Leichhardt Traffic Committee tomorrow has an item recommending two speed cushions be placed on the downhill section between Mary St  and Hawthorne Canal. They claim a speed count showed "the majority of vehicles travel up to 60 km/h downhill". Didnt report the 85% speed, which they usually do and should.

This statement doesnt make sense as it stands, bit like saying prices have been reduced by up to XX%, but they may mean there is a majority of  vehicles travelling at over the speed limit of 50. No mention of how many bicycles are in this category, or if it can be extracted from the speed counts. It is easy to reach 50 about 2/3 rds of way down without pedalling. There has been a number of crashes in last 2 years where motorists have come out of side streets and hit cyclists coming down the hill. Motorists at fault, generally, but cyclists are said to travel too fast down the hill. See recent discussions on SC.

If humps go in, as seems likely to be the case, given rather unsympathetic committee, and despite humps not being recommended on steep hills, the best that might be achieved is to insist on smooth asphalt ramps with a Watts sinusoidal profile, as recommended in the Austroads guidelines in Table 4.8 (Cycling Aspects, free download from Austroads), not those rubber things.

A new speed hump also proposed for Beattie St in Rozelle, another bike route. Speed count shows everyone exceeding the 40 K speed limit. Existing rubber humps are a pain, and falling to bits.

Also on the agenda tomorrow, plans for remarking the rest of Lilyfield Rd with uphill bike lanes, some new bike lanes on Balmain Rd south of Perry St, and a new treatment for cyclists at Robert St and Mullens.

Will see how they go. Anyone think the speed humps should not go in?

Views: 2839

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

If downhill speed humps go in on LilyField road they need to be very visible in the dark, along with an appropriate design. e.g.  remove parking spaces around speed hump signs to make them visible or similar. Otherwise they could be very nasty to hit at speed on a bicycle in the dark.

There are streetlights at or near where the humps may be going, but dont know if they are adequate.

To slow cars to around 40 average down LF Rd, (else why bother), the humps will have to be fairly aggressive I imagine, so cyclists will cop a bouncy ride. Not desirable on a down hill, as could lead to loss of control. But what to do if everyone thinks we "speed" anyway. Maybe the cops should get their radar down there instead, like they propose to do on Styles St in Leichhardt, where everyone exceeds the 40 K limit.

Also, regarding Robert St and Mullens.

I've seen more people riding up Mullens St. and getting into tight situations between the door zone and following vehicles. I was on the bus today and saw one man diligently leaving the road on Mullens St to ride on the footpath to let vehicles pass. I get the feeling their not aware of the perfectly good and more relaxed route (well, my preferred route) along Crescent Street, Goodsir, Evans, and  Beattie St. So perhaps a sign encouraging that would be a good addition. 

Agree. That route was put in as an alternative to Mullens but as you say you wouldnt know it. Also need to make that corner at Robert and Crescent safer from fast left turners  coming off Victoria Rd. Good if you could send an email to council asking for signs etc at that corner, and redo the kerb ramp to give a better gradient.

Thanks Bob. I'll send an email. I can find leichhardt@lmc.nsw.gov.au. Is there a more focussed address I should use?

That will get it into the system, but could also send to tomh@.... as well. He knows the problem and is willing to fix it, but a few emails might help in raising it up the priority list.

Thanks for raising this Bob.

I went down that hill this morning and there was a woman darting out on the left at the bottom. Perhaps it was called Charles St. I had all my attention up above the road to spot cars. Having to lower my attention to speed bump level would be  negative for my safety.

good point, given the recent history there. It is sort of discriminatory too, cars will be able to do 40 or so over the humps but bikes may only feel comfortable doing maybe 30 or less, if they put in those rubber things. 

Those 'rubber things' can knock you off if you don't see them. They are pretty anti-bike IMO. They are fine if you do see them as there is usually a gap. But it is a dumb idea anyway as I don't think there is a speeding car problem there.

They placed humps on a local road where I live ~ Moxhams Rd Northmead for similar reasons. Certainly slows the cars, barely affects me on my bike though as the bumps are so big and round. I just get out of the saddle, relax my knees and elbows and allow the bike to rise and fall beneath me. I'm easily twice as fast as cars down there now. Only issue arises when I'm passed just before the hill by a MGIF driver who then slams on the brakes approaching the bumps. Even taking the lane here doesn't always work as I've been passed on the left by impatient drivers.

Just to add to the excitement, you also have the cars who drive in the gutter inan effort to decrease the severity of the bumps. As the bumps are also on the uphill sections, it brings them close to you as you toil up the hill.

so maybe I should use that too, it will only encourage risk takers:) There will be "air" competitions, and they wont be watching for cars coming out of side streets either!

Well, if the aim is to slow cars, then it certainly works a treat for all but the most cavalier of motorists. However, if it is supposed to slow bicycles then they haven't a chance. I, personally, value my skin too much to be chasing thrills, but big air is certainly available for the cyclist who likes that kind of thing.

Ironically, I note the vehicles slowed the most seem to be your big 4WD models ... Aren't they 'designed' for driving over bumps??


© 2019   Created by DamianM.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service