12 November 2009

New Protected Cycle Lanes for Civic?

| Horrid
Join the conversation
48

The Canberra Times reports that separated ‘Copenhagen’ style cycle lanes are being considered for Civic, along with a ‘shared space’ zone on Bunda St where all users have equal rights. Pedal Power seem to think it’s a good thing and a bit of digging on their website soon revealed where the idea came from- looks like part of some kind of orbital cycling route around the whole of Civic.

Personally I reckon it’s a great idea- you could ride round this cycleway thing in quarter of the time it would take in a car in rush hour, methinks. And get to just about anywhere in Civic you needed to go on it. And give the people screaming about cyclists in their way exactly what they want- the cyclists off to one side somewhere. Now me, I don’t mind riding in Civic now, but I’ll bet that the shopper set, trendy uni students, office workers and the like would all go for this and get on their bikes to ride it.

So hopefully it’s something that Canberrans will get behind and support. I fear not all will- nothing brings out the hatemongers and rednecks faster than the prospect of taxes that cyclists pay being spent on cycling, instead of yet another freeway or carpark. But there is probably a lot more people who reckon if it works in Copenhagen, or Melbourne like the CT story says, then it’ll probably work in Canberra as well.

Join the conversation

48
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

I’m sure it does. But probably not quite as much as being flattened by a car.

It also hurts when your car meets a truck, like 4 kids found out this morning near Yass, but that doesn’t stop anyone driving.

as someone with both a car and a bike, i pay the car taxes a lot of you are talking about, as well as a suite of other taxes which doubtless get used on road infrastructure – the ‘slap a tax on cyclists’ argument really does get a bit old and we ALL know (or we should) that it’s not the case that every dollar you pay in car-related taxes get spent on roads, or your property rates on local (ie your postcode) infrastructure etc etc. not to mention some of us pay craploads more tax than others but we all drive or cycle on the same roads.

surely people who drive cars can see the benefits in encouraging people to cycle. you can’t? here’s a few simple benefits off the top of my head. more people cycling means less other cars on the road. this means those who have no choice (or who perceive they have no choice) about driving have less cars on the road to content with – you get to your destination faster, safer and easier. it means less wear and tear on our roads so lower cost of upkeep ie less taxes (or less increase in them)! it means less pollution – making our local and greater environment better which leads to healthier happier populations.

it’s really not rocket science.

annoyedcan said :

Why do cyclist’s want to ride on roads. Paths are a better opion. It hurts alot when you get hit by a car.

It hurts a lot when you headon another cyclist. The paths are dangerous this time of year.
Too many people think that “the paths are safe” so they don’t need to stay on the left for blind corners.
Monday, as I turned off the path I saw ambos holding up a saline bag with bikes in the grass by the blind corner.

dvaey said :

So, will cyclists be paying extra for this infrastructure that they have exclusive access to? Will car drivers get a discount because the available road is being reduced? Will roads such as Northborne lose a road-lane or will they lose pedestrian area? You cant add a cycle lane without sacrificing one of those two. Cyclists are ‘wheeled pedestrians’ and should be given the same allocation and rule-set as pedestrians, imho.

I’m willing to guarantee that I pay more tax than you and I ride, so I guess I’m already paying ‘extra’.

You might also need a refresher on definitions of parts of the road rules as well.

“Why do cyclist’s want to ride on roads. Paths are a better opion. It hurts alot when you get hit by a car.”

Not all do but the law is the law.

Why do cyclist’s want to ride on roads. Paths are a better opion. It hurts alot when you get hit by a car.

I’m quite comfortable cycling along Bunda St as it is, the cars slow me down as much as I slow them down – and they keep the pedestrians away.

Bit late into this discussion, but the protected cycle lanes are a great idea. I’ve seen how well this works in cities like Copenhagen and Amsterdam. Canberra is an awesome city to cycle around in and everything done to encourage cycling is a positive step for our city.

James-T-Kirk said :

I don’t have to register my trailbike I hoon up and down the reserve on.

AFAIK, if you’re unregistered and unlicensed, your riding venues consist of the ACT MCC track in Fairbairn or one of the other private tracks around.

