[bikeqld] BICYCLE AWARENESS ZONES

Mon Aug 24 20:42:27 CDT 2009

Thanks Richard ...

I have had a very quick look through including at the Appendix ... 
quick but I trust most people who know anything at all about the BFZ 
that "became" the BAZ would know I know the topic.

It looks like a typical poorly documented bit of Qld policy with 
attitude ... without much if any scrutiny external to the department 
(unless "BQ was consulted") and without much substance other than a 
continuation of the Main Roads Policy for NOT providing for cyclists 
on state controlled main roads ... or on any other roads ... and its 
policy for NOT reducing the CAUSES of the crashes that make cyclists 
over-represented (although there isn't much 'solid' evidence of this either).

These include urban speed limits among the highest in the developed 
world, total dedication to avoidance of provision for cyclists on 
road, and apparent complete disregard for policies that assert a need 
to reduce the mode share of cars by way of increasing the mode share 
of walking, cycling and/or public transport.

Thus we get a billion dollar M1 but try find a sign showing motorists 
where the V1 crosses the M1 feeders.

Or visit the third or is it the fourth redesign of the Moggill Road - 
Western Freeway Bikeway crossing ... or those crossings of Dean and 
Miskin Streets on the multi-million dollar Western Freeway Bikeway 
with its latest addition, the $13m bridge to nowhere and its merge 
and crossing onto the road ...!

Or have a look closely at how many of the "bike lanes" you see around 
SEQ that actually comply with more than the absolute bare minimum 
spatial ie "operational" requirements that Main Roads espouses so 
conveniently in this document but then negates elsewhere.

Or just have a look to see how many roads comply with the MR 
definitions and constraints in this document and then ask if the 
intent if not the effect of the document is to effectively ban 
"encouragement" of cycling on the road on virtually all roads where a 
facility might be needed?

For example do YOU know what 3000AADT means? Do you live near a road 
with this level of traffic?

So then to some of the constraints on use of BAZ ...

How often have you heard that not enough cyclists use the road to 
justify the cost of facilities?

Then from this document, why is it unclear whether in circumstances 
where a "better" cycling facility can or could be installed but funds 
are not available and may not for years, that BAZ is banned?

Surely MR does not want to discourage people from cycling so there 
won't be enough out there to justify the cost of the facilities?

Or is it to discourage cycling "on the road" so the novice cyclists 
then are encouraged to support bikepaths which in Qld is any footpath 
thus allowing NOTHING to be done by MR for cyclists?

 From an evidence perspective, it is easy for MR to promote and use 
as justification the idea that the hit from behind and car door 
crashes are a reason for NOT permitting BAZ. It is an interesting 
strategy based primarily on fear. But how many of these occur at BAZ 
sites ...? More importantly, how many are NOT at BAZ sites? If they 
are not at BAZ sites then (i) what is to be done to reduce the 
crashes, and (ii) why ban BAZ if it appears they may in fact reduce 
these crashes ... as we think actually occurs?

Its just another nail in the coffin of the rhetoric that supposedly 
supports cycling ... based on almost no references and seemingly 
based on 20 year old Australia design concepts that are threatening 
to those fear the roads becoming safe for pedestrians and cyclists .. 
let alone being responsible for why the roads we do have remain so 
dangerous that they are not safe for cyclists to use ... or at least 
not safe enough for road authorities "to endorse the likely presence 
of cyclists on the road".

Sadly in such a situation and just a few days short of 10 years since 
BCC cycling expert Kerry Fien was fatally injured while cycling 
through a Main Roads standard "required" (but for cyclists, 
dangerous) intersection, it appears nothing has been learned (other 
than how to try to discourage cycling on the road) despite many 
similar instances to the BAZ being in use elsewhere including now in the USA.

Ahh well ... worse than the USA ... now there IS a record to be proud of.

But I wonder, is this a result of the amalgamation of Mr and QT and 
if it is, is it also a sign the "roadies" (road builders not road 
cyclists) have finally won dominance over QT and all that air-fairy 
policy stuff that at least some of us thought had merit ...?

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

At 10:56 AM 25/08/2009, you wrote:

>Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
>Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
>         boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01CA251E.EE95BEA4"
>
>This looks like the final word from Mainroads on BAZs
>
><http://www.mainroads.qld.gov.au/~/media/files/business-and-industry/technical-publications/traffic-and-road-use-management-manual/1_39july2009.pdf>http://www.mainroads.qld.gov.au/~/media/files/business-and-industry/technical-publications/traffic-and-road-use-management-manual/1_39july2009.pdf
>
>
>
>R
>_______________________________________________
>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: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.65/2324 - Release Date: 
>08/24/09 12:55:00
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20090825/5969d088/attachment.htm