Somerset Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
ROAD SAFETY - 4
89 Somerset Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
4 ROAD SAFETY
4 ROAD SAFETY
LTP2 Objective:
Improve safety for all who travel:
Reducing traffic accidents with a particular emphasis on killed and seriously injured casualties and rural main roads; and Reducing fear of crime in all aspects of the transport network.
The improvement of safety for those using the highway network in Somerset is a very high priority for the County Council and across the Local Transport Plan. This is reflected in the Corporate Plan with Aim 6 being ‘To work to make our communities safer’ and is similarly reflected in the Somerset Vision.
The highway network which delivers the movement of people and goods, should be safe, accessible, and sustainable. The highway safety issues outlined in this chapter of the Local Transport Plan reflects the Vision, Objectives and Priorities established earlier in the document.
The Regional Transport Spatial Strategies embrace the need for particular care with vulnerable transport mode users; smarter choices, more sustainable modes of travel, and all must be underpinned by safe networks.
Real and perceived safety and security are fundamental considerations in delivering the town strategies in Somerset. People accustomed to using cars fear the vulnerability they perceive when walking, cycling and using public transport. These fears are not always justified, but where they are measurable and are translated into people being injured or killed on the road network we will address them through engineering and Road Safety Education Training & Publicity. measures.
This chapter sets out how road safety is delivered within Somerset, outlines the key issues that we are currently addressing in our casualty reduction strategy, and describes how we plan to meet the objective of reducing the number of road accident casualties in the County.
Between 1999 and 2004 our road safety investment has delivered:
All killed and seriously injured (KSI) causaulties down by 9%;
Child KSI casualties are down by 24%;
Pedestrian casualties have reduced by 11% and pedal cyclist casualties by 31%; and
Child casualties are down by 15%. Part of this achievement is in the pedestrian and pedal cyclist group.
However:
We are behind on progress towards the 2010 target of a 40% reduction in KSI;
The number of slight casualties has increased by 5%.
90 Somerset Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
ROAD SAFETY 4
Although some significant achievements have been made, this is not enough to meet the targets we have set ourselves. Therefore, in order to deliver a step change in our casualty reduction performance, we will be leading partners to establish a new Somerset Casualty and Accident Reduction Strategy (CARS), which will need to tackle a number of key issues including:
The number of car drivers and passengers injured on rural main roads and urban areas;
The numbers of pedestrians and cyclists injured in towns; and
The numbers of two-wheeled motor vehicle (2WMV) users injured in towns and on rural main roads.
The following diagram shows how Somerset already meets the LTP guidance requirements for road safety, and sets out our timetable for developing a fresh approach to casualty reduction through the CARS project.
Figure 4.1 Developing a Casualty and Accident Reduction Strategy
91 Somerset Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
4 ROAD SAFETY
4.1 CHALLENGES & OPPORTUNITIES
In developing our casualty and accident reduction strategy, we have:
Assessed the local issues in Somerset;
Assessed our current casualty reduction performance;
Assessed current casualty reduction achievements; and
Looked at best practice elsewhere.
Local Issues
Much of the population in Somerset is dispersed into numerous rural settlements served by market towns. This means that the car is the dominant mode of travel between, into, and out of urban centres. These journeys are often over substantial distances along a narrow, winding, and undulating highway, with inadequate geometry for modern traffic and speeds. How drivers react to and perceive these issues is a significant element of accident causation.
The pattern of road casualties within Somerset shows that the largest proportions occur along the extensive principal road network and within the main areas of population. A detailed assessment of the casualty data is presented later in this section.
Somerset County Council manages most of the highway network within the County, although three roads are the responsibility of the Highways Agency (HA): the M5, the A303 and the A36. Whilst less than 2% of the road network in Somerset, casualties on these roads represent 8% (2004) of people injured in road traffic collisions. However, we are aware that in relation to the traffic flow, these roads carry a significant higher proportion of traffic.
92 Somerset Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
ROAD SAFETY 4
Figure 4.2 Casualties by Location and Road Users Type
The following diagram shows the relative urban and rural casualty problem in Somerset and how this affects injury levels to different road users.
Current Casualty Reduction Performance
In 2000 the Council adopted the three national targets for 2011 in ‘Tomorrow’s Roads, safer for everyone’ to reduce all killed and seriously injured (KSI) casualties by 40%; child KSIs by 50%; and to tackle slight casualties. These now form the basis of Best Value Indicator 99 which is included in the Councils' Comprehensive Performance Assessment by the Audit Commission.
93 Somerset Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
4 ROAD SAFETY
The following table demonstrates the progress made over the LTP1 period in relation to National Road Safety Targets.
Table 4.1 Casualty Indicators and Targets
Casualty Indicators 94-98 Baseline 01-04 Rolling Average Change 2005 Target
BVI99a– KSI all 380 346 -9 % 301 (-20%) Not on track
BVI99b – KSI child 33 25 -24% 25 (-25%) On track
BVI99c – Slight 2085 2190 +5% 2085 (0%) Not on track
Current trajectories suggest we are unlikely to meet our LTP1 targets particularly for casualty reduction in terms of all deaths and serious injuries. These changes occurred against a background of increasing traffic, as demonstrated in the accidents casualties and traffic flow comparison graph shown later. A brief analysis of progress towards each target follows:
Target 1 (BVI99a) - 40% Reduction in the Number of People Killed or Seriously Injured in Road Accidents
Figure 4.3 KSI Casualties and the 2010 Target
KSI casualties are declining from baseline figures but at a slower rate compared to other shire authorities and when compared with the national average of 28% (DfT publication: Road Casualties Great Britain 2004, table 5c). This is largely due to a reduction in pedestrians, and pedal cyclists casualties, however this has been offset by an increase in motorcyclist casualties with car user casualties remaining at similar levels, as shown in the table below.
94 Somerset Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
ROAD SAFETY 4
Table 4.2 Killed and Seriously Injured Casualties
KSI Casualties 94-98 2001 2002 2003 2004 Average 01 - 04 % change over 1994-98
Pedestrians 56 33 41 48 40 41 -28%
Pedal Cyclists 28 15 18 19 13 16 -41%
2WMVs(i) 60 58 68 65 71 66 10%
Car Drivers 140 133 143 134 141 138 -2%
Car Passengers 81 76 60 72 71 70 -14%
Other Users(ii) 16 21 21 13 9 16 3%
TOTAL 380 336 351 351 345 346 -9%
NB: In this and following tables the figures have been rounded to two decimal places throughout.
Target 2 (BVI99b) - 50% Reduction in the Number of Children Killed or Seriously Injured
Figure 4.4 Child KSI Casualties and the 2010 Target
This target is currently on track, however a recent increase from 21 to 33 has been found to be in child car passengers. However, the numbers are relatively small and monitoring will continue to establish whether this is a trend which is significant. Details shown in the table below.
i Two-wheeled motor-vehicles ii Includes heavy goods vehicles, agricultural vehicles, minibuses etc.
95 Somerset Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
4 ROAD SAFETY
Table 4.3 Child Killed and Seriously Injured Casualties
Child KSI Casualties 94-98 2001 2002 2003 2004 Average 01 - 04 % change over 1994-98
Pedestrians 15 11 9 11 10 10 -30%
Pedal Cyclists 8 5 4 4 5 5 -46%
2WMVs 0 1 1 1 1 1 150%
Car Drivers 1 0 0 1 0 0 -58%
Car Passengers 8 8 5 4 15 8 0%
Bus/Coach Passenger 0 0 0 0 1 0 25%
Other Users 1 0 1 0 1 1 -50%
TOTAL 33 25 20 21 33 25 -25%
Target 3 (BVI99c) – No Increase in Slight Casualties per Year based on new 2001-2004 rolling average baseline (revised from LTP1). For further information see Performance Management Chapter.
Figure 4.5 Total Slight Casualties and the 2010 Target
The slight casualty totals, show a 5% increase from the 1994-1998 baseline (2085 slight casualties per annum) to the 2001-2004 average (2190 slight casualties per annum). The graph above shows a downwards trend in slight casualties since 2000, although numbers fluctuate between years. As shown in the table below two-wheeled motor-vehicle user casualties are a particular area of concern.
