Methods and Practices for Setting Speed Limits

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov

FHWA Safety Program

Methods and Practices for

Setting Speed Limits:

An Informational Report

FHWA-SA-12-004

Institute of

Transportation Engineers

Disclaimer

The contents of this handbook reﬂect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and the

accuracy of the data published herein. The contents do not necessarily reﬂect the ofﬁcial view or policies of

the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). This handbook does not constitute a standard, speciﬁcation, or

regulation. It is not intended for construction, bidding, or permit purposes.

Notice

The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’

names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of this handbook.

Acknowledgments

Gerald J. Forbes (F) served as the ITE Project Consultant and the overall technical editor for this report. He was

responsible for the technical content and developing the case studies.

This report was based on a draft report, Best Practices for Setting Rational Speed Limits, prepared by Vanasse Hangen

Brustlin, Inc. for the Federal Highway Administration, Ofﬁce of Safety in May, 2009. Westat and Raghavan Srinivasan

assisted in the development of the FHWA draft report.

ITE would like to acknowledge the following individuals who supplied information or provided comments in the

development of this informational report:

Tony S. Abbo (M)

Richard F. Beaubien (F)

Leanna M. Belluz (M)

Robert Bucholc

Harry A. Campbell (F)

Tom Carmody

Christopher J. Dack (F)

Chris C. Day (M)

Andrew W. Edgar (M)

James W. Ellison (F)

John E. Fisher (F)

Kay Fitzpatrick (F)

Jenny L. Grote (F)

Abdullah J. Habibzai

Lawrence T. Hagen (F)

Wen Hu (M)

Kenton R. Jones

Arash Khoshghalb (M)

Chris King

Ryan C. Kump (M)

Greg M. Laragan (F)

Matthew P. Lawrie (M)

Mark A. Madden (M)

Sean P. Merrell (M)

Rock E. Miller (F)

Craig S. Neustaedter (F)

Michael D. Nichols (M)

Kwabena Ofosu (M)

Martin R. Parker Jr. (M)

Veronica Pelkey

Eduardo A. Petil (M)

William B. Raffensperger (M)

Lawrence E. Sefcik

Douglas A. Skowronek (M)

Harry W. Thompson (F)

Blair Turner

Elia Twigg

David C. Woodin (F)

Peter J. Yauch (F)

Erik H. Zandvliet (M)

ITE would like to acknowledge the ITE Trafﬁc Engineering Council technical committee members who reviewed and

provided comments on this report:

Gerald J. Forbes (F), Chair

Geni B. Bahar (M)

Marcus A. Brewer (M)

Wen Cheng (M)

John A. Davis (F)

Melisa D. Finley (M)

Paul Mackey (M)

Richard J. Porter (M)

Keith B. Rohling (M)

Kelly I. Schmid (M)

Rick J. Staigle (M)

James E. Tobaben (F)

John W. Van Winkle (M)

ITE would also like to acknowledge the Federal Highway Administration staff that reviewed and provided comments on

this report:

Guan Xu (M), FHWA Project Manager

Craig Allred

James E. (Eric) Ferron (M)

Michael S. Grifﬁth (M)

Note: Letters in parentheses indicate ITE member grade: M—Member, F—Fellow.

SI* (Modern Metric) Conversion Factors

Approximate Conversions to SI Units

Symbol When You Know Multiply By To Find Symbol

Length

in inches 25.4 millimeters mm

ft feet 0.305 meters m

yd yards 0.914 meters m

mi miles 1.61 kilometers km

Area

square inches 645.2 square millimeters mm

square feet 0.093 square meters m

square yard 0.836 square meters m

ac acres 0.405 hectares ha

square miles 2.59 square kilometers km

Volume

ﬂ oz ﬂuid ounces 29.57 milliliters mL

gal gallons 3.785 liters L

cubic feet 0.028 cubic meters m

cubic yards 0.765 cubic meters m

NOTE: volumes greater than 1000 L shall be shown in m

Mass

oz ounces 28.35 grams g

lb pounds 0.454 kilograms kg

T short tons (2000 lb) 0.907 megagrams (or “metric ton”) Mg (or “t”)

Temperature (exact degrees)

F Fahrenheit 5 (F-32)/9 or (F-32)/1.8 Celsius

Illumination

fc foot-candles 10.76 lux lx

ﬂ foot-Lamberts 3.426 candela/m

cd/m

Force and Pressure or Stress

lbf pound force 4.45 Newtons N

lbf/in

pound force per square inch 6.89 kilopascals kPa

* SI is the symbol for the International System of Units. Appropriate rounding should be made to comply with Section 4

of ASTM E380.

(Revised March 2003)

Approximate Conversions from SI Units

Symbol When You Know Multiply By To Find Symbol

Length

mm millimeters 0.039 inches in

m meters 3.28 feet ft

m meters 1.09 yards yd

km kilometers 0.621 miles mi

Area

square millimeters 0.0016 square inches in

square meters 10.764 square feet ft

square meters 1.195 square yards yd

ha hectares 2.47 acres ac

square kilometers 0.386 square miles mi

Volume

mL milliliters 0.034 ﬂuid ounces ﬂ oz

L liters 0.264 gallons gal

cubic meters 35.314 cubic feet ft

cubic meters 1.307 cubic yards yd

Mass

g grams 0.035 ounces oz

kg kilograms 2.202 pounds lb

Mg (or

“t”)

megagrams (or “metric

ton”)

1.103 short tons (2000 lb) T

Temperature (exact degrees)

C Celsius 1.8C+32 Fahrenheit

Illumination

lx lux 0.0929 foot-candles fc

cd/m

candela/m

0.2919 foot-Lamberts ﬂ

Force and Pressure or Stress

N Newtons 0.225 pound force lbf

kPa kilopascals 0.145 pound force per square inch lbf/in

* SI is the symbol for the International System of Units. Appropriate rounding should be made to comply with Section 4

of ASTM E380.

(Revised March 2003)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................................... 1

PURPOSE AND SCOPE ................................................................................................................ 2

REPORT ORGANIZATION ............................................................................................................ 3

THE SAFETY OF SPEED ................................................................................................................. 4

SPEED LIMIT BASICS .................................................................................................................... 6

Types of Speed Limits ................................................................................................................................. 6

Statutory Speed Limits ........................................................................................................................... 6

Speed Zones .......................................................................................................................................... 8

SETTING SPEED LIMITS ................................................................................................................. 9

Methods of Setting Speed Limits ............................................................................................................ 10

Engineering Approach ....................................................................................................................... 11

Operating Speed Method ............................................................................................................ 12

Road Risk Method .......................................................................................................................... 15

Expert System—USLIMITS2 ................................................................................................................... 16

Overview of the Decision Rules and Data Requirements of USLIMITS2 .................................... 17

Optimal Speeds ................................................................................................................................... 21

Injury Minimization ............................................................................................................................... 22

Minimum Length of Speed Zones ........................................................................................................... 25

Special Situations ..................................................................................................................................... 27

Advisory Speeds .................................................................................................................................. 27

Nighttime Speed Limits ....................................................................................................................... 28

School Zone Speed Limits ................................................................................................................... 28

Work Zone Regulatory Speeds ........................................................................................................... 30

Truck Speed Limits ............................................................................................................................... 30

Minimum Speed Limits ........................................................................................................................ 30

Variable Speed Limits .......................................................................................................................... 30

Transition Zone Speed Limits ............................................................................................................... 31

Seasonal or Holiday Speed Limits ...................................................................................................... 31

Reevaluation ............................................................................................................................................ 32

SPEED LIMIT SIGN DESIGN AND PLACEMENT .......................................................................... 33

Speed Feedback Signs ............................................................................................................................ 35

SPEED STUDY DATA COLLECTION ............................................................................................. 37

Data Collection Planning and Coordination ....................................................................................... 37

Study Area ................................................................................................................................................ 39

Speed Data Collection ........................................................................................................................... 42

Vehicle Speeds .................................................................................................................................... 42

Speed Test Runs ................................................................................................................................... 48

Data Analysis ............................................................................................................................................ 49

85th Percentile Speed ........................................................................................................................ 49

10 mph (16 km/h) Pace ...................................................................................................................... 50

Crash Data ........................................................................................................................................... 50

SPEED LIMIT ENFORCEMENT ..................................................................................................... 52

CASE STUDIES ............................................................................................................................ 53

CASE STUDY 1: Urban Collector Road ................................................................................................... 54

Engineering Method Using Operating Speed ...................................................................................... 55

Using the Illinois DOT Method ............................................................................................................. 55

Using the Northwestern Speed Zoning Technique .......................................................................... 57

Expert Systems Approach Using USLIMITS2 ............................................................................................ 58

Optimal Speed Limit ........................................................................................................................... 60

Safe Systems Approach ..................................................................................................................... 64

CASE STUDY 2: Rural Arterial Road ......................................................................................................... 65

Engineering Method Using Operating Speed ...................................................................................... 67

Using the Illinois DOT Method ............................................................................................................. 67

Using the Northwestern Speed Zoning Technique .......................................................................... 69

Expert System (USLIMITS2) ........................................................................................................................ 71

Optimal Speed Limit ................................................................................................................................ 71

Safe Systems Approach .......................................................................................................................... 74

SUMMARY OF RESULTS .............................................................................................................. 75

REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................. 76

APPENDIX A: GLOSSARY .......................................................................................................... 79

APPENDIX B: EXAMPLE TRAFFIC CONTROL ORDER ................................................................ 81

APPENDIX C: ILLINOIS POLICY ON SETTING SPEED LIMITS ..................................................... 82

APPENDIX D: NORTHWESTERN SPEED ZONING TECHNIQUE ................................................... 84

APPENDIX E: SPEED LIMITS NEW ZEALAND (ROAD RISK METHODOLOGY) ............................ 92

APPENDIX F: EXAMPLE CASE STUDY USING USLIMITS2 ........................................................... 99

APPENDIX G: EXAMPLE SPEED STUDY FORMS ....................................................................... 104

APPENDIX H: SAMPLE 85th PERCENTILE SPEED CALCULATION ............................................ 106

vii

TABLES

Table 1. Examples of Speed Limit Statutes .............................................................................................. 7

Table 2. Base Speed for the Classiﬁcation and Land Use Combination ........................................... 15

Table 3. USLIMITS2 Data Inputs for Road Types ..................................................................................... 18

Table 4. Speed Limits for Injury Minimization.......................................................................................... 23

Table 5. Approaches to Setting Speed Limits ....................................................................................... 24

Table 6. Minimum Lengths of Speed Zones in New Zealand .............................................................. 26

Table 7. Minimum Length of Road for a Speed Limit ........................................................................... 27

Table 8. Maximum Speeds to Trigger a Speed Feedback Sign .......................................................... 36

Table 9. Information to Show on Strip Map ........................................................................................... 41

Table 10. Advantages and Disadvantages of Speed Collection Devices ....................................... 43

Table 11. Example Calculation of Sample Size for Study to Determine 85th Percentile Speed ..... 44

Table 12. Sample Sizes and Data Collection Periods Used by Three States ...................................... 45

Table 13. Speed Check Stations for Three States ................................................................................. 47

Table 14. Example of Using Speed Test Runs to Conﬁrm 85th Percentile Speeds ............................. 49

Table 15. Recommended Speed Limits for the Eldron Boulevard Case Study ................................. 64

Table 16. Recommended Speed Limits for the State Route 67 Case Study ..................................... 74

Table 17. Recommended Speed Limits for the Case Studies ............................................................. 75

Table 18. Speed Limit Justiﬁed by Speed Data..................................................................................... 85

Table 19. Speed Limit Based on Road Parameters .............................................................................. 86

Table 20. Adjustment Factors for Access Density ................................................................................. 87

Table 21. Adjustment Factors for Lane Width ....................................................................................... 87

Table 22. Adjustment Factors for Functional Classiﬁcation ................................................................. 87

Table 23. Adjustment Factors for Median Type .................................................................................... 88

Table 24. Adjustment Factors for Shoulder Type and Width ............................................................... 88

Table 25. Adjustment Factors for Pedestrian Activity ........................................................................... 88

Table 26. Adjustment Factors for Parking Activity ................................................................................ 89

Table 27. Adjustment Factors for Roadway Alignment ....................................................................... 89

Table 28. Adjustment Factors for Crash Rate ........................................................................................ 89

Table E1. Development Rating ............................................................................................................... 93

Table E2. Side Road Development Rating ............................................................................................ 94

Table E3. Pedestrians ............................................................................................................................... 95

Table E4. Cyclists ....................................................................................................................................... 95

Table E5. Parking ...................................................................................................................................... 95

Table E6. Road Geometry ....................................................................................................................... 96

Table E7. Trafﬁc Control ........................................................................................................................... 96

Table E8. Development ........................................................................................................................... 96

Table 29. Example Frequency Distribution Table ................................................................................ 106

viii

FIGURES

Figure 1. Speed Limit Study Process for Engineering and Expert Systems Methods ......................... 11

Figure 2. Optimal Speed Limit Process. .................................................................................................. 22

Figure 3. International Speed Limit Signs ............................................................................................... 33

Figure 4. Example Regulatory Speed Zone Application Showing Spacing of

Signs Transitioning from Rural District to Urban District and Within the Urban District. ...... 34

Figure 5. Speed Feedback Sign ............................................................................................................. 35

Figure 6. An Example of a Strip Map of a Study Area Showing Existing Conditions ......................... 40

Figure 7. Radar Setup .............................................................................................................................. 46

Figure 8. Portable Trafﬁc Analyzer .......................................................................................................... 46

Figure SLNZ1. Determining Speed Limit. ................................................................................................. 97

Figure SLNZ2. Speed Limit Flow Chart—Rural. ....................................................................................... 97

Figure SLNZ3. Speed Limit Flow Chart—In-Between. ............................................................................ 98

Figure SLNZ4. Speed Limit Flow Chart—Urban. ..................................................................................... 98

BACKGROUND

In 1885, Karl Friedrich Benz revealed the ﬁrst gasoline-powered automobile on the public street

system.

The fastest his car could go was about 13 mph (21 km/h). Since that time, advances in

science and technology have brought faster vehicles and better roads, both of which have served

to increase travel speeds for automotive travel. Today, attainable speeds are far higher than the

maximum speeds that society generally accepts as reasonable for motorized travel on public streets,

yet the speedometers on most motor vehicles display maximum speeds that far exceed the maximum

legal speed limits on most roads.

Speeding, commonly deﬁned as exceeding the posted speed limit or driving too fast for conditions,

is a primary crash causation factor across the globe. Based on a survey of road safety performance,

speeding is the number one road safety problem in many countries, often contributing to as many

as one-third of fatal crashes and serving as an aggravating factor in most crashes.

According to the

National Highway Trafﬁc Safety Administration (NHTSA), speeding-related crashes account for over

13,000 fatalities per year in the United States, making speeding one of the most often-cited contributing

factors for fatal crashes.

One of the most frequently used methods of managing travel speeds is the posted speed limit. The setting

of speed limits predates the automobile by some 200 years, when Newport, Rhode Island, prohibited the

horses galloping on major thoroughfares to prevent pedestrian deaths. Similarly, Boston, Massachusetts,

limited horse-drawn carriages to “foot pace” on Sundays to protect church-goers.

The English Parliament is credited with setting the world’s ﬁrst speed limit for mechanically-propelled

vehicles in 1861.

At that time, the Locomotive Act (automobiles were considered “light locomotives”)

limited the speed of all “locomotives” on public highways to 10 mph (16 km/h)–5 mph (8 km/h) through

any City, town, or village.

The Act was later amended to set speed limits of 4 mph (6 km/h) outside of

towns and 2 mph (3 km/h) within them. These new operating speeds also required three operators for

each vehicle—two traveling in the vehicle and one walking ahead and carrying a red ﬂag to warn

pedestrians and equestrians.

Selecting an appropriate speed limit for a facility can be a polarizing issue for a community. Residents

and vulnerable road users generally seek lower speeds to promote quality of life for the community and

increased security for pedestrians and cyclists; motorists seek higher speeds that minimize travel time.

Despite the controversy surrounding maximum speed limits, it is clear that the overall goal of setting the

speed limit is almost always to increase safety within the context of retaining reasonable mobility.

The principal exception to the safety objective of speed limits was the oil crisis in the early 1970s, when

speed limits were lowered as a means of conserving fuel. This rationale for lower speed limits was revived

in Spain in early 2011, where the government lowered the maximum speed limit of 75 mph (120 km/h)

to 70 mph (110 km/h) in an attempt to curb fuel consumption in the face of rising oil prices.

However,

the measure lasted only four months before the top speed limit was returned to the former 75 mph (120

km/h).

Maximum speed limits are laws; therefore, speed limits are set for the protection of the public and the

regulation of unreasonable behavior on the part of individuals.

This still predates the gasoline-powered automobile and was enacted for steam-powered vehicles.

PURPOSE AND SCOPE

Despite the wide-spread acceptance and use of speed limits throughout the world, there has been no

consensus among practitioners concerning the methods and techniques that should be used to select

the most appropriate speed limit for a particular facility. Currently, it appears unlikely that consensus will

be achieved in the near future. This leaves practitioners without deﬁnitive guidance on this important

issue, and in search of information that may assist them. This report provides the information necessary

for practitioners to make informed decisions concerning the method that is selected for setting speed

limits in their jurisdiction.

This report presents the various procedures that highway agencies can and do use to set speed limits.

It is an informational report and provides a broad overview of the different speed limit setting methods

that are available, but makes no speciﬁc recommendations or suggestions.

Special situations, such as advisory, school zone, and work zone speeds are discussed. Speed limit

enforcement and periodic reevaluation of speed limits are discussed brieﬂy. The design speed for

the roadway will not be discussed, except as it relates to the setting of speed limits. This is because

design speed is a characteristic of the roadway that is essentially “built-in” to the road, and is not easily

modiﬁed.

Technical terms are deﬁned in Appendix A.

REPORT ORGANIZATION

The remainder of this report is organized into eight sections as follows:

THE SAFETY OF SPEED: As speed limits are ﬁrst and foremost a road safety measure, a discussion on the

effects of speed on crash risk is provided for the information of the user.

SPEED LIMIT BASICS: An introduction to the broad categories and types of speed limits, including

statutory speed limits, prima facie speed limits, and speed zoning.

SETTING SPEED LIMITS: A detailed description of the various methods that are available for setting speed

limits, a brief discussion of special types of speed limits (i.e., nighttime speed limits, school zone speed

limits, truck speed limits, etc.), and information on minimum lengths of speed zones.

SPEED LIMIT SIGN DESIGN AND PLACEMENT: Criteria that are used in selecting sign types and in the

placement of the signs for speed zones and speed transitions. Also included is some information on

Speed Feedback signs.

SPEED STUDY DATA COLLECTION: An outline of the data required for determining a posted speed limit

with emphasis on spot speed data collection and analysis.

SPEED LIMIT ENFORCEMENT: A brief discussion on the role of engineering practitioners in assisting with the

enforcement of speed limits.

CASE STUDIES: Two case studies that demonstrate the use of several available methods for setting

speed limits.

REFERENCES AND APPENDICES: Supporting information and additional details for the reader.

THE SAFETY OF SPEED

It is important to understand how speed impacts safety, because setting speed limits is primarily a

road safety measure. While the laws of physics make it very clear that speed and crash severity are

inextricably linked (i.e., severity increases geometrically as speed increases), there has been a good

deal of controversy over the impact of speed on crash occurrence. This is primarily because the variety

of road design and operating characteristics can obscure the precise relationship between speed and

crash occurence. Numerous studies and research efforts on this topic that have presented conﬂicting

results on this important relationship. However, the most recent and statistically robust research on speed

and crash occurrence fairly deﬁnitively indicates that, all other factors being equal, increased speeds

increase crash occurrence.

The magnitude of the increase is dependent on the speciﬁcs of each case,

with urban areas having the most pronounced relationship and controlled-access facilities the weakest.

One of the most statistically robust efforts to uncover the relationship between speed and safety was

a meta-analysis conducted by the Norwegian Institute of Transport Economics.

The information and

conclusions from the meta-analysis form the basis for the statements made in this section.

For a given roadway type, there is a strong statistical relationship between speed and crash risk for

speeds in the range of 15 mph to 75 mph (25 km/h to 120 km/h). When the mean speed of trafﬁc is

reduced, the number of crashes and the severity of injuries will almost always go down. When the

mean speed of trafﬁc increases, the number of crashes and the severity of injuries will usually increase.

The relationship between mean travel speed and crash risk can be adequately described in terms of

the following model:



CMF

⎟

⎠

⎞

⎜

⎝

⎛



CMF = Crash modiﬁcation factor

= Mean speed in the after condition

= Mean speed in the before condition

X = 3.6 for fatal crash frequency

2.0 for injury crash frequency

1.0 for property-damage-only crash frequency

4.5 for fatalities

2.7 for personal injuries

The relationship between speed and crash risk can be modiﬁed to some extent by road environment,

vehicle-related factors, and driver behavior. But, the effects of speed on crash risk are remarkably

consistent across different contexts.

The above relationship between speed and crash risk is signiﬁcantly different from the traditional

U-shaped relationship that has deﬁned much of the current North American thinking on speed limits

and speed management. The U-shaped relationship (Solomon curve) between speed and crash risk

can be questioned for two reasons:

1. The U-shape is generally expected to be an artifact of errors in the measurement of speed

8,9

; and

2. There is a strong correlation between mean speed and speed variance, so it is difﬁcult to separate

the effects of mean speed and speed variance on crash risk.

This discussion describes the relationship between travel speed and crash risk, but it does not necessarily

reﬂect the relationship between speed limits and crash risk.

A change in the speed limit almost always changes the mean speed of trafﬁc. However, the changes

are not always proportional. For the most part, the change in the mean speed of trafﬁc created by a

change in speed limit is around 25 percent of the change in the speed limit.

In other words, a speed

limit increase or reduction of 6 mph (10 km/h) yields about a 1.5 mph (2.5 km/h) raising or lowering of

the mean speed, respectively. When this statistic is combined with the power formula equating change

in mean speed to crash risk, it is evident that lowering the speed limit will reduce crash risk, and raising

the speed limit will increase crash risk.

Whether the safety gains/losses associated with the change in the speed limit is worthwhile must be

examined in the context of maintaining reasonable mobility, and other system objectives. In addition,

the policy context must be considered because the relationship between travel speed and speed

limits indicates that the percentage of violators increases when speed limits are lowered and decreases

when speed limits are increased.

SPEED LIMIT BASICS

Setting speed limits in the United States has always

been a responsibility of State and local governments.

The unrestricted freedom to exercise that authority was

interrupted by the Federal Government during World War

II, and more recently with the National Maximum Speed

Limit of 55 mph (90 km/h). The National Maximum Speed

Limit was repealed in 1995.

Every State has a basic speed statute requiring drivers to

operate their vehicles at a speed that is reasonable and

prudent for conditions. This basic rule is contained in the

Uniform Vehicle Code (UVC), which provides a model set

of motor vehicle laws to encourage uniformity in State

trafﬁc regulation. State statutes authorize maximum speed

limits that may vary by highway type (e.g., interstate

highways) or location (e.g., urban district).

The UVC is a set of model trafﬁc laws that was originally

developed by the National Committee on Uniform Trafﬁc

Laws and Ordinances (NCUTLO), a now defunct, private,

non-proﬁt organization. The NCUTLO’s members were

mainly State governments and some related organizations.

The extent to which the code is used varies by State. The

UVC and most State motor vehicle laws include a basic

speed law with wording similar to the following: No person

shall drive a vehicle at a speed greater than is reasonable

and prudent under the conditions and having regard for

the weather, visibility, trafﬁc, and the surface and width of

the roadway.

Section 11-803 of the UVC recommends States establish speed zones upon the basis of an engineering

and trafﬁc investigation. Section 11-804 outlines recommended practices on how local authorities may

alter maximum limits.

Types of Speed Limits

Speed limits may be classiﬁed as default/statutory regulations, or speed zoning regulations established

on the basis of engineering studies. In all cases, a speed limit must be legislated (i.e., established by

legislative authority).

Statutory Speed Limits

Statutory limits are based on the concept that uniform categories of highways can operate safely

at certain maximum speeds under ideal conditions. State motor vehicle laws specify speed limits on

speciﬁc categories of streets and highways. For example, a vehicle code might limit speeds to 25 mph

(40 km/h) in residential areas, 30 mph (50 km/h) in business districts, and 55 mph (90 km/h) on all other

roads. Generally, statutory limits apply throughout a political jurisdiction.

Table 1 contains examples of

statutory limits for three States and for the Uniform Vehicle Code.

Article VIII—Speed Restrictions

11-801—Basic rule

No person shall drive a vehicle at a

speed greater than is reasonable

and prudent under the conditions

and having regard to the actual

and potential hazards then existing.

Consistent with the foregoing, every

person shall drive at a safe and

appropriate speed when approaching

and crossing an intersection or railroad

grade crossing, when approaching

and going around a curve, when

approaching a hill crest, when

traveling upon any narrow or winding

roadway, and when special hazards

exist with respect to pedestrians or

other trafﬁc or by reason of weather or

highway conditions. (Revised, 1968)

Uniform Vehicle Code and Model Trafﬁc

Ordinance, 2000, National Committee

on Uniform Trafﬁc Laws and Ordinances,

Evanston, Illinois.

