Memorandum by the London Cycling Campaign
(RTS 29)
ILLEGAL AND INAPPROPRIATE SPEED
The London Cycling Campaign has been the voice
of cycle users in London for the past 20 years. Through the active
involvement of our 8,000 members and the ongoing work of our individual
borough groups we have developed considerable expertise in the
field of road safety, particularly in reference to cyclists. We
greatly appreciate this opportunity to provide testimony to the
House of Commons Transport Select Committee on behalf of the 650,000
people who cycle regularly in London, and we stand ready to offer
any further assistance which might be required.
Despite low average traffic speeds in many of
the capital's streets, illegal and inappropriate speed remains
a major danger to London road users, particularly pedestrians
and cyclists. Results of a Metropolitan Police survey in June/July
1999 revealed that 63 per cent of motorists exceed the maximum
speed limit on 30mph roads in London—that is, around two
million drivers. Of those breaking the limit, 10 per cent (around
200,000 drivers) were driving at over 50mph and a very small percentage
(but still hundreds of drivers) were driving at speeds of over
70mph on 30mph roads.
Such widespread contempt for the law requires
dramatic action from police and government forces alike, akin
to that taken against drink driving over the past 20 years. Yet
road safety enforcement has been given a low priority in London—despite
the 250 people killed and 45,000 reported injured on the capital's
streets each year. In particular, the number of police officers
dedicated to road safety in London has shrunk so low that the
Commander of the Metropolitan Police Traffic OCU commented in
March 2001 that his unit can no longer meet its objectives. In
1983 the Metropolitan Police Traffic Division numbered 1,335 police
officers; today the Traffic OCU numbers under 650 officers—less
than half its former strength.
In autumn 2001 the Major of London and Transport
for London (TfL) published a Road Safety Plan for the capital,
which places great importance on speed management. We welcomed
the Plan and have worked closely with TfL in developing many aspects
of it, including the speed-related aspects. However, local initiatives
such as this are undermined by lack of political will at the central
government level. It is imperative that central government follow
up the work undertaken in 2000 in the context of its Road Safety
Strategy so as to support local authorities in their initiatives—especially
by developing a strong awareness campaign to ensure speeding becomes
seen as an unacceptable form of behaviour in the same way as drink
driving is now.
SPEED AND
ROAD TRAFFIC
CASUALTIES
Speed is now acknowledged to be the largest
single factor in road crashes. The government's Road Safely Strategy.
Tomorrow's Roads: Safer for Everyone, published in March 2000,
stated that speed is a major contributory factor in one third
of all road traffic collisions.[40]
That figure is widely seen as an absolute minimum. Evidence from
projects to reduce traffic speeds indicates that speed is the
major factor in up to 50 per cent of all road crashes, and a contributory
factor in more. In the case of 20mph zones, for example, speed
reduction measures reduce collisions by an average of 60 per cent
(67 per cent in the case of children).[41]
The connection between speed and road traffic
casualties in equally clear. Lower speeds result in fewer and
less serious collisions; higher speeds result in more and more
serious collisions Government figures show that a pedestrian hit
by a car at 40mph has only a 15 per cent chance of surviving,
at 30mph a 55 per cent chance but at 20mph a 95 per cent chance
of surviving.[42]
More recent research has confirmed that even marginal reductions
in average speeds can result in major road safety gains: every
1mph reduction in average speeds leads to a 5 per cent in the
number of road traffic collisions.[43]
SPEED AND
LOCAL ENVIRONMENT
The benefits of reducing road speeds extend
far beyond the immediate reduction in casualties; lower speeds
also bring marked improvements to the environment of local communities.
The danger brought by speeding traffic severely damages the quality
of life of local communities, which is why traffic speed consistently
features as a priority problem in public consultations on community
safety. Community audits carried out under the Crime and Disorder
Act 1998 reveal how great an issue road safety has become for
people in Britain: when asked for their views on road safety,
in 86 per cent of cases local communities rated it as an issue
of concern to rank alongside burglary and mugging.[44]
Traffic calming and speed reduction are likewise commonly identified
as the most important road safety measures for local highway authorities
to undertake—as shown by community safety audits in both
rural and urban settings alike.[45]
Fear of speeding traffic is also typically cited
as one of the key reasons preventing more people from cycling,
and studies from around Europe have shown the modal shift to cycling
and other environmentally friendly forms of transport once speed
reduction measures are introduced. In the German town of Buxtehude,
for example, the introduction of a 30kph (20mph) speed limit led
to a 27 per cent increase in cycle traffic and a 17 per cent increase
in pedestrian traffic, as well as a 60 per cent drop in road traffic
casualties. The environmental benefits of such a modal shift to
cycling and walking need no further elaboration—particularly
in cities such as London, many of whose roads already break government
regulations on pollution levels.
