[sustran] Re: [NewMobilityCafe] problem in London

[Michael Yeates]

Hi ...

One solution in use in Oz (well certainly in Brisbane with some 700 buses 
in its bus fleet) is a requirement for ALL traffic to GIVE WAY to buses 
signalling an intention to pull out from an indented bus stop/bay. It 
applies on roads with 60 and 70 (and 80km/h?) speed limits.

It works reasonably well esp if the bus drivers provide some notice, ie 
don't suddenly put on the right turn indicators AND pull out simultaneously 
......... AND motorists indicate early eg flashing headlights is useful to 
signal the bus driver.

The police action is clearly a typical pro-motorists' perspective whereas 
the legal situation is or should be quite clear namely,

1. bus driver required to signal intention to leave the bus bay ... right 
indicators on for sufficient/reasonable time
2. motorists slow down or if necessary stop to GIVE WAY to the bus 
(flashing headlights is useful to signal the bus driver)
3. motorists travelling too fast or too close to avoid crashing into the 
vehicle in front are driving illegally on a number of counts eg too close, 
too fast, without due care and attention, etc and probably others.

I am amazed this system is not in place having assumed it isn't otherwise 
the police decision does not make sense (?) so if this is a novel solution, 
then I will try to send a photo of the signage involved.

One other point ... I would strongly suggest that the problem reduces 
dramatically when rather more priority is provided to public transport eg 
as with Edinburgh's "green lane" system that provides the buses and 
cyclists and taxis with priority and creates space for the buses to pull 
out ...

So in terms of scoring using one example of Eric's "consistent philosophy" 
approach, the "York hierarchy" priority of peds including people with 
disabilities (see the Pedestrian Council of Australia for the rationale) 
then cyclists then public transport (then taxis?) then small 
freight/delivery then cars, the London police and TfL example puts cars 
first ...!!!

Not exactly what I would have expected from "green(er) transport Ken".

Michael Yeates
Public Transport Alliance

At 05:57 PM 20/01/2007, Eric Britton wrote:

>Simon Norton wrote on this date: "Any thoughts on this situation which was 
>recently the subject of an article in a
>local newspaper. Transport for London recently removed some bus laybys on 
>a main road . . . "
>
>I have, as maybe some of you know, given this a lot of thought and indeed 
>I think there is an answer to this kind of unnecessary (I think) and 
>potentially harmful anomaly. Briefly and by the numbers:
>
>    * If there is one thing that can be said without a shadow of a doubt 
> about our exiting transport arrangements in cities, it is that there are 
> notoriously piecemeal.
>    * Which to me suggest that what is needed is a broadly shared, 
> explicit, consistent philosophy.
>    * That indeed is what in fact many of us are trying to get at here.
>
>I am struggling with this and am trying to see what I can do to put down 
>the main principles of such a philosophy, which if you are interested you 
>can find in the Agenda site at 
><http://www.newmobility.org/>http://www.newmobility.org, clicking 
>Philosophy on the top menu. It is, as you will see, kind of all over the 
>place, but I would say that I have something on the order of say 80% of 
>the core values there.
>
>We need something that we can state relatively succinctly that can be 
>understood by all of the key actors (local authorities, police, media, 
>experts, interest groups, and the general public) which they can then 
>debate among themselves and, in each place perhaps according to their own 
>volition and conditions, hammer out something that is broadly shared and 
>understood.
>
>In fact, I would suggest that if it is not something that can be read and 
>understood by a reasonably bright eleven year old, then we probably have 
>it somehow wrong.
>
>Does this help at all? And if it is a start, what next? All critiques and 
>suggestions most welcome, both here to the group or to me personally as 
>you think will serve us all best.
>
>Eric Britton
>
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>  On Behalf Of Simon Norton
>Sent: Saturday, January 20, 2007 12:09 AM
>To: lotslesscars at yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [LotsLessCars] problem in London
>
>
>Any thoughts on this situation which was recently the subject of an 
>article in a
>local newspaper.
>
>Transport for London recently removed some bus laybys on a main road in outer
>London. This is often advocated as a means of reducing delays to buses 
>caused by
>them having to wait for other traffic to pass before they can rejoin the 
>traffic
>stream -- and then as a result probably missing the next set of traffic 
>lights.
>I presume that that was TfL's motivation.
>
>However, on this occasion there were reports of collisions between cars and
>buses when the latter had to brake to serve stops. As a result the police
>stepped in and ordered the bus stops closed. This created consternation among
>bus users, particularly the elderly and infirm, who would now have to walk
>further.
>
>I'm not sure whether the relevant section of road has a speed limit of 
>40mph or
>30mph. Would reduction to 20mph have been a fairer way to deal with the
>problem ?
>
>The road in question is part of the A1, just inside from the North Circular
>Road where it passes through a largely residential area. I remember when many
>years ago plans to widen it to dual 3 lane were scrapped after massive 
>protest.
>
>Before I give my own moral on the situation I'll wait to see what others 
>have to
>say.
>
>Simon Norton
>
>
>
>__._,_.___
>
>Check in here via the homepage at 
><http://www.newmobility.org>http://www.newmobility.org
>To post message to group: NewMobilityCafe at yahoogroups.com
>Please think twice before posting to the group as a whole
>(It might be that your note is best sent to one person?)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
><http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewMobilityCafe/join;_ylc=X3oDMTJmam91MzBiBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzEwODg3ODkEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA3MjA1OTU0BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA3N0bmdzBHN0aW1lAzExNjkyOTMwMDU->Change 
>settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
>Change settings via email: 
><mailto:NewMobilityCafe-digest at yahoogroups.com?subject=Email Delivery: 
>Digest>Switch delivery to Daily Digest | 
><mailto:NewMobilityCafe-fullfeatured at yahoogroups.com?subject=Change 
>Delivery Format: Fully Featured>Switch to Fully Featured
><http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewMobilityCafe;_ylc=X3oDMTJkN2RvOWdiBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzEwODg3ODkEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA3MjA1OTU0BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA2hwZgRzdGltZQMxMTY5MjkzMDA1>Visit 
>Your Group | <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use 
>| 
><mailto:NewMobilityCafe-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>Unsubscribe 
>
>
>__,_._,___
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070121/19db0adb/attachment.html