Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Interesting, but it doesn't tell the details. So the information is kind of not helpful.

By details I mean - well for example today I saw two guys on the mobiles texting whilst riding their bicycles. If they're involved in an accident they would be considered blameless just because they were cyclists (according to new plans, anyway).

PeckhamRose Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Interesting, but it doesn't tell the details. So

> the information is kind of not helpful.

> By details I mean - well for example today I saw

> two guys on the mobiles texting whilst riding

> their bicycles. If they're involved in an accident

> they would be considered blameless just because

> they were cyclists (according to new plans,

> anyway).


The details are all contained in the various accident/transport databases. A map is not designed to analyse causation. It is intended to map occurrences spatially.


Were they texting with their gloves on?

This is a great step forward if somewhat futile, can't see the point myself.

I question how up-to-date this is? I have checked on the locations of some of last years fatal incidents yet they don't appear on this map at all!!!???!!!. Really what is the point of this!!!????

Some random cyclists/fatal accidents from last year, NOT SHOWN ON THIS MAP:

Whitechapel/Valance rd/ female/ September 2009.

Elephant & castle/ Female/ mid 2009.

Holborn Viaduct/ Female/ early 2009.

Peckham/ Female/ June 2009.

Embankment nr Westminster/ Female/ Nov 2009

Goswell Road/ Female/ April 2009

etc etc


So, 6 fatal accidents last year in London and they're not on this map.....

*who's wasting who's time....*

To Sue - who's to blame isn't the point I don't think, and I can't help but think that's who's to blame retropsectively doesn't help a killed or injured person. If though a cyclist sees an accident somewhere they go and thinks "I should be a bit careful round there".., then job done.

sniffy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> This is a great step forward if somewhat futile,

> can't see the point myself.

> I question how up-to-date this is? I have checked

> on the locations of some of last years fatal

> incidents yet they don't appear on this map at

> all!!!???!!!. Really what is the point of

> this!!!????

> Some random cyclists/fatal accidents from last

> year, NOT SHOWN ON THIS MAP:

> Whitechapel/Valance rd/ female/ September 2009.

> Elephant & castle/ Female/ mid 2009.

> Holborn Viaduct/ Female/ early 2009.

> Peckham/ Female/ June 2009.

> Embankment nr Westminster/ Female/ Nov 2009

> Goswell Road/ Female/ April 2009

> etc etc

>

> So, 6 fatal accidents last year in London and

> they're not on this map.....

> *who's wasting who's time....*



It maps accidents from 2000-2008 so the ones you have listed above wouldn't show up on it. I agree with Ruffers, if it makes someone think about an area which has a high accident rate and they then take it more carefully around there then job done.

It is interesting but doesn't really help in terms of picking out 'dangerous' roads since there's no indication of how well used by cyclists the roads are. An accident 'blackspot' might have hundreds of cyclists through it on a daily basis and very low % of accidents whereas another road might only have two or three markers but only 10 cyclists have ever gone down it.


Still... in terms of junctions to watch out, it is useful although looking at my route to work, the 'worst' ones are the ones that I'd have expected.

sniffy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> This is a great step forward if somewhat futile,

> can't see the point myself.

> I question how up-to-date this is? I have checked

> on the locations of some of last years fatal

> incidents yet they don't appear on this map at

> all!!!???!!!. Really what is the point of

> this!!!????

> Some random cyclists/fatal accidents from last

> year, NOT SHOWN ON THIS MAP:

> Whitechapel/Valance rd/ female/ September 2009.

> Elephant & castle/ Female/ mid 2009.

> Holborn Viaduct/ Female/ early 2009.

> Peckham/ Female/ June 2009.

> Embankment nr Westminster/ Female/ Nov 2009

> Goswell Road/ Female/ April 2009

> etc etc

>

> So, 6 fatal accidents last year in London and

> they're not on this map.....

> *who's wasting who's time....*


Crikey sniffy, keep your hair on.


This is a first attempt by someone, which contains all the data for a number of years. No, it doesn't include the most recent. And yes, I'm sure it can be improved. Most things can.


Think of it as a 'beta', version 0.8: I'm sure the person who created it - and who has no doubt devoted considerable time to gathering data from disparate sources - would welcome constructive suggestions for improvement. Such as then combining this data with some kind of cycling traffic data.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • He did mention it's share of freehold, I’d be very cautious with that. It can turn into a nightmare if relationships with neighbours break down. My brother had a share of freehold in a flat in West Hampstead, and when he needed to sell, the neighbour refused to sign the transfer of the freehold. What followed was over two years of legal battles, spiralling costs and constant stress. He lost several potential buyers, and the whole sale fell through just as he got a job offer in another city. It was a complete disaster. The neighbour was stubborn and uncooperative, doing everything they could to delay the process. It ended in legal deadlock, and there was very little anyone could do without their cooperation. At that point, the TA6 form becomes the least of your worries; it’s the TR1 form that matters. Without the other freeholder’s signature on that, you’re stuck. After seeing what my brother went through, I’d never touch a share of freehold again. When things go wrong, they can go really wrong. If you have a share of freehold, you need a respectful and reasonable relationship with the others involved; otherwise, it can be costly, stressful and exhausting. Sounds like these neighbours can’t be reasoned with. There’s really no coming back from something like this unless they genuinely apologise and replace the trees and plants they ruined. One small consolation is that people who behave like this are usually miserable behind closed doors. If they were truly happy, they’d just get on with their lives instead of trying to make other people’s lives difficult. And the irony is, they’re being incredibly short-sighted. This kind of behaviour almost always backfires.  
    • I had some time with him recently at the local neighbourhood forum and actually was pretty impressed by him, I think he's come a long way.
    • I cook at home - almost 95% of what we eat at home is cooked from scratch.  But eating out is more than just having dinner, it is socialising and doing something different. Also,sometimes it is nice to pay someone else to cook and clear up.
    • Yup Juan is amazing (and his partner can't remember her name!). Highly recommend the wine tastings.  Won't be going to the new chain.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...