Trams, cycling and accessibility.

human909
Posts: 9059
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

Trams, cycling and accessibility.

Postby human909 » Mon Sep 10, 2018 12:46 pm

Greens councillors favour cyclists over accessible tram 'super stops' in Melbourne's north

Greens councillors have thwarted plans to build more accessible tram stops in Melbourne's inner-north in their push for a dedicated cycling lane.

Six accessible "super" tram stops along Nicholson Street in Fitzroy and Brunswick East were approved by the Andrews government earlier this year as part of a $19 million upgrade.

But three of the stops in Brunswick East were opposed by Moreland Council in August, delivering a blow to commuters using wheelchairs or pushing prams.

Greens councillor Dale Martin moved to halt the upgrade of stops near the intersections of Miller, Glenlyon and Kirkdale streets because they did not include space for a dedicated cycling lane.

The resolution was seconded by Greens councillor Jess Dorney and received majority support.

"We must do everything we can to protect the safety of the huge volume of cyclists that we have in our city," Cr Martin told the council, which must approve the stops due to the proposed removal of parking.

This would have forced Public Transport Victoria to redesign the stops and submit them to the council again, but the government agency is instead applying to appeal the decision at VCAT.

Commuters are currently facing lengthy delays as work gets under way to build three super stops in along Nicholson Street in Fitzroy.

The road is closed between Victoria Parade and Alexandra Parade for two weeks, with buses replacing sections of the 96 and 86 tram routes.

All six stops were supposed to be built at the same time to reduce commuter pain, but the road is likely to close yet again in a few months' time, when the remaining tram stop upgrades are eventually approved.

This means that people with impaired mobility will have to wait even longer to use the tram network, said wheelchair user and disability advocate Brian Caccianiga.

"It’s already been a long wait and is now turning into a longer wait over an issue that could have been discussed, not blocked," Mr Caccianiga said.

"I think there could have been a better solution to that scenario rather than say 'no'."

By law, 90 per cent of Melbourne’s tram stops were supposed to be wheelchair accessible by the end of 2017.


But only one quarter of Melbourne's 1700 tram stops meet the target.

While successive governments have been slow to commit funding the new stops, local disputes over the loss of parking and provision for cycling space has slowed down their delivery.

Such was the fate of a government-approved accessible tram terminus on Melville Road, Pascoe Vale South.

Locals were concerned about a proposed redesign of the terminus due to a loss of parking, and a plan to shorten the line by moving the stop further south on Melville Road.

The terminus was unanimously blocked by council at the same August meeting, due to a lack of cycling space, poor connectivity with nearby buses, and fears that its location would prevent the tram line from extending north.

Public Transport Victoria is appealing this decision at VCAT too.

Chief executive Jeroen Weimar said the process would cause delays in building the new stops.

"Disappointingly, the local council decided not to grant planning permission for the stops in the Moreland area," he said.

“Route 96 is Melbourne’s busiest tram route, and these latest upgrades will make it safer and more accessible for thousands of passengers every day.”


An article and headline loaded with anti cyclist bias.

The headline could just have easily been:
"Greens councillors favour cyclists and accessible tram 'super stops' in Melbourne's north over parking for motorists."

The problem is vexed. Making trams readily accessible to wheelchairs and other mobility impair users is a big challenge. IMO there are better ways to spend money to improve the lives of those less mobile. At the very least it shouldn't be done at the great expense of safety of others. The thing is there is a legal obligation to make the trams accessible. There is no legal obligation to protect the lives of cyclists.... :?

For those who aren't well informed on Melbourne and trams... There are decent solutions that provide accessibility and safety for cyclists. But they normally involve loss of parking or clearways for motorists.....

fat and old
Posts: 3705
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2014 12:06 pm
Location: Mill Park

Re: Trams, cycling and accessibility.

Postby fat and old » Mon Sep 10, 2018 8:41 pm

Batman.

User avatar
10speedsemiracer
Posts: 1335
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2017 7:38 pm
Location: Melbourne, in the suburbs, near some hills

Re: Trams, cycling and accessibility.

Postby 10speedsemiracer » Mon Sep 10, 2018 9:11 pm

The changes/upgrades are required by law...so why would a Greens Councillor or two think they know better. So now more of our $s are wasted in a VCAT application and delays before the inevitable happens...and works continue. Typical local government bs. A whole layer of pointless talking heads and corruption we could all do without....
Mmm, SunTour

human909
Posts: 9059
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

Re: Trams, cycling and accessibility.

Postby human909 » Mon Sep 10, 2018 10:12 pm

10speedsemiracer wrote:The changes/upgrades are required by law...so why would a Greens Councillor or two think they know better.