96 Somerset Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
ROAD SAFETY 4
Table 4.4 Slight Casualties
Slight Casualties 94-98 2001 2002 2003 2004 Average 01 - 04 % change over 1994-98
Pedestrians 165 180 177 145 157 165 0%
Pedal Cyclists 167 156 149 122 120 137 -18%
2WMVs 124 176 170 166 144 164 32%
Car Drivers 914 1049 1008 966 989 1003 10%
Car Passengers 609 611 597 573 570 588 -3%
Other Users 106 142 142 129 123 134 26%
TOTAL 2085 2314 2243 2101 2103 2190 5%
Casualty reduction achievements during the LTP1
Some of the measures implemented during LTP1 are set out below (more detail on some of these is presented later in this chapter). Established a successful Avon & Somerset Safety Camera Partnership with Avon and Somerset Constabulary and local authority partners. Supported the setting up of Speed Choice workshops, to which 25,000 motorists have been referred in the Avon & Somerset area; Implemented education campaigns focused on younger drivers (For My Girlfriend Campaign); Rider improvement and Bike Safe courses in conjunction with Avon & Somerset Constabulary using police motorcycle instructors; Introduced practical pedestrian training at schools, with an emphasis in the more deprived areas of Somerset; Implemented a Speed Management policy and review; Improved scheme co-ordination and safety focus by making accident data available via a GIS information system accessible to all highways project staff; and Commissioned a safer roads review and best practice study.
An underlying achievement is the ongoing maintenance and development of a flexible and accurate computer database, incorporating a Geographical Information System interface, which allows detailed assessments of accident location and causation. This has informed the above and focuses the assessment of where road safety engineering and training and publicity work should be implemented.
97 Somerset Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
4 ROAD SAFETY
Casualty Accident Reduction Engineering Schemes
Casualty accident reduction engineering schemes (CARES, formerly called ‘Local Safety Schemes’) attempt to reduce the likelihood of people making mistakes and errors that lead to accidents by altering and improving the highway environment e.g. the layout, signage, lining and lighting.
The monitoring of all casualty accident reduction engineering schemes implemented since 1999 shows that over two hundred casualties have been prevented each year due to this work. During LTP1 over £5 million pounds was spent on engineering safety improvements to the road network. The money spent is now earning a return in the order of nine times the investment.
Historically in Somerset single site treatments have been very successful in casualty reduction terms, but these ‘cluster’ sites are now diminishing. There is a more dispersed pattern generally with fewer significant clusters. This would suggest that accidents are becoming less related to specific highway features and more related to the inability of road users to avoid collisions by perceiving the potential hazards within the highway environment. Therefore the implementation of casualty reduction schemes is becoming more focused on length and area-based schemes and innovative techniques, which have proved successful in reducing casualties.
Table 4.5 Casualty Accident Reduction Engineering Scheme Performance
Schemes Types & Implementation Period Average Annual Casualty Reduction % No. of schemes Average Annual Rate of Return %
Single Site (1999-2004) 50 51 1000
Rural Route Action (2001-04) 40 32 1300
Urban Route Action (2001-04) 20 16 800
Area Action (2002-2004) 30 5 400
Total (1999-2004) * inc other miscellaneous 30 113 900 schemes
Where appropriate, engineering schemes will continue to be constructed and will be supported by targeted highways maintenance.
Current Road Safety Education Training and Publicity Campaigns
Road safety Education, Training and Publicity (ETP) aims to significantly improve hazard appreciation and the skills of all road users in order to reduce the likelihood of mistakes and errors leading to road accidents. ETP work is funded from revenue derived from the Council’s general funds and supported by income generated from cycling and motorcycling training. School Crossing Patrols are also jointly funded with local schools.
Our programme has been developed through findings of national research and assessments of casualty patterns in the county, to establish need. Many issues cannot be easily treated by engineering measures alone, particularly with a dispersed casualty problem. The outcome of such work is difficult to measure:
feedback is sought on campaigns which demonstrates awareness of them; and
the number of people trained is also monitored.
The above work has historically focused on children and the reduction of child pedestrian and cyclist casualties in recent years demonstrates some success in this area.
98 Somerset Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
ROAD SAFETY 4
Young Drivers
The current ‘For my Girlfriend’ campaign is based on research showing what most influences young male drivers – a notoriously hard to reach group. The research has shown they are motivated by risk of injury and disfigurement to their girlfriend. This age group have a high incidence of involvement in road traffic injury accidents. The campaign is reinforced by radio advertising, bus back and and posters in targeted establishment, e.g. Sixth Form Colleges.
Children
Practical cycle training is delivered in many schools. Over 1,200 children receive cycle training and in excess of the 20% of the school population receive road safety talks annually. Practical pedestrian training reaches 4,500 children each year. We have developed an interactive DVD - 'A Step in the Right Direction' (SIRD) for children key stages 1&2 and adults with learning difficulties, in partnership with day care centres and colleagues providing social services.
We work with voluntary groups to deliver road safety awareness to young people e.g. the Cub Scout Road Safety pack.
Another key element of this work is in supporting engineering schemes through publicity and training, for example if a new controlled crossing is provided near to a school. Such facilities could be provided as part of a Safe Routes to School scheme.
Targeted Measures
We use the back of parking tickets to continue to promote the anti-drink driving message. Over 280,000 of these are issued annually.
Bus back posters are used to reinforce many campaigns. e.g correct use of child seats in cars.
A community safety issue with horses and vehicle danger has been addressed. High visibility tabards and helmet bands are provided for all riders who take the BHS Road Safety course and exam. This was developed in conjunction with the British Horse Society.
The following table shows the key campaigns and activities that have been undertaken.
99 Somerset Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
4 ROAD SAFETY
Table 4.6 Key Campaigns and Activities
Activity Description Numbers
Cycle training RoSPA practical cycle training 1,200 children per year
Pedestrian Training Somerset County Council’s own practical pedestrian 4,500 children per year training
Motorcyclist training Ride to Arrive with Police, Bike Safe & Rider Improvement 1,200 motorcyclists
School Crossing Patrols Health & Safety, Training and Monitoring responsibility At approximately 80 schools
Education ‘danger route assessments’ Walking route using LARSOA guidelines 6 per year
Travel to School Initiative support Walking Bus route assessments and volunteer training Ongoing
Education & Awareness Campaigns Radio broadcasts, bus-back posters, THINK! campaign etc 500+ radio broadcasts, 140+ year round bus side/back adverts, 2000 message pens, 51 magazine months, 6 newspaper campaigns
Road Safety engineering and ETP activities have helped to deliver the casualty reductions experienced to date, so we intend to continue with these. However, we appreciate that to achieve more in this area we need to develop mutually supporting integrated strategies, engineering schemes and campaigns. This will entail focusing on those road users who are involved in the highest number of accidents.
Best Practice and Performance of Other Authorities
In 2004 the DfT identified those approaches that are common within authorities that are performing better in achieving progress towards the casualty reduction targets (Road Safety Research Report No 53 – Assessing the Casualty Reduction Performance of Local Highway Authorities). This report identified that better performing authorities:
Have strategic aims that make clear reference to road safety; Have a culture of casualty reduction; Coordinate all work on the highways with particular regard to safety and maintenance, and have external sponsorship for education, training and publicity; Have an organisational structure in which all road safety practitioners work closely together and deliver casualty reduction on an objective basis; Use collision databases to make a judgment as to where casualty reduction funding would be most effective; and Carry out monitoring on overall casualty figures as well as on a project by project basis in order to assess and evaluate the effectiveness of past projects.
We have discussed these issues with other more successful authorities in reducing casualties through a best practice review. This has established how they embrace these issues. Those councils that have performed well in casualty reduction can link their progress back to strategic documents, such as their Vision or Corporate Plan. This provides road safety with the high level buy in it needs within the organisation. The most important factor is for a local authority to have a culture of casualty reduction embedded within it.
