Another Clarendon Street response



VicRoads this time.

I fired off my objections through their website on the 11th of January,
I received a response today. Common to both responses is reference to
the Principal Bicycle Network (PBN), frankly I don't like the
implications. It smacks too much of `cycle where we tell you to cycle.'

I'm a vehicle damn it! If I want to use a road I'm legally entitled to
use, I expect it to be maintained in a safe condition.

Letter follows after sig.
--
Cheers
Euan

========================================================================
CYCLING ISSUES
CLARENDON ST, SOUTH MELBOURNE

I refer to your email of 11 January 2005 regarding the safety of
cyclists in Clarendon Street, South Melbourne.

As you may be aware, a number of trial treaments have been recently been
installed in Clarendon Street, as part of the "Think Tram Initiative" to
improve the travel time for trams along this route.

VicRoads is currently asssessing the operation of these trail treatments
with regard to operational improvements for trams ad impacts upon
pedestrians, other motorists and cyclists. If the trial proves
successful, the design of the permanent treatment will consider the
impats of the proposedtreatments on all road users. An extensive
consultation program will be undertaken with key stakeholders, including
Bicycle Victoria, to discuss issues relating to these proposals prior to
implementation.

As part of the Governmet's continulal investment in cycling facilities
throughout Victoria, VicRoads has primary responsibility for the
developmet of the Principal Bicycle Network (PBN), which is a strategic
network of on-road and off-road bicycle facilities wihin Metropolitan
Melbourne. The key north-south links on the PBN through South Melbourne
area are provided by Derrars Street and Moray Street, with a localised
on-road facility provided on Cecil Street.

Clarendon Street does not form part of the PBN, however the impacts on
cyclist safety will be considered in the development of proposed
permament treatments.

Thank you for your enquiry. Should you require any further information
on this matter, please contact <name and number supplied>
 

craigster_jd

New Member
Jun 23, 2004
107
0
0
VicRoads this time.

I fired off my objections through their website on the 11th of January,
I received a response today. Common to both responses is reference to
the Principal Bicycle Network (PBN), frankly I don't like the
implications. It smacks too much of `cycle where we tell you to cycle.'

[Response Snipped]

Euan,

Don't bite my head off, but I can sort of see their point of view here. The powers that be (Port Phillip Council, VicRoads or whoever) had a problem to address on Clarendon Street (delays to trams), and they're attempting to solve it. Unfortunately, the method they have tried has disadvantaged cyclists. I imagine there are examples of road 'improvements' that have disadvantaged other road users, including motorists, all over the place. You win some, lose some.

I'm definitely not an advocate of segregation, or one of the 'if there's a cycle path you have to use it' brigade. However, IMHO, Moray Street is a far safer and more pleasant road to cycle down (it's on my normal commute). In fact I woul take it in preference to Clarendon even when I'm in the car.

When is the pilot due to finish?

Incidentally, I was interested to hear about the Port Phillip BUG meeting you mentioned in one of your previous posts. Hopefully I'll make it to one sometime soon.

Cheers,
Craigster.
 
D

David Sutton

Guest
Hi Euan - I have been working in Sth Melb/Port Melb over the past couple of
months, and I often ride down Clarendon St. I've been following this thread
for a while and (in all seriousness) I would like to ask what exactly are
the issues that you have with the new tram stop treatment? IMO there is
still plenty of room for cyclists to ride between the tram tracks & the tram
stops, and there is still enough room left over for cars to overtake
cyclists safely. So am I missing something here? What is the exact nature of
the probelm?

DS



> From: craigster_jd <[email protected]>
> Organization: cyclingforums.com
> Newsgroups: aus.bicycle
> Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2005 17:32:13 +1100
> Subject: Re: Another Clarendon Street response
>
> [email protected] Wrote:
> VicRoads this time.
>>
>> I fired off my objections through their website on the 11th of

> January,
>> I received a response today. Common to both responses is reference to
>> the Principal Bicycle Network (PBN), frankly I don't like the
>> implications. It smacks too much of `cycle where we tell you to

> cycle.'
>>
>> [Response Snipped]
>>
>>

>
> Euan,
>
> Don't bite my head off, but I can sort of see their point of view here.

The
> powers that be (Port Phillip Council, VicRoads or whoever) had a

problem to
> address on Clarendon Street (delays to trams), and they're

attempting to solve
> it. Unfortunately, the method they have tried has

disadvantaged cyclists. I
> imagine there are examples of road

'improvements' that have disadvantaged
> other road users, including

motorists, all over the place. You win some, lose
> some.
>
> I'm definitely not an advocate of segregation, or one of the 'if

there's a
> cycle path you have to use it' brigade. However, IMHO, Moray

Street is a far
> safer and more pleasant road to cycle down (it's on my

normal commute). In
> fact I woul take it in preference to Clarendon even

when I'm in the car.
>
> When is the pilot due to finish?
>
> Incidentally, I was interested to hear about the Port Phillip BUG

meeting you
> mentioned in one of your previous posts. Hopefully I'll

make it to one
> sometime soon.
>
> Cheers,
> Craigster.



