<html>
<body>
Well said Kim ...<br><br>
Another aspect from a cyclists point of view is it forces cyclists off
the road and onto the path given it seems nobody has considered ONE WAY
towards UQ ... if for no other reason than then being able to cycle up
the small incline west of St Lucia shopping centre then roll DOWN the
very steep Tarcoola Street ... but then what happens to the intersections
at both ends of Tarcoola Street? <br><br>
Council is giving nothing away in regard to the detail of the proposed
"upgrade" to the Tarcoola and Hawken Drive intersection where
having reached the top of this steep climb, odds on traffic in both
directions would have right of way under the current ONE WAY
proposal.<br><br>
It is hard to imagine having spent or committed up to $5-6m or more of
the $100m "bikeways budget" (or is that "bike PATH
budget"?) on this link, that BCC would then give cyclists "on
the road" any priority over traffic on either Hillside Terrace or
The Esplanade at the Tarcoola Street intersection <br><br>
Then add in that Council is again "promising" to install the
BAZ on The Esplanade while despite similar previous "promises"
when Carawa Street was widened some 2 years ago and as part of Stage 1 of
this "bikeway" along Hillside Terrace (the 20 year "bike
route") which Council says is completed in 2008 ... where NEITHER
have the BAZ despite regular requests and reminders.<br><br>
It is also worth noting that this work is in the Ward of Councillor
Prentice who is well aware of the issues involved (the more so now she is
the BCC Chair of cycling) yet still Council refuses to
"complete" work that was "promised" ...! <br><br>
Even the Councillor and Chairperson can't get the previously
"promised" work done ... so why believe any more
"promises" ?<br><br>
To me the ONE WAY option is little more than an attempt to get support
from people who have not thought through the consequences ... not only
here but in general. There are always advantages for someone who will
then loudly support them.<br><br>
Perhaps the ONE WAY option is also intended to (further?) split the
support aka by "wedging" ?<br><br>
But if there is some merit in it, then why not just ban parking on the
route already well used by cyclists uphill on Highland Terrace from say
6-9am to create a BIKE LANE uphill to Hawken Drive, do nothing else
although a speed limit less than 50 would be sensible, and use Hawken
Drive through to UQ but also from here access through the middle of St
Lucia towards the CBD etc? As this is virtually all here now, all it
needs is so signs and BIKE symbols for the BIKE LANE ... so no need for
the $5-6m paths? And no need to use Tarcoola Street?<br><br>
The real question is why the whole route from the Jack Pesch Bridge to UQ
has been regularly (and it seems quite deliberately) degraded if not
downgraded from a well signed BIKE ROUTE to an ordinary road with hardly
a cycling-friendly sign on it ... it seems then the $5-6m bike path is
just an attempt to reduce cycling "on the road" to not only
benefit motorists as Kim points out below, but to remove the nuisance of
cyclists from the roads to and from UQ. But in practice who will use it?
It has poor or no connections to the nearby residences and streets. It is
not particularly safe either at speed or from a personal security
perspective. And the Stage 2 option Council seems to keep pushing
involves removing a lot more trees along what is a remarkable and very
rare river edge "natural" area from UQ to almost the
Indooroopilly Bridges. Hopefully nobody who cycles thinks that should be
reduced...!. <br><br>
So should ANY of the funding be taken from the $100m budget for
"cycling" ?<br><br>
Of course "we" always happy to be convinced otherwise ... but
need to be convinced by evidence "on the road", not by more
vague "promises" ...!<br><br>
That "evidence" would have the BAZ from Indooroopilly station
to UQ in both directions "on the road". <br><br>
Anyone who wants more details, please feel free to ask.<br><br>
Essentially it is a path not needed ... that is, there are much higher
priority areas where the same money could be better spent ... than
building paths that duplicate former BIKE ROUTES ... assuming BCC has
indeed downgraded this route ... as based on the evidence, is the case
...!<br><br>
MY ....................<br><br>
At 03:43 PM 6/10/2009, kim wrote:<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Thanks Pete, So now the latest
'option', the one-way option, seems to want to dip further into the
specious 100m 'cycling' kitty to build an off-site parking lot for
University users with a nice footpath to get from the parking lot to the
Uni and forces cyclists heading to the Uni or Bridge from Indooroopilly
to use this footpath too. What's wrong with just widening the road to
include all the available shoulders, preventing parking and extending the
Uni's 30kph zone to include this? Surely there would then be plenty of
room for a BAZ both ways. Arguably there is a footpath, albeit a narrow
one, that could be improved and made more usable for locals accessing the
park from the adjacent homes. Right now the objective seems to be for
providing a footpath for the car parkers to get back to the Uni in
style.<br>
<br>
k<br><br>
Peter Whittle wrote: <br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite=""><br>
<h3><b>From <a href="http://www.bq.org.au">www.bq.org.au</a>
</b></h3><br><br>
<br>
<h3><b> </b></h3><br><br>
<br>
<h3><b>St Lucia bikeway consultation</b></h3><br><br>
<i>6 October 2009<br>
</i><br>
Brisbane City Council is asking for cyclists' feedback on the next stage
of a bikeway through St Lucia (along The Esplanade, part of the 'river
loop'). A public consultation will be held on Saturday, 10 October 2009,
2-4pm at St Lucia Uniting Church hall, 7 Hawken Drive (opposite Ironside
State School), or you can email your opinion to
<a href="mailto:communityfeedback@bigpond.com">
communityfeedback@bigpond.com</a>. Of the options presented, BQ slightly
favours the one-way option. See the PDFs (about 1mb each) linked below
for details.
<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.bq.org.au/../_downloads/stluciatwowayoption.pdf">
Two-way option</a>
<li>One-way option
(<a href="http://www.bq.org.au/../_downloads/stlucia1wayoption1of2.pdf">
sheet 1</a>,
<a href="http://www.bq.org.au/../_downloads/stlucia1wayoption2of2.pdf">
sheet 2</a>)
</ul> <br><br>
<pre>
_______________________________________________
bikeqld mailing list
<a href="mailto:bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au">bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au</a>
<a href="http://www.bikeqld.org.au/" eudora="autourl">
http://www.bikeqld.org.au/</a>
<a href="http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld">
http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld</a>
This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle
Queensland.</pre><font face="Courier New, Courier"></font></blockquote>
_______________________________________________<br>
bikeqld mailing list<br>
bikeqld@bikeqld.org.au<br>
<a href="http://www.bikeqld.org.au/" eudora="autourl">
http://www.bikeqld.org.au/</a><br>
<a href="http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld" eudora="autourl">
http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld</a><br>
This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland.<br><br>
No virus found in this incoming message.<br>
Checked by AVG -
<a href="http://www.avg.com/" eudora="autourl">www.avg.com</a> <br>
Version: 8.5.420 / Virus Database: 270.14.4/2416 - Release Date: 10/05/09
18:23:00</blockquote></body>
</html>