On public property your trailbike is only allowed on roads – dirt or paved – and like any road you have to be registered to use them. There are no legal off-road trails in the ACT to the best of my knowledge.

MTBs are allowed on formed tracks in Canberra Nature Parks, as well as the MTB-legal areas (Kowen, Stromlo, Majura etc.)

Regarding the shared use road – traffic flows? Close it permanently and get the cafes like Gus’/Essen and restaurants like Sammy’s spread right out there. That’d be great. That little stretch of road accomodates bugger-all parking and traffic and trying to get through there at busy times is just as slow as going around Cooyong.

Not sure what you on about regarding the 90 degree thing, as the only cars at 90 degrees in the PDF are in the artist’s drawing of Bendigo.

The roads chosen for the dedicated bike lane seem like good choices to me.

Pedal Power’s members’ taxes will pay for the cost just fine, methinks. If they fall a little short, perhaps Mr Plod can hang out in Civic and fine all the bogans riding bikes without helmets. Then move onto stupid drivers, who do things like blocking intersections by entering them without being able to exit them. That’d raise revenues pretty quickly, and sort out some of those traffic flow issues you’re on about.

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy12:07 pm 13 Nov 09

Quite clearly, noone is being punished enough…

nexus6 said :

actually i think bike riders should be fined for breaking the law.

There’s nothing magical about not being registered – if you break the law, you can still be brought to account.

By the same token, I regularly see registered motorists breaking the law, and they go unpunished.

Registration has absolutely nothing to do with law-breaking and ‘being held to account’. This argument is a red herring.

James-T-Kirk11:05 am 13 Nov 09

The proposal says Pedal Power has 3000 members – Share the cost among them.

Oh – And in the stakeholder/issues list – it only mentions positives. Go out and canvas the actual stakeholders, and publish the negatives. Who gives two hoots that the NRMA is happy about the street becoming one way – what about the commuters?

Also, is the parking in one of the pictures actually 90 degree. That will stop traffic as soon as somebody goes to find a parking spot – this plan is a plan built by people with no understanding for traffic flows.

Apart from that, I *love* the idea…..

James-T-Kirk11:02 am 13 Nov 09

nexus6 said :

” should i register my MTB which has never been ridden on public roads?

Of course not – I don’t have to register my trailbike I hoon up and down the reserve on.

nexus6 said :

actually i think bike riders should be fined for breaking the law. I dont think we shoudl pay rego. should i register my MTB which has never been ridden on public roads? I also think cyclists should be liable for any damage or injury they cause. My comments earlier were more directed at the frustration that drivers feel when they see a cyclist break the law.

I see your point, I agree with most things you say. Although as others have said, a cyclist can hide behind anonymity. And a rego system similar to motorcycles makes sense – don’t register it if you don’t ride it on the road. In addition to accountability, the gov’t could spend a hell of a lot more money making dedicated cycle lanes to make cycling even safer. From my point of view, it’s the poor actions of a few cyclists which ruin it for the rest of you and give motorists a bad impression of all of you.

Horrid said :

…turning it into an unrelated discussion on road rules, full of the usual fallacies of logic, sweeping generalisations, double standards and outright lies that they use in place of actual arguments.

Please don’t act all ‘holier-than-thou’, for someone who criticises all of these negative traits you sure do use a lot of them. Instead of complaining about people highjacking your thread why don’t you break the cycle and comment on the many positive and legit criticisms (i.e. changing rooms and showers in office buildings)?

“Using that logic do you also support no rego, no fines and no liability for motorcycle and scooter riders?”

actually i think bike riders should be fined for breaking the law. I dont think we shoudl pay rego. should i register my MTB which has never been ridden on public roads? I also think cyclists should be liable for any damage or injury they cause. My comments earlier were more directed at the frustration that drivers feel when they see a cyclist break the law. “why so angry?” its not uncommon to have drivers intentionaly swerve close to you, beep their horn for no reason, yell abuse or throw things at you when you cycle on the road. basically WTF is wrong with car drivers that they get SO angry at cyclists who are only risking their own lives when they do something stupid? Maybe its the frustration of being stuck inside your metal box, breathing fumes and listening to crap commercial radio that makes you so angry? I dont know but i do my absolute best not to ride on roads at all these days, hence my calling for more and better designed paths. most of the paths are good, but there could still be more of them, and better design is somthing you should always aim for.

as fo cyclists having no liability, is this really tru? if i ride my bike into someones car or a person on the footpath are there really no penalties?