Somerset now reflects this through the LTP in that safety is a key consideration within all highways work and it is therefore a key thread throughout this and the strategies contained within it. An example of this is that all assets will be managed in accordance with the Transport Asset Management Plan and a key element within this is to maximise highway safety.
100 Somerset Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
ROAD SAFETY 4
For Somerset a change in culture is necessary, which will take some time to develop, although the work in developing this LTP has shown that all highways project managers fully support the step change in casualty reduction ethos. In this document we have therefore set targets to bring our casualty reduction performance in line with that achieved by the best third of County Council's in the long term.
4.1.1 Casualty Analysis Evidence and Current Approach
Detailed and summary analysis of the accident and casualty data will continue to inform and develop our evidence based approach to casualty reduction. An in depth understanding of the casualty situation is crucial in directing our step change approach to focus on the main areas of required improvement. The review of casualty reduction issues was undertaken using STATS 19 data supplied by Avon and Somerset Police Authority using DfT STATS 21 methodology, interrogated using a Geographic Information System. This helps us to identify and target the key issues and areas for attention.
Figure 4.6 County-wide Accident Locations (2004)
This geographical plot reflects the pattern of casualties resulting from travelling between dispersed communities and to / from major centres. The major priorities for casualty reduction are therefore demonstrated to be:
Rural principal roads; and Main urban population areas.
101 Somerset Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
4 ROAD SAFETY
Casualties and Traffic Growth
Figure 4.7 Accidents and Casualties with Traffic Growth (1982 to 2010)
The previous graph illustrates that whilst traffic has been growing in Somerset casualties and accidents are not increasing at the same level. Traffic is predicted to have grown by approximately 14% from 1998 to 2004, whilst the number of casualties overall has increased by only 3% during this time. The predicted growth over the life of this plan however makes reducing casualties more of a challenge.
Casualty Breakdown by User and Age Group
Table 4.7 All Casualties by Road User Group
Road User Type 1994-1998 Baseline 2001-04 Average %change
Pedestrians 221 197 -12
Pedal Cyclists 194 133 -46
2WMVs 184 215 15
Private Motor Vehicle Drivers 1051 1133 7
Private Motor Vehicle Passengers 691 642 -8
Other User Types 119 128 7
The table shows the user groups that will be a casualty reduction priority are:
Car users; Two-wheeled motor-vehicle casualties; and Pedestrians.
The following tables show the key numbers of KSI and slight casualties by age group and road user type casualties. Note that the tables use the data range of the 2001–2004 casualty figures taken as a rolling annual average.
102 Somerset Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
ROAD SAFETY 4
Table 4.8 KSI Casualties by Age
Pedal Age Car Pass % of all KSI Car Driver % of all KSI 2WMVs % of all KSI Cyclists % of all KSI Pedestrians % of all KSI
0 - 15 8 2 0 0 1 0 5 1 10 3
16 - 24 27 8 33 9 21 6 2 0 7 2
25 - 29 5 1 16 5 6 2 1 0 3 1
30 - 39 6 2 26 8 18 5 2 1 3 1
40 - 49 4 1 16 5 13 4 3 1 3 1
50 - 59 3 1 16 5 5 1 2 1 4 1
60 - 64 3 1 7 2 1 0 1 0 2 0
65 - 99 14 4 24 7 1 0 1 0 10 3
Total 70 20 138 40 66 19 16 5 41 12
less than 5% of all KSI
between 5 and 10% of all KSI
The table reflects that the casualty groups above will be a casualty reduction priority with emphasis on car passenger KSI casualties, particularly in the 16-24 year old age group and 16-24 and 30-39 year old motorcycle users.
Table 4.9 Slight Casualties by Age
% of all % of all % of all Pedal % of all % of all Age Car Pass Slights Car Driver Slights 2WMVs Slights Cyclists Slights Pedestrians Slights
0 - 15 137 6 1 0 2 0 49 2 54 2
16 - 24 182 8 254 12 74 3 25 1 30 1
25 - 29 38 2 102 5 15 1 8 0 11 0
30 - 39 67 3 229 10 33 2 18 1 16 1
40 - 49 50 2 172 8 20 1 19 1 13 1
50 - 59 39 2 126 6 13 1 12 1 13 1
60 - 64 17 1 34 2 3 0 1 0 4 0
65 - 99 58 3 87 4 4 0 6 0 24 1
Total 588 27 1003 46 164 7 137 6 165 8
less than 5% of all Slight casualties
between 5 and 10% of all Slight casualties
over 10% or equivalent of all Slight casualties
NB: The 25-29 age group has been highlighted as red as it is a smaller age band and, as such, pro-rata does score as an important issue.
The table reflects the issue that car drivers particularly up to the age of 39 will be casualty reduction priority.
103 Somerset Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
4 ROAD SAFETY
There have been reductions in the number of pedestrians and cyclists injured. However, car drivers make up nearly half of all casualties, 26% are car passengers and further analysis has shown that female car passengers account for 62% of these casualties.
Although smaller in number, vulnerable powered two-wheeled motor-vehicle (2WMVs) casualties have increased.
As we are a predominantly rural county we have analysed the split of urban and rural casualty information and have provided summary on these issues by casualty age and group below.
Rural Casualty Issues:
Analysis of the Somerset database indicates that the majority (70%) of all casualties occur on the rural road network and the high severity of these injuries is an identified problem ( 'rural road' definition taken as roads outside settlements with populations of 10,000 or more for national comparison - source: DfT Road Accidents Great Britain). This is frequently a function of higher vehicle speeds on the network. Further analysis shows that 'A' class roads account for 10% of the overall road network, but exhibit 53% of the total casualties.
Table 4.10 Rural KSI Casulties by Age
Pedal Age Car Pass % of all KSI Car Driver % of all KSI 2WMVs % of all KSI Cyclists % of all KSI Pedestrians % of all KSI
0 - 15 8 3 0 0 1 0 2 1 4 1
16 - 24 25 9 31 11 14 5 0 0 4 2
25 - 29 5 2 15 5 5 2 0 0 1 0
30 - 39 5 2 25 9 14 5 1 0 2 1
40 - 49 4 1 14 5 11 4 2 1 1 0
50 - 59 3 1 15 5 4 1 0 0 2 1
60 - 64 3 1 7 2 0 0 1 0 1 0
65 - 99 12 4 20 7 1 0 1 0 4 1
Total 65 23 126 45 49 17 7 2 19 7
less than 5% of all KSI casualties
between 5 and 10% of all KSI casualties
over 10% or equivalent of all KSI casualties
NB: The 25-29 age group has been highlighted as red as it is a smaller age band and, as such, pro-rata does score as an important issue.
104 Somerset Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
ROAD SAFETY 4
Table 4.11 Rural Slight Casualties by Age
% of all % of all % of all Pedal % of all % of all Age Car Pass Slights Car Driver Slights 2WMVs Slights Cyclists Slights Pedestrians Slights
0 - 15 109 7 1 0 2 0 15 1 18 1
16 - 24 141 9 192 13 33 2 8 1 10 1
25 - 29 29 2 79 5 8 1 2 0 3 0
30 - 39 51 3 172 11 21 1 6 0 7 0
40 - 49 40 3 126 8 13 1 6 0 5 0
50 - 59 31 2 100 7 8 0 2 0 4 0
60 - 64 14 1 25 2 1 0 0 0 3 0
65 - 99 45 3 67 4 1 0 2 0 8 1
Total 459 30 762 50 86 6 41 3 57 4
less than 5% of all Slight casualties
between 5 and 10% of all Slight casualties
over 10% of all Slight casualties
NB: The 25-29 age group has been highlighted as red as it is a smaller age band and, as such, pro-rata does score as an important issue.
These tables demonstrate that the main casualty reduction priority in the rural areas will be:
Car users casualties in the 0-15 and 16-24 age groups; and
Powered two wheeler casualties; we have identified that larger engined machines are an issue. The age groups to concentrate on are 16-39 year olds.
The younger age groups of both user groups frequently reflect poor hazard perception.
