Heath and Reach Average Speed cameras

Good afternoon Martin,

With reference your wishes to progress Average Speed Cameras in Heath and Reach village, I have recently been in dialogue with your colleague Cllr Mark Versallion.

In this exchange  I went into some detail with regard to roles and responsibilities of the various agencies.

Below is a bit of an adapted “ cut and paste” – so I apologise if you have seen the content previously – but it will give you absolute clarity and you are not left wondering.

Highway Authority S.39 obligations.

Section 39 Road Traffic Act 1988 states that: – Each relevant authority— (i.e. Central Beds Council in this case as the highway authority)

(a) if it is a local authority, must prepare and carry out a programme of measures designed to promote road safety, and or, may contribute towards the cost of measures for promoting road safety taken by other authorities or bodies.

(3) Each relevant authority

(a) must carry out studies into accidents arising out of the use of vehicles

(i) if it is a local authority, on roads or parts of roads, within their area

(b) must, in the light of those studies, take such measures as appear to the authority to be appropriate to prevent such accidents, including the dissemination of information and advice relating to the use of roads, the giving of practical training to road users or any class or description of road users, the construction, improvement, maintenance or repair of roads for the maintenance of which they are responsible and other measures taken in the exercise of their powers for controlling, protecting or assisting the movement of traffic on roads, and

(c) in constructing new roads, must take such measures as appear to the authority to be appropriate to reduce the possibilities of such accidents when the roads come into use.

Exec Summary

In plain English, this means that the responsibility for road safety measures rests with the highway authority which in this case is CBC;- extending from the original design of a road, through to build, maintenance and review of incidents on any road making improvements to design or layout as required. ( controlling, protecting, assisting – although they may listen and take into consideration any concerns we raise).

It is for CBC to deem what are suitable measures. Generally enforcement is considered the last option – as by installing  these assets – it is an acknowledgement of failing/ insufficient traffic management to cope with an issue ( sometimes appropriate TM is not possible due to the environment or a range of other external factors – including cost)– it also creates an enforcement burden for the police.

There are a wide range of reasons people speed– some of these reasons include inappropriately low speed limits – or look and feel of a road is faster than the limit….obviously alongside those who engage in risk based behaviour. My/our view generally is that any highway authority should look at other options before camera enforcement which deals with the symptoms of  the problem  and not the cause.

Ultimately it is the council choice to use cameras to meet their S39 obligations.

As I previously said to Mark, I will be up front an state that with finite resources; court slots; driver improvement courses etc… and a dearth of safety cameras producing violations – we as an enforcement authority must prioritise the offences we process at those locations which present the greatest threat, harm and risk to the local community. So if a Safety Camera or Average Speed System is installed in a location where there is no strong evidence of speeding ( data lead not perception) and no serious collision history – it will always remain our decision to prioritise enforcement to location where such data/ history exists – in an attempt to garner driver compliance at  higher risk locations. We have to be able to show any enforcement we do is legitimate and is the product of an evidence based problem solving approach.

There are other pressures for the highway authority. When talking about Safety Cameras. These assets  are both expensive to procure and also maintain. Apart from the initial capital outlay – other ongoing costs that must be accounted for include calibration; repairs; costs for VPN/cellular network to take violations from the outstation to the in-station – maintenance of any server and associated costs for offence processing equipment.

It should be noted that ( contrary to popular belief) the police don’t actually make a penny out of speed enforcement ( the council don’t, either). There is an element of cost recovery but we are not allowed to retain any monies over “break-even”. The “war on the motorist/ cash cow” stuff makes good clickbait  – but in reality could not be further from the truth…

The good news. Having just looked at the collision history in the village, it appears that other than 2 reported collisions last year ( one serious and one slight) – the roads have a good record for road safety.

We have previously used mobile Safety Camera site in Heath and Reach, which had historically been quite problematic  – as the location uses on street parking – but would be happy to explore with CBC a more sustainable solution around some mobile enforcement in the village if they felt it appropriate. With regard to other measures such as Safety Cameras, I do need to direct you back to CBC, however.

I appreciate this may not be exactly what you want to hear, but in terms of roles and responsibilities, I hope this helps explain the situation fully. I have tired to be as helpful as I can be within my role.

Kind Regards

Richard Hann

Road Safety Operations Manager

21st June 2021