Impact of permitted driving speed on the design of urban street network in Latvia/ Leidziamojo vaziavimo greicio itaka miesto gatviu tinklo projektavimui Latvijoje/ Atlauta brauksanas atruma ietekme uz pilsetu ielu tikla projektesanu/ Lubatud soidukiiruse moju Lati linnateede vorgu projekteerimisele.
Lazda, Ziedonis ; Smirnovs, Juris
1. Introduction
Different solutions for road infrastructure may greatly influence
speed management on roads thus providing positive impact on traffic
safety. Results of different studies show that when specific changes are
implemented in road infrastructure also the behaviour of road users both
in short--and long-term is about to change, as well. For instance,
studies of UK Dept of the Environment, Transport and the Regions have
shown that in locations where permitted driving speed was changed But no
other alterations to infrastructure were implemented the change in
actual driving speed was observed for 1/4 of the max permitted driving
speed determined with road signs.
Alterations of road infrastructure that are aimed at more harmonic
infrastructure and reflect the needs of all road users are important not
only as one of techniques for speed management applied by transport
administrations, but also because they contribute to the construction of
streets and squares in our cities and tOwns that are safer for
pedestrians and vulnerable road users and simultaneously ensure more
mobility for motorists (Antov et al. 2009; Zilioniene et al. 2010).
2. Road functions and road categories
Substantiation of geometrical parametres for road and street
network in urban areas is done on the basis of knowledge about
interconnections of transport flows in urban traffic (Cameron, Elvik
2010; Ratkeviciute et al. 2007). The choice of values of a number of
dimensions applied in the design of urban road and street network is
based on the Latvian construction norms specified in 1992 year LBN 100:
Teritorialplanosana. Pilsetu un pagastu izbuve [Territorial Planning.
Urban and Town Construction] which in turn is based on the former
Russian construction regulations and norms CHUII 1989: [TEXT NOT
REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] [Building Regulations. Town Planning. Planning
and Construction of Urban and Rural Settlements]). The parametres
specified in these norms were acquired either in the result of research
done in 60-ies to 80-ies on highways outside urban areas or on city
highways in sparsely builtup territories or simply taken over from the
experience of other countries without any testing in the existing
traffic conditions.
2.1. Existing street categories and their basic importance
Categories of city streets in the past were determined according to
the classification shown in Table 1 with respect to foreseen transport
and pedestrian flows.
It is known that the alteration of road profile with different
engineering measures which is aimed at influencing the choice of driving
speed is usually done in urban territories, but is rather rare in
sparsely built-up areas. Unfortunately the author has observed that in
Latvia different infrastructural measures the aim of which is speed
management are used rarely even in cities with densely built-up
territories. In the middle ages the gates of fortified towns required
different behaviour of road users. The idea of gates is also applied in
the modern architecture in many cities and towns as one of the most
important speed management techniques that creates the need for
different road user behaviour in transit zones between the roads outside
built-up areas and the roads inside built-up areas where much lower
speed is required in order to protect vulnerable road users (Lama et al.
2006; Lazda, Smirnovs 2009).
Traffic calming which is used to physically ensure lower traffic
speed and reduce the amount of traffic has a long history, as well.
Initial trials were carried out in Radburn (USA) in the end of 20-ies
when urban streets and squares were transformed with the aim to reduce
the amount of traffic. This approach was further developed in Europe in
60-ies when the first guidelines in Sweden stipulated the development of
urban areas with ring-type road systems. This idea spread in other
countries, as well. Since then the speed management in urban territories
with infrastructural measures became very popular and saved many lives
all over the world.
Since 90-ies traffic calming and other speed management techniques
are implemented not only in urban areas but also on roads outside urban
areas, for example, in Denmark, the Netherlands, Germany and the United
Kingdom. Alterations in infrastructure connected with speed management
are now widely used for traffic calming on urban streets with many
variations suited both for motorways and urban arterial streets that
require speed management due to safety problems with increasing
high-speed traffic flow.
