Article citation information:
Villarreal Chávez, D.B., Kurek, A., Sierpiński,
G., Jużyniec, J., Kielc, B. Review and comparison of traffic calming solutions:
Mexico City and Katowice. Scientific
Journal of Silesian University of Technology. Series Transport. 2017, 96, 185-195. ISSN: 0209-3324. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20858/sjsutst.2017.96.17.
Delia
Berenice VILLARREAL CHÁVEZ[1], Agata KUREK[2], Grzegorz SIERPIŃSKI[3], Jakub JUŻYNIEC[4], Bartosz KIELC[5]
REVIEW AND COMPARISON OF TRAFFIC CALMING
SOLUTIONS: MEXICO CITY AND KATOWICE
Abstract.
The article addresses solutions implemented in two cities, namely, Mexico City
and Katowice, with the aim of improving road traffic safety. Despite the
distance of more than 10,000 km separating the two cities, a comparison revealed
many similar solutions having been implemented in both of them. This
comparative case study is complemented with a collation of statistics
pertaining to accidents, fatalities and injured persons as reported in the
period 2012-2015.
Keywords:
traffic calming; traffic engineering; road safety
1. INTRODUCTION
Poland is currently still ranked above other
countries in respect of poor road traffic safety. The group of unprotected
traffic participants, namely pedestrians, typically accounts for one third of
all road traffic accident fatalities. In Silesia Province, 257 persons were
killed in road traffic accidents in 2016, including as many as 99 pedestrians.
The World Health Organization positions Mexico in seventh place for fatal
traffic accidents in the world, with Mexico City being the country’s most
significant contributor to the number of incidents in this respect.
In both places (Katowice and Mexico City), one
can observe a significant increase in the number of solutions implemented over
recent years in terms of traffic calming. The primary objectives of these
efforts include reducing vehicle speed and separating transit from commuter
traffic, thus minimizing the negative effects of road traffic, which translate
into specific numbers of fatal accidents and injuries. Speed exerts a major
impact on traffic safety, as it affects both the number of accidents and their
severity [10]. Drivers maintaining a safe running speed in a manner that
matches road conditions (visibility, curves, intersections, pedestrian
crossings and public transport stops, pavement roughness and levelness, road
surroundings, weather conditions), as well as traffic conditions (traffic
intensity, other vehicles’ running speed, overtaking conditions, presence of
pedestrians at road shoulders), is a factor that favours safe traffic. As
running speed rises, the degree of road traffic accident severity increases, as
does the hazard for traffic participants, whereas the possibilities of avoiding
collisions dwindle [1, 2, 13, 14, 19, 20].
In this article, activities aimed at traffic
calming in Mexico City and Katowice are compared. In the next section, a
collation of road traffic safety statistics is presented. Both the aspects
analysed confirm that the situation has been improving.
2. TRAFFIC CALMING: A
COMPARATIVE CASE STUDY ON MEXICO CITY AND KATOWICE
Car traffic in city centres is an
issue that provokes much controversy. All activities aimed at the
reorganization of city centre traffic are usually widely approved by one or
several groups of inhabitants, while raising objections in others. It is for
this very reason that undertaking bold efforts, such as establishing traffic
calming zones or limiting access to selected streets at the heart of the city,
has often been extremely difficult. There are also cases when one can place
such problems as urban traffic flow or safety of pedestrians and cyclists into
one basket, and the private interests of persons commuting into city centres by
car (and using a car to move around within the centre) into another, as the
latter are often unaware of the benefits that urban traffic calming or
switching to alternative means of transport may bring.
One may refer to numerous premises
and conditions behind the implementation of the traffic calming concept, such
as the following (among others [15, 16, 17, 18]):
• Arterial roads being overflown
with cars
• Policies that favour commuting
by car
• Pollution and noise increases
due to car traffic
• Degradation of urban space due
to car traffic and parking
• Declining road traffic safety
and growing threats for pedestrians and cyclists due to excessive running speed
The authors of the article have
decided to address the traffic calming problem using examples from two
significantly different cities, namely, Mexico City and Katowice. The
population of Mexico City exceeds 8.9 million people [12], while Katowice is
inhabited by around 0.3 million people (the total population of Silesia
Province is less than 4.6 million) [7].
Examples of the solutions applied in
Mexico City are illustrated in Fig. 1.
|
a) Speed radars |
b) Video recorders |
|
c) Breathalyser operations |
d) Speed bumps |
|
e) Secure lanes for truck freight |
f) Night operations |
Fig. 1. Comparison of traffic
calming solutions implemented in Mexico City
(source: based on [8])
The most fundamental solutions
include speed radars (58 pieces distributed all over the city) and speed bumps.