Deckard said :

Dvaey
.. You always need to hijack any thread to do with cycling to rabbit on about rego for cyclists. Give it a rest will you. It ain’t going to happen so deal with it!

I never said anything about paying rego, other than a small joke about drivers maybe paying less because of less roads to use.

Deckard said :

When drivers pay for 100% of the road they’re driving on, then maybe you’d have a point.

Drivers dont pay 100% for the road they drive on at all, but they do pay 100% for their RIGHT to drive on the road. If I try to use the road without a licence and without paying my dues for rego, road safety, and insurance or without displaying proper identification, Im liable for an offence, however once again that is an argument for another thread.

I have no problem with bike paths or cyclists in general, infact I believe they are a part of what makes canberra a more attractive place to live, with the ability to cycle along our many paths at your own pace while enjoying the best nature has to offer, which is different to how I view roadways and on-road cycleways where as I was always taught, being able to use the public road isnt a right its a privilege.

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy said :

I find it interesting that cyclists seem free to criticise and be unhappy about their cycle paths, but car drivers just have to suck up whatever is thrown at them.

Yeah right. So the NRMA has never lobbied in its entire existence?

As I predicted in my op, “nothing brings out the hatemongers and rednecks faster than the prospect of taxes that cyclists pay being spent on cycling”.

It was of course, too much to hope for that a sensible discussion on possible alternative cycling methods would not be almost immediately hijacked by anti cycling bigots (who presumably are too lazy or stupid to start their own thread), turning it into an unrelated discussion on road rules, full of the usual fallacies of logic, sweeping generalisations, double standards and outright lies that they use in place of actual arguments.

This just makes me like the idea of a redneck and bigot-free zone in these special cycleway lanes even more than I did before.

Having a small piece of cycberspace on Riot Act taken over by these morons is slightly annoying to me and other cyclists. But that’s fine- the consolation is going to be watching them work themselves into a lather of hatred and fury, when these special cycle lanes get built on physical space that they think belongs to themselves only, and being completely unable to stop it. That will be so much fun that any improvement that makes cycling easier will be almost a bonus. I might even join Pedal Power to help them achieve it.

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy9:33 am 13 Nov 09

I find it interesting that cyclists seem free to criticise and be unhappy about their cycle paths, but car drivers just have to suck up whatever is thrown at them.

If all workplaces had shower and change room facilities, I think that would help encouraging people to use their bike more. But I dont think there are many commercial buildings that have this. It would be interesting to see if that was a requirement of all new buildings that were leasing office space.

Sgt.Bungers said :

People who ride bicycles do not have to pay registration on their vehicle because it is human powered. End of story. Build yourself a Fred Flinstone car with your feet dangling out the bottom to push it along and you wont have to pay rego on that either.

I’m sorry, but that is stupid logic. Do you really think if I took the engine out of my car and pushed it down the road the police would be okay with that? I don’t think so…

nexus6 said :

But the fact that a cyclist can so easily be killed if they stuff up is more than enough of a penalty i think.

Using that logic do you also support no rego, no fines and no liability for motorcycle and scooter riders?

If they put some thought into the cycle lanes in the first place, I think there would be a lot more happy people. The cyclists on roads separated by a thin white line and some green paint is not safe by any means for either cyclists or drivers. There are far safer options available.

As for Bunda St, this one thing I actually agree with the Greens on. Close the street off to vehicle access between Genge St and Akuna St, with the exception of delivery/emergency access to certain sections through shared access. There is no point in allowing traffic on it anymore, unless you want to sit waiting for pedestrians at the zebra crossings for long periods of time. Plus there’s a perfectly good road to connect one side to the other via Corrinderk St.

dvaey said :

Many years ago, I had this thing called a ‘bike map’ which showed the myriad of bike paths available in the city. It doesnt take a rocket scientist (or apparently it does) to find bike paths in Canberra, and realise that they often follow a more direct route from point-to-point than the road network, often cutting across blocks of (bush)land more directly than roads. For example from the tuggeranong parkway to my house, is maybe 200m by bike path but over 1km by road, as a lot of suburbia is.

dvaey If there’s a cycle path that offers an safe direct route, and doesn’t ram our bikeseats into our arses, we’ll use it over roads. Trust us on that one.

