Strategic Speed Management Program

CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS

ISSUE STRATEGIES TAKEAWAYS

➤ Speeding is the top contributing

factor in fatal crashes

➤ Vulnerable road users are

overrepresented in severe crashes

➤ Austin is experiencing significant

population growth

➤ Adopted a citywide vision zero goal

➤ Identified leading causes of fatal

and serious injuries

➤ Defined High Injury Network

➤ Engaged community

➤ Established speed management

program

➤ Comprehensive speed

management activities

➤ Developed key indicators and

targeted achievement metrics

➤ Integrated effort including

enforcement

Background

The City of Austin became a Vision Zero city in 2015 with 

the goal of zero traffic-related fatalities for this rapidly 

growing, diverse, and active community. Identifying a High 

Injury Network (HIN) exposed that the majority of fatal and 

serious injury crashes were occurring on collector and arterial 

streets. This perspective helped focus their program beyond 

neighborhoods and onto the more complex roadways which 

made up their HIN1.

Addressing speed limits on the HIN required consideration 

of the Texas Transportation Code which mandates an 85th 

percentile method be used for setting speed limits with 

allowances made where crashes are above average. The city 

determined that any roadway on the HIN meets the state’s 

definition of roadways with above average crash rates and 

therefore will be using USLIMITS2 extensively to support 

setting new speed limits on collector and arterial roadways.

This moment represents a paradigm shift in how the city 

approaches transportation planning, codifying in city policy 

the preservation of human life as the paramount priority for 

Austin’s transportation network. Citizens are asking for their 

transportation network to be safe, accessible, and inclusive 

for all members of the community. The city is determined 

to achieve this by promoting a culture of safety education, 

focusing on behaviors that cause traffic injuries and fatalities, 

and through integrating safe design principles across their 

multimodal infrastructure1.

In addition, the Austin Police Department is using a datadriven approach towards enforcement strategies. This includes 

participating in a Fatality Review Board, which meets monthly 

to review all fatal crashes, and then meets quarterly to review 

overall crash statistics and serious injury crashes2.

Interior of speeding vehicle. Source: Getty Images

Case Study 1: Noteworthy Speed Management Practices 1 FHWA-SA-20-077
Strategic Speed Management Program

Austin’s busy multimodal roadways. Image Source: Neal Hawkins

The Challenges

Speeding – In Austin, speeding was recorded as the primary 

contributing factor in 24 percent of traffic crashes resulting in 

death from 2013 to 2017. Speeding is the leading contributor 

to fatal crashes with the top four being speeding, failure to 

yield, distraction, and driving while intoxicated. On average, 

more than 70 people lose their lives on Austin area streets 

each year, another 450 suffer life-altering injuries, and 

countless other crashes and near-misses are unreported.

Vulnerable Road Users – The city found that vulnerable 

road users make up a disproportionate share of severe 

crashes. The proportion of all serious injury and fatal crashes 

by mode are 61 percent motor vehicle, 17 percent pedestrian, 

16 percent motorcycle, and 6 percent bicycle. Austin’s AfricanAmerican population is also overrepresented given that their 

7 percent share of the population makes up 16 percent of the 

serious injury and fatal crashes1. 

Significant Growth – Since the last transportation plan 

was adopted in 1995, Austin has added more than 450,000 

people and the region’s population is slated to double in the 

next 30 years.

Developing a Speed 

Management Program

The objective of the Austin Transportation Department (ATD) 

speed management program is to improve safety and enhance 

the livability of Austin streets through context-appropriate 

speed reduction strategies2. ATD developed a framework 

for their new Speed Management Program through several 

actions including a workshop with ITE and the Vision Zero 

Network in February 2019 and in researching best practices 

from national studies and other leading cities. This framework 

relies on objective criteria, informed by community and policy 

objectives, to prioritize streets with the most serious speeding 

problems for targeted speed mitigation strategies3. The seven 

key Speed Management Program elements are as follows:

