From pmgough at gmail.com Sun Jan 3 22:49:58 2010 From: pmgough at gmail.com (Peter Gough) Date: Sun Jan 3 22:50:41 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Impediments to cycle planning; lack of glossy magazine articles on Brisbane Bridges In-Reply-To: <859307.78061.qm@web44812.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> References: <859307.78061.qm@web44812.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: This one?: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clifton_Suspension_Bridge That would be Isambard Kingdom Brunel's work, rather than either of the famous Ste*ph*enson's. In Brisbane terms I'd have thought that such a bridge might make quite an attractive addition to the city's riverscape but I can't see it happening given council's apparent enthusiasm for commissioning more daring pieces of engineering whenever possible. 2009/12/29 mich rolling > Here is a large issue; National Heritage Trust has in it a large fraction > of its membership people who don't want anything to change, ever. > > No trees to come down, no vistas ruined by new bridges or buildings. > > Part of the problem may lie in the lack of visibility of cycling in > planning journals and coffee table books. Without technically solid and/or > professionally accepted (through glossy Architecture mags) literature to > fall back on planners are operating in a technical vacuum made more > professionally dangerous by the lack of 'hey look, this has been done > successfully before' glossies to show their bosses and commissioning agents. > > More architects and planners need to publish more on cycle works in the > professional magazines. > > Without big pretty writeups (locally of the Kurilpa bridge and Schnoell > bridges) cycling planners are handicapped when going for the next big > project in Brisbane. > > For example, I predict that any plan for a bridge from Alice St to Kangaroo > Point will be opposed by the NHT on the grounds that it will ruin the vista > of that section of cliffs and sweeping bend of the river. > > I hope I am still around to see what happens with the Alice St bridge. It > is hard to see how it can be anything other than a suspension bridge with > the risk that that bend of the river will end up looking like a biscuit tin > image of Stevenson's bridge over the Avon gorge. > > > > __________________________________________________________________________________ > See what's on at the movies in your area. Find out now: > http://au.movies.yahoo..com/session-times/ > > _______________________________________________ > bikeqld mailing list > bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld > This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20100104/86e781e1/attachment.htm From r.andry at qut.edu.au Mon Jan 4 20:00:16 2010 From: r.andry at qut.edu.au (Andry Rakotonirainy) Date: Mon Jan 4 20:00:33 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] cyclists win three year campaign Message-ID: Cyclists win three year campaign . SUNSHINE Coast cyclists are celebrating the success of a three-year campaign to win traction in future road planning. Andry -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20100105/8cc1489c/attachment.htm From michael at yeatesit.biz Mon Jan 4 20:58:37 2010 From: michael at yeatesit.biz (Michael Yeates) Date: Mon Jan 4 20:57:46 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] cyclists win three year campaign In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20100105025727.PTNI24930.nskntotgx03p.mx.bigpond.com@yit01.yeatesit.biz> Thanks Andry ... Some very good news for 2010 ... especially for residents of the former Maroochy Shire Council area ...! Firstly that Main Roads is being controlled better now with Sunshine Coast Regional Council and secondly that the emphasis is on the necessary (and in many cases long existing) links that Main Roads refused to accept ... although clearly some are still there in Main Roads and still trying to keep bikes off the road. Unfortunately for the last 20 years, Maroochy Shire was far more cars+dollars development-oriented than Caloundra and of course Noosa. So while the latter two were quite innovative in their provision in different ways, virtually nothing happened in Maroochy ... indeed thinking about it a bit more, about the only obvious facility that comes to mind is the coastal shared footpath over Alex Headland and through to Maroochydore ... plus a few bits here and there but disconnected ...! The challenge for the "new" SCRC will be filling in the gaps created by Maroochy SC .... while still maintaining community support ... sufficient to be re-elected. One obvious change that is urgently needed is the reduction of the speed limit on the link for the whole of Brisbane Road Mooloolaba through Alexandra Parade (Alex Headland) Aerodrome Road Maroochydore to the commencement of the David Low Way ... to 50km/h ... it is insane having it 60km/h through the residential, shopping, beach and heavy volume pedestrian areas where no Council would be wanting more fast traffic ... indeed there isn't a bit of road in the Mooloolaba Beach - CBD area that is suitable for more than 50 ... maybe even 40km/h ...! All strength to the SCRC ... and the advocacy ... if it can be done in Noosa, why not elsewhere? BTW ... for your convenience, the link is < http://www.sunshinecoastdaily.com.au/story/2010/01/05/cyclists-find-a-voice/ > MY........................ At 12:00 PM 5/01/2010, Andry Rakotonirainy wrote: >Content-Language: en-US >Content-Type: multipart/alternative; > boundary="_000_C768DA50AB0Arandryquteduau_" > >Cyclists win three year campaign > >. SUNSHINE Coast cyclists are celebrating the success of a >three-year campaign to win traction in future road planning. >Andry >_______________________________________________ >bikeqld mailing list >bikeqld@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: 9.0.725 / Virus Database: 270.14.124/2599 - Release Date: >01/04/10 18:24:00 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20100105/ac9a576f/attachment.htm From akayani at aapt.net.au Wed Jan 6 02:52:39 2010 From: akayani at aapt.net.au (Yani) Date: Wed Jan 6 02:55:04 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Yani's working at BOB In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <951D0DAD2A734214A1EF0ED606EDF6E6@maud> http://www.bumsonbikes.com.au/ I'm the web / marketing manager for these dudes starting on Monday. I'll find some sweet deals for you guys, I've sussed out a few already. ;) If you want to give me any comments on what makes a good sell cycles on the net tips I'm all ears Yani -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20100106/d70e61c3/attachment.htm From michael at yeatesit.biz Wed Jan 6 16:40:39 2010 From: michael at yeatesit.biz (Michael Yeates) Date: Wed Jan 6 16:41:18 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] following the dream ... or challenging the road engineers Message-ID: <20100106224040.OOPE19767.nschwotgx02p.mx.bigpond.com@yit01.yeatesit.biz> Hi ... Some of you may know that the "yellow BIKE" symbol concept was developed in Brisbane (way back) in 1995-6 and is/was based on preliminary conceptual work in Denver Colorado ... the first of the "yellow BIKEs" were installed in Brisbane in about 1997 ... despite extreme opposition from Main Roads department and quite a few cyclists ...! Interesting then to see how the Denver message of "Sharing the Streets" has developed ... as compared to here in Brisbane ... and throughout Queensland where some of the local authorities (eg Gold Coast, Noosa, Caloundra, Toowoomba etc) implemented various applications ... some very good examples ... despite Main Roads opposition which can still be seen in the Main Roads policy documents ... although perhaps amalgamation with QT will finally end the opposition. The following links may be of interest ... http://washingtonparkprofile.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=823&Itemid=41 http://www.denverlivingstreets.org/ The recently adopted "Shared Arrow" or "Sharrow" in the USA is based on the Denver experience as well as drawing on our experiences and applications here ... pity is though, we in Australia seem to be falling in the trap of endorsing more bike paths and expensive road projects, which are unnecessary with successful application of "Share the Road". Little wonder the motoring industry in Australia is celebrating massive sales successes ... as vast amounts of scarce (?) funds are able to be found for more and bigger roads ... but not for light rail or even for "Sharing the Road" projects. Can we learn from the USA? Are we prepared to challenge the road engineers or continue go along with them? MY.................... From michael at yeatesit.biz Fri Jan 8 20:13:08 2010 From: michael at yeatesit.biz (Michael Yeates) Date: Fri Jan 8 20:14:35 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] urban speed limit reduction successes ... Message-ID: <20100109021302.MMWE5306.nskntotgx02p.mx.bigpond.com@yit01.yeatesit.biz> Hi .. http://www.lcc.org.uk/index.asp?Pageid=1662 With results like this, is it a time to wonder why the various peak cycling advocacy groups in Australia have not strongly committed to a co-ordinated national campaign to reduce urban speed limits? MY.................................. From pharmer_kim at hotmail.com Sun Jan 10 21:05:35 2010 From: pharmer_kim at hotmail.com (kim) Date: Sun Jan 10 21:07:07 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Moggill Rd crossing at Indooroopilly Message-ID: I noticed last week that MR has installed bicycle crossing lights now on the pedestrian crosswalk of Moggill Rd. It does not look like a big spend at all, just red and green bike lights in parallel with the pedestrian ones. One each side, no special bike buttons or signs so on the same priority as the existing pedestrian ones. I don't know if this is a work in progress but there is no provision for cyclists over the pedestrian crossing on the slip lane on either side so it is of little benefit as it stands as cyclists are forced to dismount and walk these or ride to the side of them and hop the island. Perhaps they will come with time. The Police I spoke with were most concerned at the time about cyclists 'endangering motorists' as they rode across the slip lane. The targeting of cyclists for riding in an otherwise safe manner over the crossings seemed to dispute the claim that they were after the cyclists bolting out in front of motorists on the slip lane. Hopefully the crossings get made bike friendly too. Last new year was in fact a blue moon and it is rummored that a pedestrian was actually seen using this facility. if indeed it was designed for the ever so occasional pedestrians then one might have expected that the light timings might have been altered to reflect the new function for a high traffic bike crossing. Who's to know whether that would have been a good thing or a bad thing though. k From b.wagner at ozemail.com.au Sun Jan 10 21:53:46 2010 From: b.wagner at ozemail.com.au (Bob Wagner) Date: Sun Jan 10 21:54:21 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Moggill Rd crossing at Indooroopilly In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2F095E08-B4FA-4D7A-99AE-BCFDAFBED80F@ozemail.com.au> Those bike lights have been there for a while now. My concern was that, just like Kim says, you must still dismount on the zerba parts of the crossing. I ride with a policeman, and at points like this wait till he says it is ok to procede. Bob Wagner Sent from my iPhone On 11/01/2010, at 1:05 PM, kim wrote: > I noticed last week that MR has installed bicycle crossing lights > now on the pedestrian crosswalk of Moggill Rd. It does not look like > a big spend at all, just red and green bike lights in parallel with > the pedestrian ones. One each side, no special bike buttons or signs > so on the same priority as the existing pedestrian ones. I don't > know if this is a work in progress but there is no provision for > cyclists over the pedestrian crossing on the slip lane on either > side so it is of little benefit as it stands as cyclists are forced > to dismount and walk these or ride to the side of them and hop the > island. Perhaps they will come with time. The Police I spoke with > were most concerned at the time about cyclists 'endangering > motorists' as they rode across the slip lane. The targeting of > cyclists for riding in an otherwise safe manner over the crossings > seemed to dispute the claim that they were after the cyclists > bolting out in front of motorists on the slip lane. Hopefully the > crossings get made bike friendly too. Last new year was in fact a > blue moon and it is rummored that a pedestrian was actually seen > using this facility. if indeed it was designed for the ever so > occasional pedestrians then one might have expected that the light > timings might have been altered to reflect the new function for a > high traffic bike crossing. Who's to know whether that would have > been a good thing or a bad thing though. > > k > > _______________________________________________ > bikeqld mailing list > bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld > This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. From flindersia at yahoo.com Sun Jan 10 22:20:30 2010 From: flindersia at yahoo.com (Flindersia) Date: Sun Jan 10 22:20:59 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Moggill Rd crossing at Indooroopilly In-Reply-To: <2F095E08-B4FA-4D7A-99AE-BCFDAFBED80F@ozemail.com.au> References: <2F095E08-B4FA-4D7A-99AE-BCFDAFBED80F@ozemail.com.au> Message-ID: <264331.77901.qm@web62306.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Bob, does he procede on his bike or on foot? Last year I started using the Centenary bike way again after a long gap. Noticed a lot more riders?which is good but have also encountered more pedestrians and jogges;?and a bl*#dy idiot on a scooter!? Cheers Ian ----- Original Message ---- From: Bob Wagner To: kim Cc: BikeQld Sent: Mon, 11 January, 2010 1:53:46 PM Subject: Re: [bikeqld] Moggill Rd crossing at Indooroopilly Those bike lights have been there for a? while now. My concern was that, just like Kim says, you must still dismount on the zerba parts of the crossing. I ride with a policeman, and at points like this wait till he says it is ok to procede. Bob Wagner Sent from my iPhone On 11/01/2010, at 1:05 PM, kim wrote: > I noticed last week that MR has installed bicycle crossing lights now on the pedestrian crosswalk of Moggill Rd. It does not look like a big spend at all, just red and green bike lights in parallel with the pedestrian ones. One each side, no special bike buttons or signs so on the same priority as the existing pedestrian ones. I don't know if this is a work in progress but there is no provision for cyclists over the pedestrian crossing on the slip lane on either side so it is of little benefit as it stands as cyclists are forced to dismount and walk these or ride to the side of them and hop the island. Perhaps they will come with time. The Police I spoke with were most concerned at the time about cyclists 'endangering motorists' as they rode across the slip lane. The targeting of cyclists for riding in an otherwise safe manner over the crossings seemed to dispute the claim that they were after the cyclists bolting out in front of motorists on the slip lane. Hopefully the crossings get made bike friendly too. Last new year was in fact a blue moon and it is rummored that a pedestrian was actually seen using this facility. if indeed it was designed for the ever so occasional pedestrians then one might have expected that the light timings might have been altered to reflect the new function for a high traffic bike crossing. Who's to know whether that would have been a good thing or a bad thing though. > > k > > _______________________________________________ > bikeqld mailing list > bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld > This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. _______________________________________________ bikeqld mailing list bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. __________________________________________________________________________________ See what's on at the movies in your area. Find out now: http://au.movies.yahoo.com/session-times/ From doctorw1963 at yahoo.com.au Sun Jan 10 22:39:10 2010 From: doctorw1963 at yahoo.com.au (Anthony Lee) Date: Sun Jan 10 22:39:28 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Moggill Rd crossing at Indooroopilly In-Reply-To: <264331.77901.qm@web62306.mail.re1.yahoo.com> References: <2F095E08-B4FA-4D7A-99AE-BCFDAFBED80F@ozemail.com.au> <264331.77901.qm@web62306.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <65145.19719.qm@web54501.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Ian, I only rode on the Centenary bikeway a couple of times but isn't that supposed to be bicycle-only? Anthony Lee The Doctor -- the last of the Time Lords? ........-- __o ....-- _ \<,_ ........(_) / (_) E-Mail: doctorw1963@yahoo.com.au ________________________________ From: Flindersia To: BikeQld Sent: Mon, 11 January, 2010 2:20:30 PM Subject: Re: [bikeqld] Moggill Rd crossing at Indooroopilly Bob, does he procede on his bike or on foot? Last year I started using the Centenary bike way again after a long gap. Noticed a lot more riders which is good but have also encountered more pedestrians and jogges; and a bl*#dy idiot on a scooter! Cheers Ian ----- Original Message ---- From: Bob Wagner To: kim Cc: BikeQld Sent: Mon, 11 January, 2010 1:53:46 PM Subject: Re: [bikeqld] Moggill Rd crossing at Indooroopilly Those bike lights have been there for a while now. My concern was that, just like Kim says, you must still dismount on the zerba parts of the crossing. I ride with a policeman, and at points like this wait till he says it is ok to procede. Bob Wagner Sent from my iPhone On 11/01/2010, at 1:05 PM, kim wrote: > I noticed last week that MR has installed bicycle crossing lights now on the pedestrian crosswalk of Moggill Rd. It does not look like a big spend at all, just red and green bike lights in parallel with the pedestrian ones. One each side, no special bike buttons or signs so on the same priority as the existing pedestrian ones. I don't know if this is a work in progress but there is no provision for cyclists over the pedestrian crossing on the slip lane on either side so it is of little benefit as it stands as cyclists are forced to dismount and walk these or ride to the side of them and hop the island. Perhaps they will come with time. The Police I spoke with were most concerned at the time about cyclists 'endangering motorists' as they rode across the slip lane. The targeting of cyclists for riding in an otherwise safe manner over the crossings seemed to dispute the claim that they were after the cyclists bolting out in front of motorists on the slip lane. Hopefully the crossings get made bike friendly too. Last new year was in fact a blue moon and it is rummored that a pedestrian was actually seen using this facility. if indeed it was designed for the ever so occasional pedestrians then one might have expected that the light timings might have been altered to reflect the new function for a high traffic bike crossing. Who's to know whether that would have been a good thing or a bad thing though. > > k > > _______________________________________________ > bikeqld mailing list > bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld > This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. _______________________________________________ bikeqld mailing list bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. __________________________________________________________________________________ See what's on at the movies in your area. Find out now: http://au.movies.yahoo.com/session-times/ _______________________________________________ bikeqld mailing list bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. __________________________________________________________________________________ See what's on at the movies in your area. Find out now: http://au.movies.yahoo.com/session-times/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20100110/be73b9eb/attachment.htm From j at jamver.id.au Sun Jan 10 23:28:09 2010 From: j at jamver.id.au (James Lever) Date: Sun Jan 10 23:28:59 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Moggill Rd crossing at Indooroopilly In-Reply-To: <65145.19719.qm@web54501.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <2F095E08-B4FA-4D7A-99AE-BCFDAFBED80F@ozemail.com.au> <264331.77901.qm@web62306.mail.re1.yahoo.com> <65145.19719.qm@web54501.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <5497D29B-D2D5-41A9-B68D-B971F3850F87@jamver.id.au> On 11/01/2010, at 2:39 PM, Anthony Lee wrote: > I only rode on the Centenary bikeway a couple of times but isn't that supposed to be bicycle-only? Signs everywhere saying bicycles only except the very small section from the Fig Tree Pocket exit heading out of town where there is a pedestrian path for a short distance. Most annoying thing ever was riding to work along there mid-morning, nobody about except one pedestrian walking right in the middle of the bike path and not on the empty, adjacent pedestrian path! cheers, James -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20100111/2ef16066/attachment-0001.htm From pharmer_kim at hotmail.com Mon Jan 11 00:26:26 2010 From: pharmer_kim at hotmail.com (kim) Date: Mon Jan 11 00:27:23 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Moggill Rd crossing at Indooroopilly In-Reply-To: <5497D29B-D2D5-41A9-B68D-B971F3850F87@jamver.id.au> References: <2F095E08-B4FA-4D7A-99AE-BCFDAFBED80F@ozemail.com.au> <264331.77901.qm@web62306.mail.re1.yahoo.com> <65145.19719.qm@web54501.