First Superhighway Fatality.

[spindrift]

Very sad:



A man has died after a collision with a tipper lorry on a cycle superhighway in east London.

The cyclist, aged in his 50s, was involved in the accident on the roundabout at the Bow flyover during the morning rush hour.

Transport for London (TfL) said he was the first person to be killed on the city's cycling superhighway network.

The Metropolitan Police said a man had been arrested on suspicion of dangerous driving in connection with the crash.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-15440182

I think that's 14 fatalities this year.

[gordon taylor]

I think that's 14 fatalities this year.

That, I assume refers to London cyclists. There are thousands of other people (cyclists, drivers, passengers, pedestrians) who die on the roads in other parts of the country too. Recent threads have focused on the issues around the conflict between two types of road user in one small geographical location.

All deaths are equally sad. IMHO.

[Redlight]

There's an odd update to the story on the BBC site with TFL talking about its campaigns to warn against the dangers of undertaking lorries. Hope that's not the first step to some victim blaming.

[Wendy]

I hope that's not our friend kmcyc.  OK, upload last at 10 hours ago, so probably not.  Phew!

[spindrift]

I have mates who commute along the Bow flyover. Personally, I wouldn't use that road. It looks and feels like a motorway. The alternative is Hackney Road-Bishops Road into The City. That's not to blame the cyclist at all, I just think it's a horrible stretch.

[Honest John]

I think that's 14 fatalities this year.

That, I assume refers to London cyclists. There are thousands of other people (cyclists, drivers, pedestrians) who die on the roads in other parts of the country too. Recent threads have focused on the issues around the conflict between two types of road user in one small geographical location.

The point of this thread, as I see it, is that someone has been killed using a facility, the "cycling superhighway", trumpeted by its prime mover, one Boris Johnson, as a major contribution to cyclists' safety. This facility just happens to be in London.

I'm not aware of any cycle route scheme similar in size, intention or execution in any other part of the kingdom but if there is one, and it leads to less safety for cyclists rather than more, we'd all be interested in hearing about it.

[Biggsy]

How many cyclists on average per year were killed on the roads where the CSHs are now, before the CSHs?

[Peter]

What is a cycling superhighway?  How does it differ from a road, especially in the perceptions of vehicle-drivers?

[clarion]

it's blue.

[Peter]

Thanks, Clarion!  So presumably no other protection from traffic than a "normal" cycle lane?

[why1040]

They're wider, bluer and tend to be a little better thought out (less likely to suddenly disappear) and have less road furniture in the middle of them.

Other than that, they're cycle lanes, but long ones.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-10648330

[Wendy]

A little less likely to disappear?  Wha???   

[alexb]

They're wider, bluer and tend to be a little better thought out (less likely to suddenly disappear) and have less road furniture in the middle of them.

Other than that, they're cycle lanes, but long ones.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-10648330

Or they can be shit like this section in Wandsworth

When it's clear, it's just blue cycing roundels


When it's busy it's just like any other part of Wandsworth's cycling infrastructure - i.e. badly thought out and poorly executed

[Psychler]

Or they can be shit like this section in Wandsworth

When it's clear, it's just blue cycing roundels


When it's busy it's just like any other part of Wandsworth's cycling infrastructure - i.e. badly thought out and poorly executed

Prince of Wales Drive, Battersea

[Biggsy]

^ I wouldn't call that cycle facility shit; I would call it non-existant.  This is one of the best types of cycling facility. 

More seriously, can anyone find the stat that I asked for earlier?  To put it into different words:

Before London's Cycle Superhighways existed, how many cyclists per anum were killed on all parts of all the roads that now have Cycle Superhighways on them?

[spindrift]

http://diamondgeezer.blogspot.com/2011/10/death-of-cyclist.html


Boris's argument was any changes to make things safer for cyclists would delay traffic, which goes against his "Smoothing Traffic Flow" ethos.

[Wowbagger]

^ I wouldn't call that cycle facility shit; I would call it non-existant.  This is one of the best types of cycling facility. 

More seriously, can anyone find the stat that I asked for earlier?  To put it into different words:

Before London's Cycle Superhighways existed, how many cyclists per anum were killed on all parts of all the roads that now have Cycle Superhighways on them?

I would suggest that that's asking the impossible: how long ago was it decided where these "superhighways" were to go?

[ScumOfTheRoad]

The Bow flyover is an absolute disgrace for pedestrians and cyclists, as Diamondgeezer says.

As a for instance, a few weeks ago I decided to visit the Olympics viewing tower, which is near Pudding Mill on the DLR. DLR was shut, so replacement bus from Stratford Tube station. Bus drops us on south side of Bow flyover, with no directiosn on how to reach the DLR station. We were left to cross four lanes of fast moving traffic with no pedestrian crossings or lights - with a wheelchair. Totally scary situation - it only took one driver swinging off the roundabout at speed and we would have been run down. As DG says: "I give thanks that I'm not elderly, because I probably wouldn't dare risk it, and were I in a wheelchair I'd have absolutely no hope whatsoever."

Another for instance - on every cycle journey along the Lee you used to have to get off the towpath and cross those same lanes of traffic. There is a new floating towpath, I haven't used it yet.


And just read that ridiculous response from Boris  - basically "F U pedestrians. Take your chances". Well Boris - I didn;t vote for you, and will certainly never, ever vote for you in the future if that's your attitude.

[woollypigs]

How many cyclists on average per year were killed on the roads where the CSHs are now, before the CSHs?

I don't think there much difference. We had a bad year in '09, but I think it is around 15-20 a year on London roads. Though that said, since the CSH and Boris bikes there are many more cyclist on the roads.

[Phil]

A whole lot of them are just existing cycle lanes painted blue, so I suspect the answer to Biggsy's question would be that there's no significant difference.  I'd be interested in seeing data if there is any, but as m'woolly friend says, it's probably not all that useful. 

[Jurek]

The amount of RLJ'ing by motorised vehicles that I have witnessed taking place at the junction underneath the flyover beggars belief.

When cycling east-west or vice versa I've found going up onto the flyover a much, much safer option.

Not one really open to pedestrians though  .

RIP the unfortunate cyclist.

[Biggsy]

I would suggest that that's asking the impossible: how long ago was it decided where these "superhighways" were to go?

I don't know, and I don't know what that has to do with the question.

Surely there are reliable records of where and when cyclists have been killed, so it should be possible to work it out.

I'm interested to know how many cyclists were killed at places that now have CSHs before there were any CSHs marked and operational.

[mattc]

How many cyclists on average per year were killed on the roads where the CSHs are now, before the CSHs?

I don't think there much difference. We had a bad year in '09, but I think it is around 15-20 a year on London roads. Though that said, since the CSH and Boris bikes there are many more cyclist on the roads.

So essentially, the topic subject makes as much sense as posting:
Cyclist-killing flyover built by tories!
or headlines like:
More tarmacadam deaths! Victims families demand apology from inventors descendants.

[woollypigs]

That flyover isn't nice, taking the roundabout below is scary. And going over like Jurek is much better, but getting up there at busy times is hard. Sad news for sure.

[Jurek]

No the flyover is not nice - but once on it you are much more visible than you are in the murky darkness, even during daylight hours (which I'd suggest along with the RLJ'ing taking place, is a contributory factor),  beneath the flyover.