--
craigster_jd
>
 
>>>>> "David" == David Sutton <[email protected]> writes:

David> Hi Euan - I have been working in Sth Melb/Port Melb over the
David> past couple of months, and I often ride down Clarendon
David> St. I've been following this thread for a while and (in all
David> seriousness) I would like to ask what exactly are the issues
David> that you have with the new tram stop treatment? IMO there is
David> still plenty of room for cyclists to ride between the tram
David> tracks & the tram stops, and there is still enough room left
David> over for cars to overtake cyclists safely. So am I missing
David> something here? What is the exact nature of the probelm?

Specifically, the junction of Park Street and Clarendon where cyclists
*have* to cross tram tracks at an unsafe angle. It might not be a
problem on a MTB but on a skinny 700 X 23 it's definately a problem.

Other than that I disagree with you when you say there's enough room
left over for cars to overtake safely. If there was enough room
motorists wouldn't have to cross the dividing line. Unfortunately they
do.
--
Cheers
Euan
 

cfsmtb

New Member
Apr 11, 2003
4,963
0
0
Specifically, the junction of Park Street and Clarendon where cyclists
*have* to cross tram tracks at an unsafe angle. It might not be a
problem on a MTB but on a skinny 700 X 23 it's definately a problem.

Other than that I disagree with you when you say there's enough room
left over for cars to overtake safely. If there was enough room
motorists wouldn't have to cross the dividing line. Unfortunately they
do.
--
Cheers
Euan

I'm with Euan with this one. Another perspective - the first encounter I had with the new 'Think Tram' stops on Friday night was when a waiting van attempted to turn right - in to me. Not a pleasant introduction. I'll make inquiries if these stops are planned anywhere else and follow up if necessary.
 
>>>>> "cfsmtb" == cfsmtb <[email protected]> writes:

cfsmtb> I'm with Euan with this one. Another perspective - the first
cfsmtb> encounter I had with the new 'Think Tram' stops on Friday
cfsmtb> night was when a waiting van attempted to turn right - in to
cfsmtb> me. Not a pleasant introduction. I'll make inquiries if
cfsmtb> these stops are planned anywhere else and follow up if
cfsmtb> necessary.

It's a pilot scheme, so there are defiantly more in the works. If you
have concerns please take the time to write the council. The more
letters they get, the more they'll take notice.

BV page on issue:

http://tinyurl.com/4nbu5

VicRoads page on project:

http://tinyurl.com/5basn

Routes that will be affected from that page:

Priority routes
Route 86: Bourke St, Gertrude St, Smith St, High St, Plenty Rd
Route 55: Queensbridge St/William St/Peel St/Flemington Rd
Route 59: St Kilda Rd/William St, Peel St/ Flemington Rd
Route 19: Elizabeth St, Royal Pde, Sydney Rd
Route 112: Clarendon St, Collins St, Brunswick St, St Georges Rd
Route 109: Collins St, Victoria Pde
Route 48/75: Flinders St, Wellington St, Bridge Rd
Route 6/8: Swanston St, St Kilda Rd

So if the changes in Clarendon street go through unopposed you can
expect the same treatment on all of the above routes. Not a pleasant
prospect.
--
Cheers
Euan
 

MikeyOz

New Member
Aug 12, 2003
942
0
0
51
>>>>> "cfsmtb" == cfsmtb <[email protected]> writes:

cfsmtb> I'm with Euan with this one. Another perspective - the first
cfsmtb> encounter I had with the new 'Think Tram' stops on Friday
cfsmtb> night was when a waiting van attempted to turn right - in to
cfsmtb> me. Not a pleasant introduction. I'll make inquiries if
cfsmtb> these stops are planned anywhere else and follow up if
cfsmtb> necessary.

It's a pilot scheme, so there are defiantly more in the works. If you
have concerns please take the time to write the council. The more
letters they get, the more they'll take notice.

