Blackfriars Bridge Fatality

This has turned into a fascinating debate, the best yet on this site. (I can't believe I agree with mapmaker). On the back of a tragedy, it has come down to one of the central problems of modern Britain: selfishness. Martin, we all want you to have a nice time on your bicycle. But, as red bus, loafer and several others have pointed out in varying degrees of eloquence, you and your no doubt lovely daughter do not exist in an empty universe. I love cyclists. Do cyclists love me?

Jon

1. You may not agree with me, bu objective accident statistics do not agree with you. The harsh reality of the situation is that the biggest cause of cyclists' fatalities on the roads (25% of all road-cyclist deaths) is where a driver overtakes a cyclist and immediately turns left after passing the cyclist. The next largest cause (12%) is where the cyclist is passing a stream of parked cars and someone opens their driver side door straight into the path of the cyclist. Another major cause (5%) is where the driver overtakes a cyclist and immediately stops in front of them. In all three cases here, the cyclists could mitigate these risks by cycling further out into the centre of the lane.

2. Tower Bridge is actually quite narrow over the bascules (ie. central) section, so in order for a car to pass a cyclist, the cyclist would have to be extremely close to the kerb; too close for any margin of error.

3. My speedometer tends to record about 18mph on the uphill section and 22 mph on the downhill section (gosh! at 22mph I am breaking the speed limit! shall we ignore my earlier point that motorists tend to travel at 30 mph on the bridge... or 50% over the speed limit?)

You still cling on to the notion that I am holding up the traffic. 100 yards ahead is file of slow moving traffic that both I and the car behind can see will hold both of us up in 30 seconds time. As a motorist you do not have an automatic right to overtake me only to have to stop in traffic as soon as you have passed me.

Tell me: if it were a car in front of you travelling at (or about, since you wanted me to precisely record my speed) 20 mph, would you be tooting your horn and telling them to get out of the way? or do you reserve such "harumph" behaviour for cyclists?

Kevin:

Strange, but, when I read Red Bus's post I thought he very eloquently put the same point as me:

Here is a snippet of his post:
"I also cycle (slowly) on the pavement from time to time and I do so safely mindful that it isn't just avoiding running people over that counts but also not scaring people by cycling fast or erratically. I actually like cycling on the pavement and I think broadly it works when I take care not to spook anyone else"

Personally, it really p*sses me off when people cycle on pavements, or anywhere else where they are not supposed to cycle.

Hello all.

Great forum!

Sorry for the length of this piece, may i please show you the email exchange I have had with the Evening Standard about this terrible accident?

To Letters Editor, Evening Standard;



Dear Catriona.

Please find attached the article from the Daily Express.

Can anyone from your paper comment on why you did not carry a single word
on this story, or the previous two deaths on London's Bridges?

Best regards
Spindrift

Copyright 2004 EXPRESS NEWSPAPERS
The Express

May 13, 2004

SECTION: NEWS; Pg. 17

LENGTH: 1056 words

HEADLINE: OUR CYCLE LANES ARE DEATH TRAPS; ONE MORE SAD STATISTIC AND A NATIONAL SCANDAL EXPOSED

BYLINE: By Tom Morgan

BODY:
VICKI McCreery's death was an accident waiting to happen. She was cycling home when she was struck and killed by a
rush-hour bus.

But she was not breaking any rules of the road.

Instead, Australian-born Vicki, 37, was travelling in a designated cycle lane - which the Highway Code states other
vehicles are not allowed to enter - when she was killed.

Her death highlighted a scandalous lack of thought and care by city planners who, in this instance, placed a bus
lane next to a cycle lane.

Road safety campaigners last night criticised the road layout on the busy Blackfriars Bridge in central London, next
to the Daily Express headquarters.

They said the cycle lane - which sits between a normal traffic lane and a bus lane - was a death trap which should
be scrapped.

Angie Lee, chief executive of the Bicycle Helmet Institution, said:

"Roads like this are leaving cyclists on a very thin line - this accident illustrates just how much danger they have
to deal with every day.

"We are trying to protect ourselves and our children from suffering serious head injuries but it seems that no one
is listening to us. We just do not know what to do.

"How many more fatalities will we have to endure before these kinds of roads are scrapped?"

