#1
|
|||
|
|||
Depressing Reading
Following recent discussions about ASLs I did a bit of Googling and
found this 2006 report for Transport for London studying the use of 10 ASL reservoirs on the A202 (a road I know well) and the A23 (a road I vaguely know). http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloa...ber-011106.pdf Overall, a despicable 39% of cyclists who arrived at lights on red ignored the red traffic signal. This fell to 7% at the busiest junction but rose to an astonishing 66% at one junction. However, and even worse in my opinion, between 46% and 91% of motorists stopped in the ASL reservoir, encroaching by 25% or more. Figures for those motorists which encroached by any degree is not in the report. Generally, motorists encroachment by more than 33% into the feeder lanes was low, with compliance between 51% and 100% (weighted towards 100% compliance) on all feeder lanes and between 80% and 100% for mandatory feeder lanes. Compliance with ASL reservoirs and feeder lanes was significantly lower amoung HGV and bus drivers than car drivers. |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Depressing Reading
On 10 Oct, 23:49, Tom Crispin
wrote: Following recent discussions about ASLs I did a bit of Googling and found this 2006 report for Transport for London studying the use of 10 ASL reservoirs on the A202 (a road I know well) and the A23 (a road I vaguely know).http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloa...-Findings-Repo... Overall, a despicable 39% of cyclists who arrived at lights on red ignored the red traffic signal. This fell to 7% at the busiest junction but rose to an astonishing 66% at one junction. However, and even worse in my opinion, between 46% and 91% of motorists stopped in the ASL reservoir, encroaching by 25% or more. Figures for those motorists which encroached by any degree is not in the report. Generally, motorists encroachment by more than 33% into the feeder lanes was low, with compliance between 51% and 100% (weighted towards 100% compliance) on all feeder lanes and between 80% and 100% for mandatory feeder lanes. Compliance with ASL reservoirs and feeder lanes was significantly lower amoung HGV and bus drivers than car drivers. Anyone know the figures (or even any) successful prosecutions/fines for contravening an ASL ? I thought there had been a change of law in the last two years to permit local authorities to police them (in the same way as yellow line parking restrictions) - but I haven't heard of any backlash......... (On the positive side, the school I work at has just sent letters to all parents that from next week the Council is starting to aggressively police the no waiting/parking restrictions outside the school with large fines in the offing.....) |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Depressing Reading
On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 23:49:26 +0100, Tom Crispin
wrote: Following recent discussions about ASLs I did a bit of Googling and found this 2006 report for Transport for London studying the use of 10 ASL reservoirs on the A202 (a road I know well) and the A23 (a road I vaguely know). http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloa...ber-011106.pdf Overall, a despicable 39% of cyclists who arrived at lights on red ignored the red traffic signal. This fell to 7% at the busiest junction but rose to an astonishing 66% at one junction. However, and even worse in my opinion, between 46% and 91% of motorists stopped in the ASL reservoir, encroaching by 25% or more. Figures for those motorists which encroached by any degree is not in the report. Why worse - it is against the law to ignore a red traffic light. Is it against the law to "encroach" in to the ASL box? You missed out the bit which said: Table 5.3 shows the proportion of vehicles that encroached into the reservoir by up to 25% of the reservoir length. Therefore, a high proportion of vehicles encroaching to this degree indicates that the reservoir was more frequently available for cyclists to use. In other words, the higher the percentage of vehicles encroaching by 25% or less, the better for cyclists. -- I encourage my children to wear helmets. (Guy Chapman) Some evidence shows that helmeted cyclists are more likely to hit their heads. (Guy Chapman) I have never said that I encourage my children to wear helmets. (Guy Chapman) - proven to be an outright lie. He then quickly changed his web page - but "forgot" to change the date of last amendment |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Depressing Reading
"Tom Crispin" wrote in message ... However, and even worse in my opinion, why ? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Depressing Reading
On Sat, 11 Oct 2008 11:25:30 +0100, judith
wrote: On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 23:49:26 +0100, Tom Crispin wrote: Following recent discussions about ASLs I did a bit of Googling and found this 2006 report for Transport for London studying the use of 10 ASL reservoirs on the A202 (a road I know well) and the A23 (a road I vaguely know). http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloa...ber-011106.pdf Overall, a despicable 39% of cyclists who arrived at lights on red ignored the red traffic signal. This fell to 7% at the busiest junction but rose to an astonishing 66% at one junction. However, and even worse in my opinion, between 46% and 91% of motorists stopped in the ASL reservoir, encroaching by 25% or more. Figures for those motorists which encroached by any degree is not in the report. Why worse - it is against the law to ignore a red traffic light. Is it against the law to "encroach" in to the ASL box? You missed out the bit which said: Table 5.3 shows the proportion of vehicles that encroached into the reservoir by up to 25% of the reservoir length. Therefore, a high proportion of vehicles encroaching to this degree indicates that the reservoir was more frequently available for cyclists to use. In other words, the higher the percentage of vehicles encroaching by 25% or less, the better for cyclists. -- I encourage my children to wear helmets. (Guy Chapman) Some evidence shows that helmeted cyclists are more likely to hit their heads. (Guy Chapman) I have never said that I encourage my children to wear helmets. (Guy Chapman) - proven to be an outright lie. He then quickly changed his web page - but "forgot" to change the date of last amendment Of course it's against the law to encroach in to an ASL box - what would the purpose of them be otherwise. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Depressing Reading
I agree with the title, but surely Swindon is even worse.
