Can I object to my local authority increasing a 20mph limit to 30mph?

My local authority has said that after Transport Minister, Ken Skates, required local authorities to listen to residents requesting specific roads be "returned to 30mph" and has announced that it has identified a list of roads that it wishes to set at 30mph.  Can members of the public object to any such proposals?

Indeed you can. 

20's Plenty are fully in favour of 30mph limits being set in a targeted manner on appropriate streets in communities where vulnerable road users are protected. And we accept that some roads were not excepted in September 2023 that in retrospect should have been set at 30mph. However, an exception to the national standard for 20mph on restricted roads requires due diligence and evidence that it does not compromise the safety of vulnerable road users.

Many Welsh Local Authorities are taking an entirely responsible approach to nuancing some further roads to 30mph using the revised Welsh Government Guidance. The following provides some background for members of the public who may feel that it is inappropriate to set a particular road to 30mph.

We have set out a series of reasons you can use to object below, which might include pointing out how any order making such a change:

...contains inaccurate statements that misinform public and decision-makers and hence will compromise the reasonability of any decision.

...fails to meet the fundamental principle of Welsh Government guidance that "strong evidence" of maintaining safety is required to set a limit higher than 20mph where motor vehicles mix with pedestrians and cyclists in a planned and frequent manner.

...fails to meet the "place" criteria set by guidance and includes community, educational, medical facilities and residential density.

...would provide minimal benefits to journey times yet constitute a considerable risk to vulnerable road users.

...has not been conducted with the appropriate due diligence and process as required by both Road Traffic and other legislation such as the Equality Act.

In order to increase the speed limit on a road with a national 20mph limit to 30mph, your Highway Authority (HA) must make a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO). The HA must advertise such a TRO, it must specifically give a Statement of Reason (SOR) for the change and must consider objections. Increasing the speed limit by 50% from 20mph is no minor matter and the HA bears a heavy duty of responsibility for the consequences. As well as taking due account of Welsh Government guidance, it must comply with other Welsh and UK-wide legislation. Although the road may have previously had a 30mph limit before the national 20mph limit was set, this would not, on its own, justify such a change.

The fact that some drivers don't like a 20mph limit on a particular road has no bearing on whether a 30mph limit is appropriate. Across the whole of Wales, with 2.3m drivers, after huge publicity, only 10,500 drivers have requested changing a 20mph road to 30mph. That is the equivalent of 1 out of 200 drivers - an insignificant number. It is a flawed basis for consideration of what could impact the safety of millions of people. 

From looking at HAs that have announced plans, there are inconsistencies in approaches to changing speed limits:

  • Flintshire is drafting a TRO for each group of roads that it intends to set at 30mph, using an identical SOR and with no specific reason for individual roads.
  • Wrexham is drafting a single TRO for all roads that it intends to set at 30mph, with a single SOR covering all roads
  • Newport has published a spreadsheet showing all the roads requested to be changed with an analysis of how they do meet or not meet their criteria. Out of 331 roads suggested for change only 16 are deemed to have met the criteria required to consider them for 30mph.

In all cases, members of the public can challenge a TRO on the validity of the process, its accuracy and whether the outcome would be beneficial. We have already submitted objections to Flintshire and Wrexham TROs:

Flintshire - Aber Road, Flint

Flintshire - Greenfield

Wrexham - Multiple Roads

We believe that the TROs in Flintshire and Wrexham fail to meet the due diligence requirements and exhibit invalid processes, inaccurate statements of fact, outcomes that would be bad for communities and potentially incur legal liability for the HA in a civil court.

So, what are the grounds for objecting to a TRO?

Although the Welsh Government (WG) updated its guidance on setting 30mph as an exception to the national default, it does not mandate any changes. The WG guidance is about roads where 30mph "could be considered" and not "should be set".  There is no checklist 'directing' a HA to set a local speed limit higher than 20mph. The  decision and justification to do so is entirely at the discretion (and the responsibility) of the HA.

