Are Highways England addressing smart motorway safety concerns?

13.07 | 19 January 2021 | | 3 comments

Image: Highways England

The safety of smart motorways has hit the news again this week, after an inquest heard the deaths of two men on a converted stretch of the M1 could have been avoided.

Smart motorways use variable speed limits and hard shoulder running to manage traffic and tackle stop-start congestion.

The two men – Jason Mercer and Alexandru Murgeanu – died in 2019 when a lorry crashed into their vehicles (via BBC News) on a stretch of the M1 near Sheffield where the hard shoulder has been replaced by an active lane.

The crash happened after a collision between Mr Mercer and Mr Murgeanu. When the pair got out to exchange details they were hit by the lorry, and both died at the scene.

Sgt Mark Brady, who oversees major collision investigations for South Yorkshire Police, told the hearing he believed the incident could have been avoided had there been a hard shoulder.

Coroner David Urpeth recorded a verdict of unlawful killing at Sheffield Town Hall, saying that smart motorways without a hard shoulder carry “an ongoing risk of future deaths”.

Mr Urpeth added he would be writing to Highways England and the transport secretary asking for a review.

Highways England said it was “addressing many of the points raised”.

Smart motorways – where are we at?
Smart motorways have polarised opinion since they were first introduced in 2006.

Until last year, there were two types of smart motorway used in the UK. The first, often referred to as ‘dynamic’, is where the hard shoulder is opened to traffic during busy periods. The second is where the hard shoulder is open all the time.

Most of the controversy relates to safety, despite Highways England maintaining they are as safe as the wider motorway network.

The Government and Highways England have made a number of changes to smart motorways since the deaths of Mr Mercer and Mr Murgeanu in June 2019.

In October 2019, the Government launched a review into the safety of the schemes, with transport secretary Grant Shapps acknowledging that ministers had ‘concerns’.

The culmination of the five-month evidence stocktake was a new package of safety measures, the most significant of which was the end for dynamic smart motorways.

The action plan addressed other controversial issues, such as the time taken to reach broken down vehicles in live lanes and the distance between emergency refuge areas.

The plan pledges to speed up the deployment of ‘stopped vehicle detection’ – a radar-based system which spots stationary vehicles – so that it is installed across the entire smart motorway network within 36 months.

It also sets out ambitions to reduce the distance between emergency refuge areas to three quarters of a mile, where feasible, so that motorists should typically reach one every 45 seconds at 60mph. The maximum spacing will be one mile.

At the time, Mr Shapps said the action plan will allow drivers to retain the benefits of smart motorways – while addressing the concerns that have been identified.

In a statement issued following the inquest into the deaths of Mr Mercer and Mr Murgeanu, reported by BBC News, Highways England said it was already addressing many of the points raised by the coroner “as published in the Government’s Smart Motorway Evidence Stocktake and Action Plan of March 2020”.

“We will carefully consider any further comments raised by the coroner once we receive the report,” it added.


 

Comments

Comment on this story

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Report a reader comment

Order by Latest first | Oldest first | Highest rated | Lowest rated

    If we narrow down the argument, surely VISIBILTY, or lack of it is at the root of the problem of impact on stationary vehicles. I carry a portable strobe beacon, to be stuck on top of the car roof before making for safety. Is it not sensible to encourage all drivers to do likewise? Going even further, can car manufacturers be persuaded to fit a blip on the rear of the roof of cars, containing a bright orange strobe light, for use instead of the pathetic hazard lights we all have at present??


    Rob Miller, Tyne and Wear
    Agree (2) | Disagree (0)
    +2

    According to the news report, the lorry driver accepted he was driving without paying proper attention. I don’t see how Highways England can be responsible for that. Vehicles stopped on conventional hard shoulders have in the past have also been hit by drivers driving without paying proper attention. Come to think of it, aren’t most collisons caused by drivers not paying proper attention? Let’s focus on that.


    Hugh Jones, Cheshire
    Agree (6) | Disagree (15)
    --9

    I was so pleased to hear the coroner at Monday’s inquest state what the vast majority of British motorists have known for years – Smart Motorways, in their current form, are not safe. No amount of tinkering, such as the minor detail changes and “considered” alterations included in Grant Shapps whitewash of a review, will rectify that fact. There really is no substitute for a continuous, dedicated and permanent hard shoulder, our lifeline, allowing drivers to get out of the path on motorway-speed traffic following behind. Sure, there are plenty of other innovations within the wider Smart Motorway project which could and should be retained, such as managed traffic flow, variable and appropriate speed limits and advance warnings of road conditions up ahead. These features alone would help to smooth traffic flow within the existing 3 lanes, easing congestion and making our motorways safer. However, a hard shoulder is an essential safety feature of every motorway, and our lifeline MUST be restored where it has been stolen from us. The British motoring public deserve nothing less.


    Gary Hewitt, Leeds
    Agree (27) | Disagree (4)
    +23

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

Close