The Streeton Dr intersection.

johnboy 17 December 2008 101

One of our Weston Creek spies sent in the following rant. I asked them to paint me a picture so they kindly provided diagrams:

    The busiest southbound section of Streeton Dr, just north of Weston Creek town centre, has had a vehicle lane removed and replaced with a green bike lane.

    With two turn-in lanes as well, four lanes of traffic now are forced into one lane, while the bike lane is wide enough for a bus (as proved yesterday by the bus who didn\’t bother merging, instead just drove on straight and allowed cars past).

    In 13yrs living in the Creek, I cannot ever recall seeing a bike riding on the road in that particular section, because 1) there\’s too many cars, and 2) there\’s a bike path OFF the road immediately to the left.

    More stupidly, the bike lane vears left across the busy intersection with Namatjira Dr, misses the bike/footpath by 15m, and then ends. Cars get two lanes again.

    We all put up with narrower lanes so the bikes could ride on Hindmarsh Dr to Woden, but now cars have lost a lane all for 400m of bike lane – which wasn\’t needed – which comes from and goes to nowhere…

    Madness…


What's Your Opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
101 Responses to The Streeton Dr intersection.
Filter
Order
« Previous 1 4 5 6
frontrow frontrow 8:23 am 17 Nov 09

This area is being remarked at the moment. The merged lane for traffic calming has remained but the bike lane has disappeared.

tylersmayhem tylersmayhem 9:31 am 22 Dec 08

A Monday morning commute to work though…no way. Concrete paths with cracks, joins, uneven bits…they’re just no good for fast riding.

Not to mention maniacs backing out of driveways doing abut 50! No thanks!

justbands justbands 9:19 am 22 Dec 08

> They are all shared space. If a path is there, you should ride on it and not on the road.

What an ignorant thing to say. Have you ever ridden a bike? On a Sunday afternoon ride with my 11yo, sure…I’ll ride along that path, slowly. A Monday morning commute to work though…no way. Concrete paths with cracks, joins, uneven bits…they’re just no good for fast riding.

The usual anti-bike brigade seem to be ignoring the fact that this traffic change actually had very little to do with bikes. Read the thred.

Aeek Aeek 9:32 pm 19 Dec 08

Allowed, but whether its a good idea is another matter. I’ve been told to “ride on the road”. Can’t please some people.

miz miz 8:41 pm 19 Dec 08

‘The supposed “bike path” that runs parallel to the new bike lane is in fact a footpath, NOT a bike path.’

Wrong. In Canberra, you are allowed to ride on footpaths. Thus, ergo, they are all considered bike paths in a sense, just as official bike paths are also for pedestrians They are all shared space. If a path is there, you should ride on it and not on the road.

Further, if there is an existing path adjacent to the road they have just stupidly modified, those who thought this was a good idea have even more rocks in their heads than I first thought!

Horrid Horrid 8:16 pm 19 Dec 08

I think Aronde and others face an impossible task convincing the motor-mouths of the unfairness and impracticality of bicycle registration, for two reasons.

1. They genuinely lack the intellectual capacity to understand the argument, and no matter how painstakingly you present the facts, how logically the arguments are made, or how much evidence you present or how overwhelming that evidence is, it will never penetrate past their unbelievable levels of complete and utter STUPIDITY. I have tried many occasions and you are just wasting your time.

2. Even if I were wrong on the first point, it would make no difference. These people are not motivated by road safety concerns, economic considerations or justice. Their desire for bicycle registration is motivated entirely by hatred and envy, and even if they did fully understand the arguements, (which they don’t!), they would still be insisting on bicycle registration for no other reason than to impose costs and inconvenience onto cyclists just for the spite of it.

Luckily, due to the stupidity mentioned above, they will never be in a position to do any more than rant on website forums- the smart people, those who cycle or support cycling, will stay in power and bicycle registration will never be implemented.

I had better stop now- some of them can read.

tylersmayhem tylersmayhem 12:22 pm 19 Dec 08

@astrosapien

I’ve enjoyed your passionate rants – and while I am also getting quite tired of this roundabout, I have a few last comment. I’ll dot point them so hopefully you can understand:

* I fail to understand how you deem pay carparks and public buses as the same “public facilities” as public schooling and playgrounds. Please help me understand.

* I still don’t see your point if cyclists pay to insure, register and licence one or more vehicles, but don’t use them while cycling isn’t some kind of middle ground.

* If you believe that registration and licensing of motor vehicles alone pay for roads then you need your head seriously read.