To keep cyclists safe AND allow changes/upgrades. Have you read anything beyond the inflammatory headline? Are you political views getting in the way of common sense?

(HINT: it wasn't just the Greens.)

User avatar
10speedsemiracer
Posts: 1335
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2017 7:38 pm
Location: Melbourne, in the suburbs, near some hills

Re: Trams, cycling and accessibility.

Postby 10speedsemiracer » Mon Sep 10, 2018 10:25 pm

Yes thanks Human I did actually read the linked article.....ok drop the word Green. My point remains regardless of affiliations or dislikes (Hint: I distrust all politicians especially those of a Local Government flavour...)
Mmm, SunTour

human909
Posts: 9059
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

Re: Trams, cycling and accessibility.

Postby human909 » Mon Sep 10, 2018 10:44 pm

10speedsemiracer wrote:Yes thanks Human I did actually read the linked article.....ok drop the word Green. My point remains regardless of affiliations or dislikes (Hint: I distrust all politicians especially those of a Local Government flavour...)


You distrust the one level of government that has been doing the most for cycling safety? I support my local government helping to keep me and other cyclists safe. I'm surprised you don't to be honest.

User avatar
10speedsemiracer
Posts: 1335
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2017 7:38 pm
Location: Melbourne, in the suburbs, near some hills

Re: Trams, cycling and accessibility.

Postby 10speedsemiracer » Mon Sep 10, 2018 11:02 pm

I've had too much professional exposure (asset seizure/fraud investigation) involving multiple local government regions to take them seriously...was even threatened and assaulted by one such POS. I could (not ethically or legally) tell you stories that would make your hair curl/fall out. So my point, is this just opposition for the sake of opposition or is there a degree of altruism involved. Looking at the mess that is Moreland,I would argue the former and maybe even a bit of deflection.
Mmm, SunTour

human909
Posts: 9059
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

Re: Trams, cycling and accessibility.

Postby human909 » Mon Sep 10, 2018 11:25 pm

10speedsemiracer wrote:I've had too much professional exposure (asset seizure/fraud investigation) involving multiple local government regions to take them seriously...was even threatened and assaulted by one such POS. I could (not ethically or legally) tell you stories that would make your hair curl/fall out.

Fair enough you've dealt with some bad eggs. I'm not sure how this relates though.

10speedsemiracer wrote:So my point, is this just opposition for the sake of opposition or is there a degree of altruism involved.

Why would it be opposition for the sake of opposition. They are doing their job and making and making the roads safer for cyclists in Brunswick. Given that Brunswick has one of the highest rates of cycling in the country I would say they are doing fairly well.

10speedsemiracer wrote: Looking at the mess that is Moreland,I would argue the former and maybe even a bit of deflection.

Please explain. You really do need to clarify this.

You are welcome to go to the SOURCE:
https://youtu.be/EEatfgFTdWs?t=1h23m58s
Last edited by human909 on Mon Sep 10, 2018 11:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
10speedsemiracer
Posts: 1335
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2017 7:38 pm
Location: Melbourne, in the suburbs, near some hills

Re: Trams, cycling and accessibility.

Postby 10speedsemiracer » Mon Sep 10, 2018 11:29 pm

human909 wrote: Please explain. You really do need to clarify this.


Sorry, can't ..
Mmm, SunTour

human909
Posts: 9059
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

Re: Trams, cycling and accessibility.

Postby human909 » Mon Sep 10, 2018 11:34 pm

10speedsemiracer wrote:Sorry, can't ..

So just being belligerent then?

I'm puzzled why you would be against actions that are motivated to make streets safer for cycling. Is it just because they are not your streets?

macca33
Posts: 1524
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2012 11:05 pm
Location: West Gippy

Re: Trams, cycling and accessibility.

Postby macca33 » Tue Sep 11, 2018 9:08 am

human909 wrote:
10speedsemiracer wrote:Sorry, can't ..

So just being belligerent then?

I'm puzzled why you would be against actions that are motivated to make streets safer for cycling. Is it just because they are not your streets?


I'm tipping by the very nature of the incidents enunciated in 10-speed's post, he/she is NOT at liberty to discuss them. Some people are bound by rules of non public disclosure in their chosen profession.

Yet again, the belligerence / ignorance lies squarely at the feet of one person....
CAAD10 Berzerker & Focus Mares CX & Ridley Noah SL

Image

User avatar
Thoglette
Posts: 4306
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:01 pm

Re: Trams, cycling and accessibility.

Postby Thoglette » Tue Sep 11, 2018 12:31 pm

macca33 wrote:I'm tipping by the very nature of the incidents enunciated in 10-speed's post, he/she is NOT at liberty to discuss them.

