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

    • Time will tell if H&B are loved or loathed, the footfall they get and generate will determine if they stay or go. That's the nature of businesses, they come and go dependant on usage. Examples are M&S, Poundland Local, Co-op, Superdrug, Mons, the chain restaurant/takeaways, the chain Estate Agents, Toolstation, Screwfix to name a few.  As much as people would like to see Lordship Lane remain a high street of independents, it is becoming clear that due to Landlords hiking rents, some are unable to survive. This leaves empty units which some of the chain brands considering it to be worth a "punt". I'd have thought that businesses operating in shops is a better alternative than a high street with multiple empty units, but what do I know, they are just thoughts on the subject.   Take a look at Croydon and Bromley where what were once thriving high streets are in decline.  I have to say that some of the prices charged by the independents are eye watering, and incomes i'd have thought have to be substantial to afford their prices. Personally I'd love a Lidl to open on what was the site of the Harvester, but I guess that would get shouted down, oh the thought of Lidl in Dulwich. Whatever next. 
    • IMO, Sealy, the best nights sleep you'll ever have.  
    • I don’t know what the shop was originally next to the big St Christopher’s but if Holland and Barrett are taking it over then surely it’s good to have a choice on Lordship Lane? The Camberwell H&B is always empty but the Brixton branch busy.  I remember when the Marks & Spencer food shop was Iceland? Now the M&S is a very busy store and at the time regenerated the high street!
    • Nor would I have done, but it came up when I googled John Lewis reviews. Do you not trust TrustPilot reviews? Even allowing for the fact that many people only post reviews when they have had poor service, 27% one star reviews is indicative of something wrong, I would say. That's 27% of 76,392 reviews. That's an awful lot of people who don't  think the service they got from John Lewis was even worth two stars, let alone more. Screenshot attached.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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