Perth Waterfront
- ColinOldnCranky
- Posts: 6734
- Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 4:58 pm
Re: Perth Waterfront
Postby ColinOldnCranky » Wed Jan 29, 2014 10:50 am
Rather than what is shown which is large numbers of cyclists and walker crossing four lanes of traffic twice. And, presumably, two light changes.
-
- Posts: 527
- Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 1:13 pm
Re: Perth Waterfront
Postby WarbyD » Wed Jan 29, 2014 11:01 am
Would have had absolutely no idea about the dotted line on the map there though if I hadn't seen a cyclist come the other way out of it - no signage that I noticed and no direction from cap'n high vis.
- blkmcs
- Posts: 976
- Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 2:44 pm
- Location: Bayswater, WA
Re: Perth Waterfront
Postby blkmcs » Wed Jan 29, 2014 11:05 am
-
- Posts: 1791
- Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 1:25 pm
Re: Perth Waterfront
Postby wellington_street » Wed Jan 29, 2014 11:18 am
Did you ride down the wrong side of Barrack Street on the road too?eldavo wrote:Silly me, I saw the path continued but sheepishly followed others as per the video animation that was shared around last week, I.e. the big upside down U detour around the work area, not across the area on the dashed cycle line in your graphic above.
- Aushiker
- Posts: 22387
- Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 1:55 pm
- Location: Walyalup land
- Contact:
-
- Posts: 1791
- Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 1:25 pm
Re: Perth Waterfront
Postby wellington_street » Wed Jan 29, 2014 2:42 pm
- rolandp
- Posts: 2316
- Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 11:47 am
- Location: Hillarys - Perth, WA
Re: Perth Waterfront
Postby rolandp » Thu Jan 30, 2014 12:40 am
There are existing traffic lights on all off these intersections that the suggestion goes through as well as existing shared paths (with the exception of the area which is basically the original Riverside Dr where we have existing curb mounts), and the amount of traffic entering/exiting Barrack St, is no more than prior to the development occurring, so no change.
Please note, that this is only until late February (aka 4 weeks away) so the big question which needs to be answered, what will be implemented late February. Will the Barrack St/Riverside Drive crossings remain after late February? If they do, and if works out quicker to ride rather than wait for the two light changes, why can't cycle lanes be installed on the Barrack Square route. Image from tonight of this area:
- ColinOldnCranky
- Posts: 6734
- Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 4:58 pm
Re: Perth Waterfront
Postby ColinOldnCranky » Thu Jan 30, 2014 2:16 am
The answer is in the limited width on southern, section of road. Taking it as a given that they will not give up any of the walking and garden areas then they would need to give up either some parking or the double decker bus in order to fit a lane along the souther section of road.rolandp wrote: Please note, that this is only until late February (aka 4 weeks away) so the big question which needs to be answered, what will be implemented late February. Will the Barrack St/Riverside Drive crossings remain after late February? If they do, and if works out quicker to ride rather than wait for the two light changes, why can't cycle lanes be installed on the Barrack Square route. Image from tonight of this area:
Cutting parking would be a hard choice. Any one ever tried to park there? Outside of some ACROD spots I seldom see a spot on the weekends for example. Lucky for me my wife has an ACROD pass.
And the tourist bus? No way will that be dropped, nor should it.
They could lose the path on the west but it would be a poor choice for the double decker bus - it's a bit out of the way which is not good for a valuable tourist service.
But I do see a solution that looks to me could still put the double decker in an appropriate place AND not lose any car bays. Simply lose the path at the west. Even before the works it was never used by peds anyway.
Then move the car parking on the west side of the east section of road and have the double decker pull up either there or on the other side up against the Lazy Shag.
Those changes will give the required extra space for a lane on all three sections of the road, not lose any car bays and place the double decker drop-off in a spot appropriate to it's tourism function. It may even give an extra bay or two for parking.
- ColinOldnCranky
- Posts: 6734
- Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 4:58 pm
Re: Perth Waterfront
Postby ColinOldnCranky » Thu Jan 30, 2014 2:29 am
Already there are commonly about 8 or more bikes waiting in the mornings to cross from the bell tower to the Supreme Court Gardens corner. But now we have to add all those that simply pass that section as they continue east or west. I reckon you could add a dozen or more who just want to head east or west that currently do not cross.
Yuch.
-
- Posts: 527
- Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 1:13 pm
Re: Perth Waterfront
Postby WarbyD » Thu Jan 30, 2014 10:41 am
This is exactly what I've done the last couple of days, along with most of the pedestrians and cyclists I've seen there at the same time as me. Plenty of space IMO. The traffic controllers don't seem to have any problem with this either..rolandp wrote:
I don't know what the traffic is like at other times though to know if this is really practical or if I've just been lucky.
- rolandp
- Posts: 2316
- Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 11:47 am
- Location: Hillarys - Perth, WA
Re: Perth Waterfront
Postby rolandp » Mon Feb 10, 2014 9:11 am
Sneak preview on the new route:
It still requires us to cross at Barrack St (now at the corner of The Esplanade/Barrack St), ride down Riverside Dr, and cross at Riverside Dr. No difference in the number of lights that we have to now cross at.