Been there, done that. Not as strict as a defence security clearance but way more annoying when you can't address the fake news. :D

human909 wrote:There are decent solutions that provide accessibility and safety for cyclists. But they normally involve loss of parking or clearways for motorists.....


Here's the rub. To save half a dozen car "free" parking spots we get a design that screws everyone else. A story that's repeated over and over.
Stop handing them the stick! - Dave Moulton
"People are worthy of respect, ideas are not." Peter Ellerton, UQ

fat and old
Posts: 3705
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2014 12:06 pm
Location: Mill Park

Re: Trams, cycling and accessibility.

Postby fat and old » Tue Sep 11, 2018 1:25 pm

Thoglette wrote:
human909 wrote:There are decent solutions that provide accessibility and safety for cyclists. But they normally involve loss of parking or clearways for motorists.....


Here's the rub. To save half a dozen car "free" parking spots we get a design that screws everyone else. A story that's repeated over and over.


OK, here's the existing Melville Rd terminus referred to.

https://www.google.com.au/maps/@-37.739 ... 312!8i6656

1. Scroll around. Feel free, as much as you want. Please show me the existing cycling infra so important in council's eyes.


2. "Future Northerly Extension". What? Where? Up Turner St? Please show me where PTV has indicated this may happen.


3. "Poor connectivity with nearby buses". What? Are these people just plain stupid? Do they not realise how easy it is to re site a bus stop?


One giant croc from council. They're pandering to the shopping strip lobby....you know, one of those local strips that we should have according to some.

human909
Posts: 9059
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

Re: Trams, cycling and accessibility.

Postby human909 » Tue Sep 11, 2018 1:29 pm

Thoglette wrote:Here's the rub. To save half a dozen car "free" parking spots we get a design that screws everyone else. A story that's repeated over and over.

Exactly. And from what I can see Moreland council is busy trying to fight for a design that keeps cyclists safe. They argued that very issue in the council meeting.


macca33 wrote:I'm tipping by the very nature of the incidents enunciated in 10-speed's post, he/she is NOT at liberty to discuss them. Some people are bound by rules of non public disclosure in their chosen profession.

Yet again, the belligerence / ignorance lies squarely at the feet of one person....


HUH? The publically available information shows Moreland councils fighting for the protection of cyclists. I have no reason to not believe that.

If 10speedsemiracer has a grudge with Moreland Council or has reasons to doubt their motives then great. But not much use arguing it if he isn't prepared to explain why.

human909
Posts: 9059
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

Re: Trams, cycling and accessibility.

Postby human909 » Tue Sep 11, 2018 1:36 pm

fat and old wrote:One giant croc from council. They're pandering to the shopping strip lobby....you know, one of those local strips that we should have according to some.

How so. The super stops are inevitable. The debate is about their design.


fat and old wrote:Scroll around. Feel free, as much as you want. Please show me the existing cycling infra so important in council's eyes.

It is more about inclusion of cycling in the PROPOSED designs. Listen to the discussion specifically referring to the superstop on Nicholson Street which has resulted in poorer outcomes for cyclists.
https://www.google.com.au/maps/@-37.766 ... 312!8i6656

fat and old
Posts: 3705
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2014 12:06 pm
Location: Mill Park

Re: Trams, cycling and accessibility.

Postby fat and old » Tue Sep 11, 2018 2:02 pm

human909 wrote:
fat and old wrote:One giant croc from council. They're pandering to the shopping strip lobby....you know, one of those local strips that we should have according to some.

How so. The super stops are inevitable. The debate is about their design.


From your OP. My only source of info on this


Such was the fate of a government-approved accessible tram terminus on Melville Road, Pascoe Vale South.

Locals were concerned about a proposed redesign of the terminus due to a loss of parking, and a plan to shorten the line by moving the stop further south on Melville Road.

The terminus was unanimously blocked by council at the same August meeting, due to a lack of cycling space, poor connectivity with nearby buses, and fears that its location would prevent the tram line from extending north.



Self explanatory.

Edit: retract comments re Council's lack of initiative on existing facilities for cyclists on Melville Rd.

human909
Posts: 9059
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

Re: Trams, cycling and accessibility.

Postby human909 » Tue Sep 11, 2018 3:24 pm

Sorry my question was whether it was really a "One giant croc from council". They were given the choice to accept a design or reject a design. They chose to reject the design as the proposed design infringes on the needs and safety of their constituents.

Maybe I'm being to generous to the council, but I don't see much reason to doubt their motives and concerns for the safety of cyclists. Listen to what the Greens members had to say about cyclists in their city. One member commutes via bicycle.