The guidance provides two important considerations:

This guidance is founded on the Safe System[footnote 1], advocating for safe speeds that are appropriate to the features of the road, the function it serves and the physical tolerance of its users[footnote 2]

In line with the Welsh Government’s aspiration to support the aims of the Stockholm Declaration a 20mph speed should remain where pedestrians and/or cyclists and motor vehicles mix in “a frequent[footnote 4] and planned manner, except where strong evidence exists that higher speeds are safe”.

Footnotes:

[1] The Safe System is based on the principles that:

  • people make mistakes that lead to crashes
  • the human body has a limited capacity to tolerate crash
  • road safety is a shared responsibility for those who design, build, manage and those who use roads and vehicles and those who provide post-crash care
  • all parts of the system must be strengthened in combination to multiply their effect, so that if one part fails, another part is still there to protect. 

Read more on the The Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (ROSPA) website.

[2] The ability of road users to withstand the forces of a crash without suffering serious injury.

[4] To be determined by the highway authority

The first "test" of the appropriateness of a 30mph limit is whether pedestrians/cyclists mix in a "frequent and planned" manner, except where strong evidence exists that higher speeds are safe". How can this be evaluated?

Does the road exist on the HA's planned walking and cycling route?

These have previously been identified by HAs and mapped by WG in the DataMap Wales Active Travel Network Map. These are based on HA submissions dating to comply with the Active Travel (Wales) Act 2013, explained here.  For example in Aber Rd, Flint you can see these detailed on the left(dashed lines) and the roads planned to change to 30mph on the right(green lines):

These maps show that the roads planned as current and future walking/cycling routes over the past decade are the very roads which Flintshire County Council wants to change to 30mph.

  1. Cycling and walking already exists on these roads which include an industrial estate.
  2. Cyclists and walkers travelling to work will mix with HGVs and vehicles with limited driver visibility.
  3. Any increase in speed limit on the first or last hundred metres of a journey will make little difference to total journey time.

As the TRO provides no evidence of changes planned to increase safety for vulnerable road users, it has failed to meet the underlying principle of the guidance and...

"You can challenge a TRO on the basis that it fails to provide "strong evidence" speeds higher than 20mph are safe"

Furthermore the TRO misinforms the public by claiming that a 30mph limit on these roads would

"meet the guidance"

and that

"The Authority continues its responsibility to consider the provision of the convenient and safe movement of motor vehicles and other traffic, and the proposed measures are aimed at ensuring that danger is minimised to road users as well as improving the amenities of the locality.

Since it is difficult to see how increasing a speed limit by 50% "minimises" danger to road users walking or cycling, or "improves the amenities of the locality"...  

"You can challenge a TRO on the basis that it misinforms the public"

In addition...

"You can challenge a TRO on the basis that it fails to meet the fundamental principle of the guidance."

The guidance includes several 'place criteria' which preclude setting a 30mph limit:

  1. within 100m walk of any educational setting (e.g. nurseries, primary, secondary, further education and higher education)
  2. within 100m walk of any community facility
  3. within 100m walk of any medical facility, e.g. hospitals, GP surgeries etc
  4. where the number of residential and/or retail premises immediately fronting a road exceeds 20 properties per km.

We have found numerous examples of where 30mph roads were being planned where they met one or more of the above. Often schools have entrances for pupils which may be closer than 100m to a road. Community facilities can be a wide range of establishments or facilities. This is taken from Supplementary Planning Guidance in Wales for Gwynedd and Anglesey (2.2.1):-

"Community facilities may be defined as resources which provide a range of services (public, private and voluntary) and which are important for the purposes of health, recreation, socialising and education. These could include schools, libraries, leisure centres, healthcare provision, theatres, village halls, cemeteries, places of worship, public houses and any other facilities which perform the function of serving the community. Community facilities can often be social hubs, thereby performing an essential function in sustaining prosperous neighbourhoods and creating a sense of place. Ensuring that there is a range of community facilities in accessible locations is essential in order to ensure that social, recreational, educational and cultural needs of society are met in the most effective way possible."