Yesterday from the Daily Express offices, which overlook the bridge, countless cars, buses and lorries could be seen
crossing the cycle lane, putting unprotected cyclists at risk of injury and death.

Vehicles also regularly flouted the 30mph speed limit on the bridge, which spans the Thames.

In other countries, proper cycle lanes separate cyclists from traffic with kerbs and filtering.

But not in Britain - where town planners have been accused of neglecting the needs of cyclists.

With 141 cyclists killed on Britain's roads in 2002, and more than 17,000 injured, those on two wheels desperately
need shielding.

The tragedy which took Vicki's life on Monday night was so horrific that police had to close the major route for
four hours, leaving the City of London gridlocked.

Witnesses said a single-decker bus collided with Vicki on the northbound carriageway.

The driver of the Stagecoach-run service called the emergency services on his mobile phone but it was too late.
Vicki was dead.

He was arrested at the scene "as a matter of routine" and released pending further inquiries.

The accident prompted cycling experts to call yesterday for a clampdown on the haphazard placement of cycle lanes.

Roger Geffen, campaigns and policy manager for the Cyclists' Touring Club (CTC) welcomed the Government's decision
to spend up to GBP 40.7million on creating cycle lanes in the next three years.

But he warned that ministers had to ensure the routes were safe - which meant individual planning. He said: "Too
often broad brush-strokes are used to make cyclists safe. It's thought that local authorities can follow a set
recipe to build bike lanes."

Responsibility for building bike lanes falls to the Highways Authority and local authorities, who, Mr Geffen
claimed, often ignored their duties to provide safe routes. Too many are like the lethal Blackfriars Bridge scheme -
where the cycle lane has not even been filled in with distinctive green road markings.

"Too often planning for cycle lanes is given to the office junior, to the bottle washer. The Government is dragging
its feet with this policy and that is costing lives, " he said.

Mary Williams, of road safety charity Brake, said: "I am extremely perturbed that cyclists are being encouraged to
cycle on lanes that end suddenly when the cycle lane network stops.

"There need to be more safe cycle lanes, better signs for lanes and clear indications of cycle lanes to ensure
cyclists are protected at all times."

There IS a solution to these potentially fatal problems.

On the Continent, the number of cyclists killed is greatly reduced by schemes which keep motor traffic and bicycles
separate on the roads.

High kerbs keep the two sets of vehicles apart on much of Holland's 9,300-mile cycle network, while the scheme has
also been a success in some German towns.

In Denmark, an entire city has been dedicated to bicycles. Odense was named the City Of Cycling by the Danish
government in 1999.

This saw hundreds of miles of cycle lanes being put in place on pavements, and more than 2,000 extra parking spaces
for bicycles.

Instead of using a van, tradesmen are encouraged to use bicycle trailers to lug their heavy tools, while children
cycle to school rather than catching the bus.

The results have been stunning.

Use of bicycles rose by around half, with the total number of road accidents falling by 20 per cent.

So could these pioneering schemes work in Britain?

Possibly, but campaigners are calling for a change in the mindset of UK road users, so they appreciate that cyclists
have just as much right to be on the road.

This mass move to pedal power also relies on the Government providing safe cycling routes.

A spokeswoman for the Department for Transport, which ultimately oversees cycle lanes, said that the introduction of
routes depended on accident statistics and specific geographical information about the road.

She said: "Under the Local Transport Planning process, we have encouraged all local highway authorities to improve
facilities for cyclists to make cycling safer and more enjoyable."

Yet none of this will come as a consolation to the family and loved ones left to grieve by Vicki's tragic death - to
which there is one final twist.

Her husband, Sandy, is an expert in city and road planning.

The university lecturer, who runs the MA course in spatial culture at Middlesex University, has written extensively
on the effects of traffic in city centres.

In one essay, entitled Don't Just Sit There, Enjoy It! , he praises traffic in inner cities.

And in a passage which now seems so chillingly prophetic and poignant, he wrote: "Allowing hard, heavy, speeding
vehicles to come into contact with fleshy mortals is a recipe for disaster.

"Cutting the death toll has consistently dominated the minds of planners."

