Pete wrote:Looking at those project maps and designs:
- there is still a southbound bike lane on the east side of Fitzroy St. It leads into a restricted 'shared space' with different paving treatments leading to the Upper Esplanade.
- the northbound side has a two-way bike path. It is clearly a seperate bike path with a 1m seperator for long sections, and wider plantation sections. You will only be able to enter Fitzroy St from the south, off the Lower Esplanade, via a pedestrian crossing to the bike path.
So riding on the road should continue to be legal in both directions, if more constrained on the north-bound. At the north end the bike path feeds onto a bike lane, so merging problems should be minimised.
That all assumes they stick to their design, rather than half-a*sing it.
I just hope Percrime's prediction doesn't come true, i.e. the lack of use of the new Fitzroy St lane leads to less funding for such lanes. Perhaps BV needs to adopt this new lane as one of their causes? That way, with any luck, these stupid give-way to side streets rules will get fixed sooner rather than later.sachamc wrote:Used Barkly this morning, and apart from a garbage truck driver that seemed to want to mow me down, it was pretty stress free compared to the silly fitzroy st bike lane.
I think I will be going this way most of the time from now on. I can see many other cyclists doing this too, until barkly gets so full of bicycles the council then decides to build a stupid segregated bike lane.
victor wrote:Perhaps BV needs to adopt this new lane as one of their causes? That way, with any luck, these stupid give-way to side streets rules will get fixed sooner rather than later.
Good point, but the local council are hardly about to undo it all now - that would be admitting they stuffed up! Perhaps the best we can hope for is to fix some of its defects?Pete wrote:victor wrote:Perhaps BV needs to adopt this new lane as one of their causes? That way, with any luck, these stupid give-way to side streets rules will get fixed sooner rather than later.
You'll still be left with the even more stupid two-way bike lane (path) an idea that has been demonstrated in Europe as far, far more dangerous than riding on an unsegregated road
It's the true defintion of 'dog's breakfast'!!
I have just finished reading the article on the new bike path and could not believe my eyes when I saw the picture in the paper. The path is showing 2 bikes going in the same direction, when in fact the path is a 2 way bike path. The person with the camera is on the wrong side of the path.
I rode the path a couple of times last week and think it is very dangerous and a dumb idea to have 2 directions on a bike path that is on one side of a busy road. I have also driven up park street to Fitzroy st and I think it will cause a number of near misses with bikes, and hopefully no one gets hurt. When you approach the intersection, your first reaction is to look to your right to see if any cars are coming, because this path is not in use anywhere else in the country, drivers will not look left for bikes and that’s when the trouble will start. Not to mention the pedestrians who will look to their right and step in front of a bike, just like what happens on Beach road, between St Kilda and Port Melbourne,
Not a very good idea, and I would love to hear who was involved in the decision making and what that process was.
Murray wrote:I discovered and rode up that track the other weekend. It's narrow for bi-directional traffic but would be just OK for two abreast in the same direction. There is a considerable loss of benefit to cyclists using it vs using the road in that the bike track is slowed by Give Way signs at all cross streets whereas Fitzroy St has priority at the same - so if I want to get places efficiently I'm better off on the road!
It strikes me as very odd that VicRoads is busy removing, over the protests of locals, two-way service lanes along FerntreeGully Rd due to safety considerations and councils are busy installing equivalent facilities for cyclists - a generally more vulnerable group of road users who need facilities of at least equal safety value, not less.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests