The government seems to getting rid of speed cameras mainly because it will save money, is this true?
Unfortunately figures are only available for safety camera program which includes mobile cameras and traffic light cameras as well as fixed speed cameras.
From 2000 to 2007 the average revenue was £10 million/yr. The safety camera program is funded centrally and receipts are passed back to government. Government has cut central funding by about 1/3 while still taking receipts leaving roughly a £38 million hole.
There is controversy over the effectiveness of cameras, a cochrane review of the evidence concludes:
“Despite the quality of the included studies being judged to be weak, the consistency of reported positive reductions in speed and crash outcomes across all studies suggest that SEDs are a promising intervention for reducing the number of road traffic injuries and deaths.”
A interesting figure to note is the cost of personal injuries of prevented accidents, the The national safety camera programme: four-year evaluation report estimates this roughly amounts to £258 million for 2003/4.
To put things in perspective the same report claims total cost of road accidents (including property damage, police and insurance costs) in 2002 was £17.8bn.
I’ve been working too much recently but plan to do some more work on the site with the weather getting nice again.
Beverley council are planning to build a cycle lane to Cottingham which is good news but I’m abit concerned by the valleys on that bypass, hopefully they’ll build over the nice flat farmland via Beverley park.
There is only short section of narrow roads that needs resurfacing.
Just discovered a new googlemaps feature that draws routes that automatically follow roads!
Two replies in quick succession, it appears politics may be working…
Greg Knight to be fair to him was very amicable in his letter and apologised for the delay explaining he was waiting for a reply from East Riding Council. He makes the point that the car will be the main form of transport in East Riding for some time to come due to it’s rural nature which is understandable but appears to support the improvement of cycling provision.
Hopefully with sustained pressure the cycling provision can continue to be improved. My main objective is to connect the cycling network between Hull and Beverley along the A1174, its currently a very dangerous road and I think a lot more people would travel between these locations by bike if facilities where improved.
“In reply to your email dated 2/10/08 requesting further details with
regards to the A1174, with regards to your question about jointly funding a
project with Hull City Council. Whilst do aim to work in partnership with
our neighbouring authorities, in this particular instance, Hull City
Council already have cycle facilities within their boundary. It would
therefore be the responsibility of this Council to find the funding for
such a route
The Authority reduced the speed limit along the entire length of the A1174,
between Hull and Beverley from 60 mph to 30/40 mph in February 2000. The
accident statistics for the 5 year period before and the 5 year period
following the implementation of the speed limit reduced by 26%.
You requested details of the costings/contractors of the cycle lane from
Beverley to Leconfield and the Woodmansey scheme. The contractor for the
Beverley to Leconfield scheme (length approx. 5 km) was Wrights
Construction and the scheme cost £195,000. The Hull Road, Woodmansey
scheme (length 1.2 km) including a zebra crossing was £215,000, contractor
Wolds Construction, but involved more re-construction and drainage work
than the Leconfield scheme.
The Council received approximately £3 million a year from Central
Government to deliver Local Transport Plan Integrated Transport Schemes for
the whole of the East Riding. The Capital funding for these schemes are
overseen by a team of Capital Project Boards members which includes the
Team Leader, Ian Burnett, Transport Policy.”
The onus is on East Riding to connect the network along the A1174.
I will look for accident data and analyse the £3 million budget.
East Riding coucil sent a nice reply to my enquiry about a cycling lane on the A1174 Beverley – Hull.
“With regards to your request for improvement of the cycle lanes between
Driffield, Beverley and Hull, especially on the A1174 from Beverley to
The Council is committed to promoting and encouraging more cycling,
particularly for shorter journeys such as commuting, shopping or school
We have recently introduced numerous cycle schemes around the authority’s
area including facilities between Woodmansey and Beverley, Leconfield to
Molescroft and Beverley Road, Driffield showground to station, the total
cost of just these three schemes was around £500,000.
With regards to a cycle route linking Woodmansey to Dunswell roundabout
along A1174, the council submitted a £2.5m supplementary bid to the
Department of Transport in 2004 for a Beverley to Dunswell Integrated
Transport Bid which induded a package of measures including an off-road
cycle route, however this was turned down. Since then the council has
provided an off-road route from Beverley to Woodmansey village (King
Street) and zebra crossing at a cost of approximately £250,000. Also, as
part of the council’s Local Transport Plan budget road safety schemes have
been implemented, with part of the A1174 speed limit reduction from 40
m.p.h. to 30 m.p.h. which provides a safer environment for cyclists. We
also promote a quieter lane route for cyclists from Beverley along Long
Lane (Route 66/1). Whilst we appreciate the remainder of the route from
Woodmansey village to Dunswell roundabout is not ideal, to date we have
undertaken as much as we can with the available funding.
Transport Policy – Asset Strategy
Senior Transport Policy Officer“
It’s not surprising really, any serious investment in cycling has to come from the top and it appears cycling (and public transport) isn’t a serious priority to our supposedly eco friendly government.
I plan to get more details of contracts and get involved in the cyclist lobby. Theres no harm in providing feedback and maybe influence council policy although I fear I’m far too insignificant.
Still no reply from my MP, I might find out where he lives and hide in a bush outside his house until he appears.
No replies from the councils or my MP yet, can’t say I’m surprised but none the less, still disappointed.