Close passes by motorists are as much a part of cycling on British roads as potholes, but there can be only two possible explanations for why a motorist overtakes dangerously close to a cyclist – incompetence or malice.
In the absence of widespread and good quality infrastructure to protect cyclists from motorised traffic, The Safer Roads Partnership and operational policing teams from both Warwickshire Police and West Mercia Police have pioneered Operation Close Pass – a scheme to reduce the number of cyclists killed or injured on their region’s roads. Close passes are intimidating and nationally account for around a third of all threatening incidents between drivers and cyclists.
The initiative, which is now being adopted by other forces, uses plain clothes officers on bikes equipped with front and rear facing cameras. Any driver seen passing closer than the recommended distance (1.5 metres) is pulled over.
The results are encouraging with the number of cyclists killed or seriously hurt on the region’s roads reduced by 20 per cent since West Midlands Police launched the operation.
Almost 200 offenders have been pulled over during close-pass operations. In 13 cases the standard of driving was so poor that drivers were prosecuted. Another 350 others were fined and received penalty points after officers reviewed helmet footage provided by cyclists.
PC Mark Hodson, from West Midlands Police’s Force Traffic Unit, said of Operation Close Pass: “I am in no doubt the operation has played a big part in that reduction: we regularly speak to cycling groups and their members are telling us that the message is getting through to drivers. They are, on the whole, being more considerate and understand we will prosecute them if they endanger cyclists. To see a fall of 20 per cent in the number of serious collisions involving cyclists is incredible especially against a backdrop of increasing numbers of people cycling on our roads. We’ve seen reports of close-passes halve in the West Midlands since we started the project and it’s great that so many other regions are looking to adopt the approach.”
Operation Close Pass is welcome – not least because it demonstrates that the police forces concerned are proactive in their concern for vulnerable road users.
The photograph at the top the page was taken by a coordinator at the Richmond Borough group of London Cycling Campaign when he was out with his 7-year-old daughter. Luckily the dangerous driving did not injure the little girl…or put her off cycling. Perhaps those drivers putting lives at risk in this way should be asked whether their actions are due to incompetence or malice before they are dealt with appropriately. Motorists who drive carelessly or dangerously to such an extent that they kill or seriously injure a cyclist routinely walk away from court with little more than a slap on the wrist. Little wonder that drivers overtake too close with impunity.
Ethical insurance
Not only are we ethical, we campaign for sustainable transport. Sometimes that means protesting until a school gets the zebra crossing they’ve been refused or running 60 roadshows this year to encourage people out of their cars, or fixing bicycles for free. We also launched Green Transport Week and helped establish Car Free Day and Twenty’s Plenty to name just a few. We’ve been campaigning for sustainable transport in this way for over 27 years with the help of people like you. Supporting this work is easy – you simply have to take out insurance with us. Home insurance, cycle insurance, travel insurance and breakdown cover and we take care of the rest. We provide an excellent level of cover while putting concern for the environment at the heart of all we do.
John Holiday
Most drivers sitting in their secure steel boxes have little if any hazard perception or regard for more vulnerable road users.
We need better driving instruction, frequent re-tests & vigorous enforcement of speed limits.
Without such measures, we are unlikely to persuade more of the population that cycling is a safe option.
Jim Woodlingfield
It’s one of the most frustrating things about being on the bike, what’s even more galling is that most drivers when challenged won’t even acknowledge or apologise, and some even then pass even closer in retaliation or threaten violence.
The only answer is safe and segregated infrastructure.
Tony Williams
“Incompetence or malice?” Probably either, and sometimes both. And also ignorance, about the amount of space you ought to allow.
In the photo, it seems that the driver of the Range Rover saw a chance to overtake the cyclist, but needed to tuck in quickly because of the oncoming van. He obviously didn’t say to himself “I could get past here, but I’d have to pass closer to the cyclist than 1.5 metres, so I won’t do it.”
Overtaking a slower-moving road-user is something that drivers often want to do, to the extent that they take a chance. Here it was a cyclist, in another case it might be a tractor or a milk float. The risks include hitting a cyclist, or a head-on crash, or losing control of their own vehicle if they cut in too sharply. All of these indicate an inadequate knowledge of the relevant law, or a lack of understanding of the situation, or a selfish disregard of the possible consequences or their actions. or some combination of those factors.
I think John Holiday’s post is absolutely right.
David Sharpe
I contacted our local Police and Crime Commissioner to ask if they had any plans to implement this sort of close pass education / enforcement with drivers. The response was basically no. So in my part of the country our public servants obviously don’t have any interest in protecting vulnerable road users. And if you happen to live in County Durham, it might be worth contacting the Commissioner to ask the same question.