Various analyses imply that speed bumps are the most efficient traffic calming
tool. The most commonly used bumps are 3.6 x 6.6 m in length. Under Polish
conditions, speed bumps reduce the traffic stream speed by 25% compared with
the obligatory speed limit [12]. Frequent sobriety checking is also an
efficient means to improve safety (Fig. 1c). Inhabitants may already be familiar
with speed limit regulations, speed radars and speed bumps, but the latest
implementation for road safety in Mexico is the use of video recording devices
(Fig. 1b). These video recorders (currently 40 devices installed all over
the city) feature cameras installed at strategic points of the city, designed
to record the moments when the driver does not respect traffic lights,
forbidden turns, pedestrian crossings or bike tracks. These cameras also record
situations when drivers are not wearing their seatbelts properly or when they
are using mobile phones while driving. Whenever the camera detects one of these
infringements, the system automatically sends a ticket to the car owner.
In order to ensure safety for
people, as well as for truck freight, a plan for night routes has been
established for freight circulation, each of which is monitored. The Mexican
authorities have defined specific routes for cargo vehicles, as well as driving
hours, on access-controlled high-speed roads with a maximum speed of 60 km/h.
The least common traffic calming
solution used in Mexico City is referred to as night operations (Fig.
1f), which have also contributed to a significant reduction in the number of
night incidents. Every night, on average, there are 73 such operations
conducted all over the city, whose main goal is to educate drivers by placing a
line of police patrol vehicles at the front of a vehicle traffic column,
circulated at a regulated speed on controlled access roads. This has led to a
reduction of 13% in the number of car accidents during the night shift (from
22:00 to 06:00).
The driving speed limitations
introduced in Mexico City range between 80 and 10 km/h, depending on the
specific location or the speed limit zone. These speed limitations have been
collated in Table 1. In most streets in the city, one can drive a car at 50
km/h, with the exception of several trunk roads (these being subject to intense
speed monitoring), where the permissible speed is 80 km/h (Fig. 2)
Tab.
1
Comparison of speed limit zones introduced in
Mexico City
|
Speed limit |
Sector |
|
10 km/h |
In car parks and on
pedestrian paths in which access to vehicles is allowed |
|
20 km/h |
In scholar zones,
hospitals, nursing homes, shelters and homes |
|
30 km/h |
In quiet transit zones |
|
40 km/h |
On secondary roads
including the sides of controlled access roads |
|
50 km/h |
Circulation on primary
roads |
|
80 km/h |
Central lanes of
controlled access roads |
(source:
based on [8])
Being the capital city of Silesia
Province, Katowice features a very dense road network. On account of the
necessity to improve pedestrian safety and the need for a modal split
transformation in favour of alternative solutions to the use of passenger cars,
a special traffic calming zone corresponding to the city centre was introduced
in 2015 (Fig. 3). Entrance to the zone, referred to as “Tempo 30”, has been
distinctively marked with vertical and horizontal signs (Fig. 4a-b). The most
popular traffic calming facilities used there are the speed humps (speed
cushions) installed at the zone borders, forcing drivers to reduce their speed
considerably. The chosen locations where these measures have been used are
situated near to centres of culture, public offices or schools (Fig. 5a). Other
characteristic elements of the solutions implemented there are raised
pedestrian crossings, as well as road pavements, which have been redeveloped
using paving stone (Fig. 5b). One can also encounter entire intersections,
which have been raised and stone paved (Fig. 5c). Due to uneven pavement
surface, drivers reduce their driving speed in order to avoid damaging their
car. (Intentional) chicanes represent another traffic calming measure applied
in Katowice. In the case shown in Fig. 4f, the chicanes were developed by
alternating locations of parking spaces (on the left-hand and the right-hand
side, alternately), forcing drivers to dynamically change the driving track and
reduce speed.
Fig. 2. Map of Mexico City streets
subject to speed limitations
(excluding zones with speed limits
below 40 km/h) [8]
Fig. 3. Map of Katowice with the “Tempo 30”
traffic calming zone marked (yellow colour delimits the “Tempo 30” zone, while
blue marks the “walking and biking only” zone)
(source: [6])
|
a) Szkolna
Street, Katowice |
b) Jagiellońska Street, Katowice |
Fig. 4. Marking at the beginning of the “Tempo
30” zone in Katowice (source: own research)
|
a) Traffic calming elements known as speed cushions (Andrzeja Street,
Katowice) |
b) Marking at the beginning of the “Tempo 30” zone (Jagiellońska Street,
Katowice) |
|
c) Raised intersection (Sienkiewicza and
Powstańców Streets, Katowice) |
d) Alternating parking spaces (Plebiscytowa Street, Katowice) |
Fig. 5. Comparison of selected
traffic calming solutions implemented in Katowice
(source: own research)
Within the traffic calming zone of
downtown Katowice, a walking and biking only zone has also been sectioned off
(marked in blue on Fig. 3), which covers streets where automotive vehicles are
forbidden to enter (including Mariacka, Staromiejska, 3-go Maja, Stawowa and
Rynek Streets). That said, this zone has not eliminated another element
threatening pedestrians, namely, trams running on lines that intersect to a
considerable extent in the main square area (Rynek). In order to reduce
accident hazard exposure, an innovative solution has been applied, i.e., long
colour-changing lamps embedded in the pavement. As a default, they emit green
light when there is no tram approaching, but, when one is incoming, their
illumination changes to red. Owing to this solution, even when paying no
special attention to the surrounding, pedestrians will realize the tram’s
proximity. An example illustrating the concept is provided in Fig. 6.
