Labor proposes $4.7m UC-CIT-town centre bikeway for Belconnen

gooterz said :

Do bikes get fined for breaking the 10km /h speed limit? Do bikes have regristration or compulsory insurance?

Probably, yes they do. What’s your point?
On registration: http://www.executivestyle.com.au/18-reasons-why-registering-bicycles-is-a-bad-idea-1m23gh
On Insurance. Not compulsory because a person on a bicycle is relatively unlikely to cause massive personal and property damage.

Cars however…

gooterz said :

What roads are unused?
There are plenty of roadside cycle lanes that arent used for weeks at a time.

Most roads are used, but some are rather excessively funded, like a dual carriageway through a high pedestrian area.
Unused cycle lanes That may be the case, but if an extra line and some symbols on the road are enough to make more drivers aware, then it’s worth the extra 1% budget to put them on.

gooterz said :

You just sound bitter. Don’t let facts fall in the way of ur strawman argument.

The facts still ramain that the gov is catering for people that dont live here yet. The current residents are expected to foot the bill for the next 150,000 people to move in. Why not charge those people a fair share of it.

Because charging people a “new residents” levy is unlikely to encourage people to move to Canberra…

Its clear that Barr and mainly Rattenbury want to only encourage certain people to live here. And they eant to use our money to do so. They aren’t content to follow what residents want.

Well, obviously that’s people who support Labor and the Greens. As a prospective immigrant to Belconnen I am following this proposal very closely, as it will infulence where I move to next year.

Obviously with transport infrastructure the devil is in the details. It’s quite likely that lanes will be narrowed to accomodate the bike lane.
Disjointed cycle infrastructure is relatively commonplace. Even the Civic Cycle Loop has some disconnects; the childcare centre/bus stop being a major sticking point. Do you similarly rage at pedestrians for crossing against the light? All things considered, I think it’s a pretty minor thing to get worked up about. It’s not like they’re endangering anyone but themselves.

The bottom line is bicycles aren’t dangerous. It’s the motor vehicles that pose the hazard, that kill all the people with great mass and speed. That’s why separated cycle infrastructure is hands down an effective tool to encourage people to ride to uni and the shops instead of drive, because with this, they don’t need a 1.5-tonne metal box to feel safe.

gooterz said :

Maya123 said :

gooterz said :

There is already massively unused cycle infrastructure. None of the bikes obey road rules as it is.

That is such a silly statement.
See how silly this reads, but it makes the same statement:
There is already massively unused road infrastructure. None of the cars obey road rules as it is.

Do bikes get fined for breaking the 10km /h speed limit? Do bikes have regristration or compulsory insurance?

What roads are unused?
There are plenty of roadside cycle lanes that arent used for weeks at a time.

You just sound bitter. Don’t let facts fall in the way of ur strawman argument.

The facts still ramain that the gov is catering for people that dont live here yet. The current residents are expected to foot the bill for the next 150,000 people to move in. Why not charge those people a fair share of it.

Its clear that Barr and mainly Rattenbury want to only encourage certain people to live here. And they eant to use our money to do so. They aren’t content to follow what residents want.

I’m sure if they had the chance they would bring back prohibition too.

Not bitter; just sad that people continue to make incorrect, biased claims. I by the way have insurance, as do all PP members. What shared paths aren’t used for weeks at a time? Most adults who cycle also have cars which they pay registration for, so if they leave their car at home and use the bike, they are reducing the wear and tear on roads, congestion, use of finite petrol, etc, and so reducing all our costs. It’s a sedentary population that is costing us in health care expenses. People do need to stop driving everywhere and get some exercise, and having people on bikes is one way to improve the populations health.
The ACT government can’t be blamed for extra population; the fault there lies with the Federal government and their high immigration polices and the child bonus scheme too. Blame them, not local governments who have to then cater and prepare for the extra population. I want the Australian population stabilised and voted for the Sustainable Australia last election to reflect this. Now, is it just talk on your account, or have you also voted to reflect that you don’t want the population to continue to grow? If you voted for either of the main parties federally, it is just talk, because both of them believe in a much larger population.
By the way, I find a spell checker helpful; you would too.

