S
spindrift
Guest
It's kicking off on the LCC emails...
The cops' email:
OPERATION CUB
This report refers to the completion of the Snow Hill Neighbourhood
policing Team cycle road safety enforcement campaign called op CUB .
The op was run between 0730-0930 and 1600-1800 daily between Monday
8th - Friday 12th October 2007.
The main focus was on 4 Hotspot Public road locations, Holborn
Circus, Ludgate Circus, Aldersgate Street and Newgate Street Police
officers were deployed to the above locations between the relevant
times as they could deal with all offences committed on a public road.
The other focus was cycling on footway occurrences at the following
Hotspot locations, Grand Avenue, Moorfields and Millennium Bridge.
PCSO's and some police officers were deployed to the above locations
between the relevant times they have been given powers to stop
cyclists committing footway offences.
Op CUB was a two pronged approached. One side being the road safety
awareness and enforcement campaign the other being the checking of
cycle frame numbers and the promotion of the Immobilise database.
The following points were raised as a result of the operation de
brief. To run the operation one day over either a 5 week period as
the feedback from the staff engaged in the operation thought that due
to the initial highly visible presence within the first few day
greatly reduced the amount of cyclists committing offences thus
having a short term impact where as the feeling is if this was spread
out over a 5 week period it might have more of a longer term impact.
The second point to come out of the de-brief was in relation to the
Grand Avenue location. City Police and the market constables need to
have a more of a partnership approach to cyclists committing offences
at the location. The main issue is:
In Grand Avenue the enforceable signs are the two red circles on
white background at each side of both ends of the road. Those signs
mean 'No vehicles' which includes bicycles, and also applies to all
the other (market?) vehicles in the road. The offence of passing
those signs is decriminalized with regard to motor vehicles, but is
still a criminal offence (FPN) with regard to cyclists. Grand Avenue
is also on the TFL cycle map as a route where cyclist should dismount
and walk. Of course cyclists generally cycle on the footway to pass
the barrier to enter Grand Avenue, which would be more effective for
enforcement.
After liaison with the market constables it was decided that the most
effective and balanced approach to dealing with cyclists cycling
through Grand Avenue was for PCSO's to deploy either end of the site
where the market constables would be located at the closed barriers
asking cyclists to dismount. If cyclists continued and cycled on the
footway PCSO's would attempt to stop the offending cyclists and deal
with this matter by way of enforcement.
Between 0800-0900 hourson Tuesday 25th September 2007 a survey was
carried out at Ludgate circus which showed 54 offences committed by
cyclists. By comparison between 0745-0845 hours on Monday 15th
October 2007 another survey was carried out at Ludgate circus which
showed 34 offences committed by cyclists.
This shows a 37 % decrease in the amount of offences being committed
at the location showing that the operation has had a marked and
positive impact.
In all 243 Non-Endorsable Fixed Penalty Notices (NEFPN's) of £30 were
issued along with 19 verbal warnings, 163 stop checks were carried
out and 2 arrests were made. One for wanted on an outstanding warrant
and one for sus-theft of a bicycle.
PLANS FOR THE FUTURE
Now that the winter evenings are drawing in it had come to the notice
of officers that there is a sizeable proportion of cyclists that are
cycling without lights on their bicycles. In the past we have run an
operation where cyclists were issued NEFPN's for having no lights on
their cycles. Offenders were given the option of electing to join a
scheme where their tickets were revoked if they returned to Snow Hill
Police Station within two weeks with proof of purchase of cycle
lights. We are looking to run a similar operation in the near future.
This is to encourage cyclists to conform to the law and be more
conspicuous to other road users. We would welcome any
comments/feedback you may have on this proposed operation.
[email protected]
My reply:
City of London Police antipathy toward cyclists The City has
the worst fatality rate for cyclists anywhere in the UK
(2)
(2) The City has about a tenth of all of London's cyclist fatalities
every year - about 2 out of 20 - while only making up a thousandth of
the capital's area. According to Transport for London, the capital
has
by far the worst road safety record in the UK.
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 Advanced Stop Lines.