Table 1. Examples of Speed Limit Statutes

Jurisdiction Speed Limit Statute

Uniform Vehicle Code 55 mph (90 km/h) in locations other than urban districts

35 mph (60 km/h) in urban districts

Delaware Where no special hazard exists, the following speeds shall be lawful, but any

speed in excess of such limits shall be absolute evidence that the speed is not

reasonable or prudent and that it is unlawful:

All types of vehicles:

25 mph (40 km/h) in any business district

25 mph (40 km/h) in any residential district

20 mph (30 km/h) at all school zones where 20 mph (30 km/h) regulatory signs

are in effect during speciﬁc periods

50 mph (80 km/h) on 2-lane roadways

55 mph (90 km/h) on 4-lane roadways and on divided roadways

Minnesota 10 mph (15 km/h) in alleys

30 mph (50 km/h) on streets in urban districts

70 mph (110 km/h) on rural interstate highways

65 mph (105 km/h) on urban interstate highways

65 mph (105 km/h) on expressways

55 mph (90 km/h) on other roads

Oregon 15 mph (25 km/h) – alleys; narrow residential roadways

20 mph (30 km/h) – business districts, school zones

25 mph (40 km/h) – residential districts, public parks, ocean shores

55 mph (90 km/h) – open rural highways, trucks on interstate highways

65 mph (105 km/h) – passenger vehicles, light trucks, motor homes, and light

duty commercial vehicles on interstate highways.

Statutory speed limits allow for speed limits to be in effect even when it is not practical to post them.

There are two types of statutory speed limits: (a) absolute limits and (b) prima facie limits. The principle

difference between the two types is whether someone who is charged with driving over the speed

limit can defend her/his actions. An absolute speed limit is a limit above which it is unlawful to drive

regardless of roadway conditions, the amount of trafﬁc, or other inﬂuencing factors. There is no recourse

to contend a charge. A prima facie speed limit is one above which drivers are presumed to be driving

unlawfully but, if charged with a violation, they may contend that their speed was safe for conditions

existing on the roadway at that time. And, therefore, that they are not guilty of a speed limit violation.

Prima facie limits provide greater ﬂexibility to drivers to determine an appropriate speed for conditions

and place a greater burden of proof on the enforcement community that a violation has occurred.

Approximately two-thirds of the States have absolute speed limits.

Speed Zones

Where statutory limits do not ﬁt speciﬁc road, trafﬁc, or land uses conditions, most road authorities

have the power to establish speed zones to reﬂect the safe maximum reasonable speed. These

alternative speed limits may be higher or lower than those prescribed by the UVC or the statutory

limits of the jurisdiction. Alternative maximum legal speed limits are established by legislating the

speed zone, typically founded on the basis of an engineering study, and becoming effective when

the limits are posted and properly recorded.

Agencies process resolutions, trafﬁc control orders,

or other formal documents to properly record the legal speed limit. An example of a Trafﬁc Control

Order is shown in Appendix B.

To encourage compliance and effectively manage risk, many agencies set speed limits to reﬂect the

“reasonable and prudent” behavior of the majority of motorists acting in an appropriate manner. This

encourages drivers to obey the posted speed limit and travel at a reasonable speed. It also targets

limited enforcement resources at the occasional violator who disproportionately contributes to crash

risk. The concept of a rational speed limit involves a formal engineering review, during which drivers’

free-ﬂowing speeds are observed. The assumption is that by reﬂecting actual driver speeds, most people

will consider the speed limit appropriate. Such speed limits are desirable because they encourage

public compliance, reduce speed differences among drivers, and offer a defensible enforcement tool.

SETTING SPEED LIMITS

This section describes the main objectives and guiding principles of setting speed limits and provides a

detailed description of the principal available methods.

Speed limits are set to inform motorists of appropriate driving speeds under favorable conditions.

Drivers are expected to reduce speeds under certain conditions (e.g., poor visibility, adverse weather,

congestion, warning signs, or presence of bicyclists and pedestrians). Legislation and statutes

generally reﬂect this requirement. All speed control regulations provide the legal basis for adjudication

and sanctions for violations of the law. Road authorities may also post advisory speed signs, which

do not have the force of law but warn motorists of suggested safe speeds for speciﬁc conditions at

a particular location (e.g., a turn or an intersection approach).

Having stated the above, however, a

motorist exceeding an advisory speed could still be cited under the basic speed rule (i.e., driving too

fast for the prevailing conditions).

The primary purpose of the speed limit is to advise drivers of the maximum reasonable and safe

operating speed under favorable conditions. It provides a basis for enforcement and ought to be fair in

the context of trafﬁc law.

Methodologies for setting speed limits typically are designed to result in recommended speed limits that:

• Are related to crash risk;

• Provide a reasonable basis for enforcement;

• Are fair in the context of trafﬁc law; and

• Are accepted as reasonable by a majority of road users.

The selected methodology is generally applicable on all road types and capable of being

implemented with existing resources.

Factors that affect safe speeds along roadways, and also inﬂuence the speed selected by motorists,

include:

• A vehicle’s mechanical condition and characteristics;

• Driving ability/capabilities;

• Trafﬁc volume: vehicles, pedestrians, and bicycles;

• Weather and visibility;

• Roadway design elements, including:

» Road function/purpose;

» Lane and shoulder width;

» Horizontal and vertical curves;

» Available sight distances;

» Driveways with restricted visibility and other roadside developments;

» High driveway density;

» Rural residential or developed areas; and

» Paved or improved shoulders.

• Pavement conditions; and

• Crash frequency and severity.

All of these factors should be considered when designing appropriate speed limits at locations where

the speed limits need to be varied from the statutory limits. Special situations also exist that necessitate

nighttime, school zone, work zone, minimum and variable speed limits or advisory speeds.

The above-mentioned factors to be considered in selecting a speed limit are also heavily inﬂuenced

by geometric design features of the road and roadside development/activity. This is largely because

drivers tend to select operating speeds based on the visual scene presented to them. Therefore, the

speed limit and design of the road must work in concert if desired operating speeds are to be achieved.

Due to the lack of speciﬁc guidance and procedures from the Manual on Uniform Trafﬁc Control

Devices (MUTCD) and other documents, engineers often rely on their experience and judgment when

considering factors that affect decisions about setting appropriate speed limits. The use of subjective

procedures by decision-makers with various levels of experience, and the use of different procedures

across jurisdictions, may lead to inconsistencies in how speed limits are set in different jurisdictions.

Methods of Setting Speed Limits

Within the trafﬁc engineering community, there are four general approaches to setting speed limits:

• Engineering approach: A two-step process where a base speed limit is set according to the 85th

percentile speed, the design speed for the road, or other criterion. This base speed limit is adjusted

according to trafﬁc and infrastructure conditions such as pedestrian use, median presence, etc.

Within the engineering approach there are two approaches; 1) Operating Speed Method and

2) Road Risk Method.

• Expert system approach: Speed limits are set by a computer program that uses knowledge and

inference procedures that simulate the judgment and behavior of speed limit experts. Typically,

this system contains a knowledge base containing accumulated knowledge and experience

(knowledge base), and a set of rules for applying the knowledge to each particular situation

(the inference procedure).

• Optimization: Setting speed limits to minimize the total societal costs of transport. Travel time,

vehicle operating costs, road crashes, trafﬁc noise, and air pollution are considered in the

determination of optimal speed limits.

• Injury minimization or safe system approach: Speed limits are set according to the crash

types that are likely to occur, the impact forces that result, and the human body’s tolerance to

withstand these forces.

Engineering and expert system approaches are widely used in North America, injury minimization methods

are gaining wide-spread use in countries that are at the forefront of global road safety (i.e., Sweden,

Australia, etc.). The concept of setting optimal speed limits has been studied by some jurisdictions, but is

not known to have been adopted by any road authority. However, the optimal speed limits approach

seems applicable within the context of providing context sensitive solutions (CSS)—an approach that

considers the total context within which a facility will exist—and has been considered for application on

some New Jersey roads.

Speed limits set by either an engineering method or an expert system use similar basic tenets. The

engineering method is often limited to a basic study, while the expert system approach employs a

more structured set of decision and judgment rules. For both methods, the speed limit is determined by

considering the existing speed, roadway, and crash information. Figure 1 shows the steps that lead to

producing the ﬁnal report for either an engineering or an expert systems type of speed study.

Speed limit studies are most often undertaken in response to a request for a lower speed limit

than currently posted. In some instances, however, the road authority ﬁnds itself in the position of

recommending a higher speed limit than the one currently posted. In these latter instances, some

jurisdictions require a road safety audit be conducted prior to a higher speed limit being approved.

The following sections detail the steps to setting speed limits using the four methods.

Engineering Approach

The steps in the engineering approach to setting speed limits include planning, coordination, data

collection and analysis, and ﬁnally, determination of the speed limits. A trafﬁc engineering study is

the observation and analysis of road and trafﬁc characteristics to guide the application of trafﬁc

engineering principles. The study of speed limits includes the following:

Figure 1. Speed Limit Study Process for Engineering and Expert Systems Methods.

Select Study

Methodology

• Determine issue

at hand.

• Does the study

require a small or

large sample?

• Select the method

for collecting speed

data.

Select Location

• Select the proper

location.

• Plan the data

collection

preparations.

• Select a day

(Tuesday, Wednesday,

or Thursday).

• Complete

the pre-study

documentation.

Complete Study

• Collect the data.

• Evaluate the data.

• Calculate the speed

percentiles.

• Develop the limits of

the zone.

• Develop sign

locations.

Document

• Finalize the report.

• File the report.

• Communicate

the results.

• Review of the road’s environment, features, and condition and trafﬁc characteristics.

• Observation and measurement of vehicle speeds at one or more representative spots along the

road in ideal weather and under free-ﬂowing trafﬁc conditions.

• Analysis of vehicle speeds to determine 85th percentile speed and other characteristics.

• Review of the road’s crash history.

• Review of any unusual conditions not readily apparent.

Setting speed limits is complex and often controversial. The engineering approach requires the use

of engineering judgment based on the engineering and trafﬁc investigation. Quality data and good

documentation provides support for the judgments that are made.

Within the engineering approach to setting speed limits there are two basic methods: the operating

speed method and the road risk method. Each of these is detailed below.

Operating Speed Method

Most engineering approaches to speed limit setting are based on the 85th percentile speed—the speed

at which 85 percent of free-ﬂowing trafﬁc is traveling at or below. The typical procedure is to set the

speed limit at or near the 85th percentile speed of free-ﬂow trafﬁc. Adjustments to either increase or

decrease the speed limits may be made depending on infrastructure and trafﬁc conditions.

Setting a speed limit based on the 85th percentile speed was originally based on safety. Speciﬁcally,

research at the time had shown that traveling at or around one standard deviation above the mean

operating speed (which is approximately the 85th percentile speed) yields the lowest crash risk for drivers.

Furthermore, crash risk increases rapidly for drivers traveling two standard deviations or more above or

below the mean operating speed. Therefore, the 85th percentile speed separates acceptable speed

behavior from unsafe speed behavior that disproportionately contributes to crash risk.

The 85th percentile speed method is also attractive because it reﬂects the collective judgment of

the vast majority of drivers as to a reasonable speed for given trafﬁc and roadway conditions. This is

aligned with the general policy sentiment that laws (i.e., speed limits) should not make people acting

reasonably into law-breakers. Setting a speed limit even 5 mph (8 km/h) below the 85th percentile

speed can make almost half the drivers illegal; setting a speed limit 5 mph (8 km/h) above the 85th

percentile speed will likely make few additional drivers legal.

Under the operating speed method of setting speed limits, the ﬁrst approximation of the speed limit is to

set the speed limit at the 85th percentile speed. The MUTCD recommends that the speed limit be within

5 mph (8 km/h) of the 85th percentile speed of free-ﬂowing trafﬁc. The posted speed limit shall be in

multiples of 5 mph

, or 10 km/h for jurisdictions that employ metric.

While the MUTCD recommends setting the posted speed limits near the 85th percentile speed, and

trafﬁc engineers say that agencies are using the 85th percentile speed to set speed limits, in reality the

speed limit is often set much lower. At these locations, the 85th percentile operating speeds exceed the

The original research between speed and safety which purported that the safest travel speed is the 85th percentile speed

is dated research and may not be valid under scrutiny. See the section titled “The Safety of Speed” for a synopsis of current

thinking on the relationship between speed and safety.

posted speed limits; and, in many cases, the 50th percentile operating speed is either near or exceeds

that posted speed limit as well.

Many agencies deviate from their agency’s written guidelines and

instead post lower speed limits. According to an ITE Engineering Council Technical Committee survey,

these reduced speed limits are often the result of political pressures.

However, it is important to note

that setting speed limits lower than 85th percentile speed does not encourage compliance with

the posted speed limit.

The 85th percentile speed can be adjusted on the basis of engineering and trafﬁc investigation. The

following are typical adjustments made by several States:

• Adjustments made for roadway factors and/or crash data may be lower than the 85th percentile

speed, but normally no more than 7 mph (11 km/h) lower.

• Adjustments for roadway factors may reduce the 85th percentile speed by as much as 10 mph

(16 km/h) below the 85th percentile speed based on sound and generally accepted engineering

judgment that includes consideration of the following factors:

» Narrow roadway pavement widths (20 feet (6 m) or less, for example).

» Horizontal and vertical curves (possible limited sight distance).

» Driveways with restricted visibility and other developments (possible limited sight distance).

» High driveway density (the higher the number of driveways, the higher the potential for

encountering entering and turning vehicles).

» Rural residential or developed areas (higher potential for pedestrian and bicycle trafﬁc).

» Narrow shoulder widths (constricted lateral movement).

• If the crash rate for a two-year period is much higher than the average for other highways of

similar classiﬁcations, adjustments are considered.

• Adjustments can be made based on crash data when enforcement agencies will assure a

degree of enforcement that will make the speed zone effective.

• A 12 mph (20 km/h) reduction for locations where roadway factors and crash rates are higher

than the statewide average.

After the 85th percentile speeds and zone lengths have been selected, some jurisdictions recommend

that several test runs be made through the area in both directions driving at the selected speeds.

This should show any irregularities in the zoning that need correction before the speed zone is

implemented.

The last step in the analysis process for the operating speed method is to draw conclusions based on the

observed data and to prepare a report. The report can be elaborate or very basic depending on why

the study was performed and how the results will be used.

The use of the 85th percentile speed as the primary criterion for selecting a suitable speed limit is

founded on the following fundamental concepts deeply rooted in government and law:

• Driving behavior is an extension of social attitude, and the majority of drivers respond in a safe

and reasonable manner as demonstrated by their consistently favorable driving records.

• The normally careful and competent actions of a reasonable person should be considered legal.

• Laws are established for the protection of the public and the regulation of unreasonable behavior

on the part of individuals.

• Laws cannot be effectively enforced without the consent and voluntary compliance of the

public majority.

The operating speed method has the added advantage that a properly set speed limit will provide

residents, businesses, and pedestrians with a realistic expectation of actual vehicular speeds on the street.

Criticisms of the operating speed method of setting speed limits are largely targeted at the use of the

85th percentile speed as the starting point for establishing the speed limit. They include:

• This criterion assumes that motorists are aware of and select the safest speed.

• Drivers are generally bad at accounting for the externalities of their driving.

A further criticism that has been leveled against the 85th percentile speed as a primary determinant of

the speed limit is that this practice may lead to an upward drift or creep in average operating speeds

over time.

The engineering approach to setting speed limits has manifested itself in North America as the setting

of “rational” speed limits. The premise is that speed limits based on a formal, analytical review of trafﬁc

ﬂow, roadway design, local development, and historical crash data will result in a high percentage of

drivers complying with the speed limit and traveling at about the same speed.

Despite wide-spread use of the operating speed method for setting speed limits in North America,

there are few jurisdictions that have quantitative criteria for the adjustments to the 85th percentile

speed. For example, how much should a speed limit be reduced if there is a high volume of

pedestrian trafﬁc on the street? For the most part, the analyst is to use “engineering judgment”

to make such valuations. Two notable exceptions to the qualitative procedures are the Policy on

Establishing and Posting Speed Limits on the State Highway System by the Illinois Department of

Transportation (DOT)

, and the Northwestern Speed Zoning Technique (which is a procedure used by

several municipalities).

The Illinois procedure considers access, pedestrian trafﬁc, curbside parking, and safety performance,

in addition to existing speed proﬁle to establish the recommended speed limit. Speciﬁc numerical

adjustments are speciﬁed in the procedure for each of the above criterion. The Illinois procedure is

described in Appendix C.

The Northwestern Speed Zoning Technique is similar to the Illinois DOT procedure mentioned above,

but it considers a wider range of trafﬁc and infrastructure factors including presence of a median, lane

width, vertical alignment, etc. Again, numerical direction is provided concerning the adjustments that

are required for different road features, making the process repeatable and reliable. The Northwestern

Speed Zoning Technique is detailed in Appendix D.

Road Risk Method

Another method of setting speed limits using an engineering approach is the road risk method in

which the speed limit is determined by the risks associated with the physical design of the road and

the expected trafﬁc conditions. This method has numerous guises, but the core methodology is to set

the speed limit according to the function or classiﬁcation of the road (which also tends to dictate the

design of the road), and then to adjust the speed limit based on the relative risk introduced by various

road and roadside design features. This method is currently employed by Canada and New Zealand.

The road risk method is the same as the operating speed method in that a selected base speed limit is

adjusted by various factors to determine the recommended speed limit. The main difference between

the two engineering methods is that the operating speed method uses the 85th percentile speed as the

base speed limit, and the road risk method uses a base speed limit that is predicated on the functional

classiﬁcation of the road and its setting.

Under the road risk method to setting speed limits the level of roadside development and the function

of a road are the primary determinants of the appropriate speed limit.

Although road geometry is also

a factor in determining a speed limit, it is secondary to roadside development. In situations where the

road design encourages users to travel at a higher speed than the speed limit determined by roadside

development, engineering techniques should be used to lower vehicle speeds. When a road in a built-

up area primarily serves through trafﬁc, engineering and access control techniques should be used to

provide safety at the higher speeds that will prevail.

Table 2 provides the base speed limits for different land use and road classiﬁcations as used in the road

risk methodology used in Canada.

Table 2. Base Speed for the Classiﬁcation and Land Use Combination

Classiﬁcation

Land Use

Rural Urban

Undivided Divided Undivided Divided

1 lane

per

direction

2+ lanes

per

direction

1 lane

per

direction

2+ lanes

per

direction

1 lane

per

direction

2+ lanes

per

direction

1 lane

per

direction

2+ lanes

per

direction

Arterial

Major

55 mph

(90 km/h)

60 mph

(100 km/h)

60 mph

(100 km/h)

70 mph

(110 km/h)

50 mph

(80 km/h)

55 mph

(90 km/h)

Minor

50 mph

(80 km/h)

55 mph

(90 km/h)

55 mph

(90 km/h)

60 mph

(100 km/h)

45 mph

(70 km/h)

50 mph

(80 km/h)

Collector

Major

45 mph

(70 km/h)

50 mph

(80 km/h)

50 mph

(80 km/h)

55 mph

(90 km/h)

45 mph

(70 km/h)

50 mph

(80 km/h)

Minor

35 mph

(60 km/h)

45 mph

(70 km/h)

45 mph

(70 km/h)

50 mph

(80 km/h)

35 mph

(60 km/h)

45 mph

(70 km/h)

Local

35 mph

(60 km/h)

30 mph

(50 km/h)

Lane = through lane

Divided = a median that separates travel lanes of trafﬁc in opposing directions, which may be ﬂush with,

raised above, or depressed below adjacent travel lanes

By using the land use and functional classiﬁcation of the road as the primary determinants of the

desirable speed limit, road authorities that use the road risk method are attempting to reconcile the

legislated speed of the road with the function of the road.

The road risk method used in New Zealand sets out the method for calculating the speed limit for a

section of road from the following information:

• The existing speed limit;

• The character of the surrounding land environment (e.g., rural, fringe of city, fully developed);

• The function of a road (i.e., arterial, collector, or local);

• Detailed roadside development data (e.g., number of houses, shops, schools, etc.);

• The number and nature of side roads;

• Roadway characteristics (e.g., median divided, lane width and number of lanes, road geometry,

street lighting, sidewalks, cycle lanes, parking, setback of fence line from the road);

• Vehicle, cycle, and pedestrian activity;

• Crash data; and

• Speed survey data.

The road risk method employed in New Zealand is detailed in Appendix E and includes a working

example.

Despite the fact that the road risk method downplays operating speed as a factor in developing the

speed limit, it is noted that the road risk method should recommend speed limits that are consistent with

operating speeds.

Expert System—USLIMITS2:

An expert system is one approach that can be used to identify the appropriate speed limit for a speed

zone. Transportation Research Board’s (TRB) Special Report 254 argues that the expert system approach

deserves consideration because it provides a systematic and consistent method of examining and

weighing factors other than vehicle operating speeds in determining an appropriate speed limit.

Expert systems aim to mimic the expert’s thought process in solving complex problems.

The original expert system for setting speed limits was developed by the Australian Road Research Board

and was based on site studies at over 60 locations. The ﬁeld data were reviewed by a panel of experts

who used this information to come up with decision rules for appropriate speed limits for different types

of roads and trafﬁc conditions. This information was coded into a computer program which prompts

users to respond to a series of questions, which the system uses to recommend a speed limit. It is

important to note that the Australian expert system logic is hard coded, and this system does not learn

from previous experience, as some other “smart” expert systems do.

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) developed a knowledge-based expert system for

recommending speed limits in speed zones that are considered to be credible and enforceable. The

expert system (known as USLIMITS2) was developed based on results from previous research, responses

from practitioners to hypothetical case studies as part of two web-based surveys, input from experts

from three panel meetings, and lessons learned from the ﬁrst generation expert system developed by

the Australian Road Research Board for FHWA.

USLIMITS2 is designed to determine speed limits in speed zones on all types of roadways, from rural two-

lane segments to urban freeway segments. Speed limits not addressed by the system include statutory

limits (such as maximum limits set by State legislatures for interstates and other roadways), temporary or

part-time speed limits (such as limits posted in work zones and school zones), and variable speed limits

that are raised or lowered based on trafﬁc, weather, and other conditions.

Based on input from the user, USLIMITS2 employs a decision algorithm to advise the user of the speed

limit for the speciﬁc road section. Appropriate warnings are also provided in a summary report that may

suggest that additional information and/or action is necessary to address areas of concern. The system

is meant to assist the user in making the speed limit decision for a road segment, but will not make the

decision for him or her.

Overview of the Decision Rules and Data Requirements of USLIMITS2

A brief overview of the logic ﬂow and decision rules that are used in the expert system is described

in the following section, along with the data requirements. For brevity, ﬂow charts describing the

decision rules are not provided here, they are available in the National Cooperative Highway Research

Program’s (NCHRP) Research Results Digest 318.

The user is ﬁrst asked to enter information about the

location of the project and then indicate whether the road is a limited access freeway, road section

in an undeveloped area, or a road section in a developed area (photographs illustrating the roadway

types and deﬁnitions are provided in the User Guide, which can be downloaded from

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/USLIMITS). The following are the roadway types:

• Limited access freeway

• Road section in undeveloped areas

• Road section in developed areas

» Residential subdivision/neighborhood street

» Residential collector street

» Commercial street

» Street serving large complexes

After users select the roadway type, they are taken to a window where they are asked to enter the site

characteristics. Table 3 shows the site characteristics users are prompted to enter for each road type.

Table 3. USLIMITS2 Data Inputs for Road Types

Road Type Site Characteristics

Limited access freeway Operating Speed: 85th percentile speed and 50th percentile speed.

Presence/absence of adverse alignment.

Is this section transitioning to a non-limited access highway?

Section length.

Current statutory limit for this type of road.

Terrain.

Annual average daily trafﬁc.

Number of interchanges within this section.

Crash statistics (if available).

Road sections in

undeveloped areas

Operating speed: 85th percentile speed and 50th percentile speed.

Presence/absence of adverse alignment.

Current statutory limit for this type of road.

Annual average daily trafﬁc.

Roadside hazard rating.

Number of lanes and presence/type of median.

Crash statistics (if available).

Road sections in

developed areas

Operating speed: 85th percentile speed and 50th percentile speed.

Current statutory limit for this type of road.

Annual average daily trafﬁc.

Presence/absence of adverse alignment.

Area type.

Number of driveways in the section.

Number of trafﬁc signals within the section.

Presence/usage of on-street parking.

Extent of pedestrian/bike activity.

Crash statistics (if available).

For each roadway type, the program calculates a speed limit using one of two approaches:

Approach 1—Based on operating speeds and results from the crash module.

In the crash module, the user is asked to enter the total number of crashes and total number

of injury crashes. In addition, the user is asked to enter the average crash rate and the

average rate of injury and fatal crashes for similar sections in the same jurisdiction. If data on

average rates are not available, the program makes use of average rates calculated with

data from eight States that are part of the Highway Safety Information System (HSIS)

(http://www.hsisinfo.org). Using the average crash rate and the average rate of injury and

fatal crashes, the program calculates the critical crash rate and critical injury rate at a

95 percent level of conﬁdence.

