Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Cambridge police say close pass operation ‘not practical’ due to lack of road space

‘We would be potentially forcing motorists to drive at the speed of cyclists when there isn’t the recommended space to overtake’

Campaigners have questioned Cambridgeshire’s police’s explanation that there isn’t sufficient road space to carry out a close pass operation. They point out that such initiatives are specifically designed to highlight why space needs to be given when passing cyclists.

Cambridge Cycling Campaign (Camcycle) has professed itself ‘beyond disappointed’ with Cambridgeshire police’s decision not to run a close pass operation similar to that pioneered by West Midlands police and has questioned the force’s reasoning.

Close pass operations involve plain clothes police officers out on bikes identifying drivers who don't allow enough room when overtaking. The West Midlands operation has led to a 20 per cent reduction in cyclists killed or seriously injured on the region’s roads since it was adopted in 2016.

A number of forces have since followed suit – most recently in Norfolk and Suffolk – but Cambridge will not be among them.

Casualty reduction officer Jon Morris explained:

"We have been liaising with officers in the West Midlands about Operation Close Pass and have explored the possibility of implementing something similar locally.

"The average road is approximately 3.5 metres from the kerb to the white lines. Cyclists are advised to cycle 0.75 metres away from the kerb to avoid drain covers and an average car is about two metres wide. Operation Close Pass recommends drivers leave about 1.5 metres when passing a cyclist. If we add all those figures together it would mean drivers are moving into the opposite lane to overtake.

"For Cambridge city where roads are narrower and often very congested we would be potentially forcing motorists to drive at the speed of cyclists when there isn’t the recommended space to overtake.

"Cyclists are vulnerable road users and it’s important that we are doing all we can to make the roads safer for everyone but at this time we don’t believe Operation Close Pass in its current format is practical in Cambridge."

Campaigners ‘angry’ at message being sent

Camcycle said: “We are angry that they are apparently advising drivers that it is OK to pass closely because maintaining the speed and flow of motor traffic is more important than the safety of vulnerable road users.

“The fact that Cambridge's roads are narrow is precisely the reason why close-passes are a problem here and action should be taken against them. Cambs police contradict Highway Code rule 163 'Give vulnerable road users at least as much space as you would a car'. The accompanying image is clear: you should wait until the opposite carriageway is clear to overtake if there isn't space.

“Given the express intention of the police not to safeguard vulnerable road users, we suggest people cycling follow Bikeability training guidelines and cycle centrally in the lane on narrow roads, to prevent the kind of dangerous overtakes the police refuse to take action against.

“We have seen that Cambridgeshire Police have been very reluctant to enforce 20mph despite the proven benefits for road safety in other towns and cities. We see them once more refusing to take action that is proven to protect vulnerable road users because they do not wish drivers of motor vehicles to be delayed whether in the city or out on the country roads of the county.”

Sam Jones, campaign coordinator at Cycling UK, told Cambridge News: “Cambridgeshire police’s decision is very disappointing. Not only does it demonstrate a lack of understanding of the Highway Code’s guidance on overtaking people cycling, but it also seems to prioritise the inconvenience of one road user over the safety of another.

“Cycling UK would urge Cambridgeshire police to rethink their position, as clearly in a congested city like Cambridge, close passes are a problem, and need to be addressed if they are serious about keeping cyclists safe.”

The local view

Our own Simon MacMichael is a Cambridge resident.

“Compared to other places I’ve lived and used a bike to get around, we’re absolutely spoilt in Cambridge.

“We have some terrific off-road routes particularly on or close to the river, and the separated lanes on Hills Road are a delight to ride along, as are the cycle paths along the guided busways.

“And in many parts of the city centre, the introduction of filtered impermeability – barriers across streets that block through motor traffic but allow people on bikes to pass freely – means the streets are largely given over to cyclists.

“True, many drivers give you ample space when overtaking – here, given that levels of cycling far exceed those anywhere else in the UK, the likelihood is that they will ride a bike, or have family members who do.

“But, it only takes one close pass to ruin your day, and it is a daily occurrence for anyone who chooses to get around the city on two wheels.

“And in my experience, it’s due not just to sometimes shocking driving, but also poorly thought out road layouts.

“Late at night, on Mill Road, say, it’s not unusual to have a driver pass you closely at 40, 50mph on what is a 20mph road – and moreover, one that isn’t too far from the main police station.

“Riding into town along Cherry Hinton Road, you encounter another problem. There are narrow cycle lanes either side, but the space that leaves for the single lane of motor traffic going in each direction means that if you are riding in them, close passes are inevitable.

“Then, you have somewhere like Arbury Road where, particularly at the southern end close to the junction with Milton Road, parked cars either side mean that it’s highly likely you will be overtaken far too closely.

“As I said above, there are a lot of positives here, but there is also much that could be improved.

“And, is it just me, or is rejecting the concept of a close pass operation on the grounds that there isn’t enough space to do so missing the point, while at the same time reinforcing why it’s needed?”

Close pass crackdown

A close-pass enforcement day was held by Cambridge police two years ago, targeting motorists passing cyclists too closely.

It was subsequently reported that the operation ended with officers instead turning their attention to cyclists riding without lights.

Referring to close-passes, a police spokesman said of officers: “So far they’ve not seen it as a problem.”

Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn't especially like cake.

Add new comment

69 comments

Avatar
brooksby replied to ktache | 6 years ago
1 like

ktache wrote:

When I filter I do it with great concentration, covering my brakes, and on the flat bars, my little fingers about 2 inches from the wides point of my bicycle.  I have the knowledge that if I connect with anything it could result in personel injury.

The vehicle driver does has none of these things.  This is why I can pass closer to their vehicle, when we are both travelling relatively slowly, than they should be passing me, when we are both moving at greater speeds.

