Skip to content Skip to main navigation

GDE 90 km/h implementation failures

Sgt.Bungers 16 March 2012 73

After a review that apparently lasted 5 months, the A.C.T Government decided to raise the speed limit on the Gungahlin Drive Extension from 80 km/h to 90 km/h.  The implementation was carried out over the weekend of the 10th and 11th of March 2012.  After the implementation of the higher speed limit, the following issues are immediately apparent:

  • Northern boundary of 80 and 90 km/h speed limit is unclear.  A 700 metre discrepancy exists with the 90 km/h zone extending 700 metres further north for northbound traffic, than the point where the 90 km/h zone commences for southbound traffic.  In violation of Australian Standard 1742.4 2.3.6.a.
  • 2x situations where motorists merging onto the GDE do not pass a speed limit sign for over 1 km (from Barton Highway and Bandjalong Cres).  In violation of AS 1742.4 3.2.7.d.
  • 60 km/h speed limit may still be found on off ramps from the GDE to Belconnen Way and Ginninderra Drive, despite Belconnen Way and Ginninderra Drive having 80 km/h speed limits.  Exits to Barton Highway from the GDE, and Exits to Hindmarsh Drive, Cotter road and William Hovel Drive have either have no speed limit signs or 80 km/h speed limits.  Why the inconsistency?
  • Less critical: small signs have been used to mark the boundaries of the new limit.  Why are large signs used to mark the boundary of the 80 and 100 km/h zones at the southbound end of the Tuggeranong Parkway / Drakeford drive, yet small signs used at the northern end?  There is no consistency in signage sizes.  Could also be argued not compliant with AS 1742.4 3.2.8.

These issues were not created by bad weather or vandalism.  They were created by a system within the A.C.T Government that allows speed limit signage to be implemented in an apparently low priority manner… despite enforcement of those speed limits being amoungst the most rigorous in the country.

(More detailed explanation and eventually pictures)

Not good enough

This decade has been declared by the United Nations to be the decade of Action for Road Safety. 1.3 million people are killed and up to 50 million are seriously injured each year on the worlds roads. The World Health Organisation has identified inappropriate and excessive speed as being one of the leading factors influencing road crashes. Jon Stanhope has also been quoted as saying that speed is “one of the biggest killers” on roads.

Despite this… ACT Government continues to implement speed limits in a manner which is so dumboundingly poor and apathetic, that it can only result in motorists treating speed limits in an equally apathetic manner, fueling the general disrespect for speed limits that the community already holds, and fueling the belief that speed cameras are about revenue.

The 90 km/h speed limit on the GDE is the result of a review so complicated that it took several months.  Yet the implementation of the speed limit signs on this new and high profile road has apparently been carried out with the basic instructions “just replace all the 80 signs with 90 signs.” No thought has been given to existing issues with the 80 signage, or where the new 80/90 km/h boundary at the northern end of the road will need to exist. The speed limit signage certainly is not reflective of a government so concerned about motorists exceeding speed limits, that they operate the highest number of fixed speed cameras in the country.

The signage issue that now exists on the GDE was NOT created by vandalism or natural events, it was created by pure incompetence.  It continues to be the case that the ACT Government, Roads ACT and their contractors are not concerned with having road users 100% aware of a speed limit by providing overt signage, with clear and unquestionable boundaries of speed limit zones.


What's Your Opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
73 Responses to GDE 90 km/h implementation failures
Filter
Order
KB1971 KB1971 7:06 am 18 Mar 12

TheDancingDjinn said :

I’ll add my bit, just because i have had problems with the cyclists recently. My son goes to Turner school and his entrance is on David St. There is a large zebra crossing there – many mornings i almost hit cyclists becasue they fly across it at top speed, i have no issues with cyclists, other than the fact that i almost hit them daily because they cannot bother to follow road rules. It would be my worst nightmare to hurt someone on the road, i do not want to hit you so please take care with yourselves. I am in a 1 ton bubble of safety, and your on 12kgs of metal with a styrofoam helmet on your head. Get off your bike and walk it ! And before anyone goes on about why i drive, i have said before, that i HAVE to drive, as i could not enrol my son in the neighbourhood school so i have to drive from the back of Spence to Turner every day

You know cyclists are only one road user group but you are hightlighting them as special. What about anybody else who does not use the road properly?

