[bikeqld] Walking shoes for Coro drive... again?

[Michael Yeates]

It seems to be futile trying to get government and/or consultant 
support for cyclists, but assuming at least some of the "lurkers" on 
this site are either government or contractor/consultant employed, it 
can be nothing other than deliberate "policy" to decide NOT to 
provide at least minimum space and layouts for relatively long term 
and/or distance "temporary" diversions at projects like these .. and 
clearly the government agencies esp QT have no intention of setting a 
policy that requires such provision.

Lets face it ... the list of problem projects over recent years is endless.

Indeed my guess is that there has not been one project that HAS 
provided the minimum space AND layout complying with the "code" 
requirements ... noting of course that these people know there is NO code ...!

Anyone willing to name even one example of good temporary works that 
do/did comply?

The speed thing is easy ... but won't work to solve conflicts if 
there is no space and/or poor layout.

These are BCC projects along Coro Drive ... ask the Lord Mayor why he 
is promoting himself with the $100m bike paths but won't comply with 
the standards,

Sadly there does not seem to be much point in reminding everyone that 
for example, the Dutch design guide has a chapter on temporary 
provision ... and it is on the basis that cyclists will be able to 
cycle albeit usually on minimum complying facilities ... which 
obviously require tolerance and responsibility from all parties.

In some cases where it is an option (as on Coro Drive), an adjacent 
road lane will be closed to provide the temporary diversion ... 
imagine that ...  but then that is about the width required ... so why not?

So what is a minimum width?

At least 2400 and probably closer to 3000 if enclosed by barriers, 
fences, walls, or similar.

As for cycling on the road (which I encourage of course), the problem 
on Coro Drive (and city wide) is the lack of complying access to/from 
road and path  ... another BCC "policy" designed to discourage use of 
the roads and thus to encourage conflict between cyclists and between 
cyclists and peds.

Also the inability for police to enforce the speed limit ... but if 
it extended further (and/or provision for enforcement was required as 
part of the project as its a WH&S issue for the police as well as 
legal constraints), then perhaps cyclists could help the traffic to 
travel slower ... maybe even get used to 40km/h?

Why not?

MY..............................

At 10:28 AM 9/04/2009, kim wrote:

>Hi Ken, I think you will also find that there were more than 5 
>accidents/incidents in the past which could be blamed on the safety 
>layout of the site. There are many blatant examples of where the 
>safety and design manuals have not been followed. I do believe it is 
>a mix of faults down there. My gripe was that all the effort seemed 
>to be directed at controlling the cyclists. Why are police or 
>BCC  resources not directed to enforcing the 40kph zone on the 
>road?  Are the 'Single File' directives of any legal significance? 
>Are pedestrians being targeted as well? The BCC seems bent on 
>maintaining the fast flow for traffic to win a few points from the 
>motorists but does not regard the cycle traffic as needing a smooth 
>flow, far from it. Will the BCC direct pedestrian traffic to use the 
>footpath when the narrow bypass opens or will cyclists be encouraged 
>to use the road? I am all for addressing the big picture rather than 
>just singling out cyclists for enforcement.
>
>kim
>
><mailto:Ken.Yeo at allianz.com.au>Ken.Yeo at allianz.com.au wrote:
>>
>>My understanding of it is they are there for the safety of the 
>>workers on the site.  Blatant disregard shown by a number of 
>>cyclists riding through the area has resulted in the injury of 
>>several workers.  I believe there have already been at least five 
>>(avoidable) incidents.
>>
>>The stretch of path we are talking about is in total no more than 
>>400 metres... yet some users [cyclists] just cannot allow 
>>themselves to sacrifice 30 seconds of their time to slow down.... 
>>Does this sound familiar to the issues put forward by cyclists 
>>against 'cagers' on the roads?
>>
>>B'gards.
>>______________________________________
>><mailto:Ken.Yeo at allianz.com.au>Ken.Yeo at allianz.com.au
>>______________________________________
>>
>>
>>
>
>_______________________________________________
>bikeqld mailing list
>bikeqld at bikeqld.org.au
>http://www.bikeqld.org.au/
>http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld
>This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland.
>
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>Version: 8.5.285 / Virus Database: 270.11.48/2048 - Release Date: 
>04/08/09 19:02:00
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20090409/9144f859/attachment-0001.htm