1. Data and information

2. A toolkit of engineering countermeasures

3. Methods for setting speed limits

4. Holistic approach with education and enforcement

5. Coordination with other programs

6. Equity

7. Evaluation

Case Study 1: Noteworthy Speed Management Practices FHWA-SA-20-077

2
Strategic Speed Management Program

This approach provides different tools and strategies by roadway 

contextual factors applied to street levels including the following:

• Street Levels 1 & 2 (neighborhood and collector streets)

• Street Levels 3 & 4 (corridor and arterial roadways)

Images of several physical engineering countermeasures used are shown above: Rain Garden Bulb Out (top 

left), Median and Speed Cushions (top right), and Mountable Traffic Circles (bottom). Source: City of Austin

Case Study 1: Noteworthy Speed Management Practices 3 FHWA-SA-20-077
Strategic Speed Management Program

Key Takeaways and Lessons Learned

• Community Engagement – The final measures and

criteria used for the new speed management program

framework included community conversations from three

open houses, seven public meetings, and an online survey

that received more than 1,100 responses.

• High Injury Network – While all streets should function

with safe speeds, some streets have egregious and more

persistent speeding problems than others. Given limited

resources, ATD will prioritize how and where to apply

speed management strategies.

• Behavior – Crash locations change but driver behaviors

are constant. The city identified the top four behaviors

contributing to serious injury and fatal crash and is

focused on coordinating education and enforcement

strategies to influence change. City policy seeks to

advance innovative approaches toward enforcing traffic

regulations and aligning penalties for traffic violations with

the severity of the offense.

• Target Speeds – Austin’s approach to speed

management begins with selecting safe target speeds

for all streets based on their context. Target speed

refers to the speed at which the city want cars to drive

on the street. Surrounding land uses, traffic volumes,

and pedestrian activity all affect the appropriate target

speed. Target speed informs the design speed which

is specific to geometric features or the elements of a

roadway necessary to achieve the target speed. Staff

uses design criteria that are at or below the target speed

of a given roadway. The posted speed limits are set to

help communicate and reinforce target speeds. After

setting the target speed, and implementing design

speeds, staff analyze operating speed, which refers to

the observed speed of motorists using the roadway.

Using target instead of operating speeds to influence

the design speed allows the community to prioritize

safety and the agency to design for safety in support

of the goal to reduce the likelihood that any crash will

result in a fatal or serious injury.

• Indicators and Targets – The city has established specific

measures to gauge achievement, for example, the indicator

to “Reduce serious injury and fatal crashes at locations

where major capital improvement projects have been

implemented” is matched with a target to “Achieve at least

40% reduction over a five-year period, on average.”

• Enforcement – Speeding is expected to be substantially

underreported as a contributing factor given the difficulty

in determining the actual travel speed of a vehicle after

a crash has occurred. Austin seeks to promote driver

adherence to posted speed limits through coordinated

education and enforcement campaigns and policy reforms

around automated enforcement. In addition, police officers

can assign one or more contributing factors to a crash

in their crash report. This information provides valuable

insights into some of the human behaviors that most

frequently contribute to crashes. As an example, the rise in

the use of alternative transportation modes, such as electric

scooters, creates a new data demand for traditional crash

forms. Austin Police are working with TxDOT to consider

adding “scooter” as a vehicle type on their crash form

to quantify crash experience, target enforcement, and to

support selection of potential safety improvements3.

1 Austin Strategic Mobility Plan. [Report]. Retrieved December 28, 2019 from http://app.box.com/s/7aiksxmwwgymalsty0lm21wingk0slug

2 Miesse, Eric (July 21, 2019). Speed Management: Law Enforcement Perspective [Presentation]. Noteworthy Speed Management Practices, 

ITE Annual Meeting, Austin, TX.

3 Spillar, Robert (June 24, 2019). Speed Management Program - Draft Framework [Memorandum]. City of Austin, TX. 

http://www.austintexas.gov/edims/pio/document.cfm?id=322565

FHWA-SA-20-077 4

Case Study 1: Noteworthy Speed Management Practices