In the last two days I have nearly had two accidents, neither my fault. One was after the Glenloch on Parkes Way, all the left hand lanes from the GDE & William Hovell heading into the city going slow. I was last in a line of cars coming in from Tuggers & anybody who knows this stretch of road knows that it builds up in the morning. I had my safety gap & there was no one behind me but that didnt stop the bloke in the Moroon N15 Pulsar from pulling out from a near stop in front of me travelling at 60 (20km under the posted limit) forcing me to brake evasively (lucky for us I was not in my old Patrol but my newer Pathfider as I would most certainly have cleaned him up).

Number two, was in my street, a woman in a black Holden Astra failed to stop a stop sign & was well in my path before she even looked right, crapped herself & stopped in my path. I was doing 50 which if I had hit her would almost have certainly put her in hospital.

So, only bike riders do stupid things on the roads?

Postalgeek Postalgeek 11:53 pm 17 Mar 12

And what is it with this recurring obsession with Lycra? You can’t seem to take your eyes off it. Is it driven by some form of self-loathing homoerotic phobia? A lot of cyclists don’t wear the stuff and those that do obviously don’t give a shit what you think.

You do yourself a disservice by immediately pigeon-holing yourself as a dumbarse bigot with your repititious and tedious need to use the word as some form of perceived denigration (as if anyone else gives a shit), and it detracts from the rest of your arguments (those with some element of factual basis).

Postalgeek Postalgeek 10:50 pm 17 Mar 12

HenryBG said :

Oh, one of these idiots cleaned up my 4-year-old nephew a few weeks ago, right in front of me. God forbid somebody wearing lycra should actually slow down in consideration of other users of the cycle paths. He completely failed to apologise or in any way make it clear that he regretted knocking a small child off its bicycle. I gave that @#%# an ear-bashing, let me tell you.

I assume you were controlling the child on a cycle path and keeping him to the left, and the cyclist veered into you, which is sincerely terrible..

…because if not I’m going to have an absolute pharking field day with this: all this whinging about cyclists on roads and then whining about cyclists on cycle ways, and bollocks about cyclists clogging roads (post a photo on Monday if it happens so often. If you can’t, just take a photo of cars clogging a road; 8.30AM Monday on Monaro Hwy if you need a guaranteed starting point) and then bellyaching that they are going too fast on cycle paths to avoid wayward kids belonging to deluded adults who think shared infrastructure should be a safe place for all.

But that’s not you, is it?

TheDancingDjinn TheDancingDjinn 10:02 pm 17 Mar 12

I’ll add my bit, just because i have had problems with the cyclists recently. My son goes to Turner school and his entrance is on David St. There is a large zebra crossing there – many mornings i almost hit cyclists becasue they fly across it at top speed, i have no issues with cyclists, other than the fact that i almost hit them daily because they cannot bother to follow road rules. It would be my worst nightmare to hurt someone on the road, i do not want to hit you so please take care with yourselves. I am in a 1 ton bubble of safety, and your on 12kgs of metal with a styrofoam helmet on your head. Get off your bike and walk it ! And before anyone goes on about why i drive, i have said before, that i HAVE to drive, as i could not enrol my son in the neighbourhood school so i have to drive from the back of Spence to Turner every day

Jethro Jethro 9:09 pm 17 Mar 12

HenryBG said :

Jethro said :

Again. HenryBG I don’t understand why you are so anti-cyclist when you also fervently believe in global warming.

Surely if it is an issue that concerns you, you would be ditching the car yourself and switching to bike?

It seems to me that you are in denial yourself, with regards to the impact driving has on the climate. To criticise global warming denialists on one thread, and then criticise cyclists on another thread seems to be more than a bit hypocritical.

I don’t “believe” in anything – I assess the facts and conform to reality, unlike the minuscule minority of astronomically selfish lycra fans who labour under the delusion that their extreme fringe choice of sporting activity is deserving of support from *any* of our taxes.

Now they’ve got a new one one – “In Vancouver…blablabla”.
Well, the last was was “In Copenhagen…” and I conclusively demonstrated that Canberra ratepayers have funded cycling in this city by an order of magnitude higher than the citizens of Copenhagen have done in theirs. I really can’t be bothered looking past the cycle-fundie propaganda about Vancouver to see what the truth of that one is, but it’s safe to assume they are lying to us, again and as usual.

