Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

ASLs Greenwichcyclists] Cycling Safety Seminar (or Truck Safety Seminar)

Expand Messages
  • paulmouk@btinternet.com
    I believe I read (a couple of years ago?) that the advisory period had ended and that ASLs had become mandatory. Where can a definitive answer be found? Paul.
    Message 1 of 7 , Jul 31, 2011
    • 0 Attachment

      I believe I read (a couple of years ago?) that the advisory period had ended and that ASLs had become mandatory.

       

      Where can a definitive answer be found?

       

      Paul.

       

       

       
    • Mark PHC
      The answer is, of course, in the Highway Code. If you are riding a bicycle on the road you need to be very clear about the rules of the road and this very
      Message 2 of 7 , Aug 1, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        The answer is, of course, in the Highway Code. If you are riding a
        bicycle on the road you need to be very clear about the rules of the
        road and this very cheap book is where you'll find them. The relevant
        rule is:

        178
        Advanced stop lines. Some signal-controlled junctions have advanced
        stop lines to allow cycles to be positioned ahead of other traffic.
        Motorists, including motorcyclists, MUST stop at the first white line
        reached if the lights are amber or red and should avoid blocking the
        way or encroaching on the marked area at other times, e.g. if the
        junction ahead is blocked. If your vehicle has proceeded over the
        first white line at the time that the signal goes red, you MUST stop
        at the second white line, even if your vehicle is in the marked area.
        Allow cyclists time and space to move off when the green signal shows.

        For those who haven't read the Highway Code, it uses two very
        important words: SHOULD and MUST. The first is not law, the second is.
        Therefore, an ASL IS legally enforceable if an officer can see that
        the first Stop line was breached when the lights were red or amber.
        However, the police have told me that it is not in the public interest
        to prosecute infringements which means that ASLs are effectively a
        waste of paint. You should also note that cyclists cannot legally
        enter the box by crossing the first Stop line. You must use the gutter
        lane to gain entrance through the broken white line. Those who take an
        interest in paint on the road might like to know that ASLs were
        initially designed to be 5m deep but it was felt that this gave too
        much room to cyclists so they were reduced to 3m which is barely
        effective if the vehicle behind is an articulated lorry.

        Mark


        On 31 July 2011 22:34, <paulmouk@...> wrote:
        >
        >
        >
        > I believe I read (a couple of years ago?) that the advisory period had ended and that ASLs had become mandatory.
        >
        >
        >
        > Where can a definitive answer be found?
        >
        >
        >
        > Paul.
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
      • Liz Delap
        Thank you Ian for your time in attending and writing up such detailed notes.. There are indeed some worrying points (so many HGVs not legal in a spot check,
        Message 3 of 7 , Aug 1, 2011
        • 0 Attachment

          Thank you Ian for your time in attending and writing up such detailed notes.  There are indeed some worrying points (so many HGVs not legal in a spot check, such limited availability of training – I don’t suppose Greenwich is a biking borough, but what is a biking borough? and lack of importance attached to safety in new road design)    But also a few good signs (requirements for training for drivers from 2014)

           

          I shall go and get myself a new Highway code.

          Kind Regards

          Liz



          From: greenwichcyclists@yahoogroups.com [mailto: greenwichcyclists@yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of Louise Blore
          Sent: 31 July 2011 17:58
          To: Cyclists
          Subject: [greenwichcyclists] Cycling Safety Seminar (or Truck Safety Seminar)

           

           

          Cycling Safety Seminar (or Truck Safety Seminar)

          This seminar was called by TfL to explain what they and others were doing to promote road safety between cyclists and trucks. About 50% of serious injury and fatalities to cyclists are caused by HGVs and half of those are by construction vehicles. 

          Got to City Hall well in time for the Changing Places prologue with 6 MET police to watch over the bikes and make very effective use of 2 loaned semi-trailer power units (by Hanson and Cemex). For one who had not Changed Places by sitting in a cab it was a powerful reinforcement of the message that cyclists are almost invisible when in the gutter next to or just in front of even a modern truck. 

          The seminar took a whole morning and consisted of 9 presentations. This inevitably squeezed the limited Q&A time and the event came across (to me) as a TfL response to the recent petition organised by LCC. Rather than try to summarise (many of you will probably know much of the information already - including the baffling array of acronyms and initials), I will highlight what seemed to be the more interesting points and link them to a relevant speaker (by using initials).

