Shared Paths over 3 metres are unsafe

[Sinner]

From Western Suburbs Weekly, Perth 04 Jun 2013

Length more important than width of pathway

CYCLISTS and pedestrians will share a new riverside path at Matilda Bay in Crawley. The path will be long rather than wide because of state budget cutbacks.

“Department of Transport provided advice to Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC), based on budget constraints at that time, that replacing the existing path over the longest length was more desirable than increasing the capacity over a smaller length in the short term,” Department of Transport director general Reece Waldock said.

Since March, Nedlands resident and cycling advocate Richard Stallard had lobbied for a 3m path. The wider route – initially proposed by the DEC and supported by Nedlands MLA Bill Marmion in 2011 – would have conformed with Australian Standards.

However, Mr Waldock said cyclists could ride at unsafe speeds if it was 3m and it would be more appropriate to have a narrower, meandering, dual-use path with markings, which was not promoted for greater use by bikes.

[Baalzamon]

If that is referring to Hackett Drive, well what fast riders ride on the path, most of them head for the road. I sure prefer the road to the path there and there is a dedicated cycle lane there.

[missinglink]

However, Mr Waldock said cyclists could ride at unsafe speeds if it was 3m and it would be more appropriate to have a narrower, meandering, dual-use path with markings, which was not promoted for greater use by bikes.

Finally some common sense! I’m sure Mr Waldock will now be applying the same conditions to road design/construction to help kerb motorists driving at unsafe speeds.

[just4tehhalibut]

I would hope that if he is designing paths to deter cyclists then he gets no funding that could be used for actual shared paths. Why doesn't he just call it what it is, a footpath? Answer: funding.

There must be lawyers out there gleefully waiting for the first accident because it is now on public record that this path will be signed to invite cyclists but purposely designed to be narrow, meandering and dangerous for cycle traffic. We get the same problem on the road from council engineers who love to mix cycle lanes and traffic calming devices like roundabouts and islands, making the bikes the car-slowing devices (not). So now we'll have a path narrowed and the pedestrians become the traffic calming devices. Yep, that'll work well.

[citywomble]

Sinner wrote:
However, Mr Waldock said cyclists could ride at unsafe speeds if it was 3m and it would be more appropriate to have a narrower, meandering, dual-use path with markings, which was not promoted for greater use by bikes.

Finally some common sense! I’m sure Mr Waldock will now be applying the same conditions to road design/construction to help kerb motorists driving at unsafe speeds.

A sudden outbreak of uncommon common sense. There is some merit in what the Director General is saying about paths, but even more if it extends to road design/construction as missinglink suggests.

Every wall starts off difficult to break down until there is a hole to start working from. Is this a chink?

[ColinOldnCranky]

While the average speed may be lower on the Riverside Drive path than, say, the kwinana freeway PSP, I don't see it's narrow meandering construction as being as safe. A fair number of riders still go at speed and slice and dice between other riders and peds. And getting more so now that e-bikes are on the increase.

About the only plus is that no group rides happen there, they prefer Riverside Drive.

However I do see the rationale of length when budgets are constrained. A pity Mr Wladock didn't just leave it at that. Gilding the lilly methinks.

[rodneythellama]

Meandering paths are longer than straight paths. So money could be saved making bike paths straight and direct.

[Timeonabike]

Meandering paths are longer than straight paths. So money could be saved making bike paths straight and direct.

Nice.

Not to mention the savings in costs (somehow) by actually getting where you want to go sooner due to the lack of meanderment.

[citywomble]

Colin one wheel said:

While the average speed may be lower on the Riverside Drive path than, say, the kwinana freeway PSP, I don't see it's narrow meandering construction as being as safe. A fair number of riders still go at speed and slice and dice between other riders and peds. And getting more so now that e-bikes are on the increase.

About the only plus is that no group rides happen there, they prefer Riverside Drive.

Two issues here:

First it's the riders, rather than the infrastructure that's unsafe. We are all supposed to be riding to the conditions, so the conditions aren't to blame.

Secondly.

About the only plus is that no group rides happen there, they prefer Riverside Drive.

Perhaps it's because of the meandering construction that they prefer Riverside Drive.

Also, as the Kwinana freeway does not provide an alternative on road route, there is good reason for the PSP to be a dedicated bike path and not a Shared (foot) Path.