And despite all this spending, far, far fewer people are cycling today than ever before. It’s probably time the government stopped listening to cycle lobbies and started listening to real people instead.

Oh, one of these idiots cleaned up my 4-year-old nephew a few weeks ago, right in front of me. God forbid somebody wearing lycra should actually slow down in consideration of other users of the cycle paths. He completely failed to apologise or in any way make it clear that he regretted knocking a small child off its bicycle. I gave that @#%# an ear-bashing, let me tell you.

You didn’t respond at all to my comment.

If, by assessing the facts, you accept the scientific consensus behind climate change, you must also acknowledge that cars are one of the biggest contributors. Why with the cycle hate, when people who choose to commute by cycling are clearly doing something which is a positive for the environment.

To me, anyone who truly cares about climate change would be all in favour of diverting funding from policies that encourage people to drive and towards policies that encourage alternative forms of transport, particularly zero emission forms such as cycling.

HenryBG HenryBG 8:41 pm 17 Mar 12

caf said :

HenryBG said :

And despite all this spending, far, far fewer people are cycling today than ever before.

I believe this is what’s usually known as “bullshit”.

Less people were cycling to work or full-time study in the Northern Territory and in the Australian Capital Territory (both 5% in 2006 down to 3% in 2009).
2.5 WALK OR CYCLE TO WORK OR FULL-TIME STUDY
The most common reason reported by people for why they did not walk or cycle to their place of work or full-time study was that the distance was too far (71% for not walking, 45% for not cycling). This was reported by people in every age group.

http://www.abs.gov.au

1301.0 – Year Book Australia, 2009–10

caf caf 8:04 pm 17 Mar 12

HenryBG said :

And despite all this spending, far, far fewer people are cycling today than ever before.

I believe this is what’s usually known as “bullshit”.

HenryBG HenryBG 7:49 pm 17 Mar 12

Jethro said :

Again. HenryBG I don’t understand why you are so anti-cyclist when you also fervently believe in global warming.

Surely if it is an issue that concerns you, you would be ditching the car yourself and switching to bike?

It seems to me that you are in denial yourself, with regards to the impact driving has on the climate. To criticise global warming denialists on one thread, and then criticise cyclists on another thread seems to be more than a bit hypocritical.

I don’t “believe” in anything – I assess the facts and conform to reality, unlike the minuscule minority of astronomically selfish lycra fans who labour under the delusion that their extreme fringe choice of sporting activity is deserving of support from *any* of our taxes.

Now they’ve got a new one one – “In Vancouver…blablabla”.
Well, the last was was “In Copenhagen…” and I conclusively demonstrated that Canberra ratepayers have funded cycling in this city by an order of magnitude higher than the citizens of Copenhagen have done in theirs. I really can’t be bothered looking past the cycle-fundie propaganda about Vancouver to see what the truth of that one is, but it’s safe to assume they are lying to us, again and as usual.

And despite all this spending, far, far fewer people are cycling today than ever before. It’s probably time the government stopped listening to cycle lobbies and started listening to real people instead.

Oh, one of these idiots cleaned up my 4-year-old nephew a few weeks ago, right in front of me. God forbid somebody wearing lycra should actually slow down in consideration of other users of the cycle paths. He completely failed to apologise or in any way make it clear that he regretted knocking a small child off its bicycle. I gave that @#%# an ear-bashing, let me tell you.

shadow boxer shadow boxer 7:06 pm 17 Mar 12

Gungahlin Al said :

shadow boxer said :

gasman said :

I finally realise I’m arguing with “one of those”. I’ll let it rest. Enjoy your traffic jams, your bushfires and your future coronary bypass, Shadow Boxer.

lol, you got owned dude.

And we shall all remember this admission that you are indeed trolling, every time in future you trot out your stupid anti-cyclist “arguments”. I for one am over your games. Life’s too short.

Where did I admit that ?

Self entitlement

It means that an individual believes he is entitled to have whatever he want when he want it, without regard to what is fair or reasonable to others. So he takes everything and everyone for granted. He expects to receive favours without ever having to do anyone else a favour. He feels entitled to invade and trespass on others’ boundaries; believes that everything he receives is his due.

He has no concern or respect for the rights of others but vigorously protects his own. Rules, guidelines, convention and laws apply to other people and he alone is entitled to disregard them. Often he projects an image of arrogance, inconsiderateness and selfishness.

