Cycle lights proposal in Sydney

Equipment and On Road Behaviour, Laws and Rules. Cycling Promotion and Advocacy

Re: Cycle lights proposal in Sydney

Postby itsaghostcar » Thu Dec 23, 2010 9:34 am

wombatK wrote:While bicycle boxes might have made it on the Staysafe recommendations list (and into the Aus Road Rules), there aren't any in the CBD - but they would probably do more to promote cyclists safety than all of Clover's half-baked bi-directional cycle lanes.

I've got the privilege of riding along many of these cycle lanes each day on my route to and from work. Whilst I agree that the light phasing isn't the best, I don't understand the hate that cyclists have towards them. For anyone who isn't wanting to have a race through the city, they are a perfectly good way of getting through town. Attitudes from the public are also getting better - each week, I see more people (pedestrians and drivers) checking closely as they go across any cycle paths. Not everyone remembers, and you still need to be careful ... but it will take some time. There are close calls in Amsterdam and Copenhagen and other bicycle friendly places every day too.

The more cyclists about the better it will be for us. Yes they may slow you up a bit, but remember that that's exactly the thinking that drivers have towards cyclsts. These cycleways and bike boxes are great things to promote cycling in Sydney. These visible signs make people aware that there is a viable alternative to sitting in traffic.
User avatar
itsaghostcar
 
Posts: 1230
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 5:05 am
Location: Sydney

by BNA » Thu Dec 23, 2010 10:39 am

BNA
 

Re: Cycle lights proposal in Sydney

Postby il padrone » Thu Dec 23, 2010 10:39 am

Intriguing response form Cycling Central's blog to the media outrage.

Cycling Central wrote:It's multi-functionality gone mad in an increasingly politically correct world. As you know I prefer to call a spade a shovel and I'm telling you roads are for cars.

But that's not all the editorial notes, catering to cyclists is expensive business - in fact this writer thinks it may be cheaper to house them offshore, or better yet, send them back to Melbourne or Copenhagen for their protection

:P :lol: :lol:
Riding bikes in traffic - what seems dangerous is usually safe; what seems safe is often more dangerous.
User avatar
il padrone
 
Posts: 18188
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: Cycle lights proposal in Sydney

Postby Nate » Thu Dec 23, 2010 10:49 am

itsaghostcar wrote:
wombatK wrote:While bicycle boxes might have made it on the Staysafe recommendations list (and into the Aus Road Rules), there aren't any in the CBD - but they would probably do more to promote cyclists safety than all of Clover's half-baked bi-directional cycle lanes.

I've got the privilege of riding along many of these cycle lanes each day on my route to and from work. Whilst I agree that the light phasing isn't the best, I don't understand the hate that cyclists have towards them.


+1
The light phasing is superb along Kent St though, at a gentle pace i have to stop ONCE between the harbour bridge & King st (at market), everywhere else it is Sync'd up
User avatar
Nate
 
Posts: 2701
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 7:49 pm

Re: Cycle lights proposal in Sydney

Postby CommuRider » Thu Dec 23, 2010 10:53 am

Nate wrote:
itsaghostcar wrote:I've got the privilege of riding along many of these cycle lanes each day on my route to and from work. Whilst I agree that the light phasing isn't the best, I don't understand the hate that cyclists have towards them.


+1
The light phasing is superb along Kent St though, at a gentle pace i have to stop ONCE between the harbour bridge & King st (at market), everywhere else it is Sync'd up


The slower pace also reduces the sweat + smell factor once you arrive at the office. Especially when one is running late :oops:
Amateur oenologist and green-friendly commuter.
User avatar
CommuRider
 
Posts: 5053
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2010 6:16 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Cycle lights proposal in Sydney

Postby Nate » Thu Dec 23, 2010 10:53 am

Nate wrote:
mikesbytes wrote:So this picture is actually supporting the need for the 'cycle first' lights

sorry - but unless i see a red light - then he didnt cross on the red.
Odd how the red light somehow didnt make it into the photo



Just had another look at the photo... look at where the blue car is... the car is entirely in front of the end of the double whites (to the left of the car).
Which means the car is IN the intersection - i.e. the lights must have gone green as the car is moving into the intersection.

