15 posts • Page 1 of 1
The Premier of Western Australia, Colin Barnett in a election promise (the question of course is this a core promise or one that will be conveniently put aside after the election?) has announced that Curtin Avenue, south of the Marine Parade roundabout in Mosman Park will be realigned so that it runs along the railway line towards North Fremantle.
According the press release up to $40 million will be set aside for the realignment of Curtin Avenue. The big question for cyclists is how will this impact on Fremantle – Perth Principle Shared Path (PSP)? The press release states that “cyclists, too, have lobbied government for a safer path along the beach to Fremantle.” This does not sound promising as the draft WA Bicycle Network Plan 2012 – 2021 suggests that the existing PSP will be re-directed from Curtin Avenue to run along the beach front.
I have shared some more thoughts on this announcement here but for me it is unclear how this will impact the PSP. My understanding is that the PSP was to exit Curtin Avenue near Marine Parade and follow the beach (WA Bicycle Network Plan) and it does seem the fits with the announcement. On the other hand all major road re-constructions now include cycling infrastructure. Is it too much to expect that the PSP will be build along side the re-aligned Curtin Avenue?
Maybe time to let the Minister of Transport Troy Buswell now your views.
Yep, I too was thinking the same thing.
It does seem that the Government does factor PSP into new builds, such as the bridges and tunnels along Stubbs Terrance between Karrakatta and Shenton Park. Plus the PSP to nowhere at Cottesloe Station.
However the recent Leighton Beach development saw a PSP constructed along the ocean front, mind you this PSP is essentially more dangerous than the road due to all of the 'architectural' chicanes and road crossings, plus its generally over crowded.
Heres hoping they build the PSP along the new road/rail artery and push through to Tydeman Road - theres loads of space along the railway for it. The next sector over the harbour will be the one not worth holding our breath for!
Where does it say that?
The long term plan is along the rail line, as shown in the map on page 27. The discussion on page 25 indicates that in the 10 year horizon, the PSP will only reach as far as Marine Pde/Montessori School and then connect to the RSP/Curtin Ave sealed shoulders.
So I guess the tunnel under the rail line and connection to Stirling Highway in the vicinity of Marine Pde/Wellington St is off the cards then?
If the traffic bridge gets replaced, the western footway will probably be rebuilt to PSP standard.
In the meantime, use the path? A fair bit slower but certainly a lot less fear inducing.
Page 25 of the Western Australian Bicycle Network Plan (Draft) states:
Last edited by Aushiker on Tue Jan 29, 2013 10:58 pm, edited 5 times in total.
That is not a PSP, it is really a recreational shared path and should be riden with that in mind.
Recreational Shared Paths (RSP) are described in the draft Western Australian Bicycle Network Plan on page 23 as:
There is a new connection shared path between the North Fremantle Train Station and Pearse Street/Tydeman Road. I haven't riden it so no first hand comments on how it has worked out.
Yeah, so no the PSP is not going via the foreshore, it's just the next stage will terminate at the Montessori school with appropriate connections to the RSP. No different to what is there now where you have a choice between the shoulders of Curtin Ave or the RSP along that bit of the waterfront.
Although I find the bridge to be a remarkably courteous area so far as the truckies are concerned, I still don't feel so comfortable there so these days I duck from Tydeman St into Burns St (last interspection before the lights at Stirling Hwy) and take the western path instead. This also gives me a more straightforward drop onto the river than the one-way road up from the Left Bank pub.
I just hope this is the start of something good for Freo bike paths.
What I mean is, all paths lead to Freo (well almost) but once you're in Freo the infrastructure is almost non-existent. There is no clear defined route to ride through Freo Centre - continual bottle necks and stop-starts.
With any luck some gubberm'nt engineer will declare it unsafe for vehicular use and the no-change-ever brigade won't let it be replaced.
Ergo: only solution is to keep it for peds and bikes.
OK, I know, back off the medication a notch or two. But can't an old fella dream?
Stop handing them the stick! - Dave Moulton
Don't quote me but IIRC a discussion last week, there is some talk about taking the path over the river on the side of the railway bridge. I may have misunderstood this and it maybe 20 years away but there is at least some awareness of the issue with the relevant government departments.
I have heard this as well and I think it is pure fantasy. The way the bridge was designed, the WAGR even had to cantilever the overhead stanchions to electrify the line. With my (admittedly limited) knowledge of bridge engineering, I don't believe you could cantilever anything else off the present structure.
That means new piers are required in which case, the economics don't come close to stacking up, especially when the traffic bridge will be replaced anyway, and you can build PSP quality paths on both sides, only 100m or so upstream.
15 posts • Page 1 of 1
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: NewStew