There will be an additional alternative temporary route from early 2015, as 'road works' are required for the extensions of Howard St/Sherwood Ct, which will occur on the south side of The Esplanade St. This last alternative temporary route is still under discussion as it may use car bays on The Esplanade (subject to required approval).
The bike lanes on Barrack St are committed, and I was verbally told they will be here in the next couple of months (or earlier).
There will not be bike lanes around the Quay. Still trying to work out 'shared-use city centre roads' is as announced by Minister of Planning late last month, and specified on MRA's website.
- ColinOldnCranky
- Posts: 6734
- Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 4:58 pm
Re: Perth Waterfront
Postby ColinOldnCranky » Mon Feb 10, 2014 4:33 pm
But no sign anymore of these attendents this morning during peak. So, as initially anticipated by myself, cyclists are required - as per signs placed - to cross two sets over two light changes, and clustered for one light-change on an inadequate path space in the middle where there is far too little room for them and the pedestrians sharing the space.
The only reason that it was workable this morning was the majority of cyclists ignoring the requirement and making an illegal and somewhat clumsy and somewhat dangerous direct cut across in the face of traffic. Without those illegal crossing I think the inadequacy of the setup would be patently obvious and we would have calls to the media by peds and cyclists alike. It's a bit rough when the only way something will work is by people putting themselves in some danger and flagrantly ignoring the law.
But inevitably someone will come unstuck. Watch this space.
I rate the arrangements in place as about the biggest fail possible.
-
- Posts: 934
- Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2014 10:49 am
- Location: Perth, WA
Re: Perth Waterfront
Postby Scott_C » Mon Feb 10, 2014 5:17 pm
I haven't been through Barrack St since the most recent changes (I use Riverside, Plain St & the Terrace to get in and the Terrace, Plain St & Riverside PSP to get out of the CBD and only on Saturdays) so I may be completely wrong but, if I understand correctly, the cyclists are in effect making a hook turn which is, as I understand it, legal for cyclists at any intersection where it is not specifically banned. Depending upon how it is done it may not be safe/legal from an entry/exit of the carriageway in the face of traffic but a bicycle starting behind the stop line westbound can legally make a cross to the diagonal corner on a green light provided they give way to any straight through traffic.ColinOldnCranky wrote:The only reason that it was workable this morning was the majority of cyclists ignoring the requirement and making an illegal and somewhat clumsy and somewhat dangerous direct cut across in the face of traffic. Without those illegal crossing I think the inadequacy of the setup would be patently obvious and we would have calls to the media by peds and cyclists alike. It's a bit rough when the only way something will work is by people putting themselves in some danger and flagrantly ignoring the law.
This doesn't apply to the rider of a "wheeled toy" though.
If I've got anything wrong corrections are welcomed.
- ColinOldnCranky
- Posts: 6734
- Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 4:58 pm
Re: Perth Waterfront
Postby ColinOldnCranky » Tue Feb 11, 2014 9:38 pm
Noble guess.Scott_C wrote:I haven't been through Barrack St since the most recent changes (I use Riverside, Plain St & the Terrace to get in and the Terrace, Plain St & Riverside PSP to get out of the CBD and only on Saturdays) so I may be completely wrong but, if I understand correctly, the cyclists are in effect making a hook turn which is, as I understand it, legal for cyclists at any intersection where it is not specifically banned. Depending upon how it is done it may not be safe/legal from an entry/exit of the carriageway in the face of traffic but a bicycle starting behind the stop line westbound can legally make a cross to the diagonal corner on a green light provided they give way to any straight through traffic.ColinOldnCranky wrote:The only reason that it was workable this morning was the majority of cyclists ignoring the requirement and making an illegal and somewhat clumsy and somewhat dangerous direct cut across in the face of traffic. Without those illegal crossing I think the inadequacy of the setup would be patently obvious and we would have calls to the media by peds and cyclists alike. It's a bit rough when the only way something will work is by people putting themselves in some danger and flagrantly ignoring the law.
This doesn't apply to the rider of a "wheeled toy" though.
If I've got anything wrong corrections are welcomed.
At each corner the cyclists (and peds) are leaving shared-paths, they are not yet on the road. Hook turns apply to vehicles on the road.
The intersection is otherwise also not really a hook-turn situation. The lights for east-west and north-south are the simultaneously the same - walk on both crossings or green drive thru both crossings. Done apparently so that cyclists could bypass the middle "island" corner which was supported earlier with attendants on both lights directing cyclists onto the road to the other corner. But those attendants are no longer there and signs have been placed on the "island" corner directing cyclists to head over there.
Essentially the lights have been synched to allow cyclists to take the diagonal short cut that they are now taking illegally but signage and attendants are no longer supporting that or making it clear either. Result is that most cyclists are simply riding and wobbling around the edge of the car lanes, sometimes in sync with the lights and sometimes not.