In 60-ies and 70-ies guidelines for urban planning with specific
respect to traffic safety were developed in Sweden. These guidelines
recommended the creation of such traffic environment that had simple
planning and was easy to comprehend by the road users.
Further concepts were developed in 80-ies and 90-ies that
specifically stressed the adequacy of road structure so that the road
users could themselves choose appropriate driving speed. As indicates in
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, European
Conference of Ministers of Transport and OECD/ECMT Transport Research
Centre (The JOINT OECD/ECMT) report of 2006 "Speed management"
the proposed concepts emphasised the need for structuring the road
network and adapting uniform and consequent design principles that would
contribute to the reduction of the variability of different road
profiles in the road network.
Having analyzed experience of other countries in which climatic
weather is similar in Latvia, it is concluded that it would be to use a
narrower carriageway lanes than in the existing local design rules. For
example, according Roads and Transportation Association of Canada
"Geometric Design Guide for Canadian Roads" of 1986 year, lane
width for free flow of arterial street having more lanes in each
direction is related to design speed 80 km/h, lane width is 3.5 m.
SWOV Institute for Road Safety Research in 1994 report
"Infrastructure Design and Road Safety" says that at
prevailing speed 70 km/h, which is equivalent to an appropriate design
speed of 80 km/h, the width of the lane arterial street is 3.5 m.
Besides, the arterial street with distribution function, the width of
lane is from 3.0 m to 3.25 m, that is considerably less than the Latvian
design standard set (Table 2).
2.2. General road functions
Based on different references the author has come to conclusion
that in general the following three basic road functions may be defined:
Traffic flow function.
Roads with traffic flow function may ensure long-distance traffic
efficiently. Inter-urban motorways and highways and sometimes urban
arterial streets have the flow function. Other modes of transport and
vulnerable road users on such roads have to be strictly separated. The
number of access and exit points is limited and the distance between
crossings is considerable.
Traffic distribution function.
Roads with traffic distribution function provide opportunity for
the road users to access and exit from any urban and rural territory in
the whole length of the road. Crossings are more frequent and all types
of manoeuvres in crossings are allowed. Such roads are also used by
different types of public transport.
Traffic destination or access function.
Roads with access function allow actual access to properties in the
whole length of the road or street. Both crossings and interchanges
ensure traffic exchange. Engineering measures may be needed in order to
ensure appropriate low speed.
2.3. General road categories
In order to choose the most appropriate road profile that will
greatly influence traffic flow and safety, the road function has to be
defined and also the road category has to be determined that would show
the location of road (roads in urban areas or outside urban areas) and
road type (e.g., motorway) (Table 3).
The general idea is that the roads depending on their function are
self explaining. Therefore based on the above mentioned the
characteristic cross-profiles and crossing layouts, as well as, type of
use and max permitted driving speed have to be determined according to
road function types. In addition to that, the placement of horizontal
and vertical road furniture has to conform to the main road function and
followingly the determined appropriate speed.
2.4. Design speed
Depending on goals both the design and permitted speed is applied
in the planning of urban roads and streets. The design speed in Latvia
is defined as the max possible driving speed (depending on stability on
road and safety conditions) of a single vehicle at normal weather
conditions and normal skid resistance of vehicle tyres on roadway
surface. This speed is determining the design of geometrical parametres
and, first of all, the choice of road cross- and longitudinal profile.
With the increase of the level of mobilisation high design speeds
may not be efficiently implemented at extensive road loading. The world
experience shows that a stabile trend to reduce the design speed in the
road network developed already in 80-ies. It mostly concerns road
design, but in urban areas it relates to the design of high-speed urban
arterials.
The values for design speed specified in the temporary Latvian
construction norms were taken over from the design norms of the Russian
Federation used in 60-ies to 80-ies. At present they do not reflect the
actual situation on roads and streets and do not allow the incorporation
of urban environment limitations created by urban use of land and
densely built-up areas. The experience of different countries shows that
the values for design speed specified in the temporary Latvian
construction norms for all street categories exceed the values specified
in the European countries by 10 to 30 km/h.
