First reported 14 Oct 2019•Latest report 17 Feb 2024
Definition
What this concern includes
Includes failures in controls specifically intended to prevent, detect, warn about or mitigate the risks created by stationary vehicles on dynamic hard-shoulder or all-lanes-open motorways, including emergency refuge provision, monitoring, stationary-vehicle detection, warnings and protection for stranded occupants.
Not included
Excludes general motorway breakdown, driving or vehicle-maintenance failures not tied to stationary vehicles on dynamic hard-shoulder or all-lanes-open motorways.
Excludes the existing narrower concerns limited solely to emergency-refuge provision or stationary-vehicle detection when no wider stationary-vehicle safety condition is asserted.
Excludes hospital, ambulance or emergency-service response failures after the stationary-vehicle hazard has been reliably detected and appropriately managed.
Excludes generic smart-motorway design or public-information concerns where stationary-vehicle safety is not the material unsafe condition.
Reports
6
Distinct published reports
Individual concerns
7
A report can raise multiple concerns
Date range
2019–2024
First to latest report issue date
Stated actions
17
Described in published responses
Reports over time
Reports over time
Reports about this concern issued each year.
* 2026 is projected from reports observed to 7 Sep 2026.
Most frequent recipients
Most frequent recipients
Reports about this concern sent to each recipient.
National Highways6
National road infrastructure body6
Concerns and responses across reports
Only concerns grouped under this recurring concern are included. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.
Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent
Concerns raised1
Lack of stopping areas between refuse areas on all lanes open motorways
This report raised 1 other concern. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1
Action
Complete the nationwide programme constructing and installing more than 150 additional emergency areas on all-lane-running motorways.
Stated by National HighwaysStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 17 February 2025.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.3
Position
The M6 section’s emergency areas were spaced 1.2 miles apart, within the applicable 1.6-mile design maximum.
Stated by National HighwaysDisputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.
Position
New emergency-area standards are not retrospectively funded for the existing Strategic Road Network.
Stated by National HighwaysUnable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.
Position
No additional emergency areas were planned because safety data identified higher-priority locations where they would provide greater immediate benefit.
Stated by National HighwaysNo action considered necessaryThe respondent said that no further action was needed.
Northamptonshire
Concerns raised1
Absence of a safe stopping place on all-lane-running smart motorways
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.2
Action
Install over 150 additional emergency areas on operational and construction all-lane-running motorways, subject to governance.
Stated by National HighwaysStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 20 April 2023.
Action
Consider retrofitting further emergency areas when formulating the 2025–30 Road Investment Strategy, based on evidence of potential benefits.
Stated by National HighwaysStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 20 April 2023.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
Position
A hard shoulder would not eliminate collision risk; emergency areas provide a safer relative place to stop during emergencies.
Stated by National HighwaysDisputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.
Berkshire
Concerns raised1
Lack of refuge or hard shoulder for stranded vehicles on smart motorways
This report raised 2 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1
Action
Deliver a £390 million programme installing additional emergency areas across operational smart-motorway sections.
Stated by National HighwaysStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 22 March 2022.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.2
Position
The incident occurred under temporary roadworks traffic management, not on a completed all-lane-running smart motorway.
Stated by National HighwaysDisputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.
Position
No additional actions are considered necessary in response to the concerns about hard-shoulder removal.
Stated by National HighwaysNo action considered necessaryThe respondent said that no further action was needed.
Bedfordshire and Luton
Concerns raised1
Absence of a hard shoulder or other safe stopping place on the all-lanes-running motorway
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.6
Action
Apply the new emergency stopping-place spacing standard to newly designed smart motorways.
Stated by National HighwaysStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 8 March 2021.
Action
Monitor the effect of additional M25 emergency areas on live-lane breakdowns.
Stated by National HighwaysStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 8 March 2021.
Action
Develop safety-measure delivery programmes for the M6 Bromford viaduct and four M1 sections, including the incident location.
