Advanced Stop Lines: An Accident Waiting To Happen
Yesterday there was a whole lot of twitterings about this Ross Lydall article. It’s all about how a lorry driver got off scott free after running over a cyclist. James Moor suffered horrific injuries after Nigel Gummer turned his lorry left across Moor’s path, dragging him under the vehicle:
‘Mr Moore had been riding on a cycle lane on the inside of queueing traffic and drew level with the tanker’s front axle virtually as it began pulling away. He tried to cycle straight on but was hit by the lorry - which had stopped in the advance cyclist’s “box” - as it turned.
PC Austin said the Highway Code made clear that Mr Moore had the right of way. “Had he [the driver] looked in his mirrors as Mr Moore cycled up, it’s very clear he would have been visible. He is utilising the cycle lane as is right and just.”
But under cross examination from Mr Gummer’s barrister Alexis Dite, PC Austin admitted: “It would have been a pertinent move, as a cyclist coming down the inside of a large goods vehicle, to show some level of caution.”
… Mr Gummer, who has more than 30 years’ experience as a HGV driver and a clean licence, was found not guilty of careless driving after insisting he had checked his mirrors before pulling away. The CCTV images showed he was indicating left as he waited at the lights.’
According to the police’s road crash investigator, the driver would have had twelve seconds in which to notice James Moor approaching in the cycle lane.
Another case of thoughtless HGV driver doing their bit to keep tree-hugging, sandal-wearing yoghurt-knitting cyclists off the road?
Actually, I don’t think so.
Firstly, 12 seconds sounds like a long time, but given the number of mirrors and other outside hazards that a driver of an HGV is has to keep track of, it could be easy simply not to be looking directly at the mirror which would have shown Mr Moor for the whole of this time.
So I would say that the problem isn’t driver error here, but that we allow such blind-spotted vehicles to use roads within crowded cities.
Secondly, even if we decided that it’s a good idea to have ever-larger lorries in our towns, there’s still a clear fault with the whole concept of the Advanced Stop Line. The dream we’ve been sold is this:
So people on bikes can use the ASL’s box to position themselves in front of the traffic waiting at the lights. They’ll be visible, and get a head start when the lights turn green. To help cyclists get to such a prime position, there’s a narrow feeder-lane to filter them past the odd car that’s got to the ASL ahead of them. How lovely.
The reality is more like this:
…or this:
Those feeder lanes send you into the ASL through the most dangerous place on the road - up the inside of an HGV. If we were thinking of “fault tolerant design”, this would not be it - the length of HGVs means that it can take even an experienced cyclist a good few seconds to pass them, which is more than enough time for the lights to change and for the driver to start to pull away.
So, to sum up:
- We really shouldn’t be allowing HGVs into town and city centres. The roads are simply not designed to accommodate them.
- That’s almost certainly not going to happen.
- We therefore need a better design of junction to replace the ASL and it’s associated feeder lane. Something that provides physical segregation at these critical points. Maybe like this:
Correct analysis.
Correct answers.
Don’t hold your breath for anything to happen about it.
Sadly.
The highway code already provides guidance for cyclists approaching junctions, ok this junction includes an ASL but guidance still appropriate:
Highway code rule 72:
“When approaching a junction on the left, watch out for vehicles turning in front of you, out of or into the side road. Just before you turn, check for undertaking cyclists or motorcyclists. Do not ride on the inside of vehicles signalling or slowing down to turn left.”
Guidance seems clear:
Cyclists - do not cycle down inside, you don’t know when those lights are going to change!
Drivers - be aware of cyclists not following the rules and going down inside anyway.
…and rule 73:
“Pay particular attention to long vehicles which need a lot of room to manoeuvre at corners. Be aware that drivers may not see you. They may have to move over to the right before turning left. Wait until they have completed the manoeuvre because the rear wheels come very close to the kerb while turning. Do not be tempted to ride in the space between them and the kerb.“
Very true, the other point that I believe showed how dangerous ASL’s and their feeder lanes are is the TFL billboard campaign that shows the blindspots of a HGV. Amazing how the 2 are pretty much identical!
Karl, I don’t like advanced stop lines either. They do exist in the Netherlands, but they’re old infrastructure and are increasingly rare. This isn’t something aspirational here, and it shouldn’t be aspirational elsewhere either.
We don’t have any advanced stop lines at all in Assen. The closest thing we have to an advanced stop line looks like this. Conflict was already eliminated here, and in any case it’s about to be changed to something else.
@Matthew - my face is turning blue, and I’m starting to feel dizzy. I think I’ll stop holding my breath…
@Baldcyclist I think the problem here is more complex. The cyclists approached the junction oblivious to the stationary-but-signalling vehicle; the driver of the lorry driver did not see the bike when just before he turned, he checked for undertaking cyclists or motorcyclists.
My argument is that this is a design failure. The individual errors involved would be seen as relatively small by each of the actors, yet the consequences are the most severe. Cyclists filter past stationary traffic every day, and drivers often have only a peripheral sense of what’s going on around their vehicles - especially when they’re HGVs. To design junctions that do not take account of this is wrong. To design junctions with that bicycle feeder lane inviting people to ride through the worst possible place is just crazy.
@Mark S - Got a link to that campaign / photos?
@David - Once again, we’re putting in road designs that are 40 years out of date!
Who are ASLs for? Those happy to cycle with the traffic or those the 65% of the population who would cycle if it was safer?
I don’t know the history of ASLs but I get the feeling they were introduced to make people feel safer and backed by the major cycle campaign groups. However, their function has never been full explained to the majority of drivers and they are very rarely, if ever, enforced. It is clearly time for a re-think, they may have a place where traffic flows are low, but in most places they are applied they are inappropriate.
Clearly, ASLs are not effective at persuading the roughly 65% of the population who say they would ride a bicycle for transport if they felt safe. Oddly most of the population is tends to be risk averse…
Here in Staffs we haven’t advanced quite as far as ASL yet and in Newcastle, where I commute, the cycle lanes simply disappear at junctions - spitting you out in the most dangerous place to be. And this is my biggest beef with cycle lanes & ASL - while giving you them impression of safety, they actually put you in a very vulnerable position.
Dare I even say it but it’s hard to imagine this doesn’t breach some health and safety legislation and it’s about time Local Authorities were made accountable for accidents in these locations and not just the drivers and cyclists involved.
ASLs are a coping mechanism. Nothing ‘advanced’ about them. retrograde…
ASLs: the little space that cyclists are worth having. In fact, ASLs are fiendishly flawed with conflict, as you purposefully have to plonk yourself in front of the driver. (If you manage to use the lead-in lane and the ASL space isn’t already blocked.)
It’s conflict and danger that keeps people from cycling. ASLs aren’t bad per se, but they aren’t helping either.
Just like jug-handles, ASLs, especially the ones with bad lead-ins, just by themselves are a sign that cycling isn’t taken seriously.
Combine them with good cycle lanes and we’d get somewhere.
Just think of the issues when they add another 2.05mts to the lorries as the trial for longer lorries gathers momentum crossing Advance cycle boxes, turning space required, pedestrian barriers, kerbs pedestrian and even the motor car driver will need to be moved back oh and dont forget getting round mini roundabouts it seems hard enough for some buses let alone lorries..
Just had a chance to read this. Great minds really do think alike!
Different approaches to explain the issue, same outcome.