So the bike probably just took off quicker than the car!
User avatar
Nate
 
Posts: 2701
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 7:49 pm

Re: Cycle lights proposal in Sydney

Postby zero » Thu Dec 23, 2010 11:33 am

Nate wrote:
itsaghostcar wrote:
wombatK wrote:While bicycle boxes might have made it on the Staysafe recommendations list (and into the Aus Road Rules), there aren't any in the CBD - but they would probably do more to promote cyclists safety than all of Clover's half-baked bi-directional cycle lanes.

I've got the privilege of riding along many of these cycle lanes each day on my route to and from work. Whilst I agree that the light phasing isn't the best, I don't understand the hate that cyclists have towards them.


+1
The light phasing is superb along Kent St though, at a gentle pace i have to stop ONCE between the harbour bridge & King st (at market), everywhere else it is Sync'd up


There is no syncing between lights along Kent. Its easily provable by riding it at night, in which case you will have to stop for every light. Tested it once for a couple of laps, and I got 39 red lights, and 1 green. In 100% of the cases, the red light was demand based, ie I would NOT get a green until I went up to and sat on the detectors. If you get a rolling green its because of opposite direction bicycle traffic or a red light runner ahead of you, and the green period is only 5 seconds per 2-3 minute cycle too. I don't even know how we can reliably make a legal turn onto kent from king because the bicycle light goes red before the pedestrian light starts flashing - so if there are pedestrians, you can easily be blocked for the duration of your sequence.

Even during peak times, its easy to spend 2 or 3 minutes sitting there whilst cars travelling in your direction have a green light, and then cars not travelling in your direction have a green light, ie the wait time in the cycle lane is on average longer than in any other users - including pedestrians because the pedestrian lights frequently last longer than the bike lights.

The "syncing" is done in the cross street direction so that each short street has a reasonable chance of being emptied of cars during its cycle.

To put things in perspective, in similar conditions (bugger all traffic), I averaged 8km/hr on the path system on a fast road bike, and 24km/hr onroad on a 15kg DS mountain bike. Matter of fact, even testing the onroad vs cycle path is difficult because I run out of CBD very quickly whilst onroad.
zero
 
Posts: 2617
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 1:54 pm

Re: Cycle lights proposal in Sydney

Postby Nate » Thu Dec 23, 2010 11:37 am

zero wrote:There is no syncing between lights along Kent. Its easily provable by riding it at night, in which case you will have to stop for every light. Tested it once for a couple of laps, and I got 39 red lights, and 1 green. In 100% of the cases, the red light was demand based, ie I would NOT get a green until I went up to and sat on the detectors. If you get a rolling green its because of opposite direction bicycle traffic or a red light runner ahead of you, and the green period is only 5 seconds per 2-3 minute cycle too. I don't even know how we can reliably make a legal turn onto kent from king because the bicycle light goes red before the pedestrian light starts flashing - so if there are pedestrians, you can easily be blocked for the duration of your sequence.


I only ride at peak times (8:15am & 4:45pm) & even without other cyclists waiting they've turned green - i'll have to have a close look. But they've been going well for me so far.

Yeah King --> Kent is a bugger, best bet is to dismount, walk and rejoin the roadway on Kent.
User avatar
Nate
 
Posts: 2701
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 7:49 pm

Re: Cycle lights proposal in Sydney

Postby Nate » Thu Dec 23, 2010 11:38 am

Wonder if i'll get anything out of this:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To: '[email protected] '; '[email protected] '

Gemma/Rosemarie,

I've got a few questions about the article in the telegraph the other day.

You've stated in your article:
Under a proposal from the powerful State Government StaySafe committee, cyclists would have their own green traffic signals to get a head start over vehicles

Where a quick read of the proposal states (p8 Recommendation #7):
should be trialled where appropriate.

So it seems you have mis-read the proposal, you have also completely missed recommendation #6 about bike boxes, which when preceding #7 puts it in a lot clearer context, and would mean it is no change in behaviour at the intersection, because bikes would be at the front of the queue anyway, due to the bike box.

