trailgumby wrote:Now, who was calling me unduly harsh when it came to (alleged) journalists at the Daily Terrorgraph?
fixed it for you
I don't think the article was that bad, after it it is the daily telegraph It only really seeks out to confirm people's beliefs so they can sell more papers.
What is stupid about it is that it only criticises but does not suggest anything to improve it.
Yes - seems you fell right into that one.
Of course road bike/long distance commuters will be put off by a cycleway that includes sections that go on an off footpaths - make us wait a long time a pedestrian lights etc. Its not a shock.
But as ghetto says - other than comment there is nothing to the story - not even solutions. If he dug deeper and even looked at more comments from posters here - he would have seen some solutions and he would have also seen what the barriers are to those solutions are - the biggest barrier is the RTA. Always is always will be.
Until the RTA realises bicycles are a valid form of transport to commute into the city they will continue to treat us like faster versions of pedestrians - who they already treat woefully.
There are many flaws with Clover's cycleways - but they are mostly because of the RTA - but any infrastructure is better than none. Once there is a critical mass of cyclists (due to increased cyclists due to these new cycleways) more will hopefully be done by the RTA. Im hoping they add bike boxes to the mix.
I'm one of those 'tough' riders then. Perhaps the Laws should change to make it illegal for bike riders to ride in a lane?
2010 BMC SLC01
Not at all just don't bag the infastructure that cycle friendly people are putting in place as there are enough baggers outside the tent.
Don't think for a minute that Alan Jones won't have tremendous pull once he gets his boy Barry in Macquarie St come March next year. If we lose Clover than the game is up and out come the dozers and you may well get your wish and it will be illegal for cyclists to take a lane in peak hour (Jones has said this on his program)
I'm wondering if he'll show is face here again.
Also whether or not his article was "edited" by an editor to change its outcome significantly - that's something we'll never know.
Personally I think the silent majority of people (particularly in the City of Sydney electorate where the most controversial infrastructure changes are made) generally support the direction Clover Moore is taking Sydney, it's a vocal minority who don't. It's a direction which most of the world is generally heading and I doubt Sydney or Australia would be the last bastion against sustainability.
Mate, criticism is the only thing that will get us safe bicycle infrastructure designed to impact peak-time transport choices. In my opinion it is the duty of experienced cyclists to point out that deep channel narrow bi-di bicycle lanes placed on one side of a roadway, are highly discredited designs, known to produce higher levels of accidents than riding with the traffic. Connecting the rubbish up, isn't going to make it non rubbish, its just going to make it connected rubbish.
Another article - http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/o ... 5921252041
"Mate, criticism is the only thing that will get us safe bicycle infrastructure designed to impact peak-time transport choices. In my opinion it is the duty of experienced cyclists to point out that deep channel narrow bi-di bicycle lanes placed on one side of a roadway, are highly discredited designs, known to produce higher levels of accidents than riding with the traffic. Connecting the rubbish up, isn't going to make it non rubbish, its just going to make it connected rubbish."
Wrong what criticism will get you is the people putting the infastrucutre in place remeoved from office, an end to any new bike infastructire in the future and the removal of the existing infastruture. If you thinking I'm joking listen to what Alan Jones is saying and what do you think will happen when he gets Barry in as Premier?
Last edited by anonymous_ on Tue Sep 14, 2010 12:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
First up, please try and make your sentences legible.
Secondly, WT? are you doing listening to Alan Jones? he's trash.
2010 BMC SLC01
If they put decent infrastructure in to begin with then there would not be an issue to begin with.
Who cares what Alan Jones thinks?
http://www.clivehamilton.net.au/cms/med ... _Jones.pdf
The only people who listen to him are idiots who vote lib/nats anyway (not saying that lib/nat voters are idiots, just people who take AJ seriously are idiots and vote this way). Swinging voters, if they pay attention to him at all, are pushed the other way by him.
People who vote in the Seat of Sydney, the important bit for Clover's paths, seem not to care about AJ at all.
"My bicycle masters boardwalk and quagmire with aplomb. Those that doubt me... suck THUMB by choice."
The only thing that will prevent OFarrell getting in at the next election is his own big mouth, and he's clearly got enough sense to keep it mostly shut. As far as bicycle lanes go, until this week, virtually all forward movement on bicycle infrastructure has happened at the local council level, with the state government as represented by the RTA kicking and screaming and arguing, and using every bit of red tape in its arsenal. Its the RTA that put up bollards on Anzac Bridge, and it was complaining about them, that got them removed.
In any case, there is nothing doing, state residents are adopting bicycles regardless of the infrastructure state, and the infrastructure is only likely to ever represent one road in a typical journey of half a dozen roads - ie every resident that chooses to use a bicycle, will still predominately be riding on the road.
Hi All, of course I'm happy to show my face on here. I'm not one to duck and weave, nor do I feel like I have to.
Firstly, my aim was not to offend, but to communicate a consensus from commuting cyclists (and no, I didn't just use this forum, I spoke to many more individuals and cycling clubs). Perhaps the tone was a touch aggressive, given I actually support Clover's approach to bike lanes, just not the design of some of them. The general thought on this thread was exactly that _ the Bourke St/Rd and King St bike paths were poorly designed and made for a terribly slow commute, but hey, thumbs up for bike lanes, which I believe I communicated in the story.
Yes, perhaps we could've presented some solutions and we are exploring ways this week to provide some ideas and present the other side of the argument. Stay tuned.
Secondly, this is not exactly a News Limited agenda. I initiated the story, not my editor or chief of staff. I approached them with the story idea, on the basis that it was a hassle for me in my daily commute.