          Those speakers were: CI Ian Vincent, MET (IV); Lilli Matson, TfL (LM); Gordon Telling, FTA (GT); Dan Evanson, of the FORS unit in TfL (DE); Lee Thornton, LB Barking and Dagenham (LT); Cynthia Barlow, Roadpeace (CB); Mick Heduan, Crossrail (MH); Charlie Lloyd , LCC (CL); John Lee, TfL (JL). The audience was about 50, many of them RSOs from boroughs and cycle trainers and included Misha Byrne from Greenwich Council..

          Much of the discussion centred on training, both of truck drivers and cyclists; other issues could be largely grouped into highway engineering and policy; and heavy goods vehicle design and policy.

          A) HGV Design and Policy

           1. trucks built post 2000 are required to have downward looking mirrors to sides and front (IV)

           2. some operators have installed warning devices to sides of the cab which activate when turning (IV)

           3. longer lorries are being considered at national and European level (point from floor)

           4. but London could ban them on most unsegregated roads if it so wished (GT)

           5. a MET random test of 3000 HGVs found about 2400 were not legal (CB)

           6. power steering has tended to raise manouevring speeds from about 2 to 5 mph (CL)

          B) Road Design and Policy

           1. an admission that many road improvements of the last 50 years were counterproductive for safety (JL), specifically:

           2. more highly splayed junctions - ie tighter corners lower turning speeds (JL)

           3. guardrails (JL)

           4. wider lanewidths (ease flow, ie increase speed) (JL)

           5. left filters to advanced stop lines (IV who admitted to an "advanced dialogue" between the MET and TfL on this point)

           6. ASLs are designed to a minimum of 3 metres from the stop line; some felt that they need to be at least 4 (JL); they are not legally enforceable for vehicles

          C) Training

           1. Hammersmith and Fulham, Lambeth, Hackney, Southwark, and Barking and Dagenham have had good HGV training schemes (DE)

           2. Barking spent £10,000 to train 360 HGV drivers (LT)

           3. freight operator recognition scheme (FORS) is run by TfL but is a benchmarked system (DE)

           4. to ensure specific TfL training cash a borough needs to be either a Biking Borough or require contractors to be FORS compliant (DE)

           5. training cash is now not ring-fenced, hence Greenwich spend ceased in 2011 (Cycle Training UK )

           6. in 2014 all European HGV drivers need to have had 35 hours of training over 5 years - 7 hours is a typical module - as part of the DriverCPC directive (DE)

           7. many cycle safety training units are trying to get accreditation to provide DriverCPC but none has so far succeeded (David Dansky, CT UK)

           8. Crossrail have a strict compliance policy and a safety training module which it would like to offer (sell) to London Boroughs  but it is only 3.5 hours and therefore not accredited

           9. it was argued that Borough in-house organisation of driver training is ineffective and costly compared to outsourcing (Brian Dalton)

          I may have committed sins of omission or commission but can make available 6 of the 9 presentations. The big question is how do we use the fact that 10,000 cyclists signed the truck safety petition (CL). I have dropped Misha Byrne of Greenwich Council an email since we did not meet on the day. We perhaps need to reflect on how we can most effectively get LBG to do some HGV training to emulate Hackney and Barking & Dagenham. More broadly, we perhaps need to reflect on our position re. policy issues. Cycling has been the lead passenger transport mode in the capital for over a decade (an increase of 150% 2000-2010). Lead activities should be given priority and not consigned to the gutter.

          PS I did get the chance to ask about vehicle speeds. Not surprisingly the answer for HGVs is rather about low speeds when turning (see A6 above) than speed limits per se. But there was much mutter from the gutter about a bold city-wide initiative on speed generally. It is both a major cultural and technical issue and one that most transport planners just cannot get.

          Ian Blore

          02082931796

           

           

          Page Title

          * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

          This email may contain information that is confidential, privileged or otherwise protected from

          disclosure. If you are not an intended recipient of this email, do not duplicate or redistribute it

          by any means. Please delete it and any attachments and notify the sender that you have received

          it in error.

           

          Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent

          those of TESLA, Inc. or TESLA (Europe) Ltd.

           

          TESLA, Inc. is a company incorporated in the Commonwealth of Virginia, with its registered office

          at 9201 Arboretum Parkway, Suite 120, Richmond, VA 23236-5403, USA.

          TESLA (Europe) Ltd. is a company registered in England (Registered No. 2777311), with its

          registered office at 42-43 Lower Marsh, London, SE1 7RG, UK.

           

          * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

        • scarlgar
          Many Thanks Ian for attending the event and providing such a comprehensive account of it. When you say there was much mutter from the gutter about a bold
          Message 4 of 7 , Aug 1, 2011
          • 0 Attachment
            Many Thanks Ian for attending the event and providing such a comprehensive account of it.

            When you say "there was much mutter from the gutter about a bold city-wide initiative on speed generally", are you saying there was demand for this from the attendees (if so, from whom?) or are you saying that such an initiative is being seriously considered by the powers-that-be (again if so, who, and what would the initiative consist of?).

            Best wishes,
            Gareth


            From: Louise Blore <louiseatbeadles@...>
            To: Cyclists <greenwichcyclists@yahoogroups.com>
            Sent: Sun, 31 July, 2011 17:58:20
            Subject: [greenwichcyclists] Cycling Safety Seminar (or Truck Safety Seminar)



            Cycling Safety Seminar (or Truck Safety Seminar)
            This seminar was called by TfL to explain what they and others were doing to promote road safety between cyclists and trucks. About 50% of serious injury and fatalities to cyclists are caused by HGVs and half of those are by construction vehicles. 
            Got to City Hall well in time for the Changing Places prologue with 6 MET police to watch over the bikes and make very effective use of 2 loaned semi-trailer power units (by Hanson and Cemex). For one who had not Changed Places by sitting in a cab it was a powerful reinforcement of the message that cyclists are almost invisible when in the gutter next to or just in front of even a modern truck. 
            The seminar took a whole morning and consisted of 9 presentations. This inevitably squeezed the limited Q&A time and the event came across (to me) as a TfL response to the recent petition organised by LCC. Rather than try to summarise (many of you will probably know much of the information already - including the baffling array of acronyms and initials), I will highlight what seemed to be the more interesting points and link them to a relevant speaker (by using initials).
            Those speakers were: CI Ian Vincent, MET (IV); Lilli Matson, TfL (LM); Gordon Telling, FTA (GT); Dan Evanson, of the FORS unit in TfL (DE); Lee Thornton, LB Barking and Dagenham (LT); Cynthia Barlow, Roadpeace (CB); Mick Heduan, Crossrail (MH); Charlie Lloyd, LCC (CL); John Lee, TfL (JL). The audience was about 50, many of them RSOs from boroughs and cycle trainers and included Misha Byrne from Greenwich Council.
            Much of the discussion centred on training, both of truck drivers and cyclists; other issues could be largely grouped into highway engineering and policy; and heavy goods vehicle design and policy.
            A) HGV Design and Policy
             1. trucks built post 2000 are required to have downward looking mirrors to sides and front (IV)
             2. some operators have installed warning devices to sides of the cab which activate when turning (IV)
             3. longer lorries are being considered at national and European level (point from floor)
             4. but London could ban them on most unsegregated roads if it so wished (GT)
             5. a MET random test of 3000 HGVs found about 2400 were not legal (CB)
             6. power steering has tended to raise manouevring speeds from about 2 to 5 mph (CL)
            B) Road Design and Policy
             1. an admission that many road improvements of the last 50 years were counterproductive for safety (JL), specifically:
             2. more highly splayed junctions - ie tighter corners lower turning speeds (JL)
             3. guardrails (JL)
             4. wider lanewidths (ease flow, ie increase speed) (JL)
             5. left filters to advanced stop lines (IV who admitted to an "advanced dialogue" between the MET and TfL on this point)
             6. ASLs are designed to a minimum of 3 metres from the stop line; some felt that they need to be at least 4 (JL); they are not legally enforceable for vehicles
            C) Training
             1. Hammersmith and Fulham, Lambeth, Hackney, Southwark, and Barking and Dagenham have had good HGV training schemes (DE)
             2. Barking spent £10,000 to train 360 HGV drivers (LT)
             3. freight operator recognition scheme (FORS) is run by TfL but is a benchmarked system (DE)
             4. to ensure specific TfL training cash a borough needs to be either a Biking Borough or require contractors to be FORS compliant (DE)
             5. training cash is now not ring-fenced, hence Greenwich spend ceased in 2011 (Cycle Training UK)
             6. in 2014 all European HGV drivers need to have had 35 hours of training over 5 years - 7 hours is a typical module - as part of the DriverCPC directive (DE)
             7. many cycle safety training units are trying to get accreditation to provide DriverCPC but none has so far succeeded (David Dansky, CT UK)
             8. Crossrail have a strict compliance policy and a safety training module which it would like to offer (sell) to London Boroughs  but it is only 3.5 hours and therefore not accredited
             9. it was argued that Borough in-house organisation of driver training is ineffective and costly compared to outsourcing (Brian Dalton)
            I may have committed sins of omission or commission but can make available 6 of the 9 presentations. The big question is how do we use the fact that 10,000 cyclists signed the truck safety petition (CL). I have dropped Misha Byrne of Greenwich Council an email since we did not meet on the day. We perhaps need to reflect on how we can most effectively get LBG to do some HGV training to emulate Hackney and Barking & Dagenham. More broadly, we perhaps need to reflect on our position re. policy issues. Cycling has been the lead passenger transport mode in the capital for over a decade (an increase of 150% 2000-2010). Lead activities should be given priority and not consigned to the gutter.
            PS I did get the chance to ask about vehicle speeds. Not surprisingly the answer for HGVs is rather about low speeds when turning (see A6 above) than speed limits per se. But there was much mutter from the gutter about a bold city-wide initiative on speed generally. It is both a major cultural and technical issue and one that most transport planners just cannot get.
            Ian Blore
            02082931796