Senior police say it's simply up to the discretion of the officer at
the scene. We say their discretion is in fact discrimination and it
seems they're going for 'easy pickings' to reach their targets for
fining cyclists. Many cyclists were pleased to see City Police get
back on their bikes but now these feelings have changed dramatically
as the new units' main task is to harrass cyclists.
City Cyclist
This is a disgrace, it's clear the cops are discriminatory to
cyclists
whilst letting drivers off all over the place.
Here's the latest:
Between Monday 8th and Sunday 14th October the City of London Police
will again be running a campaign to "promote safer cycling in the
City".
The key message is around staying safe, which means the police will
not only focus on cyclists but also on drivers. Where drivers fail to
observe the advance stop line at automatic traffic signals, they will
be given educational leaflets pointing out the offence.
The City of London Police will also be targeting four 'hotspot'
junctions to enforce traffic regulations.
Cyclists get fined, drivers get handed a little piece of paper, way to
go guys.
Ralph's response:
The posting by City Police has provoked a record six responses to this
list
within half an hour, none of them positive, to put it mildly.
While asking the City Police in an open email if they could explain
the
locations chosen, we are simply told they have targetted "4 Hotspot
Public
road locations". Statistics show that cyclists are not to blame for
about
75% of collisions they are involved in, further that most collisions
don't
involve cyclists. Are these locations where there are high levels of
contraventions by cyclists, complaints by certain influential City
VIPs or
actually locations where there is a _casual link_ between cyclist
violations and collisions?
While the City Police claimed previously this enforcement was about
targetting all road offences and in the email below the aim is stated
as
to "deal with all offences committed on a public road", all the
figures
cited by the police relate to offences of people cycling _only_.
Indeed if
their statements are to be believed then the only offences at
the 'hotspots' were carried out by cyclists: "This shows a 37 %
decrease in
the amount of offences being committed at the location showing that
the
operation has had a marked and positive impact."
Given the response the City Police have faced at the City Cycle
Forum,
posting these figures to the cycling community without saying
anything
about enforcement against drivers is obviously going to provoke a
strongly
negative response and damage community relations. Further I feel as if
I
and City Cyclists have been seriously misled about this operation.
In relation to Grand Avenue the prohibition on cycling here is
unjustifiable
but City Cyclists have been unable to change it due to the influence
of a
few City VIPs. How can City Police say this is for safety when the
only
collision involving a member of their cycle squad (at least that I'm
aware
of) was riding round Smithfield, the very route people cycling along
Grand
Avenue are trying to avoid? In any event riding in the middle of
Grand
Avenue is not a footway offence so some cyclists may want to check
the
validity of their tickets.
In relation to Moorfields there is the same problem with someone in
the City
being against this. It makes no sense as there is explicit provision
to
cycle on the narrower sections of pedestrian area either side of
this.
Further Moorgate itself - the alternative route - has a particularly
poor
safety record for cyclists. However the City of London have been
unable to
confirm the legal status of the wide section - as pointed out to the
City
Police in an email they decided to ignore - so again tickets are of
dubious
legality.
To end of the positive side, the proposal to have conditional
penalties for
those without lights sounds a reasonable one, the only problem is
where a
cyclist who has mistakenly left their lights at home one day is
expected to
buy new ones rather than show that their existing lights do attach to
the
brackets on their bikes.
Further the promotion of the immobilise database should be supported
but
there needs to be more targetting of cycle thieves, speaking as surely
the
only LCC member to have defended bike thieves in the City Magistrates
court
(*blush*, I blame the barristers' 'cab rank' rule).
The presence of City Police indeed wider issues about this list should
be
discussed at our forthcoming meeting which has now been postponed to
7
November at 6.15pm at the LCC offices: if you're interested in coming
and/or find this time inconvenient please email me urgently before I
announce it formally.
All in all while dialogue is generally good, in their first forray
into the
LCC the City Police has been handled particularly badly if not
stupidly.
If anything the gulf between the City Police and the people cycling in
or
through the City has widened: this is hardly going to help make the
City's
streets any safer.
regards
Ralph
The Millennium Bridge is a good example- I'll buy a bottle of Chablis
for anyone who, over an hour period, ctahces more cyclists riding over
the bridge than drivers jumping the red pedestrian light outside St
Paul's School.
