Sydney City Council Cycle Plan

In article <[email hidden]>,

dewatf said:

The Sydney City Council put out a PR release Saturday about its new plan
(to be released Monday).
http://www.smh.com.au/text/articles/2007/03/23/1174597882715.html

Well, I look forward to seeing the conversion of Kent St.
--

dewatf said:

The plan is for two-way on-road cycle-lanes. The council likes these
because they can pander to the green lobby and only destroy half the
businesses on the street by removing parking on only one side. Helasinki
put in 800km of two way off-road cycle lanes and found they yeilded no
safety benefits at all. Two-way on road cycles lanes will probably kill
more cyclists, but that is Bicycle NSW's idea of good policy.

From the papers I've read that's 100% correct. Two way bike paths appear to be the most hazardous facilities a cyclist can use.

In aus.bicycle on Mon, 26 Mar 2007 10:54:18 +1000

EuanB said:

From the papers I've read that's 100% correct. Two way bike paths
appear to be the most hazardous facilities a cyclist can use.

What are the main problems?

Cyclists not coping cos they aren't wide enough? Peds not looking the
right way? Cyclists riding against traffic?

Zebee

Zebee Johnstone said:

In aus.bicycle on Mon, 26 Mar 2007 10:54:18 +1000

EuanB said:

From the papers I've read that's 100% correct. Two way bike paths
appear to be the most hazardous facilities a cyclist can use.

What are the main problems?

Cyclists not coping cos they aren't wide enough? Peds not looking the
right way? Cyclists riding against traffic?

Width is a factor. IMO the most important factors are:

1) Cyclists not in the line of sight of other road users (until the very last instant)

2) Cyclists coming from a direction unexpected by other road users.

The diagram at this URL illustrates the problem en.wikipedia.orgImage:Cycle path collision risks.jpgOpen ↗

Bicycle facilities of the Netherlands

Beukers. Dutch Ministry of Transport. ITE Conference, 1977

Safety problems of two-way cycle tracks at junctions almost insuperable.

Amenagements cyclables en Belgique

Review in Roue Libre, 1991.

Review of new Belgian Government policy on cycling.
Cycle tracks no longer favoured in urban areas due to problems and danger.
Preferable to remove narrow paths and where in bad state.
Two-way cycle tracks to be declassified as particularly dangerous

Haveriundersökningar av vägtrafikolyckor 'motorfordon-oskyddad trafikant'

Ahlcrona et al. Sweden, 1994.
Referenced from Safety of vulnerable road users.

Small sample investigation of crashes to vulnerable road users at Skåne. Two-thirds of collisions occurred at pedestrian and cycle track crossings. In two-thirds of the cycle crashes, the cyclist was riding on a two-way cycle path counter to traffic flow or appeared somewhere he was not supposed to be.

The risks of cycling

Pasenen, Helsinki City Planning Department
Full paper available on-line

In Helsinki, using a road-side cycle path is nearly 2.5 times likely to result in injury than cycling on the carriageway with traffic. At junctions the relative risk rises to more than 3 times. In those countries and cities which are just beginning to build cycling facilities, two-way cycle paths in particular should be avoided in an urban street network.

In Helsinki and Lund (Sweden), cycling leads to more pedestrian injuries per kilometre reported to the police than motor traffic.

Source for all the above: cyclecraft.co.ukresearch.htmlOpen ↗

In aus.bicycle on Mon, 26 Mar 2007 11:51:50 +1000

EuanB said:

Quoted message said:

Width is a factor. IMO the most important factors are:

1) Cyclists not in the line of sight of other road users (until the
very last instant)

2) Cyclists coming from a direction unexpected by other road users.

I suspected the 2nd one, but didn't really think about junctions.

Given the way that junctions are usually handled in Sydney - badly - I
can see the horror of it all...

Zebee

"Zebee Johnstone" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In aus.bicycle on Mon, 26 Mar 2007 11:51:50 +1000

EuanB said:

Quoted message said:

Width is a factor. IMO the most important factors are:

1) Cyclists not in the line of sight of other road users (until the
very last instant)

2) Cyclists coming from a direction unexpected by other road users.

I suspected the 2nd one, but didn't really think about junctions.

Given the way that junctions are usually handled in Sydney - badly - I
can see the horror of it all...