The level of speed restrictions is determined in relation to the
total min costs. However, considering that not all parametres may be
expressed in monetary terms, the restrictions of permitted driving speed
are chosen according to priorities. The priority for roads is the total
number of road traffic accidents and their severity. For city arterial
streets the priority is road capacity, and for local road network it is
the safety of vulnerable road users.
If the permitted driving speed is considered from the point of view
of max road capacity, then the lowest threshold of this speed has to be
considered. However, if traffic safety is in question, the highest
threshold of driving speed has to be considered. From the point of view
of max road capacity the permitted speed on highways should be not less
than 80 km/h but on urban arterial streets--not less than 60 km/h due to
shorter distances between traffic nodes (Lazda, Smirnovs 2011).
In accordance with the European Transport Safety Council (ESTC)
report in 1995 "Reducing Traffic Injuries Resulting Form Excess and
Inappropriate Speed" road design speed may be defined as "the
max speed that may be safely and comfortably maintained in the
conditions of free traffic". This definition differs greatly from
the past design speed definition used in Latvia which was based on the
condition that vehicle was driving on the road solely but not in traffic
flow.
In the essence the needed design speed depends on road function and
thus on the desired driving level. If a road has several functions
depending on the urban use of land, the lowest of the speed levels
appropriate to each function has to be applied. At present the following
limits of driving speed are applied in the European cities:
--70-80 km/h on roads with traffic flow function;
--50 km/h on roads with traffic distribution function;
--30 km/h on roads with access function.
However, if high speed is desirable because of the road function,
the road quality and roadside safety furniture has to be in the
appropriate level. Alternative for the improvement of road standard is
the reduction of speed limits and the actual speed in accordance with
the road standard and risks.
Undoubtedly the design speed may never be lower that the determined
max permitted driving speed. On the other hand, it is also not wise to
determine much lower max permitted driving speed than the design speed.
This may discredit the reliability of max permitted driving speed.
In addition to that, it is important that design speed in sparsely
built-up areas is consequent in as long road sections as possible. If
the design speed is essentially reduced in any location the road profile
has to be changed and appropriate road sings and markings have to be
provided.
Driving speed, traffic flow capacity, etc. are the things that
determine the desired level of traffic comfort and traffic safety. When
planning the street network one has to understand clearly what the
necessary or the desired speed on road should be. In accordance with
ESTC, The JOINT OECD/ECMT and Danish Road Directorate report in 1991
"Urban Traffic Areas. Road Planning in Urban Areas" these
desired speeds in urban environment could be classified in four main
groups: low speed (0-20 km/h); medium low speed (30-40 km/h), medium
high speed (50-60 km/h) and high speed (70-80 km/h).
When planning and designing roads one has to monitor consequently
that the road users respect this desired speed (Hauer et al. 1982). When
choosing the desired speed, road conditions, content of traffic flow,
road user groups, road function aNd category have to be taken into
account. The next step after defining the desired speed for each
specific street is the choice of geometrical parametres depending on the
design speed.
Therefore when planning and managing the traffic in urban street
network the road owners have to be very careful in the choice of
geometrical street parametres. In the essence they should be chosen not
according to a specific road category as it was done in Latvia in the
past years but according to real needs, namely, road function, traffic
conditions and needs, financial conditions and also traffic safety
requirements.
3. Results of the study
A practical study was carried out on 30 arterial streets with
different applied design speeds in order to evaluate the substantiation
of the chosen road profile and consequently street geometrical
parametres in the existing street network. In random order the streets
with different profiles (median, number of lanes, etc.) and different
geometrical parametres (width of driving lanes, sidewalk width, etc.)
were inspected and the appropriate [V.sub.design] and installed road
signs for max permitted driving speed were registered. Table 4 shows the
summary of roadway widths, lane numbers, lane widths, sidewalk widths,
as well as, design speeds ([V.sub.design]) and max permitted driving
speeds ([V.sub.perm]) of the inspected streets.