* I am all for “fair and equal” use of the roads – and I as a cyclist would be more than happy to pay a nominal fee for “registration”, if it did indeed mean that there would be less agro from motorists. But frankly, if we started paying $20 – 50 per year, the same motorists would bitch and moan that it’s not enough to cover the cost of the paths we are riding on blah blah blah – and round we’d keep going.

* Please find another country, or indeed city in the World that requires registration of cycles and please post it on here. I’ve travelled extensively and never heard of it. But typically, it’s a handful of seemingly moronic drivers in little old Canberra who are demanding it – go figure! Some of us really are insulated aren’t we?

* Please also define how the administration of this yearly fee will actually be financially feasible.

If I’ve still failed to answer any of your questions or “hypotheticals”, and I’ll be more than happy to do so.

aronde aronde 12:18 pm 19 Dec 08

Astrosapien I am happy to agree to disagree for the reasons I and others have outlined. At the end of the day though the whole discussion is probably moot because no government is ever going to register bicycles in this day and age of ‘carbon reduction schemes’ , ’emission trading schemes’ and the like.

Hypothetically if as you say though it WERE possible to do then I as a registered bike rider would demand MORE from my government re bicycle infrastructure. Canberra does not even come close to what happens overseas. I would probably start by wanting one of these on Northbourne Ave, Belconnen Way etc – http://vimeo.com/1910758?pg=embed&sec=1910758

phototext phototext 10:44 am 19 Dec 08

Astrosapien,

I’ve explained why I don’t think it would work, how about you come up with reasons why it would work, how it would be implemented, policed and a figure you think would be appropriate for bicycle registration.

It is impractical and political suicide no matter which way you look at it.

Clown Killer Clown Killer 10:38 am 19 Dec 08

… the process is not made any easier when people insist on shooting ideas down as “stupid”. That doesn’t encourage healthy discussion and only serves to antagonize…

I’m certainly not shooting any ideas down buddy, I’m simply pointing out the facts. It would be different if the topic had never been debated before, if goverment representatives, policy makers and regulatory authorities had never applied themselves to the debate. This people are increadibly switched on, they’re also extremely intelligent – we know this, because without exception there’s not a jurisdicytion in the country thant thinks registration for bicycles is a smart idea – and the opposite of smart is … stupid.

dr.evil dr.evil 10:09 am 19 Dec 08

OK…Just a few questions on the fair and equal system and a few of my thoughts.

Astrosapien said

astrosapien said :

…any system that requires a majority of a resources users to pay for use and not others is NOT a fair and equal. It doesn’t matter how you try and explain it off… It’s not fair and equal…

dr.evil comment – Would everyone that has a bicycle be expected to pay bicyle registration for each bike they have? We have about 8 bikes – my fanmily (5 of us) have a bike each and I like riding. Would we expect to pay rego for a 2 year old’s bike? Do you have any bicycles?

Astrosapien also said

astrosapien said :

…So, if you’re not prepared to participate in a system fairly and equally, is it any surprise that you’re not being treated fairly and equally…

dr.evil comment – I ride a bike and I use paths, roads, fire trails. All different systems and I participate fairly and equally in everyone one of these systems. For example, on the road I behave just like any other road user. I meet the all current requirements/laws for the privilege of using the road. I obey the rules of the road and am aware of other users.

Astrosapien also also said

astrosapien said :

…do you think acting like you deserve to be treated any differently or specially to others just because you own two cars and a bike is really going to earn the respect and understanding of the drivers out there…?…

dr.evil comment – I think most cyclists don’t want to be treated any differently or specially to others regardless of the situation. I think they want to be treated as legitimate road users just like every other road vehicle/user.

Glad to hear your thoughts…

astrosapien astrosapien 10:05 am 19 Dec 08

I agree Justbands, but as tiresome as it may be it would be worse not to discuss it all. It is plain and obvious that people feel passionately about it on both sides of the argument, but there is not much in the way of forums for the community at large to debate it. As good as RiotACT is, it isn’t sufficient and not necessarily indicitive of community feelings on the whole…

Having said that, the process is not made any easier when people insist on shooting ideas down as “stupid”. That doesn’t encourage healthy discussion and only serves to antagonize…

The debate needs to be had otherwise elements of the community are going to continue to be at loggerheads…

justbands justbands 9:49 am 19 Dec 08

These arguments are getting very tiresome.

