please empty your brain below

There was also the death further along on Mile End Road, and other incidents elsewhere this week, but the Bow Roundabout has been an accident waiting to happen for far too long. Condolences to all those affected.
Details are a bit thin at the moment, but sadly it looks like CS2 claimed another victim in Whitechapel last night.
So terribly depressing, and sadly predictable, to read of another victim at this hateful junction.
"...no provision for pedestrians whatsoever"

At least people are thinking about and planning for cyclists. Pedestrians are always at the bottom of the heap.
Sorry, my comment is framed rather clumsily when cyclists are dying like this. I meant no disrespect. It just depresses and angers me that not only is this roundabout a lethal mess for cyclists, it's a potentially lethal mess for pedestrians too, and no-one seems to have given that the slightest thought.
@Stilted Banter: That's rubbish, most Boroughs have a road user heiracy that put pedestrians at the top. There are many many safety enhancements that are being made for pedestrians that are putting cyclists at risk, such as crossing islands on roads or pavement widening narrowing the road. I'm not saying we shouldn't look after pedestrians, but I do think there should be more use of solutions that help all road users.
@Flare Respectfully, my perception differs from yours. I walk, but I also cycle. As a regular cyclist I've never felt that crossing islands put me in danger. As a pedestrian I am very glad to have them. As for widening the pavement resulting in narrowing the road, for too many cyclists the road/pavement distinction does not appear to matter that much anyway.
@Flare, that may be so but, as dg says, none of these enhancements have been provided at the Bow roundabout. I only use it occasionally, it must be very annoying to have to walk round there regularly as residents must have to.
So two types of infrastructure that are occuring in 100s of places and are massive benefit to pedestriasn means they are at the bottom of the heap. Think you've talked yourself out of them.

Incidentally, I agree Bow Roundabout is awful for pedestrians. need something like this http://bicycledutch.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/hovenring2.jpg
but that undulates to deal with the flyover.
At Staples Corner roundabout (M1/A5/North Circular) there's a collection of ramps and bridges (just visible on Google Maps satellite view)for pedestrians but also used by bikes. There's a load more space there, though. At Bow, everything's shoehorned in horizontally and vertically.

Ramps up from CS2 at ground level, swinging over the roundabout slip roads, then onto the flyover (or onto separate cycle lanes cantilevered out from the sides of the flyover) might be feasible. ££££ though, and years away if ever.
Very sad news about this latest cyclist death [at Bow] and the other recent fatalities elsewhere.

Like the Staples Corner idea.

There is also a case for Cyclist licensing including compulsory training which would include "defensive riding" techniques.

Similar to CBT required to ride small motorcycles.
There are a couple of ways to look at this issue.

Traffic signals to regulate the flow and allow pedestrians and cyclists to cross the slip roads feeding the roundabout already exist - on the Bow side there are signals for a pedestrian crossing West of Bow Church, which some riders use to get across the eastbound flow, and also check the Westbound flows, and on the North-East corner traffic signals already regulate the flow from the A102 to Stratford High Street to let all traffic out to use the fudged road layout that has 2-way traffic and 3 cross-over lanes under the flyover before the roundabout itself. So only the corner opposite the Three Mills Cafe presents a 'new' constraint on (motor) traffic flow. Even then I'd estimate that 80-90% of the motor traffic goes around the roundabout, and is safely near stationary at the busiest times. Westbound, one lane on the flyover is already closed off, and Eastbound worked fine with just one lane during the 2012 Olympics - so effectively one lane in each direction could be converted in to a footway and cycle lane over the top.

The issue of getting across the slip roads without recourse to additional traffic signals is also resolvable. A bridging span, from the flyover to span each slip road, can connect with a ramp running down to street level in the footway 'zone' - then there would be no need to add further traffic signals to 'disrupt' the motor traffic flow (sic) at peak hours
@Flare You have a point, and I take it.
Slightly off topic, although you mention the street replaced by the roundabout. The National Library of Scotland (not sure why) have been adding old OS maps onto a Google Maps layer. It's quite something - [link]
@dave H

All four corners have traffic lights covering not only the entry slips but the corresponding arms of the roundabout, thus giving access to the centre island. DG suggested two years ago that, even as it stands, this is the safest way for a pedestrian to negotiate the junction. - even though the lights do not actually have a "green man" you can obviously cross when the lights are red for traffic. There is no reason why cylcists shpouldn't be able to go that way too. Two blue stripes across the middle of the roundabout: job done.

Boris seems to be suggesting cyclists aren't using the junction as the traffic engineers intended.
"when people make decisions on the road that are very risky - jumping red lights, moving across fast-moving traffic in a way that is completely unexpected and without looking to see what traffic is doing - it's very difficult for the traffic engineers to second-guess that"
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/uk/cycle-deaths-put-pressure-on-mayor-29754649.html

Sorry, but that is the traffic engineer's job: to make traffic layouts intuitive. All right, so 95% of the users may be familar with how a particular junction works. Accidents occur because the other 5% are strangers to the area, and either make a mistake themselves, or because one of the 95% wrongly assumes the other driver is also one of the 95%.
timbo

So it's the traffic engineers job to stop cyclists jumping red lights is it?

These deaths are all very sad but it seems peoples emotions are getting in the way of the real causes of these sad instances.

The "lets blame Boris" crew are alive and well as Green party Baroness Jones has unashamedly made this a political opportunity.
I do think that the cycle lobby has done a good job in raising the profile of cycle fatalities in London, but this has been at the expense of pedestrian fatalities, which are over FIVE TIMES the number than the number of cyclists killed. When was a pedestrian fatality given the sort of column inches each cycle fatality is now given? 2012 figures - pedestrians 69, motor cycles 27, cars 19, cycles 14, others 5.
Yes, it is the road engineers' job to make the road layout as safe as it can be, given that it will be used by human beings that make mistakes, not by robots. That includes trying to minimise the incidence of mistakes (so, for example, preferring a simpler layout to a more complicated one) and trying to minimise the consequences of making a mistake (so, for example, where possible, there is a chance to correct the mistake or take avoiding action).