In the meantime, it sounds like you’ve got it made with a 200m bike path to the Tuggeranong Parkway. Of course, if the Tuggeranong Parkway isn’t your ultimate destination, you might be a little stuffed if you think cyclists don’t need to use roads.

Dvaey

Start a new thread on road/cycling rules will you. You always need to hijack any thread to do with cycling to rabbit on about rego for cyclists. Give it a rest will you. It ain’t going to happen so deal with it! If I ever do have to pay rego I’m going to ride down the middle of Northbourne Ave doing 20kph, blocking the traffic and yelling out to the world that I pay for this road!!

When drivers pay for 100% of the road they’re driving on, then maybe you’d have a point. Would love to see the day when you have to pay a toll to drive down the shops.

Purpose built cycle lanes, not shared with pedestrians, would be a godsend. But I feel city circle loop may not be utilised enough to stop the rednecks complaining.

I think it’s an excellent idea!

🙂

sepi said :

someone told me this is ok if you have 3 people in the car – isn’t it a transit lane? Or is that little roundabout bit just a bus lane?

The transit lane is further up Yarra Glen where it is signposted as a transit lane. The section off the roundabout, unless I’m mistaken, is a bus lane and therefore should only be used by buses, taxis or motorcycles (or cyclists if they stay in the cycle lane).

someone told me this is ok if you have 3 people in the car – isn’t it a transit lane? Or is that little roundabout bit just a bus lane?

Sgt.Bungers said :

I have no problem with people driving cars having their own stretch of pavement so long as they abide by whatever road rules are set.

Not like the driver I saw a few days back heading north on Melrose Drive – got to the Yamba/Yarra Glen Roundabout, so all of a sudden the driver decided his vehicle was a Bus/Taxi or Motorcycle and used the Bus Lane adjacent to the round about to gain 5 seconds over everyone else… only to have that 5 seconds lost at the traffic lights out the front of the British High Commission.

Just my little whine for the day (I know it’s been brought up time and time again).

A few weeks ago I actually saw a car driver get pulled over and booked for doing just that! Good to see the police in the right place at the right time.

However I have never, ever seen a cyclist being pulled over and booked for not obeying road rules.

nexus6 said :

If a car breaks the rules, it can mean serious injury or death to someone who was minding their own business and obeying the rules. when a bike breaks the rules, it is most likely going to end up with the rider being injured /killed. how many people have been killed in the past year by a cyclist?

A better question, is how many drivers have been charged with hitting a cyclist in the past year, compared to how many cyclists have been charged with hitting a car? Sure, the cyclist might get injured (the same as another driver would be injured in an accident), but the cyclist is never at fault. Sure, it might not be dangerous to the general public if a cyclist crosses on a red light or chooses to dart across lanes of traffic, but it IS illegal.

When was the last time a cyclist was issued an infringement for breaking the law? Unless the cyclist stops of their own will, a police vehicle has pretty much zero chance of identifying the rider once they decide theyre no longer a road-user but a bicycle, and ducks off onto a side-path.

Several years ago, a friends 16 year old son hit a car side-on after darting out from a sidewalk and not watching where he was going. The driver was charged, and had to repair the damage caused to their car, which involved new windscreen, door, etc. The cyclist (obviously) had no CTPI or even any identification, and was even able to sue for medical expenses from the drivers insurance company, even though in practice the cyclist was at fault, the law holds the driver responsible. None of this even starts to cover the fact that the driver has to live with the fact they hit a child because the rules werent followed.

nexus6 said :

yes we need more bike paths, and better designed/mantained ones at that.