Zebee

The Herald artists impression did look dangerous, with narrow bollards only
between two way cycle lane and motorists. Hit a bollard, fall into oncoming
traffic, etc. Not sure that is what will go in though. Kent St proposal was
for a conventional bike lane on either side I think. The Bike Plan is up for
approval tonight.

fb

Sydney City Council has (at least?) one very pro councillor.
Can't remember which one off the top of my head...
who knows what will come of this...

often wondered if it were possible too make those 2way separated lanes possible, but the more i sketched it up the less i liked it. good research Euan

EuanB said:

Width is a factor. IMO the most important factors are:

1) Cyclists not in the line of sight of other road users (until the very last instant)

2) Cyclists coming from a direction unexpected by other road users.

3) Bar ends. No I'm not being completely facetious here either. 😉

Interesting times in Sydney, it seems most of the progressive transport initiatives are coming from either the Greens or Liberals. ALP? They went MIA until the very last moment, see here;
http://www.vote4cycling.com.au/candidate_survey.html

For starters at the local government level, there's Cr Shayne Mallard and Cr Norman Jew doing a lot of excellent work on behalf of cyclists. Also there's some very switched on local government employees, although general networking up in NSW isn't as good as down here in Vic, ie: we've got Sustainable Transport Officers in many local councils. But the NSW situation can be worked upon & improved. 🙂

cfsmtb said:

EuanB said:

Width is a factor. IMO the most important factors are:

1) Cyclists not in the line of sight of other road users (until the
very last instant)

2) Cyclists coming from a direction unexpected by other road users.

They will have traffic lights to control bikes and cars at
intersections. If you want to turn right I guess you will have a
separate phase.

Quoted message said:

3) Bar ends. No I'm not being completely facetious here either. 😉

No, yr right about that.

Quoted message said:

Interesting times in Sydney, it seems most of the progressive transport
initiatives are coming from either the Greens or Liberals. ALP? They
went MIA until the very last moment, see here;
http://www.vote4cycling.com.au/candidate_survey.html

For starters at the local government level, there's Cr Shayne Mallard
and Cr Norman Jew

? He passed some IMHO silly motion at the LGA conference about all off
road cycleways in new subdivisions- doesnt believe cyclists should be on
the road.

doing a lot of excellent work on behalf of cyclists.

Quoted message said:

Also there's some very switched on local government employees, although
general networking up in NSW isn't as good as down here in Vic, ie:
we've got Sustainable Transport Officers in many local councils. But
the NSW situation can be worked upon & improved. 🙂

you can download the whole City bike plan from the
cityofsydney.nsw.gov.au site, under committees/planning. It was up for
approval yesterday. A quick squizz at it and they have changed Kent St
to a Local Route and are thinking of using Clarence St as the main link
to the bridge. Attachments A and C have diagrams of the proposed 2 way
bike lanes, and there _are_ Bollards. Seems they have had a major
rethink since the plan was released for comment last year and have
decided car door lanes are no good and are going for these two way cycle
lanes on one side instead on some main routes. Some have a 0.7 metre
median between cars and bikes, others seem to have just a narrow line of
bollards separating moving traffic or parked cars from bikes. Seems they
are ignoring the RTA guidelines about not having vertical obstacles
right next to a cyclepath - to allow for handlebar or pedal clearance.

Still have to watch out for opening car doors (as cars will be parked
in some cases next to the bollards) and people stepping out of cars onto
the cycle lane.

Robert Moore said:

? He passed some IMHO silly motion at the LGA conference about all off
road cycleways in new subdivisions- doesnt believe cyclists should be on
the road.

Fair call, although keep in mind Cr Jew is a relatively recent convert to cycling, so his newbie perspective may broaden with more experience. Although I can't really fault his attitude for overall safer cycling facilities, see more here:
http://www.rideforlife.com.au/

Robert Moore said:

They will have traffic lights to control bikes and cars at
intersections. If you want to turn right I guess you will have a
separate phase.

Lights are the RTA's responsibility (good luck).
And what happens at drive ways, parking entrances, alleys, side streets,
pedestrian crossings etc.?

I haven't seen reports of anything similar working, guess we will have to
see what the council and RTA come up with. Though it sounds like something
that should be trialed before being rolled out on a large scale.

So two way cycle paths are now "Bike Roads". And report lists them as only
be considered, and then built within a budget that is far lower than the
sum of the proposed work in the old draft plan. A lot of the plan is
dependant on State Government authorities and with Bike Plan 2010 and
regional routes effectively scrapped are uncertain.

Quoted message said:

you can download the whole City bike plan from the
cityofsydney.nsw.gov.au site, under committees/planning. It was up for
approval yesterday. A quick squizz at it and they have changed Kent St
to a Local Route and are thinking of using Clarence St as the main link
to the bridge.

The Kent St becomes less attractive with the State Government reversing the
lane changes for the Cross City Tunnel around Town Hall.

dewatf.