Three cycling fatalities in London last month.
 

Keitht wrote:

JNugent wrote:

Oh, please feel free to challenge it. I'm fairly relaxed about that.
If there are official figures showing that pedestrians would be safer
wandering off in random directions across (say) the junction of the
North Circ and Watford Way rather than crossing at a controlled point,
let's have them, I say.

Now now, that's three levels, not one.

OK, just think of the ground level at any large London EOT interchange.

Three cycling fatalities in London last month.
 

JNugent wrote:
Keitht wrote:

JNugent wrote:

Oh, please feel free to challenge it. I'm fairly relaxed about that.
If there are official figures showing that pedestrians would be safer
wandering off in random directions across (say) the junction of the
North Circ and Watford Way rather than crossing at a controlled
point, let's have them, I say.

Now now, that's three levels, not one.

OK, just think of the ground level at any large London EOT interchange.


Sorry -'EOT' ?

--

Come to Dave & Boris - your cycle security experts.

Three cycling fatalities in London last month.
 

Keitht wrote:
JNugent wrote:
Keitht wrote:

JNugent wrote:

Oh, please feel free to challenge it. I'm fairly relaxed about that.
If there are official figures showing that pedestrians would be
safer wandering off in random directions across (say) the junction
of the North Circ and Watford Way rather than crossing at a
controlled point, let's have them, I say.

Now now, that's three levels, not one.

OK, just think of the ground level at any large London EOT interchange.


Sorry -'EOT' ?

Sorry...

"Edge of town".

Along with "OOT" (out of town), often used to describe retail parks,
multiscreen cinemas, etc.

Three cycling fatalities in London last month.
 

JNugent wrote:
Keitht wrote:
JNugent wrote:
Keitht wrote:

JNugent wrote:

Oh, please feel free to challenge it. I'm fairly relaxed about
that. If there are official figures showing that pedestrians would
be safer wandering off in random directions across (say) the
junction of the North Circ and Watford Way rather than crossing at
a controlled point, let's have them, I say.

Now now, that's three levels, not one.

OK, just think of the ground level at any large London EOT interchange.


Sorry -'EOT' ?

Sorry...

"Edge of town".

Along with "OOT" (out of town), often used to describe retail parks,
multiscreen cinemas, etc.


It depends on how the junction is laid out and things like traffic light
sequences. Even at some roundabouts pedestrians who know how the traffic
will behave tend to expliot the snarl-ups to find more direct routes.

My local 'entertainment complex' is difficult to drive round at times
owing to the numbers of people on foot.





--

Come to Dave & Boris - your cycle security experts.

Three cycling fatalities in London last month.
 

JNugent writes:

OK, just think of the ground level at any large London EOT interchange.

"Edge of town".

Before we go too far down this path of enquiry I think it may be worth
considering whether these large London edge-of-town interchanges are the
places where cyclists are getting crushed against railings anyway. My
understanding is that by and large they're not. It's the urban
junctions where there are large numbers of cyclists and pedestrians to
start with that offer more possiblities for conflict, and it's those
locations we're taking about when considering (or even advocating) the
removal of railings.


-dan

Three cycling fatalities in London last month.
 

On Tue, 07 Jul 2009 12:10:04 +0100, Keitht KeithT wrote:

JNugent wrote:
Keitht wrote:

JNugent wrote:

Oh, please feel free to challenge it. I'm fairly relaxed about that.
If there are official figures showing that pedestrians would be safer
wandering off in random directions across (say) the junction of the
North Circ and Watford Way rather than crossing at a controlled
point, let's have them, I say.

Now now, that's three levels, not one.

OK, just think of the ground level at any large London EOT interchange.


Sorry -'EOT' ?


^D

HTH
--
Tim

Three cycling fatalities in London last month.
 

Daniel Barlow wrote:

JNugent writes:

OK, just think of the ground level at any large London EOT interchange.
"Edge of town".

Before we go too far down this path of enquiry I think it may be worth
considering whether these large London edge-of-town interchanges are the
places where cyclists are getting crushed against railings anyway.

The sub-topic was pedestrians and the protection afforded them by railings
and "official pedestrian routes"

But point taken. Think, then, of the Elephant and Castle, or Vauxhall Cross.
Or any of a number of other similar locations.

My
understanding is that by and large they're not. It's the urban
junctions where there are large numbers of cyclists and pedestrians to
start with that offer more possiblities for conflict, and it's those
locations we're taking about when considering (or even advocating) the
removal of railings.

That would be - IMHO (and it seems to be the way that the authorities think)
- unacceptably risky for pedestrians.

Three cycling fatalities in London last month.
 

JNugent wrote:
Daniel Barlow wrote:

JNugent writes:

OK, just think of the ground level at any large London EOT
interchange.
"Edge of town".

Before we go too far down this path of enquiry I think it may be worth
considering whether these large London edge-of-town interchanges are the
places where cyclists are getting crushed against railings anyway.

The sub-topic was pedestrians and the protection afforded them by
railings and "official pedestrian routes"

But point taken. Think, then, of the Elephant and Castle, or Vauxhall
Cross. Or any of a number of other similar locations.


Used to take several short-cuts at the Elephant.
Not all the signed routes or subways go where you want them to.
The traffic lights are handy as there are pauses to let vehicles clear
from some parts to avoid (so many) clog ups.
Need to know how the phases of the lights work there but it's wot the
locals do as well.

--

Come to Dave & Boris - your cycle security experts.