Search results for:

I just got a PM re a ghost bike. Not sure if this has been posted: London Tonight 5th Sept 2009 on Vimeo

Boris is an inviting target, but he can't really do much.

I think the most appropriate targets are national level government and the haulage business itself.

In terms of a shopping list, I would contact the following people for ideas:

Cynthia Barlow, Roadpeace
Charlie Lloyd, LCC
Ian Brooke, TfL FORS scheme
Chair, All Party Parliamentary Cycling Group Gwyn Prosser MP (Lab)
Roger Geffen, CTC
Bob Davis, Road Danger Reduction Forum

I spoke to Debra - campaigns coordinator @ CTC, and also Chris - policy coordinator @ CTC; hopefully at least one will be able to make it, and maybe Roger as well. Def. a good place to start.

I can speak to some more experienced large-scale (200 people plus) meeting facilitators if you want, I'm sure one of them would be up for pitching in if needed.

Bill, I agree. Boris is a bit of a red herring. Its bigger than he.
Wrt your list we have reps coming from Roadpeace, LCC, and as Seak said CTC. Can anyone invite anyone from the others?

[QUOTE=flxh;952334]got hit by a van yesterday. Then after getting home i heard about the cyclist, now another.

ok, so why did you get hit? what kind of van? how could you have avoided it? was it possible to avoid? who admitted culpability? etc etc

proper analysis of collisions and near misses will help us find the solutions.
the authorities dont care or bother to work out why.

Apologies, I won't be able to make this meeting.To be really effective, I think you should be looking at what everyone else (ie LCC HGV group, CTC, Roadpeace, All-party Parliamentary Cycling group etc) is doing and try to complement their activities.There are a lot of very experienced campaigners who have achieved progress (blind-spot mirrors etc) but it has been painfully slow. I was involved in some of it, and the pace was excruciating.

Exactly Bill, I want to map out what we have already, take all your work and research to date and kick it into action and ram it down the throat of boris and whoever (in a very politically correct and constructive and productive way - advice needed on that). I know there is loads of stuff out there already, we need to harness it and synergise it and let them know now is the time.

don't want to bog down this initial meeting, however if succesful and a desire to establish a charitable organisation i would love to offer my skills as a treasurer (i.e. all the boring stuff - setting up bank accounts and managing funding etc...)

thank you for this offer.
people have asked me about setting up a charity and I think perhaps this is the default action in this situation, but not necessarily the right one.
I didnt want to do it cos I think there are enough organisations already covering this. maybe the problem is they are not focused enough on this one particular (HGV vs Cyclist) issue. anyway, i dont know the benefit of a charity apart from fund raising. the public should not be funding this, we need to prove a case for the govt, for councils, for construction companies, the dvla, to fund this stuff. other people are raising awareness etc etc. we just need to help all these other people do this stuff better, and make them do the stuff that needs doing that they are not doing.

I updated the map today with yesterday''s incident and also one on from 10/08 on Upper Thames street

hi, its you, glad you are on this forum. that map is excellent. (although eilidh features twice on the left....?) she always did merit and extra mention... ;)

OK so the first meeting should be small, just the very relevantly-skilled amongst us, like howsyourdad? or whoever has expertise in this field. Right?

ok, recap
I am going to do an agenda, and points and proposed actions/items and post it before hand. We will have structure. We need to be efficient. I can chair if need be but I cant organise biscuits and all that. we need a good venue that will facilitate discussion and not be a distraction or hinderance. surely someone has a posh office who can throw in tea and biscusits and that we can link a laptop to a screen and minute everything realtime for everyone to see? Does the warehouse have those facilities?

Amy from Roadpeace will set the scene tell us the state of play at the moment. She is on all sorts of groups with the police, tfl etc etc and knows the craic.
Lets not get into issues, like separate lanes or not.
Lets get everyone there now at the first meeting who wants to come and wants to do sthg, even if they dont know what they want to do yet. There are so many things to be done, some need special skills, some dont. I want to be lean, effective and efficient. We dont want to repeat work or reinvent the wheel. First thing is to find out what is being done by whom. We can break out into working groups. Eg 4 people looking at whether we should be promoting lane separation. Looking at case studies - copenhagen, or more relevantly a street I came upon a couple of weeks ago - Howland street - separated with a kerb. Why the case study may or may not be applied.

Every issue I see us deciding on what needs to be done, collecting best practice, and then spreading that. Raising the bar in all issues at all levels.
Eg Cemex and their vehicles, Lambeth council and their lorry policy, etc etc.

I dont want to exclude anyone right now. We can whittle down later and break out into specialisms. We need people with skills in media, campaigning, law, highways, behaviour, maps (have you seen that google map of all the cycling deaths in the capital? Its v powerful but out of date now - job for ftony...?! ) statistics, analysis, policy, construction industry and people that are good at collecting and organising information, and admin, sending emails, webstuff etc etc.

