1. VRU AGE and Road Safety
Suzanne Meade

2. Introduction Who are VRU? Cyclist and Pedestrian
- Unprotected vulnerable road users.
Within these two groups there is an array of needs, utility and levels of participation.
This presentation looks at VRU in terms of age and road safety. 1

3. Street design standards / Reduce car trips / health
Carbon emissions
Targets?
obesity
23%
Road Safety
VRU ¼ casualties
ageing population
2:1 workers
Zero Vision ?
Outcomes | policies
living cities
Street design standards /
Population density
urbanisation
75% living urban 2050
Across Europe, half of all car trips are less than three miles, a distance most people could happily cycle in about 20 minutes
The rise of the e-bike means such trips are more possible even for older people, or those living in a hilly area
Even with an assumption of the average bike weighing a hefty near-20kg, the study came up with an emissions rate for ordinary bikes of 21 grams of CO2e (carbon dioxide equivalent) per kilometre travelled. For e-bikes, the figure was barely more, at 22g/km. In contrast, the emissions for a car were 271g/km per person, and 101g/km for bus passengers.
Cycle more Often 2
cool down the planet !
Quantifying CO2 savings of Cycling European Cycling Federation (ECF) in 2011
A similar study came out last week, from the New York-based Institute for Transportation and Development Policy and the University of California, Davis. This found that even e-bikes can often prove more energy efficient per passenger-kilometre than many rail systems.
It concluded that a not-too-outrageous upshift in global cycling use – from a current 6% or so of all urban passenger miles to 11% in 2030 and 14% in 2050 – would cut overall emissions by 7% (in 2030) and then 11% (in 2050
children
Reduce child deaths
modal share
Cycling (10%) 2020
travel plans
Reduce car trips / health
air quality
premature/yr 15

4. VRU Safety – Disproportionate VRU Risk
Mode Share (National Statistics for Scotland, 2015)
1% mvkm
Casualty Proportion – STATS19
(Scottish Transport Statistics, 2016) 3

5. Overall Trend - 4

6. VRU Safety – Travel Varies with Age5

7. VRU Safety - Risk
Key
0-16
17-64
+65
Pedestrians
Decreases after 10-14
Continued
Decrease to 70+
Sharp risk increase.
Cyclists
(Per mvkm x 10 higher than car)
Peak 10-14
Less risk
Likely Increased risk
Scottish 0-16 and 65+ Age Groups travel less compared to high bike mode share countries (Netherlands, Germany) 6

8. VRU +65 17% Scottish Pop. (increasing)Census 2011
Walk and Cycle less (- 50%) and shorter distance
Avoid Traffic/ travel at lower speeds
Injury outcome/recovery
STATS
Fatal
Serious Injury
Problem Locations
Urban
Slight Increase , Mostly Urban(Cyclists)
Uncontrolled Junctions
23% KSI (Ped)
Rural
Mostly Rural (Cyclists) 7

9. VRU 0-16 (Children)
18% Scottish Pop. Global Drop casualties (29% of all)
Walk and Cycle shorter distance
Walk (4-11) 58% (12-18) 42%
Primary cycling growth (2.4%), + 12 don’t cycle (0.7%)
TATIS 2014 Table 15
2.5 times
STATS
Fatal
Serious Injury
Problem Locations
Urban
Decrease
Decrease Urban (Cyclists & Peds)
Links 1/3 KSI (Ped) on links, children crossing/playing
Rural
Cyclists little change
Uncontrolled Junctions(Cyclists) 8

10. VRU 17-64 (Adults-Commuters)
65% Scottish Pop.
Doubled (in some places )
+ More affluent
+34% Hospital
+25% Police
Higher cycling speeds*
Fatal
Serious Injury
Problem Locations
Urban
Marked Increase(Cyclists)
Uncontrolled Junctions, Roundabouts & TL
Rural
Mostly Rural (Cyclists)
Slight Increase (Cyclists)
Marked increase & link (cyclists)
Links(Cyclists) 9

11. Problem Areas for Age Groups
Uncontrolled Crossings
Cross-roads,
T-Junction / Staggered T-Junctions,
Pproportions of +65 at urban junctions
Children on Links , proportionally higher than junctions
Serious Injury increase mainly over a relatively short time – Urban Junctions and Rural Links 10

12. How do we Compare? Key Scotland Netherlands (Secret to Success) Impact
Mode Shares
+65
17-64
0-16
Segregated Cycle Paths
Very little
Yes
Space/mode share
Rural Links
Space/ mode share
Traffic Calming
WIP (20mph)
Severity Urban
Severity
Urban
Urban/Play
Junction Treatment
Traffic Lights(Yes)
Priority(No) (75%)
Cognitive/
Space
Priority/
Experience/Space
Traffic Education Driver/Cyclists
Attitudes
Experience
Pro Cyclists Regulation No
?under reporting
SiN ?
?Urban maybe
2% / 4 11

13. Protected Infra - Do we HAVE to wait?
& Pop 500k
- 12km to 152km
- Risk reduced 50%(KSI/mvkm)
- 3 to +16 million trips
- Segregated paths caused change
(Marques et al, 2017) 12

14. Conclusion Think 8-80, should be easy to follow, forgiving.
Transformation to segregation doesn’t have to take a very longtime.
A lot is possible. 13

15. Operation Close Pass
Thankyou