Many years ago, I had this thing called a ‘bike map’ which showed the myriad of bike paths available in the city. It doesnt take a rocket scientist (or apparently it does) to find bike paths in Canberra, and realise that they often follow a more direct route from point-to-point than the road network, often cutting across blocks of (bush)land more directly than roads. For example from the tuggeranong parkway to my house, is maybe 200m by bike path but over 1km by road, as a lot of suburbia is.

nexus6 said :

yes we need more bike paths, and better designed/mantained ones at that.

Good comment Nexus6. For that I’ll go easy when it’s time to hunt you down 😉

Road rules are there to make us safe, not to keep people happy. If a car breaks the rules, it can mean serious injury or death to someone who was minding their own business and obeying the rules. when a bike breaks the rules, it is most likely going to end up with the rider being injured /killed. how many people have been killed in the past year by a cyclist? Of course cyclists should obey the rules and id quite happily see them being fined for breaking the rules. But the fact that a cyclist can so easily be killed if they stuff up is more than enough of a penalty i think.

yes we need more bike paths, and better designed/mantained ones at that.

Here’s a crazy idea. Let’s focus our police on enforcing road rules (other than speeding and drink driving) for a while, so we can all see what it’s like when the rules are actually upheld.

And yes, tooks, I mean through the proper channels with proper resourcing and support.

I have no problem with people driving cars having their own stretch of pavement so long as they abide by whatever road rules are set.

Not like the driver I saw a few days back heading north on Melrose Drive – got to the Yamba/Yarra Glen Roundabout, so all of a sudden the driver decided his vehicle was a Bus/Taxi or Motorcycle and used the Bus Lane adjacent to the round about to gain 5 seconds over everyone else… only to have that 5 seconds lost at the traffic lights out the front of the British High Commission.

Just my little whine for the day (I know it’s been brought up time and time again).

Funky1 said :

I have no problem with cyclists having their own stretch of pavement so long as they abide by whatever road rules are set.

As you pointed out, cyclists obeying the laws/rules of the road do so on an honour system. If a car behaves dangerously, you report it to the police or whine on riot act. If a bike behaves dangerously, you whinge on riot act stereotyping all cyclists as theyre not identifiable. Take the following situation of a car and a bike crossing an intersection on a red light. Both activities are just as dangerous, however only one can ever be held accountable.

I have no problem with cyclists having their own stretch of pavement so long as they abide by whatever road rules are set.

Not like the two cyclists I saw this morning heading south down Commonwealth Ave – got to the lights which were red, so all of a sudden became pedestrians (whilst still seated on their cycles) and used the adjacent crossing before riding down past the Britsh High Commission against the red light.

Just my little whine for the day (I know it’s been brought up time and time again).

Lol @ #5.

People who ride bicycles do not have to pay registration on their vehicle because it is human powered. End of story. Build yourself a Fred Flinstone car with your feet dangling out the bottom to push it along and you wont have to pay rego on that either.

2600 said :

Once it’s built, the pedal nazis wont use it. They’ll continue to ride on the road just to piss off motorists, just like they do now on Lady Deman Drive (and many other places we’ve built cycle roads for them). This is all part of their extreme anti-car campaign. Screw ’em!

Troll

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy1:06 pm 12 Nov 09

2600 said :

Once it’s built, the pedal nazis wont use it. They’ll continue to ride on the road just to piss off motorists, just like they do now on Lady Deman Drive (and many other places we’ve built cycle roads for them). This is all part of their extreme anti-car campaign. Screw ’em!

I agree. I still see plenty of cyclists using the road when there’s a cycle path just metres away.

Once it’s built, the pedal nazis wont use it. They’ll continue to ride on the road just to piss off motorists, just like they do now on Lady Deman Drive (and many other places we’ve built cycle roads for them). This is all part of their extreme anti-car campaign. Screw ’em!

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy12:05 pm 12 Nov 09

Aubergine said :

#5 – not the “cyclist don’t pay” argument again.

I would happily pay $100 “cyclist rego” every year just to never hear this stupidity ever again.

Send me a cheque care of the RiotACT and I’ll never mention it again.

#5 – not the “cyclist don’t pay” argument again.

I would happily pay $100 “cyclist rego” every year just to never hear this stupidity ever again.