Fig. 6. Lights warning pedestrians of an
incoming tram (source: own research)
3. REVIEW OF ACCIDENT STATISTICS FOR 2012-2015
A review of the Mexico City accident statistics (Table 2) for the last
five years implies that the situation has improved significantly. The number of
traffic accidents and fatalities has decreased considerably in recent years in
Mexico City. From 2011 to 2015, the number of persons injured dropped by nearly
49%, whereas the number of fatalities dropped by more than 38%. A considerable
quantitative drop, i.e., by 48%, was also observed in traffic accident figures.
The decrease in the number of accidents involving pedestrians is yet another
positive fact worth mentioning. This is due to the safety and public awareness
programmes that have recently been implemented in different parts of the
capital city.
Tab.
2
Mexico City accident statistics
|
Year |
Fatal
traffic accidents (deaths)
|
Non-fatal
traffic accidents (injured) |
Persons killed in traffic accidents |
Persons injured in traffic accidents |
Accidents involving pedestrians |
|
2012 |
315 |
4,221 |
343 |
5,673 |
1,248 |
|
2013 |
342 |
3,548 |
370 |
4,801 |
1,112 |
|
2014 |
291 |
2,822 |
312 |
3,799 |
1,017 |
|
2015 |
200 |
2,147 |
210 |
2,899 |
748 |
(Source: own research based on [3])
With regard to Katowice, the number
of fatalities dropped by 40% in the corresponding period (Table 3). However,
the decrease in the number of traffic accidents (by only as much as 7%) and
persons injured (8%) does not imply any major improvement in this respect.
Therefore, the implementation of the “Tempo 30” zone in 2015 should be regarded
as well grounded, since a more significant improvement was achieved in a
similar period, compared to the entire
province, which translated into nearly 19% fewer accidents and 20% fewer
injured persons (Table 4).
Tab. 3
Katowice accident statistics
|
Year |
Total traffic accidents (deaths and injured) |
Persons killed in traffic accidents |
Persons injured in traffic accidents |
Pedestrians killed in traffic accidents |
Pedestrians injured in traffic accidents |
|
2012 |
301 |
20 |
338 |
10 |
113 |
|
2013 |
303 |
21 |
352 |
14 |
94 |
|
2014 |
276 |
14 |
322 |
9 |
158 |
|
2015 |
280 |
12 |
311 |
7 |
98 |
(Source: own research based on [5, 10])
Tab.
4
Silesia Province accident statistics
|
Year |
Total traffic accidents (deaths and injured) |
Persons killed in traffic accidents |
Persons injured in traffic accidents |
|
2012 |
4,675 |
336 |
5707 |
|
2013 |
4,529 |
267 |
5506 |
|
2014 |
4,360 |
249 |
5324 |
|
2015 |
3,792 |
255 |
4584 |
(Source: own research based on
[4])
The initial period when the “Tempo 30” zone was functioning triggered
an improvement in road traffic safety across the zone area. The total number of
accidents in the zone dropped by 41% in 2016 (compared to 2014, i.e., before
the zone concept implementation), while the number of injured persons declined
by 32%. A similar comparison for accidents involving pedestrians and cyclists
is provided in Fig. 7. One can also notice a clear improvement in safety within
the zone in this respect.
Fig. 7. Comparison of statistics for
accidents involving pedestrians and cyclists that took place in the “Tempo 30”
zone in Katowice in 2014 and 2016
(source: own research based on [4])
4. CONCLUSIONS
The traffic calming
methods discussed in the article are mainly related to infrastructural
solutions. In both cities analysed in the paper, physical obstacles forcing
drivers to reduce driving speed and speed limit zones were deployed. As confirmed
by the analysis, both the number of accidents and the number of persons killed
and injured declined (the analysis covered the period 2012-2015), although the
improvement thus achieved was more evident in Mexico City. The fact that should
be emphasized is that fatality figures increased in 2013 in both cities. Other
speed limiting methods, which also deserve to be highlighted, include the night
operations introduced in Mexico City, since this solution prevents driving
faster than the speed limit set by police vehicles. This method has not been
applied in Poland.
References
1.