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <5497D29B-D2D5-41A9-B68D-B971F3850F87@jamver.id.au> Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20100111/c49588e9/attachment.htm From unixbigot at pobox.com Mon Jan 11 16:38:10 2010 From: unixbigot at pobox.com (Christopher Biggs) Date: Mon Jan 11 16:39:35 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Western freeway bikeway - water tap out of order Message-ID: <4B4BA852.1030908@pobox.com> On the subject of western bikeway insanity... I noticed today (by dint of having run out of water) that the water tap at the taringa parade spur junction of the bikeway is turned off (again). It was out of order for many months last year, despite several letters to council. This is the only trackside tap in evidence for about 3km either side, so double up on water if you have a 2nd carrier. --chris From pharmer_kim at hotmail.com Mon Jan 11 18:17:02 2010 From: pharmer_kim at hotmail.com (kim) Date: Mon Jan 11 18:18:33 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Moggill Rd crossing at Indooroopilly In-Reply-To: <004201ca929a$8c67c430$a5374c90$@com> References: <2F095E08-B4FA-4D7A-99AE-BCFDAFBED80F@ozemail.com.au> <264331.77901.qm@web62306.mail.re1.yahoo.com> <65145.19719.qm@web54501.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <5497D29B-D2D5-41A9-B68D-B971F3850F87@jamver.id.au> <004201ca929a$8c67c430$a5374c90$@com> Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20100112/1bc6f156/attachment.htm From pharmer_kim at hotmail.com Mon Jan 11 18:22:23 2010 From: pharmer_kim at hotmail.com (kim) Date: Mon Jan 11 18:23:28 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Western freeway bikeway - water tap out of order In-Reply-To: <4B4BA852.1030908@pobox.com> References: <4B4BA852.1030908@pobox.com> Message-ID: Good point about the lack of water. The dogs are not going to be happy either. That park is actually MR road reserve (or at least that is what MR claim) and maybe there is politics going on there wrt BCC's non action on it. Perhaps try a request to MR to fix it up. Perhaps its deliberate too. k Christopher Biggs wrote: > On the subject of western bikeway insanity... > > I noticed today (by dint of having run out of water) that the water > tap at the taringa parade spur junction of the bikeway is turned off > (again). It was out of order for many months last year, despite > several letters to council. > > This is the only trackside tap in evidence for about 3km either side, > so double up on water if you have a 2nd carrier. > > --chris > > _______________________________________________ > bikeqld mailing list > bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld > This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. > > From doctorw1963 at yahoo.com.au Mon Jan 11 18:23:14 2010 From: doctorw1963 at yahoo.com.au (Anthony Lee) Date: Mon Jan 11 18:23:32 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] City Botanic gardens to Storey bridge? In-Reply-To: <4B4BA852.1030908@pobox.com> References: <4B4BA852.1030908@pobox.com> Message-ID: <387315.50403.qm@web54505.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Hi all, Does anyone know if one can cycle from the city Botanic gardens all the way to the Storey bridge along the river? Or is there still a section under repair? Thank you Anthony Anthony Lee The Doctor -- the last of the Time Lords? ........-- __o ....-- _ \<,_ ........(_) / (_) E-Mail: doctorw1963@yahoo.com.au __________________________________________________________________________________ See what's on at the movies in your area. Find out now: http://au.movies.yahoo.com/session-times/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20100111/83916e11/attachment.htm From list-bikeqld at lister.dnsalias.net Mon Jan 11 18:28:58 2010 From: list-bikeqld at lister.dnsalias.net (Ian Lister) Date: Mon Jan 11 18:29:40 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] City Botanic gardens to Storey bridge? In-Reply-To: <387315.50403.qm@web54505.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <4B4BA852.1030908@pobox.com> <387315.50403.qm@web54505.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20100112102710.P6325@singha.lister.id.au> Hi Anthony, There is still a narrowed section but the closed section has been reopened, so there is no longer a need to detour up to Adelaide St. Ian On Mon, 11 Jan 2010, Anthony Lee wrote: > Hi all, > > Does anyone know if one can cycle from the city Botanic gardens all the > way to the Storey bridge along the river? Or is there still a section > under repair? > > Thank you > Anthony From flindersia at yahoo.com Mon Jan 11 18:38:12 2010 From: flindersia at yahoo.com (Flindersia) Date: Mon Jan 11 18:38:27 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Western freeway bikeway - water tap out of order In-Reply-To: References: <4B4BA852.1030908@pobox.com> Message-ID: <283432.36695.qm@web62302.mail.re1.yahoo.com> It is a bit off the track but there is a drinking tap at Moore Park, just delow the public toilets (about 100m off the bikeway) ----- Original Message ---- From: kim To: BikeQld Sent: Tue, 12 January, 2010 10:22:23 AM Subject: Re: [bikeqld] Western freeway bikeway - water tap out of order Good point about the lack of water. The dogs are not going to be happy either. That park is actually MR road reserve (or at least that is what MR claim) and maybe there is politics going on there wrt BCC's non action on it. Perhaps try a request to MR to fix it up. Perhaps its deliberate too. k Christopher Biggs wrote: > On the subject of western bikeway insanity... > > I noticed today (by dint of having run out of water) that the water tap at the taringa parade spur junction of the bikeway is turned off (again).? It was out of order for many months last year, despite several letters to council. > > This is the only trackside tap in evidence for about 3km either side, so? double up on water if you have a 2nd carrier. > > --chris > > _______________________________________________ > bikeqld mailing list > bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld > This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. > > _______________________________________________ bikeqld mailing list bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. __________________________________________________________________________________ See what's on at the movies in your area. Find out now: http://au.movies.yahoo.com/session-times/ From pharmer_kim at hotmail.com Mon Jan 11 18:42:36 2010 From: pharmer_kim at hotmail.com (kim) Date: Mon Jan 11 18:43:30 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Observations on the Centennial bikeway Message-ID: Now that the dust has settled on the new separated section of the Centennial bikeway I have noticed that a small number of pedestrians still walk on the bike side. I am not sure if this is due in part to BCC's use of the skater symbols along with the bike symbols. People are used to seeing the pedestrian and bike symbols, the skater symbols are a bit of a rarity and I believe that they are a little confusing as they do appear to be normal pedestrian symbols from a distance with the only distinction being a couple of tiny circles under their feet. The QRR do require skaters to use the bike section here and so they are a little redundant and I believe possibly at the expense of some confusion as pedestrian symbols for approaching pedestrians from the shared sections. The 0.5m clearance section that was added between the wall and the bike section seems to attract some pedestrians too who may justify this by not walking on the green section. BCC added this to avoid the handlebar strike points that they designed into the wall. The tiny font warnings that are placed along the boundary between peds and the cycles seem a little token and I am not sure that they actually serve much purpose as you can only read them up close and if you crank your head around. I am not a regular peak hour commuter down there but I would say it is working better. Any feedback from any of the regular peak hour commuters out there? k From doctorw1963 at yahoo.com.au Mon Jan 11 19:00:05 2010 From: doctorw1963 at yahoo.com.au (Anthony Lee) Date: Mon Jan 11 19:00:26 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] City Botanic gardens to Storey bridge? In-Reply-To: <20100112102710.P6325@singha.lister.id.au> References: <4B4BA852.1030908@pobox.com> <387315.50403.qm@web54505.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <20100112102710.P6325@singha.lister.id.au> Message-ID: <983726.2291.qm@web54507.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Thanks Ian. Where is the narrowed section? Anthony Lee The Doctor -- the last of the Time Lords? ........-- __o ....-- _ \<,_ ........(_) / (_) E-Mail: doctorw1963@yahoo.com.au ________________________________ From: Ian Lister To: bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au Sent: Tue, 12 January, 2010 10:28:58 AM Subject: Re: [bikeqld] City Botanic gardens to Storey bridge? Hi Anthony, There is still a narrowed section but the closed section has been reopened, so there is no longer a need to detour up to Adelaide St. Ian On Mon, 11 Jan 2010, Anthony Lee wrote: > Hi all, > > Does anyone know if one can cycle from the city Botanic gardens all the way to the Storey bridge along the river? Or is there still a section under repair? > > Thank you > Anthony _______________________________________________ bikeqld mailing list bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. __________________________________________________________________________________ See what's on at the movies in your area. Find out now: http://au.movies.yahoo.com/session-times/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20100111/0915a6dc/attachment.htm From michael at yeatesit.biz Mon Jan 11 19:33:55 2010 From: michael at yeatesit.biz (Michael Yeates) Date: Mon Jan 11 19:34:47 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Moggill Rd crossing at Indooroopilly In-Reply-To: References: <2F095E08-B4FA-4D7A-99AE-BCFDAFBED80F@ozemail.com.au> <264331.77901.qm@web62306.mail.re1.yahoo.com> <65145.19719.qm@web54501.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <5497D29B-D2D5-41A9-B68D-B971F3850F87@jamver.id.au> <004201ca929a$8c67c430$a5374c90$@com> Message-ID: <20100112013347.RCQJ1743.nschwotgx01p.mx.bigpond.com@yit01.yeatesit.biz> Wow ... welcome to the New Year ...! Thanks Kim and Pete ... A useful concept here is "fitness for purpose" ... noting that (i) fitness and "fit" are not necessarily regulated (and it would appear are quite arbitrary in Qld) and (ii) purpose may vary ... including along a facility as well as over time. When the first stage of the Western Freeway Bikeway (WFB) was completed, it had a soft opening some time later on May 8, 1998 as I look at a piece of the officially cut ribbon on my notice-board ...! In the interim, several of us did a "user" audit ... and using Part 14 and personal experience/observation as the criteria, there was a lot wrong. However MR argued that it was for a very specific user group who would know how to use it. And so it would seem for few complaints are made about how badly it is designed ... most about how it is (mis)used ie not used as intended. Is the intended use forever or subject to change? So the regular "commuter" users are OK ... but what would happen if a larger number of "novice" cyclists did use it? Would they create problems for the regulars that are similar to those created by joggers, walkers (without dogs or young kids), etc? Realistically the answer is "yes" and the reason is that more or less the whole facility (ie Stage 1) is too narrow ie it was NOT designed to meet the user criteria in Part 14. Putting aside the time separation argument (as this too is problematic), would use by a lot of primary school "novice" cyclists be acceptable or cause a similar problem to the "regulars" ? And what about people walking to get access to a better bus or train option? So moving on 10 years or more, it might be that the best outcome is for more of the network to be "shared" ... for reasons not unlike those Pete espouses ... namely that the sooner the various modes learn (how?) to interact safely, the better for all. An example is the speed issue where it is claimed cyclists are exposed to too much danger (as distinct from risk or threat) if using roads with higher speeds yet rather than lower the speed expectation, separation is preferred ... as for example on the Western Freeway which wasn't too bad for cycling (with a couple of exceptions) until MR designed the WFB and used up some of the road shoulder ...! The novices won't enjoy cycling on facilities like the WFB if it is "shared" with 50 and 60 and higher speed cyclists ... and the latter clearly won't enjoy "sharing" it either ...! So should the fast cyclists still be permitted on the freeway shoulders? Should the freeway and other highway and fast road "shoulders" be wider for general safety? Yes...! So wouldn't that be better than narrowing the shoulders to build a bikepath if the purpose of the bikepath is for novices and not for high speed regulars? Fitness for purpose ...! Also of course the question arises more across the whole network than just on "footpaths" whether designated (as against designed) for pedestrians, or for cyclists or "shared" ie for both. In most cases, roads that are safe enough for cyclists are safe enough for pedestrians ... especially in the case of novice cyclists. So should the roads and paths be designed for novices or for regulars? Perhaps we would get more paths if they are shared ... and designated for both pedestrians and novice cyclists ...? If that "purpose" creates a problem for (or caused by) the regular or high speed cyclists, then should we let them on the roads and if necessary, then, make the roads safe enough???? As similar issues are discussed, namely who is designing what and for whom, etc etc, you might like to have a look at http://www.abc.net.au/rn/backgroundbriefing/stories/2009/2758349.htm re on road cycling ... but also at "Housing the Millions" from last weekend (a repeat it would seem of an earlier programme on the same topic from 22 November 2009) but with some different comments ... all worth considering as part of planning and in planning of infrastructure. And noting that the subject has been slightly (?) hi-jacked, at a "network" level, while it may be the case a lot of cyclists use the WFB and therefore there should be better provision for them to cross the Moggill Road corridor with less delay and perhaps increased priority (including replacing the slip lane zebra crossings with traffic lights?), its worth noting that there is the need to preserve walking routes and where necessary, to give pedestrians priority too ... including priority over cyclists ... if only to encourage kids (and everyone else) to walk and/or cycle instead - to quote from QT's slogan ... as that is where the "novice" cyclists are ...! MY............................ At 10:17 AM 12/01/2010, kim wrote: >Hi Pete, > >I think what the fuss is really about, is that >the Western Arterial Bikeway is a pretty useful >and valuable commuter route where cyclists can >travel at a reasonable pace and this risks >turning into what the Centennial Bikeway became >with shared traffic. It is basically generating >conflict by design or rather, lack of it. Your >'pedestrian point of view' is that of a seasoned >runner who is deliberately choosing to flaunt >the rules and take/make the risk. I don't think >the issue of signs is going to deter those >people but if the police point of view or that >of the BCC is correct in that the lack of signs >allows other pedestrians to inadvertently get >onto the bikeway then it is not fair on those >people if they are exposed to or cause risk. The >'pedestrian point of view' should be through >their eyes. I would venture to say that it is >those people who present the greater risk to >cyclists also. I have encountered the most WTF >situations along there making me wonder if it is >just me riding at some odd hour or what. >I think it is fair to say that most of the >seasoned road cyclists are already out there >doing their thing but if Brisbane wants to grow >its cyclist numbers its going to have to attract >the new, less experienced riders or indeed the >not-as-yet riders. Your survival of the fittest >philosophy doesn't really foster that, that's >why much of the advocacy needs to look at some >of the stumbling blocks for those lesser >experienced people. Same goes for the bike >lights, the average Joe Pedal's bike probably >costs less than a high tech super bright light, >so it is unreasonable to expect bikes to have >much in the way of lumens to spare. That's where >passive reflective devices on the posts and >rails at the bridges are not only useful but are >dirt cheap and required in the manuals. >While you say that there are bigger fish to fry, >I would say that it is not simply a matter of >spending your life going for the big ones, like >Ahab pursuing Moby Dick, it's about getting bang >for buck and a more immediate result. I reckon >that significant improvements to that bikeway >can be made at very little cost and for that >reason alone have a better chance of coming to >fruition. The crossing there of Moggill Rd is an >obvious one that can be improved with a small >outlay and some cheap thought. Same goes for the >lighting issues. If there is a need to >accommodate pedestrians in there, then by all >means look into it, but do it by design, not by >lack of design. If small improvements are not >made, its utility will eventually just degrade the way the Centennial did. > >k > >I must say that I am pleased that MR is still >slogging along with these freeway corridor >bikeways despite the lack of monies; the SE >freeway one is gradually connecting up with >Logan while other MR projects have basically just stalled. > >Peter Whittle wrote: >>I?m not sure what the fuss is. Even on ?bikes? >>roads, the hazard/complexity between motor >>vehicles/bikes is far greater than encountered >>between bikes and the occasional peds on the >>bikeway. To be honest there is far more hazard >>from the occasional wayward cyclist than any ped. >> >>I?ve been known to use ?no bikes? roads where >>it suits me. Looking at it from the point of >>view of a pedestrian, it is the only decent >>linear, uninterrupted run for miles around. >>When living on the Sunshine Coast, I flouted >>the ?no bikes? rule on the motorway, along with >>many other cyclists, and if I was a runner >>these days and living around there, I?d be out >>there running on the bikeway, and telling outraged riders to chill out. >> >>I agree about lighting issues but again, >>cyclists are often just as bad as any ped, even >>though they are legally required to be lit. >>These days, after nearly hitting a dog on a >>road in the dark, I take responsibility for my >>lighting by using a very bright one, and I try >>to anticipate dark things emerging from darkness. >> >>Don?t be too shrewish about this ? there are bigger fish to fry. >> >>Pete >> >> >> >_______________________________________________ >bikeqld mailing list >bikeqld@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: 9.0.725 / Virus Database: >270.14.135/2615 - Release Date: 01/12/10 05:35:00 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20100112/b1390ba0/attachment.htm From r.hockey at sph.uq.edu.au Mon Jan 11 19:48:43 2010 From: r.hockey at sph.uq.edu.au (Richard Hockey) Date: Mon Jan 11 19:48:59 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] urban speed limit reduction successes ... In-Reply-To: <20100109021302.MMWE5306.nskntotgx02p.mx.bigpond.com@yit01.yeatesit.biz> References: <20100109021302.MMWE5306.nskntotgx02p.mx.bigpond.com@yit01.yeatesit.biz> Message-ID: More on this here: http://www.lcc.org.uk/documents/braking-point-20mph.pdf R -----Original Message----- From: bikeqld-bounces@bikeqld.org.au [mailto:bikeqld-bounces@bikeqld.org.au] On Behalf Of Michael Yeates Sent: Saturday, 9 January 2010 12:13 PM To: bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au Cc: bfa-oz@topica.com Subject: [bikeqld] urban speed limit reduction successes ... Hi .. http://www.lcc.org.uk/index.asp?Pageid=1662 With results like this, is it a time to wonder why the various peak cycling advocacy groups in Australia have not strongly committed to a co-ordinated national campaign to reduce urban speed limits? MY.................................. _______________________________________________ bikeqld mailing list bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. From list-bikeqld at lister.dnsalias.net Mon Jan 11 20:27:04 2010 From: list-bikeqld at lister.dnsalias.net (Ian Lister) Date: Mon Jan 11 20:28:10 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] City Botanic gardens to Storey bridge? In-Reply-To: <983726.2291.qm@web54507.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <4B4BA852.1030908@pobox.com> <387315.50403.qm@web54505.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <20100112102710.P6325@singha.lister.id.au> <983726.2291.qm@web54507.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20100112122508.P6325@singha.lister.id.au> On Mon, 11 Jan 2010, Anthony Lee wrote: > Thanks Ian. Where is the narrowed section? Just north of the City Cat stop, if I recall correctly. I think there's a sign requesting (but not requiring) cyclists dismount, but of course not many do. Ian From pharmer_kim at hotmail.com Tue Jan 12 20:19:05 2010 From: pharmer_kim at hotmail.com (kim) Date: Tue Jan 12 20:21:30 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Moggill Rd crossing at Indooroopilly In-Reply-To: <20100112013347.RCQJ1743.nschwotgx01p.mx.bigpond.com@yit01.yeatesit.biz> References: <2F095E08-B4FA-4D7A-99AE-BCFDAFBED80F@ozemail.com.au> <264331.77901.qm@web62306.mail.re1.yahoo.com> <65145.19719.qm@web54501.