Lorries carrying materials to and from building sites are disproportionately responsible for cyclist deaths, something the construction industry is failing to take sufficiently seriously, an expert report has suggested.
The study, commissioned by Transport for London (TfL), recommends contractors give drivers “realistic” delivery times to prevent them rushing, plan safe routes to and from sites and treat accidents involving construction trucks as seriously as they do deaths or injuries among building workers.
Overall in the construction industry, the study concludes, “road risk is viewed as less important than general health and safety risk”.
The relatively high incidence of serious cycling incidents involving all heavy goods vehicles, particularly in London, has long been a worry for campaigners. In the capital around 50% of all cyclist deaths involve lorries, which comprise only about 5% of traffic, with a high proportion happening when left-turning trucks crush cyclists.
The issue has become something of a touchstone for cyclists nationally, additionally over speculation that female cyclists could be particularly vulnerable – in 2009 10 of London’s 13 cyclist deaths were women, eight crushed by lorries.
With the capital seeing something of a recent construction boom despite the difficult economic times, much connected to the Olympics and the vast, £15bn Crossrail project, there has been scrutiny of construction traffic. In 2011, of the 16 cyclist deaths in London nine involved lorries, of which seven were construction vehicles.
TfL commissioned the Transport Research Laboratory, an independent study group hived off from the Department for Transport in 1996, to look into what could be done to make construction traffic in the capital safer for cyclists.
The findings were damning. Across the industry, it found, there was “a lack of ownership of road risk”, unlike the attitude towards accidents on site.
The report makes a dozen recommendations, including that road collisions connected to building sites should be reported as if they were workplace accidents, and that contractors set out safe delivery routes which avoid narrow roads, risky junctions and schools. The report suggests more work on blind spots on lorries, less stressful delivery deadlines and research into whether “pay per load” contracts can tempt drivers into recklessness.
Peter Hendy, who heads TfL, said a particular problem seemed to be limited delivery windows at construction sites: “If you drive a bus and you’re late because of traffic you’re not asked to make up the time by driving quickly. The construction industry seems to have a very rigid idea about time slots.”
The issue went beyond London or even just cyclists, said Charlie Lloyd, campaigns officer for the London Cycling Campaign (LCC), saying that lorries, and particularly construction trucks, were also disproportionately involved in the deaths of pedestrians and motorcyclists.
In the capital there was a particular problem with certain traffic, he said: “Worst of all is the tipper companies, which tend to be smaller. A lot of them are owner drivers, or subcontractors to subcontractors.
“If the driver is the person who owns the lorry, or his brother owns the lorry, and they’ve mortgaged the house to buy the lorry, they’re under huge pressure to take an extra load that day, or two extra loads. It’s a problem the police are aware of but they can realistically only look at it after there’s been a crash. They don’t have the resources to stop lorries and check records against invoices.”
One solution has been to oblige freight companies to comply with certain standards, such as making drivers take training sessions on a bike, before they win contracts. This is already in force for firms working on Crossrail and more widely for TfL, and the LCC hopes many London councils will impose the same conditions on companies who work for them.
Lloyd said: “We know that health and safety don’t have the resources. We know that police have so few experts on this it takes forever to take action. But if this kind of thing is written into contracts then the companies have to demonstrate they’re up to speed before they even get on the tender list.”
Hendy said there was a need for concerted action: “Too much of this debate is characterised by trying to blame the mayor or us for road design, trying to blame drivers or cyclists. What this report is trying to do is to dispassionately look at things you can do to make this class of vehicle on our streets safer.”
Karen Dee, director of policy for the Freight Transport Association, said members took the issue extremely seriously. She added: “But our concern has always been that people take a balanced approach. It can be easy to say: ‘Just fix this to the lorry and that’s it solved.’ What we’d argue is that it’s a very complex problem that requires some very complex solutions. It’s not going to involve just the lorry operator or lorry driver, it’s going to involve all road users.”
Source: Read Full Article