Open Hastings Search or ask⌘K

NoM briefing note - 30mph 24 09 2026 FINAL (003)

Committee report · Full Council · Tue 13 Oct 2026 · East Sussex County Council · agenda item 10 · the whole meeting

Read the council's document ↗

In plain English

Each sentence was checked against the passage it cites; how the checking works.

Noted · Received for information; no decision followed.

This briefing note states that the majority of villages in East Sussex already have a 30mph limit through their built-up core. p4

It states that reducing a speed limit by signs alone typically reduces average speeds by only around 1-2mph. p3

It estimates that the total cost of implementing additional traffic calming measures on the 18 main/key roads identified as needing them to bring speeds down to a compliant 30mph level would be in the region of £4 million. p5p6

It also states that an individual signed-only speed-limit scheme has indicative design and implementation costs of £20,000 to £30,000, while schemes requiring traffic calming can cost between £200,000 and £700,000. p8p9

Show the 6 passages this is based on
  • p32.7 For this reason, we consider the mean average recorded speeds, as well as factors such as the amount of frontage development, the road layout, visibility, pedestrian activity and the overall character of the route. 2.8 While it may seem that reducing the speed limit from 40mph to 30mph would address concerns around vehicle speeds, experience both locally and nationally shows that simply changing the signs is unlikely to result in a significant reduction in vehicle speeds. Signing alone typically reduces average speeds by only around 1-2 mph. 2.9 The average speeds that would be required for a lower speed limit by signs alone are shown in Appendix 1 – ESCC Speed Limit Policy. 2.10 Where mean speeds exceed the threshold set out in our Policy, engineering measures for traffic calming are considered. Due to the additional costs associated with traffic calming schemes, requests for speed limits with engineering measures are assessed against the desired outcomes set out in Local Transport Plan 4 to determine whether or not the proposed scheme would be a priority for funding from the Capital budget. 3. Scrutiny Review and Local Transport Plan 4 3.1 The cross-party Scrutiny Review of Local Speed Limit Policy considered national guidance, the approach of other authorities, the effectiveness of lower limits, the assessment process, officer resources and funding. It concluded that PS05/02 complies with Department for Transport guidance and is broadly aligned with neighbouring and comparable authorities. 3.2 The Review found that signs alone are unlikely to change the behaviour of the minority who drive inappropriately. It recorded that signed-only lower limits generally produce limited reductions in mean speed where the road environment remains unchanged. The Scrutiny Review report is included at appendix 3 3.3 Local Transport Plan 4 states that speed limits should appear reasonable to drivers and reflect the environment through which a road passes.
  • p4It identifies PS05/02 as the determinant for lower limits and recognises that engineering measures may be required to create a lower-speed environment. 3.4 The Government’s Road Safety Strategy was published in January 2026 and sets out a number of proposals to tackle the number of killed and seriously injured on the road network, one of which is to update the DfT’s guidance on setting speed limits. As part of the scrutiny review, officers stated that PS05/02 will be reviewed when the national guidance on setting local speed limits is updated. The updated guidance from the DfT is still in development. 4. Villages in East Sussex 4.1 In 2006/07, 270 villages, hamlets, settlements, suburbs and small localities were assessed to ascertain whether they constituted a village as part of a Countywide assessment that was carried out due to the change in DfT Guidance (Circular 01/2006). This guidance recommended that “where appropriate a 30mph speed limit should be the norm in villages”. The definition of a village, according to the DfT for speed limit consideration purposes being “20 or more houses (on one or both sides of the road)”; and “a minimum length of 600 metres”. 4.2 All locations were assessed and those that met the definition of a village and our speed limit policy criteria at the time were reduced to 30mph. 4.3 The majority of villages in East Sussex already have a 30mph limit through the built-up core. Villages with limits above 30mph have been assessed, with the higher limit generally reflecting that the road character and recorded average speeds do not meet the current criteria for a signed-only 30mph limit. In the majority of cases, engineering measures would be needed to achieve reasonable compliance which were in excess of the available budget or were not suitable for the class of road. A location can be reassessed where relevant evidence or circumstances change.
  • p54.4 The previous Lead member for Transport and Environment approved an allocation of £500,000 to a three-year Speed Management Programme which reviewed the speed limits across the county's A and B-class road network, assessed whether the existing speed limits were appropriate and identified areas where they could be reduced or made more effective. The initial appraisal process assessed each road against a priority framework based on the County Council's policy on Local Speed Limits (PS05/02). The priority framework considered a range of factors such as the character and environment of the road, the average speed of vehicles, the likely number of vulnerable road users, facilities such as schools, shops and medical facilities in the area, and the existing personal injury crash record. This process identified a priority list of sixteen sites to be taken forward in the first two years of the Speed Management Programme 4.5 Three of the sites prioritised under the Speed Management Programme were village 30mph speed limits where further measures were required to encourage compliance, based on higher than expected average speeds recorded through these villages. The sites prioritised were A272, Hadlow Down, A275 Danehill and B2087 Flimwell. Prior to further measures being introduced, the speed limits were in place by signs alone or by signs and roundel markings. This confirms that speed limits by signs alone are not effective at all locations. 4.6 Appendix 2 provides an initial analysis of the 24 main/key roads in villages which are not subject to a 30mph speed limit. It identifies: 5 main/key roads within villages that are suitable for 30mph signed only speed limit, based on current average speeds. 1 main/key road where the road environment doesn’t meet current policy for 30mph limit 18 main/key roads where additional traffic calming would be required to bring the speed down to a compliant speed for a 30mph limit.