In memory of Vicki - and for all those cyclist exposed to these daily dangers, planners' thoughts must now turn to
the nation's perilous cycle lanes.

LOAD-DATE: May 14, 2004











Dear Ms Luke.

Please find attached my last unanswered email.

The Daily Express newspaper carried a full page on the lady who was killed
on Blackfriar's Bridge, the third cyclist to die on London's bridges in a
year.

I think it is depressing that your rival, a national tabloid, carries a
story that your paper, London's only city-wide paper, ignored.

The Evening Standard devotes a tremendous amount of space to stories which
present the congestion charge in a negative light. Since the congestion
charge started cycling has increased in The City by 30%, yet The City of
London is easily the most dangerous place in England to cycle in, more than
twice as dangerous as the next worse area.


I think it is a shame that your partisan approach to road safety means that
stories such as that covered by The Express are ignored by your paper.

Cyclists are getting killed in London and you are taking no notice.

Your paper has a chance to demonstrate that you do not simply represent
motorists' interests, it is a shame that your rival has demonstrated more
responsible reporting than you.


Best regards

spindrift







Dear Ms luke.

Please find attached my last unanswered email.

I wondered why your paper ignores cyclist's deaths but can find space on
your website to advertise a product which helps law-breaking motorists
evade detection with a number plate spray.

I am sorry that you were unable to respond, and I regret to inform you that
another cyclist was killed on Monday this week;

Appeal for Witnesses

On Monday 10th May 2004 at about 5.35 pm, a FATAL road traffic collision
occurred on Blackfriars Bridge, North bound carriageway between a female
cyclist and a single decker red bus.

If you witnessed the collision, please contact the City of London Police on
020 7601 2222/2139/2419

Thank you for your assistance.

Martin Job
PC 397A
Roads Policing Unit
City of London Police



Ms Luke, may I ask whether the Evening Standard has an explicit policy of
ignoring cyclist's deaths?

Best regards
spindrift









Dear Ms Luke


Thank you for your response.

Regrettably your newspaper has chosen to ignore the death of Sebastien
Lukomoski, killed in The City on 24.02.04, just as the previous seven
deaths of cyclists in London were all ignored. The City of London has the
worst killed and seriously injured rate for cyclists of the entire country.

Interestingly, your website, Thisislondon, has managed to find space for
this advertisement;

http://www.safeplate.co.uk/

-this link appears at the bottom of your homepage.

This product advertises itself as a safe and legal way of avoiding
detection by speed cameras by spraying a substance over your number plate.

Leaving aside the fact that this pointless garbage does not work and is
illegal, is the Evening Standard content to allow their website to be used
by dodgy companies flogging products which help avoid detection while
breaking the law?

Can the Evening Standard explain why they appear to be happy to not only
ignore but actually ASSIST in the deaths of the 1200 people killed every
year by speeding motorists?

I look forward to your response.

Best regards

spindrift








This is the Letters Editor of the Evening Standard. Fair point. I have just
been over to News to say that there should be discussion as to news
coverage on this issue.
Catriona Luke, Letters Editor








Dear Sir

I wrote to your office last year and complained that the four deaths of
cyclists in London in three months was not even mentioned by your paper.

A cyclist was killed yesterday on Southwark Bridge and again nothing was
carried in the Standard.

Given the huge amount of space that your paper devotes to the anti-speed
camera movement it is disappointing that these events are ignored.
The article;




( http://www.cityoflondon.police.uk/news/latest_news_5/story5.htm )



states 'ninety nine cyclists stopped for the irresponsible manner of
their
cycling and ninety seven fixed penalty tickets were issued.'



Know how many motorists received Fixed Penalty Notices for encroaching

advance stop lines in the last year?



Not one.



City Police issue more Fixed Penalty Notices to cyclists than any other

police force despite being the smallest.



But they have never prosecuted or issued any FPNs to drivers obstructing

cycle lanes or Advandced Stop Lines.



Senior police say it's simply up to the discretion of the officer at the

scene.






Can you see why many cyclists see that this is another example




of discrimination?

Do you intend to cover this story at all?

Best regards

Spindrift

Martin, we see what we want to see, I suppose. It's the last nine words that said it for me. You spook pedestrians on a bike, even if you don't mean to. And I'm sure you don't. Simple as that.

