Would anyone be able to indicate what it would cost to set up a traffic model for a road junction using industry standard software eg LinSig, Arcady, Picady or Transyt.
The junction I have in mind is a simple crossing of two roads ie four arms and each arm has 2 lane and allows for a left, right and straight forward movement.
The aim is to test various scenarios which involve closing down some lanes and substiuting dedicated cycling lanes
All the data in PCUs (Passenger Car Units) would be provided free.
Can that software actually model the stupid things cyclists do? Just having a cycle lane doesn't mean the cyclists will use it. They usually don't know what a cycle lane is or are the arrogant lycra louts that refuse to use them. I would estimate less than 10% of cyclists around here use the cycle lanes.
Round here we have some (brand new) cycleways a mile wide, separated from the main road and as smooth as a baby's bum but that's still not good enough for the lycra louts.
Not sure that any of those models could cope. Most date from 70s & 80s You haven't mentioned ped phases? A rule of thumb is that reducing two motor traffic lanes to one will more than half capacity, because conflicting movements can stall a flow ANY change to a junction that does not take more space will reduce capacity because modern guidelines on ALL RED, ped phases and conflicting movements will reduce capacity. Have you seen the stuff that TRL/TfL did with junctions and cycles? see:
formatting link
If your junction has wide approach lanes you may be able to create space for a 'queue busting' cycle lane by reducing width of motor vehicle lanes or narrowing footways Large ASBs with 'advance greens' for cycles can then help.
Have you seen:
formatting link
This was originally a bit of dual carriage-way with no cycle lanes over the railway bridge and with traffic lights at each end. It takes over 5k cycles each day, and note the arrangement enables blue lights to get through even in congested conditions
Just ignore some of the other ignorant comments. Drivers of motor vehicle are the biggest danger on the road. 10% of all ped fatalities occur after a motor vehicle has left the road, and it is estimated that
10% of all fatalities would be saved if there were full compliance with laws regarding mobile phones. It is extremely rare that someone riding a pedal cycle is responsible for the death of an innocent party.
Most regard bicycles not as legitimate form of transport but as children's toys or preserve of hobbyists, research finds
London is among UK cities to have seen increases in cyclist numbers over recent years, but the overall proportion of journeys made by bike nationally is 2%.
Years of government efforts to promote cycling have had almost no impact on a sceptical population who largely view bikes as either children's toys or the preserve of Lycra-clad hobbyists, a university study has found.
"Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton, of Lancaster University, wrote in an interim assessment of the Understanding Walking and Cycling study.
"For them, cycling is a bit embarrassing, they fail to see its purpose, and have no interest in integrating it into their lives, certainly on a regular basis."
Many see cycling as, at best, something reserved for country weekends rather than everyday travel. The few who do ride in cities tend to be keen enthusiasts, thus reinforcing the niche image."Regrettably, we did not find this mass of people on the threshold of change, who only needed a little push to start cycling as a daily means of getting around,," said Griet Scheldeman, also of Lancaster University.
While some towns and cities, notably London, have seen increases in cyclist numbers over recent years the overall figure for the national percentage of journeys made by bike has remained at about 2%.
You could probably save more than 10% of cycling deaths if they were trained in basic road sense. You should see the number of idiots that totally ignore the rules of the road and then blame the drivers for having to take avoiding action.
You should be aware of the poor stopping distances for a cyclist, they don't appear to be.
However I agree drivers nor cyclists should be using their phones.
Whatever class of road user, they are all their own worst enemy. Pedestrians, cyclists, motorcyclists or car drivers, the largest single contributory factor to being involved in an accident is that they failed to look properly. In 2011, for accidents involving each type of road user, the percentage of accidents with this as a factor were cyclists
26%, pedestrians 59%, motorcyclists 16%, car drivers 24%. The next two most common factors being failed to judge the speed or path of the other involved (10%, 19% 13%, 12% respectively) and careless, reckless or in a hurry (9%, 25%, 9% and 9%). One unique to cyclists, which was a factor in 8% of accidents involving cyclists, was cyclist entering the road from the pavement.
As a cyclist, I'm not a fan of the majority of cycle lanes as so many of them are appallingly conceived and executed. I prefer traffic management that makes roads safer for all users, trucks/cars/bicycles/pedestrians etc.
The Poynton solution to their problem is particularly interesting.
IMO shared space is a remarkably stupid idea. Traffic types should be separated, not mixed. The greatest single cause of accidents is road users, of all types, failing to look properly. Mixing them in one area is not going to change that except, perhaps, in the short term when the system is new and everybody is uncertain.
Poynton would have been better served by a bypass to take the trunk road traffic away from the centre.
Close to where I work they introduced lights on a round-about with the sole excuse it was to make it safer for cyclists. The traffic flow went from relatively free flow, albeit busy during the rush hour periods, to near grid lock as the traffic builds up waiting for the non-existent cyclists to navigate the junction.
I guess that the net effect is road rage behaviour and many people jumping the red lights. I bet this is not factored into the road safety calculations.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.