BV page on issue:

http://tinyurl.com/4nbu5

VicRoads page on project:

http://tinyurl.com/5basn

Routes that will be affected from that page:

Priority routes
Route 86: Bourke St, Gertrude St, Smith St, High St, Plenty Rd
Route 55: Queensbridge St/William St/Peel St/Flemington Rd
Route 59: St Kilda Rd/William St, Peel St/ Flemington Rd
Route 19: Elizabeth St, Royal Pde, Sydney Rd
Route 112: Clarendon St, Collins St, Brunswick St, St Georges Rd
Route 109: Collins St, Victoria Pde
Route 48/75: Flinders St, Wellington St, Bridge Rd
Route 6/8: Swanston St, St Kilda Rd

So if the changes in Clarendon street go through unopposed you can
expect the same treatment on all of the above routes. Not a pleasant
prospect.
--
Cheers
Euan
I live on Park Street and often have to venture down Claredon Street for one reason or another by car and bike! There has already been 1 incident involving a Car and Tram, already, its ugly, its dangerous and its only a matter of time before a cyclist or driver is killed or injured seriously.

The worst thing I see quite often is impatient drivers stuck behind a tram at one of those stops, trying to go straight ahead, the lights change and then they decide to turn right anyway! Not using the hook-turn, its a recipe for disaster.

I know all roads there are inherently dangerous, but I thought the idea was to decrease the dangers not increase them, I can only assume their drive behind this is to drive traffic away from clarendon street ?? If it works I guess they will be called geniuses.
 
G

ggf

Guest
On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 22:50:34 +1100, [email protected] wrote:

>Specifically, the junction of Park Street and Clarendon where cyclists
>*have* to cross tram tracks at an unsafe angle. It might not be a
>problem on a MTB but on a skinny 700 X 23 it's definately a problem.


Ok firstly, a public mass-transit system has to take priority over any
single user vehicle (including bikes)

Secondly, maybe you should consider a more appropriate bicycle for
such conditions. You wouldn't take a Porsche 911 down a bush-track.
Sounds like a skinny racer bike isn't the best thing for this surface.
 

MikeyOz

New Member
Aug 12, 2003
942
0
0
51
No youve missed the point... its unsafe... if you are crossing the road,
riding a bike or in a car, it is absoluetely unsafe, especially when it has the ability to case back of traffic through the lights, which happens all the time.

so when I head out for a ride along Beach Road, do I first have to ride my mountain bike across the tram tracks and then hope back on the roadie again.

I have no problem with a mass transit system tacking priority, just be good if it was safe thats all.

Ive sent my email to the council and vic roads anyway.

ggf said:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 22:50:34 +1100, [email protected] wrote:

>Specifically, the junction of Park Street and Clarendon where cyclists
>*have* to cross tram tracks at an unsafe angle. It might not be a
>problem on a MTB but on a skinny 700 X 23 it's definately a problem.


Ok firstly, a public mass-transit system has to take priority over any
single user vehicle (including bikes)

Secondly, maybe you should consider a more appropriate bicycle for
such conditions. You wouldn't take a Porsche 911 down a bush-track.
Sounds like a skinny racer bike isn't the best thing for this surface.
 

aeek

New Member
Jun 15, 2004
757
0
0
ggf said:
Secondly, maybe you should consider a more appropriate bicycle for
such conditions. You wouldn't take a Porsche 911 down a bush-track.
Sounds like a skinny racer bike isn't the best thing for this surface.

You could be onto something.
Think of the money the authorities can save by not repairing potholes.
Then, if a car is damaged, or worse, tough.
Drivers should know better than to drive, without off-road suspension, on a CITY STREET.

========

I don 't remember the Adelaide tram tracks being a problem.
Maybe they lay the bitumen closer and limit the speed of the trams on those sections?
Something to think about.
 
>>>>> "ggf" == ggf <[email protected]> writes:

ggf> Ok firstly, a public mass-transit system has to take priority
ggf> over any single user vehicle (including bikes)

Uh huh, your point? I haven't argued that bicycles should take priority
over trams, I've argued that the engineering to facilitate that is
flawed and endangers other road users. That is not acceptable.

Let's take the closing off of one lane for a start, that increases
vehicular congestion down the entire street (indeed this was cited in a
letter to me as an "improvement" for cyclist safety) which only serves
to delay trams even more. The extension of the pavement to the offside
lane puts cyclists in the path of trams as well.

The only reason hook turns work in the city is because it takes right
turning vehicles out of two lanes of traffic. The right turn lanes in
Clarendon Street close off one of the lanes which is downright dumb.

The accident rate in Clarendon street has increased for the duration of
the pilot so far, that should be telling enough.

ggf> Secondly, maybe you should consider a more appropriate bicycle
ggf> for such conditions. You wouldn't take a Porsche 911 down a
ggf> bush-track. Sounds like a skinny racer bike isn't the best
ggf> thing for this surface.

Unless you missed it, Clarendon Street is a road, not a bush track. If
I was going to the bush I'd take a mountain bike. I use a road bike and
with good reason. My commute is 40KM day, soon to go up to 65km a day.
--
Cheers
Euan
 

Similar threads