The rural casualty problem in Somerset is focused on the main road network. The priorities here are such roads as the rural sections of the A39, A38 and the A358 which account for around 150 casualties per year in the county.
105 Somerset Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
4 ROAD SAFETY
Urban Casualty Issues:
Records show that 30% of the casualties are in the urban areas and this is still a significant number.
Table 4.12 Urban KSI Casulties by Age
% of all Pedal % of all % of all Age Car Pass KSI Car Driver % of all KSI 2WMVs % of all KSI Cyclists KSI Pedestrians KSI
0 - 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4 7 10
16 - 24 3 4 2 3 8 12 1 2 3 4
25 - 29 0 0 2 3 1 1 1 1 2 2
30 - 39 1 1 2 2 5 7 1 2 2 2
40 - 49 0 0 1 2 2 3 1 2 2 2
50 - 59 0 0 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 3
60 - 64 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0
65 - 99 2 2 4 6 0 0 1 1 6 9
Total 5 8 12 19 17 25 10 15 21 32
less than 5% of all KSI casualties
between 5 and 10% or equivalent of all KSI casualties
NB: The 25-29 age group has been highlighted as amber as it isa smaller age band and, as such, pro-rata does score as an important issue.
Table 4.13 Urban Slight Casualties by Age
% of all % of all % of all Pedal % of all % of all Age Car Pass Slights Car Driver Slights 2WMVs Slights Cyclists Slights Pedestrians Slights
0 - 15 28 4 0 0 0 0 34 5 36 5
16 - 24 41 6 61 9 42 6 16 2 20 3
25 - 29 10 1 23 3 7 1 7 1 8 1
30 - 39 17 2 57 8 12 2 12 2 10 1
40 - 49 10 1 46 7 7 1 13 2 8 1
50 - 59 8 1 26 4 6 1 10 1 10 1
60 - 64 4 1 8 1 2 0 1 0 1 0
65 - 99 13 2 21 3 3 0 5 1 16 2
Total 129 19 241 36 78 12 96 14 108 16
less than 5% of all Slight casualties
between 5 and 10% of all Slight casualties
NB: The 25-29 age group has been highlighted as amber as it is smaller age band and, as such, pro-rata does score as an important issue.
These tables show that in urban areas we need to concentrate on particularly on vulnerable road users:
106 Somerset Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
ROAD SAFETY 4
Pedestrian casualties in the 0-15 and 65 plus age groups; Motorbike casualties in the 16-24 age group, which are generally using the smaller engined bikes; Car users casualties; and Cyclist casualties, particularly the 0-15 age group.
Further analysis shows that the three major towns of Taunton, Yeovil and Bridgwater account for an average of 555 casualties per annum, with over half (287) in the vulnerable road user category. The former figure accounts for 20% of the annual casualties in Somerset.
Children
In 2003 and 2004 there were no child road accident fatalities in Somerset. Child safety audit work has helped identify key issues, especially that most children that are killed or seriously injured are car passengers on rural roads or pedestrians on urban roads.
Though we have been successful in reducing child casualties however we are keen to do more. The above tables show:
7% of slight casualties occur to children as passenger in cars in rural areas, with 4% in towns; 5% of slight casualties involve children as pedestrians in towns; 5% of slight casualties involve children as pedal cyclists in towns; and 3% of all KSI casualties involve children as car passengers in rural areas.
In Somerset significant numbers of children walk to secondary schools, but we are concerned that for many children this follows their formative years of being delivered to school by car with minimal practical pedestrian experience. In 2004 there was a rise in the number of child pedestrians aged 11-15 injured. The majority of children injured in the county are travelling in cars and our strategies need to tackle this, education of drivers is and will be a key strategy. Alongside of this though we need to carry on with the work which will maintain a downwards trends in casualties which arise when children are travelling as pedestrians and cyclists.
Safe Routes to School Schemes can contribute to child safety improvements and casualty prevention but their main emphasis is encouraging sustainable travel and improving accessibility.
Disadvantage
National research has identified that children who come from poorer backgrounds are several times more likely to be involved in road accidents. There are often concentrations of accidents on streets in deprived community areas and people who grow up in such areas are more likely to have a higher involvement in accidents for the rest of their lives. The Index of Multiple Deprivation for Somerset shows two Super Output Areas (SOA's) in Bridgwater and Taunton are within the most deprived 10% in the country. Casualty data will be further assessed to further establish significant locations of any accidents in deprived areas and any trends. Our proposed Child Safety Audit review will also consider this, especially within our urban safety management studies which cover the key towns.
Road safety practical training activity is currently focussed in deprived areas. Practical pedestrian training is offered at no charge to all primary schools in the most socially deprived Wards. Area wide traffic calming schemes have also been implemented. An example scheme that has achieved traffic reduction, lower speeds, and a casualty reduction of 70% is the Eastern Yeovil Child Pedestrian Casualty Reduction Scheme. A similar joint Local Safety and Safe Routes to School scheme was implemented in Hamp, Bridgwater. Emphasis and additional
107 Somerset Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
4 ROAD SAFETY
support is given to facilitate the development of school travel plans for schools serving pupils from such areas and need resulting from measured deprivation adds weight to the priority of schemes to support safe routes to school initiatives.
There are many very small pockets of poverty in rural Somerset which makes targeting all children in deprived circumstances difficult but we will continue to work towards achieving safer roads and improving life prospects in deprived areas.
Motorcyclists
Congestion and accessibility policies promote the use of cycling and motorcycle use. However we have identified that there is an increasing casualty problem involving motorcyclists in both urban and rural areas. This links to the increasing popularity of this as a transport mode, which is evident nationally.
17% of all KSI’s in rural areas occur to motorcyclists, generally between the age group 16-39. 12% of KSI’s in urban areas are motorcyclists between the ages of 16-24. 45% of motorbike KSI casualties in rural areas involve riders using bigger bikes. 61% of powered two wheeler slight casualties in urban areas involved riders using moped and smaller engined motor bikes. 42% of moped user casualties occur in the Taunton Deane District.
Younger inexperienced riders tend to be using the smaller motorbikes. In rural areas the larger bikes, used by older riders feature as a key issue and the relative speed of impact means severity is higher when involved in an accident. Under reporting of accident occurrence is an issue here, particularly for slight injuries in towns.
Motorcyclist casualties numbers have been a focus for route engineering but also road safety education through local Bike Safe and Ride to Arrive courses, and the eye catching TwistandGo4it campaign, which as recently been introduced and will be monitored. Efforts in these areas these will continue and be further developed.
Our Road Safety Unit supports the Somerset Rural Youth Project’s Moped Loan Scheme which enables young adults to travel at low cost to improve accessibility between their homes and education and work places. This scheme is of particular value in disadvantaged areas. We will continue to support this important transport area whilst seeking to reduce casualty severity and occurrence.
Casualties By Age
The propensity for injury of drivers aged 16-24 is as marked in Somerset as it is nationally. These road users lack experience and may have a more casual approach to danger. By further analysis we have found greater probability of accident involvement occurs on Friday and Saturday nights, when other factors such as alcohol and drug use becomes more prevalent. A particular issue within this is that the 16-24 age group have a higher propensity to be killed or seriously injured whilst using motorbikes and cars. Analysis has identified a correlation between the number of car driver casualties in the 16-24 age group and the number of passengers in the similar age group. Further analysis is needed to understand this better. Casualty numbers in these areas are higher now than during the baseline years 1994-1998. Therefore casualty reduction work aimed at this age group will be a priority to maximise success in casualty reduction.
Further analysis has identified that there are areas where elderly casualties are an issue. Elderly car passengers stand out as a group suffering more serious injury when involved in accidents. Reaction times either as a pedestrian or drivers can be a problem.The trend of increasing numbers of elderly casualties is being monitored and is related to demographic and lifestyle trends.