Nigel Searle
As, in no particular order, I’m an experienced motorist, cyclist and walker I hope I behave appropriately and respectfully to other road users whatever my selected method for getting from A to B is at any particular time (don’t get me wrong I’m certainly not saying that I’m perfect!); this includes when I’m driving, and being fully aware of the danger to them, giving adequate space when passing cyclists.
However, as a walker, I am often amazed at how little space and consideration is given by some overtaking cyclists (often at high speed) on paths which are officially designated as – I won’t raise the issue of those that aren’t – shared routes. Some cyclists seem completely unaware that their approach is not as audible to the walker ahead as it is to them sitting atop their mount, and that it is not necessary to give any other warning (bell ring, cheery greeting, voiced warning, cough etc.), or slow down (dare I even suggest freewheeling?) when approaching to pass. Quite rightly, there are no restriction on pedestrians using shared, unsegregated paths, so these users will include the young, the elderly and the infirm whose awareness & reactions will not be as quick as those of the able bodied and should be allowed for. Reasons cited for motorists giving at least 1.5 metres is to allow a cyclist room to suddenly manoeuvre safely around pot holes, drain covers & others kerbside hazards which might not be immediately apparent to the motorist approaching from behind in their steel cocoon; pedestrians on shared routes will also unexpectedly veer away from the line they are travelling – there’s no rule or regulation to say they shouldn’t – to avoid all manner of things that they don’t want, or, for that matter, shouldn’t have to walk through (or on) without realising that there is cyclist rapidly bearing down on them from behind. It certainly shouldn’t be expected for a pedestrian to be continually turning round to see what may, or may not, be approaching.
So, while I totally agree that motorists should allow adequate space when passing cyclists, the latter should, as well as slowing down, also allow the same when passing pedestrians, but then ETA customers are already likely to be responsible road/path users, so I’m probably preaching to those that don’t actually need to hear it.
Christopher
On-road (painted) cycle lanes encourage dangerous close passing, while of course encouraging harassment by motorists who believe they’re mandatory for cyclists to use.
The Dutch solution is best, IIRC it’s something like this:
Only mix motorists with cyclists on quiet local roads where very low speed limits apply.
Prevent residential roads being used as rat-runs and cut-throughs, by bollards. Permeability.
Provide extensive fully segregated and continuous cycle lanes beside all main roads.
Provide fast cross-country routes for cyclists only. (A footway can run alongside the cycle track.)
Keep pedestrians and their dogs off cycle infrastructure. (A footway can run alongside the cycle track.)
Town centres need to be car-free.
All cycle-routes need high quality surfaces to permit rapid cycling.
Cyclists need to be able to cross major roads without stopping.
Cycle routes need to be good enough to permit safe unsupervised cycle travel by youngsters to school. To end the school-run.
Essentially, cyclists need to be able to cycle safely from door to door without exposure to motor-vehicles travelling faster than 20 mph.
No cycle-tracks in the door-zone.
Current cycle infrastructure design appears to be designed by people who apparently hate cyclists and with the clear purpose purpose of discouraging cycling. Cycle routes need to be free from obstacles (waste-bins; telephone kiosks; bus shelters; bollards; fences; railings; trees; styles, gates; flights of steps http://is.gd/lY2sCQ; mystery obstacles; width restrictions (narrower than a bicycle) & etc.
For examples of bad and often bizarre and barely credible crap cycling infrastructure see: http://wcc.crankfoot.xyz/facility-of-the-month/
Mike
Wow that’s a pretty aggressive slam dunking of motorists and not a single comment on the inconsiderate brainless thoughtlessness of quite a large number of cyclists who ride on pavements (footpaths) ignore traffic lights, abuse pedestrian crossings, ride in large groups and don’t give a fig for the endless line of traffic behind them, oh and not forgetting of course that it is the responsibility of all other road users to make sure that cyclists are properly taken care of as it is always the motorists fault if a cyclist is injured because cyclists seem to expect preferential treatment.
Incomptentence possibly, malice I hope not, frustration definitely, mutual lack of respect for each other, well I can but wonder.
The ETA
Mike, it’s attitudes like yours that ensure there’s still a need for articles like this.
Chris
Mike definitely has no respect for cyclists – I wonder if he has ever cycled?
I fully concur with ETA’s comment.
Mike
Ah Chris you have totally missed the point, there are none so blind as those who will not see, and yes I have ridden a bike, but never on the footway and I sincerely hope never as thoughtlessly as lots of cyclists seem to do today.
Happy cycling