the Committee consider these items.

Here's what I had to say:

HATOC 19 April 2012

Agenda item 5

Speed enforcement/SCARF

If a pedestrian where to be hit by a car travelling at 40mph, less than 1 in 10 survive.

At 20mph more than 9 out of 10 pedestrians will survive.

Simple and effective numbers – that’s why I and many others care passionately about speeding in or wards. It can save lives.

As a city councillor, I am constantly being told about speeding – I guess it’s up there with dog poo.

I hear about it on Barley Lane in Cowick

I hear about in Bowhay Lane

I’m told by Cllr Macdonald the same is true in Warwick Way in Pinhoe.

It’s the same all across the city, so at a recent HATOC meeting I was pleased to hear the Chair say that

"Exeter already is a 20 mph residential are city. It's been done"

– indeed the comment appears to borne out by this map 

So why isn’t that the perception across the city?

People say to me its unenforceable and ineffective.

I know I’m confused about whether it’s a 20mph speed LIMIT or a 20mph ZONE.

The LIMIT should be used for individual roads, or for small number of roads – and are only suitable in areas were speed limits are already low.

The 20mph speed LIMIT is indicated by large terminal speed limit ROUNDEL signs and samller repeater roundels along the road –or roads – covered by the limit.

As I understand it , the purpose of a ZONE is to create conditions within which drivers naturally drive at AROUND 20mph because of the general nature of the location, or as a result of traffic measures being put into place.

These ZONES are indicated by large GATEWAY signs and no additional speed limit signs are required.

I’m pleased to say every road in Cowick off the main highways of Cowick Lane, Buddle Lane and Dunsford is within a 20mph ZONE.

Or are they?

As I said, the ZONE is there to create conditions within which drivers naturally drive at AROUND 20mph because of the general nature of the location, or as a result of traffic measures being put into place.

And this is where I enter Cllr Prowse mode!

According to Dept for Transport Circular 01/2006

Paragraph 79 refers to direction 16(1) of

The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002

Which require that no point within the zone must be further than 50m from a traffic calming feature.

So lets take Barley Lane.

Entering by a right turn from Dunsford Roa, there is the correct Gateway signage and a nice painted 20mph sign on the highway.

Heading to the entrance to the new Sylvan Heights there are traffic calming measure – but the pillows are only 2 rather than 3 wide, and the rumble strip causes noise nuisance to neighbours without lowing down traffic. Surely here the road needs to be raised into a table similar to that found on Okehampton Street?

These traffic calming measures were paid for by Section 106 money to DCC specfications – yet they are ineffective. Somehting needs to be down about them

That’s 3 in 100m or so – but then nothing for the rest of Barley Lane and up into Nadder Park Road.

Back to that circular and TSRGD – to be a zone no point within the zone must be further than 50m from a traffic calming feature.

No true in the case of Barley Lane and much elsewhere of the Cowick 20mph ZONE.

So the fact that Cowick is a 20mph ZONE is a MYTH.

Would it matter if there were conditions within which drivers naturally drive at AROUND 20mph because of the general nature of the location

That’s not the case in Barley Lane.

To get some empirical data rather than just anecdotal eveidence, I drove at 20mph between 2 lamp-posts and timed myself.

At 20mph I took 6seconds.

I then watched and monitored traffic on 2 separate occasions.

3s = 5

4s = 14

5s = 28

6s = 5

That’s 52 vehicle movements I observed, and only 5 observing the 20mph speed limit

That’s only 9.6% of traffic observing the speed limit

But by the same token, that’s 9.6% of traffic going TWICE AS FAST as they should be.

And so I refer you all back to the figures when I started if a collision with a pedestrian occured, only ONE in ten would survive.

But the fact remains, if we think that anything up to 27mph would not be prosecuted that still leaves something like 35.5% of drivers on Barley Lane liable for speeding fines and points.

It is acknowledged that in almost every local authority

Implemting wide area 20mph limits, local councilors have had to fight police apathy towards enforcement

It is local elected Councillors who through democratic debate are responsible for setting local speed limits

Police have a duty to enforce and should not be permitted to dictate to communities which speed limits should be implemented.

Its no good setting up enforcement cameras on Dunsford Hill – they need to be in Barley Lane.

I have had promises from the local neighbourhood police team that they would attend with the mobile speed camera, but never than confirmation about dates.

It seems impossible to get a response from the D&C Speed Watch team

They were due to announce a new recruitment drive for Community Police Volunteers to assist with Speed Gun work in the New Year, but despite a reminder early last month, nothing seems to have come of this.

County members have mentioned the mysterious SCARF initiative - yet I can find no reference to it, let along what it really does or how to contact it.

I’ve now had officer input on this and I hope that the initiative will be able to do some monitoring of speeds in the very near future.

Vehicle activated signs appear to be effective, but this comes at a cost.

We’re going to talk latter in the meeting about a number of these signs for Exwick.

Can I make my pleas NOW for some for Cowick – barley lane is almost essential but one in Bowhay Lane would make a good second site.

Can this committee or even the Exeter Locality Committee commission additional Vehicle Activated Signs?

Thank you for following this far.

And here's how it was minuted:

*126 Speed Enforcement/Speed Complaints Action Review Forum (SCARF) process

(Councillor Bull attended and spoke to this item in accordance with Standing Order 25)

In accordance with Standing Order 23(2) Councillors Bull and Prowse have asked that

the Committee consider these items.

Councillor Prowse asked questions relating to the SCARF process and enforcement of speeding restrictions within roads in his division. Councillor Bull also related incidents of perceived excessive speeding and efficacy of traffic calming measures. Other members related to similar concerns and made reference to the former Environment and Economy

Scrutiny Committee Task Group on enforcement issues.

The Neighbourhood Group Manager outlined a revised and streamlined SCARF process and indicated that members concerns about speeding issues should be directed to their local Neighbourhood Highway Officer. Members of the public should refer issues via the Customer Services Centre. If a problem was then identified preventative action and options could then be considered against other priorities action included setting up a local Speed watch, Vehicle Actuated Signs or recommending the site for enforcement action. If none of these were effective then a formal SCARF process could be initiated which could lead to a road engineering solution if there was a serious casualty record. Other engineering work could be done as part of a wider scheme within the LTP or as part of a development and section 106 funding.

Inspector Pryce (Devon and Cornwall Constabulary) in terms of enforcement of 20 mph limits or zones advised that the first priority should not be the issuing of penalty notices (in large part to local residents) but for better understanding and education and confirmed that persistent offenders (violators) would be subject to enforcement action. Perceived issues and problems would need objective analysis over usually longer periods and then remedial actions would have to be prioritised against the finite resources available. He outlined the extensive areas covered but the Constabulary s Casualty Reduction Officers and confirmed that they would not be able to attend all meetings of the local HATOCS within their areas but would endeavour to attend for specific items if requested.

The Chairman confirmed that a 20 mph city wide zone was not being proposed and zones would apply to residential areas only.

Councillor Hannaford referred the appropriateness of 20 mph limit in Exwick Road which the Neighbourhood Group Manager agreed he would investigate.

The Chairman thanked Inspector Pryce for his attendance and answers to members questions.