Also you have actually mis-quoted section 4.125 as well, you stated:
to protect cyclists include putting airbags on the outside of cars

Where as 4.125 states:
"potential future developments"... pedestrian protection airbags, which will also assist cyclists
Given it is a POTENTIAL FUTURE development, they cannot really call for it to be installed, as they do not really exist in practice, and being a "pedestrian protection airbag" - I would confidently say that it is to protect pedestrians, it is the name that gives that away.


Also in regards to the photograph in the article, were either of you present when it was taken? Has it been cropped at all?
As you state: cyclist runs the red light
Conveniently there's no actual red light in the photograph, nor anything else that gives the indication he has run the red light.

In fact a keen eye would actually notice that the blue car behind the cyclist has proceeded into the intersection, as it is clearly past the double white lines to the left of the car (looking at the photo).
Which would mean that when the photo was taken - the lights were actually green.
Also you state it is to get in front of cars, given he is turning right at a busy intersection, and as above the lights turned green - do you have a preceding photograph showing that he was previously behind the line of cars that are turning right?

If you could please clarify those few things above - that would be really appreciated.
User avatar
Nate
 
Posts: 2701
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 7:49 pm

Re: Cycle lights proposal in Sydney

Postby zero » Thu Dec 23, 2010 11:49 am

Trucks occasionally cause false detects, but if you get a sequence of them opening up ahead of you - its usually a red light runner triggering em - 2 minutes ahead of you is far enough that you won't see the rider concerned, but may benefit.

The worst thing I've videod is a bmw era mini (ie the not so small mini) tailbacking in the kent/king intersection and getting stuck in the bicycle area of the intersection. All the contra flow bikes on King went round the outside of him and into the oncoming traffic lane, because all the riders know they only have 5 seconds in the next 3 minutes to pass the intersection. To me, thats pretty much defeating the purpose of having the lanes and lights because the riders are riding head on into straight accelerating traffic from an invisible position... I had to ride between him and the peds, then push through the peds just to get through on my yellow.
zero
 
Posts: 2617
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 1:54 pm


Re: Cycle lights proposal in Sydney

Postby Nate » Thu Dec 23, 2010 12:11 pm

Oopsies... more digging, more lies..

Gemma/Rosemarie,

Just has another quick look through the article and you state:
speed limits dropped to 30km/h in CBD streets not yet torn up to accommodate cyclists

As per 5.24, they are identifying speed as a risk - and noting that action has been taken in the City of Sydney:
According to the City of Sydney submission: "…Lowering speed limits to 40 km/h, or preferably to 30 km/h, in central Sydney

If you ducked over to the City of Sydney website & had a quick look, you would find that 30km/h is again aimed at PEDESTRIANS:
http://www.cityofsydney.nsw.gov.au/comm ... heCity.asp
On Druitt Street a speed limit of 30km/h has been introduced to reduce pedestrian crashes.

Also you stated that Clover Moore told the committee...
There's not a single mention of Clover in the report, she's not even referenced as attending any meetings as per the agenda's at the end.
Can you please point me to where Clover "told" the committee?
User avatar
Nate
 
Posts: 2701
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 7:49 pm

Re: Cycle lights proposal in Sydney

Postby mikesbytes » Thu Dec 23, 2010 12:29 pm

Nate wrote:
Nate wrote:
mikesbytes wrote:So this picture is actually supporting the need for the 'cycle first' lights

sorry - but unless i see a red light - then he didnt cross on the red.
Odd how the red light somehow didnt make it into the photo



Just had another look at the photo... look at where the blue car is... the car is entirely in front of the end of the double whites (to the left of the car).
Which means the car is IN the intersection - i.e. the lights must have gone green as the car is moving into the intersection.

So the bike probably just took off quicker than the car!


Yes the blue car has taken off from the lights
A helmet saved my life
User avatar
mikesbytes
Super Mod
Super Mod
 
Posts: 14733
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 10:42 pm
Location: Tempe, Sydney

Re: Cycle lights proposal in Sydney

Postby Nate » Fri Dec 24, 2010 3:41 pm

a reply!... ish...

From: Jones, Gemma [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, 23 December 2010 7:34 PM
To:
Subject: Re: Your article: city road plan gives green light to cyclists

Hi Nathan,
Thanks for your thoughts on this.
Regards,
Gemma
________________________________________

My reply:

Gemma,

You seem to have mis-read my email, I was not giving my thoughts on your article I was asking questions about it.
Can you also please provide the details of your editor so I can raise the issue with them also.