  • p6The total cost for implementing these measures is estimated to be in the region of £4 million. It is important to note that a full assessment may identify other main/key roads villages which are not subject to a 30mph speed limit. 4.7 Traffic calming measures will not be suitable for all roads, and the type of traffic calming required will be dependent on several factors including the class of road and average speeds. A and B class roads are not suitable for physical measures such as speed humps or build-outs due to the level of traffic they are expected to carry and the potential delay to emergency services using these routes. These types of measures also require street lighting which is often undesirable amongst rural communities. 5. Response to the principal points raised in the motion Consistency and driver expectation 5.1 The motion proposes to remove driver ambiguity over speed limits through the use of a default 30mph limit on village roads. PS05/02 provides consistency through the application of common assessment criteria to roads with different functions and environments. Under the current framework, different limits may result where road character, frontage development, measured speeds, vulnerable road-user activity or road function differ. Within villages, there are roads which provide different functions and environments, ranging from shopping streets, residential areas and main through routes. 5.2 A predetermined 30mph standard for villages would differ from the route-specific approach in Department for Transport guidance and PS05/02. Roads that did not meet the frontage, minimum-length, road-character or mean-speed criteria would be subject to the same speed limit as other more built up roads where there is a greater risk of vulnerable road users. Self-enforcement, speed reduction and collision evidence 5.3 A key aim when setting speed limits is that the resulting speed limit should be self-enforcing.
  • p8This does not minimise the workload to officers or the costs to the Authority as the same consultations and advertisements would still be required. 5.9 Should an objection be received on one proposed length of road, the remaining sites could not progress until the objection has either been resolved or a decision has been made at a Planning Committee meeting. Street lighting and restricted roads 5.10 Roads with a qualifying system of street lighting are generally restricted roads subject to 30mph unless another limit applies. In these roads, speed limit repeater signs for 30mph are not permitted. 5.11 Where a road is subject to a 30mph speed limit and there is no system of street lighting, speed limit repeater signs are required by the Department for Transport at intervals of no greater than 250 metres apart when placed on alternate sides of the road. Countywide process and Traffic Regulation Orders 5.12 A Traffic Regulation Order may cover more than one road or area. However, each restriction would still require a defined extent and supporting schedules or plans, appropriate terminal points, consideration of adjoining roads and junctions, consultation and consideration of objections. 5.13 The site assessment and average speed information are used to determine whether the proposed limit meets PS05/02 and whether engineering measures are required, as well as deciding the exact length of road that the speed limit should apply to, taking consideration of any roads that join it. Those matters are location-specific and all roads included in the TRO would therefore still require individual assessment. 6. Cost, funding and delivery 6.1 The Scrutiny Review recorded indicative costs of £20,000 to £30,000 for the design and implementation of an individual signed-only speed-limit scheme. Schemes requiring traffic calming cost considerably more, with the amount depending on the measures, traffic management, drainage and other site conditions.
  • p9Traffic calming schemes can cost between £200,000 and £700,000 depending on the length of road being considered and the type of measures being proposed. 6.2 For extensive measures such as build-outs and speed humps, consideration needs to be given to lighting and drainage as well as the construction of the features themselves. 6.3 For less restrictive measures such as gateway features, signage schemes and coloured or high friction surfacing, the costs will be at the lower end of the scale quoted in 6.1, however these measures are likely to be less effective where average speeds are well above the required average speed as detailed in the ESCC Local Speed Limit Policy. 6.4 The costs quoted include designers’ fees, a 2 or 3 stage road safety audit, lane rental charges and construction. 6.5 The motion does not quote the number of village roads that would be involved, therefore a reliable countywide estimate cannot therefore be produced without a verified inventory and route-level assessment. 6.6 At the time of the Scrutiny Review, the Integrated Transport Block was around £3 million per year and supported a wide range of transport schemes, not only speed-limit changes. Current processes prioritise proposals through the Casualty Reduction and LTP4 Programmes. Unless new funding was allocated, this new programme to implement 30mph speed limits would need to be considered alongside other schemes competing for the same capital funding and officer capacity. 6.7 The Scrutiny Review recorded that highway schemes can take between two and four years to design and implement, depending on scale, complexity, consultation and objections. The duration of this new countywide programme would depend on the number and complexity of the individual restrictions and required engineering measures. 7. Conclusion 7.1 The majority of villages in East Sussex already have a 30mph limit through their built-up core.

Places and organisations it names

Other papers for this meeting

The council's document is the record; this page collects what Open Hastings knows about it. If something here is wrong, it is corrected in place and logged on the about page.