A problem when a street in the existing street network has high
category but its function is low or traffic conditions is often
encountered in Latvia. As the street category for city arterials is
usually high, high [V.sub.design] was applied accordingly and
automatically high geometrical parametres were implemented, as well. As
the function of the street or traffic conditions are low, the road owner
with respect to traffic organisation or traffic safety has been forced
to decrease the desired driving speed on road. In the result
unnecessarily expensive infrastructure has been created in the urban
street network. Existence of good geometrical street parametres and
inadequately low permitted max driving speed contributes to the
violation of road traffic regulations thus creating unnecessary tension
in the society and hindering traffic safety.
Practical study showed that the street function is incorrectly
determined for most of the streets in the existing urban network and
that the applied geometrical street dimensions are obviously inadequate.
Depending on different traffic conditions the max permitted driving
speed on arterial streets mostly is 50 km/h, but the streets themselves
according to Table 2 were designed with [V.sub.design] = 70 km/h or even
[V.sub.design] = 80 km/h which required inadequately high street
geometrical parametres. Based on good practice examples for the planning
of urban street network the author in Columns 8, 9 and 10 of Table 4 has
made his proposals what could be the function of a specific street, what
are the recommended design speed and max permitted driving speed, and
what is the recommended width of driving lanes.
Thus inefficient and expensive infrastructurE is created that has
negative impact on traffic safety because too wide driving lanes
contribute to the exceeding of max permitted driving speed. The speed is
more accurately estimated in peripheral sight, but underestimated in
central sight. The studies revealed the impact of the perception of
speed based on the available sphere of sight and they explain why
drivers underestimate the speed on wide roads, because there are fewer
points of reference. To conclude, the maintenance of such infrastructure
also in future may not be feasible.
In addition to that, there are no grounds to specify design speed
higher than 60 km/h for regulated city highways, as max permitted
driving speed on regulated city highways may not exceed 50 km/h because
traffic is regulated with traffic lights and in any case driving speed
before traffic lights has to be reduced to 50 km/h.
4. Conclusions
1. It is obvious that the existing legislation on the design of
street network in urban areas has to be revised with special attention
paid to built-up areas. Appropriate [V.sub.design] has to be applied
with respect to urban traffic conditions;
2. When drafting norms under Latvian conditions for the sections of
urban streets, the good practice of developed countries should be taken
as a basis for the standardisation of street functions with special
emphasis of self-explaining roads. It is proposed to use the following
main road functions in the planning of urban road network: traffic flow,
traffic distribution and access functions, with contribution to
simplified understanding and proper use of these functions;
3. Together with the revision of norms the road owners should
review the actual functions of streets with respect to traffic
conditions in the whole length of the street, as well as, the desired
driving speed. Only after that road engineers should choose respective
geometrical parametres in their plans and designs;
4. All the above mentioned should serve as pre-condition for the
creation of such road infrastructure where drivers acquire knowledge on
road environment based on their experience and they themselves organise
roads into categories, wherewith a number of additional traffic
organisation measures, monitoring and control of traffic flow would
become unnecessary.
doi: 10.3846/bjrbe.2011.36
Received 20 April 2010; accepted 4 November 2011
References
Antov, D.; Abel, K.; Surje, P.; Rouk, H.; Roivas, T. 2009. Speed
Reduction Effects of Urban Roundabouts, The Baltic Journal of Road and
Bridge Engineering 4(1): 22-26. doi:10.3846/1822-427X.2009.4.22-26
Cameron, M. H.; Elvik, R. 2010. Nilsson's Power Model
Connecting Speed and Road Trauma: Applicability by Road Type and
Alternative Models for Urban Roads, Accident Analysis & Prevention
42(6): 1908-1915. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2010.05.012
Hauer, E.; Ahlin, F. J.; Bowser, J. S. 1982. Speed Enforcement and
Speed Choice, Accident Analysis & Prevention 14(4): 267278.
doi:10.1016/0001-4575(82)90038-0
Ratkeviciute, K.; Cygas, D.; Laurinavicius, A.; Maciulis, A. 2007.
Analysis and Evaluation of the Efficiency of Road Safety Measures
Applied to Lithuanian Roads, The Baltic Journal of Road and Bridge
Engineering 2(2): 81-87.