There's an old women in our block who is genuinely terrified of walking along the river because of cyclists. If you can't see it, you'll never get it. Ride on.

ok, Martin, this will likely be my last post here, because hopefully what I say you'll agree with.

1 . all of these accidents could have been avoided by the cyclist being further into the lane. However, it also likely that all of these accidents could have been avoided by the drivers taking more care, being more observant, and generally driving more safely.

2. I wouldn't expect a driver to overtake in the centre, as there isn't enough room, but on either side, it is likely if there is nothing coming, and if the driver is going faster than you (which he shouldn't as it's only 20mph), and once again I'm not suggesting that you should cycle in the gutter to let people pass, I'm suggesting that you shouldn't cycle in the middle, stopping people passing.

3. yes you were breaking the speed limit, and the law. maybe I'll come to TB and make a citizens arrest one day ;-)

I wasn't being specific to TB about holding up traffic - I meant generally. I considered that if you cycle in the middle of the carriageway on TB then it's not unlikely that you'll do it elsewhere as well, in places that aren't 20mph zones, and hence in these places you'ld be holding people up.

yes if I were driving a car (in a 30mph area) and someone was purposefully driving at about 20, in front of me, then I'd get annoyed, I'd toot my horn, I'd lean out of the window and shout 'get out of the effing way you dozy twit! you're holding me up!'

You will recall a few years ago, one motorist drove very slowely through London during rush hour as some kind of protest, and he was arrested by the police. I think he was refusing to go faster than 20mph. Lots and lots of people got very annoyed, people were late, tempers frayed. extreme case I know, but it makes my point.

I'm sorry Jon, you are wrong.

The average speed of a cyclist in London is far higher than the average speed of traffic.

Drivers routinely overtake and then slam the brakes on at the next lights.

Their manoevre has not saved them any time yet their impatience kills and maims cyclists and other vulnerable road users.

I'm a cyclist, pedestrian and car driver. I firmly believe in not cycling on pavements - that's not what they're meant for and they are not an alternative to the roads for bicycles. Likewise, I get annoyed by cars that are in bicycle (or bus/bicycle) lanes and pedestrians who walk in the road instead of on the pavement. There are systems in place for a reason. II don't want to go on a journey of any kind and have to ask people who shouldn't be on the same pavement/lane/road as me to get out of the way. If more people follows Martin's example and cycles on the Millenium Bridge to work/school, then it is going to become very difficult for pedestrians to use. Bicycles have to go VERY slowly in order to not overtake/frigthen very slow pedestrians, and why should people who are having a gentle potter over the river have to get out of the way or feel pressure to walk faster just to let a bike past? In my experience, most cyclists on pavements are impatient and ring their bell at pedestrians and swerve round them and generally are a bit of a nuisance.

However, I agree that Central London is terrible for cyclists. Kingston, in Surrey, is great for cyclists - lots of bike lanes, bike crossings and cycle racks - and you do notice a difference in the way cyclists are treated by cars and other traffic - i.e. with more respect. Around here (SE1) it is ridiculous - very few cars are careful round cyclists and although there are cycle lanes, often they tend to be very short which is no use whatsoever.

I also agree that buses are for the main part a dangerous breed. Having worked for bus companies in the past, I know that bus drivers are - sweeping generalistation coming up here - a poorly paid, ill-trained, unmotivated workforce with little English. This causes apathy and incompetence and the bus companies are not - for complicated reasons - quick to discipline them.

Martin you're loving this, aren't you.

1. Cycle lanes with kerb stones. Many many cyclists complain bitterly about such kerb stones, as they end up with cycle lanes that are full of broken glass & other rubbish which become impassable by bicycles. That's why there aren't more of them, because pressure organisations such as CTC complain.

2. I heartily support better provision for cyclists. In its absence, cyclists must cycle as Harriet says, assuming half witted drivers.

3. 'Ah, so BB was meant to be Blackfriars Bridge in Mapmaker's earlier post about cycling in pedestrian areas.... strange, I didn't realise Blackfriars Bridge was suddenly pedestrianised in the last few days...' But you've spent the whole post telling us that you cycle on the pavement on Blackfriars Bridge....

4. Do you have third party insurance for cycling?