If the crash or injury rate is higher than the corresponding critical rates, or at least 30

percent higher than the corresponding average rates, the user is asked to indicate if

trafﬁc and geometric measures can reduce the crash and/or injury rate in this section. If

the user answers “Yes” to this question, the recommended speed limit from this module

is the 5 mph (8 km/h) multiple closest to the 85th percentile speed. If the user answers

“No” or “Unknown,” the recommended speed limit from this module is the 5 mph (8 km/h)

increment obtained by rounding down the 85th percentile speed (if crash or injury rate is

at least 30 percent higher than the average rate) or closest to the 50th percentile speed (if

the crash or injury rate is higher than the critical rate).

Approach 2—Based on operating speeds and other site characteristics (also called safety surrogates).

The surrogates were chosen based on input from the Expert Panel and evidence (based

on previous research) of a relationship between these surrogates and crash statistics. For

freeways, safety surrogates include interchange spacing and annual average daily trafﬁc

(AADT). Based on the research team’s judgment in interpreting the results of the work of

Bared et al.,

recommended speed limits are the following:

• If AADT is higher than 180,000 and the average interchange spacing is between 0.5 and 1 mile

(0.80 and 1.6 kms), the recommended speed limit from this approach will be the 5 mph (8 km/h)

multiple obtained by rounding down the 85th percentile speed.

• If AADT is higher than 180,000 and the average interchange spacing is less than 0.5 mile (0.8 kms),

the recommended speed limit is the 5 mph (8 km/h) multiple closest to the 50th percentile speed.

For other situations in freeways, the recommended speed limit from this approach will be the 5 mph

(8 km/h) multiple closest to the 85th percentile speed.

For road sections in undeveloped areas, the roadside hazard rating

was selected as the safety

surrogate. The recommended speed limits are the following:

• For roadside hazard ratings of 1, 2, or 3, the recommended speed limit is the 5 mph (8 km/h)

multiple closest to the 85th percentile speed.

• For roadside hazard ratings of 4 or 5, the recommended speed limit is the 5 mph (8 km/h) multiple

obtained by rounding down the 85th percentile speed.

• For roadside hazard ratings of 6 or 7, the speed limit is the 5 mph (8 km/h) multiple closest to the

50th percentile speed.

For road sections in developed areas, extent of pedestrian/bicycle activity, presence/usage of on-street

parking, number of trafﬁc signals, and the number of driveways and unsignalized access points were

selected as surrogates. Based on the FHWA-sponsored work on the Beneﬁts of Access Management,

and the opinions of the Expert Panel, the following rules are used to calculate the recommended speed

limit for road sections in developed areas:

If at least one of the following is true, the speed limit is the 5 mph (8 km/h) multiple closest to the 50th

percentile speed:

• Signals per mile > 4.

• Pedestrian/bike activity is High (deﬁnitions are available in the USLIMITS2 User Guide).

• Parking activity is High (deﬁnitions are available in the USLIMITS2 User Guide).

• Driveways per mile > 60.

If Driveways per mile > 40 and ≤60, and Signals per mile > 3, and Area Type is (commercial or residential-

collector) then the speed limit is the 5 mph (8 km/h) multiple obtained by rounding down the 85th.

For all other conditions, the speed limit is the 5 mph (8 km/h) multiple closest to the 85th percentile

speed.

The lower value of the speed limit from Approaches 1 and 2 is reported as the recommended speed

limit in the output window. The expert system does not recommend speed limits higher than the 5 mph

(8 km/h) increment closest to the 85th percentile speed; it also does not recommend speed limits lower

than the 5 mph (8 km/h) increment closest to the 50th percentile speed. The system also provides

warnings if the 85th percentile speed is unusually low or high for a particular road type.

In the output window, the program provides the recommended speed limit and some additional

warnings depending on the site characteristics that were entered by the user. For example, warnings

are provided if the following conditions occur:

• The length of the section is shorter than the minimum section length for the recommended

speed limit.

• The ﬁnal recommended speed limit is higher than the statutory limit for that type of road.

• There is adverse alignment in the section.

• The crash rate is higher than the critical crash rate or at least 30 percent higher than the average

crash rate.

• The rate of injury and fatal crashes is higher than the critical injury rate or at least 30 percent

higher than the average injury rate.

Available at http://Onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/trbnet/acl/NCHRP 0367_FinalReport.pdf.

Appendix F is a sample case study that outlines the data inputs and shows the applicable screens.

USLIMITS2 can be accessed through the Internet at http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/USLIMITS.

Optimal Speeds

The concept of optimal speed limits is one that suggests speed limits that are optimized from a

societal perspective considering the impacts that operating speeds have on the various societal

objectives. It is recognized that individual drivers, in most instances, do not consider the risks imposed

on others by their choice of driving speeds, or on the cumulative effects of their speed choice on the

environment (i.e., fuel consumption, emissions, noise, etc.). The optimal speed for an individual driver

may be different from the optimal speed for a community.

Determining socially optimal speed limits is more complicated than calculating speed limits that have

been optimized for the individual driver. However, this method is congruent with and considers overall

transportation objectives and is thus appealing from a context sensitive solutions (CSS) perspective.

The optimum speed limit is the speed limit that yields the minimum total societal cost, which includes

vehicle operation costs, crash costs, travel time costs, and other social costs. This method of setting

speed limits is rarely used due to the difﬁculty of quantifying key variables.

As with any complex topic, whether a system is truly optimal is dependent on the perspective of the

analyst. The road user, the taxpayer, the local community, and society all have differing views and

values affecting the output of any optimization process. For example, the societal cost of noise caused

by motor vehicle operation does not have a ﬁxed price, but has a monetary value that is mainly

established by means of stated preference. Motorists would likely place a lower value on noise than a

local resident, perhaps leading to different optimal speeds for the same road.

In optimal speed limit setting, a total cost model is developed to express cost per mile of travel as a

function of the posted speed limit. The total cost includes crash cost, travel time cost, fuel consumption

cost, and vehicle emissions cost. Each of these costs varies with the posted speed limit, and cost

curves are obtained based on the relationship between costs and speeds. The optimal speed limit is

then determined as the minimum point on the total cost curve. This minimum total cost indicates the

minimum social cost of transportation based on a particular set of conditions.

In general, the road user perspective and the taxpayer perspective result in higher speed limits, while

the residential perspective results in the lowest. In some cases, particularly for motorways (freeways),

variation in the total costs of travel is found to be very small for speeds in the range of 45 to 70 mph

(70 to 110 km/h), making the choice of an optimal speed limit in this range almost an individual

agency preference.

Optimal speed limits have been explored for use on shared-use roadways in New Jersey.

This

method of setting speed limits seems particularly useful in situations where pedestrians, cyclists, and

motorized trafﬁc share the road, and motorists may not be fully aware of the externalities of their

speed on other road users—in particular, the harm borne by pedestrians and cyclists when struck by

a motor vehicle moving at a rapid speed. The Yang model for calculating the optimal speed limit is

shown in Figure 2.

In addition to the difﬁculty of achieving consensus on the costs, another characteristic of the optimal

speed methodology is that proposed speed limits may not be immediately apparent to road users,

they may not be congruent with the design of the road, and ultimately may result in an inordinate

percentage of drivers exceeding the speed limit.

The optimal speed limit methodology has also been considered as an appropriate method of setting

seasonal speed limits in jurisdictions with snow. The calculation showed that it is possible to apply the

optimal speed limits to all road and trafﬁc conditions, except for urban expressways for which the

optimal speed limit obtained was too low to be viable.

Injury Minimization

The cornerstone of the injury minimization approach to setting speed limits is the tolerance of the human

body to injury during a crash. It is based solely on a road safety platform and takes the position that it is

unethical to create a situation where fatalities are a likely outcome of a crash in order to reduce delay,

fuel consumption, or other societal objectives.

The principal challenge in an injury minimization approach to speed limits is to manage crash energy so

that no user is exposed to impact forces capable of causing death or serious injury. Thus vehicles cannot

legally travel at speeds where, in the event of a crash, the release of kinetic energy can produce a

serious or fatal injury.

Under the current road system and vehicle ﬂeet, this would limit speeds to those

shown in Table 4.

Figure 2. Optimal Speed Limit Process.

*Vehicle-Pedestrian/Bicycle

Injury Severity

Model for

Veh.-Ped./Bic.*

Injury Severity for

Veh.-Ped./Bic.

Crash Frequency

Model for

Veh.-Ped./Bic.

Crash Frequency

for Veh.-Ped./Bic.

Injury Severity

Model for

Veh.-Veh.

Injury Severity

for Veh.-Veh.

Crash Frequency

Model for

Veh.-Veh.

Crash Frequency

for Veh.-Veh.

Crash Cost for

Veh.-Ped./Bic.

Crash Cost

for Veh.-Veh.

Total Crash Cost

Total Cost

CORSIM Simulation

Vehicle

Travel Time

Fuel

Consumption

Vehicle

Emissions

Travel Time

Cost

Fuel

Cost

Emissions

Cost

Optimal Speed Limit

Table 4. Speed Limits for Injury Minimization (Adapted from Reference 28)

Road type Speed Limit, mph (km/h)

Roads with a mix of motorized and unprotected road users

(i.e., pedestrians and cyclists)

20 (30)

Roads with uncontrolled access where side impact crashes can result 30 (50)

Undivided roads where head-on crashes can result 45 (70)

Controlled access facilities with a physical median separation, where

at-grade access and non-motorized road users are prohibited

>60 (>100)

A safe system strategy does not imply that crashes are caused solely (or even mainly) by speed

and it recognizes that any given crash event is likely to be the result of an interplay of many factors.

Accordingly, a safe system approach requires that all aspects of the system work together for the safest

possible outcome, with speed representing but one component, albeit a critical one.

The injury minimization approach to speed limit setting results in speed limits that are lower than

those traditionally used in North America (which are generally set by engineering and expert system

methods). Thus implementing an injury minimization approach to speed limits would be problematic.

The road authority cannot simply lower the speed limit and expect immediate or substantial

compliance. Drivers are unlikely to fully respond except in the face of almost constant enforcement.

As mentioned throughout this report, speed limits need to be credible—they must generally reﬂect driver

expectancies regarding travel speed. So while obtaining safe travel speeds is the prime objective of the

injury minimization approach (as well as the major challenge), it should be noted that many jurisdictions

need to understand they are starting from a point where driver expectancies result in operating speeds

that are higher than the target speeds of an injury minimization approach.

In order to achieve safe speeds and make the associated speed limits credible for the driving

population, road authorities need to:

• Make the road and its environment more “self-explaining” through trafﬁc control devices, publicity

and education campaigns, and reconstruction where required; and

• Build a case over time for a new paradigm as to what is regarded and legislated as a safe speed

limit for the street network.

A summary of each method for setting speed limits and the advantages and disadvantages of each

are shown in Table 5.

Table 5. Approaches to Setting Speed Limits

Approach Jurisdictions Basic Premise Data Required Advantages Disadvantages

Engineering

(Operating

Speed)

United States The speed limit is

based on the 85th

percentile speed,

and may be slightly

adjusted based on

road and trafﬁc

conditions and crash

history.

The existing speed

proﬁle as well as

data on accesses,

pedestrian/bicycle

trafﬁc, curbside

parking, safety

performance, etc.

Using the 85th

percentile speed

ensures that the

speed limit does

not place an

undue burden on

enforcement, and

provides residents

and businesses with

a valid indication of

actual travel speeds.

Drivers may not be

adequate judges

of the externalities

of their actions, and

may not be able

to self-select the

most appropriate

travel speed. Speed

limits are often set

lower than the 85th

percentile speed.

Engineering

(Road Risk)

Canada,

New Zealand

The speed limit

is based on the

function of the road

and/or the adjacent

land use and then

adjusted based on

road and trafﬁc

conditions and crash

history.

Functional

classiﬁcation of the

road, setting (urban/

rural), surrounding

land uses, access,

design features of

the road.

The speed limit and

the function of the

road are aligned.

The function of the

road also dictates

many of the design

elements of the

road, so this method

aligns the speed

limits with the design

of the road.

The road risk

methods may result

in speed limits that

are well below the

85th percentile

speeds, resulting in

an increased burden

on enforcement if

remedial measures

are not employed

(i.e., trafﬁc calming,

etc.).

Expert

System

United

States,

Australia

Speed limits are

set by a computer

program that

uses knowledge

and inference

procedures that

simulate the

judgment and

behavior of speed

limit experts.

Data needs depend

on the system, but

generally expert

systems require the

same data as used

in the engineering

approaches.

A systematic and

consistent method

of examining and

weighing factors

other than vehicle

operating speeds

in determining

an appropriate

speed limit. It is

reproducible and

provides consistency

in setting speed limits

within a jurisdiction.

Practitioners may

need to rely on

output from the

expert system

without applying a

critical review of the

results.

Optimal

Speed Limits

--- The selected speed

limit minimizes

the total societal

costs of transport

when considering

travel time, vehicle

operating costs,

road crashes, trafﬁc

noise, air pollution,

etc.

Cost models and

input data to

account for air

pollution, crashes,

delay, etc.

Provides a balanced

approach to setting

speed limits that

is considerate of

many (if not all)

of the impacts

that speed has on

society. Allows for

the consideration

of pedestrian and

cyclist trafﬁc in

setting speed limits.

May be particularly

useful in a context

sensitive situation.

Data collection

and prediction

models may be

difﬁcult to develop

and are subject to

controversy among

professionals.

Resulting speed

limits may not be

immediately obvious

to the user.

Injury

Minimization/

Safe System

Sweden,

Netherlands

Speed limits are set

according to the

crash types that

are likely to occur,

the impact forces

that result, and

the tolerance of

the human body

to withstand these

forces.

Crash types and

patterns for different

road types, and

survivability rates for

different operating

speeds.

There is a sound

scientiﬁc link

between speed limits

and serious crash

prevention. Places a

high priority on road

safety.

This method is

based solely on a

road safety premise

and may not be

accepted as

appropriate in some

jurisdictions.

Minimum Length of Speed Zones

The length of any section or zone set for a particular speed is typically as long as possible and still

consistent with the underlying methodology. Applying minimum road lengths aims to prevent having

frequent changes in speed limit along a road with varying characteristics. This section discusses the

approaches several jurisdictions take in determining speed zone length.

Massachusetts and Ohio both recommend that the minimum length of a new zone, not contiguous to

an existing speed zone, be greater than or equal to 0.5 miles (0.8 kms) in length.

18,29

Extensions of existing

warranted zones may be shorter. In rural areas of Massachusetts, each zone in a series of graduated

speed zones normally is at least 0.2 miles (0.3 kms) in length, and, if the speed limit is reduced from one

zone to the next by 15 mph (25 km/h) or greater, a REDUCED SPEED AHEAD sign is erected in advance

of the lower limit in order to inform motorists to adjust their speeds accordingly.

The State of Florida has no required minimum length for any speed zone, rather it is suggested that

engineering judgment be applied. With respect to graduated speed limits, the Florida guidelines

indicate that the buffer speed zones should not be so short that they require a driver to apply his/her

brakes to comply with the posted speed limit.

Graduated or buffer zones may be used on approaches to cities and towns to accomplish a gradual

reduction of highway speeds to the speed posted at the city limits. The change in speed between two

adjacent zones should not normally be greater than 15 mph (24 km/h), because the change in speed

would be too abrupt for driver observance. If adjacent 85th percentile speeds show an abrupt change

of more than 15 mph (24 km/h), Texas requires graduated zones, and recommends that a transition

zone of approximately 0.2 miles (0.3 kms) or more in length should be used.

States may specify the minimum incremental length of a speed zone. For example, Massachusetts

requires all zones to be computed to the nearest tenth of a mile (0.16 kms).

In Texas, school zones are exceptions and may be as short as reasonable in urban areas, depending on

approach speeds. School zones in urban areas where speeds are 30 mph (50 km/h) or less may have

school zones as short as 200 to 300 feet (60 to 90 meters).

Alaska’s general rule for speed zone length is that the minimum length of a speed zone is the distance

traveled in 25 seconds at the posted limit. While speed limit changes in Alaska are permitted in

increments of 5, 10, or 15 mph (8, 16, or 24 km/h), it is preferable to use 10 or 15 mph (16 or 24 km/h)

changes with relatively long zones rather than multiple short zones with 5 mph (8 km/h) increments.

When multiple speed studies made on a continuous segment of road result in 85th percentile speeds

within 5 mph (8 km/h) of each other, the results are typically averaged to minimize the number of speed

limit changes. It may be helpful to plot a speed proﬁle along a road using the 85th percentile speeds

from the spot speed checks. Different combinations of speed zone lengths and speed limit change

increments may then be compared to see which combination minimizes the number of speed limit

changes while still conforming as closely as practical to spot speeds.

The Canadian guidelines for setting speed limits recommend a minimum length of speed zone of 0.6 miles

(one kilometer) where the speed limit is 45 mph (70 km/h) or higher. Shorter lengths may be used at slower

speeds, but speed zone lengths of less than one-third of a mile (500 meters) should be avoided.

Practice in Australia and New Zealand is to vary the minimum length of a speed zone with the proposed

speed limit. To provide reasonable consistency while avoiding excessive variations in speed limits, a

balance needs to be achieved between:

• Roadside development;

• Road environment; and

• The number of changes of speed limit.

The desirable minimum typical lengths, shown in Table 6, have been developed with these needs in mind.

Table 6. Minimum Lengths of Speed Zones in New Zealand

Speed Limit, mph (km/h) Minimum Length of Zone, miles (km)

25 (40) 0.1 (0.2)

30 (50)* Not applicable**

30, 35 (50, 60) 0.3 (0.5)

45, 50, 55 (70, 80, 90) 1.25 (2.0)

60 (100) 2.0 (3.0)

70 (110) 6.0 (10.0)

*This is the urban default limit.

**If urban default limit is used the minimum length of the zone is not used in this procedure.

The level of development should be reasonably consistent along the entire length of a speed limit, especially

in areas with sparse development. For example, it is not appropriate to install a 0.3 mile (500 m long),

45 mph (70 km/h) speed restriction in a rural area if the only development is located in a 300-foot (100 m)

section of road in the middle of the proposed speed limit. In these circumstances, road users see no

reason for the change in speed limit, compliance will be poor, variations in operating speeds will increase,

and judgments of speed and distance become more difﬁcult for all road users. Such conditions will usually

contribute to a reduction in safety, especially for pedestrians and cyclists.

Table 7. Minimum Length of Road for a Speed Limit

Speed Limit,

mph (km/h) Nature of Road and Adjacent Speed Limits

Minimum Length,

miles (kms)

30 (50) Urban street, adjacent speed limits 45 mph (70 km/h) or less.

Urban fringe, adjacent speed limits greater than 45 mph

(70 km/h).

0.3 (0.5)

0.6 (1.0)

35 (60) Urban arterial route, adjacent speed limits 50 mph (80 km/h)

or less.

Other situations.

0.6 (1.0)

0.3 (0.5)

45 (70) Partly built-up, adjacent speed limits 50 mph (80 km/h) or less.

Other situations.

0.6 (1.0)

0.3 (0.5)

50 (80) Arterial route, adjacent speed limits 45 mph (70 km/h) or less.

Other situations.

0.6 (1.0)

0.5 (0.8)

60 (100) All situations. 1.2 (2.0)

All boundary points between speed limits must be at, or close to, a point of signiﬁcant change in the

roadside development or the road environment to emphasize the change in speed limit. Appropriate

locations include a marked change in the level or type of roadside development, a change in the road

geometry, a bridge, a threshold or other feature that affects speed (e.g., a roundabout or a curve).

A threshold treatment may be necessary to reinforce a change in the speed limit where there is no

obvious change in the road environment.

Special Situations

Several situations not covered earlier in this document are covered in this section. Certain geometric

conditions, school zones, and work zones are examples of situations that may require considerations in

addition to the concepts already presented.

Advisory Speeds

Advisory speeds are used on short sections of road where the physical conditions of the roadway restrict

safe operating speed to something lower than the maximum legal speed (e.g., a horizontal curve).

Advisory speeds are typically used because the feature that dictates the lower speed is isolated, and

it is not feasible or desirable to adjust the legal speed for a short section of road. The posted regulatory

speed limit is not lowered to conform to the advisory speed. Similarly, an advisory speed within a

regulatory speed zone is not posted if the advisory speed is higher than the posted speed limit.

In erecting advisory speed signs, care should be taken not to install a regulatory speed limit sign so

near the advisory speed sign that drivers may become confused by two different speed values. More

importantly, regulatory speed signs should not be located between an advisory speed sign and the

location to which the advisory speed applies.

The separation between signs should be in accordance

with the MUTCD.

The most common use of advisory speeds is on horizontal curves. More information on advisory speeds

can be found in the ITE Informational Report Methodologies for the Determination of Advisory Speeds

and the FHWA handbook Procedures for Setting Advisory Speeds on Curves.

38, 49

Nighttime Speed Limits

Speeds are normally posted on the basis of daylight speed values determined under good weather

conditions. It is permissible, however, for different day and night speeds to be posted for speed zones

where it can be shown to be necessary by an engineering study.

Nighttime speed limits generally begin 30 minutes after sunset and end 30 minutes before sunrise,

although this may vary by jurisdiction. Nighttime speed limits are generally established on roads where

safety problems require a speed lower than what is prescribed by the daytime limit, and the operating

speed that is self-selected by drivers. Examples of roads that might require nighttime speed limits are

non-illuminated roads with relatively high operating speeds and an overrepresentation of crashes during

“dark” environmental conditions, or roads crossing the routes and movement patterns of large-sized,

nocturnal wildlife.

Where different speed limits are prescribed for day and night, both limits shall be posted. A Night Speed

Limit sign (R2-3)* may be combined with or installed below the standard Speed Limit (R2-1) sign.

School Zone Speed Limits

Reduced speed limits should be considered for school zones during the hours when children are going

to and from school. Usually such school speed zones are only considered for schools located adjacent

to highways or visible from highways. However, school-age pedestrian activity should be the primary

basis for implementing reduced school zone speed limits. This includes irregular trafﬁc and pedestrian

movements that may result from children being dropped off and picked up from school.

A review of U.S. State school zone speed limits showed that most States use a school zone speed limit

of 15 to 25 mph (25 to 40 km/h) in urban and suburban areas, with 20 mph (30 km/h) being the most

common.

VicRoads Australia proposes the following:

• Outside schools on 30 mph (50 km/h) roads: A permanent 25 mph (40 km/h) speed limit. In some

special cases, such as on high trafﬁc volume streets, a time-based 25 mph (40 km/h) limit may be

applied.

• Outside schools on 35 and 45 mph (60 and 70 km/h) roads: A time-based 25 mph (40 km/h) speed

limit that is in effect during school entry and exit times on school days.

• Outside schools on 50, 55 and 60 mph (80, 90 and 100 km/h) roads: A time-based 35 mph

(60 km/h) speed limit that is in effect during school entry and exit times on school days.

Since school zone speed limits are active only for certain times of the day, it is desirable that the school

zone speed limit be no more than 12 mph (20 km/h) below the speed limit on the approaches. This

removes the requirement for a MAXIMUM SPEED AHEAD sign (which would only be valid when the

SCHOOL ZONE MAXIMUM SPEED sign is activated).

Numbers in parentheses refer to the corresponding sign number in the MUTCD.

Ultimately, school zone speed limits, like other speed limits, ought to be based on an engineering study

and trafﬁc investigation to determine whether they are warranted, as well as an appropriate reduced

speed limit for the study area. The investigation normally considers factors such as existing trafﬁc control,

whether school crosswalks are present, the type and volume of vehicular trafﬁc, the ages and volume

of school children likely to be present, and the location of children in relation to motorized trafﬁc. The

most common factors considered in the engineering study are:

• Children walking along or crossing the roadway;

• Fencing around school property;

• Number and size of gaps in trafﬁc for school-age pedestrians to cross the street;

• Presence of crossing guards;

• Average pedestrian demand per appropriate gap;

• Student enrollment at the school;

• Location of school property (i.e., abutting the road allowance or visible from street); and

• Presence of sidewalks.

A School Speed Limit assembly or a School Speed Limit (S5-1) sign shall be used to indicate the speed

limit where a reduced speed zone for a school area has been established (in accordance with law

based upon an engineering study) or where a speed limit is speciﬁed for such areas by statute.

The

School Speed Limit assembly or School Speed Limit sign shall be placed at, or as near as practical,

the point where the reduced speed zone begins. According to the MUTCD, the reduced speed zone

should begin either at a point 200 ft (120 m) in advance of the school grounds, a school crossing, or

other school-related activities. This distance should be increased if the reduced school speed limit is

30 mph (50 km/h) or more below the speed limit on the approach.

Local regulations may provide

more stringent guidance, requiring greater distances than speciﬁed above.

The School Speed Limit assembly shall be either a ﬁxed-message sign assembly or a changeable message

sign. The ﬁxed-message School Speed Limit assembly shall consist of a top plaque (S4-3P) with the legend

SCHOOL, a Speed Limit (R2-1) sign, and a bottom plaque (S4-1P, S4-2P, S4-4P, or S4-6P) indicating the

speciﬁc periods of the day and/or days of the week that the school speed limit is in effect.