The Benjamin Way section has no available space on the kerb for a 3-4 meter wide cycleway. The western side has the Westfield shopping center facade with pedestrian activity and the entrances to the carpark, you can’t build it there.
The eastern side has pedestrian traffic, coffee shops and the facades of the buildings so it also is not suitable.
If you put it in the middle, there are 9 vehicular intersections to cross and many pedestrian crossings. Do you give pedestrians or cyclists the right of way on this super highway? Do we need traffic signals so pedestrians don’t get flattened by the cyclists charging down to the lake doing 40km/h+?
If the map is correctly representing the path as continuing north of Emu Bank and down Joynton Smith Drive, using the disused old bus interchange entrance, they run into a problem at the flats on the corner of Emu Bank and Luxton street because of the existing trees and pedestrian path. There is already a cycle path running along there anyway.
I think that due to the complexities of the design, we are either going to see the roads in this area lose a whole car lane to cyclists or a whole lot of trees getting chopped down and footpaths surrendered to bikes.
If the cyclists in Belconnen are anything like those in Civic, we will simply see them go from being cyclists [on shared/bike path] to pedestrians [when at a pedestrian crossing green walking man], to vehicles [after crossing half way across the crossing and then turning into the opposite car lane] and then back to being a cyclist [when the bike lane resumes]. They cannot obey a basic traffic signal but instead try to use any part of the road, shared path and footpath to keep moving instead of waiting patiently like everyone else has to. They meander all over the intersection, going against the flow of traffic, riding whichever way is devoid of activity just so they don’t have to stop and wait like everyone else. If a car or motorcycle was to navigate like this, it’d be called driving in a manner dangerous to the public. But cyclists are immune to laws, they have their own laws now that pretty much enable them to do whatever they want and if they come unstuck, it’ll be somebody else’ fault.
If these cycle only lanes eventuate, there has to be a law that stipulates that they have to use that path and not ride on the road. Why kick up such a fuss all the time for safety and then ignore the methods provided?

Maya123 said :

gooterz said :

There is already massively unused cycle infrastructure. None of the bikes obey road rules as it is.

That is such a silly statement.
See how silly this reads, but it makes the same statement:
There is already massively unused road infrastructure. None of the cars obey road rules as it is.

Do bikes get fined for breaking the 10km /h speed limit? Do bikes have regristration or compulsory insurance?

What roads are unused?
There are plenty of roadside cycle lanes that arent used for weeks at a time.

You just sound bitter. Don’t let facts fall in the way of ur strawman argument.

The facts still ramain that the gov is catering for people that dont live here yet. The current residents are expected to foot the bill for the next 150,000 people to move in. Why not charge those people a fair share of it.

Its clear that Barr and mainly Rattenbury want to only encourage certain people to live here. And they eant to use our money to do so. They aren’t content to follow what residents want.

I’m sure if they had the chance they would bring back prohibition too.

The blue bike path on Ginninderra Drive in the top right hand side annoyed me. Why not 1 continuous path on the one side of Ginninderra drive from Ellenborough Street to at least Aikman Drive?

gooterz said :

There is already massively unused cycle infrastructure. None of the bikes obey road rules as it is.

That is such a silly statement.
See how silly this reads, but it makes the same statement:
There is already massively unused road infrastructure. None of the cars obey road rules as it is.

I think this is a great idea. Any bike route connecting residential areas to a university is going to see high usage; just look to the Lyneham->ANU shared path for comparison.

Labors plan is to build the city for the people they want to live here. They don’t care about the ones that don’t agree that already live here.

There is already massively unused cycle infrastructure. None of the bikes obey road rules as it is.