Stromlo Bike Park - Is it ever good for kids?

dungfungus said :

This is code for the criterium track at Stromlo is for the exclusive use of “serious” cyclists who couldn’t care less about the fact that is was funded by ALL Canberra ratepayers.

Oh look, your rabid hatred of bikes is once again overriding any logic. Firstly, it’s not “code” for anything. You clearly have zero understand of, or insight into the mentality of cyclists and what they do and don’t care about – so should probably stop claiming you do.

Secondly … How dare the government build a bike facility and let it be used for free by the designed-for users, despite that then making it unsuitable for completely different users (such as kids) at that time? 😛

Now, I was there last Sunday lunchtime. The XC was on, and the crits track was empty when I first looked. A little later there were a couple of kids on it. There’s a million places equally-suitable for a kid just coming off their training wheels, and the kids track right next to it isn’t a bad start. School and office car-parks are good on weekends ..

Mysteryman said :

I think the exact same thing when I see the lycra brigade riding two abreast, or even a single cyclist ruiding well into the centre of a car lane. It strikes me as selfish and arrogant, especially considering the difference in speed between cars and cyclists and the inconvenience it causes to the flow of traffic and other road users.

Man, I hate trucks, they take up so much room and stop me from getting to where I want to go. They should pull left when I come up behind them so I can pass.

dungfungus said :

Leon said :

The criterium track at Stromlo is specifically designed for bicycle racing.

There are plenty of suitable car parks around Canberra that get little weekend use – for example at Dickson College and alongside Langton Crescent in Parkes.

A local grassy park may be an even better option, because grass is much softer to fall on.

This is code for the criterium track at Stromlo is for the exclusive use of “serious” cyclists who couldn’t care less about the fact that is was funded by ALL Canberra ratepayers.

Dungfungus, before you also get too far on your “all cyclists are arrogant f@#$%s” rant, as a cyclist I disageree with some of what Leon said. Yes it is a dedicated racing track but this track is a public facility which is not locked off when not in use.

It is perfect for teaching kids to ride on because it is big and wide and has no through traffic like a cycle path. They can meander as they please.

Having said that, I would only do it when there are no races on (obviously) and there are hardly any bikes training on it which is pretty well most of the time anyway.

Most serious road racers train on the road (much to Mysterymans disgust, sucked in) as that gives them better fitness than doing 38 laps of a criterion track that has bugger all climbing.

Sorry to others for my rant but peoples dogmatic approach to what other people do with their lives infuriates me. I sometimes think they would be happier living in North Korea where the Kim Jong Un will tell youn how it is or you will get shot!

Oh & on your taxpayer funded crap……….why cant I go and kick a footy on Bruce Stadium on a Sunday arve when its not being used? I pay for it, I should be able to use it…..dont you think??

Leon said :

The criterium track at Stromlo is specifically designed for bicycle racing.

There are plenty of suitable car parks around Canberra that get little weekend use – for example at Dickson College and alongside Langton Crescent in Parkes.

A local grassy park may be an even better option, because grass is much softer to fall on.

This is code for the criterium track at Stromlo is for the exclusive use of “serious” cyclists who couldn’t care less about the fact that is was funded by ALL Canberra ratepayers.

Mysteryman said :

Maya123 said :

But sadly I don’t think some parents can see the danger to their children or others. This was brought home to me some years ago when riding home from work at peak hour. The path was busy with a person cycling past every few seconds. This was of no importance though to the mother sitting watching her toddler playing in the middle of the path with people on bikes having to go around the child. I said as I passed that her child shouldn’t be in the middle of the busy path. Her astonishing reply, “But he’s so little, you can go around him.” No concept of the danger she was putting her child or others in, or the inconvenience she was causing…

I think the exact same thing when I see the lycra brigade riding two abreast, or even a single cyclist ruiding well into the centre of a car lane. It strikes me as selfish and arrogant, especially considering the difference in speed between cars and cyclists and the inconvenience it causes to the flow of traffic and other road users.

But I bet the people cycling are going in a straight line. Much more predicable than a toddler, hardly able to stand up I might add, tottering about the path, NOT in a straight line. And not old enough to be responsible, which was a shame, because his mother certainly wasn’t being so. Plus the road, as was the path, is a transport corridor. The people cycling are using it as such, while the toddler was not. Hardly comparable.

14 posts without one of the L-words and 19 posts before both of them, that’s gotta be a RiotACT record!!!

(L-words: Lycra and Lance. Internet rules say they must appear to turn every bike related thread into a rant, apparently even this one about young kids)

Maya123 said :

But sadly I don’t think some parents can see the danger to their children or others. This was brought home to me some years ago when riding home from work at peak hour. The path was busy with a person cycling past every few seconds. This was of no importance though to the mother sitting watching her toddler playing in the middle of the path with people on bikes having to go around the child. I said as I passed that her child shouldn’t be in the middle of the busy path. Her astonishing reply, “But he’s so little, you can go around him.” No concept of the danger she was putting her child or others in, or the inconvenience she was causing…

I think the exact same thing when I see the lycra brigade riding two abreast, or even a single cyclist ruiding well into the centre of a car lane. It strikes me as selfish and arrogant, especially considering the difference in speed between cars and cyclists and the inconvenience it causes to the flow of traffic and other road users.