          • Paul Moss
            I do have a copy of the latest Highway Code! There is an online version here www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/index.htm Paul. ... From:
            Message 5 of 7 , Aug 1, 2011
            • 0 Attachment
              I do have a copy of the latest Highway Code!

              There is an online version here
              www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/index.htm

              Paul.

              --------------------------------------------------
              From: "Mark PHC" <mark@...>
              Sent: Monday, August 01, 2011 8:06 AM
              To: <greenwichcyclists@yahoogroups.com>
              Subject: Re: [greenwichcyclists] ASLs Greenwichcyclists] Cycling Safety
              Seminar (or Truck Safety Seminar)

              > The answer is, of course, in the Highway Code. If you are riding a
              > bicycle on the road you need to be very clear about the rules of the
              > road and this very cheap book is where you'll find them. The relevant
              > rule is:
              >
              > 178
              > Advanced stop lines. Some signal-controlled junctions have advanced
              > stop lines to allow cycles to be positioned ahead of other traffic.
              > Motorists, including motorcyclists, MUST stop at the first white line
              > reached if the lights are amber or red and should avoid blocking the
              > way or encroaching on the marked area at other times, e.g. if the
              > junction ahead is blocked. If your vehicle has proceeded over the
              > first white line at the time that the signal goes red, you MUST stop
              > at the second white line, even if your vehicle is in the marked area.
              > Allow cyclists time and space to move off when the green signal shows.
              >
              > For those who haven't read the Highway Code, it uses two very
              > important words: SHOULD and MUST. The first is not law, the second is.
              > Therefore, an ASL IS legally enforceable if an officer can see that
              > the first Stop line was breached when the lights were red or amber.
              > However, the police have told me that it is not in the public interest
              > to prosecute infringements which means that ASLs are effectively a
              > waste of paint. You should also note that cyclists cannot legally
              > enter the box by crossing the first Stop line. You must use the gutter
              > lane to gain entrance through the broken white line. Those who take an
              > interest in paint on the road might like to know that ASLs were
              > initially designed to be 5m deep but it was felt that this gave too
              > much room to cyclists so they were reduced to 3m which is barely
              > effective if the vehicle behind is an articulated lorry.
              >
              > Mark
              >
              >
              > On 31 July 2011 22:34, <paulmouk@...> wrote:
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >> I believe I read (a couple of years ago?) that the advisory period had
              >> ended and that ASLs had become mandatory.
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >> Where can a definitive answer be found?
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >> Paul.
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >
              >
              > ------------------------------------
              >
              > Yahoo! Groups Links
              >
              >
              >
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.