[bikeqld] Moggill Rd crossing at Indooroopilly

[Ian Lister]

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