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <5497D29B-D2D5-41A9-B68D-B971F3850F87@jamver.id.au> <004201ca929a$8c67c430$a5374c90$@com> <20100112013347.RCQJ1743.nschwotgx01p.mx.bigpond.com@yit01.yeatesit.biz> Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20100113/567e508e/attachment.htm From b.wagner at ozemail.com.au Tue Jan 12 21:00:09 2010 From: b.wagner at ozemail.com.au (Bob Wagner) Date: Tue Jan 12 21:01:17 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Moggill Rd crossing at Indooroopilly In-Reply-To: References: <2F095E08-B4FA-4D7A-99AE-BCFDAFBED80F@ozemail.com.au> <264331.77901.qm@web62306.mail.re1.yahoo.com> <65145.19719.qm@web54501.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <5497D29B-D2D5-41A9-B68D-B971F3850F87@jamver.id.au> <004201ca929a$8c67c430$a5374c90$@com> <20100112013347.RCQJ1743.nschwotgx01p.mx.bigpond.com@yit01.yeatesit.biz> Message-ID: Yes a law that came into force last year I believe, pedestrians have right of way at slip lanes. Zebra crossings at these places are made redundant. We had this issue with kids walking to school and crossing at lights, there is no zebra crossing across the slip lane to the island of lights. We were told that there doesnt need to be one. Shame most car drivers dont know this law..... Bob Wagner b.wagner@ozemail.com.au On 13/01/2010, at 12:19 PM, kim wrote: > Happy New Year too Michael. > > Yes the thread got a bit off topic, but back to the crossing there, > I have had no involvement in any of that so I really don't know what > transpired or what was/is planned there. As I said, I only just > noticed the red/green bike lanterns added but nothing else. I had > not heard any options about lights on the slip lanes, but I couldn't > see that happening, nor do I think it would make for a better > crossing for bikes or cars. I don't think there is any real need for > any sort of sophisticated system of priority either. It is pretty > clear that MR had always expected cyclists to ride over there and it > is pretty obvious that they would do so. Look how they placed the > yellow grab rails by the crossing button despite the dismount sign > being way over on the bike way entrance and across the slip lane. > While MR probably used the excuse in the past that it would involve > great expense with lights and changing the timings to reflect the > different time through intersection for mounted cyclists, additional > buttons etc, clearly that was not the case. > I don't think there is any loss of amenity for pedestrians > regardless of what is done. If the zebras are scrubbed, peds (and > dismounted cyclists of course) still have priority over cars on the > sliplanes. The adjacent Moggill footpath up to the school is already > ped only, no bikes. It would be better in my opinion not to have to > scrub the zebras but to simply change the QRR to allow the zebras to > be shared zones (with the usual proviso of not bolting out into > traffic etc). That would fix the issue statewide. I do find it > ironic that we have some million km of shared paths in Bris but each > time they cross a road it becomes exclusively a pedestrian zone. > Then of course that could not happen quickly and the actual cost of > the bureaucracy and QRR changes would be high (altho the cost per > crossing would be no doubt lower). > It really is a bit of a 'much ado about nothing' as 99.9% of riders > have not had a problem of just riding across there. If the police > had not got involved it probably could have continued that way too > without drama. I am not sure of what politics went on there but I > gather there was some and probably still is. > You are familiar with that crossing, what are your thoughts on what > should have been done (if anything)? > > k > > ps. I did arrive back up here in Qld to see that great progress > has been made on the Hale St Bridge and it is getting a splash of > paint. It looks uninspiringly like the Captain Cook Bridge and the > Victoria Bridge - a basic box section cantilever on a budget! Seems > to be a bit of a lump in Coro Drv there too but at least they don't > charge to drive over that (anyone christened that on their bike > yet?). I guess the Bus Lane on Coro is well and truly gone now with > that narrow two lane lump. Gateway2 joined up too and I hear someone > forgot about the design rights and simply copied Gateway1 without > permission of the original Italian designers and it cost Qld another > $12m to buy out the design rights after the fact! On the ball - not! > > cheers > > > Michael Yeates wrote: >> >> Wow ... welcome to the New Year ...! >> >> Thanks Kim and Pete ... >> >> A useful concept here is "fitness for purpose" ... noting that (i) >> fitness and "fit" are not necessarily regulated (and it would >> appear are quite arbitrary in Qld) and (ii) purpose may vary ... >> including along a facility as well as over time. >> >> When the first stage of the Western Freeway Bikeway (WFB) was >> completed, it had a soft opening some time later on May 8, 1998 as >> I look at a piece of the officially cut ribbon on my notice- >> board ...! >> >> In the interim, several of us did a "user" audit ... and using Part >> 14 and personal experience/observation as the criteria, there was a >> lot wrong. >> >> However MR argued that it was for a very specific user group who >> would know how to use it. And so it would seem for few complaints >> are made about how badly it is designed ... most about how it is >> (mis)used ie not used as intended. Is the intended use forever or >> subject to change? >> >> So the regular "commuter" users are OK ... but what would happen if >> a larger number of "novice" cyclists did use it? >> >> Would they create problems for the regulars that are similar to >> those created by joggers, walkers (without dogs or young kids), etc? >> >> Realistically the answer is "yes" and the reason is that more or >> less the whole facility (ie Stage 1) is too narrow ie it was NOT >> designed to meet the user criteria in Part 14. >> >> Putting aside the time separation argument (as this too is >> problematic), would use by a lot of primary school "novice" >> cyclists be acceptable or cause a similar problem to the >> "regulars" ? And what about people walking to get access to a >> better bus or train option? >> >> So moving on 10 years or more, it might be that the best outcome is >> for more of the network to be "shared" ... for reasons not unlike >> those Pete espouses ... namely that the sooner the various modes >> learn (how?) to interact safely, the better for all. >> >> An example is the speed issue where it is claimed cyclists are >> exposed to too much danger (as distinct from risk or threat) if >> using roads with higher speeds yet rather than lower the speed >> expectation, separation is preferred ... as for example on the >> Western Freeway which wasn't too bad for cycling (with a couple of >> exceptions) until MR designed the WFB and used up some of the road >> shoulder ...! >> >> The novices won't enjoy cycling on facilities like the WFB if it is >> "shared" with 50 and 60 and higher speed cyclists ... and the >> latter clearly won't enjoy "sharing" it either ...! So should the >> fast cyclists still be permitted on the freeway shoulders? Should >> the freeway and other highway and fast road "shoulders" be wider >> for general safety? Yes...! So wouldn't that be better than >> narrowing the shoulders to build a bikepath if the purpose of the >> bikepath is for novices and not for high speed regulars? >> >> Fitness for purpose ...! >> >> Also of course the question arises more across the whole network >> than just on "footpaths" whether designated (as against designed) >> for pedestrians, or for cyclists or "shared" ie for both. >> >> In most cases, roads that are safe enough for cyclists are safe >> enough for pedestrians ... especially in the case of novice cyclists. >> >> So should the roads and paths be designed for novices or for >> regulars? >> >> Perhaps we would get more paths if they are shared ... and >> designated for both pedestrians and novice cyclists ...? >> >> If that "purpose" creates a problem for (or caused by) the regular >> or high speed cyclists, then should we let them on the roads and if >> necessary, then, make the roads safe enough???? >> >> As similar issues are discussed, namely who is designing what and >> for whom, etc etc, you might like to have a look at http://www.abc.net.au/rn/backgroundbriefing/stories/2009/2758349.htm >> re on road cycling ... but also at "Housing the Millions" from >> last weekend (a repeat it would seem of an earlier programme on the >> same topic from 22 November 2009) but with some different >> comments ... all worth considering as part of planning and in >> planning of infrastructure. >> >> And noting that the subject has been slightly (?) hi-jacked, at a >> "network" level, while it may be the case a lot of cyclists use the >> WFB and therefore there should be better provision for them to >> cross the Moggill Road corridor with less delay and perhaps >> increased priority (including replacing the slip lane zebra >> crossings with traffic lights?), its worth noting that there is the >> need to preserve walking routes and where necessary, to give >> pedestrians priority too ... including priority over cyclists ... >> if only to encourage kids (and everyone else) to walk and/or cycle >> instead - to quote from QT's slogan ... as that is where the >> "novice" cyclists are ...! >> >> MY............................ >> >> At 10:17 AM 12/01/2010, kim wrote: >> >>> > _______________________________________________ > bikeqld mailing list > bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld > This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20100113/409dba61/attachment-0001.htm From r.hockey at sph.uq.edu.au Wed Jan 13 18:13:24 2010 From: r.hockey at sph.uq.edu.au (Richard Hockey) Date: Wed Jan 13 18:13:34 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] SMH- Cycling without a helmet Message-ID: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/never-mind-t he-nudity-wheres-your-bike-helmet-20100113-m6xo.html a positive article about cycling, I think?. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20100114/19431ab9/attachment.htm From pharmer_kim at hotmail.com Sun Jan 17 04:51:23 2010 From: pharmer_kim at hotmail.com (kim) Date: Sun Jan 17 04:53:16 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Kurillpa know how... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Bump..... Ok, I know I posted this a while back and there was not a lot of interest on list for that neck of the woods but as a matter of update I did spend a bit of time down there on the weekend checking how it was used. The connection between West End of the world and the Centennial seems to me to be a desirable one given the cycle friendly nature of that neck of the woods with Bicycle Revolution (the fixies fix), Bicycle Queensland and such fine bicycle friendly cuisine such as Sol Breads :) all located over there. Here's what I noticed: The nearest ramp from the Centennial to the actual Kurilpa bridge is the ca. Turbot St one. As far as I noticed it is not signed as the desirable ramp to access the bridge (altho like all the other ramps there are signs to the KGS bike centre, as seemingly all roads and especially the green ones lead there.) That ramp takes you up to Nth Quay which is one way south away from the Kurilpa bridge. Your option is to take the footpath which narrows down to the traffic lights at Ann St where there are cycle lights to allow you to pedal across and land you on the opposite footpath. Now technically the QRR don't allow you to ride on that side of the footpath (contra-flow) back down to Tank St to get up to the bridge but of course it can be done. There is of course a pedestrian crossing as you go over Turbot St, which technically you can't ride across either but given the proximity to the seats of law, you might as well as BCC seem to encourage this contra-flow ride down Nth Quay with their provision of bicycle lights crossing Ann St and facing this direction (and they did mandate that during construction as the detour). You can of course go just outside the marked crossing too. You can legally ride up Tank St to access the Bridge. If you are not comfortable with that or some barrister in a frock and a wig walking down there takes a different view you can also ride on the other abandoned footpath which might actually be legal despite Nth Quay being a one way. That is plenty wide and a lovely shady bikeway in itself. That will take you all the way to the bridge but then you just have to cross the 3 lanes of Nth Quay under the bridge. There is even a kerb ramp there to assist you. I watched plenty of cyclists do this on Saturday but there was very little car traffic and it was easy to get across. Different story in the week tho. It would be lovely if the bridge actually had a ramp to land you there but that would be a tall order. Coming back the other way from West End to the Centennial you find that Tank St is a No Entry but only for a very short section from where cyclists get off the bridge. You could ignore that or to be pedantic you can hop on the opposite footpath on Tank St for no more than about 10m and then get onto the two way part of Tank St via convenient driveways and head down to Nth Quay. This time you are pointing in the legal direction and can use the footpath or road. If there is no traffic you can shoot straight across Nth Quay onto the riverside footpath or you can frogger your way across the three lanes and come directly onto the ramp down to the Centennial as it has a kerb ramp to assist. You can also continue up the footpath on the law court side and use the bike crossing at Ann St and then double back a little on the footpath to access the ramp down to the Centennial. The footpath does get a bit crowded there with the courts and motorcycle parking in the area during the working week. Some BCC signage would be nice but I think they do not want to endorse that route as technically it probably breaks the current QRR unless they make it a proper bikeway /shared/separated path. A signalled bike crossing of Nth Quay at Tank St would be very nice as this could be synchronised with the Ann St signals and effectively not be any impost for car traffic on Nth Quay. Even a less imposing solution might be just a big Keep Clear zone across Nth Quay at Tank St so that bikes could ride across when traffic was stopped for the Ann St lights. In theory the traffic on Nth Quay is supposed to not queue across there anyway under the QRR as a T intersection is treated like any other in that respect. Of course Keep Clears mostly get ignored viz Miskin St at Toowong or any fire station exit but some flashing yellow warnings as sometimes used might be a cheap way out. Not sure if riders do dodge their way across there when Nth Quay traffic is stopped in peak times, will have to have a look. k kim wrote: > So how does one get from West End onto the Centennial Bikeway at North > Quay using the new bridge? I knew it was going to be a bit round about > but really, it seems impossible without getting onto the footpath > somewhere. > > The yellow brick road, or in this case the green pavement paint road > seems to get you to the KGS bike parking station and marginally to the > Roma St Parklands but nowhere else. > > If you come off the bridge and head up Tank St to George St, what's > the deal with turning left to go down George St to then go left again > down Herschel or Makerston St to get to the bikeway via the BAZ's on > those streets? It would seem that you are to turn left when you get > the green left turn arrow at George St but there are also left turning > cars in the Tank St car lane adjacent to the bike lane which is > dangerous as a turning cyclist will be slow to get up to speed and a > car rushing up Tank St to catch the green arrow onto George St may not > expect traffic on George St. > > So when you get down to North Quay you need to pedal all the way back > up to Adelaide St to be able to use the ride across facility there. > The Makerston St and Herschel St ramps to the bikeway are pedestrian > accessible only via the pedestrian crossings. > > You can't ride up George St the other way, directly to Adelaide St as > Adelaide St only allows a left turn at North Quay and the bike ride > over is on the other side of Adelaide St. > > If you use the Vic Bridge, you are no better off. It seems like the > Goodwill Bridge is the only connection from that side of town. > > Or is there some secret route I am missing? > > k > > _______________________________________________ > bikeqld mailing list > bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld > This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. > > From pharmer_kim at hotmail.com Sun Jan 17 06:26:20 2010 From: pharmer_kim at hotmail.com (kim) Date: Sun Jan 17 06:27:44 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] What some hipsters will do to make an impression...... Message-ID: http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/8562/p7110035js5.jpg From pharmer_kim at hotmail.com Mon Jan 18 00:00:14 2010 From: pharmer_kim at hotmail.com (kim) Date: Mon Jan 18 00:01:34 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Moggill Rd crossing at Indooroopilly In-Reply-To: References: <2F095E08-B4FA-4D7A-99AE-BCFDAFBED80F@ozemail.com.au> <264331.77901.qm@web62306.mail.re1.yahoo.com> <65145.19719.qm@web54501.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <5497D29B-D2D5-41A9-B68D-B971F3850F87@jamver.id.au> <004201ca929a$8c67c430$a5374c90$@com> <20100112013347.RCQJ1743.nschwotgx01p.mx.bigpond.com@yit01.yeatesit.biz> Message-ID: Ok finally got hold of someone in MR who knew a little about the changes at that crossing, but not a whole lot. The person involved was still on leave till the 27th. The person I spoke to had said that the request for a bicycle crossing had come from a 'bicycle group'. I presumed this to mean Bicycle Queensland. I asked if the job was finished and he said it was finished for now. I pointed out the futility of just adding the ride across at the lights and not the slip lanes. He claimed that it did allow the cyclists to 'ride a bit further', he did not see the ridiculousness of the dismount-mount-dismount-mount needed to ride this little extra. I asked if that is what was requested by the 'bicycle group' and he was a little hesitant to give details but did allude to a plan they had to put a bike crossing point a bit further up the slip lane. He claims that this was not done due to lack of funding and the fact that this whole intersection would be up for a change when the Toowong tunnel is started/finished. I could not pin him down on why the bike crossing of the slip lane would cost so much to make it not possible now. I gather they looked at widening the gap in the median strip which means knocking out some concrete edging - big deal. I pointed out that right now 99% of cyclists ride across now as it is safer and more expedient for the flow of traffic if they do not become pedestrians and have to step slowly and unsurely across in their cleats. I pointed out that aside from the narrow gap in the median, that the cyclists can ride clear of the marked crossing anyway. I pointed out that their were no signs on Moggill Rd warning cars of the cyclists crossing and MR were burying their heads in the sand to pretend all cyclists are dismounting and becoming pedestrians. I am wondering if BQ is happy with the outcome or whether they are still on the case or perhaps it was not even them that were involved. k From akayani at aapt.net.au Mon Jan 18 02:33:20 2010 From: akayani at aapt.net.au (Yani) Date: Mon Jan 18 02:33:48 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] BOB one week in Message-ID: <006201ca9818$e4302d00$ac908700$@aapt.net.au> Hi, Well here goes weeks 2 of BOB for me. All the feedback from here was processed. There have been some staff changes in all shops at the manager level in the last month. ;) The Kippa-Ring guys are doing 6am rides at Redcliffe on Sunday mornings. (Don't expect me to be there, GWAD 6am) All the info about that is on Facebook. Sign up in if you are on Facebook. Just search 'bums on bikes' and we come up. David Arnold is looking after Sundays but if you are looking at a new bike from us you can organise with Dave to have it available on Sunday for a test ride. Just say "Yani said you would do this for me". There are a couple of really good deals going. http://www.bumsonbikes.com.au/index.php Sigma BC1606 DTS Wireless -- $79.95 I'll price match any deal on that product. You just can't buy them cheaper as far as I know. Also BOB is getting out of all things Eddy Merchx. They were the distributor but someone else has that now. Basically they wanted BOB to hold more stock and it just wasn't worth the investment. So that is being replaced with Scott. All things Eddy must go. We cut prices by almost 50% but if you were interested I'm sure we could throw in a bike build or some other temper. It's a really great product and we will do anything to get it out of the warehouse to make space. If you are interested in any bike Eddy Merchx purchase send me a note and I'll see what we can do to swing the deal. Yani From kenzomtb at gmail.com Mon Jan 18 15:13:44 2010 From: kenzomtb at gmail.com (Ken) Date: Mon Jan 18 15:13:57 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Moggill Rd crossing at Indooroopilly In-Reply-To: References: <264331.77901.qm@web62306.mail.re1.yahoo.com> <65145.19719.qm@web54501.