1)
Asks for a legal requirement for minimum passing clearance when overtaking or near to cyclists, to try and reduce the frequency of vehicles passing too close. On roads with speed limits up to and including 30 mph/hr, a 1m minimum is suggested and on roads with higher speed limits, a 1.5m minimum passing distance is suggested.
Reasons
Trying to provide an extra incentive for drivers to take more care when overtaking cyclists, only overtaking when suitable space is available, http://cyclingtips.com.au/2015/10/south ... -cyclists/
2
The CTC to promote a European Union climate change policy of national governments funding cycling infrastructure, with a 3% minimum investment of transport spending on cycling infrastructure (built to CROW standards) or investment in relationship to the modal share of cycling.
Reasons
Trying to ensure that reasonable levels of funding are available to provide cycling infrastructure in all EU countries. The CTC may gain support via MEPs and in conjunction with the ECF.
Possible CTC AGM motions (reasons),
1
Ask for a trial of a minimum passing clearance when overtaking cyclists, to try and reduce the frequency of vehicles passing too close.
(trying to provide an extra incentive for drivers to take more care when overtaking cyclists, only overtaking when suitable space is available), http://cyclingtips.com.au/2015/10/south ... -cyclists/
2
The CTC to promote a European Union climate change policy of national governments funding cycling infrastructure. With a 3% minimum investment of transport spending on cycling or in relationship to the modal share of cycling.
(trying to ensure that reasonable levels of funding are available to provide cycling infrastructure in all EU countries, see viewtopic.php?f=6&t=102233)
http://www.ecf.com/wp-content/uploads/D ... t-Mode.pdf
3
The CTC to establish a ‘CTC Bridge charity group’, with the aims of assessing the need, advising on design, and assist in raising funds to provide extra bridges or crossing facilities for rivers, roads or rail in regards to cycling.
(CTC could assist in highlighting where an additional crossing may be worthwhile, provide design advice and help to raise funds. This could potentially get the CTC directly involved in providing more cycle routes and working with Sustrans or others to deliver them.)
4
The CTC to organise extra cycle rally/camping events with funds raised going to the ‘CTC Bridge charity’.
(Following the major cycling events successes in England and more people cycling in parts, providing extra events may help to promote cycling generally and raise funds in support of a ‘CTC Bridge charity.)
5
The CTC to take steps to ensure that when a road/section of road is proposed to be closed permanently to cyclists that at least 12 months notice is provided and publication of alternative routes and costs of improvements to existing routes or alternatives be published. Only after the details have been published and if no objection lodged could a closure be exacted.
(Some high speed roads without proper provision for cycling are closed to cyclists for safety reasons. A full assessment in each case is required to ensure all options are considered and cost estimate/s be provided regarding the options before a closure is enacted and if objections are lodged, a procedure to consider the options is required.)
6
The CTC to support introducing 25 mph limits for suitable roads.
(Suitable roads may be in moderately congested areas where a current 30 mph limit is too high for safety and a 20 mph limit may add to inconvenience due to speed humps/costs. For pedestrians the risk of death reaches 10% at an impact speed of 23 mph, 25% at 32 mph. https://www.aaafoundation.org/sites/def ... sSpeed.pdf )
7
The CTC take suitable action to have changes made to the Highway Code.
The Introduction to the Highway Code includes:
Although failure to comply with the other rules of The Highway Code will not, in itself, cause a person to be prosecuted, The Highway Code may be used in evidence in any court proceedings under the Traffic Acts (see The road user and the law) to establish liability. This includes rules which use advisory wording such as ‘should/should not’ or ‘do/do not’.
By adding, “However, liability should not be based primarily on wearing extra safety aids in the case of pedestrians and cyclists.” This would help ensure that the Highway Code's advice is not used as an excuse to reduce fair compensation for cyclists or pedestrians who have been wearing normal cloths, without extra safety aids.