Stated by National HighwaysStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 8 March 2021.
Action
Install additional emergency areas where needed on the existing smart-motorway network.
Stated by National HighwaysStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 8 March 2021.
Action
Complete safety risk assessments to guide possible widening of narrow emergency areas.
Stated by National HighwaysStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 8 March 2021.
Action
Complete the programme to widen emergency areas narrower than the current standard.
Stated by National HighwaysStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 8 March 2021.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
Position
Although absence of hard shoulders increases collision risk, all-lane-running motorways reduce overall risks and result in fewer deaths than conventional motorways.
Stated by National HighwaysDisputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.
Birmingham and Solihull
Concerns raised1
Heightened collision hazard from stationary vehicles in motorway running lanes
This report raised 1 other concern. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.5
Action
Conduct comprehensive driver information campaigns on breakdowns, Red X, keeping left and variable speed limits.
Stated by National HighwaysStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 15 November 2019.
Action
Enhance emergency refuge-area visibility using redesigned signs, more frequent approach signage and orange road surfacing on the M6 southbound.
Stated by National HighwaysStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 15 November 2019.
Action
Repeat motorway safety information campaigns in four waves covering breakdowns, Red X, keeping left and variable speed limits.
Stated by National HighwaysStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 15 November 2019.
Action
Roll out stopped-vehicle detection capability to similar smart-motorway schemes, beginning with the M3 between Junctions 2 and 4a.
Stated by National HighwaysStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 15 November 2019.
Action
Explore and evaluate CCTV analytics, vehicle telemetry and crowdsourced data to reduce risks to stopped vehicles in higher-flow conditions.
Stated by National HighwaysStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 15 November 2019.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.5
Position
Safety assessments indicate smart motorways are as safe as, or safer than, conventional motorways, and the stopped-vehicle risk is not confined to smart motorways.
Stated by National HighwaysDisputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.
Position
Existing smart motorway technology and operational procedures are considered sufficient to mitigate risks from stopped vehicles, including lane closures, warnings and traffic officer assistance.
Stated by National HighwaysExisting arrangements considered sufficientThe respondent said that existing arrangements were sufficient, so no further action was needed.
Position
Existing MIDAS, CCTV coverage and operational management are considered sufficient to mitigate stopped-vehicle risks during higher traffic flows.
Stated by National HighwaysExisting arrangements considered sufficientThe respondent said that existing arrangements were sufficient, so no further action was needed.
Position
Further rollout of innovative stopped-vehicle technologies cannot yet be timetabled because evaluation, testing and Government funding remain unresolved.
Stated by National HighwaysUnable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.
Position
Stopped-vehicle detection on future smart motorway schemes is conditional on the availability of funding.
Stated by National HighwaysUnable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.
Birmingham and Solihull
Concerns raised2
Failure to target stationary-vehicle detection research at dynamic hard shoulder schemes and the M6
Unavailability of lone-stationary-vehicle detection in higher-flow dynamic hard shoulder schemes
This report raised 8 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.2
Action
Evaluate and test alternative technologies for detecting stopped vehicles in higher-flow conditions, including CCTV analytics, vehicle telemetry and crowdsourced data.
Stated by National HighwaysStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 13 November 2019.
Action
Roll out stopped-vehicle detection capability to similar smart motorway schemes, starting with the M3 between Junctions 2 and 4a.
Stated by National HighwaysStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 13 November 2019.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
Position
A timetable for higher-flow stopped-vehicle detection cannot be provided because technologies require evaluation and testing and funding is unconfirmed.
Stated by National HighwaysUnable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.
Pin
Get email alerts
Request correction
Includes failures in controls specifically intended to prevent, detect, warn about or mitigate the risks created by stationary vehicles on dynamic hard-shoulder or all-lanes-open motorways, including emergency refuge provision, monitoring, stationary-vehicle detection, warnings and protection for stranded occupants.