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <5497D29B-D2D5-41A9-B68D-B971F3850F87@jamver.id.au> <004201ca929a$8c67c430$a5374c90$@com> <20100112013347.RCQJ1743.nschwotgx01p.mx.bigpond.com@yit01.yeatesit.biz> Message-ID: <6d724de31001181313s4210c67bgde3f8d348593b304@mail.gmail.com> Throwing this into the ring... if 99% of cyclists ride across it now anyway, then what's the problem? The 1% of cyclists who walk and the 1% of them who might slip over in their cleats? Are you suggesting main roads need to invest more money and - as you say, "knock out some concrete edging" to cater for the clumsy few? As for signs warning about cyclists.... how far up Moggill Road are the signs warning about pedestrians? Do cyclists really need special warning signs? My view: the problem here is not the lack of a clear cyclist path, the problem is the law(s) which makes the path a requirement. Change the law .... and the path, the lights, the knocked off edging would all be moot. =============================================== On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 4:00 PM, kim wrote: > Ok finally got hold of someone in MR who knew a little about the changes at > that crossing, but not a whole lot. The person involved was still on leave > till the 27th. The person I spoke to had said that the request for a bicycle > crossing had come from a 'bicycle group'. I presumed this to mean Bicycle > Queensland. I asked if the job was finished and he said it was finished for > now. I pointed out the futility of just adding the ride across at the lights > and not the slip lanes. He claimed that it did allow the cyclists to 'ride a > bit further', he did not see the ridiculousness of the > dismount-mount-dismount-mount needed to ride this little extra. I asked if > that is what was requested by the 'bicycle group' and he was a little > hesitant to give details but did allude to a plan they had to put a bike > crossing point a bit further up the slip lane. He claims that this was not > done due to lack of funding and the fact that this whole intersection would > be up for a change when the Toowong tunnel is started/finished. I could not > pin him down on why the bike crossing of the slip lane would cost so much to > make it not possible now. I gather they looked at widening the gap in the > median strip which means knocking out some concrete edging - big deal. I > pointed out that right now 99% of cyclists ride across now as it is safer > and more expedient for the flow of traffic if they do not become pedestrians > and have to step slowly and unsurely across in their cleats. I pointed out > that aside from the narrow gap in the median, that the cyclists can ride > clear of the marked crossing anyway. I pointed out that their were no signs > on Moggill Rd warning cars of the cyclists crossing and MR were burying > their heads in the sand to pretend all cyclists are dismounting and becoming > pedestrians. > I am wondering if BQ is happy with the outcome or whether they are still on > the case or perhaps it was not even them that were involved. > > > k > > > _______________________________________________ > bikeqld mailing list > bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld > This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. > -- >From www.gcta.asn.au RESPECT Others Respect other visitors to the forest Expect someone may be around the next corner Slow to approach others Pass with care Everyone wants to enjoy the trails Control your speed Train when the trails are not busy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20100119/cc5095ce/attachment.htm From matt at people.net.au Mon Jan 18 17:07:03 2010 From: matt at people.net.au (Matt) Date: Mon Jan 18 17:07:22 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] BOB one week in Message-ID: <4447.1263856023@people.net.au> The only thing I've ever had that was Eddy Mercx was a pair of the Adidas cleats (Eddy Mercx Supers they were called and had the velcro flap that went over the laces). They were the MOST comfortable cleat I have ever owned (because they fit a W-I-D-E foot). Betcha there are none of those to be found anywhere because I would but them! On Mon 18/01/10 08:33 , "Yani" akayani@aapt.net.au sent: Hi, Well here goes weeks 2 of BOB for me. All the feedback from here was processed. There have been some staff changes in all shops at the manager level in the last month. ;) The Kippa-Ring guys are doing 6am rides at Redcliffe on Sunday mornings. (Don't expect me to be there, GWAD 6am) All the info about that is on Facebook. Sign up in if you are on Facebook. Just search 'bums on bikes' and we come up. David Arnold is looking after Sundays but if you are looking at a new bike from us you can organise with Dave to have it available on Sunday for a test ride. Just say "Yani said you would do this for me". There are a couple of really good deals going. http://www.bumsonbikes.com.au/index.php [1]">http://www.bumsonbikes.com.au/index.php Sigma BC1606 DTS Wireless -- $79.95 I'll price match any deal on that product. You just can't buy them cheaper as far as I know. Also BOB is getting out of all things Eddy Merchx. They were the distributor but someone else has that now. Basically they wanted BOB to hold more stock and it just wasn't worth the investment. So that is being replaced with Scott. All things Eddy must go. We cut prices by almost 50% but if you were interested I'm sure we could throw in a bike build or some other temper. It's a really great product and we will do anything to get it out of the warehouse to make space. If you are interested in any bike Eddy Merchx purchase send me a note and I'll see what we can do to swing the deal. Yani _______________________________________________ bikeqld mailing list bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ [2]">http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld [3]">http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. Links: ------ [1] http://www.bumsonbikes.com.au/index.php [2] http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ [3] http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20100118/8385cf2c/attachment.htm From pharmer_kim at hotmail.com Mon Jan 18 17:39:46 2010 From: pharmer_kim at hotmail.com (kim) Date: Mon Jan 18 17:41:23 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Moggill Rd crossing at Indooroopilly In-Reply-To: <6d724de31001181313s4210c67bgde3f8d348593b304@mail.gmail.com> References: <264331.77901.qm@web62306.mail.re1.yahoo.com> <65145.19719.qm@web54501.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <5497D29B-D2D5-41A9-B68D-B971F3850F87@jamver.id.au> <004201ca929a$8c67c430$a5374c90$@com> <20100112013347.RCQJ1743.nschwotgx01p.mx.bigpond.com@yit01.yeatesit.biz> <6d724de31001181313s4210c67bgde3f8d348593b304@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20100119/b9139572/attachment.htm From list-bikeqld at lister.dnsalias.net Mon Jan 18 17:56:57 2010 From: list-bikeqld at lister.dnsalias.net (Ian Lister) Date: Mon Jan 18 17:57:43 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Moggill Rd crossing at Indooroopilly In-Reply-To: References: <2F095E08-B4FA-4D7A-99AE-BCFDAFBED80F@ozemail.com.au> <264331.77901.qm@web62306.mail.re1.yahoo.com> <65145.19719.qm@web54501.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <5497D29B-D2D5-41A9-B68D-B971F3850F87@jamver.id.au> <004201ca929a$8c67c430$a5374c90$@com> <20100112013347.RCQJ1743.nschwotgx01p.mx.bigpond.com@yit01.yeatesit.biz> Message-ID: <20100119095417.Y6325@singha.lister.id.au> On Mon, 18 Jan 2010, kim wrote: > Ok finally got hold of someone in MR who knew a little about the changes at > that crossing, but not a whole lot. The person involved was still on leave > till the 27th. The person I spoke to had said that the request for a bicycle > crossing had come from a 'bicycle group'. I presumed this to mean Bicycle > Queensland. [snip] I suspect it was probably CBD BUG's request: http://www.cbdbug.org.au/corroMoggillRdMainRoads20090403.pdf Cheers, Ian From peter.whittle at qut.edu.au Mon Jan 18 18:50:50 2010 From: peter.whittle at qut.edu.au (Peter Whittle) Date: Mon Jan 18 18:51:18 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Moggill Rd crossing at Indooroopilly In-Reply-To: <6d724de31001181313s4210c67bgde3f8d348593b304@mail.gmail.com> References: <264331.77901.qm@web62306.mail.re1.yahoo.com> <65145.19719.qm@web54501.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <5497D29B-D2D5-41A9-B68D-B971F3850F87@jamver.id.au> <004201ca929a$8c67c430$a5374c90$@com> <20100112013347.RCQJ1743.nschwotgx01p.mx.bigpond.com@yit01.yeatesit.biz> <6d724de31001181313s4210c67bgde3f8d348593b304@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Haha, good point. We read recently that road speed limits are set by the speed 80% of motorists do :) From: bikeqld-bounces@bikeqld.org.au [mailto:bikeqld-bounces@bikeqld.org.au] On Behalf Of Ken Sent: Tuesday, 19 January 2010 7:14 AM To: kim Cc: BikeQld Subject: Re: [bikeqld] Moggill Rd crossing at Indooroopilly Throwing this into the ring... if 99% of cyclists ride across it now anyway, then what's the problem? The 1% of cyclists who walk and the 1% of them who might slip over in their cleats? Are you suggesting main roads need to invest more money and - as you say, "knock out some concrete edging" to cater for the clumsy few? As for signs warning about cyclists.... how far up Moggill Road are the signs warning about pedestrians? Do cyclists really need special warning signs? My view: the problem here is not the lack of a clear cyclist path, the problem is the law(s) which makes the path a requirement. Change the law .... and the path, the lights, the knocked off edging would all be moot. =============================================== On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 4:00 PM, kim > wrote: Ok finally got hold of someone in MR who knew a little about the changes at that crossing, but not a whole lot. The person involved was still on leave till the 27th. The person I spoke to had said that the request for a bicycle crossing had come from a 'bicycle group'. I presumed this to mean Bicycle Queensland. I asked if the job was finished and he said it was finished for now. I pointed out the futility of just adding the ride across at the lights and not the slip lanes. He claimed that it did allow the cyclists to 'ride a bit further', he did not see the ridiculousness of the dismount-mount-dismount-mount needed to ride this little extra. I asked if that is what was requested by the 'bicycle group' and he was a little hesitant to give details but did allude to a plan they had to put a bike crossing point a bit further up the slip lane. He claims that this was not done due to lack of funding and the fact that this whole intersection would be up for a change when the Toowong tunnel is started/finished. I could not pin him down on why the bike crossing of the slip lane would cost so much to make it not possible now. I gather they looked at widening the gap in the median strip which means knocking out some concrete edging - big deal. I pointed out that right now 99% of cyclists ride across now as it is safer and more expedient for the flow of traffic if they do not become pedestrians and have to step slowly and unsurely across in their cleats. I pointed out that aside from the narrow gap in the median, that the cyclists can ride clear of the marked crossing anyway. I pointed out that their were no signs on Moggill Rd warning cars of the cyclists crossing and MR were burying their heads in the sand to pretend all cyclists are dismounting and becoming pedestrians. I am wondering if BQ is happy with the outcome or whether they are still on the case or perhaps it was not even them that were involved. k _______________________________________________ bikeqld mailing list bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. -- >From www.gcta.asn.au RESPECT Others Respect other visitors to the forest Expect someone may be around the next corner Slow to approach others Pass with care Everyone wants to enjoy the trails Control your speed Train when the trails are not busy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20100119/09a45472/attachment.htm From pharmer_kim at hotmail.com Mon Jan 18 19:23:00 2010 From: pharmer_kim at hotmail.com (kim) Date: Mon Jan 18 19:24:38 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Moggill Rd crossing at Indooroopilly In-Reply-To: <20100119095417.Y6325@singha.lister.id.au> References: <2F095E08-B4FA-4D7A-99AE-BCFDAFBED80F@ozemail.com.au> <264331.77901.qm@web62306.mail.re1.yahoo.com> <65145.19719.qm@web54501.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <5497D29B-D2D5-41A9-B68D-B971F3850F87@jamver.id.au> <004201ca929a$8c67c430$a5374c90$@com> <20100112013347.RCQJ1743.nschwotgx01p.mx.bigpond.com@yit01.yeatesit.biz> <20100119095417.Y6325@singha.lister.id.au> Message-ID: Thanks too Ian, That letter from CBD BUG looks like it might have been what prompted MR's attention. My assumption that BQ might have taken up the case was probably then wrong. Good on the CBD BUG for taking up the issue with MR. It seems that the BUGs are doing the lion's share of the advocacy for cyclists. I would have hoped that such a major commuter bikeway and what is a more universal problem in Bris (that of the not riding across crossings despite footpaths being shared paths) might have attracted some interest from BQ. What's CBD BUG's view on the outcome? MR did say something occurred just before Christmas, not sure if he meant a complaint or that was when the lights were put up. I think that in the letter the mere mention that the zebra crossings might be more of a problem and asking MR is they had any ideas was a bit of a way out for MR. There was always the option of removing the zebra crossings as pedestrians still have priority there; that was not suggested nor was the idea of making provision beside the zebra or even narrowing the zebra to achieve this, all possibilities. I think that they might be there simply by some policy that it is an intersection/interchange with a motorway rather than because of the number of pedestrians expected. You might think that if they were indeed placed there for dismounted cyclists that now they would make them into mounted cyclists crossings under the same rationale. There are slip-ons and slip-offs further along Moggill that notably don't have zebra crossings which have more actual pedestrian use. Places such as Taringa Pde by the school rightfully have zebras on the slip lanes on and off. It was a gallant suggestion tho, in these harsh financial times to say the BUG supported a nice cycle bridge there after MR just forked out some $20m on the Toowong bridge which might get buggered by the tunnel :) k Ian Lister wrote: > On Mon, 18 Jan 2010, kim wrote: >> Ok finally got hold of someone in MR who knew a little about the >> changes at that crossing, but not a whole lot. The person involved >> was still on leave till the 27th. The person I spoke to had said that >> the request for a bicycle crossing had come from a 'bicycle group'. I >> presumed this to mean Bicycle Queensland. > [snip] > > I suspect it was probably CBD BUG's request: > > http://www.cbdbug.org.au/corroMoggillRdMainRoads20090403.pdf > > Cheers, > > Ian > > _______________________________________________ > bikeqld mailing list > bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld > This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. > > From michael at yeatesit.biz Mon Jan 18 23:09:34 2010 From: michael at yeatesit.biz (Michael Yeates) Date: Mon Jan 18 23:09:47 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Moggill Rd crossing at Indooroopilly In-Reply-To: References: <264331.77901.qm@web62306.mail.re1.yahoo.com> <65145.19719.qm@web54501.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <5497D29B-D2D5-41A9-B68D-B971F3850F87@jamver.id.au> <004201ca929a$8c67c430$a5374c90$@com> <20100112013347.RCQJ1743.nschwotgx01p.mx.bigpond.com@yit01.yeatesit.biz> <6d724de31001181313s4210c67bgde3f8d348593b304@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20100119050920.QNUR5111.nschwotgx03p.mx.bigpond.com@yit01.yeatesit.biz> Pete ... It is "worse" (?) than 80% ... its actually 85% ...! So presumably if 99% don't obey, then the facility should be changed ... ! But NOT the rule because there are many other seemingly "similar" circumstances where (as with traffic speed) the rule may be right or wrong depending on context. Here at Indro, it is clear that peds need a high visibility and high priority pedestrian crossing ie zebras, if only to encourage the school kids and the occasional pedestrians. MY............... At 10:50 AM 19/01/2010, Peter Whittle wrote: >Content-Language: en-US >Content-Type: multipart/alternative; > >boundary="_000_EC61BDEE23F3A248AB0266765F653F8906201277C5QUTEXMBX03qut_" > >Haha, good point. We read recently that road speed limits are set by >the speed 80% of motorists do J > >From: bikeqld-bounces@bikeqld.org.au >[mailto:bikeqld-bounces@bikeqld.org.au] On Behalf Of Ken >Sent: Tuesday, 19 January 2010 7:14 AM >To: kim >Cc: BikeQld >Subject: Re: [bikeqld] Moggill Rd crossing at Indooroopilly > >Throwing this into the ring... > >if 99% of cyclists ride across it now anyway, then what's the >problem? The 1% of cyclists who walk and the 1% of them who might >slip over in their cleats? > >Are you suggesting main roads need to invest more money and - as you >say, "knock out some concrete edging" to cater for the clumsy few? > >As for signs warning about cyclists.... how far up Moggill Road are >the signs warning about pedestrians? Do cyclists really need special >warning signs? > > >My view: the problem here is not the lack of a clear cyclist path, >the problem is the law(s) which makes the path a requirement. Change >the law .... and the path, the lights, the knocked off edging would >all be moot. > > > >=============================================== >On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 4:00 PM, kim ><pharmer_kim@hotmail.com> wrote: >Ok finally got hold of someone in MR who knew a little about the >changes at that crossing, but not a whole lot. The person involved >was still on leave till the 27th. The person I spoke to had said >that the request for a bicycle crossing had come from a 'bicycle >group'. I presumed this to mean Bicycle Queensland. I asked if the >job was finished and he said it was finished for now. I pointed out >the futility of just adding the ride across at the lights and not >the slip lanes. He claimed that it did allow the cyclists to 'ride a >bit further', he did not see the ridiculousness of the >dismount-mount-dismount-mount needed to ride this little extra. I >asked if that is what was requested by the 'bicycle group' and he >was a little hesitant to give details but did allude to a plan they >had to put a bike crossing point a bit further up the slip lane. He >claims that this was not done due to lack of funding and the fact >that this whole intersection would be up for a change when the >Toowong tunnel is started/finished. I could not pin him down on why >the bike crossing of the slip lane would cost so much to make it not >possible now. I gather they looked at widening the gap in the median >strip which means knocking out some concrete edging - big deal. I >pointed out that right now 99% of cyclists ride across now as it is >safer and more expedient for the flow of traffic if they do not >become pedestrians and have to step slowly and unsurely across in >their cleats. I pointed out that aside from the narrow gap in the >median, that the cyclists can ride clear of the marked crossing >anyway. I pointed out that their were no signs on Moggill Rd warning >cars of the cyclists crossing and MR were burying their heads in the >sand to pretend all cyclists are dismounting and becoming pedestrians. >I am wondering if BQ is happy with the outcome or whether they are >still on the case or perhaps it was not even them that were involved. > > >k > > >_______________________________________________ >bikeqld mailing list >bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au >http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ >http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld >This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. > > > >-- > >From www.gcta.asn.au >RESPECT Others >Respect other visitors to the forest >Expect someone may be around the next corner >Slow to approach others >Pass with care >Everyone wants to enjoy the trails >Control your speed >Train when the trails are not busy >_______________________________________________ >bikeqld mailing list >bikeqld@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: 9.0.730 / Virus Database: 270.14.149/2631 - Release Date: >01/19/10 02:56:00 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20100119/365b8c91/attachment-0001.htm From pharmer_kim at hotmail.com Tue Jan 19 04:29:26 2010 From: pharmer_kim at hotmail.com (kim) Date: Tue Jan 19 04:30:49 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Moggill Rd crossing at Indooroopilly In-Reply-To: <20100119050920.QNUR5111.nschwotgx03p.mx.bigpond.com@yit01.yeatesit.biz> References: <264331.77901.qm@web62306.mail.re1.yahoo.com> <65145.19719.qm@web54501.