And of course I am not threatening their safety, whearas a mistake on their part could result in my serious injury or even death.

What he said. (thumbs up)  1

Avatar
srchar | 6 years ago
4 likes

Casual Retardation Officer wrote:

"...it would mean drivers are moving into the opposite lane to overtake.

For Cambridge city where roads are narrower and often very congested we would be potentially forcing motorists to drive at the speed of cyclists when there isn’t the recommended space to overtake."

YES. THAT'S THE ENTIRE FUCKING POINT OF A CLOSE PASS INITIATIVE YOU UTTER FUCKING MORONS.

When the police are quite happy to make this statement publicly, it make me wond- oh I can't be bothered anymore.

Avatar
wycombewheeler replied to ktache | 6 years ago
0 likes
ktache wrote:

When I filter I do it with great concentration, covering my brakes, and on the flat bars, my little fingers about 2 inches from the wides point of my bicycle.  I have the knowledge that if I connect with anything it could result in personel injury.

The vehicle driver does has none of these things.  This is why I can pass closer to their vehicle, when we are both travelling relatively slowly, than they should be passing me, when we are both moving at greater speeds.

And of course I am not threatening their safety, whearas a mistake on their part could result in my serious injury or even death.

All true but in my opinion the principal difference is that a moving cyclists may deviate laterally intentionally or unintentionally for a number of reasons, many of which are actually spelled out in the highway code. I have yet to see a stationary car move laterally for any reason. I don't filter past moving vehicles too dangerous.

Avatar
ChrisB200SX | 6 years ago
1 like

I literally can't have enough outrage for Cambridge Police's incompetence here, so I'll save expressing any and save it for something else that is less draining and less ridiculous.

Avatar
burtthebike | 6 years ago
1 like

"Above all else it puts the safety and security of the public first." The Office of Constable, Police Federation.

I always thought that the first duty of any police officer is the safety of the public.  If somehow that doesn't apply to cyclists in Cambridge, then Casualty reduction officer Jon Morris should explain in words of one syllable, why not.  Is he suggesting that cyclists aren't members of the public?  Or that their safety is somehow less important than that of other members of the public?

I sincerely trust that local cyclists will be inundating the PCC with emails, letters and phone calls 24/7, demanding that the police perform their duty to protect the public who ride a bicycle.

Avatar
handlebarcam | 6 years ago
1 like

There is very little to say that hasn't already been said, and isn't depressing to have to repeat when things should, and could so easily, be getting better. Except...

Quote:

"The average road is approximately 3.5 metres from the kerb to the white lines. Cyclists are advised to cycle 0.75 metres away from the kerb to avoid drain covers and an average car is about two metres wide."

The average car width is not two metres. Increasing numbers are that wide, mostly SUVs, so how about banning them from the city centre? If safe passing is such a mathematical impossibility, surely that's the problem which needs to be tackled.

Avatar
Paul J replied to Helmut D. Bate | 6 years ago
2 likes
Helmut D. Bate wrote:
BarryBianchi wrote:

Ush wrote:

Don't you worry.  You'll be banned for your own good.  Except from the MTB trails and the turbo trainer in the garage.

Already are in a way.  My kids are MTB only. Riding on the road is just too dangerous.  Close pass initiative are not going to change that.  No more than speed cameras have solved speeding.  Or mobile phone law has stopped abuse of those while driving.

Why do Binary, Barry? You want to ride your Bianchi only on separate infrastructure, or do you actually use the roads?

Nobody's arguing AGAINST better, separate infrastructure, but if you're as well-lived as you claim to be, you'll know we're eons away from that in the UK.

So, meanwhile, those who actually ride on UK roads will take the baby steps - and still campaign for the whole shebang including drivers being safer and proper infrastructure.

I both the views above have merit.

Barry's right, in that ultimately nothing but dedicated, high-quality, infrastructure is going to fix the (relatively, compared to a number of other European states) poor cycling safety conditions in the UK. And I think it's also right that that drum must be beaten loudly *every* time cycling safety comes up.

However, the police work with the conditions today, and the law as it is today. And they can improve things significantly in short order, if they'd bloody well enforce the law. The statements from the police in this story are clearly idiotic, showing an ignorance of the law and a dereliction of their duty.

One other comment I'd make... that high-quality, dedicated infrastructure.. it does NOT take long to do. Significant amounts of it can be built within /years/, "all" it needs is the political will to do so.

I remember (vaguely) the Netherlands in the late 70s. I remember watching the cycling infrastructure being built near us. We went from cycling on the road, to me being able to cycle on my own to school, aged 6.

The Netherlands went from no cycling infrastructure, to lots of it, in a relatively short space of time (in the grand scheme of things). Building it is easy, and does /not/ take that long. Once the will is there. Do not be defeatist about how "easy" it is do, in terms of the practical side.

Cycling was part of the dutch cultural identity then, and still normal. The normality of cycling has been lost here, unfortunately.

Avatar
antigee replied to fanatic278 | 6 years ago
0 likes

fanatic278 wrote:

The close pass initiative isn't really the big headline of this story. It's the fact that the "Casualty Reduction Officer" doesn't even know the highway code. And he is also unable to apply a hint of logic. And he's in a job that requires at least a little of these two skills. 

 

He needs to be sacked, regardless of whether he eventually agrees to the initiative. At the very least he needs retraining (i.e. to read the highway code).

might just be deliberately passing on as a press release what he or she has been told is firm policy by more senior officers - knowing it is not a good road safety argument but that senior officers are responding to the car driving public's perception of  what is right - probably add in pressure from local politicians who should know better

Avatar
kitsunegari | 6 years ago
1 like

This from the cops in one of Britains "premier cycling city" folks.

You couldn't make it up.

Pages

Latest Comments