A Reduced School Speed Limit Ahead (S4-5, S4-5a) sign is normally used to inform road users of a

school zone speed limit where the speed limit is 10 mph (15 km/h) or more below the speed limit on the

approach road, or where engineering judgment indicates that advance notice is appropriate. If used,

the advance warning assembly is typically installed not less than 150 ft (45 m) nor more than 700 ft

(210 m) in advance of the school grounds or school crossings.

The end of an authorized and posted school speed zone shall be marked with an End School Speed

Limit (S5-3) sign and may be marked with a standard Speed Limit sign showing the speed limit for the

section of highway that follows.

Work Zone Regulatory Speeds

Trafﬁc control in work sites is designed on the assumption that drivers will only reduce their speeds if they

clearly perceive a need to do so; therefore, reduced speed zoning ought to be avoided as much as

practicable. Speed Limit signs are erected only for the limits of the section of roadway where speed

reduction is necessary for the safe operation of trafﬁc and protection of construction personnel. The

reduced speed limits are effective only within the limits where signs are erected. If reduced speed limits

are not necessary for the safe operation of trafﬁc during certain construction operations or those days

and hours when the contractor is not working, the regulatory construction Speed Limit signs are typically

made inoperative. In selecting the speeds to be posted, consideration is given to safe stopping sight

distances, construction equipment crossings, the nature of the construction project, and any other

factors which affect the safety of the traveling public and construction workers.

The regulatory Speed Limit sign (R2-1) shall be used.

Truck Speed Limits

Speeds are normally posted on the basis of all motorized trafﬁc. It is permissible, and in some cases

desirable, for trucks and other heavy commercial vehicles to have different (i.e., lower) maximum

speeds than passenger cars. The need for a lower speed limit for trucks is primarily demonstrated as

necessary by an engineering study considering factors such as magnitude and length of roadway

grades, horizontal curvature, etc. Where different speed limits are prescribed for trucks and passenger

cars, both limits shall be posted. A Truck Speed Limit sign (R2-2) may be combined with or installed

below the standard Speed Limit (R2-1) sign.

The safety effectiveness of differential speed limits for trucks is inconclusive.

Minimum Speed Limits

Minimum speed limits are generally justiﬁed when studies show that slow-moving vehicles on any part

of a highway consistently impede the normal and reasonable movement of trafﬁc to such an extent

that they contribute to unnecessary lane changing or passing maneuvers. The maximum speed

limits and the need for minimum speed limits must be determined from the same speed check data.

Whenever minimum speed zones are used, the minimum posted speed should be within 5 mph

(8 km/h) of the 15th percentile value.

The Minimum Speed Limit (R2-4) sign may be installed below

a Speed Limit (R2-1) sign to indicate the minimum legal speed. If desired, these two signs may be

combined on one sign panel (R2-4a).

Variable Speed Limits

Variable speed limits are speed limits that change, using dynamic sign messages, based on road, trafﬁc,

and weather conditions. Variable speed limits offer considerable promise in restoring the credibility

of speed limits and improving safety by restricting speeds during adverse conditions. Variable speed

limit systems may use sensors to monitor prevailing trafﬁc and/or weather conditions, and input from

transportation professionals and law enforcement in posting appropriate enforceable speed limits on

dynamic message signs.

The most common conditions that warrant variable speed limits are trafﬁc congestion, road

construction, incident management, fog, snow, ice, and other weather-related situations.

Variable speed limits are being successfully used in Europe, and are used or are being tested by several

State departments of transportation such as Colorado, New Jersey, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming.

The speed limit that is to be posted depends on the purpose for installing the variable speed limit. In

cases where congestion or post-incident management are the impetus for use, the recommended

speed limit for the condition is generally a function of the average speed of trafﬁc, and an attempt

to minimize speed differentials in the trafﬁc stream. Weather-related variable speed limits often are

determined by an algorithm that uses data gathered from road weather monitoring stations.

Transition Zone Speed Limits

Transition zone speed limits are generally considered when there is a speed reduction of more than 25 mph

(40 km/h) between adjacent zones, and may be considered at other locations if a ﬁeld assessment has

determined that a transition zone speed limit may improve safety or trafﬁc operations. The following

factors may be considered in determining the need for a transition zone speed limit:

• Roadway operating speeds in advance of speed reduction.

• Existing operational/safety issues (i.e., due to speed differential between vehicles, speed

exceeding that which is considered suitable for the roadway environment).

• History of overly aggressive braking at the entrance to the reduced speed limit area.

• Low speed limit compliance in the lower speed limit area.

• Expected compliance with a transition speed zone (i.e., will motorists perceive it to be justiﬁed by

the surrounding roadway environment?).

In situations where rural roads approach and continue through urban areas and villages, there is a

need for a commensurate reduction in the speed limit that reﬂects the change in the roadway and the

roadside character. In many instances these speed transitions can be sizable, and the road authority

needs to post an intermediate or transition zone speed limit to assist drivers in slowing down.

Transition zone speed limits are typically set to divide the overall speed reduction approximately in half.

For instance, a speed limit decrease from 60 mph (100 km/h) to 30 mph (50 km/h) might use a transition

speed limit of 45 mph (70 km/h) or 50 mph (80 km/h).

The minimum transition speed zone length usually allows for the placement of REDUCED SPEED AHEAD

signs and a sufﬁcient speed zone length to achieve compliance.

An excellent source of information on high-to-low speed transition zones that includes speed limits and

other measures is available from the National Cooperative Highway Research Program.

Seasonal or Holiday Speed Limits

A seasonal or holiday speed limit applies for a speciﬁed period or periods during a year, generally at

locations with signiﬁcantly different levels of roadside activity at different times—for example, a beach

resort that is popular in summer, but only sparsely populated for the remainder of the year. Typically,

when the level of activity is at its highest, a relatively low speed limit would be appropriate, while the

level of activity would justify the relatively high speed limit otherwise.

Reevaluation

After a speed limit is established, changes in the roadway geometry, land uses, or other circumstances

could prompt a need for further study to determine if the limit needs to be raised or lowered. The MUTCD

recommends that engineering studies be conducted to reevaluate non-statutory speed limits on roads

that have undergone signiﬁcant changes since the last review, such as the addition or elimination of

parking or driveways, changes in the number of travel lanes, changes in the conﬁguration of bicycle

lanes, changes in trafﬁc control signal coordination, or signiﬁcant changes in trafﬁc volumes.

ITE provides

similar guidance regarding the importance of revisiting sites to conduct speed studies every ﬁve years or

when changes are made to roadways to ensure that the speed limits are still appropriate.

In Texas, periodic rechecks of all zones are desirable at intervals of about three to ﬁve years in urban

areas regardless of roadway improvements, roadside developments, or increases in trafﬁc volumes. Trial

runs or rechecks of every third speed check station may be made. In rural areas, rechecks are desirable

at intervals of 5 to 10 years. In many instances, trial runs may be sufﬁcient. If the speed checks or trial

runs indicate a need for revision of the zone, rechecks of speeds should be made at all speed check

stations for that particular section and a revised strip map made and submitted.

Massachusetts recommends that consideration be given to revising numerical limits that vary by 7 mph

(11 km/h) from the 85th percentile speed when rechecks are performed. They also feel it is beneﬁcial to

make a comparison of the crash experience for zones that have been in effect for a year or more.

Speed Limit Sign Design and Placement

Speed Limit signs must be correctly posted to ensure a speed limit is enforceable and to encourage

compliance. Typical maximum Speed Limit signs are shown in Figure 3. In North America, the latest

editions of the MUTCD and Standard Highway Signs

should be referenced when developing signing

for speed zones. The MUTCD contains Standards, Guidance, and Options for the signing, and general

guidelines to follow for the design and layout of the signs are contained in Standard Highway Signs. The

general guidelines show different standard sizes depending on the type of highway or facility where the

sign is intended to be.

In general, Standard Highway Signs states that signs for regulatory speed zones shall be of the

appropriate design—including size, text, and color.

The MUTCD states that the speed limits shown shall

be in multiples of 5 mph (8 km/h).

Section 2A of the MUTCD discusses standardization of location, mounting height, lateral offset,

orientation, posts, and mountings. Speed Limit (R2-1) signs, indicating speed limits for which posting

is required by law, shall be located at the points of change from one speed limit to another. At the

end of the section to which a speed limit applies, a Speed Limit sign showing the next speed limit shall

be installed. Additional Speed Limit signs shall be installed beyond major intersections, downstream

of egresses from major trafﬁc generators, and at other locations where it is necessary to remind road

users of the speed limit that is applicable. Speed Limit signs indicating the statutory speed limits shall be

installed at entrances to the State and at jurisdictional boundaries of metropolitan areas.

In rural areas,

on two-lane highways, Washington State recommends locating Speed Limit signs at 10 to 20 mile

(16 to 32 km) intervals.

United States Canada Europe/Australia /United Kingdom

Figure 3. International Speed Limit Signs.

The preferred location for the beginning and ending points of speed zones is where there are deﬁnite

changes in the character of the roadside development, like rural and urban boundaries. It is often

desirable to begin and end a speed zone to encompass an important road intersection or driveway of

a major generator like schools or residential developments. It is important to note the location of other

trafﬁc control devices in the segment and coordinate Speed Limit signs with them effectively.

For all highways in Washington State, signs for both directions of travel should be located opposite one

another at speed zone boundaries. Furthermore, signs should be installed on both sides of the traveled

way on multi-lane divided highways. If existing highway features prohibit opposite installations, the signs

may be installed a maximum distance of 300 feet

(100 meters) apart, or offset up to 150 feet (50

meters) in either direction from the speed zone

boundary. If these distance parameters cannot

be met, the speed zone boundary may need to

be adjusted to allow for sign installation.

Figure 4 illustrates the typical location and

frequency of signs for regulatory speed zones

established by the Texas DOT. Distances shown

between Speed Limit signs are minimums and

may be greater, depending on the results of

speed checks.

The following six States offer guidance

concerning repetition of Speed Limit signs:

• Alaska: Intermediate Speed Limit signs

should be placed at least once every

two minutes of travel time on urban

roads, and no more than ten minutes

apart on rural roads (except on low

volume rural roads where the signs may

be up to 30 minutes apart).

• Arizona: Where the speed limit is less than

55 mph (90 km/h), the recommended

maximum spacing is given by the formula

S = V/6, where S is the maximum distance

between Speed Limit signs in miles and V

is the speed limit in miles per hour. In rural

areas where the speed limit is 55 mph

(90 km/h) or greater, the formula is

modiﬁed to S = V/5.

• California: On freeways with limits of 65

or 70 mph (105 or 110 km/h), spacing is to

be no more than 25 miles (37 km) apart.

Where the freeway speed limit is reduced

to 55 mph (90 km/h), Speed Limit signs are

to be no more than 3 mi (5 km) apart. On

conventional roads, the maximum spacing

between Speed Limit signs is no more than

5 to 10 miles (8 to 16 km).

Figure 4. Example Regulatory Speed Zone Application

Showing Spacing of Signs Transitioning from Rural District

to Urban District and Within the Urban District. (Source:

Adapted from the Texas Department of Transportation.

)

• Minnesota: Speed Limit signs are to be repeated at intervals of 60 seconds of travel at the posted

speed where speed is reduced. The repetition may be less in dense urban areas. The maximum

spacing between Speed Limit signs in rural areas is 10 miles (16 km).

• New York: Where a roadway speed limit is restricted relative to the State speed limit, a second

Speed Limit sign is placed within 1100 ft (336 m) of the ﬁrst. Subsequent Speed Limit signs are to be

no further apart than 100 times the posted speed limit (e.g., for a restricted speed of 35 mph

(60 km/h) the maximum separation is 3500 ft (1068 m)).

• Pennsylvania: Where special speed limits are in effect, the spacing between Speed Limit signs

must be no more than 0.5 miles.

International practices include:

• United Kingdom and Ireland: Place Speed Limit signs at approximately half-mile intervals where

speed is restricted to less than the national speed limit for that class of road.

• British Columbia, Canada: On long, uninterrupted sections of rural highways, it is recommended

that Speed Limit signs be repeated at least every 9 to 12 miles (15 to 20 km). Additionally, a

repeater Speed Limit sign should be placed 1000 to 2000 ft (300 to 600 m) downstream of

wherever the speed limit changes.

Speed Feedback Signs

A Speed Feedback sign (also called a driver feedback sign, or variable message sign) is an interactive

sign, generally constructed of a series of light emitting diodes (LEDs), that displays actual vehicle speed

to drivers as they approach the sign (see Figure 5). The purpose of this sign is to reduce vehicle speeds

by making drivers aware of their

speed relative to the posted speed

limit.

Studies have found that Speed

Feedback signs can be effective in

reducing mean and 85th percentile

speeds in a variety of situations.

If used, the changeable message

sign legend should be “YOUR SPEED

XX MPH” or similar wording. The

legend should be yellow on a black

background or the reverse of these

colors. Installation of a Speed Feedback

sign is optional, but if used it should be

installed in conjunction with a Speed

Limit sign.

Speed Feedback signs are particularly

useful at speed reductions where drivers

have been traveling for some time at a

higher speed. The phenomenon known

as “speed adaptation” causes drivers

Figure 5. Speed Feedback Sign. (Source: Richard Drdul)

to underestimate their actual operating speeds in these instances, and the Speed Feedback sign can

assist them in achieving the necessary speed reduction.

Speed Feedback signs may be permanent or temporary installations. However, permanent installations

are usually restricted to selected locations since a proliferation of Speed Feedback signs could lessen

the effectiveness of the signs when they are needed most.

Speed Feedback signs typically operate as follows:

• A blank display is shown when no vehicles are approaching the sign.

• An approaching vehicle’s speed is displayed as a solid numeral (non-ﬂashing numeral) if the

approach speed is at or below the posted speed limit.

• The approach speed is shown as a ﬂashing numeral if the approach speed exceeds the posted

speed limit by 3 mph (5 km/h) or more.

• To discourage racing, the sign must be programmed to not display speeds that are well in excess

of the posted speed limit. In these instances, the sign is most often blank. The maximum speed

that a Driver Feedback sign may display is outlined in the table below:

Table 8. Maximum Speeds to Trigger a Speed Feedback Sign

Posted Speed Limit, mph (km/h) Maximum Speed Display Threshold, mph (km/h)

20 (30) or less 30 (50)

25 (40) 35 (60)

30 (50) 50 (80)

35 (60) 55 (90)

45 (70) 70 (110)

50 (80) 75 (120)

55 (90) or more 80 (130)

Source: Alberta Transportation

Speed Feedback signs are most effective when combined with enforcement activities.

Speed Study Data Collection

Data collection is an integral part of setting speed limits. Adequate planning and coordination must

occur to ensure the data collection process is as complete, efﬁcient, and effective as possible. This

section describes typical activities that highway agencies will undergo to plan and implement a

data collection effort. Several types of data, including speed, crash, and roadway environment

information, are vital to this process. The ITE Manual of Transportation Engineering Studies

provides

guidance in this regard.

The data collection requirements depend on the methodology selected by a jurisdiction in setting

posted speed limits. The Safe Systems approach, for instance, requires very little data collection since it

is based on very basic road design parameters (e.g., number and frequency of accesses, presence of

a raised median, etc.) and general trafﬁc characteristics (e.g., type and frequency of road users). The

data collection effort is relatively minor.

The Optimal Speed Limit methodology has a more intensive data collection effort. While the data

required for the particular roadway under study is generally manageable, there is a large volume of

local data that is required to calibrate the prediction equations and models that are used assessing the

societal impacts of the different speed limit alternatives. A discussion concerning the models and their

calibration is beyond the scope of this document. Project-speciﬁc data that is required as input to these

models is detailed in the following subsections of this chapter.

The remainder of this chapter describes the collection process for data that is most often used in the

engineering and expert systems methodologies. The exact data needs are determined by the method

employed by the road authority—more or less data than described herein may be required.

Data Collection Planning and Coordination

Speed zoning studies are conducted to evaluate safety issues and identify appropriate speed limits

for speciﬁc roadway segments. In addition to actual travel speeds, there are several other types of

information that may be appropriate input to the process of setting speed limits. Therefore, coordination

within an agency performing the study and with other agencies that may have additional information

may be needed to ensure all the appropriate inputs are considered. Crash data, recent and planned

roadway or adjacent land use changes, and even anecdotal information can be obtained from safety,

planning, enforcement, and other stakeholders. The data collected will be used to examine the speeds

of free-ﬂowing trafﬁc, as well as information on roadway geometry, crash characteristics, land use, and

access. The studies provide details regarding some or all of the following:

• Average annual and hourly vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian trafﬁc volume.

• Trafﬁc speeds for each ﬂow direction by hour of day.

• Road design elements that may be crash factors, such as horizontal and vertical road curvature,

access points, drainage, pavement condition, sight distance restrictions, roadside objects,

signage, markings and delineation, etc.

• Road lighting and trafﬁc control devices, including signals, signal timing, and STOP signs.

• Summary of crashes and crash causes over a multiyear period.

• Plans for expected new development, changes in the type of development, or major closing of

existing development that may change the trafﬁc ﬂow characteristics in the future.

• Recommendations for the speed limit.

When planning the data collection activity, it is important to document and control any aspect of

the collection that might have an impact on the measured speed. Measurable physical features,

roadway surface characteristics and conditions, and trafﬁc characteristics and control are items to be

inventoried. If conditions are not relatively consistent throughout the zone under study, consideration

can be given to splitting the study area into shorter sections. For example, if the road transitions from a

2-lane to a 4-lane divided facility, or from on-street parking to no parking, or from rural agricultural land

use to a commercial or residential land use, then speed samples are typically taken in each section.

Factors such as roadway lighting and delineation are reﬂective of road geometry and land use, but are

not necessarily factors that warrant splitting a study area into shorter sections.

Variables considered for documentation of the site include (but may not be limited to):

• Location and roadway conﬁguration.

• Lanes, delineation, shoulders, medians, grade separation, roadside objects, driveways or

entrances, curvature or grades, lighting, etc.

• Posted speed limit.

• Weather (limiting measurements to fair weather is preferable).

• Direction.

• Restricted sight distance.

• Pedestrian activity.

• Cyclist activity.

• Date and time (in a common format among collections).

• Trafﬁc control devices (regulatory and warning).

• Type and condition of pavement surfaces.

• Businesses, advertising, or residential developments.

• Proximate schools and school routes.

• Surrounding area changes in travel habits or inﬂuences.

• Vegetation changes.

In most instances, the variables collected by a particular road authority are dependent on the

methodology used in that jurisdiction to set speed limits, the expected effect of the variable on

operating speeds, and available resources.

When undertaking data collection efforts, it is important to understand if there are activities or

conditions outside of the study area that may affect measurements, including construction or

maintenance activities in the area, road closures, detours, the presence of enforcement, and whether

proximate schools are in session.

Study Area

A speed zone study can be initiated in response to a public request for a speed limit review, as a result

of network screening (for crash prone locations), or for any other reason. In all situations, a general study

area is identiﬁed through the initial request or data analysis. The study area can then be divided into

homogeneous sections for analysis. A homogeneous section is one where:

• The roadside development is consistent (residential vs. commercial; type and frequency of

businesses and driveways, etc.); and

• The roadway features are consistent (lane widths, medians, shoulders, surface roughness,

curvature, intersection spacing, etc.).

The data collection area will typically extend 500 feet beyond each end of the proposed speed zone

in order to include nearby features. These features will help to determine the homogeneity of the

proposed speed zone, and whether the study area limits should be extended. It may be helpful to take

photographs of features in the intended speed zone and the extended study area, as they may be

helpful in describing any concerns within the study area.

A scaled area map, sketch, or aerial view is usually developed to show the study area and the ﬁeld

conditions. Generally, a speed zone study used to support a request for alteration of a speed limit

would include this exhibit to identify the location of the proposed zone and any features of interest.

A strip map, or line diagram, is an example of an appropriate format for the exhibit, and details the

information that can be shown on the map. The data points can be collected using a Geographic

Information Systems (GIS) unit, which helps improve the accuracy of the strip map. Figure 6 shows an

example of a strip map that is appropriate for a speed zone study. Table 9 shows the information that

should be shown on a strip map.

Figure 6. An Example of a Strip Map of a Study Area Showing Existing Conditions. (Source: CalTrans, 2009)

Table 9. Information to Show on Strip Map

Information Item Notes

Name and highway number of the

route to be zoned

Show all names and/or highway numbers.

Indicate sections to be zoned with a wide center line on the

strip map.

Cross section Width of the roadway/lanes.

Pavement markings.

Number of lanes.

Parking restrictions.

Crossroads, cross streets, and driveway

access points

Show all names and highway numbers.

Limits of the speed zone Indicate reference marker, milepoint, control, and/or section

numbers.

Adjoining speed zone(s) of connecting

map(s)

Note speed limit information for adjoining roadway sections.

Limits of any incorporated city or town Show reference marker, milepoint, control, and section numbers.

Names and approximate limits of the

developed area of unincorporated

towns

Indicate by “Beginning of Developed Area” and “End of

Developed Area” under the heading, “Development”—

not as “City Limits.”

Urban districts Indicate any urban district clearly under the heading

“Development.”

The territory contiguous to and including any highway or

street which is built up with structures devoted to business,

industry or dwelling houses, situated at intervals of less than

100 feet for a distance of 0.25 mile or more on either side.

Schools and school crossings Show schools abutting the highway and those in the vicinity

of the highway.

Show location of schools.

Show all school crosswalks.

Trafﬁc signals Show location of existing devices to aid in proper spacing

and placement of speed zone signs.

Important trafﬁc generators Show all factories, shopping centers/malls, and any other

establishments that attract large volumes of trafﬁc.

Ball bank readings Show readings for each direction of travel for all curves.

Railroad crossings Indicate the number of tracks and type of grade crossing

protection (crossbucks, cantilevers, crossbucks with signals,

gates).

Show the name of the railroad at each crossing.

Bridges Indicate if the roadway on the bridge is narrower than the

roadway on either side of it.

Source: Adapted from the Texas Department of Transportation.

Speed Data Collection

The result of the speed data collection effort is an accurate picture of the range of vehicles and driver

behavior in the study area. In addition to collecting spot speeds of vehicles traveling through the study

area, test runs can be used to conﬁrm free-ﬂow speeds and compare study area speeds to adjacent

areas outside the speed zone. These data, combined with other crash, roadway environment, and

enforcement information, feed into the data analysis and the determination of the speed limit as

discussed in the next section.

Vehicle Speeds

A variety of methods are available to measure speeds. These methods can generally be grouped into

three categories based on the installation location of the collection equipment:

• Manually-operated, handheld devices that are portable and can be used in most places

(e.g., stopwatch, radar gun, and lidar gun).

• In-road devices that are installed into or on top of the roadway surface (e.g., pneumatic road tube).

• Out-of-road devices that are installed overhead or to the side of the roadway surface

(e.g. radar recorders).

The advantages and disadvantages for several common speed collection devices are shown in Table 10,

and should be considered when selecting a device for use at a particular location.

Ideally, data collection:

• Uses techniques that capture typical trafﬁc behavior without affecting it.

• Collects free-ﬂow vehicles and ignores platoons (less than 5 seconds separation from the vehicle

ahead

• Collects vehicle type along with the speed so that speed proﬁles for different vehicle types can

be identiﬁed, if desired.

The vehicles checked should be only those in which drivers are choosing their own speed or are free-

ﬂowing. When a line of vehicles moving closely behind each other passes the speed check station, only

the speed of the ﬁrst vehicle is checked, since the other drivers may not be choosing their own speed.

Vehicles involved in passing or turning maneuvers are not to be checked, because they are probably

driving at an abnormal rate of speed. Turning lanes, or other special lanes, are not normally used to

collect speed data.

Some analysts prefer to discard a speed measurement if a vehicle is following another vehicle within ﬁve seconds, as the lead

driver may be slower than they would ordinarily be traveling in an open road situation.

Table 10. Advantages and Disadvantages of Speed Collection Devices (Adapted from Reference 43)

Method

Data

Collected Labor

Equipment

Cost* Advantages Disadvantages

Radar

Recorders

Instantaneous

speed, trafﬁc

volumes,

vehicle class,

trafﬁc ﬂow

gaps**

Low High Little labor required to

collect and tabulate data:

can collect data for long

periods of time; other

trafﬁc-related data may

be collected at the same

time; can be used when

snowplows may be present

without risk of damage;

less visible to traveling

public than road tubes

User cannot randomly

select vehicles for data

set; some devices

may not accurately

collect data for multi-

lane roadways and/or

determine directionality

of observed vehicles;

equipment-intensive

method; maintenance/

calibration required

Pneumatic

Road Tube

Instantaneous

speed, trafﬁc

volumes,

vehicle class,

trafﬁc ﬂow

gaps**

Low Medium Little labor required to

collect and tabulate

data; can collect data for

long periods of time; other

trafﬁc-related data may

be collected at the

same time

Visible to traveling public

which may change

driver behavior; user

cannot randomly select

vehicles for data set;

use discouraged when

snowplows may be

present; most equipment-

intensive method;

maintenance/calibration

required

Laser Gun Instantaneous

speed

Medium High Equipment is easily

portable; user controls

vehicles sampled as

a more focused laser

beam limits the number

of readings for non-target

vehicles as compared to

radar

Cosine error limits

horizontal/vertical

deployment; scopes and

sights may not be user-

friendly; laser beams more

sensitive to environmental

variances than radar;

maintenance/calibration

required

Radar Gun Instantaneous

speed

Medium Medium Equipment is easily

portable; user controls

vehicles sampled;

accurate data collection

method; widespread

equipment availability has

lowered its cost

Cosine error limits

horizontal/vertical

deployment; closely-

spaced and larger

vehicles may create

readings for non-targeted

vehicles; maintenance/

calibration required

Stopwatch Travel time

over a

distance

High Low Little equipment to

purchase and maintain;

easy to perform data

collection process

Labor-intensive; collects

time data that needs to

be converted to speed

data; typically low

accuracy

*Equipment costs reﬂect the initial purchasing costs of the equipment and not future maintenance and calibration costs.