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <5497D29B-D2D5-41A9-B68D-B971F3850F87@jamver.id.au> <004201ca929a$8c67c430$a5374c90$@com> <20100112013347.RCQJ1743.nschwotgx01p.mx.bigpond.com@yit01.yeatesit.biz> <6d724de31001181313s4210c67bgde3f8d348593b304@mail.gmail.com> <20100119050920.QNUR5111.nschwotgx03p.mx.bigpond.com@yit01.yeatesit.biz> Message-ID: I think that in both MR/QT and BCC design centres, cyclists being regarded as lesser forms of life, probably means we don't even get considered with that 80% (85%) rule in mind. Look at the 10kph limits BCC have put on their separated bikeway at 'Roo Pt. Supposedly a new extension to that coming soon (or already), wonder if that state-of-art design can accommodate better than 10kph speed? Same goes for the recent bridges and their 10 kph limit. Now what percentage of cyclists would normally go at 10kph or less in those places? Probably closer to 1% and that is being generous. So Pete might be onto something here. Perhaps that while they aim to please 80-85% of motorists, the figure that they aim to please though for cyclists is that magic 1%. I have no problems with the need for zebras if there is a genuine need for the peds sake but I have my doubts that they were needed for pedestrians (other than dismounted cyclists) in this instance. I don't even think that there is a pedestrian crossing or lights across the rest of the entry to the motorway south at this point where pedestrians might come from the direction of Kenmore along the footpath. It really does not look geared up for pedestrians at all and the generators are not apparent to me either. I am sure they must have an objective process to make that determination tho. k Michael Yeates wrote: > Pete ... > > It is "worse" (?) than 80% ... its actually 85% ...! > > So presumably if 99% don't obey, then the facility should be changed ... ! > > But NOT the rule because there are many other seemingly "similar" > circumstances where (as with traffic speed) the rule may be right or > wrong depending on context. > > Here at Indro, it is clear that peds need a high visibility and high > priority pedestrian crossing ie zebras, if only to encourage the > school kids and the occasional pedestrians. > > MY............... > > At 10:50 AM 19/01/2010, Peter Whittle wrote: > From pharmer_kim at hotmail.com Tue Jan 19 04:36:01 2010 From: pharmer_kim at hotmail.com (kim) Date: Tue Jan 19 04:37:14 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Ergonomic seats - was (no subject) In-Reply-To: <3635.1257371669@people.net.au> References: <3635.1257371669@people.net.au> Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20100119/c9213f29/attachment.htm From cameraperson at bigpond.com Tue Jan 19 20:34:43 2010 From: cameraperson at bigpond.com (Michael Fanning) Date: Tue Jan 19 20:34:58 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Armstrong Down Under Message-ID: <2D2D46D1-30AF-4080-858E-1C09FFBD0433@bigpond.com> Armstrong in Oz: mountains of money and hoardes of ?yes men? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20100120/a63a704b/attachment.htm From craig.d.brown at gmail.com Wed Jan 20 13:54:19 2010 From: craig.d.brown at gmail.com (Craig Brown) Date: Wed Jan 20 13:54:31 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] King George Square Cycle Centre - Shower for Casual Visitor now $8 Message-ID: <2907821f1001201154v20c986e5lfd6be478f6653835@mail.gmail.com> I'm based in the city for a couple of months, and decided to take the opportunity and get some mid-week commute/training rides in, making use of the King George Square Cycle Centre for a shower afterwards (I have a secure place for my bike during the day). The cost was initially $5 (which, although dear, I could wear) but I was immediately informed that the price would be going to $8 at the end of January on the basis of towel and laundry costs Well, the end of January came early this year and they attempted to charge me $8. So, a quick heads up to anyone planning to use the centre, showers for casual visitors are now $8. The centre is actually run by a contractor on behalf of council. Anyone got any suggestions for shower locations in the CBD? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20100121/a147e6a9/attachment.htm From doctorw1963 at yahoo.com.au Wed Jan 20 15:31:56 2010 From: doctorw1963 at yahoo.com.au (Anthony Lee) Date: Wed Jan 20 15:32:11 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] King George Square Cycle Centre - Shower for Casual Visitor now $8 In-Reply-To: <2907821f1001201154v20c986e5lfd6be478f6653835@mail.gmail.com> References: <2907821f1001201154v20c986e5lfd6be478f6653835@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <170937.97237.qm@web54506.mail.re2.yahoo.com> I presumed it is more expensive with Fitness First on Hershel St? Anthony Lee The Doctor -- the last of the Time Lords? ........-- __o ....-- _ \<,_ ........(_) / (_) E-Mail: doctorw1963@yahoo.com.au ________________________________ From: Craig Brown To: bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au Sent: Thu, 21 January, 2010 5:54:19 AM Subject: [bikeqld] King George Square Cycle Centre - Shower for Casual Visitor now $8 I'm based in the city for a couple of months, and decided to take the opportunity and get some mid-week commute/training rides in, making use of the King George Square Cycle Centre for a shower afterwards (I have a secure place for my bike during the day). The cost was initially $5 (which, although dear, I could wear) but I was immediately informed that the price would be going to $8 at the end of January on the basis of towel and laundry costs Well, the end of January came early this year and they attempted to charge me $8. So, a quick heads up to anyone planning to use the centre, showers for casual visitors are now $8. The centre is actually run by a contractor on behalf of council. Anyone got any suggestions for shower locations in the CBD? __________________________________________________________________________________ See what's on at the movies in your area. Find out now: http://au.movies.yahoo.com/session-times/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20100120/bec96a96/attachment.htm From cameraperson at bigpond.com Wed Jan 20 15:48:03 2010 From: cameraperson at bigpond.com (Michael Fanning) Date: Wed Jan 20 15:48:20 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] In today's Fairfax media Message-ID: <8CF1B7AF-5FF4-4F00-A42F-B2DD59E359F3@bigpond.com> Why I ride my bicycle, despite the road rage -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20100121/55dcf1d1/attachment.htm From matt at people.net.au Wed Jan 20 16:14:07 2010 From: matt at people.net.au (Matt) Date: Wed Jan 20 16:14:37 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] King George Square Cycle Centre - Shower for CasualVisitor now $8 Message-ID: <4691.1264025647@people.net.au> Are there showers near the Kodak Pool (or whatever it is called) over at Southbank? On Wed 20/01/10 21:31 , "Anthony Lee" doctorw1963@yahoo.com.au sent: I presumed it is more expensive with Fitness First on Hershel St? ?Anthony Lee The Doctor -- the last of the Time Lords? ........-- __o ....-- _ Find out now._______________________________________________ bikeqld mailing list bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ [2]">http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld [3]">http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. Links: ------ [1] http://au.movies.yahoo.com/session-times/ [2] http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ [3] http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20100120/f6eda494/attachment.htm From doctorw1963 at yahoo.com.au Wed Jan 20 17:32:34 2010 From: doctorw1963 at yahoo.com.au (Anthony Lee) Date: Wed Jan 20 17:33:02 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] King George Square Cycle Centre - Shower for CasualVisitor now $8 In-Reply-To: <4691.1264025647@people.net.au> References: <4691.1264025647@people.net.au> Message-ID: <163244.34880.qm@web54507.mail.re2.yahoo.com> I don't know why some enterprising hotels don't take advantage of this. Hilton on Elizabeth St has gym. They could easy let people use the shower there for a fee! May BQ or CDB-Bug could organise something? Anthony Lee The Doctor -- the last of the Time Lords? ........-- __o ....-- _ \<,_ ........(_) / (_) E-Mail: doctorw1963@yahoo.com.au ________________________________ From: Matt To: bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au; Anthony Lee Sent: Thu, 21 January, 2010 8:14:07 AM Subject: Re: [bikeqld] King George Square Cycle Centre - Shower for CasualVisitor now $8 Are there showers near the Kodak Pool (or whatever it is called) over at Southbank? On Wed 20/01/10 21:31 , "Anthony Lee" doctorw1963@yahoo.com.au sent: I presumed it is more expensive with Fitness First on Hershel St? > > Anthony Lee >>The Doctor -- the last of the Time Lords? >>........-- __o >>....-- _ \<,_ >>........(_) / (_) >>E-Mail: doctorw1963@yahoo.com.au > > > > > ________________________________ From: Craig Brown >To: bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au >Sent: Thu, 21 January, 2010 5:54:19 AM >Subject: [bikeqld] King > George Square Cycle Centre - Shower for Casual Visitor now $8 > >>I'm based in the city for a couple of months, and decided to take the opportunity and get some mid-week commute/training rides in, making use of the King George Square Cycle Centre for a shower afterwards (I have a secure place for my bike during the day). The cost was initially $5 (which, although dear, I could wear) but I was immediately informed that the price would be going to $8 at the end of January on the basis of towel and laundry costs > >>Well, the end of January came early this year and they attempted to charge me $8. So, a quick heads up to anyone planning to use the centre, showers for casual visitors are now $8. > >>The centre is actually run by a contractor on behalf of council. > >>Anyone got any suggestions for shower locations in the CBD? > >________________________________ >See what's on at the movies in your area. http://au.movies.yahoo.com/session-times/" target="_blank">Find out now._______________________________________________ >> >bikeqld mailing list >bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au >http://www.bikeqld.org.au/">http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ >http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld">http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld >> >This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. > > __________________________________________________________________________________ See what's on at the movies in your area. Find out now: http://au.movies.yahoo.com/session-times/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20100120/bd339a3d/attachment-0001.htm From ben at ultramotive.com.au Wed Jan 20 18:02:41 2010 From: ben at ultramotive.com.au (Ben Guymer) Date: Wed Jan 20 18:03:00 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] King George Square Cycle Centre - Shower for CasualVisitor now $8 In-Reply-To: <163244.34880.qm@web54507.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <4691.1264025647@people.net.au> <163244.34880.qm@web54507.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4B5799A1.9020209@ultramotive.com.au> Hi, well I took my bike into town one evening and couldn't even find the King george square cycle centre ?! Is it not in king George Square? So I chained it to a post in Albert st instead :( Ben Anthony Lee wrote: > I don't know why some enterprising hotels don't take advantage of > this. Hilton on Elizabeth St has gym. They > could easy let people use the shower there for a fee! May BQ or > CDB-Bug could organise something? > > Anthony Lee > The Doctor -- the last of the Time Lords? > ........-- __o > ....-- _ \<,_ > ........(_) / (_) > E-Mail: doctorw1963@yahoo.com.au > > > *From:* Matt > *To:* bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au; Anthony Lee > *Sent:* Thu, 21 January, 2010 8:14:07 AM > *Subject:* Re: [bikeqld] King George Square Cycle Centre - Shower for > CasualVisitor now $8 > > Are there showers near the Kodak Pool (or whatever it is called) over > at Southbank? > > > > On Wed 20/01/10 21:31 , "Anthony Lee" doctorw1963@yahoo.com.au sent: > > I presumed it is more expensive with Fitness First on Hershel St? > > Anthony Lee > The Doctor -- the last of the Time Lords? > ........-- __o > ....-- _ \<,_ > ........(_) / (_) > E-Mail: doctorw1963@yahoo.com.au > > > From: Craig Brown > To: bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au > Sent: Thu, 21 January, 2010 5:54:19 AM > Subject: [bikeqld] King George Square Cycle Centre - Shower for > Casual Visitor now $8 > > I'm based in the city for a couple of months, and decided to take > the opportunity and get some mid-week commute/training rides in, > making use of the King George Square Cycle Centre for a shower > afterwards (I have a secure place for my bike during the day). > The cost was initially $5 (which, although dear, I could wear) but > I was immediately informed that the price would be going to $8 at > the end of January on the basis of towel and laundry costs > > Well, the end of January came early this year and they attempted > to charge me $8. So, a quick heads up to anyone planning to use > the centre, showers for casual visitors are now $8. > > The centre is actually run by a contractor on behalf of council. > > Anyone got any suggestions for shower locations in the CBD? > > See what's on at the movies in your area. > http://au.movies.yahoo.com/session-times/ > " > target="_blank">Find out > now._______________________________________________ > bikeqld mailing list > bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/">http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld">http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld > This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. > > > See what's on at the movies in your area. Find out now > . > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > bikeqld mailing list > bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld > This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. -- Ben Guymer RPEQ Ultramotive Technologies P/L 5 / 148 Tennyson Memorial Drive Tennyson Q 4105 Ph. +617-3217 1175 Mob.:0414 759 907 Fx. +617-3217 1165 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20100121/1b0a7130/attachment.htm From doctorw1963 at yahoo.com.au Wed Jan 20 18:13:53 2010 From: doctorw1963 at yahoo.com.au (Anthony Lee) Date: Wed Jan 20 18:14:07 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] King George Square Cycle Centre - Shower for CasualVisitor now $8 In-Reply-To: <4B5799A1.9020209@ultramotive.com.au> References: <4691.1264025647@people.net.au> <163244.34880.qm@web54507.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <4B5799A1.9020209@ultramotive.com.au> Message-ID: <184392.68904.qm@web54504.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Oh, I know the cycle centre must be like Control (i.e. Get Smart), you need to find a phone booth and dial in. Only problem is with mobile phones, there are fewer phone booths. The cycle centre is really like Control, they are both under ground aren't they :-)? So much for promoting cycling. Must be same reasoning for increasing public transport fare. Do tell us if you manage to find it :-). Anthony Lee The Doctor -- the last of the Time Lords? ........-- __o ....-- _ \<,_ ........(_) / (_) E-Mail: doctorw1963@yahoo.com.au ________________________________ From: Ben Guymer Cc: bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au Sent: Thu, 21 January, 2010 10:02:41 AM Subject: Re: [bikeqld] King George Square Cycle Centre - Shower for CasualVisitor now $8 Hi, well I took my bike into town one evening and couldn't even find the King george square cycle centre ?! Is it not in king George Square? So I chained it to a post in Albert st instead :( Ben Anthony Lee wrote: > >I don't know why some enterprising hotels don't take advantage >of this. Hilton on Elizabeth St has gym. They >>could easy let people use the shower there for a fee! May BQ or CDB-Bug >could organise something? > > >Anthony Lee >>The Doctor -- the last of the Time Lords? >>........-- __o >>....-- _ \<,_ >>........(_) / (_) >>E-Mail: doctorw1963@yahoo.com.au > > > > >From: Matt >To: bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au; Anthony Lee > >Sent: Thu, 21 January, 2010 8:14:07 AM >Subject: Re: [bikeqld] King George Square Cycle >Centre - Shower for CasualVisitor now $8 > >>Are there showers near the Kodak Pool (or whatever it is called) over >at Southbank? > > > >On Wed 20/01/10 21:31 , "Anthony Lee" doctorw1963@yahoo.com.au >sent: > >I presumed it is more expensive with Fitness First on Hershel >>St? >> >> >>Anthony Lee >>>>The Doctor -- the last of the Time Lords? >>>>........-- __o >>>>....-- _ \<,_ >>>>........(_) / (_) >>>>E-Mail: doctorw1963@yahoo.com.au >> >> >> >> >>From: Craig Brown >>To: bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au >>Sent: Thu, 21 January, 2010 5:54:19 AM >>Subject: [bikeqld] King George Square Cycle Centre - >>Shower for Casual Visitor now $8 >> >>>>I'm based in the city for a couple of months, and decided to take the >>opportunity and get some mid-week commute/training rides in, making use >>of the King George Square Cycle Centre for a shower afterwards (I have >>a secure place for my bike during the day). The cost was initially $5 >>(which, although dear, I could wear) but I was immediately informed >>that the price would be going to $8 at the end of January on the basis >>of towel and laundry costs >> >>>>Well, the end of January came early this year and they attempted to >>charge me $8. So, a quick heads up to anyone planning to use the >>centre, showers for casual visitors are now $8. >> >>>>The centre is actually run by a contractor on behalf of council. >> >>>>Anyone got any suggestions for shower locations in the CBD? >> >>>>See what's on at the movies in your area. http://au.movies.yahoo.com/session-times/" >>target="_blank">Find out >>now._______________________________________________ >>>>bikeqld mailing list >>bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au >>http://www.bikeqld.org.au/">http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ >>http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld">http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld >>>>This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. >> >> >>See what's on at the movies in your area. Find >out now. > > ________________________________ >_______________________________________________ >bikeqld mailing list >bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld >This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. -- Ben Guymer RPEQ Ultramotive Technologies P/L 5 / 148 Tennyson Memorial Drive Tennyson Q 4105 Ph. +617-3217 1175 Mob.:0414 759 907 Fx. +617-3217 1165 __________________________________________________________________________________ See what's on at the movies in your area. Find out now: http://au.movies.yahoo.com/session-times/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20100120/58475e33/attachment.htm From matt at people.net.au Wed Jan 20 18:23:21 2010 From: matt at people.net.au (Matt) Date: Wed Jan 20 18:23:19 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] King George Square Cycle Centre - Showerfor CasualVisitor now $8 Message-ID: <2568.1264033401@people.net.au> I know what you mean - I only found it by accident one day (I don't need to use it because my building has lots of bike racks and a shower/locker room in the carpark). I don't know if there is more than one entrance either but if you know where the entrance to the northern busway is just to the west of the Turbot St overpass (across Roma St road from the new courthouse building (the one with the squashed worm sculpture over on George St) - look for a green path that seems to disappear down into the never-never somewhere under the overpass.? If you find the bus terminus that is opposite King George Square over Ann St, you have gone past it. $8 for a shower is theft. People are going to be upset if I leave where I work.... I brought in my own stationery cabinet for my locker as well as a couple of banks of lockers that were sitting behind the shed.? I get the luxurious one but everyone else gets the others from free (locks supplied).? Better than leaving them out the back to rust. On Thu 21/01/10 00:02 , "Ben Guymer" ben@ultramotive.com.au sent: Hi, ??? well I took my bike into town one evening and couldn't even find the King george square cycle centre ?!? Is it not in king George Square?? So I chained it to a post in Albert st instead :(? Ben Anthony Lee wrote: I don't know why some enterprising hotels don't take advantage of this. Hilton on Elizabeth St has gym. They could easy let people use the shower there for a fee! May BQ or CDB-Bug could organise something? ? Anthony Lee The Doctor -- the last of the Time Lords? ........-- __o ....-- _ http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ [2] http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld">http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld [3] This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. See what's on at the movies in your area. http://au.movies.yahoo.com/session-times/ [4]">Find out now. ------------------------- _______________________________________________ bikeqld?mailing?list bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld This?list?has?NO?affiliation?with?Bicycle?Queensland. --? Ben?Guymer RPEQ Ultramotive?Technologies?P/L 5?/?148?Tennyson?Memorial?Drive Tennyson?Q?4105 Ph.?+617-3217?1175 Mob.:0414?759?907 Fx.?+617-3217?1165 _______________________________________________ bikeqld mailing list bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ [5]">http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld [6]">http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. Links: ------ [1] http://au.rd.yahoo.com/movies/mailtagline/*%3Ca%20href= [2] http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ [3] http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld [4] http://au.movies.yahoo.com/session-times/ [5] http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ [6] http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20100121/c85f88e7/attachment-0001.htm From b.wagner at ozemail.com.au Sun Jan 24 02:34:08 2010 From: b.wagner at ozemail.com.au (Bob Wagner) Date: Sun Jan 24 02:38:31 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Tour Down Under Message-ID: Here is a thought! Lets just replace the Indy at the GC with something like the Tour Down Under. Think of all the fuel, alcohol and noise that would be saved. Although it would be replace with Coffee and Gatorade. Bob Wagner b.wagner@ozemail.com.au From pharmer_kim at hotmail.com Sun Jan 24 06:56:18 2010 From: pharmer_kim at hotmail.com (kim) Date: Sun Jan 24 06:57:41 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Tour Down Under In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Makes good sense Bob, I wish the NSW Gov had better sense to do something like that rather than all these car races they have signed up for. We have this World Rally Championship here for 20 years - cars blasting through Northern NSW National Parks - crazy - same Gov is promoting this place as the Green Cauldron. Bob Wagner wrote: > Here is a thought! > > Lets just replace the Indy at the GC with something like the Tour Down > Under. > Think of all the fuel, alcohol and noise that would be saved. Although it > would be replace with Coffee and Gatorade. > > > Bob Wagner > b.wagner@ozemail.com.au > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > bikeqld mailing list > bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld > This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. > > From xdollarfuel at yahoo.com.au Tue Jan 26 00:31:42 2010 From: xdollarfuel at yahoo.com.au (mich rolling) Date: Tue Jan 26 00:31:58 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Truck under-run guards a probably highly cost effective safety measure Message-ID: <707130.69957.qm@web44807.