We have a massive massive resource and a will to act. Actually I find it very exciting, this opportunity to change. But we have to be clever and make it work.

I have to get off line now and look after my kiddywinks but I will try and do the agenda and everything else tonight when they are in bed and post it - if I can do an attachment. This is following discussion with lots of people over the past months. But remember we need to stay focused on the big picture and then break it down in a mangeable fashion, we cant all discuss everything at once.
Apologies - this posting seems a bit lengthy....

oh goodness.... now we need not only tea and biscuits but photocopying and presentation facilities. we cant talk to 30 people all at once... need to present the ideas and take feedback and discussion and type it all in, on a big screen, and agree it then and there. yet again its starting to swamp me...........argh!

Velocio, you have pointed out one of the first issues.
We need a comprehensive list of what organisations are doing what work that is relevant.
First task - desk based study.
(Eg orgs: Roadpeace, LCC, TfL, cyclesafelondon, moving target etc etc..
Eg their respective objectives: action, reporting, comment etc)
Then we work out where there are gaps, why are they not succeeding. EG as you say "The single-worst thing regarding action has been the cycle communities continuing inability to focus on a few things and make those work. Everyone disagrees and then pulls different directions... the cat herding syndrome... and then nothing happens."

If you cant come on that day please add your name to the list and just put (apologies) in brackets and list your interest connections so can keep you in teh loop and on the list for the next meeting. Twist I mean!

Had suggestion of Imperial College library, South Ken. Cafe with long tables. Will be quiet then.

Great guys. Didnt want to get into the detail with people who werent interested. We will have an Agenda. Amy from Roadpeace is coming. She will give us a 5min summary of their actions/ issues. I will be at the LCC/Roadpeace/ etc Working group meeting on HGVs the day before so can feedback from them, although I am hoping that Charlie or Oliver will comen from LCC.
I have a list of issues. I want us to discuss and prioritise and agree action and responsibilities. Will prepare a paper for discussion and proposals which I will attach to the thread before the meeting.

Greasy, thanks for suggesting the Lamb. Anyone have any ideas of an office area rather than a pub area. We mean business not chat!

Phil, the LCC does constant work on this. We host the joint HGV Working Group which CTC, RoadPeace, and Living Streets attend, and most of the advances in this area (and yes, despite this new tragedy, there have been a few) are directly attributable to the work of that group. It's constant hard work and there's a huge amount going on.

Oliver
LCC

This smacks me in the heart again, and again and again. Why is this happening?!? Why is the 'action' not working? There is no urgency, no importance, no priority, and no resources.

I am going to this meeting on monday, invited by Roadpeace. I have been working a lot with Roadpeace since Eilidh went down.
After putting up her ghost bike 2 weeks ago, several of her friends made further suggestions about action to take. I have a list as long as my arm already. The film we are making raises more and more questions. Since the ghost bike I felt overwhelmed and lost momentum but this is just not good enough.

I WANT TO PUT TOGETHER AN ACTION GROUP TO MAKE CHANGE AND MAKE IT FAST.
I cant carry on at my pace and intensity and there are already bodies like LCC and Roadpeace which need support. Cyclists have ideas, people have resources and connections. Let's work together. Many of you have expressed a desire to do sthg. I was planning a proper proposal/post/email but this cant wait so I had to post it here and now.

IM ASKING ANYONE WHO IS INTERESTED IN DOING SOMETHING TO COME AND MEET, ALL TOGETHER, to make a list (I already have an extensive one for comment), to prioritise, to delegate and to make change happen. Its up to us. Noone else is going to do this.

Im in London next week. Who wants to meet after work, maybe from about 6-7pm tuesday or wednesday, to discuss and get involved? Who can suggest/provide a location/ office somewhere central? I will ask at the meeting on monday what they think we could do.

For me, and for Eilidh, and for the other 6, Im sure this is the best thing we can do. Otherwise they die in vain. Let's make the death of this young woman propel us into action for change.

Please start another thread if appropriate...Im not sure best how to manage this.
Ktee

Im going to order another plaque and fix it back to back with the one facing the pedestrians, when Im back in a couple of weeks. Its pretty obvious when you see the plaque what its for. We spent ages welding brackets to the bike and painting them up so they could be bolted properly to the railings. ITs a really professional job, which is just what I wanted, and what Eilildh is worthy of.
I hope this sets a precendent for other permanent ghost bikes. Some friends told me this route was recommended as a cycle route in the skyrides (?) but there was no mention of the fatality. At least cyclists, and drivers, can see if for themselves now, and make their own judgements.

We will be erecting a ghost bike for Eilidh at Notting Hill on Sat 5th Sept at 11am.
This is to mark the spot of her tragic crash, and to warn all road users to take care, and action, to prevent this re-occuring.

We are very pleased to have Boris Johnson's reassurance that the ghost bike will not be removed.