108 Somerset Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
ROAD SAFETY 4
Figure 4.8 Casualties by Month and by User Type (2001 to 2004 Rolling Average)
People are injured in accidents which occur for a range of reasons with a matrix of environmental conditions, personal circumstances and other contributory factors, such as road condition, geometry and lighting. In Somerset 27% of casualties: 25% of pedestrian and 27% of driver casualties currently occur in the dark.
An analysis of the data behind the graph shows significant issues, as follows:
Pedestrian casualties are higher January to November; Cyclist casualties are higher June to September; Moped rider casualties are higher in January and March then September through to October; Smaller engined motorbike user casualties are higher in March and August to December; Car driver casualties are highest in November; and Car passenger casualties are highest in August.
Speed Management
National research has identified that for the period 2000 to 2004, excessive speed was a contributory factor in at least:
13 % of all injury collisions; 19 % of serious injury collisions; and 29 % of fatal collisions.
Further research has shown that about a fifth of rural accidents involve vehicles going too fast for the situation. However, even when driving at appropriate speeds collisions on rural roads are likely to result in greater damage and injury simply because speeds are higher at impact than is likely to be the case on urban, lower speed roads.
109 Somerset Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
4 ROAD SAFETY
Local Action
Community Speed Watch teams coordinated by local councils and the police operate in parishes where speed is of particular local concern. In the Blackdown Hills a particular initiative involves the local community working to encourage safer driving through a local ‘Safe Lanes Initiative’ in partnership with Somerset and Devon County Councils.
Engineering and Traffic Management
Rural route treatments address accidents where casualties are made more severe by vehicle speed at impact. Urban speed can be managed by installing traffic calming and new speed limits with a focus on preventing injury to vulnerable road users. It is recognised that speed management measures must impart clear and unambiguous instruction to avoid causing confusion and frustration if it is to be accepted by motorists and local communities. We have introduced a number of new speed limits in villages, and outside some schools to improve quality of life and address community concerns about traffic intimidation and danger.
Safety Camera Partnership (SCP)
The Council works with the Avon and Somerset Police Authority and others through the Safety Camera Partnership Board, chaired by the Assistant Chief Constable, to manage and deliver enforcement and speed education activities.
The Safety Camera Partnership in Avon and Somerset was launched in April 2002. Its aim is to reduce road accidents and casualties through the enforcement of speed limits and reduce the incidence of red light running using camera technology; and to operate speed related driver education programmes. The Partnership was formed by local highways and health authorities, Police, the Magistrates' Courts Service, Crown Prosecution Service and the Highways Agency. Department for Transport regulations stipulate that camera sites must have a collision history of speed-related accidents and/or a general speeding problem. All fixed sites must adhere to visibility/signing guidelines.
Camera Sites:
The partnership operates fixed and mobile safety camera units. New 'RedSpeed' digital cameras can detect vehicles travelling through a green traffic light at excessive speed as well as detecting vehicles that travel through on red. There are currently 27 roadside fixed safety cameras in the Somerset area - with mobile speed detection cameras being used at another 80 locations. In addition there are 7 red light cameras. These have reduced casualties at these locations by 14% following implementation. Many of the cameras were already in place through local authority and police cooperation prior to the formal partnership arrangement and launch enabled by hypothecating speeding fines. Operational costs of the Safety Camera Partnership are currently funded by this. Some roadside cameras in Avon and Somerset lie 'dormant' because the casualty rates have dropped significantly since they were installed.
Driver Speed Education:
The partnership also funds Speed Choice workshops, which provide offending motorists the opportunity to attend a speed awareness course as opposed to receiving a fine. About 25,000 motorists have been referred to the programme in the Avon and Somerset area. A recent report on this area of work considers effectiveness of these courses and we are currently reviewing this Transport Research Laboratory (TRL649) information.
New funding Guidelines:
110 Somerset Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
ROAD SAFETY 4
There are likely to be changes to the management of safety cameras influenced by the Police Force Review and the January 2006 Government guideline on Safety Camera Partnership funding. The latter will take effect from the 2007/08 financial year.The greater local flexibility of funding for road safety measures including camera enforcement is welcomed. We are therefore currently considering how best to build upon the current success of this area of casualty reduction work .
Involvement in developing our speed management strategy.
October 2003: Commission on speed management policy including:
Survey with the public, parish councils and stakeholders; Over 1800 responses with 170 responses from parish councils; Written representations from 12 stakeholder organisations.
Key issues raised:
Given several options, people felt that our previous ‘signs and lines’ approach was least effective at reducing speed, with more interactive signs such as ‘speed visors’ most effective; Concerns with appropriateness of speed limits, buffer zones, consistency of speed limit and impact on strategic routes; Visual impact and number of signs; Need for driver education; Support for part-time school speed limits rather than full-time; and Lack of visible enforcement.
This commission led to a revised policy in August 2004, a review and modification of measures on key strategic routes such as the A358 & A39 in West Somerset.
Road Safety at Work
Road safety issues for drivers who are travelling to and for work is evidenced by high number of casualties in the economically active age group of 25-59. This accounts for over 900 casualties per annum on average 2001-2004. See tables above. The new Stats 19 journey purpose record will help to determine any specific routes and areas on which to focus in future.
Work on Travel Plans and encouragement of driver training will help to contribute to tackling this area of concern. We are currently working closely with our County Council health and safety group to establish what can be done on this from within the County Council initially.
We are receiving requests through the Safety Camera Partnership to provide more Speed Choice type courses for industry, to assist companies with managing road risk.
Summary
Detailed analysis of our evidential data suggests that there is no one simple solution to solve the casualty problem within Somerset. We have identified what has worked well, and specific areas for improvement. To help us develop our future casualty reduction strategy we have reviewed, and will continue to learn from best practice in better performing authorities.
111 Somerset Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
4 ROAD SAFETY
4.1.2 Challenges, Implications and Opportunities
The analysis of our evidence base has identified a number of issues within the County which will influence our ability to improve road safety across the County and to be able to deliver the step change in casualty reduction that we are looking to achieve. However, there are also a number of opportunities which, if taken, can support our activities and help to deliver this improvement, and meet our targets. It is therefore vital that we recognise these and understand their implications so that we can continue to build on our past performance.
Table 4.14 Summary of Challenges and Opportunities for Safety
Challenge Implications Opportunities
Somerset is a rural county with a dispersed There is a dependency on car travel, which The continuing aim to improve accessibility through reducing settlement pattern. increases the volume of traffic on the the distance needed to travel to services, could provide an network, including that travelling through opportunity to minimise accidents. smaller communities, and so increases the The volume of traffic on our roads could be reduced through potential for conflict. ensuring that the networks provide a safe means of travel Road Casualties are more severe on rural for all modes of transport, and thereby encourage sustainable roads due to the higher speeds involved, and modes. more dispersed making them more difficult The ongoing development of the Safety Camera Partnership to tackle. will help to address speed related accident concerns.
Somerset has a mature highway network The resulting narrow, winding, undulating Enhancing the coordination of maintenance and safety roads often have inadequate geometry for priorities through this LTP and the Transport Asset modern travel. This can contribute to the Management Plan will provide opportunities to update the safety record of some roads and can make network to modern standards. it difficult to install appropriate remedial Improving the route management of the principle roads in measures. the County will help to identify and address safety concerns.
Population Growing quickly especially in Congestion is forecast to rise in these areas New developments will provide safe facilities to minimise Taunton, Bridgwater and Yeovil. thereby creating a higher potential for conflict, future safety concerns. and significant numbers of people injured, Significant opportunity exists for more effective traffic control particularly pedestrians and cyclists. Offset and management through the implementation of area wide by slower vehicle speeds at peak times. safety schemes, town centre enhancements and improving travel options in through the development of the Town Plans, and the introduction of telematics and intelligent transport systems.
High number of people and organisations This can lead to a duplication of effort or Improving our Partnerships with all those involved in road with a role to play in delivering road safety conflicting messages if programmes are not safety though the Somerset Casualty Reduction Partnership, improvements coordinated. and improving our links with bodies such as the Primary Care Trust and Avon and Somerset Police will ensure maximum benefit from all our work.
