<html>
<body>
Thanks Anthony ...<br><br>
The first step here is to get the cycling back to two way ... and
accepted or tolerated ... ie self-managed by cyclists ... <br><br>
then get better signage so it is very clear that peds are banned ... and
that enforced as necessary ...<br><br>
then perhaps to get rid of the "big brother is concerned about
cyclists safety attitude of BCC", it is up to the cyclists to sort
themselves out and avoid collisions, etc?<br><br>
That done (if it doesn't take the 6 weeks ;-) ) the issue will be why BCC
continues to build these substandard facilities and why QT and all those
"experts" who profess (and indeed get paid by me and you) to
promote and provide for cycling, are not doing their job ...!<br><br>
So if the attention of the controllers IS turning to keeping the peds on
their path ie the footpaths along the side of Coro Drive, and this is
working, then the issue can also return to why ANY of the $100m is being
spent on this project as it is clearly for both peds and motorists ie is
either part of the HUGE BCC road budget (ie a stage of the previous
numerous widenings of Coro Drive) or from the minuscule BCC footpath
budget ... as all this project will do is (hopefully) return the
Bicentennial Bikeway to cyclists only ie a "bike path"
.<br><br>
Any other feedback would be appreciated esp somebody (anybody?) with a
tape who will measure the clear width ... please?<br><br>
MY......................<br><br>
At 05:31 AM 7/05/2009, Anthony Lee wrote:<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Hi Michael,<br><br>
I rode through there on Tuesday (four times) and the traffic controllers
seem to be letting traffic <br>
flow both ways. What annoy me is that there are not enough signs to let
pedestrians know that<br>
they are not allowed on the temporary section. I think the traffic
controllers is there to make<br>
sure that the pedestrians walk on the footpath above.<br><br>
Anthony<br>
<br>
Anthony Lee<br>
The Doctor -- the last of the Time Lords?<br>
........-- __o <br>
....-- _ \<,_<br>
........(_) / (_) <br>
E-Mail: doctorw1963@yahoo.com.au<br><br>
<br>
<br>
<font face="Tahoma" size=2><b>From:</b> Michael Yeates
<michael@yeatesit.biz><br>
<b>To:</b> bikeqld <bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au><br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, 6 May, 2009 9:24:20 AM<br>
<b>Subject:</b> RE: [bikeqld] Coro Drive - oh goody<br>
</font><br>
Hi all ...<br><br>
How is the Coro Drive ONE WAY "bikeway" ?<br><br>
Does it <u>really</u> need to be one way?<br><br>
Does BCC <u>really</u> need to waste scarce cycling funds on traffic
controllers?<br><br>
Or is the current situation evidence that ...<br><br>
(i) BCC has been rather vindictive in implementing the ONE WAY controlled
system and <br><br>
(ii) wants to "bury" the issue of allegedly substandard
provision?<br><br>
If (ii) is the case, is BCC trying to distract from the real issue namely
provision of facilities that do (or do not) comply with
"standards" and "guidelines" in order to avoid public
scrutiny and investigation as to how the problems (?) with the facility
came about?<br><br>
To date it seems nobody has made public the measured <u>clear</u> minimum
width ... although 2m has been mentioned.<br>
</blockquote></body>
</html>