Does that pretty well sum up the Cyclist vs car debate ? I’m glad i’ve got my horse.

Gungahlin Al Gungahlin Al 6:25 pm 17 Mar 12

Meanwhile back OT, good summary Sgt Bungers.

On disappearing bike lanes, this is my favourite (NOT) spot on my monthly night rides after Belco Arts Centre board meetings: http://maps.google.com.au/maps?q=mitchell+ACT&hl=en&ll=-35.218901,149.131417&spn=0.001665,0.003168&sll=-25.335448,135.745076&sspn=58.257118,103.798828&hnear=Mitchell+Australian+Capital+Territory&t=h&z=19

The lane just disappears and you find yourself in the middle of a 90kph road pedalling your guts out to get up to the lights before traffic takes you out.

I wrote to Tony Gill about this weeks back and he said it would be fixed, but nothing yet. Looking at the satellite shot I see there is a disconnected bike path up on top of the bank, but no connection to it. And it’s a bit of a steep climb. But it’s a simple job to fix – just extend the bikepath down to t and chuck in a ramp in the gutter. Sorted.

So why didn’t the people building it sort this in the first place. This ain’t bloody rocket science…

switch switch 6:15 pm 17 Mar 12

Is this a record for how long it took for the Subject to devolve into “Bikes vs. Cars?”

Gungahlin Al Gungahlin Al 6:11 pm 17 Mar 12

shadow boxer said :

gasman said :

I finally realise I’m arguing with “one of those”. I’ll let it rest. Enjoy your traffic jams, your bushfires and your future coronary bypass, Shadow Boxer.

lol, you got owned dude.

And we shall all remember this admission that you are indeed trolling, every time in future you trot out your stupid anti-cyclist “arguments”. I for one am over your games. Life’s too short.

shadow boxer shadow boxer 5:26 pm 17 Mar 12

gasman said :

shadow boxer said :

I rest my case, when they write the history of the most deluded and self entitled groups that pissed everybody off in the early 21st century the nominees are;

Soccer fans (who think everybody wants to watch soccer if we could just force them to)
Cyclists (who think everybody wants to ride a bike if we could just force them to) and
Dog owners (who think everybody loves their dog and is happy to listen to them bark, bound up to their children and leave faeces everywhere).

Honourable metions to the public transport and climate change folks.

I finally realise I’m arguing with “one of those”. I’ll let it rest. Enjoy your traffic jams, your bushfires and your future coronary bypass, Shadow Boxer.

lol, you got owned dude.

Are you sure you dont want to join my horse riding advocacy group, we could ride on the paths but we find them a bit bumpy so we are demanding on road horse paths.

If we dont get them I will be off to the anti discrimination commissioner.

gasman gasman 4:35 pm 17 Mar 12

shadow boxer said :

I rest my case, when they write the history of the most deluded and self entitled groups that pissed everybody off in the early 21st century the nominees are;

Soccer fans (who think everybody wants to watch soccer if we could just force them to)
Cyclists (who think everybody wants to ride a bike if we could just force them to) and
Dog owners (who think everybody loves their dog and is happy to listen to them bark, bound up to their children and leave faeces everywhere).

Honourable metions to the public transport and climate change folks.

I finally realise I’m arguing with “one of those”. I’ll let it rest. Enjoy your traffic jams, your bushfires and your future coronary bypass, Shadow Boxer.

Jethro Jethro 4:18 pm 17 Mar 12

HenryBG said :

Postalgeek said :

First, bikes aren’t just a sport, anymore than driving is a sport.

Get off the grass.

Those pixies don their lycra gear and clog the roads entirely for reasons of sport.

Transport infrastructure in the form of roads has as its purpose to enable motor vehicles to move about. It is expensive enough without paying even more to cater for every lunatic fringe element that wants to stick its oar in.

Again. HenryBG I don’t understand why you are so anti-cyclist when you also fervently believe in global warming.

Surely if it is an issue that concerns you, you would be ditching the car yourself and switching to bike?

It seems to me that you are in denial yourself, with regards to the impact driving has on the climate. To criticise global warming denialists on one thread, and then criticise cyclists on another thread seems to be more than a bit hypocritical.

shadow boxer shadow boxer 4:04 pm 17 Mar 12

gasman said Actually, I regard the needs of cyclists not as equal to that of car drivers but even more important.