Regards,
User avatar
Nate
 
Posts: 2701
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 7:49 pm

Re: Cycle lights proposal in Sydney

Postby trailgumby » Fri Dec 24, 2010 4:01 pm

"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

http://www.facebook.com/Drive2WorkDay
User avatar
trailgumby
 
Posts: 10205
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 4:30 pm
Location: Northern Beaches, Sydney

Re: Cycle lights proposal in Sydney

Postby Nate » Fri Dec 24, 2010 4:23 pm

User avatar
Nate
 
Posts: 2701
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 7:49 pm

Re: Cycle lights proposal in Sydney

Postby Boognoss » Fri Dec 24, 2010 7:58 pm

Nate wrote:


of course!

next reply....
Hi Nathan,

I didn't misread your email. I didn't agree with the content but I did want to acknowledge receiving it. As you have asked for someone senior to raise this with, please send any further correspondence to my chief-of-staff lillian saleh at [email protected] . She is away until tuesday so it is unlikely you will get a response until then.

Regards,
Gemma


You're going to have to lower the bar in dealing with Gemma I think Nate. To communicate with an idiot you will have to think like an idiot ;).
n = 3 for now

Image
User avatar
Boognoss
Super Mod
Super Mod
 
Posts: 5754
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2007 10:45 am
Location: Castle Hill, NSW

Re: Cycle lights proposal in Sydney

Postby Mulger bill » Fri Dec 24, 2010 8:35 pm

Boognoss wrote:You're going to have to lower the bar in dealing with Gemma I think Nate. To communicate with an idiot you will have to think like an idiot ;).


And risk being soundly thrashed by experience. :wink:
...whatever the road rules, self-preservation is the absolute priority for a cyclist when mixing it with motorised traffic.
London Boy 29/12/2011
User avatar
Mulger bill
Super Mod
Super Mod
 
Posts: 25579
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:41 pm
Location: Sunbury Vic

Re: Cycle lights proposal in Sydney

Postby human909 » Fri Dec 24, 2010 9:07 pm

wombatK wrote:. I'd be happy to see cyclists given the same green phase as cars, with the cars obligated to give way when turning across the bicycle lanes - just as cars must give way to vehicles in a lane they wish to cross.


Well that is the current law.
human909
 
Posts: 4728
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:48 am

Re: Cycle lights proposal in Sydney

Postby Nate » Sat Dec 25, 2010 1:31 pm

human909 wrote:
wombatK wrote:. I'd be happy to see cyclists given the same green phase as cars, with the cars obligated to give way when turning across the bicycle lanes - just as cars must give way to vehicles in a lane they wish to cross.

Well that is the current law.


No, what wombat is saying - is to have the green bike as long as the cars & for them to automatically give way.
Wont happen though - car sees green & will always hook it across regardless of the bike light.

Green bike & flashing yellow arrow would work well.
User avatar
Nate
 
Posts: 2701
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 7:49 pm

Re: Cycle lights proposal in Sydney

Postby il padrone » Sat Dec 25, 2010 1:41 pm

Nate wrote:
human909 wrote:
wombatK wrote:. I'd be happy to see cyclists given the same green phase as cars, with the cars obligated to give way when turning across the bicycle lanes - just as cars must give way to vehicles in a lane they wish to cross.

Well that is the current law.


No, what wombat is saying - is to have the green bike as long as the cars & for them to automatically give way.
Wont happen though - car sees green & will always hook it across regardless of the bike light.

Ahhh..... speaking legally, any vehicle turning left from the traffic lane must give way to the bike lane traffic before doing their turn. This is all pretty clear in the road rules.

Victorian Road Rules wrote:148 Giving way when moving from one marked lane or line of traffic to another marked lane or line of traffic
(1) A driver who is moving from one marked lane (whether or not the lane is ending) to another marked lane must give way to any vehicle travelling in the same direction as the driver in the marked lane to which the driver is moving.
Penalty: 5 penalty units.
Riding bikes in traffic - what seems dangerous is usually safe; what seems safe is often more dangerous.
User avatar
il padrone
 
Posts: 18188
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: Cycle lights proposal in Sydney

Postby wombatK » Sat Dec 25, 2010 5:44 pm

il padrone wrote:Ahhh..... speaking legally, any vehicle turning left from the traffic lane must give way to the bike lane traffic before doing their turn. This is all pretty clear in the road rules.