Guess who the PCO's are sent to stop and fine....
The cops' email:
OPERATION CUB
This report refers to the completion of the Snow Hill Neighbourhood
policing Team cycle road safety enforcement campaign called op CUB .
The op was run between 0730-0930 and 1600-1800 daily between Monday
8th - Friday 12th October 2007.
The main focus was on 4 Hotspot Public road locations, Holborn
Circus, Ludgate Circus, Aldersgate Street and Newgate Street Police
officers were deployed to the above locations between the relevant
times as they could deal with all offences committed on a public road.
The other focus was cycling on footway occurrences at the following
Hotspot locations, Grand Avenue, Moorfields and Millennium Bridge.
PCSO's and some police officers were deployed to the above locations
between the relevant times they have been given powers to stop
cyclists committing footway offences.
Op CUB was a two pronged approached. One side being the road safety
awareness and enforcement campaign the other being the checking of
cycle frame numbers and the promotion of the Immobilise database.
The following points were raised as a result of the operation de
brief. To run the operation one day over either a 5 week period as
the feedback from the staff engaged in the operation thought that due
to the initial highly visible presence within the first few day
greatly reduced the amount of cyclists committing offences thus
having a short term impact where as the feeling is if this was spread
out over a 5 week period it might have more of a longer term impact.
The second point to come out of the de-brief was in relation to the
Grand Avenue location. City Police and the market constables need to
have a more of a partnership approach to cyclists committing offences
at the location. The main issue is:
In Grand Avenue the enforceable signs are the two red circles on
white background at each side of both ends of the road. Those signs
mean 'No vehicles' which includes bicycles, and also applies to all
the other (market?) vehicles in the road. The offence of passing
those signs is decriminalized with regard to motor vehicles, but is
still a criminal offence (FPN) with regard to cyclists. Grand Avenue
is also on the TFL cycle map as a route where cyclist should dismount
and walk. Of course cyclists generally cycle on the footway to pass
the barrier to enter Grand Avenue, which would be more effective for
enforcement.
After liaison with the market constables it was decided that the most
effective and balanced approach to dealing with cyclists cycling
through Grand Avenue was for PCSO's to deploy either end of the site
where the market constables would be located at the closed barriers
asking cyclists to dismount. If cyclists continued and cycled on the
footway PCSO's would attempt to stop the offending cyclists and deal
with this matter by way of enforcement.
Between 0800-0900 hourson Tuesday 25th September 2007 a survey was
carried out at Ludgate circus which showed 54 offences committed by
cyclists. By comparison between 0745-0845 hours on Monday 15th
October 2007 another survey was carried out at Ludgate circus which
showed 34 offences committed by cyclists.
This shows a 37 % decrease in the amount of offences being committed
at the location showing that the operation has had a marked and
positive impact.
In all 243 Non-Endorsable Fixed Penalty Notices (NEFPN's) of £30 were
issued along with 19 verbal warnings, 163 stop checks were carried
out and 2 arrests were made. One for wanted on an outstanding warrant
and one for sus-theft of a bicycle.
PLANS FOR THE FUTURE
Now that the winter evenings are drawing in it had come to the notice
of officers that there is a sizeable proportion of cyclists that are
cycling without lights on their bicycles. In the past we have run an
operation where cyclists were issued NEFPN's for having no lights on
their cycles. Offenders were given the option of electing to join a
scheme where their tickets were revoked if they returned to Snow Hill
Police Station within two weeks with proof of purchase of cycle
lights. We are looking to run a similar operation in the near future.
This is to encourage cyclists to conform to the law and be more
conspicuous to other road users. We would welcome any
comments/feedback you may have on this proposed operation.
[email protected]
My reply:
City of London Police antipathy toward cyclists The City has
the worst fatality rate for cyclists anywhere in the UK
(2)
(2) The City has about a tenth of all of London's cyclist fatalities
every year - about 2 out of 20 - while only making up a thousandth of
the capital's area. According to Transport for London, the capital
has
by far the worst road safety record in the UK.
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 Advanced Stop Lines.