Lama, A.; Smirnovs, J.; Naud[]uns, J. 2006. Road Traffic Safety in
the Baltic States, The Baltic Journal of Road and Bridge Engineering 1
(1): 63-68.
Lazda, Z.; Smirnovs, J. 2009. Evaluation of Road Traffic Safety
Level in the State Main Road Network of Latvia, The Baltic Journal of
Road and Bridge Engineering 4(4): 156-160. doi:10.3846/1822-427X.2009.
4.156-160
Lazda, Z.; Smirnovs, J. 2011. Research on Traffic Flow Speed of
Arterial Streets in Urban Areas, in Proc. of the 8th International
Conference "Environmental Engineering": selected papers, vol.
3. Ed. by Cygas, D.; Froehner, K. D. May 19-20, 2011, Vilnius,
Lithuania. Vilnius: Technika, 936-941.
Zilioniene, D.; Oginskas, R.; Petkevicius, K. 2010. Research,
Analysis and Evaluation of Roundabouts Constructed in Lithuania, The
Baltic Journal of Road and Bridge Engineering 5 (4): 240-245.
doi:10.3846/bjrbe.2010.32
Ziedonis Lazda (1) Juris Smirnovs (2)
Institute of Transport Structures, Civil Engineering Faculty, Riga
Technical University, Azenes 16, LV 1048 Riga, Latvia
E-mails: (1) ziedonis.lazda@csdd.gov.lv; (2) smirnovs@bf.rtu.lv
Table 1. Street categories and their basic importance specified
in the norms (LBN 100; ChuII 1989)
Street category Street importance
Highways (arterial --high-speed transport
roads) *: connections within urban
territory;
--high-speed (crossings --exits to main roads outside urban areas,
only in separate grades) to airports, recreation areas, other urban
areas.
--regulated flow --transport connections between urban
(crossings mostly at districts in specific directions and
grade) sections outside residential areas that
have intensive, mostly freight traffic;
--exits to main roads outside urban areas.
City arterials (arterial
streets) *:
1. Urban importance
(general urban
importance) *
--free flow (crossings in --transport connections between urban
main directions only in districts and centres, as well as, to
separate grades) other arterials and roads outside urban
areas;
--regulated flow --transport connections between urban
(crossings with highways districts and centres;
and arterials mostly at
grade)
--exits to other roads and arterials and
roads outside urban areas.
2. District importance
--transport and --transport and pedestrian connections
pedestrian between urban territories and public
centres;
--exits to other arterials.
--pedestrian and --pedestrian and transport (mostly public
transport transport) connections within separate
urban territories.
Streets of local
importance (local
streets and roads): *
1. Residential streets; --pedestrian and transport (except freight
and public transport) flow within
residential territories;
--exits to regulated roads and arterials.
2. Freight transport --mostly freight and car transport within
streets; industrial areas;
--exits to urban roads.
3. Pedestrian streets and --pedestrian traffic to workplaces and
roads; recreation areas, service centres, public
transport stops, including public centres.
4. Park roads; --pedestrian and transport traffic in
parks and forest territories.
5. Access roads; --transport accesses to residential and
public buildings and their groups and
other buildings within city blocks.
6. Cycling roads --cycling on tracks where no other
vehicles are allowed.