As far as I am concerned I don't want new super stops to be built that put me or other cyclists at risk of injury and death.

fat and old wrote:From your OP. My only source of info on this

I have linked the council meeting. Though I haven't listened to the section on Melville road, only the Nicholson Street section...

User avatar
antigee
Posts: 552
Joined: Sun Sep 01, 2013 10:58 am
Location: just off the Yarra Trail but not lurking in the bushes

Re: Trams, cycling and accessibility.

Postby antigee » Wed Sep 12, 2018 4:17 pm

"Greens councillor Dale Martin moved to halt the upgrade of stops near the intersections of Miller, Glenlyon and Kirkdale streets because they did not include space for a dedicated cycling lane.

The resolution was seconded by Greens councillor Jess Dorney and received majority support."


....so its all the Green councillors fault ( 3 of them I think) for using a democratic process to thwart a poor design by unaccountable body that is going to waste public money by appealing to tribunal rather than fix the issue? Fully understand that there is potential for conflict between state bodies and local councils but the challenge is producing an acceptable and timely solution for all..personally I'd like to see a mayoral style elected roads commissioner who can be elected based on policies and be publicly held accountable and hold state bodies accountable for policy

fat and old
Posts: 3705
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2014 12:06 pm
Location: Mill Park

Re: Trams, cycling and accessibility.

Postby fat and old » Wed Sep 12, 2018 5:22 pm

Is there actually room for a dedicated cycle lane though? Looking at the terminus of Nicholson St there just isn't room. Maybe it's that? I have no idea. Does anyone else?


On a tangent....TBH I find it ridiculous that council has a veto over a road that it has no responsibility for beyond reaping the benefits it provides. No maintenance, no legal liability, no nothing. Just income. That's a sweet deal right there.


Edit: Glenlyon and Nicholson

https://www.google.com.au/maps/@-37.773 ... 312!8i6656

One lane next to the tram tracks.

Kirkdale

https://www.google.com.au/maps/@-37.769 ... 312!8i6656

Same

Miller

https://www.google.com.au/maps/@-37.776 ... 312!8i6656

Same.

I'd like to see the plans for the stops and Council's plan for a cycle lane. If the stops are the type that are to the side of the tracks (which I'd expect to keep costs down) then the only way to have a cycle lane would be similar to Swanston St or High St Northcote where the passenger alighting area is shared with the cycle lane on a separated grade with ramps at each end. Footpath thieving won't work as it's too narrow and congested already

human909
Posts: 9059
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

Re: Trams, cycling and accessibility.

Postby human909 » Wed Sep 12, 2018 5:44 pm

fat and old wrote:If the stops are the type that are to the side of the tracks (which I'd expect to keep costs down) then the only way to have a cycle lane would be similar to Swanston St or High St Northcote where the passenger alighting area is shared with the cycle lane on a separated grade with ramps at each end


I believe that is the preferred options for cyclists and groups like revitalise Sydney Road.

fat and old wrote:On a tangent....TBH I find it ridiculous that council has a veto over a road that it has no responsibility for beyond reaping the benefits it provides. No maintenance, no legal liability, no nothing. Just income. That's a sweet deal right there.

It is a reasonable point, though in this case I personally are happy that we have council involved because they are much more likely to have cyclists' interests in mind that VicRoads or PTV.

From what I understand council might not be involved if it weren't for loss of parking. (which at least on the enforcement and collections side of things is a council area)

fat and old
Posts: 3705
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2014 12:06 pm
Location: Mill Park

Re: Trams, cycling and accessibility.

Postby fat and old » Wed Sep 12, 2018 5:49 pm

That is fraught with danger. Personally (and I know that everyone has their own ideas and preferences) I'd rather use a narrow lane ala CBD stops. Just claim the lane, like old mate lycra cyclist in the Glenlyon pic (not the commuter type dressed in "normal" clothes...he's gutter bait lol). Bugger mixing it with tram passengers. You're on a hiding to nowhere.

human909
Posts: 9059
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

Re: Trams, cycling and accessibility.

Postby human909 » Thu Sep 13, 2018 7:16 am

fat and old wrote:That is fraught with danger. Personally (and I know that everyone has their own ideas and preferences) I'd rather use a narrow lane ala CBD stops. Just claim the lane, like old mate lycra cyclist in the Glenlyon pic (not the commuter type dressed in "normal" clothes...he's gutter bait lol). Bugger mixing it with tram passengers. You're on a hiding to nowhere.


Personally I'm happy, claiming the lane too. (Which shouldn't surprise you.) But most people are not. If we want to encourage more cycling we need our cycling infrastructure such that it is safe and comfortable for all cyclists. Ideally children too!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: London Boy, Tamiya