Cycle lanes

You are reading a single comment by @bothwell and its replies. Click here to read the full conversation.

•

h2o

http://www.citymetric.com/transport/naked-streets-floating-bus-stops-and-how-cycling-infrastructure-can-endanger-blind-1327

This week one of the 3,500 blind and partially sighted people who live around Whitechapel High Street in London will step outside and attempt to reach their bus stop. To get there, they’ll find that they have to cross a lane of fast moving cyclists, over whom they have no formal priority and whose silent approach they are unable to detect. According to Transport for London’s (TfL) own research, only 15 per cent of cyclists will stop for them.

•

bothwell in reply to @h2o

. According to Transport for London’s (TfL) own research, only 15 per cent of cyclists will stop for them.

This seems to me to be a slightly strange inclusion. The requirement to stop is determined by signs or road markings, surely, of which there are none. So only 15% of cyclists stop to let people cross at an unmarked, informal crossing? How many drivers stop to let people do the same on a road?

It seems to me from this article that the biggest problem with floating bus stops (aside from the dangerously high kerbs) is that nobody has a fucking clue what to do with them, not even TFL?

•

h2o in reply to @bothwell

I don't think it's a strange thing to include. Yes, there is no requirement to stop, and the floating bus stop basically assumes that pedestrians will be able to wait for a suitable gap in the flow of cyclist traffic, because not many cyclists will stop without being directed to. For the partially sighted or blind, this might be rather difficult.

And no, not many car drivers stop for pedestrians, but that's why we put zebras and Pelicans and stop lights up. The floating bus stops seem to assume we'll all just muddle through fine.

I think mainly the point is that they're a bloody stupid bit of design.

About

Avatar for bothwell @bothwell started