Anyway…just to add a little more fact into this story: The supposed “bike path” that runs parallel to the new bike lane is in fact a footpath, NOT a bike path.

dexi dexi 9:33 am 19 Dec 08

So would you have people fined for riding an unregistered bike?

astrosapien astrosapien 9:28 am 19 Dec 08

Clown Killer, if that is indeed your real name,

Just because it hasn’t been implemented yet does not mean that it should be written off as being a “stupid idea”.

In the example of seat belts: Seat belts were legislated to be included with all cars in Australia by the late 1960s. It wasn’t until the early 1980s that the entirety of Australia ended up with laws making the wearing of those seat belts compulsory (however some states did start in the late 1970s).

I acknowledge that you’ve all made your “points” regarding why you think registration shouldn’t go ahead. BUT, hypothetically,if there WERE a way that it would be cost effective and the money raised via registration did actually go towards bike path maintenance etc, would you still be opposed to it?

I just want to know if you’re coming up with your reasons because you honestly don’t think it would work, or if you are against it on principle and are just making up bull$#!+ excuses…

Interesting to note that none of the other questions that I asked in my earlier posts still haven’t been answered yet, too… It seems you’re all happy to copy and paste your ideas from post to post but noone has actually been able to provide an adequate answer to some of the other questions…

Clown Killer Clown Killer 8:24 am 19 Dec 08

Astrosapien, I’ll type this slowly so it’ll be easier for you to understand.

If registration for bicycles was such a brilliant idea, with all the self evident benefits that supposedly come with it, then just perhaps, maybe someone, somewhere, might have done it? It’s not like it’d be hard.

Like you say, once upon a time we weren’t required to wear seat belts in cars or helmets on motor bikes but when we looked at the facts it was a pretty simple decision. Likewise, despite the conga-line of rocket surgeons who line up to point out all the reasons why we should require registration for bicycles, when we consider the facts the decision is obvious.

phototext phototext 8:04 am 19 Dec 08

In fact thinking about it, if car rego doesn’t cover the costs of maintaining the roads, my riding to work instead of driving a car, thus causing less damage to the road, therefore saving the government money, I should be getting paid to ride a bike to work.

Brilliant !

If all you car drivers just want to save the admin costs and send me the cash….

phototext phototext 7:54 am 19 Dec 08

I see aronde is thinking along similar lines.

phototext phototext 7:48 am 19 Dec 08

Isn’t rego scaled to the weight and subsequent damage a vehicle does to the road. Motorcycle costs less to register than a 5 ton truck. If that is the case then the rego for a bicycle would be around a 20c a year.

I’m sure a bureaucrat has thought about it and decided it too hard and not very practical.

If a bicycle needs to be registered then it would need to have a sticker of some sort to show it has been registered. Throw in admin costs to create such a sticker and that probably costs the government $50. To make it worth the governments while to do so it then costs $50 and 20 cents to register a bicyle.

Family of four with bicycles that the kids use to ride to school and the parents use a few times a month to go for a sunday ride and occasionally to the shops = $200 and 80 cents a year. You want to lose the next election, start charging people that kind of ticket to ride a bike.

Even if you only charge a token fee of $10 a year, it becomes self defeating. I’d love to ride to the shops but the bike has no rego, I’ll drive instead. Car does more damage to road, government loses out and the admin costs outway the money the government gets from the registration.

I can’t see any system that works that actually makes money for the government and doesn’t lose them an election.

The use of a bike as means of transportation to and from work does save the government money. A bike does less damage to the road than a car.

aronde aronde 7:41 am 19 Dec 08

astrosapien said :

I’d love to see the kind of business model that needs over a million dollars a year to receive registration payments.

I will try to keep this simple. The costs would be immense and require a lot more then the people currently sitting in canberra connect. All bikes would need some sort of registration plate or decal to ensure that the fee paid is matched up to the right bicycle. There is then the cost of enforcement which would need to be done to ensure that people have some ‘incentive’ to pay the fee plus the cost of setting up a billing system which could need to cope with thousands of bicycles, people changing addresses, people changing bicycles half way through the registration year (do we need to submit a change of ownership form for instance and if I sell my bicycle do I get my registration fee back pro rata?). It would just be an administrative nightmare for no benefit except perhaps to make the bicycle hating people feel good about the fact that bicycle riders are making their ‘contribution’. Hey maybe we should do it for that reason alone – then we would not have to read the car vs bike wars on Riot every few weeks!

« Previous 1 4 5 6

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top

Search across the site