E&E | Devon County Council carries out major review of 20mph zones in Exeter

Thursday 31 October 2013

Devon County Council carries out major review of 20mph zones in Exeter

By Exeter Express and Echo  |  Posted: October 30, 2013

Devon County Council carries out major review of 20 mph zones in Exeter

Many, according to Paul Bull, city councillor for Cowick, were not compliant with Department for  Transport guidelines and were thus unenforceable.

Now, however, the county council has advertised a new traffic order for them and residents have until November 7 to comment on the scope of them.

A spokesman for the county council said: “Having carried out a city wide review of 20mph limits and zones we have advertised a new traffic order. This order is purely to make simple changes to ensure that the TRO is updated to reflect what is on site.

“Where a limit is proposed to be removed from the historical order, this is because a 20mph limit or zone has not been signed on site and speeds are already very low (generally below 20mph) due to the roads affected being short or cul de sac style, so there is no need for a 20mph limit to be signed on site.

“This is in line with the county council’s aim not to add signing clutter to the network, especially where there isn’t a key justification.

“We are inviting comments on this proposed order which must be submitted by November 7.”

The spokesman added that in Devon a 20mph speed limit or zone can be considered in cases where all or most of the following apply:

• It is used by high numbers of pedestrians and cyclists

• Where there is a speed-related casualty record

• Where average speeds are already low or traffic calming will be introduced

• Where signing and traffic calming will not damage the environment and

• a school travel plan supports the proposal.

Paul Bull, city councillor for Cowick, has been campaigning for a 20mph limit in all residential streets and said: “Some two years ago, the Government changed the regulations so that as long as the zone had one physical traffic calming measure the others could be replaced by a 20mph repeater roundel or a 20mph carrriageway roundel. Even despite this relaxation, many, if not all zones within Exeter, were not meeting the regulations, so were not compliant with the legislation and able to be enforced.

“Pressure by myself and others have forced the county council to carry out an audit to see which zones were legal.

“I’ve heard from the county council that the contractors have finished the Broadway zone, but when I followed up around there I found several stretches where there was more than 100m between physical calming measures and/or zones. So they are still not compliant or enforceable.

“Also as a consequence of the audit they found that several road where not signed properly.

“In Cowick this covered Franklyn Drive and Orchard Gardens.

“For various reasons, the county council has decided to approach each of these streets in a different manner – put in the proper signs along Franklyn Drive because there are some speed humps in place; officers think that drivers could never go above 20mph in Orchard Gardens and so have decided not to put up signs, and let it revert back to 30mph ‘by virtue of street lighting’.

“This upsets me. For more than two years I have been saying that all residential roads – other than the major routes of Cowick Lane, Buddle Lane and Dunsford Road – are 20mph. This is what I had been told was the case, now due to errors in the past this will not be the case in the future."

Some more thoughts on 20 mph zones in Exeter

Once again, I've been contacted by people about the recent official advert in a recent Express and Echo  relating to the new Traffic Regulation Order, Devon County Council (Various Roads, Exeter) (20 mph Zones and Limits) Order

Some have asked Devon County Council about the difference between 20 mph zones and limits - here's DCC's response:

20mph limits are:

“introduced on roads where speeds are already low and generally traffic calming features are not needed”.

And 20mph zones are: 

“usually introduced in Urban Areas over several streets and normally be supported by traffic calming in order to make vehicles speeds self-enforcing to 20mph. In a 20mph zone there is also no need to sign or light traffic calming features, which would otherwise have a negative impact on the residential street scene”.

In Devon a 20mph Speed Limit or Zone can be considered in cases where all or most of the following apply:-

• - used by high numbers of pedestrians and cyclists

• - where there is a speed-related casualty record.

• - where average speeds are already low or traffic calming will be introduced.

• - where signing and traffic calming will not damage the environment.

• - a School Travel Plan supports the proposal.

Interested in what they said constituted a 20mph zone!

Especially "In a 20mph zone there is also no need to sign or light traffic calming features, which would otherwise have a negative impact on the residential street scene” as it is only by increasing physical traffic calming measures and/or street signage is the ONLY way DCC can make 20 mph zones compliant and able to be enforced

When they were first introduced (in Cowick in 2000)20 mph zones needed 

(1) a gateway sign at each and every entrance to the zone

(2) physical traffic calming measures (humps, chicanes, bends greater than 70 degrees, etc) no more than 50m from any point within the zone - in practice that means no more than 100m between any physical traffic calming measure

This is of course very expensive so some 2 years ago, the Govt changed the regulations so that as long as the zone had ONE physical traffic calming measure, the others could be replaced by a 20mph repeater roundel or a 20mph carrriageway roundel.

Even despite this relaxation, many if not all zones within Exeter, were not meeting the regulations, so were not compliant with the legislation and able to be enforced.

Pressure by myself and others have forced DCC to carry out an audit to see which zones care legal.