Please come and spend a moment for Eilidh.
We will be having a drink at the Mitre afterwards.

london tonight with buffalo bill etc...
http://www.vimeo.com/6249263

Check out this on BBC News tonight at 6.30 ........this is the guy that did the 'installation' at traf sq on the deaths of cyclists since jan 08.

4th Plinth Pedal Power is this Friday, 21st, August at 6.30 p.m. on BBC news!

This week BBC is putting the spotlight on the two wheel debate; Cycling is one of the capital's most contentious transport issues after the congestion charge and Tube strikes.

Dont know if youve seen what this guy Neil Ellis did in Traf Sq on the 4th Plinth in July. Check out his vid:
http://www.oneandother.co.uk/participants/Neil

"After much careful thought I will be using my hour to highlight the unacceptable high levels of deaths involving cyclists within London by lorries, dangerous junctions, road conditions and the inadequate response to these issues by Boris and TFL.
22 Cyclists have died since Jan 2008 - 15 of which involved HGVs.
I have started a Facebook Group '4th Plinth Pedal Power' to encourage discussion and debate on this issue."

let put this in perspective.

on average 500,000 londoners cycle everyday.

on average (so far), 15 people die cycling in London, most of them HGV related.

while it's a sad avoidable loss, it's still a very small numbers.

Now Edscoble, you are starting to talk like a politician. Dont quote numbers that are 'acceptable'. What number would you say is not acceptable, and not a 'small' number? These are people, individuals, that are contributing to society and to your quality of life. Each single death leaves behind millions of pounds of cost - paid by you the tax payer - and human pain and suffering. And massive consequences on other individuals, even those not directly related. I spoke to a number of people at the scene who told me they were traumatised by seeing Eilidh. Young children who were on their way to school and nursery and who then couldnt sleep at night, who had to go to the Drs., whose parents had to explain why the girl was 'sleeping'. People who will live with the image for ever.
You think its ok if one of these dead cyclists have left 4 small children as orphans?
The pertinent word is 'avoidable'. I would argue that because they are avoidable even 1 single person who dies cycling in London is unacceptable, never mind 15. We dont need millions of pounds worth of research to find a cure. We know what the cure is. We just need to ACT NOW.
Dont fall into the statistics trap, we can argue black is white with statistics.

London Tonight is covering the Exchanging Places (where the cyclists get in a truck to look at the blind spots) and doing a piece on HGVs and cyclists tonight.
Think the prog is on at 6pm.

Ive just seen this thread.
We are hoping to put Eilidh's ghost bike up at the beginning of Sept.
Im coming to London to meet with the CPS then, when they have made their charging decision. We were wondering how we could let people know it is up and have some sort of memorial - no idea what this would look like - and one of her friends suggested another ride but I thought we had already done that so people wouldnt be keen.
However, maybe we could have this general ghost/memorial ride - ride passed the other bikes and whatever route you decide and maybe finish up at Eilidhs ghost bike in Notting Hill? And then maybe going to that pub we went to last time- the Mitre. Helping making it a news story might be the news of CPS result.
Sat 5th Sept might be a good date. It is also 7months since Eilidh's crash. The ride we had for Eilidh in March was on a saturday and it went pretty well and London Tonight came down. Incidentally they just phoned me - thanks Buffalo Bill! - as there will be a piece today on London Tonigh about HGVs and cyclists. Keep an eye out for it.
Is that too soon to organise? Is anyone keen? Let me know what you think.
Ktee

Dangers from HGVs to cyclists and pedestriansProposals to TfL for a campaign—AAT revised

Background to the problem
More than half of the cyclists killed in London result from collisions with Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGVs), in many cases, but not all [AMY DO WE KNOW WHAT PERCENT?] turning left at junctions. HGVs also endanger pedestrians; although this danger is lower profile. 50% more pedestrians than cyclists are killed by HGVs. HGVs also seriously injure many cyclists and pedestrians

In the first six months of 2009, preliminary reports indicate that 7 cyclists and 4 pedestrians have died from collisions with HGVs. 6 of the 7 cyclists and all 4 pedestrians were women. [ARE YOU GOING TO UPDATE THESE FIGURES TO THIS MONTH? – I THINK THERE HAVE BEEN ANOTHER AT LEAST 2 CYCLIST DEATHS (MANCHESTER AND LEEDS)

Background to the proposals
The problem is longstanding and has been the subject of previous initiatives. These have shown that there is no “magic bullet”. A range of measures is needed to make a sufficient impact

Proposals
The proposals are organised [IS THIS THE RIGHT WORD? IMPLEMENTED IS BETTER?] by vehicle (HGV), road user, road environment, and safety management.
**HGV **
1. Mirrors. TfL should examine the imposition of restrictions on lorries allowed on streets in the GLA area. Such restrictions could be progressively tightened. Currently [YOUR MEANING IS UNCLEAR HERE. DO YOU MEAN THIS SHOULD BE IMPLEMENTED NOW, OR THIS IS CURRENTLY ALREADY THE CASE