** The amount of additional data collected varies for each device. Consult the device’s user manual for a better understanding

of the capabilities.

Due to different physical and operational characteristics of trucks and buses, data for these vehicles

are usually recorded separately. If separate speed limits are believed warranted for large trucks or other

vehicle classiﬁcations, a separate count and analysis of these vehicles may be needed.

Data collection forms help organize data for the spot speed study. Appendix G (Example Speed Study

Forms) contains a sample “Vehicle Spot Speed Study” data collection sheet from the Florida DOT.

The speed proﬁle for a particular road section can only be estimated by measuring individual speeds

through a spot speed study. Prior to conducting these studies, the minimum number of vehicles for

which speed data are needed to sufﬁciently estimate speed parameters should be estimated. The

minimum number of vehicles required to accurately estimate the speed proﬁle is dependent on the

level of conﬁdence required for the statistical analysis of the data. The ITE Manual of Transportation

Engineering Studies

presents the following equation to calculate the minimum sample size for

estimating the 85th percentile speed:

























Where:

N = minimum number of measured speeds

S = estimated sample standard deviation, mph

K = constant corresponding to desired conﬁdence level

U = constant corresponding to the desired percentile speed

E = permitted error in the speed estimate, mph

The Manual of Transportation Engineering Studies provides tables for determining the values for S, K,

and U. Table 11 shows an example sample size calculation for estimating the 85th percentile speed,

using this formula.

Table 11. Example Calculation of Sample Size for Study to Determine 85th Percentile Speed

Assumptions:

The average standard deviation is rounded to 5.0 mph S = 5.0 mph

The desired conﬁdence level is 95 percent K = 1.96

The study will determine 85th percentile speed U = 1.04

The permitted error is 2 mph E = 2 mph

Calculation:

Sample Size N = 37

Analysis:

Using a sample size of 37, the 85th percentile speed can be determined within 2 mph at a 95 percent

conﬁdence level.

Performing the same calculation with a permitted error of 1 mph (E = 1 mph) results in a sample size of 148.

A common sample size for many jurisdictions is 100 vehicles. Assuming a standard deviation of 5 mph, and

using a 95 percent level of conﬁdence, the 100 vehicle sample size will yield between a 1 and 2 mph error in

the 85th percentile speed, and it makes calculation of the 85th percentile fairly simple (refer to Appendix H).

Table 12 lists the sample sizes and sample periods used by three States. Most States use 100 or more

vehicles in each direction for each station. Since meeting the minimum collection data on low-volume

roads can be difﬁcult, adjustments on the sample size can be made based on the duration of the

collection period. On highways carrying low trafﬁc volumes, the speed checks at any one station are

usually discontinued after two hours, even if a minimum of 100 vehicles have not been recorded.

Table 12. Sample Sizes and Data Collection Periods Used by Three States

State Sample Size Exceptions

MASSACHUSETTS

100 or more vehicles in each

direction should be checked at

each station.

On highways carrying low trafﬁc

volumes, the checks at any one

station may be discontinued after

two hours although a minimum of 100

vehicles have not been timed.

OHIO

Record speeds of 100 vehicles for

each direction of travel.

Observation need not exceed one

hour even if less than 100 vehicles are

recorded traveling in each direction.

TEXAS

A minimum of 125 cars in each

direction, at each station.

Discontinue after two hours if radar

is used, or after four hours if a trafﬁc

counter that classiﬁes vehicles by type

is used—even if 125 cars have not

been timed.

The

Manual of Transportation Engineering Studies

formula for determining a spot speed sample size

is premised on a random sample of vehicles over the course of the time. Since the analyst is usually

stationed at the study site for a limited time, the speed data is actually assembled from a cluster sample.

Cluster sampling generally increases the variability of sample estimates above that of simple random

sampling, and for this reason cluster sampling usually requires a larger sample than simple random

sampling to achieve the same level of accuracy. Therefore, sample sizes that are slightly larger than those

predicted by the Manual of Transportation Engineering Studies formula would increase the accuracy of

the 85th percentile speed estimate. Furthermore, the times at which the spot speed sample is conducted

should include observable speeds that are representative of the operating speeds for all times of the day.

If automated collection of speed data is employed, then it is possible to collect data for extended

periods. Collecting data for a 24-hour period will account for variation in trafﬁc patterns and will allow

for determination of different speed limits for different times of the day, if needed. For example, a time-

limited school zone speed limit or a nighttime speed limit.

Care must be exercised when using automated data collection to ensure that only free-ﬂow speeds are

collected, and that data collection units are placed sufﬁciently far from intersections and other points of

access where vehicles that are accelerating/decelerating may inﬂuence the speed proﬁle.

Speed check stations need to be

located to show all the important

changes in prevailing speeds. The

data collector should pick a location

that will not inﬂuence the behavior

of the drivers. Table 13 shows

recommendations for speed check

stations for three States for both

urban and rural areas. While these

States provide some guidance in the

form of set distances between speed

check stations, it is important to

remember that it is not the distance

between stations that is critical—

rather it is the changes in the road,

trafﬁc, and environment that may

lead to different speed proﬁles

and operating speeds. Distances

between speed check stations may

be increased or decreased from

those provided accordingly.

Radar speed meters, which operate on the Doppler principle, or lidar, which operates on a laser principle,

are normally used for making manual speed checks. These devices typically operate from the power

of an automobile battery and give direct readings of vehicle speeds which are accurate to within 2

mph (3 km/h).

The operating instructions for the radar unit will provide factors for calibration, optimum

distance of survey, and optimum angle of survey. Speed measurement should be done in an unobtrusive,

undetectable manner so as to obtain a sample of normal trafﬁc speeds. If the radar operation is detected

by drivers, there is the potential for the data to be biased as drivers change their speeds.

Figure 7 shows

an example of a radar operation

setup.

Automatic speed classiﬁcation

equipment technology may be used

in determining vehicular speeds for

use in calculating 85th percentile

speed. Examples of technologies are

counter-classiﬁers with the capability

of classifying vehicles, determining

vehicular speeds, and differentiating

the gap between vehicles. These

devices may include video imaging,

tube counters, magnetic counters,

inductive counters, etc.

Figure 8

shows an example of a portable

trafﬁc analyzer. With automatic data

collection equipment, speed data is

normally collected at sites for at least

a 24-hour period.

Figure 7. Radar Setup.

Figure 8. Portable Trafﬁc Analyzer.

The reason for collecting spot speed data is to estimate the free-ﬂow speed of a facility for use in setting

speed limits. Ordinarily, it is only necessary to collect spot speed data once during the time-of-day,

and the day-of-week that will yield the best estimate of free-ﬂowing speeds. Collecting speed data

at more than one time-of-day or day-of-week is dependent on the analyst’s conﬁdence in the single

measurement representing the true free-ﬂow speed for the facility. Additional spot speed studies at a

single location may also be conducted if the analyst is considering a variable speed limit, or a speed

limit that is time-limited (i.e., a school zone speed limit).

Table 13. Speed Check Stations for Three States

State Speed Check Station Layout Information

MASSACHUSETTS

URBAN • Speed check stations should be strategically located to show all

the important changes to municipalities; speed check stations

should generally be located at intervals not to exceed 0.25

miles, depending upon the locality and the uniformity of physical

and trafﬁc conditions. Much closer spacing than this may be

necessary to obtain an accurate picture of the speed pattern.

RURAL • In rural areas, the spacing of speed check stations may be at

much greater intervals provided they properly reﬂect the general

speed pattern. There should be at least one observation for each

direction of travel in each zone of a different numerical limit.

OHIO

• Speed checks may be taken with any device that will indicate

vehicle speed with an accuracy of +/-10 percent.

• Speed checks should be taken at the 1/3 point (total of four

checks) for zones 0.25-1.00 mile in length, and at 0.5-0.75 mile

intervals for zones over 1 mile in length.

TEXAS

URBAN • Should generally be located at intervals of 0.25 mile or less if

necessary to ensure an accurate picture of the speed patterns.

• Should be located midway between signals or 0.2 miles from any

signal, whichever is less, to ensure an accurate representation of

speed patterns.

• Should take into account locality, and the uniformity of physical and

trafﬁc conditions may be determined by trial runs through the area if

volumes are too low or if a recheck of speeds is all that is needed.

• Should be checked midway between interchanges on the main

lanes of expressways and freeways.

RURAL • May be at intervals greater than 0.25 mile, as long as the general

speed pattern is followed and may only be necessary at each

end and the middle point if the characteristics of the roadway

are consistent throughout the entire section.

• May be determined by trial runs through the area if the

characteristics of the roadway are consistent throughout the entire

section and a speed check in that section indicates that 125 vehicles

cannot be checked within the two hours if radar is used, or after four

hours if a trafﬁc counter that classiﬁes vehicles by type is used.

Speed Test Runs

The purpose of the test runs is to generate an operating speed proﬁle and ensure that measured spot

speeds are representative of speeds throughout the section.

The general idea is to perform several runs at free-ﬂow speeds as a way to conﬁrm the speed data

collected for use in determining 85th percentile speed and compare spot speeds to the test run speeds

for the full study section. When planning test runs, in general:

• Test runs should be made by driving as fast as it is comfortably safe.

• Test runs should be made so that other trafﬁc will not delay the test car.

• The speed should be recorded at a range of 0.10 to 0.25 mile (.15 km to .45 km) interval or more.

• The average speed of three test runs should be determined in each direction.

An alternative methodology for conducting a speed test run is the ﬂoating car method, i.e., following

cars and recording their speeds or journey times through the study area. This method allows an

assessment of a driver’s free-ﬂow speed, and not the desired speed of the person conducting the

survey (as this might differ from the general population).

To counter arguments that the 85th percentile spot speed studies are not representative of the

operating speeds along the entire street, a test run speed proﬁle can be combined with the spot 85th

percentile speeds to obtain an 85th percentile speed proﬁle.

The speed proﬁle is established by an

individual driving the road in his or her usual manner, while an observer records the time for the vehicle

to travel a set interval (e.g., 100 m). Then the following procedure can be used to develop an 85th

percentile speed proﬁle (the data in Table 14 is referenced to demonstrate method):

• For each location where a spot speed is measured, comparison factors are calculated by

dividing the 85th percentile speed by the test run speeds and the average test run speeds for

the same location. In the example, there are two locations where spot speeds were measured—

Station 0+600 and Station 1+600.

• The variation of comparison factors for each test run is determined separately. In the example,

there are only two comparison factors for each test run, so the difference between the two

factors is used as the measure of variance.

• The comparison factors for the test run with the lowest variation are then averaged and this

average factor becomes the correction factor. In the example, Test Run 1 has the lowest

variation.

• The average test run speed for each location is multiplied by the correction factor to yield an

estimated 85th percentile speed for each location.

Table 14. Example of Using Speed Test Runs to Conﬁrm 85th Percentile Speeds (km/h)

Test Run Comparison Factor

Station

Spot

Speed 85th

Percentile 1 2 Average 1 2 Average

Estimated

85th

Percentile

Speed

0+000 85 86 86 88

0+200 87 86 87 89

0+400 84 79 82 84

0+600 83 80 88 84 1.038 0.943 0.988 86

0+800 82 84 83 85

1+000 80 78 79 81

1+200 75 78 77 78

1+400 62 63 63 64

1+600 71 70 66 68 1.014 1.076 1.044 70

1+800 69 71 70 72

2+000 72 70 71 73

Variation

0.023

0.133 0.056

Correction

Factor

1.026

Data Analysis

The ITE Trafﬁc Engineering Council Technical Committee surveyed the speed zoning practices used by

agencies across the United States. The committee collected speed zoning guidelines from 40 States and

conducted 124 surveys with ITE members serving as trafﬁc engineers in State and local agencies. Based

on the results of the survey, the most important factors considered for recommending a speed limit are:

85th percentile speed; followed by roadway geometry, crash exposure, and roadside development.

This section discusses the compilation of speed and crash data used to develop the inputs to the speed

limit setting process.

85th Percentile Speed

The Manual on Uniform Trafﬁc Control Devices (MUTCD) lists the current speed distribution of free-ﬂowing

vehicles as a primary factor to consider when establishing speed limits. The MUTCD also states that the

speed limit should be within 5 mph (8 km/h) of the 85th percentile speed.

The 85th percentile speed is the speed at or below which 85 percent of the free-ﬂowing vehicles

travel, and has traditionally been considered in an engineering study to establish a speed limit. Trafﬁc

engineers have assumed that this high percentage of drivers will select a safe speed on the basis of the

conditions at the site. The 85th percentile speed is considered the ﬁrst approximation for the speed limit.

The Ohio Department of Transportation collects vehicle speeds even if it is not possible to observe free-

ﬂow conditions. Then the 85th percentile speed of all vehicles is increased 5 to 10 mph (8 to 16 km/h) to

approximate the free-ﬂow 85th percentile speed. If the 85th percentile speed of several speed checks varies

considerably, the 85th percentile speeds are averaged, or the most representative speed is selected.

A convenient way to determine speed percentiles is a frequency distribution table. An example, with an

explanation of how to use it, is provided in Appendix H.

10 mph (16 km/h) Pace

The speeds of individual vehicles on a highway vary. Speed dispersion refers to this spread in vehicle

speeds. The 10 mph (16 km/h) pace is the ten mile-per-hour range of speeds containing the greatest

number of observed speeds and is a measure of speed dispersion. It is described by both the speed

value at the lower end of the range and the percentage of all vehicles that are within the range; and,

thus, is an indicator of speed dispersion.

A normal speed distribution contains approximately 70 percent of the vehicles within the pace, with

approximately 15 percent of the vehicles below and 15 percent above the limits of the pace speed.

The upper limit of the 10 mph (16 km/h) pace speed is therefore approximately the 85th percentile

speed in most cases. However, the upper limit of the pace speed may vary from the 85th percentile

speed, depending on the distribution curve of the vehicle speeds.

There is general agreement that the safest conditions occur when all vehicles at a site are traveling at

about the same speed.

Crash Data

Crash data are typically considered in establishing speed limits. The factors potentially contributing to

the crashes should be examined to determine whether speeding was involved, or whether the speeds

were too high for a speciﬁc condition or feature. Speed contributes to the severity of a crash, and sites

with a history of severe injury or fatal crashes may be locations with high levels of speeding. The National

Highway Trafﬁc Safety Administration (NHTSA) considers a crash to be speeding-related if the driver

was charged with a speeding-related offense or if an ofﬁcer indicated that racing, driving too fast for

conditions, or exceeding the posted speed limit was a contributing factor in the crash.

Crash data may be accessed via State, local, county or community-wide databases. These

databases may be housed within State agencies including the Department of Safety, Department

of Transportation, or State Highway Patrol, within local law enforcement agencies, or within the court

system. In some cases there may be some information missing from the database. For example, if a

database is not GPS-based, or does not include detailed information regarding the location of a crash,

it may be difﬁcult to locate the site. In some communities the data is still maintained in paper format,

and manually reviewing paper records is time consuming and costly. Coordinating ﬁeld data collection

and crash analysis prior to the start of the program is one way to minimize costs.

A review of crash data can show whether the study area has a higher than average crash experience,

and whether the portion of crashes that appear to be related to speeding is higher than average. The

MUTCD recommends reviewing reported crash experience for at least a 12-month period.

Twelve

months is considered a short-term crash count and is insufﬁcient as a basis for making sound safety

decisions. The implications of crash frequency ﬂuctuation and variation of site conditions are often

in conﬂict. On one hand, the year-to-year ﬂuctuation in crash frequencies tends toward acquiring

more years of data to determine the expected average crash frequency. On the other hand,

changes in site conditions can shorten the length of time for which crash frequencies are valid for

considering averages. This conﬂict between crash data variations and changing site conditions requires

considerable judgment in selecting an analysis period.

Typically, road authorities review crash data for a three- to ﬁve-year period.

When crash data are collected, it is important to consider the following factors before interpreting

existing data or gathering new data:

• Only consider data collected on road segments that are within the study area.

• Gather categorized details about the site geometry, trafﬁc control devices, signage, weather,

lighting conditions, time of day, day of week, interaction with other vehicles, etc.

• Minimize the amount of emphasis placed on individual (severe) crashes rather than trends or

clusters of crashes.

• Differentiate between mid-block and intersection crashes.

• When comparing crash datasets, ensure that the same ﬁltering criteria are used to develop the

datasets.

• Watch for data format issues between data sources and collection periods to avoid difﬁculties in

coding and analysis.

• Although data should be sanitized for driver identity before reporting, maintaining a link to the raw

data source until the data is ready to be published or used for the last time will make it possible to

go back to the source easily to supplement and verify details for analysis and report generation.

• Note extenuating circumstances that may preclude or overshadow typical trends and analyses

and be prepared to ﬁlter or caveat them (e.g., long-term construction zones, new developments,

major changes or reconstruction, etc.).

Some measure of the crash experience of the study site can be developed and compared to the

average of that measurement for similar sites in a jurisdiction. Examples are crash frequency, crash

density, and crash rate. Some agencies factor crash severity into safety analyses by giving a higher

weight to injury and fatal crashes. The average of this frequency, rate, or other measure, for all

roadways of a similar type (such as urban 4-lane undivided arterials) in a State would be a good value

for comparison. A discussion of how the analyzed data are used in determining speed limits is presented

in the next section.

Isolating the effect of one crash factor, such as speed, can be a challenge. Often it is difﬁcult to identify

the role of speed in crashes, and for this reason it is thought that speed-related crashes are often under-

reported.

For this reason, all crashes may be considered in setting speed limits.

A crash diagram is often prepared as a part of the safety analysis to help identify patterns and trends in

the crash data.

The state-of-the-art in crash data analysis and determining the safety performance of a facility is

contained in the Highway Safety Manual. This document provides analytical tools and techniques for

estimating the expected crash risk of different facilities, and it can also be used in assessing the safety

effects of a change in the posted speed limit.

SPEED LIMIT ENFORCEMENT

While a properly selected speed limit is hopefully self-enforcing, the reality is that an effective speed limit

generally relies in part on enforcement of the limit. The engineering community has four main roles in

speed enforcement:

• Communicate with those responsible for enforcement during the setting of speed limits;

• Provide data to enforcement ofﬁcials so they may effectively deploy enforcement resources;

• Provide and maintain automated speed enforcement (ASE) equipment and technologies (where

allowed); and

• Integrate features in the road design to facilitate speed enforcement (i.e., laybys and median

openings that assist enforcement personnel).

Because speed limits and enforcement are intertwined, it is important for the road authority to liaise

with enforcement personnel before setting a speed limit for a facility. Enforcement personnel have

experience and unique insights into the enforceability of speed limits that may be used to ensure that

rational speed limits are applied.

Speed enforcement is essentially a crash countermeasure and therefore beneﬁts from a proper

understanding of the persons, place, time, and conditions that foster speeding. Engineering personnel

can provide speed and crash data as well as citizen complaints to enforcement personnel so that

appropriate enforcement strategies are identiﬁed. This data-driven approach to resource deployment

can target speciﬁc scenarios of speeding or types of speeding activities (e.g., commuters, after-school,

racing, deliveries, etc.).

Automated speed enforcement uses equipment to monitor speeds and photograph offenders to

produce citations that are mailed to the registered owner of the vehicle. ASE is particularly effective

at locations where the roadway geometry or trafﬁc volumes make it difﬁcult to use more traditional

methods (e.g., requiring a trafﬁc stop). This strategy requires enabling legislation, if such legislation has

not already been passed. NHTSA’s Speed Enforcement Camera Systems Operational Guidelines is a

useful reference.

The engineering community is generally involved in ASE, as it requires speed cameras that are

maintained by the road authority. In all cases, enforcement personnel need to be involved and an

integral part of any ASE activities.

A combination of the various enforcement strategies described above, in addition to engineering and

communications countermeasures, may contribute to ongoing compliance with the speed limit. When

an effective speed enforcement program is sustained, it can continue to deter speeders. The NHTSA

and FHWA Speed Enforcement Program Guidelines is a useful reference.

CASE STUDIES

To demonstrate the application of some of the principles and methods presented in this informational

report, two case studies are presented. The case studies use existing roads and real data. In both

cases, the posted speed limit is determined by the engineering, expert system, optimal speed, and safe

systems methods. It is noted that not all of the data was collected for each of the methods, and for the

sake of presenting each of the speed limit setting methods, reasonable assumptions were made about

some values.

The outcomes may or may not match with the actual posted speed limit as determined by the

governing road authority. This does not suggest that the road authorities are using outdated or incorrect

methods in setting their speed limits. On the contrary, the methods used to set the initial and/or revised

speed limits were in compliance with State statutes and requirements and the guidance provided in the

federal MUTCD.

It must be remembered that in all speed limit setting studies, the tools and techniques that are available

to the practitioner are intended to assist the practitioner in making a decision—it is guidance and not

direction as to the speed limit to be posted. Engineering judgment must be applied.

CASE STUDY 1: Urban Collector Road

As part of a speed limit reevaluation process, the City of Palm Bay, Florida, identiﬁed Eldron Boulevard

from Jupiter Boulevard to Raleigh Road for analysis. The study area was selected based on the following

considerations:

• The roadside development is consistent throughout the study area;

• The physical features of the road are consistent throughout the study area; and

• The study area is bounded by signalized intersections at both ends of Eldron Boulevard, which

form a natural break-point for speed zoning.

Eldron Boulevard is a north-south collector road approximately 2.3 miles long and located in a

northeastern portion of the City. The study segment is essentially straight and ﬂat, with a design speed of

50 mph or more. It is a two-lane, undivided facility with no shoulder and an 8-foot wide sidewalk on the

east side of the road, located about eight feet from the edge of the pavement. The lane widths are 12

feet each.

The contiguous and surrounding land use is single-family residential. There are 85 single-family residential

driveways, one minor commercial driveway, and 26 two-way, stop controlled intersections that access

Eldron Boulevard. The area is basically fully developed, and trafﬁc volumes are relatively stable over time.

Eldron Boulevard is a municipal transit route. Parking is not prohibited, but happens very infrequently.

Pedestrian volumes are typical for a residential street, and cyclist volumes are considered low. Street

lighting is present throughout the study area.

Given the consistent physical features throughout the study area, a single spot speed measurement

location was deemed sufﬁcient. However, given the length of the study area, and as an extra

precaution, the analysts decided to measure spot speeds at two locations. The spot speed stations

were spaced evenly in the study area, and were located away from intersections or major driveways

that would include vehicles changing speeds while using these accesses. Pneumatic road tubes were

used to collect spot speed data at two locations in the study area; the results are as follows:

North Station South Station

Posted Speed Limit 40 40

Median Speed (50th Percentile) 38.8 37.2

Average (Mean) Speed 39.3 32.2

85th Percentile Speed 43.4 43.0

10-mph Pace 35 – 44 35 – 44

Percent Exceeding the Speed Limit 48.3 32.2

Five test runs were undertaken through the study area, and the average test run speed was 41 mph.

From January 2009 to July 2010 (19 months), there were 19 crashes in the study area. Two of these

crashes resulted in personal injuries, none in fatalities. The average daily trafﬁc volume during this time

was 9200 vehicles per day. The crash rate for this road is 1.55 crashes per million-vehicle-miles (MVM).

The average crash rate for these types of facilities is 2.22 crashes/MVM.

Engineering Method Using Operating Speed

Using the Illinois DOT Method

STEP 1: Establish the Prevailing Speed

The prevailing speed is the average of the 85th percentile speed, the upper limit of the 10 mph pace,

and the average test run speed, rounded to the nearest 5 mph increment.

A B C (A+B+C)/3

Station

85th Percentile

Speed (mph)

Upper Limit of the

10-mph Pace (mph)

Average Test Run

Speed (mph)

Prevailing Speed

(mph)

North 43.4 44 41 42.8

South 43.0 44 41 42.7

The prevailing speed rounded to the nearest 5 mph increment is 45 mph for both locations in the study area.

STEP 2: Supplementary Investigations

Adjustment factors for determining the proposed posted speed limit as determined by further

investigation of the following four conditions:

• Elevated Crash Risk: The speed zone being studied has a crash rate of 1.55 crashes/MVM, which

is lower than the statewide average of 2.22 crashes/MVM for these types of roads. Hence, there is

no adjustment required for crash risk.