SPEED MANAGEMENT
Local authorities across Britain have introduced
a broad range of speed management measures in order to increase
road safety for vulnerable road users. Many of these measures
have been extremely successful in reducing speed and road casualties,
and central government must press for their wider introduction.
From the London context, we would like to draw particular attention
to the introduction of area-wide speed limits, and especially,
a 20mph standard speed limit on all but the most major roads.
Reducing the speed limit to 20mph in all streets
where Londoners live, work, shop or meet for recreational purposes
would be the single most effective means of meeting London's casualty
reduction targets, as well as reducing the sense of danger experienced
by road users such as pedestrians and cyclists. It would:
— save up to 200 of the 250 lives lost
each year in road traffic collisions on London's streets;
— save up to 25,000 of the 45,000 reported
road crash injuries in London, including a high proportion of
serious injuries;
— bring an annual cost benefit of over
£1 billion to London, based on government figures for the
prevention of road traffic collisions.[46]
Introducing 20 mph as the standard speed limit
on all streets used by people in London would also reduce congestion,
air pollution and noise pollution. Moreover, it would be a highly
popular move with Londoners: opinion polls reveal overwhelming
public support for 20 mph as the standard speed limit on London's
streets in view of the road safety gains it would bring.[47]
It should be noted that area-wide speed reduction
programmes have proved extremely successful in bringing down driver
speeds (average as well as 85th percentile) and reducing casualties.
It is widely recognised that physical restrictions bring greater
speed reductions than speed limits on their own, and there should
be a presumption in favour of such solutions wherever possible.
However, there are many non-physical measures (eg fibre-optic
and vehicle-activated signing, road safely awareness campaigns,
speed cameras etc) which have achieved substantial speed reduction
both in Britain and other countries.
Table 1: Average reductions in speed gained
by non-physical measures[48]
| |
effect on mean speed (mph)
| effect on 85th %ile (mph)
|
| Speed cameras | -6.0
| -4.2 |
| Vehicle-activated signs | -4.2
| -4.5 |
| Flashing signs (not vehicle-activated) |
-3.8 | no data
|
Used in combination with each other or with physical restrictions,
these measures would obviously have the potential to reduce speeds
still further. Yet even if used on their own, the correlation
between 1mph speed reduction and 5 per cent casualty reduction
means that these non-physical measures would reduce casualties
by a very significant 20-30 per cent. Even the simplest (and cheapest)
measure of just using static 20mph signs has been found to reduce
mean speeds by around 2.5mph, thereby bringing a 12.5 per cent
reduction in the number of casualties.
At the same time, we would press the government to accelerate
the introduction of the home zone and safe routes to schools programmes,
both of which represent more substantial development of a people-friendly
infrastructure on our streets. At present these programmes are
proceeding at a painfully slow pace, with their potential drastically
unfulfilled. We would also recommend the introduction of school
safety zones around every primary and secondary school in the
country, with maximum speeds reduced to 10, 15 or 20mph. This
objective formed an important part of York City Council's 1997
Speed Management Strategy, and has now been identified as a priority
by the Mayor of London too.
Peter Lewis, Director
London Cycling Campaign
John Hilary, Chair
LCC Greater London Working Group
January 2001
40
Tomorrow's Roads: Safer for Everyone; The Government's road safety
strategy and casualty reduction targets for 2010 (DETR, 2000). Back
41
Reviewof traffic calming schemes in 20mph zones, Transport Research
Laboratory Report 215 (TRL, 1996). No Back
42
Killing Speed and Saving Lives (Department of Transport, 1997). Back
43
The effects of drivers' speed on the frequency of road accidents,
Transport Research Laboratory report No 421 (TRL, 2000). Back
44
ACPO Review of Crime and Disorder Audits (Association of Chief
Police Officers, 1999). Back
45
Killing Speed: A Good Practice Guide to Speed Management (Slower
Speeds Initiative, 2001). Back
46
1999 Valuation of the benefits of prevention of road accidents
and casualties, DETR Highways Economics Note No 14 1999 (DETR,
October 2000); see TfL's calculation of costs for personal injury
crashes in London in Accidents and casualties on London's roads
2000 (TfL, 2001). Back
47
20mph as a Standard Speed Limit: Why London Needs It (London
Cycling Campaign, July 2000). Back
48
Urban speed management methods, Transport Research Laboratory
Report No 363 (TRL, 1998). Back
| 
