Lower speed limits are not enough

A recent report from the Fietsberaad shows that merely having lower speed limits is not enough to achieve adequate safety for cyclists or other road users.

The Netherlands now has over 40000 km (25000 miles) of roads with a 30 km/h (18 mph) speed limit (out of a total of 120000 km of road). These roads are safer than 50 km/h ( 30 mph ) roads, but not as safe as they used to be. The number of cyclists and pedestrians injured and killed on 30 km/h roads is rising as the lower limits have been applied more widely. Drivers have also become more familiar with the lower speed limits and break them more often. In the last ten years, as the proportion of roads with the lower speed limit has grown, the injury figures have more than quadrupled on 30 km/h roads. These have gone from from 2.4 to 11.7 serious woundings per 1000 km of 30 km/h road. Two thirds of accidents involving children 11 and under occur as they cross roads.

Also of note: A large number of the injuries occurring on 30 km/h roads take place at uncontrolled junctions. In Dutch cities where other potentially more dangerous designs of junction have already been addressed, it is uncontrolled junctions which are left as amongst the most dangerous. Note also that if cyclists are to be given priority at road junctions then designs need to be very careful to avoid a heightened rate of injury as that has all too often been the result of giving priority to cyclists.

Meanwhile, always a decade or two (or four) behind, Britain is just starting to get to grips with the idea of 20 mph ( 32 km/h ) speed limits, and the police have announced to errant drivers in advance of implementation that they don't intend to enforce the new limits...

I should explain that I think lower speed limits, especially on residential roads, are a fine idea. They make the environment more pleasant, including more pleasant for cycling and they do play a part in improving safety. However, the benefit of changing speed limits alone only goes so far. This is being given far too much emphasis in countries which are trying to get something for nothing in terms of growing the cycling rate. If you want more cyclists, you need to address such things as subjective safety and directness of cycle routes. You need not just the benefit of lower speed limits, but the much greater benefits which comes from the whole package of sustainable safety measures. Merely putting up a different speed limit sign on a busy street doesn't achieve much in the way of safety for cyclists if their routes remain shared with drivers. Motor vehicles need to be excluded from roads used mainly by cyclists.

The Netherlands still has the safest cyclists in the world, and despite the large number of vulnerable road users, Dutch roads vie to be the safest roads overall in the world.

Do Dutch drivers stick to limits ?
The simple answer is 'no'. Just as everywhere in the world, drivers in the Netherlands break laws that they think they'll get away with breaking.

The photo shows a road on my commute which has a 30 km/h speed limit. I always ride my bike along this section above the speed limit, but even if I'm riding at 35 km/h or more, almost every car still passes me. Dutch drivers are very much like those elsewhere. Speeding in this location lead to the only incident of anything approaching road rage which I experienced in five years of living in the Netherlands.


Also read about how speed limits are being reduced in rural areas.

If not just lower speed limits, what else is important ?
Campaigns based only on speed limit reduction can never achieve the scale of change required to make the streets and roads of a country safe for everyone to use. Lower speed limits are just one tool out of a number which are required to create the needed change.

Amongst the other things which the Dutch do to increase the safety and convenience of cycling are unravelling motor-routes from cycle-routes, building very high quality cycle-paths, allowing cyclists to avoid traffic light junctions, and making it easy to cross the road. All these things come under the umbrella of "sustainable safety" and they particularly benefit the next generation. Note that pedestrians also benefit from sensible policies, not just "cyclists".

After criticism, Cambridge police retracted their statement that they would not enforce the law, but a few years later the Association of Chief Police Officers in the UK again said that they would not enforce lower speed limits.

Leaving a village

This photo was taken at the edge of a village near here. It's a pretty typical view of a country road.

You'll see the sign that indicates the edge of Noordlaren and underneath it is a crossed out 30, that being the speed limit in kilometres per hour within villages (18 mph). The sign on the right hand side of the road shows the speed limit on a rural road. 60 km/h ( 37 mph ). Note also the deliberately rough road surface to encourage drivers to slow down. Speed limits used to be higher, and quite a lot of them were reduced recently.

Within this village, which has very little through traffic, cyclists share the road with drivers. However, at the edge there is a single direction cycle path on both sides of the road. On the right it starts just before the 60 sign, which is why some of the rough surface is left smooth for cyclists.

Note also the rubbish bin for cyclists visible on the left side of the road. That's a pretty good give-away that this is a popular route for school children. Also, look at that beautiful blue sky. Not at all bad for January.

Almost all villages have 30 km/h speed limits on all their roads, even when they also have cycle-paths.

Lowering speed limits

Today's local newspaper brings the news that the speed limit on rural roads around Assen is being reduced.

The subtitle, Zestig op platteland, gives the gist of the story: 60 km/h in the countryside. That's 37 mph. Quite enough for country roads.

It carries on: "In the coming weeks, on all country roads around Assen, a maximum speed of 60 km/h is being adopted in order to increase road safety outside of the built up area as well as inside. On the main roads to Vries, Rolde, Hoogeveen and Smilde, the existing speed limit of 80 km/h (50 mph) is being retained."

The article goes on to explain why: "This is in line with the national recommendation for "sustainable safety" - a national scheme to reduce traffic deaths (which are already low in the Netherlands). The new speed limit is better for pedestrians and cyclists as well as motorists. It's hoped to decrease the number of incidents of motorists crashing into berms and trees. It's more in keeping with the touristic character of the countryside."

A 60 km/h road, with cycle-path alongside because there's
enough traffic that cycling would not feel safe here

The roads which remain at 80 km/h are all 6.3 metres or wider and have segregated cycle paths. These roads provide good access out of the city in all directions. Many of the roads which have 60 km/h speed limits also have very good quality cycle paths. e.g. the one to the right.

Surely 60 km/h is enough for anyone on a narrow country road...

On the other hand, compare with the cycle path on a road near Cambridge featured a couple of days ago. Is it surprising that people feel happy to let their children cycle to school here, though they don't in the UK ?

Speed limits inside villages are already predominantly 30 km/h (18 mph).

Note that not only do low speed limits make cars less dangerous, they also act to discourage people from driving on roads with the lower speeds because journey times using them are longer than journey times on other roads, and especially on motorways where the limit is usually either 120 or 130 km/h.

For more about rural cycling, see the rural tag. There are also more posts on speed limits in the Netherlands.

The photo shows participants on a Study Tour in May this year. If you would like to be shown this infrastructure, please book yourself on a tour.