I rest my case, when they write the history of the most deluded and self entitled groups that pissed everybody off in the early 21st century the nominees are;

Soccer fans (who think everybody wants to watch soccer if we could just force them to)
Cyclists (who think everybody wants to ride a bike if we could just force them to) and
Dog owners (who think everybody loves their dog and is happy to listen to them bark, bound up to their children and leave faeces everywhere).

Honourable metions to the public transport and climate change folks.

gasman gasman 3:57 pm 17 Mar 12

HenryBG said :

johnboy said :

They put an on-road cycling lane near my house about 2.5 years ago – I have *never* seen a single, solitary cyclist *ever* use it.[/quote>

Probably because it doesn’t go anywhere important (sorry) or doesn’t link to other cycle routes. Although Canberra is often touted as the cycle capital of Australia, in reality the cycle network is extremely patchy. Cycle lanes have often been put where the road is wide enough to accommodate. As soon as the road narrows, the cycle lane ends. A patchy cycle network is almost as useless as no network at all, and won’t be used.

I spent 2 years in living in Vancouver, BC. While I was there, there was a shift in policy on bicycle infrastructure. The new mayor formulated a goal to decrease congestion in Vancouver, one of North America’s busiest downtown areas. Bike lanes and paths were created, back streets shut down or traffic calmed to allow cyclist safe routes through the city. Entire lanes on bridges shut down to cars, and converted to cycleways, initially as a trial, but was so successful it became permanent. Old railways converted to bike trails. Signage, maps, point of interest and refreshment stations.

Read my write-up here.

It became so successful that downtown car traffic decreased by 7%, with a concurrent increase in cycling. Vancouver is far more hilly than Canberra, yet there are far more cyclists in that city.

It means that those people that want to or have to drive can do so more easily, and those that want to or choose to ride bikes can do so more safely.

gasman gasman 3:30 pm 17 Mar 12

shadow boxer said :

The idea that the needs of cyclists are equally important to that of cars, trucks and buses on our roads is quite silly.

Any debate that starts from this premise is flawed.

By all means share the road but dont interfere with their primary function.

Actually, I regard the needs of cyclists not as equal to that of car drivers but even more important.

Firstly, cyclists are far more vulnerable to injury and death from cars, and therefore there are standards that are formulated (in Australia, by Austroads) to ensure safety of all, standards that are not complied with by the new speed limit on the GDE. There exists a duty of care from society to look after its more vulnerable members.

Secondly, riding a bike is far more justifiable on many grounds than driving a car. We cost the community far less in terms of oil, health and environmental degredation. Or to put it another way, by spending more on cycling facilities (or in the case of the GDE, simply complying with Austroads standards), the community as a whole, including car drivers, save money.

By giving cycling a higher priority, we all benefit.

TheDancingDjinn TheDancingDjinn 3:27 pm 17 Mar 12

Skidbladnir said :

PrinceOfAles said :

Cyclists pay taxes. Therefore they`re entitled to have cycle paths/on road cycle lanes built for them.

That’s an awfully weak line of argument.
First, road users pay additional fees and surcharges on top of standard taxes, which (in theory) go to building and maintaining a road network, services, and regulation thereof. That the roads, services, and regulatory bodies cost significantly more than these fees cover is legitimised by the overlap of roads with basic economic infrastructure.
So when road users complain, government listens. When cyclists complain, most governments pretend to listen. For some strange reason our government started to do more than nod politely, and tried providing for all desires of all people, but disproportionately burdens its current tax base.

Less seriously, pedophiles also pay taxes, but we give them prison sentences and therapy.
Do you really want to draw comparisons between cyclists and the demands vs actual returns of -any possible subcategory- of taxpayer?
Or are you advocating a user-pays model, because then cyclists will start getting only what they pay for, instead of what they simply expect handouts for…

No, no – THIS^^^^

gasman gasman 3:07 pm 17 Mar 12

To those of you who are expressing anti-bike sentiments: You and I want the same thing!

You, in a car, want to be able to drive without bikes slowing you down. I, on a bike, want to be off the road where car drivers often drive badly at 90km/h. This can easily be acheived by building fairly inexpensive infrastructure to separate bikes from cars. At the moment, the ACT Govt spends far less than 1% of its roads budget on cycling facilities. If it spent a little more, we would have more people on bikes, less in cars, and that would benefit us all, including those that choose to drive.

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2020 Region Group Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | riotact.com.cn | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site