• Access Control: The access conﬂict number (ACN) is calculated for the speed zone, based on

85 single–family, residential driveways, one minor, commercial driveway, and 27 two-way, stop-

controlled intersections in the study area:

ACN* Reduction (%)

< 40 0

41 to 60 5

> 60 10

Where:

= Number of ﬁeld entrances and driveways to single-family dwellings

= Number of driveways to minor commercial entrances, multi-family residential units, and

minor street intersections

= Number of driveways to major commercial entrances, large multi-family developments,

and major street intersections

Therefore, based on accesses, it is appropriate to lower the prevailing speed (from Step 1) by 10 percent.

• Pedestrian Activity: The pedestrian activity is typical for a residential area, is accommodated

by a sidewalk on one side of the street, and is not considered “signiﬁcant pedestrian activity.”

No further adjustment is required for this factor.

• Parking: Parking is negligible and is not a factor in determined the posted speed limit.

The total adjustment from the 4 different factors is 10 percent.

Step 3: Selection of Preliminary Speed Limit

The preliminary speed limit is either the calculated prevailing speed (from Step 1), or if the optional

investigation was undertaken, it is the prevailing speed as adjusted by application of the percentage

corrections from the optional investigation (Step 2). Since Step 2 was undertaken, the preliminary posted

speed limit is:

• 45 mph – (0.1*45 mph) = 41 mph

The following rules apply to the outcome:

• The preliminary posted speed limit should be the closest 5 mph increment to the (adjusted)

prevailing speed. This results in a preliminary posted speed of 40 mph.

• The preliminary posted speed limit shall not differ from the prevailing speed (from Step 1) by more

than 9 mph or by more than 20 percent, whichever is less. This condition is satisﬁed by the 40 mph

preliminary posted speed limit.

Therefore, the proposed preliminary speed limit is 40 mph.

Step 4: Violation Check

The proposed speed limit should be either the preliminary posted speed limit or the 50th percentile

speed, whichever is greater. In this case, the median speeds are 38 to 39 mph, so the preliminary posted

speed limit of 40 mph is valid.

It is noted that the statutory speed limit for Eldron Boulevard is 30 mph, which is less than the preliminary

posted speed limit determined above. At this point, the road authority has the option of either posting

at the statutory speed, or the proposed speed limit.

The Illinois method of setting speed limits results in a recommended speed limit of 40 mph.

Using the Northwestern Speed Zoning Technique

Step 1: The Minimum Speed Study

Station

85th Percentile Speed,

km/h (mph)

Upper Limit of the 10-

mph Pace, km/h (mph)

Average Test Run Speed,

km/h (mph)

North 43.4 (70) 71 (44) 66 (41)

South 43.0 (69) 71 (44) 66 (41)

For the minimum speed study, speed measurements yield the following:

Criteria

Justiﬁed Speed Limit (from

Table 18) Weight Weighted Limit

85th Percentile Speed 70 3 210

Upper Limit of the Pace 70 3 210

Average Test Run Speed 80 4 320

Sum 740

The weighted average is 740/10 = 74 km/h, which suggests a speed limit of 75 km/h based solely on the

speed data.

The suggested speed limit needs to be checked against the major physical features of the road. The

design speed of Eldron Boulevard is 50 mph (80 km/h), and the length of road under study is 2.3 miles

(3.7 kms). The average distance between intersections is:

Design

Speed (km/h)

Average Distance

Between Intersections

(m)

Length of Proposed

Zone (km)

Maximum Speed Limit

(km/h)

110 400 1.5 110

100 300 1.0 100

90 250 0.8 90

90 175 0.7 80

70 125 0.6 70

70 100 0.5 60

50 75 0.4 50

50 60 0.3 40

30 45 0.2 30

All three criteria are satisﬁed by a 70 km/h (45 mph) speed limit. Therefore the minimum study

recommends a speed limit of 70 km/h (45 mph).

Continuing on with the detailed analysis, the factors determined from the various tables are:

Adjustment Factors

Non-commercial Access (Table 20) -5

Commercial Access (Table 20) +5

Lane Width (Table 21) +5

Functional Classiﬁcation (Table 22) -5

Median Type (Table 23) 0

Shoulder Type and Width (Table 24) 0

Pedestrian Activity (Table 25) -15

Parking Activity (Table 26) 0

Roadway Alignment (Table 27) +10

Crash Rate (Table 28) +10

Totals +30 -25 =+5

The overall adjustment factor (OAF) is +5 which can be used to determine the multiplication factor (MF) as:

MF = (100+OAF)/100 = (100+5)/100 = 1.05

The multiplication factor is less than 1.25 and greater than 0.75; therefore, the recommended speed

limit (SL) is the speed limit from the minimum study multiplied by the multiplication factor and rounded to

the nearest 10 km/h:

SL = 70 km/h * 1.05 = 73.5 km/h ➞ 75 km/h or 45 mph

The recommended speed limit based on the Northwestern Speed Zoning method is 45 mph.

Expert Systems Approach Using USLIMITS2

The data from the Eldron Boulevard speed limit study was entered into the USLIMITS2 program

to determine the recommended speed limit for this section of road. The entered data and the

recommended speed limit are shown in the boxed area below. The speed limit recommended by the

USLIMITS2 approach is 40 mph.

USLIMITS2 Data Output

Top of Form

Basic Project Information

Project Name – Case Study 1

Project Number –

Project Date – 09-21-2011

State – Florida

County – Brevard County

City – Palm Bay City

Route – Eldron Boulevard

Route Type – Road Section in Developed Area

Termini from – Jupiter Boulevard

Termini to – Raleigh Road

Route Status – EXISTING

Description – FHWA/ITE Informational Report

Case Study

Roadway Information

85th Percentile Speed – 43 mph

50th Percentile Speed – 39 mph

Section Length – 2.30 mile(s)

Statutory Speed Limit – 30 mile(s)

AADT – 9200

Adverse Alignment – No

Lanes and Presence/Type of Median – Two-lane

road or undivided multi-lane.

Number of Lanes – 2

Area Type – Residential Collector

Number of Driveways – 112

Number of Signals – 0

On Street Parking and Usage – Not High

Pedestrian / Bicyclist Activity – High

Crash Data Information

Crash Data Months/Years – 1.58

Crash AADT – 9200

Total Number of Crashes – 19

Total Number of Injury Crashes – 2

Section Crash Rate – 155

Section Injury Rate – 16

Crash Rate Average for Similar Sections – 222

Injury Rate Average for Similar Sections – 73

Comments –

Recommended Speed Limit is: 40

Note:

The ﬁnal recommended speed limit is higher

than the statutory speed limit for this type of

road. The statutory limit is 30 mph.

Optimal Speed Limit

The optimal speed limit is determined by calculating and selecting the speed that produces the lowest

societal cost. In this case study only crash costs and fuel costs will be considered to demonstrate

the method. In a full analysis, other societal costs would be analyzed, including time travel costs,

automobile emissions, etc.

Step 1: Calculate the Crash Costs

The road authority has developed the following crash prediction models using regression techniques,

trafﬁc, infrastructure, and historic crash data for roads under their control:

(

)

ULUCUMAGMNOLWSLADT

XX.EXPN

5.219.142.038.019.00069.0026.0000014.071.013.0950 −−−−+−−+++

−



Where: N

P+B

= Number of pedestrian and bicyclist crashes per year, per mile

v-v

= Number of vehicle-vehicle crashes per year, per mile

SL = Posted Speed Limit (mph)

X = Number of intersections in the segment

= Number of signalized intersections on the segment

W = Pavement width (feet)

NOL = Number of lanes

GM = 1 if median, 0 if no median

UMA = 1 if urban minor arterial, 0 if not

UC = 1 if urban collector street, 0 if not

UL = 1 if urban local road, 0 if not

ADT = Average daily trafﬁc

L = Length (miles)

Additionally, the road authority has examined its severity distributions of the two crashes types based on

speed, and has produced the following probabilities using the KABCO severity scale. The KABCO severity

scale was developed by the National Safety Council, and is used by the investigating ofﬁcers to classify

injury severity for occupants into one of ﬁve categories: K – killed; A – disabling injury; B – evident injury;

C – possible injury; O – no apparent injury. These deﬁnitions may vary slightly for different police agencies.

Probability of Crash Severity for Vehicle-Pedestrian/Cyclist Crashes

Speed Limit (mph)

Crash Severity

K A B C O

20 0.0028 0.0339 0.2053 0.5631 0.1949

25 0.0040 0.0435 0.2335 0.5555 0.1635

30 0.0057 0.0549 0.2622 0.5415 0.1357

35 0.0080 0.0684 0.2905 0.5219 0.1112

40 0.0110 0.0841 0.3178 0.4970 0.0901

45 0.0150 0.1020 0.3432 0.4677 0.0721

50 0.0202 0.1221 0.3657 0.4349 0.0571

55 0.0268 0.1443 0.3846 0.3997 0.0446

60 0.0351 0.1682 0.3993 0.3630 0.0344

Probability of Crash Severity for Vehicle-Pedestrian/Cyclist Crashes

Speed Limit (mph)

Crash Severity

K A B C O

20 0.002 0.0006 0.0081 0.0862 0.9049

25 0.0004 0.0009 0.0116 0.1081 0.879

30 0.0006 0.0015 0.0158 0.1313 0.8508

35 0.001 0.0022 0.0218 0.1591 0.8159

40 0.0016 0.0031 0.0289 0.187 0.7794

45 0.0025 0.0044 0.0386 0.2188 0.7357

50 0.0037 0.0062 0.0495 0.2491 0.6915

55 0.0055 0.0088 0.0635 0.2816 0.6406

60 0.008 0.0117 0.0788 0.3105 0.591

The City of Palm Bay uses the societal costs of crashes shown below:

Crash Severity Societal Cost ($)

K 3,366,388

A 233,100

B 46,620

C 24,510

O 2,590

Therefore, employing the crash model for vehicle-pedestrian/cyclist, the probability distributions for the

different crash severities, and the societal costs for the different crash severities, the cost of vehicle-

pedestrian/cyclist crashes for the different available speed limits is shown below.

Speed Limit

(mph)

No. of Ped/

Cyclist

Crashes

Crash Costs by Severity ($)

K A B C O Total

20 6.7 62,820 52,664 63,787 91,982 3,364 274,617

25 4.3 57,509 43,306 46,491 58,149 1,809 207,263

30 2.7 52,516 35,024 33,455 36,324 962 158,280

35 1.8 47,233 27,963 23,752 22,435 505 121,888

40 1.1 41,618 22,033 16,652 13,691 262 94,256

45 0.7 36,368 17,124 11,524 8,256 134 73,407

50 0.5 31,385 13,136 7,869 4,920 68 57,378

55 0.3 26,684 9,948 5,303 2,897 34 44,867

60 0.2 22,395 7,431 3,528 1,686 17 35,058

It is noted that under this particular crash model, the number of pedestrian and cyclist crashes

decreases as the speed limit increases. This is likely due to the fact that higher speed roads have lower

pedestrian and cyclist trafﬁc than similar lower speed roads. In other words, exposure to these types of

crashes decreases as speed increases.

The same methodology is employed to identify the societal cost of vehicle-vehicle crashes for the

different speed limit alternatives.

Speed Limit

(mph)

No. of Vehicle-

Vehicle

Crashes

Crash Costs by Severity ($)

K A B C O Total

20 19.4 — 2,256 5,145 32,599 46,386 86,386

25 17.0 114,456 2,378 6,419 35,916 39,842 199,011

30 14.9 20,101 3,132 8,073 39,551 33,984 104,839

35 13.1 26,475 4,583 9,655 42,183 28,884 111,780

40 11.5 38,746 5,902 11,698 44,883 24,322 125,552

45 10.1 54,437 7,303 13,617 46,323 20,402 142,082

50 8.9 74,689 9,102 15,970 47,593 16,910 164,265

55 7.8 97,064 11,262 17,983 47,578 13,957 187,845

60 6.8 126,696 14,037 20,257 47,229 11,353 219,572

It is noted that the number of crashes decreases as the speed limit increases. This is likely due to the fact

that the design of higher speed roads affords more generous dimensions and greater safety features

than similar lower speed facilities.

The total crash costs are the sums of the vehicle-vehicle crash costs and the vehicle-pedestrian/cyclist

crash costs.

Speed Limit (mph)

Ped/Cyclist Crash

Costs ($)

Vehicle-Vehicle Crash

Costs ($) Total Crash Costs ($)

20 274,617 86,386 361,003

25 207,263 199,011 406,275

30 158,280 104,839 263,120

35 121,888 111,780 233,669

40 94,256 125,552 219,808

45 73,407 142,082 215,489

50 57,378 164,265 221,642

55 44,867 187,845 232,712

60 35,058 219,572 254,630

According to published data on the fuel efﬁciency of late model passenger cars and light trucks

according to speed, the annual fuel consumption for different speed limits can be calculated.

Assuming a cost for gas of $3.50/gallon yields an annual fuel cost. This annual fuel cost can be added

to the annual crash costs to determine the net societal cost for the different speed limit alternatives. The

results are shown below.

Speed Limit

(mph)

Fuel Economy

(mpg)

Annual Fuel

Annual Crash

Cost ($) Total Cost ($)Gallons

Fuel Cost

(at $3.50/gal)

20 26.4 292,553 1,023,936 361,003 1,384,939

25 30.2 255,848 895,467 406,275 1,301,741

30 31.8 243,161 851,063 263,120 1,114,183

35 32.7 236,190 826,664 233,669 1,060,332

40 32.6 236,733 828,564 219,808 1,048,372

45 32.8 235,559 824,457 215,489 1,039,946

50 32.1 240,698 842,443 221,642 1,064,086

55 31.1 248,441 869,542 232,712 1,102,254

60 29.0 266,095 931,332 254,630 1,185,961

Under an optimal speed limit approach to Eldron Boulevard, the recommended speed limit is 45 mph.

The subsequent analysis does not include the cost of travel time, or automobile emissions, which would

typically be included in the thorough analysis.

Safe Systems Approach

Under the safe systems approach to setting the speed limit, the critical factor is the type of crashes that

can be expected to occur given the physical features of the road, and the types of road users that are

expected to be encountered.

In this instance, pedestrians and cyclists are permitted to use Eldron Boulevard but cyclists are very

infrequent, and pedestrians walking along the road are provided with a sidewalk that is set back

from the edge of pavement. The fact is that pedestrian-vehicle and cyclist-vehicle interactions are

uncommon, and are not a signiﬁcant factor in determining a “safe speed limit.”

However, there are 26 two-way, stop controlled intersections and 86 driveways (85 residential and one

minor commercial) along this section of Eldron Boulevard. This means that the potential for right-angle

crashes, which have the greatest potential for causing serious injury to vehicle occupants, is signiﬁcant.

Therefore, under a safe systems approach to setting speed limits, speeds on Eldron Boulevard from

Jupiter Road to Raleigh Road should be limited to those speeds where a right-angle crash will not cause

any serious injuries. This being the case, research on human biomechanical tolerance, and vehicle

crashworthiness studies indicate that speeds should be limited to 30 mph.

The recommended speed limit under the safe systems approach is 30 mph.

The recommended speed limits yielded by each speed limit setting method, and the actual speed limit

enacted by the road authority are shown in Tables 15 and 16.

Table 15. Recommended Speed Limits for the Eldron Boulevard Case Study

Eldron Boulevard, Florida

Actual Speed Limit 40

Illinois DOT 40

Northwestern 45

USLIMITS2 40

Optimal Speed 45

Safe System Speed 30

CASE STUDY 2: Rural Arterial Road

Roadway improvements undertaken in an 11.5-mile segment of State Route 67 between Milepost 11.3

and 22.8 in California prompted the need for a re-examination of the existing 55 mph speed limit. This is

an existing road with consistent road and land use characteristics throughout.

State Route 67 is a 24.4-mile road running primarily in a north-south direction between the City of El

Cajon and the community of Ramona. The study segment is a 2-lane highway, which traverses hilly

terrain, resulting in undulating vertical grades and winding horizontal curves. Strategically-located

passing lanes are present through the study area.

Trafﬁc volumes are as follows:

Milepost 2011 AADT

13.56 24,900

15.20 25,500

20.87 25,000

21.35 29,500

Average 25,350

The roadway is asphalt with varying shoulder widths throughout. Shoulders are generally paved and

range from 3 feet (1.0 meter) to 8 feet (2.4 meters).

A painted median is provided that includes a median rumble strip and raised pavement markers. The

median is typically three feet wide.

In addition to the appropriate trafﬁc control devices and trafﬁc barriers, 11 digital Speed Feedback

signs are employed.

There are three signalized intersections in the study area.

A Doppler radar system was used to conduct spot speed studies at ﬁve different locations within the

study area.

Milepost

85th Percentile

Speed (mph)

Median Speed

(mph)

Mean Speed

(mph)

Upper Limit of

the 10 mph

Pace (mph)

Percent

Exceeding the

55 mph

11.30 61 56 56 61 57

15.00 63 57 57 60 60

18.10 65 60 60 64 83

19.70 59 56 56 60 59

21.00 54 51 51 55 8

Average 60.4 56.0 56.0 60.0

Based on a review of the horizontal alignment in the study section, the design speed is 50 mph. None of

the curves require an advisory speed warning.

The 3-year crash rate for the entire study area is 0.80 crashes per million-vehicle-miles, which is lower

than the statewide average crash rate of 1.51 crashes per million-vehicle-miles. However, there have

been 17 fatal crashes in the 3-year analysis period that have been evenly distributed throughout the

study section. The fatal crash rate is 0.46 crashes per million-vehicle-miles (MVM), which is almost double

the statewide average fatal crash rate of 0.25 crashes/MVM.

Public and private accesses to State Route 67 were inventoried and consist of the following:

NBND (milepost) SBND (milepost)

Private Access 12.10

12.17

12.38

12.76

13.80

13.96

14.07

14.10

14.34

14.36

14.89

15.46

15.67

15.89

16.13

16.96

17.00

17.89

18.05

18.14

18.21

20.25

11.49

11.96

12.78

13.69

13.78

14.06

14.89

15.56

16.19

16.28

16.45

17.43

17.51

18.16

18.27

18.37

18.54

18.92

Public Road 14.35 (Iron Mountain Trail)

17.73 (Rockhouse Road)

20.87 (Mussey Grade Road)

13.56 (Scripps Poway Parkway)

15.15 (Poway Road)

18.11 (Mount Woodson Road)

18.55 (Archie Moore Road)

All of the private accesses are to single family residential dwellings or small-scale agricultural operations.

State Route 67 has a rural cross-section, so there are no sidewalks. Pedestrians and cyclists are not

prohibited from the facility, but the volume of both user groups is extremely low.

Parking is permitted, but there are no signiﬁcant roadside attractions, so parking activity is negligible.

Five test runs were undertaken during off-peak periods, and the average test run speed was 63 km/h.

Engineering Method Using Operating Speed

Using the Illinois DOT Method

STEP 1: Establish the Prevailing Speed

The prevailing speed is the average of the 85th percentile speed, the upper limit of the 10 mph pace,

and the average test run speed, rounded to the nearest 5 mph increment.

A B C (A+B+C)/3

Milepost

85th Percentile

Speed (mph)

Upper Limit of

the 10 mph

Pace (mph)

Avg. Test Run

Speed (mph)

Prevailing

Speed Rounded

11.30 61 61 63 62 60

15.00 63 60 63 62 60

18.10 65 64 63 64 65

19.70 59 60 63 61 60

21.00 54 55 63 57 55

STEP 2: Supplementary Investigations (Optional)

Adjustment factors for determining the proposed posted speed limit may be determined by further

investigation of any or all of the following four conditions:

• Elevated Crash Risk: The speed zone being studied has a crash rate that is lower than the

statewide average for similar facilities. However, it is still deemed a high-crash segment based on

the elevated fatal crash rate, which is double the statewide average. Therefore, a 10 percent

reduction in the prevailing speed is appropriate.

• Access Control: The access conﬂict number (ACN) is calculated for the speed zone, based on 40

private accesses to residential driveways and farms, and 7 public road intersections.

ACN* Reduction (%)

< 40 0

41 to 60 5

> 60 10

Therefore, no adjustment is required for access concerns.

• Pedestrian Activity: There is no signiﬁcant pedestrian activity, so no further adjustment is required

for this factor.

• Parking: Parking is negligible and is not a factor in determining the posted speed limit.

The total adjustment from the 4 different factors is 10 percent.

Step 3: Selection of Preliminary Speed Limit

The preliminary speed limit is either the calculated prevailing speed (from Step 1), or if the optional

investigation was undertaken, it is the prevailing speed as adjusted by application of the percentage

corrections from the optional investigation (Step 2).

Milepost

Prevailing Speed

(Step 1), mph

Adjusted Speed

(Step 2), mph

Preliminary Speed Limit

(Rounded), mph

11.30 60 54 55

15.00 60 54 55

18.10 65 59 60

19.70 60 54 55

21.00 55 50 50

The following rules apply to the outcome:

• The preliminary posted speed limit should be the closest 5 mph increment to the (adjusted)

prevailing speed.

• The preliminary posted speed limit shall not differ from the prevailing speed (from Step 1) by more

than 9 mph or by more than 20 percent, whichever is less.

Both of these conditions are satisﬁed by the preliminary speed limits reported above.

Step 4: Violation Check

The proposed speed limit should be either the preliminary posted speed limit or the 50th percentile

speed, whichever is greater. In all cases, the preliminary speed limit and the median speeds yield the

same speed limit (rounded to the nearest 5 mph increment).

Milepost Preliminary, mph Median, mph

11.30 55 56

15.00 55 57

18.10 60 60

19.70 55 56

21.00 50 51

If the proposed speed limit exceeds the statutory speed limit for the highway in question, either the

statutory speed or the proposed speed limit may be posted. If the selected speed limit results in a

violation rate greater than 50 percent, the appropriate police agency(ies) should be notiﬁed that extra

enforcement efforts may be necessary.

It is noted that differences in posted speeds between adjacent speed zones should not be more than

10 mph. However, the Illinois policy permits a larger difference provided that adequate speed reduction

signs are posted.

Using the Northwestern Speed Zoning Technique

Milepost

85th Percentile Speed

(mph) (km/h)

Upper Limit of the

10 mph Pace (mph)

(km/h)

Average Test Run Speed

(mph) (km/h)

11.30 61 (98) 61 (98) 63 (101)

15.00 63 (101) 60 (97) 63 (101)

18.10 65 (105) 64 (103) 63 (101)

19.70 59 (95) 60 (97) 63 (101)

21.00 54 (87) 55 (88) 63 (101)

For the minimum speed study, the speed measurements yield the following:

Justiﬁed from Table 13

Milepost

85th Percentile

Speed (mph)

(km/h)

Upper Limit of

the 10 mph Pace

(mph) (km/h)

Average Test Run

Speed (mph)

(km/h)

Weighted Limit

(mph) (km/h)

Speed Limit

(Rounded), mph

(km/h)

11.30 60 (100) 65 (110) 65 (110) 635 (1070) 65 (110)

15.00 60 (100) 65 (110) 65 (110) 635 (1070) 65 (110)

18.10 65 (110) 65 (110) 65 (110) 650 (1100) 65 (110)

19.70 55 (90) 65 (110) 65 (110) 620 (1040) 60 (100)

21.00 55 (90) 60 (100) 65 (110) 605 (1010) 60 (100)

The recommended speed limit based on the minimum study is 60 to 65 mph depending on the location

within the study area. The lower speeds being produced at the higher mileposts may cause the analyst

to review the site and trafﬁc conditions to determine if the speed zone should be divided into two

separate zones. The conditions are consistent through the study area, and the difference in the speed

limit recommended by the minimum study is only 5 mph. Therefore, the study area will be considered as

one speed zone.

The speed limit from the minimum study needs to be checked against the major physical features of the

road. The design speed of State Route 67 is 50 mph (80 km/h), and the length of the road under study is

11.5 miles (18.5 kms). The average distance between intersections is:

Design

Speed (km/h)

Average Distance

Between Intersections (m)

Length of Proposed

Zone (km)

Maximum Speed Limit

(km/h)

110 400 1.5 110

100 300 1.0 100

90 250 0.8 90

90 175 0.7 80

70 125 0.6 70

70 100 0.5 60

50 75 0.4 50

50 60 0.3 40

30 45 0.2 30

All three criteria are satisﬁed with the 70 km/h speed limit. Therefore, the minimum study recommends a

speed limit of 45 mph (70 km/h).

Continuing on with the detailed analysis, the factors determined from the various tables are:

Adjustment Factors

Non-commercial Access (Table 20) -5

Commercial Access (Table 20) +5

Lane Width (Table 21) +5

Functional Classiﬁcation (Table 22) -5

Median Type (Table 23) 0

Shoulder Type and Width (Table 24) 0

Pedestrian Activity (Table 25) -15

Parking Activity (Table 26) 0

Roadway Alignment (Table 27) +10

Crash Rate (Table 28) +10

Totals +30 -25 =+5

The overall adjustment factor (OAF) is +30 which can be used to determine the multiplication factor

(MF) as:

MF = (100+OAF)/100 = (100+30)/100 = 1.30

The multiplication factor is greater than the maximum allowed, so it is reduced to 1.25. Therefore, the

recommended speed limit (SL) is the speed limit from the minimum study multiplied by the multiplication

factor and rounded to the nearest 10 km/h:

SL = 70 km/h * 1.25 = 87.5 km/h ➞ 90 km/h or 55 mph

The recommended speed limit based on the Northwestern Speed Zoning method is 55 mph.

