20 mph - The Cambridge ExperienceJohn RichardsActing Project Delivery & Environment Manager

Background to Cambridge 20 mph Challenges facing City’s

infrastructure: Compact city of 120,000 residents,

seasonal students and visitors Historic core Highest cycling rates in UK Road casualties Growth, congestion and pollution

Existing 20 mph areas have proved popular!

History Early safety driven schemes date from

late 80s/early 90s Engineering ‘heavy’

Awareness of changing national landscape around lower speeds

2010 ‘Trial’ schemes based on signing/road markings alone Central area within

inner ring road Wulfstan Way /

Gunhild Way late 1940s residential estate

Objectives

City-wide 20 mph consistency, rationalise existing areas and signage

Facilitate active and sustainable travel modes Health and congestion benefits

Improve safety and feeling of security Reduce noise and pollution Environmental improvement

New beginnings… Project established through 2011

motion to Council City-wide approach Cross party support £600k Capital budget over 3 years Light not heavy handed approach,

based on signing and road marking changes

Self enforcing

Consider the function of streets and 20 mph as a catalyst for potential change…

Routes for movement…

‘Thoroughfare’ dominates e.g. ‘A’ and ‘B’ category roads generally unsuited to 20 mph…

Routes for access…

Thoroughfare less dominant e.g. residential and shopping streets generally suited to 20 mph…

But what about those in between?

e.g. ‘C’ class or distributor roads

these are different sections of same road….

Recommendations based upon:

Function of route within hierarchy

Road and traffic characteristics Existing traffic speeds

(comprehensive surveys) Levels of public support

Approach

Phased implementation over 2-3 years

Efficient mix of zones and limits Engagement centred around 4 Area

Committees 132 miles, or 85% of city’s roads, included Project Board aligns key stakeholders and processes

(e.g. County Council as Highway Authority)

High Public Engagement expectations Approx. 60,000 consultation

packs delivered to all city addresses

Project web page and online questionnaire

Public exhibitions Press releases and social

media Area Committee and

Environment Scrutiny Committee consideration

Opportunity for public to have say and help shape – encourages ownership

Consultation headlines Approx. 11,000 responses, 18%

return rate < 4% non city residents > 2 to 1 in favour Mixed support on ‘C’ road suitability Key concerns: enforcement and

worsening congestion Popular misconceptions

Implementation Progress

Phase 3 (South and West /

Central areas)consultation completed, member review, target implementation next

12 months

Phase 1 (North area) completed

Phase 2 (East area)

TROs in place, implementation

Spring 2015

Victoria Road A busy ‘A’ class route forming part of the city’s inner ring road Considered ineligible for 20 mph given County policy that excludes

‘A’ and ‘B’ class roads Road and usage characteristics similar to many ‘C’ class routes

included Public demand and political support Agreement to advertise, objections determined (by County Council)

and now included within project scope

Post implementation monitoring (north area) On 93% of streets previously above

20 mph, speeds have reduced Average reduction 1-2 mph typical 3 mph reduction on a busy ‘C’ road

(Arbury Road) Average speeds on roads included

now below 24mph, with 56% below 20mph

Further work Complete city-wide (realise

maximum benefit) Marketing (hearts & minds) and

promotion Enforcement (carrot and stick) Monitoring of:

Travel choices Traffic speeds Casualties Air quality and noise Public perceptions, and satisfaction?

Lessons

Development phase Design phase Implementation phase

Development phase learning Ensure sound evidence base Adequately resource, plan and

programme Establish governance and

processes Challenge assumptions Flexibility around road and user

characteristics rather than classification

Design phase learning

Care around sign positioning Administrative boundaries New developments

Design phase learning

Care around sign positioning Administrative boundaries New developments

Design phase learning

Care around sign positioning Administrative boundaries New developments

Implementation phase learning Effective procurement and

early provider involvement Forward visibility of

programme and constraints Street Works liaison ‘Right first time’ construction

Future challenges Scrutiny around ‘value for money’ Compliance and need for enforcement Public acceptance and ownership Maintaining advocacy message Dealing with inconsistencies and

problem streets Project integrity What next?

Thank youJohn Richards

John.richards@cambridge.gov.uk01223 458525

Consider widespread 20 mph coverage as a step change in public attitudes around healthy, living, cities

And finally…