On this audit, DCC have said:

 “Having carried out a city wide review of 20mph  limits and zones we have advertised a  new traffic order. This order is purely to make simple changes to ensure that the TRO is updated to reflect what is on site. 

Where a limit is proposed to be removed from the historical order, this is because a 20mph limit or zone has not been signed on site and speeds are already very low (generally below 20mph) due to the roads affected being short/cul de sac style, so there is no need for a 20mph limit to be signed on site. 

This is in line with the County Council’s aim not to add signing clutter to the network, especially where there isn’t a key justification. We are inviting comments on this proposed order which must be submitted by 7 November.”

I've heard from DCC that the contractors have finished the Broadway zone, but when I followed up around there I found several stretches where there was more than 100m between physical calming measures and/or zones. So they are STILL not compliant or enforceble

So as  a consequence of the audit they found that several road where not signed properly since the zones were introduced (in Cowick's case, since 2000)

In Cowick this covered Franklyn Drive and Orchard Gardens

For various reasons, DCC have decided to approach each of these streets in a different manner - put in the proper signs along Franklyn Drive because there are some speed humps in place; officers think that drivers could never go above 20mph in Orchard Gardens and so have decided not to put up signs, and let it revert back to 30mph "by virtue of street lighting"

This upsets me - for over 2 years I have been saying that ALL residential roads - other than the major routes of Cowick Lane, Buddle Lane and Dunsford Road - are 20 mph. This is what I had been told WAS the case - now due to errors in the past this will not be the case in the future.

I'm sure there are similar cases all around Exeter. 

I've also seen some correspondence from DCC which suggests that 20 mph can be enforce even if all the roads within a 20mph are not compliant - I am not convinced of that argument and would not like to see it pursued in a court of law.

Cowick Councillors' New Year Resolution

PRESS RELEASE

COWICK COUNCILLORS' NEW YEAR RESOLUTION

For 2 years, City Councillors Paul Bull and Heather have been hearing how speeding in Cowick has affected the lives of residents.

“It shouldn’t be so says Cllr Bull. “In Cowick every street – other than Cowick Lane, Dunsford Road and Buddle Lane – are within designated 20 mph zones and every turning off the main roads are marked with appropriate gateway signs.

“We both believe that 20s Plenty for Cowick and are making it our New Years resolution to try and address this problem.”

Cllr Morris takes up the story. “Every time we go out and meet residents on the doorstep, we are always being asked what we can do about speeding.

"It's worth remembering that when stopped for speeding, the majority of those motorists live within a mile or so of where they were stopped. So we are asking Cowick residents to make sure they always keep to the speed limit of 20 mph."

Devon County Council, as highway authority, has ultimate responsibility for this matter, and appears to have recognised the problem of speeding by installing traffic calming measures along Barley Lane and Bowhay Lane.

A local resident in Bowhay Lane recently told Cllr Bull, “I’ve correspondence going back 12 years and nothing’s changed. I wish you luck”

“There are several speed tables along speeds Lane,” notes Cllr Bull, “yet speeds still exceed the 20 mph speed limit. Because of these measures, the local police are reluctant to carry out speed checks here.”

“I’ve heard talk about involving the local community in a Speed Watch campaign, yet the Community Speed Watch Co-ordinator has no knowledge of these plans, and the Neighbourhood Policing Team have confirmed to me that they do not have the time or capacity to run such a scheme.

Checking with the Aphington PCSO about a similar scheme launched there in 2009, Cllr Bull found that the scheme barely got off the ground and was rather ineffective.

Similarly, along Barley Lane, speed cushions and a speed table were specially installed as part of the planning consent for the new Sylvan Heights development.

Recent monitoring of speeds long this stretch show that average speeds were around 25mph and that 15% of vehicles exceeded the speed limit by more that 10mph.

Cllr Heather Morris is worried about this.

She said  “If a pedestrian is hit by a car travelling at 20mph, their chances of survival would be 9 out of 10. If hit at 30mph, 8 out of 10 survive, but only 50% survive being hit at 35 mph and less than 1 in 10 survive at 40 mph.

“Cllr Bull and I have been looking at the speed humps on Barley Lane and we believe that they have been installed incorrectly. We’ve asked highways officers at the County Council to investigate and we understand that they have been set too far apart, allowing cars to drive through the central gap.

“We have had assurances that this will be remedied as and when budgets allow.”

The councillors have been looking at other measures that could be implemented quickly and cheaply along these two roads and have concluded that flashing Vehicle Activated Signs could be the answer.

Cllr Bull concluded, “Flashing signs advising drivers of the speed limit appear to work. There is a stretch of road in Alphington that is less than half a mile long, yet it has 3 of these signs in operation. Cowick has none. Perhaps the local County Councillor could use some of her remaining locality budget, to pay for some of these signs? Surely this would be better than carrying unspent surpluses forward as she has done in the past? This measure would help reinforce the message that 20s Plenty for Cowick."

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.