As you can see this is quite wide and includes "public, private and voluntary" resources. We note that in the above Aber Rd TRO, within 100m of the proposed 30mph roads there are "community facilities" at :-

  • London Road Cemetery
  • Probation Service Offices
  • Jade Jones Leisure Centre
  • Flint Bowling Club

"You can challenge a TRO which fails to identify and take account of such community facilities."

There are other grounds that you can object to a TRO. Some of these are detailed in our sample objections above.  These include :-

Common Law Duty of Care: "… highway authorities owe a duty to all road users (whether careful or negligent) to use reasonable care in the manner in which they exercise their powers"

This comes from a judgement  regarding Yetkin v London Borough of Newham . The Court of Appeal has held that a highways authority still owed a duty of care to a pedestrian even though she was careless in how she tried to cross a busy road. It could be argued that setting a speed limit 50% higher than the national default may not have been done with "reasonable care" and therefore could open the HA to civil liability. An insurance company could well use this case to mitigate the responsibility of both a negligent driver and pedestrian/cyclist and transfer liability to the HA.

It begs the question "What is reasonable care?". We would suggest that this be judged on the basis of:

Reasonable decision-making -  there is the Wednesbury case which is a foundation of judicial review. ASSOCIATED PROVINCIAL PICTURE HOUSES, LIMITED v. WEDNESBURY CORPORATION. KB 1948

“The court is entitled to investigate the action of the local authority with a view to seeing whether they have taken into account matters which they ought not to take into account, or, conversely, have refused to take into account or neglected to take into account matters which they ought to take into account."

In this matter it would require that the HA had taken full account of all the responsibilities when setting a 50% higher speed limit. These would include :-

Matters that ought to be taken into account

The WG guidance on setting 30mph Speed Limits and in particular :-

"The potential disbenefits of setting a 30mph speed limit for a road should be evaluated by considering the following factors:

  1. impact on walking, wheeling and cycling safely: Raising the speed limit will have negative consequences on a range of important outcomes (e.g. safety, difficulties for pedestrians in crossing roads, potential to inhibit walking, wheeling and cycling and potentially leading to negative physical and mental health consequences), particularly due to the clear relationship between impact speed and the frequency and severity of casualties.
  2. collision data: A high frequency of collisions and casualties (when the limit was previously 30mph) would reduce the justification for raising the limit. However, the absence of collisions previously should not automatically justify a higher speed limit, as pedestrians and cyclists may have been deterred by high speeds.
  3. assessment of collision risk: The potential for collisions should be assessed by considering the number of pedestrian and cyclist movements, including for recreational purposes, and the risk of collision, taking into account traffic flow. 
    This can be determined mainly through factors such as whether there are destinations/trip attractors for walking, wheeling and cycling, and if the route is an important walking, wheeling or cycling corridor (such as a public right of way or a route which is identified on the Active Travel Network Map).
  4. perceived safety and community cohesion: Higher speeds can create real and perceived dangers that may make places less attractive and hinder community cohesion and interaction.
  5. air quality: Higher speeds have the potential to discourage walking and cycling leading to increased reliance on private motor vehicles (in turn leading to pollution and poor air quality).
  6. noise pollution: Evaluate noise levels considering traffic flow patterns, vehicle types, and the proximity of residential properties to the road."

The policies of central and local government

  1. Environment
  2. Climate change and Carbon Emissions
  3. Planning
  4. Active Travel
  5. Public health
  6. Etc

Other statutory duties

  1. S149 Public Sector Equality Duty  - Equality Act 2010 – (relevant to elderly, and disabled people, and also women – who are more likely to be carers in charge of children)
  2. Active Travel (Wales) Act
  3. The Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015
  4. relevant duties in the Traffic Management Act 2004 )to expedite the movement of traffic including pedestrians and cyclists
  5. the 1984 Act (duty on local highway authorities so far as practicable having regard to the matters specified in section 122(2) of the Act to secure the expeditious, convenient and safe movement of vehicular and other traffic, including pedestrians when exercising functions under the 1984 Act such as the setting of speed limits).
  6. The Road Traffic Act 1988
  7. S1 Public Sector Duty regarding Socio-Economic Inequality – recognising that speed limits affect and benefit some socio-economic groups more than others.