If cyclists (and indeed motorists) are presented with a variety of confusing red and green lights in quick succession then it is not surprising that the occasional person makes a mistake, and then not surprising that occasionally one of those mistakes ends up with someone driving a heavy lump of moving metal causing serious injury to someone not protected in the same manner.

A coroner has already noted that this junction is confusing and dangerous; indeed, an accident waiting to happen. Well, it has. Again.

Until a couple of weeks ago, this was actually a reasonably good year: "only" 8 cyclist deaths in London in 10 months. Now, not so good. Sigh. Let's be careful out there, everyone.
XMB53 makes a good point. Are there statistics of deaths per journey, or per mile travelled?
To be honest, it surprises me sometimes how bad some 'road safety' measures can turn out to be, and showing all too often a complete lack of any common sense on the part of the planners.
Take for example speed humps that cover the full width of a road, with no provision for cyclists, which means that - even at 10mph - they get a painful judder up the spine as surely as anyone else.
Or those traffic-calming chicanes of the type that also lack any provision for cyclists, which actually have the unfortunate effect of funnelling cycle riders and motorists into a pinch point only big enough for one.
I've lost count of the number of examples of poor road planning/engineering I've seen around London. Bow roundabout, sadly, would have to come near the top
In my experience, and I've observed this junction a lot, the early-start lights at the Bow Roundabout have increased the number of cyclists jumping red lights.

Partly that's because there are now twice as many lights to jump. Partly that's because not everyone realises the second set of lights is different to the first. And partly that's because cyclists are now in a more privileged position, so feel more confident in nipping ahead and exploiting gaps in the traffic on the roundabout.

The early-start design isn't intuitive, and encourages cyclists forward, and that's proving dangerous.
More needs to be done to make the roundabout safer for pedestrians as the population of the area increases, but there's only so much that can be done to make this junction safe.

I live on the north-east side of the Bow roundabout and have to go to and from the south-west side twice a day. This involves crossing nine lanes of traffic in total, and at no point do I have the help of a pedestrian signal. But at least it keeps me alert. It seems that all these measures for cyclists lull them into a false sense of security. In the end, people have to take some responsibility for their own safety.
@agent Z

"So it's the traffic engineers job to stop cyclists jumping red lights is it?"

No of course not,
DG put it better than me, but some layouts are so confusing (as DG has pointed out Bow is an example) that6 people do it inadvertently. Others are so badly laid out that the only way not to have to stop six inches in front of 38 tonnes of steel and aggregates operated by someone eight feet above the ground is to be some distance beyond the line - so technically jumping the light.
And other junctions are abused by ASL squatters so in order to be visible you have in turn to be in front of them, and beyond the stop line (or sit in the killing zone beside them)


I haven't looked closely at the time of day these accidents happened but is it more than a co-incidence that the number of fatalities has increased after clocks went back to GMT?
@Agent Z

"So it's the traffic engineers job to stop cyclists jumping red lights is it?"

On the day someone has been killed by a bus... you heartless *****! And wrong!

A national study for the Department for Transport in 2009 showed that where cyclists were seriously injured in collisions with other road users police said that the rider disobeying a stop sign or traffic light was a likely contributing factor in just 2% of cases.

http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2009/dec/15/cycling-bike-accidents-study

@xmb53

"2012 figures - pedestrians 69, motor cycles 27, cars 19, cycles 14, others 5"

Any death is a death too many, but seeing as we are all pedestrians, but only a small minority cyclist it would seem that the percentage of cyclists killed is dozens of times the percentage of pedestrians killed.
I would be very surprised if cyclists deliberately jumping lights (as distinct from misreading them, as has been suggested could happen with Bow's unusual set-up) were a major cause of fatalities: most cyclists have a better self-preservation instinct than that. It is probably pedestrians who are most at risk from the practice.

And yes, Mr Red Transit man this morning, I am perfectly aware there is a cycle lane on the left hand side of the road. Perhaps the fact I had put my right arm out is a clue as to why I wasn't in it, but in front of you instead?
Dan Dodex

I'm not being heartless at all, I did say it's very sad, so less of your name calling please. I am merely saying that if you want to stop these deaths you must stop being so emotional and look at the real reasons they are happening in the cold light of day. It is very easy to just blame lorry, bus or car drivers without knowing the full facts.

Your surely not denying that lots of cyclists jump red lights are you, or that they go up the inside of large vehicles that the drivers of which cannot see them.
The only safe solution is two cycle bridges over the roundabout.
Surely you Brits can calculate that 1.5 death per year means a yearly cost of £3m, so you could easily spend £30 and be quids in.
@agent Z. I have not referred to the number of miles walked/ridden/driven, partly because the difficulty in recording and interpreting such data (for example, I would not count someone walking from their front door to their car as a pedestrian trip). Only that each cycle fatality is provided with several column inches in the Evening Standard, but pedestrian and motorcycle fatalities get NONE, which is distorting the perspective and political landscape on this issue.

All readers:
There are no simple solutions to retrofitting cycle and pedestrian facilities to junction designs such as Bow Roundabout, traffic engineers will do the best they can, given that behaviour of people is unpredictable. Designs go through an independent 4 stage safety audit and review process, which includes traffic Police review to try and make them as user-friendly and safe as possible. The main adage is to try and design out enforcement issues, but you can't design out signals where you need to give different streams of traffic priority.










TridentScan | Privacy Policy