Average earnings in the area are below the People are less able to pay for road safety In deprived areas, certain elements of road safety education national and regional averages education, and unable to buy more modern for children can be provided free of charge. vehicles with the latest safety equipment.
Somerset has a rich biodiversity, landscape In some cases road safety engineering Careful use of local partnership and consultation to ensure of national importance and towns and villages measures could be constrained by these appropriate and acceptable schemes can be delivered. with rich heritage. factors, with space and visibility splays restricted by buildings and natural landscape.
Behind Schedule on KSI casualty reduction Greater focus needed on casualty reduction Best practice review will inform areas where we can improve effort. casualty reduction performance.
On track with Child KSI. Low overall numbers It is difficult to identify and target road safety The large proportion of children walking to school in some make it difficult to target measures. measures where they would have the biggest areas provides an impetus to build on their road safety impact, although areas of deprivation often education. have a higher number of child accidents. A Child Road Safety Audit will help to identify where future measures including Urban Safety Schemes could be targeted.
Some routes within the County experience These are treated as first priority over other Greater focus on route management techniques and speed higher than average KSI’s per km. routes although require a range of measures. limit review will deliver casualty reductions.
112 Somerset Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
ROAD SAFETY 4
Challenge Implications Opportunities
High risk groups are car drivers and These groups are the focus for much of the The research into best practice within other local authorities passengers, and motorcyclists. casualty reduction measures implemented will identify other opportunities for targeting these particular throughout the County. user groups.
Possible conflicts between road safety and Road safety issues can conflict with or be a Improvements in scheme prioritisation framework and other LTP objectives by-product of measures which promote the programming will enable integration of all of schemes . other LTP objectives, and vice versa.
Previous safety related schemes have The dispersed pattern of accidents resulting If there are fewer clusters evident then the opportunity arises diminished the number of cluster sites that in fewer clusters makes identifying and to target funding to other casualty reduction methods. exist implementing casualty reduction schemes more challenging
Increasing popularity of motorcycling The number of accidents and severity of The best practice review will provide the opportunity to review those accidents involving motorcyclists is how engineering schemes, as well as education and publicity increasing. measures could continue to be targeted to address this increasing concern.
High numbers of younger riders and drivers Young people in rural locations seeking The best practice review will provide the opportunity to review involved in accidents resulting in KSIs. affordable access to colleges and work, using how engineering schemes, as well as education and publicity a particularly vulnerable travel mode whilst measures could continue to be targeted to address this relatively inexperienced. increasing concern, help riders to manage their risks.
4.2 ROAD SAFETY STRATEGY
We have identified the need to introduce a step change in our performance to ensure an increase in efforts and impacts. We will build on the areas where we have already shown a reduction in casualty numbers and enhance those areas which need further work.
We recognise that a step change strategy is ambitious and has many elements, some of which can be implemented faster than others. All this will be taken into account as we develop a new Casualty Accident Reduction Strategy that will focus on:-
Safety Culture – developing our internal casualty reduction culture, and influencing external community and stakeholder culture ; Partnerships – use our casualty reduction culture, to strengthen and develop links with all parties for whom casualty reduction is or should be a strategic focus; Routes – carry out route management on the rural principal roads; Areas – develop holistic studies of casualty reduction potential commencing with the key urban areas of Taunton, Yeovil and Bridgwater; Road Users – use focused strategies for casualty groups, in particular, car drivers, passengers and motorcyclists on rural main roads and urban areas; and Publicity - strengthen our work on road safety education to make road safety more of a focus in the mind of residents and visitors in Somerset.
4.2.1 Developing A Safety Culture
Best practice elsewhere shows that successful casualty reduction is achieved through support and determination built upon a safety culture within the leading organisation.
Although we have not completed our best practice review, our initial findings suggest that we can achieve a cultural change by:
113 Somerset Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
4 ROAD SAFETY
Strengthening the message regarding how important road safety is to the County Council within our policy documents to ensure that this continues to inform County Council decisions; Keeping Road Safety at the forefront of council decisions through ensuring that County Councilors, Officers and residents of Somerset are continually reminded of the importance of road safety; Ensuring that all our officers and those of other organisations dealing with road safety work closely together and are aware of each others' work so that they provide maximum benefit; and Ensuring that we direct the appropriate resources towards delivering the specific actions that we have identified in this LTP.
These will inform how we develop our casualty reduction culture and how we achieve improvement in the areas identified in Section 4.1.2.
A significant document to assist with culture change will be the new Casualty Accident Reduction Strategy plan (CARS) because it both supports and influences the following key documents and plans:
Local Area Agreement; Somerset Corporate Plan; Community Strategy; Community Safety Strategy; TAMP; Transport Strategies for Taunton, Yeovil and Bridgwater; development frameworks; and other spatial strategies and service plans e.g. the Property Asset Management Plan.
The development of this LTP has already been influential in bringing together the ethos of casualty reduction across all LTP objectives and shared priorities.
For example, road safety engineers are working with maintenance engineers in developing and implementing the pavement management system to ensure that casualty data is used when evaluating scheme priorities and investment.
This evaluation process will be incorporated into the TAMP which will be an essential element to achieve the required step change in Casualty Reduction through ensuring that:
All assets with a significant relationship to reducing casualties or having a causative affect on casualties shall be proactively maintained; Accident data shall be taken into account when designing highway improvement and road maintenance schemes; Whole routes shall have a consistent level of service; Signs and notices along or adjacent to the highway shall be clear, unambiguous, relevant and mounted with regard to the latest safety criteria; Highway lighting is maintained and installed to agreed levels of service; and An annual review of the winter maintenance plan continues.
Further links between safety and road condition and asset management can be found in the chapter on value for money and asset management.
114 Somerset Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
ROAD SAFETY 4
Consistent project management is seen as a key element to change the culture of an organisation. We have begun to set up significant projects under a formal project management ethos using Prince2. This involves setting up a project board with elected Member and senior officer involvement and commitment. Their role is to ensure that the project is fully resourced and delivered to agreed timescales. The CARS project is now one of these significant projects.
The benefits relating to culture change are that we will:
Proactively monitor casualty numbers and outcomes; Identify areas for improvement on a frequent basis; Disseminate this information through regular newsletters which will inform interested parties; Discuss these issues with other important internal delivery teams; Discuss these issues with external partners and organisations; and Proactively monitor outcomes and introduce or adjust strategies as necessary.
All the above elements will be built into the CARS strategy which will influence the Council’s Corporate Plan, which outlines the desire to strive for safer roads and to reduce the fear of crime to make our communities safer.
4.2.2 Partnership
Best practice elsewhere shows that successful casualty reduction is enabled through the support and determination of strategic partnerships at all levels within the various organisations that deal with road safety.
We have been working with the following partners:
Table 4.15 Safety Partnerships
Sub-Regional County Regional Support
Avon and Somerset Police Authority Somerset Strategic Partnership Regional Assembly (Subject to Police Review 2006 ) Somerset Accident Prevention Forum Neighbouring authorities: Devon, Dorset, Wiltshire, Safety Camera Partnership Crime and Disorder Partnerships North Somerset, BANES, Bristol City, South Accident Data Consortium District, parish, and town councils Gloucestershire Highways Agency Avon and Somerset Strategic Road Residents Safety Forum County Surveyors Society South West Accident Other stakeholders Reduction Working Group County Surveyors Society Local Authorities Road Safety Officers Association
Some of these partnerships have currently been more successful than others. We are aware of the North East Region of England’s apparent greater overall success in casualty reduction, which is likely in part to be due to its regional partnership working.We are keen to examine and learn from their work.
We will use our influence and desire to drive our partnerships to make better informed decisions. We will achieve this by proactive monitoring and dissemination of the casualty database, linking campaigns to specific communities, road user groups, times of year etc; and
We will develop a communication strategy to deliver our message to our partners and wider audience in which feedback of success and areas for improvement are disseminated.