Expert System (USLIMITS2)

The data from the State Route 67 speed limit study was entered into the USLIMITS2 program to determine

the recommended speed limit for this section of road. The entered data and the recommended speed

limit are shown in the boxed area below. The recommended speed limit is 55 mph.

The speed data at Mileposts 18.10 and 21.00, if entered into USLIMITS2 using the same trafﬁc and

geometric data as above, will produce recommended speed limits of 60 mph and 50 mph,

respectively. These are only 5 mph different from the other mileposts, and it is desirable to use a

consistent 55 mph throughout the study area to encourage speed limit compliance.

Optimal Speed Limit

The optimal speed limit is determined by calculating and selecting the speed that produces the

lowest societal cost. In this case study, only crash and fuel costs will be considered, to demonstrate

the method. In a full analysis, other societal costs would be analyzed, including time travel costs,

automobile emissions, etc.

Step 1: Calculate the Crash Costs

The road authority has developed the following crash prediction models using regression techniques

and trafﬁc, infrastructure, and historic crash data for roads under its control:

()

ADTXSLEXPLN

0000015.000045.00102.0000016.0 +++∗



Where: N = Number of crashes per year, per mile

SL = Posted Speed Limit (mph)

X = Number of intersections on the segment

ADT = Average daily trafﬁc

L = Length (miles)

Additionally, the road authority has examined the severity distributions of the two crash types based on

speed, and has produced the following probabilities using the KABCO severity scale. The KABCO severity

scale was developed by the National Safety Council, and is used by investigating ofﬁcers to classify injury

severity for occupants into one of ﬁve categories: K – killed; A – disabling injury; B – evident injury; C –

possible injury; O – no apparent injury. These deﬁnitions may vary slightly for different police agencies.

USLIMITS2 Data Output

Top of Form

Basic Project Information

Project Name – Case Study 2

Project Number –

Project Date – 09-21-2011

State – California

County – San Diego County

City –

Route – State Route 67

Route Type – Road Section in Undeveloped

Area

Termini from – Milepost 11.3

Termini to – Milepost 22.8

Route Status – EXISTING

Description – FHWA/ITE Informational Report

Case Study

Roadway Information

85th Percentile Speed – 61 mph

50th Percentile Speed – 56 mph

Section Length – 11.50 mile(s)

Statutory Speed Limit – 55 mile(s)

AADT – 23500

Adverse Alignment – No

Lanes and Presence/Type of Median – Two-lane

road or undivided multi-lane

Number of Lanes – 2

Roadside Hazard Rating – 3

Crash Data Information

Crash Data Months/Years – 3.00

Crash AADT – 25000

Total Number of Crashes – 252

Total Number of Injury Crashes – 145

Section Crash Rate – 80

Section Injury Rate – 46

Crash Rate Average for Similar Sections – 151

Injury Rate Average for Similar Sections – 25

Comments –

Recommended Speed Limit is: 55

The crash rate of the section is 80 per 100

MVMT. The average rate for similar sections is

151 per 100 MVMT, and the critical rate is 169

per 100 MVMT. The crash rate of this section

is 47 percent lower than the average crash

rate for similar sections. The rate of injury

crashes for the section is 46 per 100 MVMT.

The average rate for similar sections is 25

per 100 MVMT, and the critical rate is 32 per

100 MVMT. The rate of injury crashes for this

section is 84 percent higher than the average

rate for similar sections. A comprehensive

crash study should be undertaken to identify

engineering and trafﬁc control deﬁciencies

and appropriate corrective actions. The

speed limit should only be reduced as a

last measure after all other treatments have

either been tried or ruled out.

Probability of Crash Severity for Different Speeds

Speed Limit (mph)

Crash Severity

K A B C O

40 0.0016 0.0031 0.0289 0.187 0.7794

45 0.0025 0.0044 0.0386 0.2188 0.7357

50 0.0037 0.0062 0.0495 0.2491 0.6915

55 0.0055 0.0088 0.0635 0.2816 0.6406

60 0.0080 0.0117 0.0788 0.3105 0.5910

65 0.0116 0.0160 0.1001 0.3390 0.5333

70 0.0200 0.1250 0.3651 0.4349 0.0550

75 0.0350 0.1500 0.3846 0.4010 0.0294

The road authority uses the societal costs of crashes shown below:

Crash Severity Societal Cost ($)

K 3,366,388

A 233,100

B 46,620

C 24,510

O 2,590

Therefore, by employing the crash model, the probability distributions for the different crash severities,

and the societal costs for the different crash severities, the cost of crashes for the different available

speed limits is shown below.

Speed

Limit

(mph)

No. of

Crashes

Crash Costs by Severity ($)

K A B C O Total

40 18.1 97,627 13,098 24,421 83,075 36,589 254,810

45 19.1 160,524 19,563 34,324 102,288 36,344 353,044

50 20.1 250,006 29,008 46,319 122,547 35,948 483,829

55 21.1 391,076 43,327 62,529 145,784 35,045 677,760

60 22.2 598,601 60,619 81,655 169,156 34,023 944,054

65 23.4 913,386 87,236 109,154 194,346 32,308 1,336,429

70 24.6 1,657,202 717,189 418,953 262,370 3,506 3,059,219

75 25.9 3,051,845 905,657 464,421 254,576 1,972 4,678,471

It is noted that the number of crashes increases as the speed limit increases. This is as expected.

According to published data on the fuel efﬁciency of late model passenger cars and light trucks

according to speed, the annual fuel consumption for different speed limits can be calculated. An

annual fuel cost can be calculated assuming a gasoline cost of $3.50/gallon. This annual fuel cost can

be added to the annual crash costs to determine the net societal cost for the different speed limit

alternatives. The results are shown below.

Speed Limit

(mph)

Fuel Economy

(mpg)

Annual Fuel

Annual

Crash Cost ($) Total Cost ($)Gallons

Fuel Cost

(at $3.50/gal)

40 28.6 3,448,995 1,2071,482 254,810 12,326,291

45 29.2 3,378,125 11,823,438 353,044 12,176,481

50 30.9 3,192,273 11,172,957 483,829 11,656,786

55 31.1 3,173,020 11,105,569 677,760 11,783,329

60 29.0 3,398,493 11,894,724 944,054 12,838,778

65 26.5 3,720,556 13,021,947 1,336,429 14,358,376

70 24.1 4,090,876 14,318,066 3,059,219 17,377,286

75 21.8 4,524,828 15,836,898 4,678,471 20,515,369

Under an optimal speed limit approach to State Route 67, the recommended speed limit is 50 mph.

The preceding analysis does not include the cost of travel time or automobile emissions, which would

typically be included in the thorough analysis and may affect the outcome of the analysis.

Safe Systems Approach

Under the safe systems approach to setting the speed limit, the critical factor is the type of crashes

that can be expected to occur given the physical features of the road, and the types of road users

that are expected to be encountered. Pedestrian and cyclists, while permitted on State Route 67, are

infrequent. Pedestrian-vehicle and cyclist-vehicle conﬂicts are rare, and do not factor into setting a

speed limit using the safe systems approach.

The controlling criteria in this instance are the presence of at-grade intersections and driveways

(which permit right-angle crashes), and the undivided cross-section (which permits head-on crashes).

State Route 67 has several at-grade intersections that are two-way stop controlled. The volumes on

these intersections are generally low and do not result in a signiﬁcant right-angle crash risk because

of extremely low exposure. This being the case, the most signiﬁcant crash type is the head-on crash.

Therefore, the appropriate speed limit under a safe system approach is about 50 mph (80 km/h).

The recommended speed limits yielded by each speed limit setting method and the actual speed limit

enacted by the road authority for State Route 67 are shown in Table 16.

Table 16. Recommended Speed Limits for the State Route 67 Case Study

State Route 67, California

Actual Speed Limit 55

Illinois DOT 55

Northwestern 55

USLIMITS2 55

Optimal Speed 50

Safe System Speed 50

SUMMARY OF RESULTS

Table 17 shows the recommended speed limits yielded by each speed limit setting method and the

actual speed limit enacted by the road authority for both case studies are shown below.

Table 17. Recommended Speed Limits for the Case Studies

Eldron Boulevard, Florida State Route 67, California

Actual Speed Limit 40 55

Illinois DOT 40 55

Northwestern 45 55

USLIMITS2 40 55

Optimal Speed 45 50

Safe System Speed 30 50

With the exception of the safe systems approach, the recommended speed limit from each of the

methodologies used are within 5 mph of each other. On the one hand, this suggests an inter-method

consistency that is reassuring. However, it needs to be remembered that these are only two speciﬁc

examples, and this consistency may not endure in other cases. In fact, the optimal speed and the

safe systems approaches are known to produce results that have a more pronounced difference from

the other methods in certain situations. This is perhaps not surprising since the Illinois DOT method, the

Northwestern method, and USLIMITS2 all start from the 85th percentile speed.

As expected, the safe speed approach resulted in speed limits that are at the low end of the range.

This becomes very apparent in the urban case on Eldron Avenue, where the potential for more frequent

right-angle crashes requires a more dramatic decrease in operating speeds to be consistent with the

zero tolerance for injury-producing crashes.

REFERENCES

1. Library of Congress, “Who Invented the Automobile?” http://www.loc.gov/rr/scitech/mysteries/auto.html (July 24, 2011).

2. Transport Research Centre, “Speed Management,” Joint Organisation for Economic Cooperation Development and European

Conference of Ministers of Transport, ITRD Number E130442 (Paris, France: 2006).

3. National Forum on Speeding Summary Report Strategies for Reducing Speeding-Related Fatalities and Injuries,

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/injury/enforce/ NatForumSpeeding/images/SpeedingForum.pdf.

4. Locomotive Act 1861, http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/24-25/70/section/11/enacted (August 26, 2011).

5. Department of Transport, “A Brief History of Registration,” Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency

http://www.direct.gov.uk/prod_consum_dg/groups/dg_digitalassets/@dg/@en/@motor/documents/digitalasset/dg_180212.pdf

(September 6, 2011).

6. European Transport Safety Council news release, “Polish Presidency of the EU: Time to Start Work towards the 2020 Road

Safety Target,” http://www.etsc.eu/documents/copy_of_ETSC_Polish_Presidency_Press.pdf (July 4, 2011).

7. R. Elvik, P. Christensen, and A. Amundsen, “Speed and Road Accidents: An Evaluation of the Power Model,” The Institute of

Transport Economics (TOI), TOI Report 740/2004 (December 2004).

8. S.B. White and A. C. Nelson, “Some Effects of Measurement Errors in Estimating Involvement Rate as a Function of

Deviation from Mean Trafﬁc Speed,”

Journal of Safety Research

, 2 (1970): 67–72.

9. E. Hauer, “Speed and Crash Risk: An Opinion,” (unpublished manuscript dated September 8, 2003, University of Toronto,

Department of Civil Engineering, Toronto, Ontario, Canada).

10. G.A. Davis, “Is the Claim that ’Variance Kills’ an Ecological Fallacy?” (paper 01-0530 from the Transportation Research

Board of the National Academies Annual Meeting, Washington DC (available on CD-Rom)).

11. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies (TRB), “Managing Speed: Review of Current Practice for Setting

and Enforcing Speed Limits,”

TRB Special Report 254

, National Research Council (Washington, DC: 1998).

12. National Committee on Uniform Trafﬁc Laws and Ordinances.

Uniform Vehicle Code

Millennium Edition.

(Evanston, Illinois: 2000).

13. Y. Yang., “Optimal Speed Limit for Shared-Use Roadways,” (Doctoral diss., New Jersey Institute of Technology, July 2005).

14. Speed Limits New Zealand,

Guidelines for Setting Speed Limits and Procedures for Calculating Speed Limits.

15. Federal Highway Administration,

Manual on Uniform Trafﬁc Control Devices for Streets and Highways

, 2009 Edition

http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov.

16. K. Fitzpatrick, P. Carlson, M.A. Brewer, M.D. Wooldridge, and S.P. Miaou,

Design Speed, Operating Speed and Posted

Speed Practices

, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, National Cooperative Highway Research

Program Report 504 (Washington, DC: 2003).

17. Institute of Transportation Engineers,

Survey of Speed Zoning Practices

, An Informational Report (Washington, DC: 2001).

18. Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Massachusetts Highway Department,

Procedures for Speed Zoning on State and

Municipal Roadways

(2005).

19. Texas Department of Transportation,

Procedures for Establishing Speed Zones

(November 2006).

20. Maine Department of Transportation, “How Are Speed Limits Set?” http://www.maine.gov/mdot/community-programs/csd/

howlimit.php (July 13, 2011).

21. Illinois Department of Transportation, “Policy on Establishing and Posting Speed Limits on the State Highway System”

(March 2011).

22. Transportation Association of Canada,

Canadian Guidelines for Establishing Posted Speed Limits

(2009).

23. National Cooperative Highway Research Program for the Transportation Research Board of the National Academies,

An Expert System for Recommending Speed Limits in Speed Zones

, Research Results Digest 318 (May 2007).

24. J.G. Bared, P. Edara, and T. Kim, “Safety Impact of Interchange Spacing on Urban Freeways,” (paper presented at the 2006

Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board of the National Academies (January 2006).

25. C.V. Zegeer, J. Hummer, D. Reinfurt, L. Herf, and W. Hunter,

Safety Effects of Cross-Section Design for Two-Lane Roads

Volume I-Final Report, FHWA-RD-87/008 (October 1987).

26. Federal Highway Administration, Ofﬁce of Operations,

Beneﬁts of Access Management

brochure, FHWA-OP-03-066

http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/access_mgmt/docs/beneﬁts_am_trifold.htm.

27. R. Elvik, “Optimal Speed Limits: The Limits of Optimality Models,”

Transportation Research Record 1818

(2002): 32-38.

28. J. Langford, “Setting Speed Limits for a Safe System,” Monash University Accident Research Centre

http://www.austroads.com.au/pdf/TestMethod2/9._Setting_speed_limits__16_Nov_06_.pdf (August 12, 2011).

29. Ohio Department of Transportation.

Trafﬁc Engineering Manual

, Part 12, Zones and Studies (Revised July 18, 2008).

30. Florida Department of Transportation,

Speed Zoning for Highways, Roads, and Streets in Florida

, Manual Number

750-010-002, 2010 Edition.

31. Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities,

Establishment of Speed Limits and Zones, Policy and Procedure

Manual

(June 2000).

32. Roads and Trafﬁc Authority NSW, NSW Speed Zoning Guidelines, Version 3.0, Safer Roads Branch (2009).

33. Federal Highway Administration,

Standard Highway Signs

, 2004 Edition

http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/ser-shs_millennium_eng.htm.

34. Washington Department of Transportation,

Trafﬁc Manual

, Chapter 2, Signs (March 2002).

35. Montana Department of Transportation,

Montana Trafﬁc Engineering Manual

, Chapter 40-Speed Studies (November 2007).

36. V.W. Inman, S. Miller, S. Tackett, J.A. Molino, and A.Z. Zineddin, “Exploration of Appropriate Intervals for Locating Speed

Limit Signs,” Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting CD-ROM (2008).

37. Alberta Transportation,

Driver (Speed) Feedback Signs

, Recommended Practice, Government of Alberta, Canada

(December 2010).

38. Institute of Transportation Engineers,

Methodologies for the Determination of Advisory Speeds

, Publication No. IR-132E

(Washington, DC: 2010).

39. K. Fitzpatrick, M. Brewer, K. Obeng-Boampong, E.S. Park, and N. Trout,

Speeds in School Zones

, Report No. FHWA/TX-

09/0-5470-1, Texas Transportation Institute, The Texas A&M University System (College Station, Texas: February 2009).

40. VicRoads, “School Speed Zones” http://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/Home/SafetyAndRules/SafetyIssues/Speed/

SchoolSpeedZones.htm (August 28, 2011).

41. Ontario Ministry of Transportation,

Ontario Trafﬁc Manual – Book 5 – Regulatory Signs

, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

42. National Highway Trafﬁc Safety Administration,

Speed Enforcement Program Guidelines

, Report No. DOT HS 810 915

(March 2008).

43. Wisconsin Department of Transportation, Bureau of Highway Operations, Trafﬁc Engineering Section,

Wisconsin Statewide

Speed Management Guidelines

, (Madison, Wisconsin: June 2009).

44. Institute of Transportation Engineers.

Manual of Transportation Engineering Studies

(Washington, DC: 2000).

45. National Motorists Association,

Speed Limits, NMA’s Model Speed Zoning Law

http://www.motorists.org/speedlimits/home/nmas-model-speed-zoning-law.

46. National Highway Trafﬁc Safety Administration, National Center for Statistics and Analysis,

Trafﬁc Safety Facts 2007,

Data: Speeding

, DOT-HS-810-998 (Washington, DC: 2009).

47. C.N. Kloeden, G. Ponte, and A.J. McLean,

Travelling Speed and the Risk of Crash Involvement on Rural Roads

. Australian

Transport Safety Bureau, CR 204 (Canberra, Australia: 2001).

48. National Highway Trafﬁc Safety Administration and Federal Highway Administration,

Speed Enforcement Camera Systems

Operational Guidelines,

Report No. DOT HS 810 916 (March 2008).

49. Federal Highway Administration, Ofﬁce of Safety,

Procedures for Setting Advisory Speeds on Curves

, FHWA Document

No. FHWA-SA-11-22 http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/speedmgt/ref_mats/fhwasa1122.

50. G. Forbes,

Speed Reduction Techniques for Rural High-to-Low Speed Transitions

, National Cooperative Highway Research

Program, Synthesis Report 412, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies (2011).

51. A. Edgar, “Speed Zoning Based on the Road Environment,” ITE

2005 Annual Meeting and Exhibit Compendium of

Technical Papers

, Institute of Transportation Engineers (2005).

52. E. Hauer, “Speed and Safety,”

Transportation Research Record 2103

, Transportation Research Board of the National

Academies (2009): 10–17.

APPENDIX A: GLOSSARY

The following deﬁnitions are provided to aid in the understanding of setting speed limits. They may or

may not coincide with terms and deﬁnitions found in related State statutes.

10 mph Pace: The 10 mph pace is the 10 mph range encompassing the greatest percentage of all the

measured speeds in a spot speed study.

85th Percentile Speed: The 85th percentile speed is the speed at or below which 85 percent of the

free-ﬂowing vehicles travel.

Advisory Speed: Advisory speeds warn drivers to proceed at a speed lower than the speed limit due to

geometrics, surface, sight distance, or other conditions.

Annual Average Daily Trafﬁc: Commonly abbreviated as AADT, the total number of vehicles traversing

a point or facility in one year divided by 365.

Average Speed: The average (or mean) speed is the most common measure of central tendency.

Using data from a spot speed study, the average is calculated by summing all the measured speeds

and dividing by the sample size.

Design Speed: The design speed is a selected speed used to determine the various geometric design

features of the roadway.

Differential Speed Limit: A system that prescribes different maximum speed limits for different vehicle

types or user groups. This is usually applied as one maximum speed limit for light passenger vehicles, and

a lower maximum speed limit for trucks and heavy commercial vehicles.

Free-ﬂow Speed: Free-ﬂow speed is the speed a driver chooses when there are no inﬂuences from other

vehicles, conspicuous enforcement, or environmental factors; in other words, this is the speed the driver

ﬁnds comfortable based on the appearance of the road.

Injury Minimization Speed Limit: Also known as a speed limit for safe systems, it is a speed limit that

is set so that the forces experienced by the human body in the event of a crash will not exceed

biomechanical tolerances resulting in death or a severe personal injury.

Optimal Speed Limit: A speed limit that yields the minimum total cost to society, including vehicle

operating costs, crash costs, travel time costs, and other societal costs.

Rational Speed Limit: A speed limit that is based on a formal, analytical review of trafﬁc ﬂow, roadway

design, local development, and crash data. For existing roads, it uses the 85th percentile speed of

free-ﬂowing vehicles operating under normal trafﬁc, weather, and roadway conditions as the speed

limit, adjusted down by factors that can affect safety, such as road design features and roadside

development and are not readily apparent to the motorist. The analysis also considers crash history and

the inﬂuence of speed as a contributing factor. The 85th percentile speed is based on the premise that

the vast majority of drivers will select a speed that is reasonable, safe, and prudent for a given road.

Drivers who exceed the 90th percentile have a signiﬁcantly higher risk of crashing.

Road Safety Audit: A formal safety performance examination of an existing or future road or

intersection by an independent audit team.

Speed Dispersion: The speed dispersion refers to the normal spread in vehicle speeds observed in a

study section.

Speed Limit, Absolute: An absolute speed limit is a numerical value, the exceeding of which is always

in violation of the law, regardless of the conditions or hazards involved.

Speed Limits, Environment: An environmental speed limit is a speed limit created for the purpose of

meeting federal air quality standards.

Speed Limit, Posted: The posted speed limit is the value conveyed to the motorist on a black-on-white

regulatory sign. Standard engineering practice is to post speed limits for freeways, arterials, and any

roadway or street where speed zoning has altered the limit from the statutory value.

Speed Limit, Prima Facie: A prima facie speed limit is one above which drivers are presumed to be

driving unlawfully. Nevertheless, if charged with a violation, drivers have the opportunity to demonstrate

in court that their speed was safe for conditions at the time and not in violation of the speed limit, even

though they may have exceeded the numerical limit.

Speed Limits, Statutory: Numerical speed limits speciﬁcally provided for under a State’s trafﬁc codes

that apply to various classes or categories of roads (e.g., rural expressways, residential streets, primary

arterials, etc.). State laws may or may not require that these limits be posted.

Speed Zoning: Speed zoning is the process of performing and engineering a study and establishing a

reasonable and safe speed limit for a section of roadway where the statutory speed limits given in the

motor vehicle laws do not ﬁt the road or trafﬁc conditions at a speciﬁc location.

Speeding: The legal deﬁnition of speeding is exceeding the posted speed limit. In the road safety

community, speeding is deﬁned as exceeding the posted speed limit or speed too fast for conditions.

Test Run: A speed test run is performed by driving through a study area (potential speed zone) at a

reasonable free-ﬂow speed and collecting speed data, then using this data to conﬁrm speed limits or

speed data collected from other vehicles in the study area.

APPENDIX B: EXAMPLE TRAFFIC CONTROL ORDER

APPENDIX C: ILLINOIS POLICY ON SETTING SPEED LIMITS

(The material in this section is adapted from Policy on Establishing and Posting Speed Limits on the State Highway System,

published by the Illinois Department of Transportation (March 2011).)

Illinois statutes and the State Manual on Uniform Trafﬁc Control Devices require that speed limits

other than statutory speed limits be based on “… an engineering study that has been performed in

accordance with trafﬁc engineering practices. The engineering study shall include an analysis of the

current speed distribution of free-ﬂowing vehicles.”

The following procedure shall be used to determine speed zones on streets and highways under the

jurisdiction of the DOT. The same procedure is recommended for local agencies.

STEP 1: Establish the Prevailing Speed

The prevailing speed is the average of the following three metrics, measured during free-ﬂowing trafﬁc conditions:

• 85th Percentile Speed: The speed at or below which 85 percent of the vehicles are traveling.

• Upper Limit of the 10 mph Pace: The 10 mph range containing the most vehicles.

• Average Test Run Speed: Determined on the basis of ﬁve vehicle runs in each direction over the

length of the proposed speed zone.

The prevailing speed is the nearest 5 mph increment to the average of the above three values.

STEP 2: Supplementary Investigations (Optional)

Adjustment factors for determining the proposed posted speed limit may be determined by further

investigation of any or all of the following four conditions:

• Elevated Crash Risk: If the speed zone being studied contains a portion of a high-crash segment

or contains a high-crash intersection as determined by the Bureau of Safety Engineering, the

prevailing speed may be reduced by 10 percent.

• Access Control: The access conﬂict number (ACN) is calculated for the speed zone, and this

number is used to determine the percent reduction of the prevailing speed as shown below.

ACN* Reduction (%)

< 40 0

41 to 60 5

> 60 10

Where:

= Number of ﬁeld entrances and driveways to single-family dwellings

= Number of driveways to minor commercial entrances, multi-family residential units, and

minor street intersections

= Number of driveways to major commercial entrances, large multi-family developments,

and major street intersections

• Pedestrian Activity: Where no sidewalks are provided or where sidewalks are located immediately

behind the curb and the total pedestrian trafﬁc exceeds 10 per hour for any 3 hours within any

8-hour period, the prevailing speed may be reduced by 5 percent. Pedestrians crossing the

route at intersections or established crossing points may be included if the point of crossing is not

controlled by a STOP or YIELD sign on the route in question, or does not have trafﬁc signals.

• Parking: The prevailing speed may be reduced by 5 percent where parking is permitted adjacent

to the trafﬁc lanes.

The adjustment factors from the four different factors are added together to produce a single

percentage adjustment that shall not exceed 20 percent.