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> A few years ago London (the big one, not the Canadian version) moved to require all trucks to mount these underrun guards. I don't think they carried through but they are required in parts of Europe. The idea is so simple and obvious that it is amazing that Australia does not require them. How many fatal road crashes involve a smaller vehicle or bike running under the tray of a semi or large rigid truck? Actually the work has been done and draft design rules drawn up ( http://www.monash.edu.au/muarc/reports/muarc194.html ) but not applied by governments. Can't be because all trucks need to have high clearance to get into outback cattle yards. Cost can't be that much. Several big fuel distributors have them on their tankers and claim increased aerodynamic efficiency justifies them. Come on Bicycle Queensland, have a go! RACQ might even join you. Side-underrun guards will be installed on the City of Portland?s truck fleet. (Photo: PDOT) http://bikeportland.org/2008/01/10/water-bureau-makes-wheeler-ave-closure-official/ http://www.underridenetwork.org/ __________________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo!7: Catch-up on your favourite Channel 7 TV shows easily, legally, and for free at PLUS7.. www.tv.yahoo.com.au/plus7 From xdollarfuel at yahoo.com.au Tue Jan 26 01:04:26 2010 From: xdollarfuel at yahoo.com.au (mich rolling) Date: Tue Jan 26 01:11:32 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Truck under-run guards a probably highly cost effective safety measure Message-ID: <176093.98773.qm@web44816.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> In fact truck underrun side guards are not cost-effective in Australia - it is cheaper to kill or maim cyclists and pedestrians that get between the front and rear wheels than to pay the $1000 per truck/trailer that side protetion costs http://www.comlaw.gov.au/comlaw/Legislation/LegislativeInstrument1.nsf/0/6FAC2CDDEF0DB20DCA2576380021AD31/$file/ADR84RIS.pdf Even very lightweigt fibreglass side panels would protect cyclists and pedestrians (but not cars) and give aerodynamic improvements at the same time. __________________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo!7: Catch-up on your favourite Channel 7 TV shows easily, legally, and for free at PLUS7. www.tv.yahoo.com.au/plus7 From doctorw1963 at yahoo.com.au Tue Jan 26 12:46:16 2010 From: doctorw1963 at yahoo.com.au (Anthony Lee) Date: Tue Jan 26 12:46:42 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] China comes back to bicycle! Message-ID: <412225.15979.qm@web54505.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Funny, all this recent talk about population in Australia. I wonder when someone will caught on to the fact about bicycles. At least in Beijing looks they are finally realising that cars are big mistakes! http://url2it.com/cane Anthony Lee The Doctor -- the last of the Time Lords? ........-- __o ....-- _ \<,_ ........(_) / (_) E-Mail: doctorw1963@yahoo.com.au __________________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo!7: Catch-up on your favourite Channel 7 TV shows easily, legally, and for free at PLUS7. www.tv.yahoo.com.au/plus7 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20100126/395d0812/attachment.htm From list-bikeqld at lister.dnsalias.net Wed Jan 27 03:10:56 2010 From: list-bikeqld at lister.dnsalias.net (Ian Lister) Date: Wed Jan 27 03:11:31 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Moggill Rd crossing at Indooroopilly In-Reply-To: References: <2F095E08-B4FA-4D7A-99AE-BCFDAFBED80F@ozemail.com.au> <264331.77901.qm@web62306.mail.re1.yahoo.com> <65145.19719.qm@web54501.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <5497D29B-D2D5-41A9-B68D-B971F3850F87@jamver.id.au> <004201ca929a$8c67c430$a5374c90$@com> <20100112013347.RCQJ1743.nschwotgx01p.mx.bigpond.com@yit01.yeatesit.biz> <20100119095417.Y6325@singha.lister.id.au> Message-ID: <20100125164115.C6325@singha.lister.id.au> Hi Kim, CBD BUG has not yet received (nor pursued) a reply to the original request. The issue came up at the meeting today, and we'll be following it up. You might be right that the CBD BUG letter gave MR an "out" by asking for (rather than specifying) a solution but, at the time I wrote the letter, we hadn't been able to come up with a satisfactory solution ourselves. I must admit the reason your suggestion (of adjusting the pedestrian crossings to allow cycling across the slip lane without cycling on the pedestrian crossings themselves) was not put forward was that we didn't think of it, but I'm not sure whether I would suggest it if I was writing the letter again today. I worry that it would similarly give MR an "out", by suggesting an approach that would quite likely be even less safe than the current situation (admittedly that's speculation, and difficult to judge), and possibly even fewer people would understand the relevant road rules (speculation again, admittedly). As you know, there's always pros and cons of requesting rather than dictating solutions. On the one hand MR (in this case) undoubtedly has the responsibility for designing and implementing a solution to the problem. It has teams of professional engineers at its disposal. Although we armchair traffic engineers might not like to admit it, they do actually have a lot of relevant knowledge that we don't. On the other hand, sometimes a good solution is pretty obvious to us and worth identifying explicitly, or a more novel idea (such as yours) is _not_ obvious, and worth suggesting. The risk of suggesting something is that it's not the optimal solution, and the responsible agency uses the suggestion as an "out" to provide something sub-optimal because it's cheaper/easier. Cheers, Ian On Tue, 19 Jan 2010, kim wrote: > Thanks too Ian, > > That letter from CBD BUG looks like it might have been what prompted MR's > attention. My assumption that BQ might have taken up the case was probably > then wrong. Good on the CBD BUG for taking up the issue with MR. It seems > that the BUGs are doing the lion's share of the advocacy for cyclists. I > would have hoped that such a major commuter bikeway and what is a more > universal problem in Bris (that of the not riding across crossings despite > footpaths being shared paths) might have attracted some interest from BQ. > > What's CBD BUG's view on the outcome? MR did say something occurred just > before Christmas, not sure if he meant a complaint or that was when the > lights were put up. > > I think that in the letter the mere mention that the zebra crossings might be > more of a problem and asking MR is they had any ideas was a bit of a way out > for MR. There was always the option of removing the zebra crossings as > pedestrians still have priority there; that was not suggested nor was the > idea of making provision beside the zebra or even narrowing the zebra to > achieve this, all possibilities. I think that they might be there simply by > some policy that it is an intersection/interchange with a motorway rather > than because of the number of pedestrians expected. You might think that if > they were indeed placed there for dismounted cyclists that now they would > make them into mounted cyclists crossings under the same rationale. There are > slip-ons and slip-offs further along Moggill that notably don't have zebra > crossings which have more actual pedestrian use. Places such as Taringa Pde > by the school rightfully have zebras on the slip lanes on and off. It was a > gallant suggestion tho, in these harsh financial times to say the BUG > supported a nice cycle bridge there after MR just forked out some $20m on the > Toowong bridge which might get buggered by the tunnel :) > > k From b.wagner at ozemail.com.au Wed Jan 27 03:46:55 2010 From: b.wagner at ozemail.com.au (Bob Wagner) Date: Wed Jan 27 03:47:08 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Moggill Rd crossing at Indooroopilly In-Reply-To: <20100125164115.C6325@singha.lister.id.au> References: <2F095E08-B4FA-4D7A-99AE-BCFDAFBED80F@ozemail.com.au> <264331.77901.qm@web62306.mail.re1.yahoo.com> <65145.19719.qm@web54501.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <5497D29B-D2D5-41A9-B68D-B971F3850F87@jamver.id.au> <004201ca929a$8c67c430$a5374c90$@com> <20100112013347.RCQJ1743.nschwotgx01p.mx.bigpond.com@yit01.yeatesit.biz> <20100119095417.Y6325@singha.lister.id.au> <20100125164115.C6325@singha.lister.id.au> Message-ID: <8703025D-5141-4A80-B3A3-0BA6D6C1EBBB@ozemail.com.au> Isn't the simple solution a sign on the Cycle way that says that "Cyclist do not need to dismount to cross" at the zebra crossing, or "Cyclist must stop before riding across" the zebra crossing. Bob Wagner b.wagner@ozemail.com.au b.wagner@staidan.qld.edu.au On 27/01/2010, at 7:10 PM, Ian Lister wrote: > Hi Kim, > > CBD BUG has not yet received (nor pursued) a reply to the original > request. The issue came up at the meeting today, and we'll be > following it up. > > You might be right that the CBD BUG letter gave MR an "out" by > asking for (rather than specifying) a solution but, at the time I > wrote the letter, we hadn't been able to come up with a satisfactory > solution ourselves. I must admit the reason your suggestion (of > adjusting the pedestrian crossings to allow cycling across the slip > lane without cycling on the pedestrian crossings themselves) was not > put forward was that we didn't think of it, but I'm not sure whether > I would suggest it if I was writing the letter again today. I worry > that it would similarly give MR an "out", by suggesting an approach > that would quite likely be even less safe than the current situation > (admittedly that's speculation, and difficult to judge), and > possibly even fewer people would understand the relevant road rules > (speculation again, admittedly). > > As you know, there's always pros and cons of requesting rather than > dictating solutions. On the one hand MR (in this case) undoubtedly > has the responsibility for designing and implementing a solution to > the problem. It has teams of professional engineers at its disposal. > Although we armchair traffic engineers might not like to admit it, > they do actually have a lot of relevant knowledge that we don't. On > the other hand, sometimes a good solution is pretty obvious to us > and worth identifying explicitly, or a more novel idea (such as > yours) is _not_ obvious, and worth suggesting. The risk of > suggesting something is that it's not the optimal solution, and the > responsible agency uses the suggestion as an "out" to provide > something sub-optimal because it's cheaper/easier. > > Cheers, > > Ian > > On Tue, 19 Jan 2010, kim wrote: >> Thanks too Ian, >> >> That letter from CBD BUG looks like it might have been what >> prompted MR's attention. My assumption that BQ might have taken up >> the case was probably then wrong. Good on the CBD BUG for taking up >> the issue with MR. It seems that the BUGs are doing the lion's >> share of the advocacy for cyclists. I would have hoped that such a >> major commuter bikeway and what is a more universal problem in Bris >> (that of the not riding across crossings despite footpaths being >> shared paths) might have attracted some interest from BQ. >> >> What's CBD BUG's view on the outcome? MR did say something occurred >> just before Christmas, not sure if he meant a complaint or that was >> when the lights were put up. >> >> I think that in the letter the mere mention that the zebra >> crossings might be more of a problem and asking MR is they had any >> ideas was a bit of a way out for MR. There was always the option of >> removing the zebra crossings as pedestrians still have priority >> there; that was not suggested nor was the idea of making provision >> beside the zebra or even narrowing the zebra to achieve this, all >> possibilities. I think that they might be there simply by some >> policy that it is an intersection/interchange with a motorway >> rather than because of the number of pedestrians expected. You >> might think that if they were indeed placed there for dismounted >> cyclists that now they would make them into mounted cyclists >> crossings under the same rationale. There are slip-ons and slip- >> offs further along Moggill that notably don't have zebra crossings >> which have more actual pedestrian use. Places such as Taringa Pde >> by the school rightfully have zebras on the slip lanes on and off. >> It was a gallant suggestion tho, in these harsh financial times to >> say the BUG supported a nice cycle bridge there after MR just >> forked out some $20m on the Toowong bridge which might get buggered >> by the tunnel :) >> >> k > > _______________________________________________ > bikeqld mailing list > bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld > This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. From b.wagner at ozemail.com.au Wed Jan 27 05:42:11 2010 From: b.wagner at ozemail.com.au (Bob Wagner) Date: Wed Jan 27 05:42:55 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Great Clip Message-ID: <4C58829D-101B-4847-A7EF-9D277B5612F7@ozemail.com.au> This is a clip I found to be so true http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vn29DvMITu4 Bob Wagner b.wagner@ozemail.com.au -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20100127/cd8db5bf/attachment.htm From list-bikeqld at lister.dnsalias.net Wed Jan 27 06:37:38 2010 From: list-bikeqld at lister.dnsalias.net (Ian Lister) Date: Wed Jan 27 06:40:32 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Moggill Rd crossing at Indooroopilly In-Reply-To: <8703025D-5141-4A80-B3A3-0BA6D6C1EBBB@ozemail.com.au> References: <2F095E08-B4FA-4D7A-99AE-BCFDAFBED80F@ozemail.com.au> <264331.77901.qm@web62306.mail.re1.yahoo.com> <65145.19719.qm@web54501.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <5497D29B-D2D5-41A9-B68D-B971F3850F87@jamver.id.au> <004201ca929a$8c67c430$a5374c90$@com> <20100112013347.RCQJ1743.nschwotgx01p.mx.bigpond.com@yit01.yeatesit.biz> <20100119095417.Y6325@singha.lister.id.au> <20100125164115.C6325@singha.lister.id.au> <8703025D-5141-4A80-B3A3-0BA6D6C1EBBB@ozemail.com.au> Message-ID: <20100127222052.I6325@singha.lister.id.au> Hi Bob, On Wed, 27 Jan 2010, Bob Wagner wrote: > Isn't the simple solution a sign on the Cycle way that says that "Cyclist do > not need to dismount to cross" at the zebra crossing, or "Cyclist must stop > before riding across" the zebra crossing. Unfortunately the road rules don't make any allowance for that; such a sign would have no legal effect, and it would still be illegal to cycle across the crossing. It is still a common sense solution, but the road rules would need to change to have an "unless otherwise signed" clause, and changing the road rules is not an easy process - even less so than changing other legislation, given the commitment to the national road rules, and to reducing the number of "laws of jurisdiction" (allowances for state-by-state variations e.g. cycling on footpaths in Queensland) over time. Cheers, Ian From doctorw1963 at yahoo.com.au Wed Jan 27 13:35:05 2010 From: doctorw1963 at yahoo.com.au (Anthony Lee) Date: Wed Jan 27 13:37:42 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Great Clip In-Reply-To: <4C58829D-101B-4847-A7EF-9D277B5612F7@ozemail.com.au> References: <4C58829D-101B-4847-A7EF-9D277B5612F7@ozemail.com.au> Message-ID: <626912.91745.qm@web54505.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Thanks Bob, that's funny. Not quite ROFL but still funny! Anthony Lee The Doctor -- the last of the Time Lords? ........-- __o ....-- _ \<,_ ........(_) / (_) E-Mail: doctorw1963@yahoo.com.au ________________________________ From: Bob Wagner To: BIQ Sent: Wed, 27 January, 2010 9:42:11 PM Subject: [bikeqld] Great Clip This is a clip I found to be so true http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vn29DvMITu4 Bob Wagner b.wagner@ozemail.com.au __________________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo!7: Catch-up on your favourite Channel 7 TV shows easily, legally, and for free at PLUS7. www.tv.yahoo.com.au/plus7 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20100127/a3f67f35/attachment.htm From guyb at ap.aurecongroup.com Wed Jan 27 15:56:52 2010 From: guyb at ap.aurecongroup.com (Bill Guy) Date: Wed Jan 27 16:04:28 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Moggill Rd crossing at Indooroopilly In-Reply-To: <8703025D-5141-4A80-B3A3-0BA6D6C1EBBB@ozemail.com.au> Message-ID: the simple solution is to remove the zebra crossing ________________________________________________________________________________ Bill Guy | Transport | Aurecon Ph: +61 7 3173 8325 | Fax: +61 7 3173 8001 | Mob: +61 (0) 421 327 599 Email: guyb@ap.aurecongroup.com 32 Turbot Street (Locked Bag 331) | Brisbane Queensland 4001 | Australia http://www.aurecongroup.com http://www.aurecongroup.com/apac/groupentity/ ________________________________________________________________________________ Please consider your environment before printing this e-mail. Bob Wagner Sent by: bikeqld-bounces@bikeqld.org.au 27/01/2010 07:47 PM To BIQ cc Subject Re: [bikeqld] Moggill Rd crossing at Indooroopilly Project Not assigned ... Isn't the simple solution a sign on the Cycle way that says that "Cyclist do not need to dismount to cross" at the zebra crossing, or "Cyclist must stop before riding across" the zebra crossing. Bob Wagner b.wagner@ozemail.com.au b.wagner@staidan.qld.edu.au On 27/01/2010, at 7:10 PM, Ian Lister wrote: > Hi Kim, > > CBD BUG has not yet received (nor pursued) a reply to the original > request. The issue came up at the meeting today, and we'll be > following it up. > > You might be right that the CBD BUG letter gave MR an "out" by > asking for (rather than specifying) a solution but, at the time I > wrote the letter, we hadn't been able to come up with a satisfactory > solution ourselves. I must admit the reason your suggestion (of > adjusting the pedestrian crossings to allow cycling across the slip > lane without cycling on the pedestrian crossings themselves) was not > put forward was that we didn't think of it, but I'm not sure whether > I would suggest it if I was writing the letter again today. I worry > that it would similarly give MR an "out", by suggesting an approach > that would quite likely be even less safe than the current situation > (admittedly that's speculation, and difficult to judge), and > possibly even fewer people would understand the relevant road rules > (speculation again, admittedly). > > As you know, there's always pros and cons of requesting rather than > dictating solutions. On the one hand MR (in this case) undoubtedly > has the responsibility for designing and implementing a solution to > the problem. It has teams of professional engineers at its disposal. > Although we armchair traffic engineers might not like to admit it, > they do actually have a lot of relevant knowledge that we don't. On > the other hand, sometimes a good solution is pretty obvious to us > and worth identifying explicitly, or a more novel idea (such as > yours) is _not_ obvious, and worth suggesting. The risk of > suggesting something is that it's not the optimal solution, and the > responsible agency uses the suggestion as an "out" to provide > something sub-optimal because it's cheaper/easier. > > Cheers, > > Ian > > On Tue, 19 Jan 2010, kim wrote: >> Thanks too Ian, >> >> That letter from CBD BUG looks like it might have been what >> prompted MR's attention. My assumption that BQ might have taken up >> the case was probably then wrong. Good on the CBD BUG for taking up >> the issue with MR. It seems that the BUGs are doing the lion's >> share of the advocacy for cyclists. I would have hoped that such a >> major commuter bikeway and what is a more universal problem in Bris >> (that of the not riding across crossings despite footpaths being >> shared paths) might have attracted some interest from BQ. >> >> What's CBD BUG's view on the outcome? MR did say something occurred >> just before Christmas, not sure if he meant a complaint or that was >> when the lights were put up. >> >> I think that in the letter the mere mention that the zebra >> crossings might be more of a problem and asking MR is they had any >> ideas was a bit of a way out for MR. There was always the option of >> removing the zebra crossings as pedestrians still have priority >> there; that was not suggested nor was the idea of making provision >> beside the zebra or even narrowing the zebra to achieve this, all >> possibilities. I think that they might be there simply by some >> policy that it is an intersection/interchange with a motorway >> rather than because of the number of pedestrians expected. You >> might think that if they were indeed placed there for dismounted >> cyclists that now they would make them into mounted cyclists >> crossings under the same rationale. There are slip-ons and slip- >> offs further along Moggill that notably don't have zebra crossings >> which have more actual pedestrian