115 Somerset Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
4 ROAD SAFETY
Work has already commenced with workshops which have identified the need for a casualty reduction partnership, and therefore the Somerset Casualty Reduction Partnership will be formed as an initial stage within this plan. The form of this partnership will use the advice on the national review of Safety Camera Partnerships to build this area of work into the wider delivery of the Somerset LTP casualty reduction strategy.
We will continue to extend and strengthen our liaison with neighbouring authorities and other cross boundary organisations such as the Primary Healthcare Trusts, Avon and Somerset Police Authority, the Somerset Fire and Rescue Service, and the Highways Agency, with a view to reducing road traffic accident casualties and addressing highway related community safety issues.
Partnerships will therefore form the core of our Casualty/Accident Reduction Strategy (CARS) to win over hearts and minds and encourage cultural and behavioural changes which can help change existing highways into a much safer space. Working through the Somerset Strategic Partnership will empower the various organisations to use their influence and skills to assist us in delivering casualty reduction. Local consultation with the Police, district, town, parish councils and residents will inform the development of proposals for engineering schemes publicity and associated road safety training.
4.2.3 Routes
Due to the level of injuries we will focus casualty reduction effort on key routes, particularly the main rural road network. This work will be prioritised by the number of KSI casualties on these routes. Capital casualty reduction engineering route management schemes, reinforced by revenue spend on education training and publicity will contribute to delivering the required casualty reductions. This work has historically demonstrated casualty reductions and rates of return in excess of 250% and we anticipate this can continue.
Treatment of routes requires alerting road users to hazards through traffic management measures and education, and using route speed and traffic management strategies to provide a consistent level of information with regard to road layout and alignment. Our use of junction marker bollards will continue as part of a consistent approach to raising driver awareness of rural junctions.
Maintenance - Asset Management
We will also incorporate the principles of route safety engineering into all aspects of asset management. Greater linkage is also being developed with the County Council skid resistance policy and the use of our new pavement condition management system, linked to accident management software. This helps to prioritise road surfacing works by considering the level of wet road surface injury accidents. The benefits of improving systems used to manage road condition and the highway asset inventory (CONFIRM system), including accident informed wearing course intervention level software, will be realized more and more throughout the life of this plan. Further synergies will be developed through closer service delivery activities as road safety is intrinsic to robust highway asset management.
The work on route management, will consider route hierarchy and cross boundary planning to ensure that measures do not adversely affect the functioning of these key transport links. As mentioned previously the issue of reviewing ‘A’ & ‘B’ class road speed limits will be a consideration here.
Road safety education activities such as route signage and publicity campaigns will be tied into this work. This has already been used on routes with high numbers of motorcycle casualties and accidents have reduced. Enforcement will also play a role here and we will continue to work with the Police and Safety Camera Partnership
116 Somerset Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
ROAD SAFETY 4
to achieve more in this area. Work with communities to tackle the problem of intimidation and fear caused by inappropriately high speeds will be encouraged through publicity campaigns and direct action (including “community speed watch” type schemes).
4.2.4 Areas
Predominately urban casualty problems, local area casualty patterns will be addressed through holistic urban safety strategies, incorporating engineering and road safety Education Training and Publicity activities targeted through whole-town casualty studies, compatible with our comprehensive town strategies.
The focus on area wide casualty reduction treatment will initially involve the key towns of Taunton, Yeovil, and Bridgwater reflecting their priority due to highest casualty numbers. The priorities for casualty reduction are set out in the previous section on urban casualty issues; these being pedestrians, cyclists, motorcyclists and car users. Pedestrian and cyclist casualties are frequently children and older people . There is also a need to focus on reducing car user casualties. We see these studies as needing to be holistic in nature to ensure the move is made away from traditional cluster sites towards an urban safety management approach. A key approach will be to identify user issues that can be tackled through revenue funded road safety education training and publicity e.g. campaigns and pedestrian training.
An early initiative will be to implement vehicle activated speed reminder signs (VASRSs, including speed information devices/SIDs) on appropriate sections of key routes to ensure drivers are aware of the speed limit when entering urban areas and are reminded of their speed at key points in towns. Such signs have been proven to reduce vehicle speeds and a speed reduction in turn has been proved to reduce casualties. National research has demonstrated that a 1 mph reduction in speed can result in a 4% reduction in casualties. We are also investigating the use of mobile variable message signs (VMS’s) to present road safety messages within towns as well as along routes.
Urban casualty reduction initiatives will also tie into the implementation of town centre enhancement schemes, particularly the Taunton Third Way and Northern Inner Distributor Road, which will increase priority for vulnerable road users, reduce the volume of traffic circulating in areas that have a high level of vulnerable road users, and manage the speed of traffic.
We will continue broad-based road safety campaigns and road safety training, with some emphasis on disadvantaged areas, monitor them for casualty reduction performance, and the need for any casualty accident reduction engineering. Community safety and fear of crime will continue to be considerations of the urban area studies.
4.2.5 Road Users
We will use the detailed studies of our casualty records to guide, update, expand and introduce engineering programmes identified above and road safety education which will focus on the key casualty groups identified. County-wide user audits (e.g. Child Safety Audits, Motor-cycle user audits) will be undertaken, to inform where and when best to apply casualty reduction effort.
Motorcyclist. Working with motorcycle organisations, the police and through publicity campaigns and route management safety engineering we will aim to spread the influence of training to improve motorcyclist safety, and awareness.
117 Somerset Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
4 ROAD SAFETY
Car Users. We have identified two car user age groups, (16-24 & 25-39 ) these require different strategies within the education training and publicity field. The younger age group has yet to develop hazard perception skills, whereas the older group is more likely to have developed such skills but may not be implementing them. Route management safety engineering will help to emphasise hazards and road layouts.
User Expectation. Influencing the culture of car drivers and raising awareness of passengers to the dangers of inappropriate driving habits is a challenging issue, but one we need to address. One element of this is to use outcomes and knowledge from market and social research allowing the development of techniques to attempt to make drivers consider the way they drive through changing their safety culture.Different age groups also require different casualty reduction strategies. Education, training, and publicity will continue to be targeted through schools and community groups formed by age and need (e.g. youth groups, Help the Aged etc). How road users react to road conditions will also be addressed by raising public awareness of the need to use lights, wear bright clothing, and leave safe braking distances etc.
4.2.6 Publicity
To change the public emphasis with regard to road safety culture we will investigate much more powerful techniques than the current education and publicity regime. The best practice learning will again support this.
It is anticipated that we will therefore use publicity campaigns and work directly with employers and schools to promote safe “in-car” practices by employees, parents and children. Publicity campaigns and training will aim to improve the safety awareness and driving skills of recently qualified drivers. Currently we are involved with setting up the Pass Plus courses in Somerset using pump priming funding via the Safety Camera Partnership (SCP).
The SCP also carries out publicity in relation to speeding and this widens resources to spread road safety measures.
We will continue to our work with schools to improve the safety awareness of child vulnerable road users. This will be supplemented by Safe Routes to School projects.
We are also keen to raise awareness of accident hotspots by providing more on-site information.
Radio provides and every day update of road safety issues from the SCP and will continue this. Our use of local radio campaigns will be enhanced. We will make further use of poster displays and bus backs.
We are employing ‘Smart Risk’ presentations, sponsored jointly with our Children and Young People’s Services Department, the Primary Care Trust and the Police. Aimed at teenagers and young adults covers all areas of personal risk in life to ensure that they are aware of how to manage life risks. 'Smart Risk Heros' talk about accident involvement and health risk from personal experience and how not ‘to cross the stupid line’, and become involved in an accident or be hurt. It promotes an integrated safety message and evaluation of risks in general day to day activities, and can emphasise key risk areas such as road safety. 4.3 PROGRAMME AND TARGETS
Bearing in mind the above considerations and where we would like to be in relation to reducing casualty numbers we intend to adopt targets for LTP2 that are challenging yet achievable. We have therefore considered our performance over LTP1, best practice, and our ability to improve compared with the performance of other authorities. We have therefore set the targets below (for additional information see Chapter 11).