Bohatkiewicz
Janusz , ed. 2008. Zasady Spokajania
Ruchu na Drogach za Pomocą Fizycznych Środków Technicznych. [In Polish: Principles of Calming Traffic on Roads Using
Physical Technical Means.] Cracow. e-Book.
2.
Gaca
Stanisław, Wojciech Suchorzewski, Marian Tracz. 2008. Inżynieria Ruchu Drogowego. Teoria i Praktyka. [In Polish: Traffic
Engineering. Theory and Practice.] Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Komunikacji i
Łączności.
3.
INEGI. “Statistics
of traffic accidents in urban and suburban areas.” Available at:
http://www.inegi.org.mx/.
4.
Katowice City
Hall. “Data about ‘Tempo 30’ area” (not published).
5.
Katowice City
Hall, Faculty of Transport. 2015. Bieżąca
Analiza Wypadkowości na Sieci Drogowej Miasta (Porównanie za Lata 2010-2014).
[In English: Current
Accident Analysis on the City Road Network (Comparison for 2010-2014).]
6.
Katowice City
Hall. “Homepage.” Available at: https://www.katowice.eu/.
7.
Katowice
Statistical Office. “Regional statistics.” Available at:
http://katowice.stat.gov.pl/en/.
8.
Secretaría de
Seguridad Pública, CDMX 2017. Available at:
http://www.ssp.df.gob.mx/reglamentodetransito/.
9.
Szczuraszek
Tomasz, ed. 2005. Bezpieczeństwo Ruchu
Miejskiego. [In Polish: Urban Traffic
Safety.] Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Komunikacji i Łączności.
10.
City Committee of
Police in Katowice. “Homepage.” Available at:
http://katowice.slaska.policja.gov.pl/.
11.
World Population
Review. Available at:
http://worldpopulationreview.com/world-cities/mexico-city-population/.
12.
Zalewski
Andrzej. 2013. “Środki uspokojenia ruchu i ich oddziaływanie na prędkość.” [In Polish: “Traffic
calming measures and their impact on the speed”.] In: Seminarium “Speed Management”.
Generalna Dyrekcja Dróg Krajowych i Autostrad, Warsaw 17-18 October 2013.
Available at:
http://materialy.wb.pb.edu.pl/marekmotylewicz/files/2016/03/Środki-uspokojenia-ruchu-i-ich-oddziaływanie-na-predkość.pdf.
13.
Czech Piotr. 2017. “Physically disabled pedestrians -
road users in terms of road accidents.” In: E. Macioszek, G. Sierpiński, ed.,
Contemporary challenges of transport systems and traffic engineering. Lecture Notes in Network Systems, Vol.
2: 157-165. Springer. ISSN: 2367-3370. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43985-3_14.
14.
Czech Piotr. 2017. “Underage pedestrian road users in
terms of road accidents.” In: G. Sierpiński, ed., Intelligent
Transport Systems and Travel Behaviour.
Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, Vol. 505: 75-85. Springer.
ISSN: 2194-5357. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43991-4_4.
15.
Kinderyte-Poškiene
Jurgita, Sokolovskij Edgar. 2008. “Traffic control elements influence on
accidents, mobility and the environment.” Transport
23(1): 55-58. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3846/1648-4142.2008.23.55-58.
ISSN: 1648-4142.
16.
Tajudeen Abiola
Ogunniyi Salau, Adebayo Oludele Adeyefa, Sunday Ayoola Oke. 2004. “Vehicle
speed control using road bumps.” Transport
19(3): 130-136. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/16484142.2004.9637965.
ISSN: 1648-4142.
17.
Donald Deborah,
Aidan McGann. 2013. Reducing Speed: The
Relative Effectiveness of a Variety of Sign Types. Research Report ARR 246
(1995). ISBN: 0 86910 685 6.
18.
Pour Alirez Toran,
Sara Moridpour, Abbas Rajabifard, Richard Tay. 2017. “Spatial and temporal
distribution of pedestrian crashes in Melbourne metropolitan area.” Road &
Transport Research: A Journal of Australian and New Zealand Research and Practice 26(1): 4-20. ISSN: 1037-5783.
19.
Madhumita Paul,
Ghosh Indrajit. 2017. “A novel approach of safety assessment at uncontrolled intersections
using proximal safety indicators.” European
Transport/Transporti Europei 65: 1-14. ISSN 1825-3997.
20.
Schmidt Marie,
Stefan Voß. 2017. “Advanced systems in public transport.” Public Transport 9(1-2): 3-6. DOI:
http://doi.org/10.1007/s12469-017-0165-z. ISSN: 1866-749X.
Received 26.04.2017; accepted in revised form 29.07.2017
Scientific Journal of
Silesian University of Technology. Series Transport is licensed under a Creative
Commons Attribution 4.0 International License