James |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Depressing Reading
On Sat, 11 Oct 2008 11:56:31 +0100, "BOFH" wrote:
"Tom Crispin" wrote in message .. . However, and even worse in my opinion, why ? Two reasons. 1. A cyclist who ignores a red traffic signal is being selfish, but the person the cyclist puts most at risk is him or herself. A motorist who ignores a ASL reservoir is being selfish and putting law abiding cyclists at risk. 2. The percentage of motorists ignoring red light signal was higher than the percentage of cyclists ignoring the red light signal. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Depressing Reading
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Depressing Reading
On Sat, 11 Oct 2008, Phil Cook wrote:
wrote: I agree with the title, but surely Swindon is even worse. No, Slough. Betjeman wasn't wrong. :-) I'm glad I'm not the only one mentally pronouncing the Subject as that. Personally, I would say Reading is worse than Swindon (but I've only spent a little time in Swindon), and Betjeman did indeed have the right idea. regards, Ian SMith -- |\ /| no .sig |o o| |/ \| |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Depressing Reading
"Tom Crispin" wrote in message ... On Sat, 11 Oct 2008 11:56:31 +0100, "BOFH" wrote: "Tom Crispin" wrote in message . .. However, and even worse in my opinion, why ? Two reasons. 1. A cyclist who ignores a red traffic signal is being selfish, but the person the cyclist puts most at risk is him or herself. A motorist who ignores a ASL reservoir is being selfish and putting law abiding cyclists at risk. There's a chance that anyone travelling through a junction that comes across a RLJer is likely to have to take avoiding action - the knock on effects of which could be serious. In other words the RLJing cyclist is putting other road users (including other cyclists) at risk. If the RLJer is injured the act is enormously selfish as it uses up precious emergency services time and, most likely, causes some significant delay to all road traffic. 2. The percentage of motorists ignoring red light signal was higher than the percentage of cyclists ignoring the red light signal. This somewhat counters my argument as obviously this could well mean the number of RLJers is less than the actual number of ASL ignorers. Statistics are wonderful things but in this case I think TfL are demonstraing that there is some work to do in training drivers and cyclists about safe road behavoiour. To use the report as evidence of the evil of the motoroist is pushing it a bit! There is another report by TRL (PPR240) that appears to have done almost exactly the same type of study for TfL in the same year! I thought at first they were the same report in different jackets but they appear to have looked at different sites. I haven't studied either in any detail but both do conclude that ASLs are worthwhile which should lead to their imcreased installation. Matt |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Dang, this is depressing! | richard | Techniques | 3 | March 26th 07 04:37 AM |
kinda depressing | John Forrest Tomlinson | Racing | 3 | March 7th 07 10:18 AM |
York Rally,Depressing ? | Sam Salt | UK | 18 | May 22nd 06 07:08 AM |
depressing | Sam O'Nella | Mountain Biking | 1 | January 27th 05 05:20 AM |
Cycling is depressing | Simonb | UK | 11 | April 26th 04 07:10 PM |