If the all did use the island corner then the whole intersection would become gridlocked with peds and cyclists at every change.
A true dogs breakfast and an accident waiting to happen.
Ignoring the gridlock for a moment, FYI to follow the signage and take the intersection in two light changes takes 3 minutes 10 seconds. All they needed to do was push the barriers that describe the arc back about 2 meters to make the ped/cyclist path continous.
- Aushiker
- Posts: 22387
- Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 1:55 pm
- Location: Walyalup land
- Contact:
Re: Perth Waterfront
Postby Aushiker » Thu Feb 13, 2014 2:00 pm
Andrew
-
- Posts: 527
- Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 1:13 pm
Re: Perth Waterfront
Postby WarbyD » Thu Feb 13, 2014 2:11 pm
-
- Posts: 1791
- Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 1:25 pm
Re: Perth Waterfront
Postby wellington_street » Thu Feb 13, 2014 3:43 pm
Do Main Roads have the authority to permit cyclists to disobey the road rules? If so, why not do it at most intersections?main roads wrote:Note: cyclists are permitted to ride on the route shown and are not required to dismount at crossings."
-
- Posts: 178
- Joined: Fri May 11, 2012 12:19 pm
Re: Perth Waterfront
Postby Sinner » Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:52 pm
- rolandp
- Posts: 2316
- Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 11:47 am
- Location: Hillarys - Perth, WA
Re: Perth Waterfront
Postby rolandp » Mon Feb 17, 2014 10:40 pm
That was a non-starter. New path remains closed. Lets see what Tuesday brings.Aushiker wrote:The route now in place from Monday February 17, 2014:
Andrew
-
- Posts: 1791
- Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 1:25 pm
Re: Perth Waterfront
Postby wellington_street » Mon Feb 17, 2014 10:52 pm
Or do we need to carry a print out with us to show to Mr Plod - "but I have a note from my
-
- Posts: 178
- Joined: Fri May 11, 2012 12:19 pm
Re: Perth Waterfront
Postby Sinner » Tue Feb 18, 2014 12:09 pm
The contractor haven't been able to complete the cycle lantern installation at Barrack/Esplanade intersection and so will place "cyclist dismount" signage at both sides of this intersection until they can install the lanterns.
So you won't be legally allowed to ride across until the lanterns go up.
- rolandp
- Posts: 2316
- Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 11:47 am
- Location: Hillarys - Perth, WA
Re: Perth Waterfront
Postby rolandp » Tue Feb 18, 2014 11:03 pm
Car had gone this evening and new path was now opened.
-
- Posts: 178
- Joined: Fri May 11, 2012 12:19 pm
Re: Perth Waterfront
Postby Sinner » Wed Feb 19, 2014 1:29 pm
- BrownBike
- Posts: 167
- Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2011 7:33 pm
- Location: Perth - Looking for a north-south route across the CBD
Re: Perth Waterfront
Postby BrownBike » Wed Feb 19, 2014 6:33 pm
-
- Posts: 1791
- Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 1:25 pm
Re: Perth Waterfront
Postby wellington_street » Wed Feb 19, 2014 6:39 pm
That's not the shared path - the shared path is on the eastern side of the trees.BrownBike wrote:The 'dual use path' along William St isn't much chop. Not marked as such and of course, peppered with streetlight poles.
- General Australian Cycling Topics
- Info / announcements
- Buying a bike / parts
- General Cycling Discussion
- The Bike Shed
- Cycling Health
- Cycling Safety and Advocacy
- Women's Cycling
- Bike & Gear Reviews
- Cycling Trade
- Stolen Bikes
- Bicycle FAQs
- Serious Biking
- Audax / Randonneuring
- Retro biking
- Commuting
- MTB
- Recumbents
- Fixed Gear/ Single Speed
- Track
- Electric Bicycles
- Cyclocross and Gravel Grinding
- Dragsters / Lowriders / Cruisers
- Children's Bikes
- Cargo Bikes and Utility Cycling
- Road Racing
- Road Biking
- Training
- Time Trial
- Triathlon
- International and National Tours and Events
- Cycle Touring
- Touring Australia
- Touring Overseas
- Touring Bikes and Equipment
- Australia
- Western Australia
- New South Wales
- Queensland
- South Australia
- Victoria
- ACT
- Tasmania
- Northern Territory
- Country & Regional
- The Market Place
- Member to Member Bike and Gear Sales
- Want to Buy, Group Buy, Swap
- My Bikes or Gear Elsewhere
- Cycling Brands
- Cannondale
- Garmin
- Giant
- Shimano
- Trek
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
- All times are UTC+11:00
- Top
- Delete cookies
About the Australian Cycling Forums
The Australian Cycling Forums is a welcoming community where you can ask questions and talk about the type of bikes and cycling topics you like.
Bicycles Network Australia
Forum Information
Connect with BNA
This website uses affiliate links to retail platforms including ebay, amazon, proviz and ribble.