The underlying science

  1. Newtonian mechanics / crash physics that you have already covered
  2. Perception of speed (including the research by Catherine Purcell at the University of Cardiff on Looming that you already have covered )
  3. Tyre Noise, speed and its impact on humans (such as sleep disturbance) and wildlife

Public opinion

  1. But bearing in mind that children often don’t get consulted, nor the elderly or most vulnerable people in society. 

Not to take into account matters which that ought not to be taken into account

  1. A small minority of drivers requesting 30mph on particular roads - just 0.5% of Welsh driving licence holders.
  2. The loudest and most vociferous groups rather than society as a whole.

There are also other considerations :-

Casualty history at 30mph. You can look up casualty history for road on several "crashmap" sites. One of the most comprehensive we have found is Bikedata. This enables you to zoom into an area or road and see all the casualties since 1999. This includes details on each casualty and whether they are vehicle passenger, pedestrian or cyclist.

Highway authorities are part of the local authority, and while they have powers to set speed limits, they remain part of the local authority and must contribute to meeting the authority’s wider policies such as on health, education (journeys to and from school), environment, economy and wellbeing, and discharging its wider statutory duties.  The HA must not operate in isolation or even as a rogue element, neglecting or refusing to take into account matters that they out to take into account.   A HA is not a liberty to make decisions solely on the basis of highway issues.  If it does so, and ignores all the other duties placed on local authorities by councils, ignores the council’s wider policies, and ignores its common law duty of care to road users, then its decisions could successfully challenged through judicial review.    

There are also professional codes of conduct that are relevant.  

And with regard to the Equality Act :

The duty under the Equality Act 2010 S149 – is to have “due regard”.  The meaning of Due regard has been explored in the courts, and means variously - an essential preliminary to a decision necessitating a substantial, vigorous and open minded approach; where consideration is given to measures to avoid adverse impact before fixing on a solution.  (Ali v Newham 2012)

Taking all of these into account there is a heavy burden of responsibility on any HA setting a speed limit 50% higher than the national default. It is certainly not a case of "putting it back to what existed before 17th Sep 2023". It requires due diligence in making such a decision which would endorse motor vehicle speeds 50% higher, since that could lead to mistakes by a negligent road user resulting in a serious injury or a fatality. Members of the public have every right to contest a TRO making such a proposal. Where decisions are made which implicate the safety of the public places that we call streets, then the highest standards are expected from councillors and officers making such decisions. If they are shown to be flawed then any such TRO should not be approved. To do otherwise would risk public safety, reputational damage, possible civil liability and possible illegality by the authority concerned.

 

Our advice to members of the public objecting to a TRO is:

  • Thoroughly go through the above and check our sample objections
  • Understand the Welsh Government guidance
  • Check the casualty history of the roads in question. Identify if vulnerable road users have been casualties.
  • Visit the roads. Observe whether it has pedestrian and cycling road users and whether there is any provision for their safety.
  • Check that the roads do not appear on the DataMap Wales Active Travel Network Map. If they do ask what changes have been made to provide "evidence" of being safe at 30mph.
  • Check whether roads fail to meet the criteria for 'place', in particular "being within 100m of community facilities"
  • Check that the wording of the TRO and SOR are accurate and do not make generalised or incorrect claims, especially around "being safe" or "improving local amenities".
  • Check that the TRO has stated that the full implications of the Equality and other acts have been met.
  • You may also submit a Freedom of Information request to ask for any documents regarding the TRO and minutes of any meetings to discuss criteria, compliance with Equalities Act, etc.
  • Put together and submit an objection which clearly states where the TRO is lacking due diligence, is incorrect and is not a basis for reasonable decision-making.

Please contact 20's Plenty for Us if you need further assistance [email protected].

Showing 2 reactions

Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.
  • Mike Thomas
    commented 2025-01-28 14:41:49 +0000
    Thanks for this guidance, it is very useful. I am waiting for Caerphilly Council to produce a list of changes before I decide what objections (if any) to raise with them.
  • Rod King
    published this page in FAQs 2025-01-23 14:35:55 +0000