• HGVs without front-facing mirrors (unless newer than 2007),
  
• HGVs with cabs and windscreens designed for inter-urban use, such that drivers cannot see their surroundings and have to rely on up to six mirrors
  
• HGVs without warning signs, and are allowed on London streets crowded with pedestrians and cyclists.
  2. Sideguards. HGVs without side overrun guards are also allowed to operate in London. Exclusions should be reconsidered
  The aim should be to go progressively beyond the requirements of national and EU legislation to a situation in which HGV drivers in London can see their surroundings and operations are safe enough to aspire to zero deaths and serious injuries. Steps along this progression could be the establishment of transhipment centres and the development of a “London lorry
  3. Sensors and alarms. Operators should be strongly encouraged to introduce sensors and alarms, as has Cemex. [DO YOU KNOW ABOUT BALFOUR BEATTY’S “360 DEGREE MIRROR” AND THEIR ‘ZERO HARM’ POLICY? CARILLION ALSO HAS A ‘DRIVING FOR WORK POLICY’ WHICH APPLIES TO ALL SUPPLIERS – I HAVENT INVESTIGATED BUT COULD USE THESE AS CASE STUDIES/ LEADING BEST PRACTICE
  4. Warning signs
  a. Cyclists. Every lorry should have a warning sign displayed on the rear nearside
  b. Pedestrians. On the sides of HGVs at the front nearside, there should be warning signs about walking close to the front of a stationary lorry
  **Road user **
  5. Training programmes
  a. Lorry drivers. The new training requirements for HGV drivers ( hours per year) make it possible to develop a focussed module, as has been done by LCC for bus drivers. A challenge will be to reach self-employed drivers and smaller firms. What about extending Lambeth programme
  b. Foreign drivers. A special training course should be mandatory for drivers of foreign registered HGVs on London’s roads. [WOULD THIS BE CONTRARY TO EU LAW ON FAIR TRADE?]
  6. Public awareness campaigns
  a. Cyclists. Messages need to stress the specific dangers, without portraying all cycling as dangerous.
  b. Pedestrians. The danger to pedestrians is less well known than that to cyclists and a media campaign may be needed.
  c. ‘Exchanging Places’ demonstrations. Placing HGVs in prominent places, such as Trafalgar Square, and inviting cyclists into the cabs should be extended to target pedestrians. To increase HGV drivers’ awareness, similar demonstrations should be organised at lorry parks just outside London.
  d. Videos. Clear, easy to understand, videos showing dangers should be made readily available for widespread distribution. The latest Metropolitan Police video is useful, but needs professional editing. [AND TOO MUCH EMPHASIS IS PLACED ON THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CYCLIST TO KEEP OUT OF THE BLIND SPOTS...?]
  e. Reporting campaign. Cyclists and pedestrians should be encouraged to report bad driving involving HGVs before a death or serious injury occurs. AND THE POLICE SHOULD BE ENCOURAGED/ ORDERED TO TAKE THESE SERIOUSLY AND PROSECUTE WHERE POSSIBLE. CAN THEY LEGALLY DO SO ON WITNESS EVIDENCE SUCH AS THIS.
  Safety management
  **7. Coordination **
  a. Commission. A standing Commission, led by TfL and including representatives from the Metropolitan Police, Cycling and Walking organisations, lorry operators, DfT and others, should be established to ensure good coordination.[/
  b. DfT A closer dialogue with DfT is needed, including on side overrun guards, where the DfT has not followed up the report it commissioned from TRL some years ago
  8. Research and policy development
  a. Update. Knowledge of the problem and possible remedies should be brought together in a single report. This should take account of the current study on Cyclists’ Safety for the DfT. The research in 2007 on cyclists’ deaths should be brought up to date and extended to cover pedestrians.
  b. Database. A constantly updated database of HGV-related deaths and serious injuries should be available to all parties concerned.
  c. Reporting. Additional data should be collected on each K/SI collision involving an HGV and a pedestrian or cyclist. This data should include presence of mirrors, sideguard, warning signs, alarms, sensors, height of cab, presence of ‘blindspot’, driver’s vision, RELATIVE POSITION OF CYCLIST AND VEHICLE
  d. Collision investigators. A meeting should be convened of collision investigators to garner lessons from their experience and insights.
  e. Annual review. An annual review should be held with findings presented to the public
  f. Research. Research should be conducted into the practicality of a London lorry with a smaller cab design and also the benefits for London of a civil compensation system based on driver liability, as being currently discussed in Scotland
  9. HGV operators. A Code of Conduct for operators should be available and promoted through trade associations and the police.
  10. Freight Operators Recognition Scheme. This TfL scheme should be expanded as quickly as possible. All public bodies in London, particularly London local authorities, should be gold standard members and should only employ FORS members for haulage contracts. ALL COMPANIES PROMOTING THE CYCLING TO WORK CAMPAIGN FOR THEIR EMPLOYEES SHOULD BE ASKED TO ENSURE ALL SUPPLIERS – RIGHT DOWN THE SUPPLY CHAIN – SIGN UP TO FORS AND ACHEIVE GOLD STANDARD. (I think there are 40,000 companies signed up)
  
