Kasislerin Sürücü Hızları Üzerindeki Etkisinin Mobil Hız Kameraları ile Tesbiti ve Bir Anket Uygulaması

Yıl 2017, Cilt: 38 Sayı: 4, 822 - 833, 08.12.2017

Arzu Ilgaz Mehmet Saltan

https://doi.org/10.17776/csj.340256

Öz

Kasisler Türkiye’de
özellikle yoğun yaya ve bisikletlilerin bulunduğu güzergâhlarda trafiği
sakinleştirmeye yönelik en fazla kullanılan önlemlerdir. Bu makalede bir
üniversite kampüsü içindeki yol ağında, öğrenci ve personellerin yaşam
kalitesini artırmak amacıyla yapılan trafiği sakinleştirme çalışmalarının örnek
uygulamaları ve sonuçları anlatılmaktadır. Akdeniz Üniversite kampüsü sınırları
içinde 50 km/s hız limitine sahip bir güzergâha kurulan mobil ortalama hız
sistemi yardımı ile kasis uygulamalarının sürücü hızlarına etkisi
değerlendirilmektedir. Mevcut güzergâhta kasis varken kaydedilen sürücü
ortalama hızları, kasis yokken kaydedilen ortalama hızlarla kıyaslanmıştır. Bu
makalede, sürücülerin hız davranışlarını azaltması yönünde etkili olduğu tespit
edilen kasisler hakkındaki sürücü görüşlerinin de araştırıldığı bir çalışma
sunulmaktadır. Her ne kadar sürücü hızları düşmüş olsa da, anket sonuçlarına
göre sürücülerin %50’si kampüs içerisindeki kasis sıklığının fazla olduğunu
düşünmektedir. Bu çalışmada, kampüs yol ağı kullanımında tüm ulaşım türleri
(yaya, bisiklet, toplu taşım, otomobil) arasındaki dağılımında dengeli bir
yaklaşımın geliştirilmesi ve kaza oranlarının düşmesi için sürücülerin yasal hız
limitlerine uyması gerektiğini vurgulanmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Hız kasisleri, ortalama hız uygulaması, Independent Sample t test, ki-kare testi

Determination of the Effects of Speed Bumps on Driver Speeds Via Mobile Cameras and A Survey Application

Öz

Speed bumps are the most frequently used in
Turkey as precautions for traffic calming at pedestrian and bicycle intensive
sections. In this article, exemplary traffic calming measures applied on the
university campus road network for increasing the quality of life of students
and personnel along with their results have been put forth. The effects of
speed bump applications on driver speeds are evaluated by way of a mobile
average speed enforcement system set up on a section inside the Akdeniz University
campus with a speed limit of 50 km/h. The average speeds recorded at the
current section with the speed bump in place were compared with the average
speeds recorded when there was no speed bump. This article also puts forth a
study in which driver opinions on speed bumps determined to be effective in
decreasing the speeding behavior of drivers have been examined. Even though the
driver speeds decreased, survey results put forth that 50 % of the drivers
think that the frequency of speed bumps in the campus is very high. It is
emphasized in this study that drivers should comply with the legal speed limits
in order to be able to develop a balanced approach with regard to the
distribution between all transportation types (pedestrian, bicycle, public transportation,
automobile) for campus road network use and to be able to decrease rates of
accidents.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Speed bumps, average speed enforcement, Independent Sample t test, chi-square test, chi-square test