Step 3: Selection of Preliminary Speed Limit

The preliminary speed limit is either the calculated prevailing speed (from Step 1), or if the optional

investigation was undertaken, it is the prevailing speed as adjusted by application of the percentage

corrections from the optional investigation (Step 2). The following rules apply to the outcome:

• The preliminary posted speed limit should be the closest 5 mph increment to the (adjusted)

prevailing speed.

• The preliminary posted speed limit shall not differ from the prevailing speed (from Step 1) by more

than 9 mph or by more than 20 percent, whichever is less.

Step 4: Violation Check

Using the spot speed data collected in Step 1, determine the median speed (the 50th percentile). The

proposed speed limit should be either the preliminary posted speed limit or the 50th percentile speed,

whichever is greater.

If the proposed speed limit exceeds the statutory speed limit for the highway in question, either the

statutory speed or the proposed speed limit may be posted. If the selected speed limit results in a

violation rate greater than 50 percent, the appropriate police agency(ies) should be notiﬁed that extra

enforcement efforts may be necessary.

It is noted that differences in posted speeds between adjacent speed zones should not be more than

10 mph. However, the Illinois policy permits a larger difference provided that adequate speed reduction

signs are posted.

APPENDIX D: NORTHWESTERN SPEED ZONING TECHNIQUE

The Northwestern Speed Zoning Technique is an example of an engineering method that can be used

to calculate a recommended speed limit for a particular facility. It is based on the 85th percentile

operating speed, and uses adjustments for different trafﬁc, roadway, and performance characteristics.

The general sentiment in the Northwestern Speed Zoning Technique is that the 85th percentile speed

is a safe, self-selected speed that also provides a reasonable basis for enforcement. However, it must

be recognized that the driver selects a speed based on her/his evaluation of the perceived hazard,

and if there are hazards of which the driver is unaware, then the selected speed may be too high. The

commonly encountered hazards and the crash history of the road can be used to determine if the 85th

percentile speed is a suitable legislated speed limit.

The Northwestern Speed Zoning Technique provides adjustments for various features of the road—these

are generally applicable to most roads, but can be altered to suit local conditions and policies.

The procedure consists of two parts—a minimum study and a detailed analysis. The minimum study is

always carried out; the detailed analysis is undertaken when unusual road or land use characteristics

make the speed limit as determined by the minimum study seem inappropriate.

Minimum Speed Study

The data required for the minimum speed study are:

• Speed data:

» 85th percentile speeds

» Upper limit of the 15 km/h pace

» Average test run speed

• Physical Road data:

» Design speed

» Length of the proposed speed zone

» Average distance between intersections (not including alleys, driveways, or entrances unless

they are controlled by STOP signs or trafﬁc signals).

The procedure used in the minimum speed study is to determine the speed limit based on the speed

data, subject to a maximum as determined by the physical features of the road.

The steps are as follows:

1. For each of the three speed measurements, use Table 18 to select the justiﬁed speed limit.

2. Compute a weighted average speed limit using the following weights, and round down to the

nearest 10 km/h:

• Justiﬁed speed limit from the 85th percentile speed: Weight = 3.

• Justiﬁed speed limit from the upper limit of the pace: Weight = 3.

• Justiﬁed speed limit from the average test run speed: Weight = 4.

433

85 runpace

SLSLSL

= 

Where: SL = Weighted average speed limit

= Speed limit justiﬁed by the 85th percentile speed using Table 18

pace

= Speed limit justiﬁed by the upper limit of the 15 km/h pace using Table 18

run

= Speed limit justiﬁed by the average test run speed using Table 18

3. Using Table 19, select the highest speed limit that will satisfy all three conditions of design speed,

average distance between intersections, and length of the proposed speed zone.

4. The recommended speed limit is the lower of the weighted average (from Step 2) and the

maximum speed limit (from Step 3).

Table 18. Speed Limit Justiﬁed by Speed Data

85th Percentile Speed

(km/h)

Upper Limit of the 15

km/h Pace

Average Test Run Speed

(km/h)

Justiﬁed Speed Limit

(km/h)

< 34 < 33 < 30 30

34 – 44 33 – 42 30 – 38 40

45 – 54 43 – 52 39 – 48 50

55 – 64 53 – 62 49 – 56 60

65 – 74 63 – 72 57 – 65 70

75 – 84 73 – 80 66 – 75 80

85 – 94 81 – 88 76 – 85 90

95 – 104 89 – 96 86 – 94 100

> 104 > 96 > 94 110

Table 19. Speed Limit Based on Road Parameters

Design Speed (km/h)

Average Distance

Between Intersections

(m)

Length of Proposed

Zone (km)

Maximum Speed Limit

(km/h)

110 400 1.5 110

100 300 1.0 100

90 250 0.8 90

90 175 0.7 80

70 125 0.6 70

70 100 0.5 60

50 75 0.4 50

50 60 0.3 40

30 45 0.2 30

Detailed Analysis

The data required for the minimum speed study are:

1. Using the recommended speed limit from the Minimum Speed Study and the other collected

data, consult Tables 3 to 11 and determine the adjustment factors based on additional trafﬁc and

roadway features.

2. Add all of the adjustment factors together to obtain an overall adjustment factor.

3. Calculate the multiplier as follows:

100

100 OAF



Where: MF = Multiplication Factor

OAF = Overall Adjustment Factor (from Step 2)

4. If the Multiplication Factor is greater than 1.25, set it to 1.25. If the Multiplication Factor is less than

0.75, set it to 0.75.

5. Multiply the recommended speed limit from the minimum speed study by the multiplication factor

and round to the nearest 10 km/h to produce the recommended speed limit.

Note: Table 20 will yield two adjustment factors—one for commercial, and one for non-commercial

driveways.

Also, if a detailed study is to be undertaken, then all of the information and tables must be included in

the analysis. It is not good practice to include selected items and ignore others.

Table 20. Adjustment Factors for Access Density

No. of Driveways per kilometer Speed Limit from Minimum Study (km/h)

Non-Commercial Commercial 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110

0 – 3 0 +15 +15 +15 +10 +10 +5 +5 0 0

4 – 6 0 +10 +10 +10 +5 +5 0 0 0 -5

7 – 12 1 +10 +10 +5 +5 0 0 0 -5 -5

13 – 21 2 – 3 +5 +5 0 0 0 -5 -5 -10 -10

22 – 30 4 – 5 +5 0 0 0 -5 -10 -10 -15 -15

> 30 > 5 0 0 -5 -10 -10 -15 -15 -20 -20

Table 21. Adjustment Factors for Lane Width

Lane width (m)

Speed Limit from Minimum Study (km/h)

30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110

< 2.8 0 0 0 -5 -5 -10 -10 -10 -15

2.8 – 3.2 +5 +5 0 0 0 -5 -5 -5 -10

3.3 – 3.5 +10 +10 +5 +5 0 0 0 0 -5

> 3.5 +15 +15 +10 +10 +5 +5 +5 0 0

Table 22. Adjustment Factors for Functional Classiﬁcation

Functional Classiﬁcation

(Urban Areas Only)

Speed Limit from Minimum Study (km/h)

30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110

Local 0 0 0 -5 -10 -10 -15 -15 -20

Collector +5 0 0 0 -5 -5 -10 -10 -15

Arterial +10 +5 +5 0 0 0 -5 -5 -10

Expressway +15 +10 +10 +5 0 0 0 0 -5

Freeway +25 +20 +15 +10 +5 +5 0 0 0

Table 23. Adjustment Factors for Median Type

Functional

Classiﬁcation

Median

None Flush or Painted Mountable Barrier

Depressed

Unpaved

0.6m –

1.8m > 1.8m

0.6m –

1.8m > 1.8m

0.6m –

1.8m > 1.8m

1.8m –

6.0m > 6.0m

Local 0 +5 +10 — — — — — —

Collector 0 +5 +5 +10 +15 — — — —

Arterial -10 0 0 +5 +10 +15 +20 — —

Expressway — -10 -5 0 0 +5 +10 +15 +20

Freeway — — -10 -10 -5 0 0 0 0

Table 24. Adjustment Factors for Shoulder Type and Width

Functional Classiﬁcation

Shoulder Type

None Turf or Gravel Stabilized Paved

Local 0 +5 +10 +20

Collector 0 0 +5 +10

Arterial -5 0 0 +5

Expressway -10 -5 0 0

Freeway -20 -10 -5 0

Table 25. Adjustment Factors for Pedestrian Activity

Pedestrian Activity

Sidewalk Setback from Edge of Pavement (m)

None 0 – 0.5 0.6 – 2.5 2.6 – 4.5 > 4.5

Age < 12

Heavy -25 -20 -15 -10 -5

Medium -20 -15 -10 -5 0

Light -15 -10 -5 0 0

If none, consider ages over 12

Age > 12

Heavy -10 -5 0 0 0

Medium -5 0 0 0 0

Light -5 0 0 0 0

None 0 0 0 0 0

Table 26. Adjustment Factors for Parking Activity

Functional Classiﬁcation

Parking Activity

No Parking Low Turnover Medium Turnover High Turnover

Local +10 0 -10 -10

Collector +10 0 -10 -15

Arterial +15 0 -10 -15

Expressway 0 -10 -15 -20

Table 27. Adjustment Factors for Roadway Alignment

Number of Curves per Kilometer with Advisory Speed

< Speed Limit from Minimum Study

Vertical Alignment

Level Rolling Hilly Mountainous

0 +10 +5 0 0

1 0 0 -5 -5

2 -10 -10 -10 -10

> 2 -20 -20 -20 -20

Table 28. Adjustment Factors for Crash Rate

Crash Rate as a Percent of Area-wide Rate for Similar Facilities Adjustment

< 75% +10

76% – 125% 0

126% – 200% -10

> 200% -20

Example Calculation

The following is an example calculation using the Northwestern Speed Zoning Technique:

Input Data: 85th Percentile Speed = 66.4 km/h

The 15 km/h pace = 45 to 60 km/h

Average test run speed = 56 km/h

Design Speed = 100 km/h

Average Intersection Spacing: 200 meters

Length of Proposed Speed Zone = 0.6 kms

For the minimum speed study, the speed measurements yield the following:

Criteria Justiﬁed Speed Limit (from Table 18) Weight Weighted Limit

85th Percentile Speed 70 3 210

Upper Limit of the Pace 60 3 180

Average Test Run Speed 60 4 240

Sum 630

The weighted average is 630/10 = 63 km/h, which suggests a speed limit of 60 km/h.

The suggested speed limit needs to be checked against the major physical features of the road using

Table 19.

Design Speed

(km/h)

Average Distance Between

Intersections (m)

Length of Proposed

Zone (km)

Maximum Speed Limit

(km/h)

110 400 1.5 110

100 300 1.0 100

90 250 0.8 90

90 175 0.7 80

70 125 0.6 70

70 100 0.5 60

50 75 0.4 50

50 60 0.3 40

30 45 0.2 30

All three criteria are satisﬁed with the 60 km/h speed limit. Therefore the minimum study recommends a

speed limit of 60 km/h.

For the detailed analysis, the following data is collected:

• Functional classiﬁcation – Arterial

• Number of non-commercial driveways – 10/km

• Number of commercial driveways – 4.5/km

• Lane width – 3.65 m

• 4.3 m painted median

• No shoulders, and barrier curbs on both sides of the road

• Light pedestrian activity for age < 12

• A sidewalk with a 0.3 meter setback

• No parking allowed

• Rolling terrain

• Crash rate = 7.4 crashes per million-vehicle-kilometers (average is 5.1 crashes per million-vehicle-

kilometers for arterial roads)

The factors determined from the various tables are:

Adjustment Factors

Non-commercial Access (Table 20) +5

Commercial Access (Table 20) 0

Lane Width (Table 21) +10

Functional Classiﬁcation (Table 22) 0

Median Type (Table 23) 0

Shoulder Type and Width (Table 24) -5

Pedestrian Activity (Table 25) -10

Parking Activity (Table 26) +15

Roadway Alignment (Table 27) +5

Crash Rate (Table 28) -10

Totals +35 -25 =+10

The overall adjustment factor (OAF) is +10, which can be used to determine the multiplication factor as:

MF = (100+OAF)/100 = (100+10)/100 = 1.10

The multiplication factor is less than 1.25 and greater than 0.75, therefore the recommended speed limit

is the speed limit from the minimum study multiplied by the multiplication factor and rounded to the

nearest 10 km/h:

SL = 60 km/h * 1.10 = 66 km/h ➔ 70 km/h

APPENDIX E: SPEED LIMITS NEW ZEALAND (ROAD RISK METHODOLOGY)

The speed limit policy in New Zealand is a national policy that aims to balance mobility and safety by

setting speed limits that are safe, appropriate, and credible for the level of roadside development and

the category of road.

The information required to determine the speed limit for a particular road is:

The existing speed limit;

• The character of the surrounding land environment (e.g., rural, fringe of city, fully developed);

• The function of a road (i.e., arterial, collector or local);

• Detailed roadside development data (e.g., number of houses, shops, schools, etc.);

• The number and nature of side roads;

• Carriageway characteristics (e.g., median divided, lane width and number of lanes, road

geometry, street lighting, footpaths, cycle lanes, parking, setback of fence line from carriageway);

• Vehicle, cycle and pedestrian activity;

• Crash data; and

• Speed survey data.

Calculating a speed limit using Speed Limits New Zealand (SLNZ) methods requires road and roadside

data collection, and the application of the set procedures speciﬁed in the policy.

Once a section of road has been identiﬁed for analysis, data collection should be commenced.

The survey should extend at least 200 meters in each direction beyond the section of road under

consideration. This is to ensure the appropriate boundary point between speed limits is identiﬁed and

features that may inﬂuence sign location are included.

Step 1: Determine Development Rating

Different types of development are allocated for the rating values as shown in Table SLNZ4. The ratings

are based on the expected number of vehicle, pedestrian and cycle movements generated each day.

For example, a house is allocated one rating unit and a large shop is given four rating units.

Development ratings are allocated for the road being surveyed (frontage development) and for

the ﬁrst 500 meters of side roads (side road development). For each 100-meter section of road, the

development rating subtotal is the sum of the frontage and the side road development ratings. The

total development rating is calculated by adding the 100-meter subtotals for the length of road being

assessed for a speed limit.

Table E1. Development Rating

Development Type Frontage Development Rating Units

A Property or access point* with 1 or 2 dwellings**; church;

small hall; playground; beach; sports ground; camping

ground; holiday cabins; cycle path or pedestrian way

that intersects with the roadway.

B Property or access point* with 3 or 4 dwellings**;

business or ofﬁce with fewer than ten employees; small

shop; large hall; cinema; small public swimming pool.

C Property or access point* with 5 or more dwellings**;

business or ofﬁce with 10 to 30 employees; general

store; takeaway shop; bank; service station; cinema

complex; hotel; restaurant; large swimming pool.

D Business or ofﬁce with more than 30 employees;

large shop; post ofﬁce; hospital; tertiary education

establishment.

E Access point* serving two or more developments. 1 to 4***

F Primary school or kindergarten. 1 for every 15 students

G Secondary school. 1 for every 30 students

* An access point includes a private driveway and a public entrance or exit.

** A dwelling includes a house, a home unit in a block, a semi-detached home unit, and a motel unit. Each unit in a block of units

counts as one dwelling.

*** When two or more developments other than dwellings, or if dwellings and other developments share a common access point

or service road, the correct rating is the greatest of:

• the rating for a development type A, B, or C according to the number of dwellings served by the access point; or

• the highest rating for any one development, other than dwellings, served by the access point; or

• the rating determined by treating the access point as a side road and allocating the rating specied in Table SLNZ5.

Multiple access points are handled in the following manner:

• Where a single development or a small group of developments has more than one access

point on the same road, the development should be rated once only and additional access

points ignored. Developments with separate entrance and exit points should also be treated as

having only one access point. Examples include service stations, motels, schools, and a small

group of shops with off-street parking.

• Where a large group of developments, such as a shopping mall or a service road, share

more than one access point, a rating is assigned to each access point. In these situations, a

proportional number of the developments should be allocated to each access point, and each

one rated as a Development Type E.

• Separate ratings may be assigned to each access point when there are at least four individual

developments or one type D development for each access point. These conditions ensure that

the sum of the access point ratings does not exceed the sum of the ratings for the individual

developments in the group.

Step 2: Determine side road development rating

The side road development rating is calculated on the ﬁrst 500 meters of a side road by applying the

rating values outlined in Table E1 to the development and then entering Table E2 to determine the side

road rating.

A notable difference in this step is that each school or kindergarten fronting on a side road is calculated

(differently) as follows:

• Use half the normal frontage rating (from Table E1) if a school or kindergarten is within 500 meters

from the road being surveyed; and

• Use a quarter of the frontage rating (from Table E1) if a school or kindergarten is between 500 and

1000 meters from the road being surveyed.

Note that a cross intersection is treated as two side roads.

Table E2. Side Road Development Rating

Trafﬁc Volume on Side road

(Vehicles per Day)

Side Road Development Rating Units According to the Frontage

Development Rating (R) on the First 500 m of the Side Road

R < 8 8 < R < 20 R > 20

< 4000 1 2 3

> 4000 2 3 4

Step 3: Roadway Rating

The roadway rating is calculated by summing the ratings related to roadway activities and trafﬁc

control. Tables E3 to E8 show the ratings that apply according to the nature and use of the road. Note

that where usage or provision of facilities is different on each side of the road, the rating is the average

of the ratings for each side.

Roadway ratings are calculated for each 100-meter section of road and the sub-total is the sum of

the ratings for each roadway activity per 100-meter section. The total roadway rating is calculated by

adding the 100-meter sub-totals for the length of road being assessed for a speed limit.

Step 4: Calculate the Rating

The average rating is calculated by summing the total development and roadway rating for the length

of road being assessed and then dividing by the number of 100-meter sections of road. However,

the total roadway rating must not exceed the total development rating for the length of road being

assessed. If the total roadway rating is higher, it must be reduced to that of the development rating.

Table E3. Pedestrians

Pedestrian Facilities

Pedestrian Volume (Pedestrians per Day)

< 200 > 200

Sidewalks behind boulevards or no

pedestrian access

0 0

Sidewalks adjacent to the roadway 0 1

No sidewalk but useable shoulder 1 2

Pedestrians must walk on road 1 3

Table E4. Cyclists

Cycling Facilities

Cyclist Volume (Pedestrians per Day)

< 200 > 200

Bicycle path separated by a boulevard or

fence or no cyclist access

0 0

Wide road, cyclists clear of moving trafﬁc 0 1

Narrow road, cyclists impede moving trafﬁc 1 2

Table E5. Parking

Parking Facilities

Normally Two Parked

Vehicles or Fewer per

100 Meters

Frequent Parking

on Both Sides, Long

Duration

Frequent Parking

on Both Sides, Short

Duration

Vehicles can park 2

meters from moving

trafﬁc

0 0 1

Vehicles park close to

moving trafﬁc but do

not obstruct it

1 2 3

Parked vehicles obstruct

moving trafﬁc, i.e.,

remaining trafﬁc lane is

3 meters or less

2 3 4

Table E6. Road Geometry

Type of Roadway

Alignment

Open Visibility Average Visibility Limited Visibility

One-way trafﬁc or divided roadway

(solid median or barrier)

0 0 0

4 or more lanes (ﬂush median or

undivided)

0 1 1

2 or 3 lanes (ﬂush median or undivided) 0 1 2

1 lane (two-way) 3 4 5

Table E7. Trafﬁc Control

Trafﬁc control (applying to trafﬁc on the road surveyed) Rating Unit

Pedestrian crossing 3

“Stop” control 3

YIELD Sign 2

Trafﬁc signals 2

Railway level crossing 1

Trafﬁc islands 1

Table E8. Development

Type of Development

Status of Road

Local Road Collector Road Arterial Road

Residential 2 1 0

Industrial 1 0 0

Commercial 0 0 0

Rural Residential 1 0 0

Rural 0 0 0

Step 5: Determine the Speed Limit

When the average rating has been calculated, the speed limit is determined as follows.

Figure SLNZ1. Determining Speed Limit.

Figure SLNZ2. Speed Limit Flow Chart—Rural.

In rare instances, because of special features or activities along a road, SLNZ cannot be used or will

not produce a sound result. SLNZ must always be used with reference to speed limits policy, and in

conjunction with sound engineering judgment, to determine the appropriate and safe speed limit.

Figure SLNZ3. Speed Limit Flow Chart—In-Between. Figure SLNZ4. Speed Limit Flow Chart—Urban.

APPENDIX F: EXAMPLE CASE STUDY USING USLIMITS2

Example 1: Speed Limit Request on a Two-Lane Road in an Undeveloped Area

The ﬁrst example is a two-lane road in a rural area. At the request of the Township ofﬁcials, the engineer

has been asked to conduct a trafﬁc and engineering investigation to determine if the existing maximum

50 mile-per-hour speed limit should be lowered. Based on data collected during the investigation, the

USLIMITS2 screens below show the input variables and ﬁnal suggested speed limit for this road section.

This is the Basic Location Information input screen:

100

This is the basic input screen for the 85th percentile speed and other variables:

This is the input screen for the crash data:

101

This is the crash summary generated by USLIMITS2 based on the crash data input by the user:

This screen provides a summary of the crash calculations:

102

This is the ﬁnal output screen showing the advisory recommended speed limit for this rural road section:

103

The results can also be printed to a Microsoft Word ﬁle as shown below:

USLIMITS2 Data Output

Top of Form

Basic Project Information

Project Name – Example 1 – Plank Road Speed Limit Request

Project Number – WAS 01

Project Date – 11-01-2006

State – Michigan

County – Washtenaw County

City –

Route – Plank Road

Route Type – Road Section in Undeveloped Area

Route Status – EXISTING

Roadway Information

85th Percentile Speed – 52 mph

50th Percentile Speed – 46 mph

Section Length – 2.12 mile(s)

Statutory Speed Limit – 55 mile(s)

AADT – 1200

Adverse Alignment – No

Lanes and Presence/Type of Median – Two-lane road or undivided multi-lane

Number of Lanes – 2

Roadside Hazard Rating – 3

Crash Data Information

Crash Data Months/Years – 3.00

Crash AADT – 1180

Total Number of Crashes – 7

Total Number of Injury Crashes – 2

Section Crash Rate – 256

Section Injury Rate – 73

Crash Rate Average for Similar Sections – 232

Injury Rate Average for Similar Sections – 84

Comments –

Recommended Speed Limit is: 50

104

APPENDIX G: EXAMPLE SPEED STUDY FORMS

105

106

APPENDIX H: SAMPLE 85th PERCENTILE SPEED CALCULATION

The 85th percentile is the speed at which 85 percent of the observed vehicles are traveling at or below.

This percentile is used in evaluating and recommending posted speed limits. Weather conditions may

affect speed percentiles. For example, observed speeds may be slower in rainy or snowy conditions.

A frequency distribution table is a convenient way to determine speed percentiles. An example, from

Iowa, is given in Table 29. The frequency of vehicles is the number of vehicles recorded at each speed.

The cumulative frequency is the total of each of the numbers (frequencies) added together row by row

from lower to higher speed. The fourth column is a running percentage of the cumulative frequency.

Table 29. Example Frequency Distribution Table

Speed (mph)

Frequency of

Vehicles

Cumulative

Frequency

Cumulative

Percent Speed Percentile

15 1 1 1%

18 2 3 3%

21 6 9 9%

24 12 21 21%

27 13 34 34%

30 20 54 54%

33 18 72 72%

85th

36 14 86 86%

39 6 92 92%

42 6 98 98%

45 1 99 99%

48 1 100 100%

Source: Handbook of Simpliﬁed Practice for Trafﬁc Studies, Center for Transportation Research and

Education, Iowa State University.

The 85th percentile speed is determined from the cumulative percent column. For the example data in

Table 4, the 85th percentile falls between 33 and 36 mph. The calculation of speed percentiles is easier

if a sample size of 100 vehicles is collected. When the sample size equals 100 vehicles, the cumulative

frequency and cumulative percent are the same.

As can be observed from Table 29, the exact 85 percent (85th percentile) is not found in the cumulative

percent column. To reach these exact percentages, a calculation is completed using percentages and

speeds from the distribution table. Shown below is the equation for calculating speed percentiles:

()

min

max

minmax

minD

+−

−

= 

where SD = speed at P

, P

= percentile desired, P

max

= higher cumulative percent, P

min

= lower

cumulative percent, S

max

= higher speed, and S

min

= lower speed.

107

The 85th percentile of speed (P

= 85 percent) falls between 33 and 36 mph (see Table 29), so S

max

36 mph and S

min

= 33 mph. The higher cumulative percent (P

max

) is 86 percent, and the lower cumulative

percent (P

min

) is 72 percent. To ﬁnd S

at P

in this case (85th percentile of speed),

()

mph mph mph mph

S 8.35333336

%72%86

%72%85

=+−

−

= 

On highways carrying low trafﬁc volumes, the checks at any one station may be discontinued after 2

hours, although a minimum of 100 vehicles have not been timed.

The above procedure is generally automated in commercially available computer spreadsheets or

workbooks. For example, Microsoft Excel has a PERCENTILE function that can be used to determine the

50th, 85th or any other percentile from an array of numbers.

For More Information:

Visit http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov

FHWA, Ofﬁce of Safety

Guan Xu

[email protected]

202-366-5892

FHWA-SA-12-004