  

ALL CONSTRUCTION COMPANIES SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO ENSURE ALL SUPPLIERS ACHIEVE GOLD STANDARD. THIS COULD BE IMPLEMENTED THROUGH AN AMMENDMENT TO THE CONSIDERATE CONSTRUCTORS SCHEME OR THEIR OWN CSR OR SUSTAINABILITY POLICES
**11. Commercial Vehicle Education Unit. **The CVEU has done much good work publicising the risk of HGVs to cyclists and should be continued. Collision investigation reports should include copies of their visit reports to any company whose driver was involved in a fatal crash.
12. Trade associations. The Freight Transport Association, the Road Haulage Association, the Mineral Products Association and other trade associations should be fully brought into this campaign AND BE ENCOURAGED TO ENCOURAGE ALL MEMBERS TO SIGN UP TO FORS – GOLD STARDARD PREFERRED AND MAYBE CREATE AN INCENTIVE SCHEME FOR MEMBERS TO DO SO
13. Operators. The new obligations under the Corporate Manslaughter legislation and Health and Safety guidance need to be promulgated more strongly, especially to smaller operators.
14. Prosecutions. A closer dialogue is need with the Ministry for Justice on prosecution policy. The Vehicle and Operator Services Agency has been provided with additional powers and resources, so the current very low level of deterrent prosecutions could be raised.
15. Funding. A campaign adequately addressing the above topics would require funding, both internally and for any NGO input required
16. Considerate Contractor Scheme. This should be extended to include approach roads to construction sites. NO NOT ENOUGH! SHOULD COVER ALL TRANSPORTATION OF MATERIALS (DEMOLITION, RESUSED, RECYCLED, NEW AND WASTE PRODUCTS) ALL THE WAY DOWN THE SUPPLY CHAIN
I see this is a City of London scheme. More widespread is the Considerate Constructors Scheme as my comments above and detail of which is below FYI
Road environment
17. Fatal collision site inspection. Each site of a fatal collision should be reviewed for altered street lay-out there and lessons elsewhere. [/FONT
18. Trixie mirrors. The trials of Trixie mirrors on cycle super highways could lead to more widespread use.
19. Junction design. The indirect road danger from traffic speeds created by curves designed to accommodate HGVs could be reduced by tighter curves, with cobbled areas for HGVs
20. Major construction projects. Special measures should be developed for HGVs for the Olympics, Crossrail and other major projects (A high proportion of HGVs delivering to the main Olympic site failed a Police check last year). KC - I CHALLENGED THEM ON THIS WHEN I SPOKE TO THEM. THEY DENIED ITand I didn’t have the source info to back it up though. Do you? They said their job was to deliver the Olympics and they couldn’t control all their vehicles outside their logistic centres. This is irresponsible and disgraceful. That’s what they said about environmental issues years ago. Now they would be slammed by activists if they didn’t comply with environmental regulations and even best practice beyond regulation on projects such as the Olympics. “Special Measures” is vague, can we not just ask that they sign up to FORS gold standard for all vehicles/ supply chain
Conclusion
The above proposals are submitted as an element of Share the Road, specific to HGVs
London Cycling Campaign, CTC, RoadPeace, Living Streets

OMG - how do I stop that happening - sorry!

Hi,
Here are DRAFT proposals to TfL for a campaign re HGVs and cyclists that I have been asked to comment on (in CAPS). It is supposed to go in by friday this week. Authored by Roadpeace. If anyone wants to comment - or to me directly - not sure the best way to record comments - please do.
Here it is anyway:
[CENTER][CENTER][SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]Dangers from HGVs to cyclists and pedestrians[/FONT][/SIZE][/CENTER]
[CENTER][SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]Proposals to TfL for a campaign—AAT revised[/FONT][/SIZE][/CENTER][/CENTER]
[FONT=Arial][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
[SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]Background to the problem[/FONT][/SIZE]
[FONT=Arial][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
[SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]More than half of the cyclists killed in London result from collisions with Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGVs), in many cases, but not all [AMY DO WE KNOW WHAT PERCENT?] turning left at junctions. HGVs also endanger pedestrians; although this danger is lower profile. 50% more pedestrians than cyclists are killed by HGVs. HGVs also seriously injure many cyclists and pedestrians.[/FONT][/SIZE]
[FONT=Arial][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
[SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]In the first six months of 2009, preliminary reports indicate that 7 cyclists and 4 pedestrians have died from collisions with HGVs. 6 of the 7 cyclists and all 4 pedestrians were women. [ARE YOU GOING TO UPDATE THESE FIGURES TO THIS MONTH? – I THINK THERE HAVE BEEN ANOTHER AT LEAST 2 CYCLIST DEATHS (MANCHESTER AND LEEDS) [/FONT][/SIZE]
[FONT=Arial][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
[SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]Background to the proposals[/FONT][/SIZE]
[FONT=Arial][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
[SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]The problem is longstanding and has been the subject of previous initiatives. These have shown that there is no “magic bullet”. A range of measures is needed to make a sufficient impact.[/FONT][/SIZE]
[FONT=Arial][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
[SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]Proposals[/FONT][/SIZE]
[FONT=Arial][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
[SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]The proposals are organised [IS THIS THE RIGHT WORD? IMPLEMENTED IS BETTER?] by vehicle (HGV), road user, road environment, and safety management. [/FONT][/SIZE]
[FONT=Arial][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
[SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]HGV [/FONT][/SIZE]
[SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]1. Mirrors. TfL should examine the imposition of restrictions on lorries allowed on streets in the GLA area. Such restrictions could be progressively tightened. Currently [YOUR MEANING IS UNCLEAR HERE. DO YOU MEAN THIS SHOULD BE IMPLEMENTED NOW, OR THIS IS CURRENTLY ALREADY THE CASE?],[/FONT][/SIZE]