*--differences between the previously mentioned sources of reference
are given
Table 2. Calculation parameters for urban streets specified in norms
(LBN 100; ChuII 1989)
Street category Design speed, Driving lane
km/h width, m
Highways (arterial roads) * :
--express 120 3.75
--regulated traffic 80 3.50
Arterials (arterial streets) *:
Urban (general urban importance) *
--free flow 100 3.75
--regulated flow 80 3.50
District importance
--vehicle and pedestrian 70 3.50
--pedestrian and vehicle 50 4.00
Local importance (local roads and
streets): *
--residential streets 40 3.00
30 3.00
--freight transport streets 50 3.50
40 3.50
--park roads 40 3.00
Access roads
--main 40 2.75
--secondary 30 3.50
Pedestrian streets
--main -- 1.00
--secondary - 0.75
Cycling roads
--separated 20 1.50
--isolated 30 1.50
Min
Street category Number of horizontal
lanes curvature
radius, m
Highways (arterial roads) * :
--express 4-8 600
--regulated traffic 2-6 400
Arterials (arterial streets) *:
Urban (general urban importance) *
--free flow 4-8 500
--regulated flow 4-8 400
District importance
--vehicle and pedestrian 2-4 250
--pedestrian and vehicle 4 125
Local importance (local roads and
streets): *
--residential streets 2-3 ** 90
2 50
--freight transport streets 2-4 90
2 50
--park roads 2 75
Access roads
--main 2 50
--secondary 1 25
Pedestrian streets
--main according to --
--secondary calculat. --
Cycling roads
--separated 1-2 30
--isolated 2-4 50
Street category Max
longitudinal
fall, [per thousand]
Highways (arterial roads) * :
--express 30
--regulated traffic 50
Arterials (arterial streets) *:
Urban (general urban importance) *
--free flow 40
--regulated flow 50
District importance
--vehicle and pedestrian 60
--pedestrian and vehicle 40
Local importance (local roads and
streets): *
--residential streets 70
80
--freight transport streets 60
70
--park roads 80
Access roads
--main 70
--secondary 80
Pedestrian streets
--main 40
--secondary 60
Cycling roads
--separated 40
--isolated 30
Street category Sidewalk
width,
Highways (arterial roads) * :
--express --
--regulated traffic --
Arterials (arterial streets) *:
Urban (general urban importance) *
--free flow 4.5
--regulated flow 3.0
District importance
--vehicle and pedestrian
--pedestrian and vehicle 2.25
3.0
Local importance (local roads and
streets): *
--residential streets 1.5
1.5
--freight transport streets 1.5
1.5
--park roads --
Access roads
--main 1.0
--secondary 0.75
Pedestrian streets
--main according to
--secondary design
Cycling roads
--separated --
--isolated --
*--differences between the previously mentioned sources of reference
are given
**--one lane is used for car parking
Table 3. Road categories and road functions according The JOINT
OECD/ECMT report in 2006
ENvironment Road category Road function
Outside urban areas Motorways (inter-urban) Flow
Main roads Flow
Motorways (inter-urban Flow
main roads)
Main roads outside urban Flow/distribution
areas
Secondary roads outside Access
urban areas
In urban areas City arterials (urban) Flow
City arterials and main Flow/distribution
roads
Urban roads Access
Table 4. Geometrical parametres of streets in urban street network
Street Carriageway Number of Lane Sidewalk
No. width, m lanes width, m width, m
1 11.03 2 5.51 2.94
2 11.08 2 5.54 2.92
3 9.18 2 3.77 --
4 9.20 2 3.69 --
5 14.03 2 6.96 2.50
6 9.60 2 4.75 --
7 14.10 4 3.40 2.0
8 11.50 2 5.70 1.53
9 14.43 2 7.21 1.52
10 9.15 2 4.52 1.95
28 10.90 2 4.55 --
29 8.92 2 4.46 2.15
30 11.10 2 4.70 --
Street [V.sub.perm'] [V.sub.design']
No.
1 50 80
2 50 70
3 70 100
4 50 100
5 50 80
6 50 80
7 70 80
8 50 70
9 50 70
10 50 80
28 90 100
29 50 70
30 70 100
Recommended
Street (actual) [V.sub. design] land width, m
No. function ([V.sub.perm]),
km/h
1 distribution 60(50) 3.00-3.25
2 distribution 60(50) 3.00-3.25
3 flow 80(70) 3.5
4 flow 80(70) 3.5
5 distribution 60(50) 3.00-3.25
6 flow 80(70) 3.5
7 flow 80(70) 3.5
8 distribution 60(50) 3.00-3.25
9 distribution 60(50) 3.00-3.25
10 flow 80(70) 3.5
28 flow 90(80) 3.5
29 distribution 60(50) 3.00-3.25
30 flow 90(80) 3.5