George St Redfern Bi-Di concept - submissions due Wed 9 May

http://www.cityofsydney.nsw.gov.au/Council/OnExhibition/CyclewayGeo...

 

Connects Bourke Rd and City Centre (College St CW) via George St Redfern and Prince Alfred Park.

 

Couldnt see that it was already posted, but if it is let me know and I will delete this.

 

Andrew 

Views: 925

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Submissions are due 9 May.

I encourage everyone to make a submission, even if it's just a quick email (georgestredfern@cityofsydney.nsw.gov.au) to say you support the proposals.

We don't want the submissions against outnumbering the ones for....

Ptooie, just make it 30 K and speed hump it to death, with bike bypasses, and a few road closures,and it will be brilliant without bidis. Give the newbies a chance to learn some onroad skills. Be an interesting experiment anyway to try an onroad treatment. It would be cheap,and could always change if it was thought necessary.

"I  support  the proposals, thank you.

 

I’d prefer an on road solution with 30km/h limits and camera+bump+bollard enforcement but understand the RMS’ obsession with maintaining our city streets as motorways precludes this.

 

Introducing pollution monitoring especially of cancer producing particulates is also something that ought to be done. Clearly CoS would be duty bound to close the street to motor traffic while unsafe pollutant levels exist."

I have drafted a 4 page reply covering implementation details that they get wrong, some of which is inherent in bidi.

I would prefer they experimented with a bike boulevard with large scale paint treatments given they have bi-di elsewhere.

Excellent Jason

 

Will you share your 4 pages with us?

yeah will do.  its written, just requires editing 3x to remove pet subject ranting.

I'd prefer to get the points across before anything is built though, as the council will be immobile as usual once built.

"so the only option...is an over engineered and expensive bidi"

Nice to see it admitted.

But maybe RMS would consider something simpler, now that Govt is against separated cycleways.

I believe less confident riders will soon learn to be more confident on properly done traffic calmed streets. Short sections ofcycleway might be needed at major problem points. CoS does say somewhere that only 50 km of the 400km planned routes will be separated, so this would seem to be one route where on road treatments might be
considered.

My whinge is up for those that wanted to read it.

http://nucleargoo.com/jason/submisnoemail.pdf

good stuff !

Yes, thanks Jason, many of the intuitively felt problems with bidis voiced by cyclists are given an engineering explanation. Basic things like pedal strike and path bend layout might seem like too minor to complain about, but in total they add up to bidis being not as desirable as is made out, IMO of course. I do not pretend to understand all the traffic light points, but am getting closer. Hope the RMS might be too, after reading!

Now we need a boulevard design. This is where CoS has it over us, they have the expertise to draw up these large scale plans. I would call on them to prepare an alternative so we can see.
CoS plans are done in house AFAIK. Takes a lot of effort, and I respect the staff, so one is reluctant to criticize. But have. I did get a letter from Clover saying they will look at some onroad treatments on Chalmers St for those who want to use the road, after the discussion on that end of the Cycleway, with it's dismount sections.

I think that's top, on-road treatments as well as off-road.

Not only does that better integrate the system for us, and give us the option of taking the road when the off-road is full, it also sends a message to drivers NO CYCLISTS ARE NOT REQUIRED TO GET OFF THE ROAD

RSS

Community Ads

Sponsors





© 2014   Created by DamianM.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service