• [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]HGVs without front-facing mirrors (unless newer than 2007), [/FONT][/SIZE]
  
• [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]HGVs with cabs and windscreens designed for inter-urban use, such that drivers cannot see their surroundings and have to rely on up to six mirrors,[/FONT][/SIZE]
  
• [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]HGVs without warning signs, and are allowed on London streets crowded with pedestrians and cyclists. [/FONT][/SIZE]
  [FONT=Arial][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]2. Sideguards. HGVs without side overrun guards are also allowed to operate in London. Exclusions should be reconsidered.[/FONT][/SIZE]
  [FONT=Arial][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]The aim should be to go progressively beyond the requirements of national and EU legislation to a situation in which HGV drivers in London can see their surroundings and operations are safe enough to aspire to zero deaths and serious injuries. Steps along this progression could be the establishment of transhipment centres and the development of a “London lorry”.[/FONT][/SIZE]
  [FONT=Arial][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]3. Sensors and alarms. Operators should be strongly encouraged to introduce sensors and alarms, as has Cemex. [DO YOU KNOW ABOUT BALFOUR BEATTY’S “360 DEGREE MIRROR” AND THEIR ‘ZERO HARM’ POLICY? CARILLION ALSO HAS A ‘DRIVING FOR WORK POLICY’ WHICH APPLIES TO ALL SUPPLIERS – I HAVENT INVESTIGATED BUT COULD USE THESE AS CASE STUDIES/ LEADING BEST PRACTICE?][/FONT][/SIZE]
  [FONT=Arial][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]4. Warning signs[/FONT][/SIZE]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]a. Cyclists. Every lorry should have a warning sign displayed on the rear nearside.[/FONT][/SIZE]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]b. Pedestrians. On the sides of HGVs at the front nearside, there should be warning signs about walking close to the front of a stationary lorry.[/FONT][/SIZE]
  [FONT=Arial][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
  [FONT=Arial][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]**Road user **[/FONT][/SIZE]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]5. Training programmes[/FONT][/SIZE]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]a. Lorry drivers. The new training requirements for HGV drivers ( hours per year) make it possible to develop a focussed module, as has been done by LCC for bus drivers. A challenge will be to reach self-employed drivers and smaller firms. What about extending Lambeth programme?[/FONT][/SIZE]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]b. Foreign drivers. A special training course should be mandatory for drivers of foreign registered HGVs on London’s roads. [WOULD THIS BE CONTRARY TO EU LAW ON FAIR TRADE??][/FONT][/SIZE]
  [FONT=Arial][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]6. Public awareness campaigns[/FONT][/SIZE]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]a. Cyclists. Messages need to stress the specific dangers, without portraying all cycling as dangerous. [/FONT][/SIZE]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]b. Pedestrians. The danger to pedestrians is less well known than that to cyclists and a media campaign may be needed. [/FONT][/SIZE]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]c. ‘Exchanging Places’ demonstrations. Placing HGVs in prominent places, such as Trafalgar Square, and inviting cyclists into the cabs should be extended to target pedestrians. To increase HGV drivers’ awareness, similar demonstrations should be organised at lorry parks just outside London.[/FONT][/SIZE]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]d. Videos. Clear, easy to understand, videos showing dangers should be made readily available for widespread distribution. The latest Metropolitan Police video is useful, but needs professional editing. [AND TOO MUCH EMPHASIS IS PLACED ON THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CYCLIST TO KEEP OUT OF THE BLIND SPOTS...?][/FONT][/SIZE]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]e. Reporting campaign. Cyclists and pedestrians should be encouraged to report bad driving involving HGVs before a death or serious injury occurs. AND THE POLICE SHOULD BE ENCOURAGED/ ORDERED TO TAKE THESE SERIOUSLY AND PROSECUTE WHERE POSSIBLE.....?[/FONT][/SIZE]
  [FONT=Arial][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
  [FONT=Arial][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]Safety management[/FONT][/SIZE]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]7. Coordination [/FONT][/SIZE]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]a. Commission. A standing Commission, led by TfL and including representatives from the Metropolitan Police, Cycling and Walking organisations, lorry operators, DfT and others, should be established to ensure good coordination.[/FONT][/SIZE]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]b. DfT A closer dialogue with DfT is needed, including on side overrun guards, where the DfT has not followed up the report it commissioned from TRL some years ago.[/FONT][/SIZE]
  [FONT=Arial][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]8. Research and policy development [/FONT][/SIZE]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]a. Update. Knowledge of the problem and possible remedies should be brought together in a single report. This should take account of the current study on Cyclists’ Safety for the DfT. The research in 2007 on cyclists’ deaths should be brought up to date and extended to cover pedestrians. [/FONT][/SIZE]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]b. Database. A constantly updated database of HGV-related deaths and serious injuries should be available to all parties concerned. [/FONT][/SIZE]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]c. Reporting. Additional data should be collected on each K/SI collision involving an HGV and a pedestrian or cyclist. This data should include presence of mirrors, sideguard, warning signs, alarms, sensors, height of cab, presence of ‘blindspot’, driver’s vision, RELATIVE POSITION OF CYCLIST AND VEHICLE[/FONT][/SIZE]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]d. Collision investigators. A meeting should be convened of collision investigators to garner lessons from their experience and insights.[/FONT][/SIZE]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]e. Annual review. An annual review should be held with findings presented to the public.[/FONT][/SIZE]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]f. Research. Research should be conducted into the practicality of a London lorry with a smaller cab design and also the benefits for London of a civil compensation system based on driver liability, as being currently discussed in Scotland.[/FONT][/SIZE]