use. Places such as Taringa Pde >> by the school rightfully have zebras on the slip lanes on and off. >> It was a gallant suggestion tho, in these harsh financial times to >> say the BUG supported a nice cycle bridge there after MR just >> forked out some $20m on the Toowong bridge which might get buggered >> by the tunnel :) >> >> k > > _______________________________________________ > bikeqld mailing list > bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld > This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. _______________________________________________ bikeqld mailing list bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. Disclaimer - http://www.aurecongroup.com/apac/disclaimer/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20100128/94cdf223/attachment.htm From peterw60 at gmail.com Wed Jan 27 17:16:02 2010 From: peterw60 at gmail.com (Peter Whittle) Date: Wed Jan 27 17:16:44 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Moggill Rd crossing at Indooroopilly In-Reply-To: References: <8703025D-5141-4A80-B3A3-0BA6D6C1EBBB@ozemail.com.au> Message-ID: <003901ca9fa6$b5c34020$2149c060$@com> Correct me if I'm wrong, but cars/trucks, when turning, are obliged to give way to pedestrians? If so, why on earth would a zebra crossing be put on a corner? Redundant, surely? P From: bikeqld-bounces@bikeqld.org.au [mailto:bikeqld-bounces@bikeqld.org.au] On Behalf Of Bill Guy Sent: Thursday, 28 January 2010 7:57 AM To: Bob Wagner Cc: BIQ; bikeqld-bounces@bikeqld.org.au Subject: Re: [bikeqld] Moggill Rd crossing at Indooroopilly the simple solution is to remove the zebra crossing ____________________________________________________________________________ ____ Bill Guy | Transport | Aurecon Ph: +61 7 3173 8325 | Fax: +61 7 3173 8001 | Mob: +61 (0) 421 327 599 Email: guyb@ap.aurecongroup.com 32 Turbot Street (Locked Bag 331) | Brisbane Queensland 4001 | Australia http://www.aurecongroup.com http://www.aurecongroup.com/apac/groupentity/ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____ Please consider your environment before printing this e-mail. Bob Wagner Sent by: bikeqld-bounces@bikeqld.org.au 27/01/2010 07:47 PM To BIQ cc Subject Re: [bikeqld] Moggill Rd crossing at Indooroopilly Project Not assigned ... Isn't the simple solution a sign on the Cycle way that says that "Cyclist do not need to dismount to cross" at the zebra crossing, or "Cyclist must stop before riding across" the zebra crossing. Bob Wagner b.wagner@ozemail.com.au b.wagner@staidan.qld.edu.au On 27/01/2010, at 7:10 PM, Ian Lister wrote: > Hi Kim, > > CBD BUG has not yet received (nor pursued) a reply to the original > request. The issue came up at the meeting today, and we'll be > following it up. > > You might be right that the CBD BUG letter gave MR an "out" by > asking for (rather than specifying) a solution but, at the time I > wrote the letter, we hadn't been able to come up with a satisfactory > solution ourselves. I must admit the reason your suggestion (of > adjusting the pedestrian crossings to allow cycling across the slip > lane without cycling on the pedestrian crossings themselves) was not > put forward was that we didn't think of it, but I'm not sure whether > I would suggest it if I was writing the letter again today. I worry > that it would similarly give MR an "out", by suggesting an approach > that would quite likely be even less safe than the current situation > (admittedly that's speculation, and difficult to judge), and > possibly even fewer people would understand the relevant road rules > (speculation again, admittedly). > > As you know, there's always pros and cons of requesting rather than > dictating solutions. On the one hand MR (in this case) undoubtedly > has the responsibility for designing and implementing a solution to > the problem. It has teams of professional engineers at its disposal. > Although we armchair traffic engineers might not like to admit it, > they do actually have a lot of relevant knowledge that we don't. On > the other hand, sometimes a good solution is pretty obvious to us > and worth identifying explicitly, or a more novel idea (such as > yours) is _not_ obvious, and worth suggesting. The risk of > suggesting something is that it's not the optimal solution, and the > responsible agency uses the suggestion as an "out" to provide > something sub-optimal because it's cheaper/easier. > > Cheers, > > Ian > > On Tue, 19 Jan 2010, kim wrote: >> Thanks too Ian, >> >> That letter from CBD BUG looks like it might have been what >> prompted MR's attention. My assumption that BQ might have taken up >> the case was probably then wrong. Good on the CBD BUG for taking up >> the issue with MR. It seems that the BUGs are doing the lion's >> share of the advocacy for cyclists. I would have hoped that such a >> major commuter bikeway and what is a more universal problem in Bris >> (that of the not riding across crossings despite footpaths being >> shared paths) might have attracted some interest from BQ. >> >> What's CBD BUG's view on the outcome? MR did say something occurred >> just before Christmas, not sure if he meant a complaint or that was >> when the lights were put up. >> >> I think that in the letter the mere mention that the zebra >> crossings might be more of a problem and asking MR is they had any >> ideas was a bit of a way out for MR. There was always the option of >> removing the zebra crossings as pedestrians still have priority >> there; that was not suggested nor was the idea of making provision >> beside the zebra or even narrowing the zebra to achieve this, all >> possibilities. I think that they might be there simply by some >> policy that it is an intersection/interchange with a motorway >> rather than because of the number of pedestrians expected. You >> might think that if they were indeed placed there for dismounted >> cyclists that now they would make them into mounted cyclists >> crossings under the same rationale. There are slip-ons and slip- >> offs further along Moggill that notably don't have zebra crossings >> which have more actual pedestrian use. Places such as Taringa Pde >> by the school rightfully have zebras on the slip lanes on and off. >> It was a gallant suggestion tho, in these harsh financial times to >> say the BUG supported a nice cycle bridge there after MR just >> forked out some $20m on the Toowong bridge which might get buggered >> by the tunnel :) >> >> k > > _______________________________________________ > bikeqld mailing list > bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld > This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. _______________________________________________ bikeqld mailing list bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. Disclaimer - http://www.aurecongroup.com/apac/disclaimer/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20100128/4c8f7bdf/attachment-0001.htm From r.hockey at sph.uq.edu.au Wed Jan 27 17:57:16 2010 From: r.hockey at sph.uq.edu.au (Richard Hockey) Date: Wed Jan 27 17:57:28 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] NZ cyclist road code. Message-ID: Does any state have one of these? http://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/roadcode/cyclist-code/docs/cyclist-cod e-2009-low.pdf R -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20100128/f0a35026/attachment.htm From michael at yeatesit.biz Wed Jan 27 19:03:50 2010 From: michael at yeatesit.biz (Michael Yeates) Date: Wed Jan 27 19:04:02 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Moggill Rd crossing at Indooroopilly In-Reply-To: References: <8703025D-5141-4A80-B3A3-0BA6D6C1EBBB@ozemail.com.au> Message-ID: <20100128010337.RQRZ5306.nskntotgx02p.mx.bigpond.com@yit01.yeatesit.biz> Hi Bill et al ... What is that saying about "simple solutions" ...? Always wrong? Not necessarily true of course at least not in all cases. But here the question is really why the zebra is there ... indeed why zebras are so common at slip lanes like this. Surely "the" answer to these questions is the very real danger to those using the crossing location that is posed by the road design. And while it might be the case the traffic engineers and road designers are supposed to be "experts", it isn't clear from their projects. At least not here indeed not anywhere along the bikeway ... with perhaps one exception and even it might not satisfy such a diverse range of opinions ... ;-) However, it would appear from seemingly endless negotiations with road designers that they want turning traffic to NOT slow down on the main through lane so the slip lanes inevitably have a fast radius entry (or rarely are longer before arriving at the left turn) so that traffic approaching and then arriving at the turn is still travelling relatively fast. Add to that the fact the drivers tend to be looking to the right for a clear space to accelerate into after to complete the left turn ... and you get (i) crashes involving nose to tail and (ii) walking across the slip lane is much more dangerous. So presumably is cycling across ... or so the traffic engineers and road designers say. A little more analysis is needed or alternatively, consideration given as to why this set of zebras can be safely removed. But then what about other zebras and similar crossing locations? This reminds me of the long arguments about zebras being "dangerous" and removing them an improvement ... run in Qld by the RACQ ... but based on "research" that related to multi-lane not single lane crossings. Is that era still having an impact here? The reason they were said to be dangerous tended to be supported by evidence that a lot of pedestrians were hit by motor vehicles while using the zebras ... and why was that? The pedestrians it was said just walked out on the crossings without looking. Now looking has some merit ... but if pedestrians are supposed to have priority on zebras, then is the responsibility on drivers (and road designers) to create a road environment where drivers slow down to a speed such that they can stop if a pedestrian "suddenly" appears on the crossing? Does the same apply for cyclists crossing roads or "suddenly" appearing? Do peds have any priority at zebras? The problem seems to be that the motorists "might is right" implies that it is always the responsibility of the pedestrian (or cyclist) to ensure it is safe to cross a road ... but does this mean it is never the responsibility of the motorist or road designer? Indooroopilly State School has an appalling traffic problem no doubt in part due to the percentage of kids being driven to school in part because there are such poor facilities for walking or cycling to the school ... not least because walking on the bikepath the only bit of reasonable quality facility for peds is where they are prohibited. So why would advocates of cycling be arguing for making walking or cycling to school more dangerous? The issue of bikes and peds crossing roads has been sorted out well in other places in Oz ... eg in Melbourne but also here in Qld. So why not here at this particular crossing? Surely it isn't yet another case of there being no suitable solution for peds and cyclists to cross? But if it is, then what are the reasons that justify that position? If this is part of a perhaps $40m NCV major bike route facility, then surely it should have some priority over motorised traffic? Taking out the zebras does not seem to address that view ... but maybe it does? MY............. At 07:56 AM 28/01/2010, Bill Guy wrote: >the simple solution is to remove the zebra crossing >________________________________________________________________________________ > > >Bill Guy | Transport | Aurecon >Ph: +61 7 3173 8325 | Fax: +61 7 3173 8001 | Mob: +61 (0) 421 327 599 >Email: guyb@ap.aurecongroup.com >32 Turbot Street (Locked Bag 331) | Brisbane Queensland 4001 | Australia >http://www.aurecongroup.com >http://www.aurecongroup.com/apac/groupentity/ >________________________________________________________________________________ > > >Please consider your environment before printing this e-mail. > > > > >Bob Wagner >Sent by: bikeqld-bounces@bikeqld.org.au >27/01/2010 07:47 PM >To >BIQ >cc >Subject >Re: [bikeqld] Moggill Rd crossing at Indooroopilly >Project >Not assigned ... > > > > >Isn't the simple solution a sign on the Cycle way that says that >"Cyclist do not need to dismount to cross" at the zebra crossing, or >"Cyclist must stop before riding across" the zebra crossing. > > > >Bob Wagner >b.wagner@ozemail.com.au >b.wagner@staidan.qld.edu.au > > > > > >On 27/01/2010, at 7:10 PM, Ian Lister wrote: > > > Hi Kim, > > > > CBD BUG has not yet received (nor pursued) a reply to the original > > request. The issue came up at the meeting today, and we'll be > > following it up. > > > > You might be right that the CBD BUG letter gave MR an "out" by > > asking for (rather than specifying) a solution but, at the time I > > wrote the letter, we hadn't been able to come up with a satisfactory > > solution ourselves. I must admit the reason your suggestion (of > > adjusting the pedestrian crossings to allow cycling across the slip > > lane without cycling on the pedestrian crossings themselves) was not > > put forward was that we didn't think of it, but I'm not sure whether > > I would suggest it if I was writing the letter again today. I worry > > that it would similarly give MR an "out", by suggesting an approach > > that would quite likely be even less safe than the current situation > > (admittedly that's speculation, and difficult to judge), and > > possibly even fewer people would understand the relevant road rules > > (speculation again, admittedly). > > > > As you know, there's always pros and cons of requesting rather than > > dictating solutions. On the one hand MR (in this case) undoubtedly > > has the responsibility for designing and implementing a solution to > > the problem. It has teams of professional engineers at its disposal. > > Although we armchair traffic engineers might not like to admit it, > > they do actually have a lot of relevant knowledge that we don't. On > > the other hand, sometimes a good solution is pretty obvious to us > > and worth identifying explicitly, or a more novel idea (such as > > yours) is _not_ obvious, and worth suggesting. The risk of > > suggesting something is that it's not the optimal solution, and the > > responsible agency uses the suggestion as an "out" to provide > > something sub-optimal because it's cheaper/easier. > > > > Cheers, > > > > Ian > > > > On Tue, 19 Jan 2010, kim wrote: > >> Thanks too Ian, > >> > >> That letter from CBD BUG looks like it might have been what > >> prompted MR's attention. My assumption that BQ might have taken up > >> the case was probably then wrong. Good on the CBD BUG for taking up > >> the issue with MR. It seems that the BUGs are doing the lion's > >> share of the advocacy for cyclists. I would have hoped that such a > >> major commuter bikeway and what is a more universal problem in Bris > >> (that of the not riding across crossings despite footpaths being > >> shared paths) might have attracted some interest from BQ. > >> > >> What's CBD BUG's view on the outcome? MR did say something occurred > >> just before Christmas, not sure if he meant a complaint or that was > >> when the lights were put up. > >> > >> I think that in the letter the mere mention that the zebra > >> crossings might be more of a problem and asking MR is they had any > >> ideas was a bit of a way out for MR. There was always the option of > >> removing the zebra crossings as pedestrians still have priority > >> there; that was not suggested nor was the idea of making provision > >> beside the zebra or even narrowing the zebra to achieve this, all > >> possibilities. I think that they might be there simply by some > >> policy that it is an intersection/interchange with a motorway > >> rather than because of the number of pedestrians expected. You > >> might think that if they were indeed placed there for dismounted > >> cyclists that now they would make them into mounted cyclists > >> crossings under the same rationale. There are slip-ons and slip- > >> offs further along Moggill that notably don't have zebra crossings > >> which have more actual pedestrian use. Places such as Taringa Pde > >> by the school rightfully have zebras on the slip lanes on and off. > >> It was a gallant suggestion tho, in these harsh financial times to > >> say the BUG supported a nice cycle bridge there after MR just > >> forked out some $20m on the Toowong bridge which might get buggered > >> by the tunnel :) > >> > >> k > > > > _______________________________________________ > > bikeqld mailing list > > bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au > > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ > > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld > > This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. > >_______________________________________________ >bikeqld mailing list >bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au >http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ >http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld >This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. > > > > > > >Disclaimer - http://www.aurecongroup.com/apac/disclaimer/ > > > > >_______________________________________________ >bikeqld mailing list >bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au >http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ >http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld >This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. > >No virus found in this incoming message. >Checked by AVG - www.avg.com >Version: 9.0.733 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2650 - Release Date: >01/28/10 05:36:00 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20100128/8d72f310/attachment-0001.htm From list-bikeqld at lister.dnsalias.net Wed Jan 27 19:09:53 2010 From: list-bikeqld at lister.dnsalias.net (Ian Lister) Date: Wed Jan 27 19:11:32 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Moggill Rd crossing at Indooroopilly In-Reply-To: <003901ca9fa6$b5c34020$2149c060$@com> References: <8703025D-5141-4A80-B3A3-0BA6D6C1EBBB@ozemail.com.au> <003901ca9fa6$b5c34020$2149c060$@com> Message-ID: <20100128103641.Q6325@singha.lister.id.au> On Thu, 28 Jan 2010, Peter Whittle wrote: > Correct me if I'm wrong, but cars/trucks, when turning, are obliged to give > way to pedestrians? If so, why on earth would a zebra crossing be put on a > corner? Redundant, surely? Almost. The obligation to give way to a pedestrian remains the same: Without a pedestrian (zebra) crossing, section 72 "Giving way at an intersection (except a T-intersection or roundabout)" subsection (4) says "If the driver is turning left using a slip lane, the driver must give way to - [..] (b) any pedestrian on the slip lane." With a crossing, section 81 "Giving way at a pedestrian crossing" subsection (2) says "A driver must give way to any pedestrian on a pedestrian crossing." I can't see any difference in requirements on drivers to give way to pedestrians looking to cross (there are none I can see), nor on pedestrians; section 236 "Pedestrians not to cause a traffic hazard or obstruction" appears to apply equally to both. However, section 81 "Giving way at a pedestrian crossing" subsection (1) imposes an additional requirement that "A driver approaching a pedestrian crossing must drive at a speed at which the driver can, if necessary, stop safely before the crossing." Not that many motorists take any notice of either of section 81's requirements at that particular location. However I imagine even fewer will give way if there's no marked crossing at all. Do we care? I think one of the key things to decide and be clear on when pushing for a change here is whether we want motorists to be required to give way to pedestrians and/or cyclists trying to cross the road, or whether we're happy to wait for a break in the traffic. Given the high volume of traffic at this intersection, the high speed of the traffic (particularly on the southern slip lane), and the general lack of inclination of motorists to bother indicating a turn, it could take quite some time to wait for a sufficient safe break. On the other hand, getting a change that would require motorists to give way to crossing cyclists would be a lot more challenging. Would people here be happy having to wait for a break to cross? Which outcome should we be pushing for? Of course, none of this precludes other approaches such as reducing the radius (and, consequently, design speed) of the southern slip lane, although such an approach might influence our other choices. Ian From j at jamver.id.au Wed Jan 27 21:07:28 2010 From: j at jamver.id.au (James Lever) Date: Wed Jan 27 21:08:44 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Moggill Rd crossing at Indooroopilly In-Reply-To: <20100128103641.Q6325@singha.lister.id.au> References: <8703025D-5141-4A80-B3A3-0BA6D6C1EBBB@ozemail.com.au> <003901ca9fa6$b5c34020$2149c060$@com> <20100128103641.Q6325@singha.lister.id.au> Message-ID: On 28/01/2010, at 11:09 AM, Ian Lister wrote: > I think one of the key things to decide and be clear on when pushing for a change here is whether we want motorists to be required to give way to pedestrians and/or cyclists trying to cross the road, or whether we're happy to wait for a break in the traffic. Given the high volume of traffic at this intersection, the high speed of the traffic (particularly on the southern slip lane), and the general lack of inclination of motorists to bother indicating a turn, it could take quite some time to wait for a sufficient safe break. On the other hand, getting a change that would require motorists to give way to crossing cyclists would be a lot more challenging. Would people here be happy having to wait for a break to cross? Which outcome should we be pushing for? > > Of course, none of this precludes other