118 Somerset Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
ROAD SAFETY 4
Table 4.16 Mandatory Targets Relating to Safety
Mandatory Indicator Description Baseline Data 1994-1998 Local Target or Outcome 2010
BVPI99a Total killed and seriously injured casualties 380 247 - 35% reduction
BVPI99b Child killed and seriously injured casualties 33 17 - 50% reduction
BVPI99c Total slight casualties 2085 2190 - no increase on recent levels
Casualty Reduction Monitoring
Central to the delivery of our casualty reduction strategy and the achievement of the casualty reduction targets is the need to ensure that we are achieving the best possible value for money and most importantly casualty savings in all that we do. Currently we regularly monitor the accident and casualty data to identify and understand existing and developing casualty trends. We also ensure that we focus on the type of casualty reduction schemes and activities that actually reduce road casualties in Somerset. This will be important where we are not necessarily the deliverers of a scheme but can help to monitor its outcome.
As the road safety strategy develops we recognise that we need to undertake more comprehensive monitoring of network safety and casualty reduction to guide our activities more effectively. We will therefore provide further resources in this area and ensure that regular feedback is disseminated with regard to achievements and areas which need improvement.
We also recognise that it is vital that we understand how the public view the casualty reduction work that we undertake and we are learning more about this through service improvement questionnaires, which are completed for all LTP schemes. Through these, it has become evident that we need to develop our consultation strategies to ensure the right groups are consulted and are aware of why we are carrying out the work. This survey work is part of a standard approach through the South-West Highways Improvement Benchmarking club, of which we are an active member.
The public relations and marketing activities supporting the delivery of road safety messages will be a key development area to influence everyone developing , maintaining and using roads in Somerset. Outcomes delivered by this activity are hard to measure but results will be monitored where practicable, and our best practice review will help inform this.
119 Somerset Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
4 ROAD SAFETY
Involvement in developing casualty accident reduction engineering schemes :
Scheme conception involves use of local knowledge at the outset; Schemes developed and proposals consulted upon with a variety of groups (dependent on size and type of scheme); and Groups generally consulted -residents, the Police, parish and district councils, statutory bodies, residents, bus companies, cycling, pedestrians, disabled and environmental groups.
Key issues raised:
Local people often wish to see larger scale proposals, which mean the scheme aims have to be explained; Timescale of delivery has to be carefully explained; Scheme justification has to be carefully set out; and Scheme success and feedback should be provided to the local community.
Summary
The Casualty Accident Reduction Strategy (CARS), will deliver our vision of future performance using the actions set out previously, based on the evidence summarised in the problems and opportunities section of this chapter. We will implement the actions and activities through the following strategies:
Project management; Proactive data management and analysis; Communication Strategy; Coordination of highway services; Working with other County Council services; Working with communities; Working with partners and other organisations; Working with highway users; Engineering solutions; Publicity campaigns; and Delivering training and education
We recognise that additional casualty reduction activity will require increased investment from both capital and revenue funds. We can be confident that this increased activity and investment will allow us to improve our casualty reduction performance through evidence arising out of our best practice study. This has identified how other better performing authorities have themselves made such a difference. It is clear that the organisational structure of a local authority should seek to ensure that it has sufficient numbers of well trained people working within the road safety field. These people should be able to develop good working relationships so that the road safety function is delivered efficiently on behalf of the Council. We are planning a conference to launch stepped-up partnership working in road safety in Somerset in mid 2006.
We will carefully manage the risks to the achievement of our targets with clarity and precision of monitoring. This will involve analysis of our current and new approaches: If we identify that an approach is not delivering casualty savings, then we will amend this approach or stop and focus resources more productively. To be able to achieve
120 Somerset Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
ROAD SAFETY 4
this a detailed knowledge of the casualty data is a pre-requisite. The support and understanding of senior officers and councilors so that programmes and activities are tailored to the dynamics of local casualty data will be an essential element of this so that we will flexibly target appropriate resources where and when they are needed.
By way of examples of the work we will be carrying out using the above approach we have set out example programmes below.
The tables below set an example of the scheme types for Casualty Accident Reduction Engineering and ETP Schemes which will be implemented in the first year of this LTP.
Table 4.17 Example Engineering Schemes 2006/07
Scheme Type Scheme Name
Rural Route Management A38 Route Management A37 Route Management B3135 Cheddar to A39 A362 Frome to Buckland Down B3134 Miners Arms to County Boundary A30 Crewkerne to Yeovil
Area - Urban Safety Management Taunton USM Study (including VASRS implementation) Yeovil USM Study (including VASRS implementation) Highbridge/Burnham USM Study Implementation
Table 4.18 Example ETP Schemes 2006/07
Scheme Type Scheme Name
Radio and Poster Campaign Think! - Rural Road Safety
Radio and Poster Campaign Think! - Switch off when you move off mobile phone campaign Supplemented by local ‘No mobile when mobile’ bus backs campaign
Radio , Poster postcard, pens and For My Girlfriend Campaign –visits to colleges key rings campaign
Motorcycle training Rider Improvement, Bike Safe & Ride to Arrive
Motorcycle awareness Younger TwistandGo4it beer mats and web based advice Riders
Motorcycle Radio , Poster and Bus Dying to Ride not Riding to Die backs campaign
School based cycle training Pre Right Track & Right Track - supporting schools with travel plans
School based training Road safety talks leading into practical pedestrian training, leaflets for parents -supporting schools with travel plans
Younger Driver Training Pass Plus courses in partnership with the Avon and Somerset Safety Camera Partnership and neighbouring Local Authority partners
Market Research to inform Research into: campaigns Moped and motorcyclist riders motivations; Car drivers and passengers.
121 Somerset Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
4 ROAD SAFETY
Table 4.19 Example Large Scale Route Safety Studies Programme
Rural Route study priority subject to Casualty Reduction Assessment Implementation Stage Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
A38 Route Management Study
Design
Implement
A37 Route Management Study
Design
Implement
A361 Route Management Study
Design
Implement
A30 Route Management Study
Design
Implement
A371 Route Management Study
Design
Implement
Future Schemes to be identified subject to casualty reduction review
Route 6 Study
Design
Implement
Route 7 Study
Design
Implement
Route 8 Study
Design
Implement
Route 9 Study
Design
Implement
Route 10 Study
Design
Implement
These schemes will be prioritised in relation to casualty numbers with particular reference to killed and seriously injured casualties and those involving vulnerable road users.
122 Somerset Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
ROAD SAFETY 4
Table 4.20 Example Area Safety Studies Programme
Urban Study priority subject to Casualty Reduction Assessment Implementation Stage Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
Taunton Urban Safety Management Study Study
Design
Implement
Yeovil Urban Safety Management Study Study
Design
Implement
Bridgwater Urban Safety Management Study Study
Design
Implement
Future Schemes to be identified subject to casualty reduction review
Urban Safety Management Study 4 Study
Design
Implement
Urban Safety Management Study 5 Study
Design
Implement
These schemes will be prioritised in relation to casualty numbers with particular reference to killed and seriously injured casualties and those involving vulnerable road users.
123 Somerset Local Transport Plan 2006-2011
4 ROAD SAFETY
Table 4.21 LTP2 Programme relating to Road Safety
Total Number of 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2006/07 Forecast Reveneue Capital new Revenue Funding 2006-2011 (iii) Estimates Schemes Budgets (£000's) 2006-2011 2006-2011 £000's (£000's)
Casualty Reduction (iv)
Areas 391 3 2 1 552 2,760
Routes 2,418 33 25 5 3
Clusters 842 22 21 1
Safe routes to schools 309 5 4 1
Schemes to be identified 3,407 To be determined following assessment. following detailed assessment of future casualty problems and priorities
Safety Camera Partnership 1,130 Integration of funding within safety strategy to be determined. 1,347 5,084
Maintenance block 86,115 Programme determined through condition surveys. 22,702 113,510
Cross-cutting revenue Ongoing activity not scheme based. 824 4,120 activity(v)
iii Subject to annual budget setting process iv Safety Camera Partnership funding on separate line v Includes LTP implementation, planning liaison/ development, integrated transport policy management, scheme & policy monitoring.
124