  [FONT=Arial][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]9. HGV operators. A Code of Conduct for operators should be available and promoted through trade associations and the police. [/FONT][/SIZE]
  [FONT=Arial][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]10. Freight Operators Recognition Scheme. This TfL scheme should be expanded as quickly as possible. All public bodies in London, particularly London local authorities, should be gold standard members and should only employ FORS members for haulage contracts. ALL COMPANIES PROMOTING THE CYCLING TO WORK CAMPAIGN FOR THEIR EMPLOYEES SHOULD BE ASKED TO ENSURE ALL SUPPLIERS – RIGHT DOWN THE SUPPLY CHAIN – SIGN UP TO FORS AND ACHEIVE GOLD STANDARD. (I think there are 40,000 companies signed up!)[/FONT][/SIZE]
  [FONT=Arial][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]ALL CONSTRUCTION COMPANIES SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO ENSURE ALL SUPPLIERS ACHIEVE GOLD STANDARD. THIS COULD BE IMPLEMENTED THROUGH AN AMMENDMENT TO THE CONSIDERATE CONSTRUCTORS SCHEME OR THEIR OWN CSR OR SUSTAINABILITY POLICES[/FONT][/SIZE]
  [FONT=Arial][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]**11. Commercial Vehicle Education Unit. **The CVEU has done much good work publicising the risk of HGVs to cyclists and should be continued. Collision investigation reports should include copies of their visit reports to any company whose driver was involved in a fatal crash. [/FONT][/SIZE]
  [FONT=Arial][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]12. Trade associations. The Freight Transport Association, the Road Haulage Association, the Mineral Products Association and other trade associations should be fully brought into this campaign AND BE ENCOURAGED TO ENCOURAGE ALL MEMBERS TO SIGN UP TO FORS – GOLD STARDARD PREFERRED AND MAYBE CREATE AN INCENTIVE SCHEME FOR MEMBERS TO DO SO[/FONT][/SIZE]
  [FONT=Arial][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]13. Operators. The new obligations under the Corporate Manslaughter legislation and Health and Safety guidance need to be promulgated more strongly, especially to smaller operators.[/FONT][/SIZE]
  [FONT=Arial][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]14. Prosecutions. A closer dialogue is need with the Ministry for Justice on prosecution policy. The Vehicle and Operator Services Agency has been provided with additional powers and resources, so the current very low level of deterrent prosecutions could be raised.[/FONT][/SIZE]
  [FONT=Arial][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]15. Funding. A campaign adequately addressing the above topics would require funding, both internally and for any NGO input required.[/FONT][/SIZE]
  [FONT=Arial][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]16. Considerate Contractor Scheme. This should be extended to include approach roads to construction sites. NO NOT ENOUGH! SHOULD COVER ALL TRANSPORTATION OF MATERIALS (DEMOLITION, RESUSED, RECYCLED, NEW AND WASTE PRODUCTS) ALL THE WAY DOWN THE SUPPLY CHAIN.[/FONT][/SIZE]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]I see this is a City of London scheme. More widespread is the Considerate Constructors Scheme as my comments above and detail of which is below FYI[/FONT][/SIZE]
  [FONT=Arial][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
  [FONT=Arial][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT][SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]Road environment[/FONT][/SIZE]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]17. Fatal collision site inspection. Each site of a fatal collision should be reviewed for altered street lay-out there and lessons elsewhere. [/FONT][/SIZE]
  [FONT=Arial][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]18. Trixie mirrors. The trials of Trixie mirrors on cycle super highways could lead to more widespread use. [/FONT][/SIZE]
  [FONT=Arial][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]19. Junction design. The indirect road danger from traffic speeds created by curves designed to accommodate HGVs could be reduced by tighter curves, with cobbled areas for HGVs.[/FONT][/SIZE]
  [FONT=Arial][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]20. Major construction projects. Special measures should be developed for HGVs for the Olympics, Crossrail and other major projects (A high proportion of HGVs delivering to the main Olympic site failed a Police check last year).[/FONT][/SIZE]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]I challenged them on this when I spoke to them. They denied it and I didn’t have the source info to back it up though. Do you? They said their job was to deliver the Olympics and they couldn’t control all their vehicles outside their logistic centres. This is irresponsible and disgraceful. That’s what they said about environmental issues years ago. Now they would be slammed by activists if they didn’t comply with environmental regulations and even best practice beyond regulation on projects such as the Olympics. “Special Measures” is vague, can we not just ask that they sign up to FORS gold standard for all vehicles/ supply chain?[/FONT][/SIZE]
  [FONT=Arial][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
  [FONT=Arial][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]Conclusion[/FONT][/SIZE]
  [FONT=Arial][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]The above proposals are submitted as an element of Share the Road, specific to HGVs.[/FONT][/SIZE]
  [FONT=Arial][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
  [FONT=Arial][SIZE=3][/SIZE][/FONT]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]London Cycling Campaign, CTC, RoadPeace, Living Streets[/FONT][/SIZE]
  [SIZE=3][FONT=Arial]July 2009[/FONT][/SIZE]
  