approaches such as reducing the radius (and, consequently, design speed) of the southern slip lane, although such an approach might influence our other choices. What about just having an extra set of traffic lights installed there that are activated when cyclists push a button and possibly have them operate in sync with the main lights? cheers, James From michael at yeatesit.biz Thu Jan 28 19:25:15 2010 From: michael at yeatesit.biz (Michael Yeates) Date: Thu Jan 28 19:25:34 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Fwd: [Cmass-Sydney] Cycling safety - this Sunday Message-ID: <20100129012500.QPDV24930.nskntotgx03p.mx.bigpond.com@yit01.yeatesit.biz> >Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 09:54:23 +1100 >To: CMASS >Subject: [Cmass-Sydney] Cycling safety - this Sunday > > >This Sunday morning :- ABC programme on cycling safety. >Transcript: >http://www.abc.net.au/rn/backgroundbriefing/stories/2010/2769072.htm From list-bikeqld at lister.dnsalias.net Thu Jan 28 19:32:37 2010 From: list-bikeqld at lister.dnsalias.net (Ian Lister) Date: Thu Jan 28 19:33:31 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Cycling safety - this Sunday In-Reply-To: <20100129012500.QPDV24930.nskntotgx03p.mx.bigpond.com@yit01.yeatesit.biz> References: <20100129012500.QPDV24930.nskntotgx03p.mx.bigpond.com@yit01.yeatesit.biz> Message-ID: <20100129113131.J6325@singha.lister.id.au> Looks a lot like the one last month that Andrew pointed us at: http://www.abc.net.au/rn/backgroundbriefing/stories/2009/2758349.htm Any idea if it's just a repeat? Ian On Fri, 29 Jan 2010, Michael Yeates wrote: >> Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 09:54:23 +1100 >> To: CMASS >> Subject: [Cmass-Sydney] Cycling safety - this Sunday >> >> >> This Sunday morning :- ABC programme on cycling safety. >> Transcript: >> http://www.abc.net.au/rn/backgroundbriefing/stories/2010/2769072.htm > > > _______________________________________________ > bikeqld mailing list > bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld > This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. > From peterw60 at gmail.com Thu Jan 28 19:58:22 2010 From: peterw60 at gmail.com (Peter Whittle) Date: Thu Jan 28 19:58:43 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Cycling safety - this Sunday In-Reply-To: <20100129113131.J6325@singha.lister.id.au> References: <20100129012500.QPDV24930.nskntotgx03p.mx.bigpond.com@yit01.yeatesit.biz> <20100129113131.J6325@singha.lister.id.au> Message-ID: <00bb01caa086$8db8a2b0$a929e810$@com> CFS said it is. P -----Original Message----- From: bikeqld-bounces@bikeqld.org.au [mailto:bikeqld-bounces@bikeqld.org.au] On Behalf Of Ian Lister Sent: Friday, 29 January 2010 11:33 AM To: bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au Cc: bfa-oz@topica.com Subject: Re: [bikeqld] Cycling safety - this Sunday Looks a lot like the one last month that Andrew pointed us at: http://www.abc.net.au/rn/backgroundbriefing/stories/2009/2758349.htm Any idea if it's just a repeat? Ian On Fri, 29 Jan 2010, Michael Yeates wrote: >> Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 09:54:23 +1100 >> To: CMASS >> Subject: [Cmass-Sydney] Cycling safety - this Sunday >> >> >> This Sunday morning :- ABC programme on cycling safety. >> Transcript: >> http://www.abc.net.au/rn/backgroundbriefing/stories/2010/2769072.htm > > > _______________________________________________ > bikeqld mailing list > bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld > This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. > _______________________________________________ bikeqld mailing list bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. From telstar at cfsmtb.net Thu Jan 28 23:31:16 2010 From: telstar at cfsmtb.net (telstar@cfsmtb.net) Date: Thu Jan 28 23:31:28 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Cycling safety - this Sunday In-Reply-To: <00bb01caa086$8db8a2b0$a929e810$@com> References: <20100129012500.QPDV24930.nskntotgx03p.mx.bigpond.com@yit01.yeatesit.biz> <20100129113131.J6325@singha.lister.id.au> <00bb01caa086$8db8a2b0$a929e810$@com> Message-ID: <81e7b7a631183b6991763afcb58bf7d4.squirrel@cfsmtb.net> Yes, it's a repeat from early December 09, although still a reasonable episode worth listening to. My rather small contribution to it: how images "evolve" on the internet: http://www.melbournecyclist.com/photo/1684380:Photo:4507 ;) > CFS said it is. > > P > > -----Original Message----- > From: bikeqld-bounces@bikeqld.org.au > [mailto:bikeqld-bounces@bikeqld.org.au] > On Behalf Of Ian Lister > Sent: Friday, 29 January 2010 11:33 AM > To: bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au > Cc: bfa-oz@topica.com > Subject: Re: [bikeqld] Cycling safety - this Sunday > > Looks a lot like the one last month that Andrew pointed us at: > > http://www.abc.net.au/rn/backgroundbriefing/stories/2009/2758349.htm > > Any idea if it's just a repeat? > > Ian > > On Fri, 29 Jan 2010, Michael Yeates wrote: >>> Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 09:54:23 +1100 >>> To: CMASS >>> Subject: [Cmass-Sydney] Cycling safety - this Sunday >>> >>> >>> This Sunday morning :- ABC programme on cycling safety. >>> Transcript: >>> http://www.abc.net.au/rn/backgroundbriefing/stories/2010/2769072.htm >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> bikeqld mailing list >> bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au >> http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ >> http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld >> This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. >> > > _______________________________________________ > bikeqld mailing list > bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld > This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. > > _______________________________________________ > bikeqld mailing list > bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/ > http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld > This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland. > -- ---------------------------------------- Don't get involved in partial problems, but always take flight to where there is a free view over the whole single great problem, even if this view is still not a clear one - Ludwig Wittgenstein http://cfsmtb.net http://www.woj.com.au http://www.ycat.org.au http://www.yarrabug.org/radio http://www.melbournecyclist.com ---------------------------------------- From xdollarfuel at yahoo.com.au Sat Jan 30 05:07:50 2010 From: xdollarfuel at yahoo.com.au (mich rolling) Date: Sat Jan 30 05:08:08 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Jindalee bicycle bridge under construction Message-ID: <500175.54312.qm@web44814.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> Yeeah! Slowly and with little fanfare (BQ you slaggards start updating your news pages and publishing this amazing bike count data talked about in your newsletter - 1000 bikes a morning on the Schonell? Publish the tables!!!) Brisbane's cycle networks emerge. http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/cycle-bridge-swings-into-place-20100129-n3f6.html "A new link in Brisbane's cycling infrastructure fell into place yesterday, with the installation of a new bridge at Jindalee. The bridge, Australia's largest single-span aluminium bridge, was lifted into place over riverside bushland this morning. About 30 locals gathered to watch as a crane gently lifted, turned, and slowly lowered into place the 39-tonne, 54-metre long bridge...... Once opened, it would give cyclists a direct link from the Rocks Riverside Park at Sinnamon Park, along Kooringal Drive to Mt Ommaney Drive, which ran around the river to Westlake" Yes Peter, "That would be Isambard Kingdom Brunel's work, rather than either of the famous Stephenson's" My mistake. That bridge is glorious in its' place and for its' era. I would like the Alice St bridge be something out of a Delaney sci-fi novel. Something gloriously inorganic and ethereally artificial launching homeward travellers towards the cliffs! __________________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo!7: Catch-up on your favourite Channel 7 TV shows easily, legally, and for free at PLUS7. www.tv.yahoo.com.au/plus7 From michael at yeatesit.biz Sat Jan 30 06:03:08 2010 From: michael at yeatesit.biz (Michael Yeates) Date: Sat Jan 30 06:03:36 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Jindalee bicycle bridge under construction In-Reply-To: <500175.54312.qm@web44814.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> References: <500175.54312.qm@web44814.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20100130120318.WLKY5306.nskntotgx02p.mx.bigpond.com@yit01.yeatesit.biz> Thanks for the news Mich ... But it is worth considering how significant it really is? Sure its good for local cycling. Is it really such a vital piece for cycling connectivity for Brisbane? Will it reduce car use in peak hours? Or is it another project in the effort to encourage cyclists off the roads? It doesn't appear to help much with replacing car trips to shops or schools etc either. It is useful to consider when the dollars being being spent per annum is mentioned, how useful the dollars spent actually are and how many people actually use the facility .. indeed to question what the aims of the project actually are. For without those aims being made explicit, monitoring and therefore evaluation is next to impossible. For example, I was told the walking/cycling provision on the Gateway Bridge #2 cost in excess of $100m. If true, is that better than spending $4m here at Jindalee ... or would $1m on sorting out the traffic lights and Western Freeway Bikeway crossings at Moggill Road be better value? It may be too that the effectiveness of any particular facility is not related to its cost ... so it is high time evaluation and monitoring addressed the connectivity benefits rather than being promoted on the cost. Same goes for counting raw numbers ... more people cycling IS a good thing but under what conditions or intentions is it the most important? Which types of cycling represent the best cost:benefit? Is cycling off road really the best outcome? For example, would a 30km/h speed limit on the streets of Jindalee have been more effective in encouraging more people cycling and cost less? Perhaps even rendered the bridge less important or even not required? Or what about a bike + ped bridge from Fig Tree Pocket to Graceville near "Sherwood Forest" aka The Arboretum ... not only for cycling trips but for a huge increase in ease of access and catchment for public transport, schools and shops etc? MY........................ At 09:07 PM 30/01/2010, mich rolling wrote: >Yeeah! Slowly and with little fanfare (BQ you slaggards start >updating your news pages and publishing this amazing bike count data >talked about in your newsletter - 1000 bikes a morning on the >Schonell? Publish the tables!!!) Brisbane's cycle networks emerge. > >http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/cycle-bridge-swings-into-place-20100129-n3f6.html > >"A new link in Brisbane's cycling infrastructure fell into place > yesterday, with the installation of a new bridge at Jindalee. > >The bridge, Australia's largest single-span aluminium bridge, was lifted > into place over riverside bushland this morning. > >About 30 locals gathered to watch as a crane gently lifted, turned, and > slowly lowered into place the 39-tonne, 54-metre long bridge...... > >Once opened, it would give cyclists a direct link from the Rocks Riverside > Park at Sinnamon Park, along Kooringal Drive to Mt Ommaney Drive, which > ran around the river to Westlake" > > >Yes Peter, "That would be Isambard Kingdom Brunel's work, rather than > either of the famous Stephenson's" My mistake. That bridge is glorious in > its' place and for its' era. I would like the Alice St bridge be >something out of a Delaney sci-fi novel. Something gloriously inorganic > and ethereally artificial launching homeward travellers towards the > cliffs! > > > >__________________________________________________________________________________ >Yahoo!7: Catch-up on your favourite Channel 7 TV shows easily, >legally, and for free at PLUS7. www.tv.yahoo.com.au/plus7 > >_______________________________________________ >bikeqld mailing list >bikeqld@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: 9.0.733 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2655 - Release Date: >01/29/10 19:08:00 From gsfergus at optusnet.com.au Sat Jan 30 18:35:23 2010 From: gsfergus at optusnet.com.au (Glen Fergus) Date: Sat Jan 30 18:35:53 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Jindalee bicycle bridge under construction In-Reply-To: <20100130120318.WLKY5306.nskntotgx02p.mx.bigpond.com@yit01.yeatesit.biz> References: <500175.54312.qm@web44814.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <20100130120318.WLKY5306.nskntotgx02p.mx.bigpond.com@yit01.yeatesit.biz> Message-ID: <6B07851436714687B62607A08E001272@golder.gds> > For example, I was told the walking/cycling provision on the Gateway > Bridge #2 cost in excess of $100m. Then you were lied to, Michael. The whole bride only cost $350M, out of a total project budget of $1.9B (most of that for the northside freeway re-alignment). See here: http://www.gatewayupgradeproject.com.au/asp/index.asp?sid=5&page=aboutIntro and http://www.gup.com.au/data/portal/00000005/content/57596001259810636286.pdf The point, surely, is that QM / QMRD as public agencies / authorities should not be allowed to get away with building road infrastructure that completely excludes major groups of road users - i.e. bikes and peds. It's just not acceptable. Same argument applies to that Mt Coot-tha overbridge that you regularly criticise. It should have been there from the start - part of the original project, not some expensive retro-fit. But it wasn't, so Metro Branch damn well should have fixed it (out of their own budget would have been better). Similarly that ongoing SE freeway bikeway extension (doubtless at huge cost for minimal use - and yes, Metro are paying). That should have been there from the start too. There is only one way that certain public authority dinosaurs will learn. G. From xdollarfuel at yahoo.com.au Sun Jan 31 04:19:02 2010 From: xdollarfuel at yahoo.com.au (mich rolling) Date: Sun Jan 31 04:22:05 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Jindalee bicycle bridge under construction Message-ID: <17296.68221.qm@web44812.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> Glen expresses the frustration that most of us feel when bicycles are accomodated as an add-on at the end of the planning and design process. Maybe it is getting better - the Gateway cycle path (didn't earlier discussions hear say it was about $30M for the whole enlarged route which was less than the project contingency budget?) suggests that it is. The Lutwyche Road / Bowen Hills schmoozle suggests not. Maybe it is the quality of the planners involved? Anyway. The Jindalee bridge is part of a suburban bicycle path system serving local active transport needs - mainly it seems kids to school and suburban exercise walkers. Both valuable things and both which have immediate benefits and help to develop habits which might increase the demand for main routes in coming years. The Jindalee bridge is also part of the programme of spreading the state cycling dollar around. There are also cycle routes and highway underpasses in Logan, bridges in Beenleigh and Taigum and Cleveland and Ipswich and ... and....and.... Maybe the money could be better spent developing the main commuter routes. But didn't I read somewhere that 80% of suburbanites work in the suburbs, not the CBDs? Maybe core routes radiating out from suburban cores which have been designed to co-locate schools near shops near train stations are an effective way of getting the masses onto two wheels and also an equitable way of spreading the money around? Bicycle Queensland is not going to tell us how they think infrastructure should be developed so we have to try and fill in the gaps in available policy ourselves. __________________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo!7: Catch-up on your favourite Channel 7 TV shows easily, legally, and for free at PLUS7. www.tv.yahoo..com.au/plus7 From michael at yeatesit.biz Sun Jan 31 22:53:48 2010 From: michael at yeatesit.biz (Michael Yeates) Date: Sun Jan 31 22:54:13 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Jindalee bicycle bridge under construction In-Reply-To: <17296.68221.qm@web44812.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> References: <17296.68221.qm@web44812.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20100201045352.HTPM5306.nskntotgx02p.mx.bigpond.com@yit01.yeatesit.biz> Thanks Mitch ... Yep ...! But ...! More to the point, the current use of apparently rubber figures for providing for cyclists allows the use of the kind of mis-information that I referred to previously, to flourish ... and since so many of our community are either employed by or work in government agencies or organisations that work for them, it is rare for any real informed critical scrutiny to be applied ... hence the sooner the cycling provision is part of road or other transport projects (eg Busway stations without bike lockers and without bike racks), and NEVER costed separately, the better. But while we have sycophants trumpeting enthusiastic support for dollars spent on a project by project basis (and usually without caveats re standards, quality, quantity, etc), we won't get "integration" . BTW The Sunday-Mail articles yesterday are of interest ...if not concern ....! Firstly re cycling (page 24) and then a bit later $1m cars (page 28) ... but then on a recent BCC web page I note that ... The central 5kms is a thriving commercial and retail Mecca surrounded by living areas, specialist employment hubs, pioneering research and education institutions, and entertainment precincts.The city centre that the Blueprint covers is six per cent of the area of Brisbane, yet it accommodates 25% of residents and 50% of jobs.The River City Blueprint addresses the need for coordinated and integrated urban planning to accommodate growth within this 5km radius of the Brisbane CBD. Under the State Government's South East Queensland Regional Plan, Brisbane needs to provide 156,000 new dwellings by 2031, with a large proportion of these falling within a 5km radius of the CBD. That could mean that if the "planning" was at all cycle-friendly, there would be no more need for any more roads ... or cars ... in that 5km radius, just convert the surface roads for cycling and walking ... and what would that mean for $4m bridges connecting bits of isolated and disconnected bike path in the suburbs where it would seem, 50km/h is considered too slow for most residents, so would they like 30km/h? Car-free Cities? Brisbane? It might mean that the utility of cars is reduced so much in the "River City Blueprint" area that ... well .. you guess feel free to guess ... MY................. At 08:19 PM 31/01/2010, mich rolling wrote: >Glen expresses the frustration that most of us feel when bicycles are > accomodated as an add-on at the end of the planning and design > process. Maybe it is getting better - the Gateway cycle path (didn't earlier > discussions hear say it was about $30M for the whole enlarged route which > was less than the project contingency budget?) suggests that it is. The > Lutwyche Road / Bowen Hills schmoozle suggests not. Maybe it is the > quality of the planners involved? > >Anyway. The Jindalee bridge is part of a suburban bicycle path system > serving local active transport needs - mainly it seems kids to school and > suburban exercise walkers. Both valuable things and both which have > immediate benefits and help to develop habits which might increase the > demand for main routes in coming years. > >The Jindalee bridge is also part of the programme of spreading the state > cycling dollar around. There are also cycle routes and highway > underpasses in Logan, bridges in Beenleigh and Taigum and Cleveland and > Ipswich and ... and....and.... > >Maybe the money could be better spent developing the main commuter routes. > But didn't I read somewhere that 80% of suburbanites work in the suburbs, > not the CBDs? Maybe core routes radiating out from suburban cores which > have been designed to co-locate schools near shops near train stations > are an effective way of getting the masses onto two wheels and also an > equitable way of spreading the money around? > >Bicycle Queensland is not going to tell us how they think infrastructure > should be developed so we have to try and fill in the gaps in available > policy ourselves. > > > >__________________________________________________________________________________ >Yahoo!7: Catch-up on your favourite Channel 7 TV shows easily, >legally, and for free at PLUS7. www.tv.yahoo..com.au/plus7 > >_______________________________________________ >bikeqld mailing list >bikeqld@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: 9.0.733 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2659 - Release Date: >01/31/10 16:39:00 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikeqld.org.au/pipermail/bikeqld/attachments/20100201/9079714e/attachment.htm From b.wagner at ozemail.com.au Sun Jan 31 23:48:32 2010 From: b.wagner at ozemail.com.au (Bob Wagner) Date: Sun Jan 31 23:49:42 2010 Subject: [bikeqld] Cycling add In-Reply-To: <20100201045352.HTPM5306.nskntotgx02p.mx.bigpond.com@yit01.yeatesit.biz> References: <17296.68221.qm@web44812.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <20100201045352.HTPM5306.nskntotgx02p.mx.bigpond.com@yit01.yeatesit.biz> Message-ID: <55047989-E783-4A3E-A4B1-68ACDE8E9D03@ozemail.com.au> I have been looking for an English add that end up with someone saying "does anyone know the way home". Any ideas Bob Wagner Sent from my iPhone