It will help if simple rules are applied in these areas – eg: cyclists must give way to pedestrians, cars must give way to cyclists and pedestrians. Different pavement treatments in the shared area will help a lot too.

There has been a “shared area” outside the Woolies entrance at Cooleman Court for a couple of years now. It is very poorly marked and almost nobody knows it’s there. A couple of signs say that cars must give way to pedestrians (and cyclists?) but almost every car driver – and pedestrian – has no idea the area exists. The signs are not obvious and the painted “Shared Area” boxes on the road are almost unnoticeable. More than once I have walked (carefully) across in front of a slow moving car and pointed the sign out to the irritated driver – they simply had no idea it was a pedestrian priority area.

A simple alternative to repaving the area would be to paint pedestrian crossing stripes across the entire length of the roadway (about 50 metres) outside Cooleman Court – every driver knows what these mean! The painted boxes and signs are not obvious and are understandably ignored. Pavement treatments in Bunda Street etc would have to be similarly obvious to be effective. Canberra streets already have too many signs – nobody has time to comprehend and prioritise them. Green paint seems to be understood on freeway exits as cyclist priority areas. “Zebra stripes” are even more obvious and universally understood. But paint erodes, and imagine the visual atrocity if the entire length of Bunda Street was covered in stripes. It has to be attractive, yet obvious and easily understood, and consistent across the city.

So, will cyclists be paying extra for this infrastructure that they have exclusive access to? Will car drivers get a discount because the available road is being reduced? Will roads such as Northborne lose a road-lane or will they lose pedestrian area? You cant add a cycle lane without sacrificing one of those two. Cyclists are ‘wheeled pedestrians’ and should be given the same allocation and rule-set as pedestrians, imho.

I really like this concept. Seems a like a sensible way to get more people (safely) on bikes.

However, I can see the government totally butchering this. I don’t know how, but they will find a way.

Good to hear. Wish all cycle lanes could be separated by a curb or bollards, but thankful for what we get. In spite of all the rants, cyclists and motorists would probably be happy with the same thing: separated parallel lane for cycles. But I guess we’ll wait to see the cost and motorists’ reactions if they get cramped or lose a lane to a physically separated cycle lane.

I found the the comparative photo in horrid’s link to the orbital cycling route very interesting. It really demonstrates just how much space cars take up.

Progress! Let’s hope it’s not botched up by ACT GovCo. To be a true shared space, gutters will be removed, an appropriate “flat” drainage system will be installed instead. The distinction between where cars are allowed to be driven and are not allowed will be made by different coloured concrete/pavement/tiles only. A speed limit of walking pace will also have to be introduced.

Laws will have to be well publicized regarding how the shared space works. Ideally, all laws regarding driving vehicles in a dangerous manner will be revoked in a shared space. People driving a car in a manner considered dangerous will be charged with reckless endangerment, or indeed any other charge able to be given to a person acting in a life threatening manner whilst NOT driving a motor vehicle.

eg: a simple grievous bodily harm charge for hitting and seriously injuring a person on foot. A manslaughter charge for killing a person on foot in ANY circumstance, other than a person deliberately jumping in front of a motor vehicle in close proximity. That said, someone driving their car at walking pace will do little to no damage to a person who deliberately jumps in front of a car.

Such laws and changes will create an uncertain driving environment for people operating motor vehicles, greatly increasing concentration and attention to the dangerous task at hand. Such laws place the responsibility for driving safely back in the hands of the motor vehicle driver, instead of the current setup which requires people walking to stay off the road and out of motor vehicles way, so as to enable higher speeds for motor vehicle drivers.

Surveillance cameras will need to be in place 24/7 to discourage the few elitist wkrs who are likely to object to such a “shared space” setup, by driving their car at speed through the area expecting everyone to get out of their way.

For a shared space to be truly equal, laws governing the shared space must be equal for everyone, regardless of their choice of transport.

This would be great. We really need good cycling routes to encourage more people to ride to work and play in Civic.

How much time would people spend in their cars, worrying about parking/ fuel costs etc and then struggling to find time to get to the gym to do some exercise. If Canberra had infrastructure along the lines of what Pedal Power is proposing then more people will find the switch to pedal power easier, safer, healthier and more enjoyable.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.