The criterium track at Stromlo is specifically designed for bicycle racing.

There are plenty of suitable car parks around Canberra that get little weekend use – for example at Dickson College and alongside Langton Crescent in Parkes.

A local grassy park may be an even better option, because grass is much softer to fall on.

Acton said :

Maya123 said:
“I said as I passed that her child shouldn’t be in the middle of the busy path. Her astonishing reply, “But he’s so little, you can go around him.” No concept of the danger she was putting her child or others in, or the inconvenience she was causing by allowing her toddler to play there.”

No concept of the danger you are putting children or others in, or the consequence of your own unsafe, selfish and inconsiderate riding attitude.
I am seeing more and more near misses involving cyclists and pedestrians.
This is happening on our shared paths, particularly around the lake, where people are slowly walking with young kids and a cyclist in racing gear comes hurtling past, from in front or behind, without any warning, acknowledgement or slowing.
Their attitude is that they have a right to pedal at high speed without the inconvenience of prams, kids, dogs, the elderly, families, walkers, tourists, joggers etc blocking their way.
The path around the lake was intended for leisurely use, not as a high-speed velodrome for the personal use of wannabe Lance Armstrongs aiming for a new PB.
Here is the consequence to think about:
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/nsw/pedestrian-emily-greenwood-run-down-by-cyclist-20150111-12iii9.html

The paths around the lake were built for people to cycle on. If not for bicycles it’s doubtful many would have been built. I was here when they were built and knew the publicity for them and why they came about. However they were never gazetted for only bicycles and were allowed to be shared. I now find it strange that the attitude of some people is that really it would be better if bikes weren’t there, when after all these paths likely wouldn’t be there but for bikes. Or at the very least everything else on the paths must take precedence over bikes.
“No concept of the danger you are putting children or others in, or the consequence of your own unsafe, selfish and inconsiderate riding attitude.”
So, you regard riding slowly off the path to avoid this lone toddler in the middle of the path, which was toddling all over it from side to side, as dangerous and selfish. Your words to whatever I did, even though you had no way of knowing what my actions were. You accuse me of being dangerous and selfish. Seems, as someone on a bike, I can’t win, when riding slowly, wide and off the path onto the grass is stated by you as being selfish and dangerous. But a mother can release her small toddler into the middle of the path, sit some distance back and watch her ‘ever so cute’ toddler wobble (as toddlers learning to walk do) all over the path in the way of whatever comes along. Would you have this attitude if whatever came along were cars?
The path can be shared. I have never said otherwise. However it needs all users to think of others. Most people do. But a small percentage make it dangerous for others, by disregarding other users, by not keeping left and not looking before changing direction and behaving appropriately. Signs have been erected asking people to keep left. Unfortunately these signs are ignored by a minority.
I also walk on paths, but I walk by the left edge, as I should, and so I have never had a problem from people cycling by, regardless of the speed. Anyone who does have a problem, I suspect is not being thoughtful and keeping left.
Some of these shared paths are now getting to the stage where people walking and cycling need to have separate paths. Many other places have done this long ago.
Unfortunately, again a small minority, will ignore this, even if there were separate paths. And I also suspect this mother would still release her toddler to totter about. And from evidence here you would defend her right to do so and call those who criticise her dangerous behaviour as “unsafe, selfish and inconsiderate riding attitude.”

Acton said :

Maya123 said:
“I said as I passed that her child shouldn’t be in the middle of the busy path. Her astonishing reply, “But he’s so little, you can go around him.” No concept of the danger she was putting her child or others in, or the inconvenience she was causing by allowing her toddler to play there.”

No concept of the danger you are putting children or others in, or the consequence of your own unsafe, selfish and inconsiderate riding attitude.
I am seeing more and more near misses involving cyclists and pedestrians.
This is happening on our shared paths, particularly around the lake, where people are slowly walking with young kids and a cyclist in racing gear comes hurtling past, from in front or behind, without any warning, acknowledgement or slowing.
Their attitude is that they have a right to pedal at high speed without the inconvenience of prams, kids, dogs, the elderly, families, walkers, tourists, joggers etc blocking their way.
The path around the lake was intended for leisurely use, not as a high-speed velodrome for the personal use of wannabe Lance Armstrongs aiming for a new PB.
Here is the consequence to think about:
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/nsw/pedestrian-emily-greenwood-run-down-by-cyclist-20150111-12iii9.html

No-one is absolved of using common sense on a shared path. Cyclists and pedestrians alike have a responsibility to those in their care and those around them. Shared paths, like roads, are not a play area. They are part of a transit system. Different people use them for different reasons. You might use them for leisure, but for other people they are a commuting corridor.

I am acutely aware when taking my kids on shared paths of enforcing the stay-left rule. Everyone has an obligation to stay left and out of the path of oncoming traffic. I find pedestrians pay far less heed to this than cyclists. As car drivers often like to remind cyclists, your perception of what you’re allowed to do does little to stay the hard mallet of physics.