Ha ha Buffalo Bill. I wanted to put "Death by HGV: The TfL Lottery"

My friend said it was too controversial! This sticker is not my main focus. A friend of Eilidhs has done it after we were discussing how cr@p the boris posters were and the safety vid that they published. I just wanted to put it on your site and see if anyone would help spread it around.
Yes. I agree re the law. They do it on the continent, burden of proof should be on the most hazardous (and safest for the occupier) vehicle. The main actions I see now are:

1. Change the law so the default situations is the most vulnerable assumed innocent (most difficult and will take ages but have egs abroad)
   
2. Separate HGVs and cyclists in rush hour (the simplest and quickest and most effective) stats show most of deaths in rush hour (obvious)
   
3. Vehicle design and driver education the best it can be - proximity sensors, alarms, cameras in cabs etc etc. This is all done, just needs implementation, and the will to do it.
   
   

Personally Ive spent 6mths kicking ass with the police which has taken huge amount of time, effort and and downright tenacity, and now Im trying to finish our film which was orginally to find witnesses but is now an educational campaign (?), would love to cover all these issues and show the obvious solutions, its just become a massive project now. Buffalow Bill features. Clip is on vimeo - think its been posted on here before http://www.vimeo.com/4545070
. Focus has changed since then.
Anyway, enough ramblings. Thanks for offers of help.
Ktee

I guess we are trying shock tactics cos nothing else has made a difference. Cynthia Barlow, Chair of Roadpeace, had her daughter killed by an HGV 10 years ago. The same truck killed another cyclist a year later, yards from the same place. She has been campaiging ever since. This campaigning is not working. The main problem is, as I see now, that DESPITE ALL THE EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY the police concluded it was Eilidhs fault. This is completely ridiculous - ok Im biased - but its still ridiculous looking objectively at the evidence presented, whoever you are. So nothing is going to change whilst the police, the CPS, and Boris, think it is the cyclists fault. Which they will continue to do unless we challenge them and get evidence to the contrary (cameras, witnesses).
Yes, of course we should be targeting the drivers, but not really the drivers, its the companies. Because the companies set the framework, they have the power. They employ the drivers. And they set requirments for drivers. How hard is that though. When I am told by the Director of the Parliamentary Advisory Committee for Transport Safety that the govt cannont insist on better safety measures for lorries because it would be contrary to EU law under free trade regs. This is a massive issue and it needs pushing by the govt cos the lorry companies are going to do nothing voluntarily, unless we can name and shame them ie with cameras, or prosecute them. When a driver who kills someone does not even go to court, this will keep happening. When a driver who fails his eyesight test - to the degree that it is less than half as good as it should be - and he kills someone and the police recommend a charge of driving with uncorrected defective vision - of which the penalty is 3 points and a £60 fine, this will still keep happening. There is absoultely NO INCENTIVE for lorries to stop killing cyclists. I agree we should be doing everything. Targeting cyclists, drivers, companies, and the govt. Im trying..................its a big job.