Nohumps - epetition reply
18 July 2007
We received a petition asking:
"We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to Remove all speed humps from UK roads."
Details of Petition:
"Speed humps create needless pain and suffering, particularly to people with certain medical conditions.In addition they delay emergency services, damage vehicles, create more noise and air pollution and have no proven impact on road casualty figures."
Read the Government's response
The purpose of traffic calming is to reduce vehicle speeds in areas where inappropriate speed, that is to say within the limit but considered too fast for the conditions, is a problem. This is particularly evident in areas where the more vulnerable road users are likely to be present. The Government would much rather drivers voluntarily reduce their speed, but it is acknowledged this does not always happen.
Road humps are one of the most effective traffic calming measures available to local authorities. The highest permissible hump of 100mm in height can reduce vehicle speeds by around 10mph. This is a significant reduction when you consider an average 1mph reduction in vehicle speed can reduce accident risk by around 5%.
The Government's traffic calming policies are evidence based. That is to say each form of traffic calming undergoes vigorous tests and trials before they are introduced nationally.
The Government has published guidance on a wide range of issues relating to road humps, including discomfiture, noise and the effect on the emergency services. In addition, research commissioned by the Transport Research Laboratory (TRL) has analysed the impact on vehicles and their occupants of repeatedly crossing road humps. This research is reported in TRL Report 614 Impact of road humps on vehicles and their occupants and published in 2004. Copies may be obtained from the TRL website at www.trl.co.uk (new window)
For vehicle occupants, levels of discomfort were, generally speaking acceptable if speeds did not exceed 15mph-20mph. Expert medical opinion following this research was that damage to healthy bones, discs, ligaments or muscles was very unlikely. It was noted that excessive exposure to repeated loading from humps could lead to the prolapse of an unhealthy disc.
However, "excessive exposure" would have to be more than that expected from even a busy taxi driver in an urban environment.
It was therefore considered that injury as a result of traversing road humps would be a very rare event. Those with pre-existing conditions resulting in weak bones, for example, those suffering from osteoporosis could be more susceptible to injury, depending on the seriousness of their condition.
Visual inspections revealed no damage to any of the vehicles (saloon car, ambulance, London taxi single deck bus and mini-bus). Speeds tested ranged from 10mph and 40mph. Minimal changes in suspension and tyre wear were found when vehicles tested at higher speeds. When tested at speeds below 25mph changes were within tolerance levels and any possible defects would be picked up during normal maintenance, e.g. MOT.
Local authorities are required by law to consult emergency services wherever road humps are proposed. There is no evidence to suggest that the emergency services oppose the use of road humps. Indeed the Government consulted each and every local emergency service about the effect of traffic calming on their performance. The overwhelming result of this exercise was that the emergency services had no concerns that road humps effected their performance.
The Government will continue to encourage local authorities to consider the use of road humps, alongside all other traffic calming measures, wherever lower vehicle speeds are required.
Further Information
Watch our short films