What I was really referring to was the situation which developed on the Bourke St cycleway, which has now got give way signs painted on the cycleway at every intersection. My concern is that it won't be long before they are all marked like this.

Unless a lawyer can tell me otherwise, my guess is that clearly requires the cyclist to give way to everything, and puts the cyclist using the cycleways in a vastly inferior and more vulnerable unsafe position.
WombatK

Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us -Jerry Garcia
User avatar
wombatK
 
Posts: 5192
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 9:08 pm
Location: Yagoona, AU

Re: Cycle lights proposal in Sydney

Postby human909 » Sat Dec 25, 2010 6:02 pm

wombatK wrote:
il padrone wrote:Ahhh..... speaking legally, any vehicle turning left from the traffic lane must give way to the bike lane traffic before doing their turn. This is all pretty clear in the road rules.

What I was really referring to was the situation which developed on the Bourke St cycleway, which has now got give way signs painted on the cycleway at every intersection. My concern is that it won't be long before they are all marked like this.

Unless a lawyer can tell me otherwise, my guess is that clearly requires the cyclist to give way to everything, and puts the cyclist using the cycleways in a vastly inferior and more vulnerable unsafe position.


I'm confused. Are you saying there is both a green light and a give way sign? That seems to be a contrary indications from the traffic control signals. Plainly unsafe if that is true.
human909
 
Posts: 4728
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:48 am

Re: Cycle lights proposal in Sydney

Postby ghettro » Sat Dec 25, 2010 10:55 pm

On the bourke st cycleway anytime a street intersects it (for example a T junction) the cycle lane has a give way sign - yes even if the cycle lane is travelling straight. This is ridiculous and against convention for a T-Junction where traffic travelling straight always has right of way over traffic turning left or right.

Just another example of how the RTA has munted the cycle paths to make them more convenient for motorists.
User avatar
ghettro
 
Posts: 960
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:38 am
Location: London, UK

Re: Cycle lights proposal in Sydney

Postby human909 » Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:43 am

ghettro wrote:On the bourke st cycleway anytime a street intersects it (for example a T junction) the cycle lane has a give way sign - yes even if the cycle lane is travelling straight. This is ridiculous and against convention for a T-Junction where traffic travelling straight always has right of way over traffic turning left or right.

Just another example of how the RTA has munted the cycle paths to make them more convenient for motorists.


I'm glad I don't live in Sydney! :lol: Though Melbourne had a similar situation with their Fitzroy St cycle path. However they came (partially) to their senses and removed them. Still it is safer and faster to ride on the road which is flat and 40kph limit.
human909
 
Posts: 4728
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:48 am

Re: Cycle lights proposal in Sydney

Postby Nate » Tue Jan 04, 2011 8:27 pm

bucket & spade & going home it seems...

gemma wrote:Hi Nathan,
I didn't misread your email. I didn't agree with the content but I did want to acknowledge receiving it. As you have asked for someone senior to raise this with, please send any further correspondence to my chief-of-staff lillian saleh at ???@dailytelegraph.com.au . She is away until tuesday so it is unlikely you will get a response until then.

Regards,
Gemma


me wrote:Thanks for the clarification Gemma.
I assume you're not providing your source/a reference where Clover Moore made her statements to the committee?
Also you won't answer if you were present when the photo was taken? or specify who was actually there?


gemma wrote:Hi Nathan,
At your request, I have already sent you the name and contact details of someone senior. I asked then that you direct all correspondence to that person.

Regards,
Gemma
User avatar
Nate
 
Posts: 2701
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 7:49 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Cycling Safety and Advocacy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users



Popular Bike Shops
Torpedo 7 Torpedo7 AU
Ground Effect Ground Effect NZ
Chain Reaction Cycles CRC UK
Wiggle Wiggle UK
Ebay Ebay AU



InTouch with BNA
“Bicycles BNA Twitter
“Bicycles BNA Facebook
“Google+ BNA Google+
“Bicycles BNA Newsletter