Senior police say it's simply up to the discretion of the officer at
the scene. We say their discretion is in fact discrimination and it
seems they're going for 'easy pickings' to reach their targets for
fining cyclists. Many cyclists were pleased to see City Police get
back on their bikes but now these feelings have changed dramatically
as the new units' main task is to harrass cyclists.
City Cyclist
This is a disgrace, it's clear the cops are discriminatory to
cyclists
whilst letting drivers off all over the place.
Here's the latest:
Between Monday 8th and Sunday 14th October the City of London Police
will again be running a campaign to "promote safer cycling in the
City".
The key message is around staying safe, which means the police will
not only focus on cyclists but also on drivers. Where drivers fail to
observe the advance stop line at automatic traffic signals, they will
be given educational leaflets pointing out the offence.
The City of London Police will also be targeting four 'hotspot'
junctions to enforce traffic regulations.
Cyclists get fined, drivers get handed a little piece of paper, way to
go guys.
Ralph's response:
The posting by City Police has provoked a record six responses to this
list
within half an hour, none of them positive, to put it mildly.
While asking the City Police in an open email if they could explain
the
locations chosen, we are simply told they have targetted "4 Hotspot
Public
road locations". Statistics show that cyclists are not to blame for
about
75% of collisions they are involved in, further that most collisions
don't
involve cyclists. Are these locations where there are high levels of
contraventions by cyclists, complaints by certain influential City
VIPs or
actually locations where there is a _casual link_ between cyclist
violations and collisions?
While the City Police claimed previously this enforcement was about
targetting all road offences and in the email below the aim is stated
as
to "deal with all offences committed on a public road", all the
figures
cited by the police relate to offences of people cycling _only_.
Indeed if
their statements are to be believed then the only offences at
the 'hotspots' were carried out by cyclists: "This shows a 37 %
decrease in
the amount of offences being committed at the location showing that
the
operation has had a marked and positive impact."
Given the response the City Police have faced at the City Cycle
Forum,
posting these figures to the cycling community without saying
anything
about enforcement against drivers is obviously going to provoke a
strongly
negative response and damage community relations. Further I feel as if
I
and City Cyclists have been seriously misled about this operation.
In relation to Grand Avenue the prohibition on cycling here is
unjustifiable
but City Cyclists have been unable to change it due to the influence
of a
few City VIPs. How can City Police say this is for safety when the
only
collision involving a member of their cycle squad (at least that I'm
aware
of) was riding round Smithfield, the very route people cycling along
Grand
Avenue are trying to avoid? In any event riding in the middle of
Grand
Avenue is not a footway offence so some cyclists may want to check
the
validity of their tickets.
In relation to Moorfields there is the same problem with someone in
the City
being against this. It makes no sense as there is explicit provision
to
cycle on the narrower sections of pedestrian area either side of
this.
Further Moorgate itself - the alternative route - has a particularly
poor
safety record for cyclists. However the City of London have been
unable to
confirm the legal status of the wide section - as pointed out to the
City
Police in an email they decided to ignore - so again tickets are of
dubious
legality.
To end of the positive side, the proposal to have conditional
penalties for
those without lights sounds a reasonable one, the only problem is
where a
cyclist who has mistakenly left their lights at home one day is
expected to
buy new ones rather than show that their existing lights do attach to
the
brackets on their bikes.
Further the promotion of the immobilise database should be supported
but
there needs to be more targetting of cycle thieves, speaking as surely
the
only LCC member to have defended bike thieves in the City Magistrates
court
(*blush*, I blame the barristers' 'cab rank' rule).
The presence of City Police indeed wider issues about this list should
be
discussed at our forthcoming meeting which has now been postponed to
7
November at 6.15pm at the LCC offices: if you're interested in coming
and/or find this time inconvenient please email me urgently before I
announce it formally.
All in all while dialogue is generally good, in their first forray
into the
LCC the City Police has been handled particularly badly if not
stupidly.
If anything the gulf between the City Police and the people cycling in
or
through the City has widened: this is hardly going to help make the
City's
streets any safer.
regards
Ralph
The Millennium Bridge is a good example- I'll buy a bottle of Chablis
for anyone who, over an hour period, ctahces more cyclists riding over
the bridge than drivers jumping the red pedestrian light outside St
Paul's School.
Guess who the PCO's are sent to stop and fine....