Kaynakça

• [1]. Kaygısız Ö., Trafiği Sakinleştirmeye Yönelik Önlemler. Aydoğdu Ofset, EGM Trafik Araştırma Merkezi Müdürlüğü, Katalog No:696, Ankara, 2012.
• [2]. Pau M., Angius S., Do speed bumps really decrease traffic speed? An Italian experience. Accident Analysis & Prevention 33(5): 585–597, 2001.
• [3]. WHO. Global status report on road safety 2015, Geneva, 2015.
• [4]. Vet J.M., Thierry M.C., Horst A.R.A., Rahman A.K.M., The first integrated speed management program benefitting vulnerable road users in Bangladesh: results and implications for LMICs. In 17th International Conference Road Safety On Five Continents (RS5C 2016), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 17-19 May 2016 (pp. 1-21), 2016.
• [5]. Cynecki M.J., Huang H.F., The Effects of Traffic Calming Measures on Pedestrian and Motorist Behavior. FHWA Report RD-00-104, 2001
• [6]. Patterson T., Local Area Traffıc Management Schemes / Traffıc Calmıng, Land Transport Safety Authority of New Zealand, Yeni Zelanda, 2004
• [7]. Taylor M.C., Lynam D.A., Baruya A., The Effects of Drivers’ Speed on the Frequency of Road Accidents. TRL Report No:421, 2000.
• [8]. Roberts C.A., Brown-Esplain J., Technical Evaluation of Photo Speed Enforcement for Freeways, Arizona, 2005.
• [9]. Gil M.J.M., Malenstein U.P.M.J., Innovative Technology for Monitoring Traffic, Vehicles and Drivers, Police Enforcement Policy and Programmes on European Roads. 6th Framework Programme, European Commission, Technical Report, 2007.
• [10]. Speed Check Service. Temporary Roadworks Speed Enforcement - M6, 2007. Address: http://www.speedcheck.co.uk/pdf/M6%20TASCAR%20case%20study.pdf
• [11]. Speed Check Services, SPECS Safety Cameras-M4 10-12 Technology Upgrade, 2009. Address: http://www.speedcheck.co.uk/images/M4_Case_Study.pdf
• [12]. Speed Check Services, SPECS: Results, 2009. Address: http://www.speedcheck.co.uk/specs.htm
• [13]. Young K.L., Regan M.A., Intelligent Transport Systems to Support Police Enforcement of Road Safety Laws. ATSB Research and Analysis Report No: 2007-02, 62p, 2007.
• [14]. Cameron M., Development of Strategies for Best Practice in Speed Enforcement in Western Australia, Supplementary Report, Monash University Accident Research Centre, Melbourne, 2008.
• [15]. Koy T, Benz S. Automatic Time-Over-Distance Speed Checks İmpacts on Driving Behaviour and Traffic Safety. In the 6th ITS World Congress and Exhibition on Intelligent Transport Systems and Services, 2009.
• [16]. Simcic G., Section Control: Towards a More Efficient and Better Accepted Enforcement of Speed Limits? Speed Fact Sheet 2, 2009.
• [17]. Soole D., Fleiter J., Watson B., Point-to-Point Speed Enforcement. Report No: AP-R415-12., 2012.
• [18]. Soole D.W., Watson B.C., Fleiter J.J., Effects of Average Speed Enforcement on Speed Compliance and Crashes: A review of the Literature,. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 2013, 54: 46-56.
• [19]. Montella A, Punzo V, Chiaradonna S, Mauriello F, Montanino M., Point-to-Point Speed Enforcement System: Speed Limits Design Criteria and Analysis of Drivers’ Compliance. Transport. Res. Part C, 2015; 53: 1–18.
• [20]. Speed Check Services, Temporary Roadworks Speed Enforcement - M1, 2006. Address: http://www.speedcheck.co.uk/pdf/M6%20TASCAR%20case%20study.pdf
• [21]. Australian Transport Council, National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020, Australian Transport Council, 2011.
• [22]. Cameron M.H., Diamantopoulou K., Clark B., Langford J., Identifying Traffic Enforcement Practices and Opportunities in Western Australia, 2011. Address: http://c-marc.curtin.edu.au/local/docs/ITEPOWA_March2012.pdf
• [23]. Lynch M., White M., Napier R., Investigation into the use of Point-to-Point Speed Cameras, NZ Transport Agency Research Report 465, 2011.
• [24]. Soole D.W., Fleiter J.J., Watson B.C., Point-to-Point Speed Enforcement: Recommendations for Better Practice. Australasian Road Safety Research Policing and Education Conference, 28-30 August, 2013.
• [25]. Høye A., Speed Cameras, Section Control, And Kangaroo Jumps – A Meta-Analysis. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 2014; 73: 200-208.
• [26]. Townsend E., Achterberg, F. Enforcement Monitor (No. 4). Brussels, Belguim: ETSC, 2005.
• [27]. Crawford E., Beyond 2010 – A Holistic Approach to Road Safety in Great Britain. Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety, London, 2009.
• [28]. Korthof E.W., Effects of Section Control on Traffic Safety at Dutch Motorways. Delft University of Technology, Master Thesis, 202, Delft, 2014.