Yes, stories on bike paths seem to generate a plethora of responses from our readers (many views of which I actually detest given their disgusting hatred for cyclists) but that was not the reason we chose to do the story. And no, Alan Jones has nothing to do with the Daily Telegraph. There is no connection. On that matter, I don't really want to print my actual views.
Here is my opinion piece which accompanied the bike path story.
I USED to baulk at telling people I'm a journalist. Such an admission was always greeted with suspicion at best and outright derision at worst. An instant conversation-killer.
But these days, I'm happy to inform all and sundry of my profession . . . as long as they don't discover my other secret dirty love affair.
I'm a cyclist in a city that hates the lycra-clad set more than Melbourne Storm supporters or Kyle Sandilands.
Even worse, I'm a cyclist who rides outside of bike
lanes, even casually adjacent to bikes lanes, and sometimes on the opposite side of the road to a bike path. But never on a bike lane. Don't blame me, I didn't want the bike lanes there in the first place.
Lord Mayor Clover Moore doesn't speak for me, or for the thousands of other semi-serious Sydney riders who cop endless abuse from motorists and business owners for ruining/carving up/defiling/destroying their inner-city roads with oversized bike lanes. For many cyclists, the two-way lanes that Ms Moore, in her infinite wisdom, is erecting on every second street are far too much hassle for commuting to work.
Take the Bourke Rd lanes from Gardeners Rd to Green Square station -- cyclists could easily make up 15 minutes by avoiding the slow bike lanes and riding on the road.
But while the commuting-cyclist crowd vent their spleen on cycling forums about the design of the bike lanes, there is a parallel consensus that tips its collective helmet to Ms Moore's vision to encourage people to take up riding.
And that, no doubt, was half the reason for Ms Moore's bike-lane decree -- not for regular bike commuters like me, but to tempt more novice riders onto their bikes.
God this guy has a hide coming back in here with a completely different tone to the one in the article.
People might fall for that once but (I hope) not twice.
Alan Jones and the Daily Telegraph have the same agenda to get the Lib national party eleceted both state and federally and to get rid of Clover Moore.
Alan Jones gets most of his stories agenda for the day straight from the pages of the Tele.
Hi Cama7, in Sydney there is a direct relationship between facilities and cycling numbers. To quote one of many examples would be Anzac Bridge. Prior to its opening you had 3 options;
1. ride along a dirt track
2. ride in high density traffic
3. don't ride
Most people took option 3
When the path was made available, initially few used it, but with each year numbers built as more became aware there was a suitable cycling route. Numbers will continue to climb, with each successive improvement, however the increases will occur over a period of time after the facility is provided.
"Build quality facilities and the riders will follow"
There is criticism of the new bike paths not having enough riders on them, however many of those new routes are not complete meaning that they are currently only suitable for riders experienced in riding in high density traffic thru the missing links. Once those routes are complete cyclists will commence using them and the numbers will increase with each successive year and each subsequent improvement.
I've got stuff on ebay
Whatever you think of his article, that's just rubbish. Forums are public and he is entitled to express his opinions as much as you or anyone else has.
Personally, I believe his article was reasonable and reflected the fact that he was a bicycle commuter (unlike the story in today's Telegraph).
Regardless of that, I appreciate the fact the author has returned to state his case and I look forward to reading his constructive suggestions on how to approach the cycling infrastructure issues.
WombatK - Jerry Garcia, Grateful Dead
It was. I cannot say that your support of Clover's support actually came across that well, if at all, in the article.
You also failed to mention that the a lot of the routes are not actually complete yet (as Mike pointed out above) or the fact that most of the problems are down to State/RTA (e.g. traffic light timings) not local council/Clover which was pointed out many times on this thread with the net result that you do come across as biased (albeit not as much as some terrorgraph articles).
"My bicycle masters boardwalk and quagmire with aplomb. Those that doubt me... suck THUMB by choice."
Glad to see you're not a hit and run forumer - that gives you *some* credibility.
To further your credibility you might wish to educate yourself about the true causes of the King St and Bourke Road cycleway debacle.
Short summary: It's not Clover that's screwed up, it's the RTA.
BNSW submission to the Staysafe Inquiry into Vulnerable Road Users
This won't be news to any of us who've been observing RTA behaviour over time, but there is a major cultural problem within the RTA and its attitude to both pedestrians and cyclists, favouring motorised transport. The above paper and its appendix, once you account for the professional reserve, makes for quite alarming reading by cyclists.
I won't spoil the surprise further. Read and - ahem! - enjoy.
"People have a right to their own opinions, but not their own facts. Evidence must be located, not created, and opinions not backed by evidence cannot be given much weight." -- James W Loewen
+1 to what wombat said and I further believe that having a cycling journo on board actually makes for an opportunity to get certain messages out to the masses. one article I'd really like to see one about paying rego v road usage.
So cama7 please hang around, if not as a journo, a fellow cyclist. You might even pick up some more stories.
Personally I see the increase in walking/cycling/public transport in our cities as inevitable as density increases, people become more aware of sustainability issues and demand a better quality of life. It's not a matter of if, but more a matter of when and how. I don't think I've ever heard any plausible alternative solution to our current problems (congestion, sustainability, density) by any detractors of cycling/reducing car dependence. All these detractors do is suggest things like "ban cyclists during peak hours" without thinking of the bigger picture.
It's not like what is happening in Sydney is any different to what Copenhagen went through in the 70's and 80's or what Paris or many other cities around the world have gone through in the process of reclaiming the streets from automobiles. History will tend to repeat itself, the exact same thing happened elsewhere in the past and is happening again in Sydney.
Except these detractors don't realise Peak Hour is when we NEED the bycicles...
2010 BMC SLC01
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users