Local Laws putting one group in danger

kwv

Why do we have in Queensland a Local Law that by allowing cyclists to ride on the footpath is putting pedestrians in danger.

Especially as many cyclists I have seen (5 at one time) thinks it okay to break the law and put pedestrians at risk by riding their bikes from the footpath straight across the crossing amongst the pedestrians instead of walking their bikes across as required by law.

Also if cyclists are allow to ride their bikes on the footpath then why aren't under The Australian Road Rules pedestrians are not allow on bikepaths.

And why do we have another law that allows a group of cyclists on the footpath at once for example one adult and a group of 12 year olds.

Chris_L

I agree wholeheartedly. Personally I avoid riding on the footpath because I find the road to be much safer, not to mention practical. However, a number of recent things on the bike-qld list have convinced me that the Queensland Government is not really interested in promoting cycling the way they say they are.

To be honest, I think they'd rather have people riding on the footpath, perceiving cycling as being 'dangerous' as a consequence, and dumping the bike altogether.

__________________
Stop the world...
This is where I get off.

kwv

Thanks for your comments Chris it was appreciated.

I have heard that they are spending 5 million dollars on one bike track along the coast.

But to me 5 million dollars on several things for cyclists would be better.

And spending 5 million on one thing is similar to the Brisbane Mayor pet project spending around 900 million on one tunnel instead of several public transport projects.

steve

How many people use the the tunnel compared to 'the other projects'?

cheers!

__________________
Steve

CyclingForums.com

Chris_L

Yes, this is their response to the M1 controversy. When they built it (it's the major highway between the Gold Coast and Brisbane for those who don't know) they decided that cyclists wouldn't be allowed on it, and that they wouldn't consider cyclists in the design of it (totally at odds to what NSW does, but I digress).

A little later on, they decided to allow cyclists to use it on a trial basis (without all the infrastructure that NSW and Victoria provide in these situations). Unfortunately we then had a couple of 'road rage' incidents on the 'Coast (not on the M1 mind you) and the Luke Harrop tragedy, and the Govt decided to go back to banning cyclists again.

The $5million goes towards 'upgrading' the service roads along the 'qld transport' route that we're expected to use. I rode this route late last year (as I may have mentioned before) and it needs more than $5million to fix it properly. I've taken the liberty of devising a couple of routes of my own between the Gold Coast and Brisbane, so I'll continue to use those instead.

Of course, when nobody uses the second-rate facilities, they'll pat themselves on the back for trying to 'encourage sustainable transport' and say that nobody wanted it, and so stop spending money on cycling. Unfortunately, BQ right now seems to think they should be applauded for this. Why?

__________________
Stop the world...
This is where I get off.

steve

The safest roads down here are the bloody freeways, its not rocket science!

__________________
Steve

CyclingForums.com

Chris_L

The 'problems' on the M1 up here could be fixed in five minutes if they really wanted to. The road has already got a massive shoulder on both sides virtually all the way. All they need is to adopt some sane speed limits on the exits as they have done in NSW.

Problem solved. Unfortunately, we're still 35 years behind the rest of Australia up here.

__________________
Stop the world...
This is where I get off.

steve

What are the speed limits?

__________________
Steve

CyclingForums.com

kwv

We don't know as it hasn't been built yet are you sure don't know ?

But if 900 million dollars was spent on different public transport projects, how many people would use them compared to the road tunnel.

And drivers can also use the public transport system such as park and ride but cyclists and pedestrians cannot use the proposed road tunnel even those they wouldn't have paid for it out their rates.

kwv

And it is not rocket science to know even those cyclists will pay for the proposed tunnel (and I hope it doesn't go ahead) out of such things as rates, they won't be allow to use it.

Chris_L

Up here there are no separate speed limits for the exits on the M1, so presumably it's still the same 110km/h. Contrast that with the Burringbar Bypass in NSW which has 35km/h speed limits on the exits.

__________________
Stop the world...
This is where I get off.

kwv

Since both the Queensland Government and Brisbane Council won't change the road rules allowing cyclists to ride on the footpath and read in a cycling magazine Bicycle Queensland don't want the road rules to be change.

Maybe the law should be change to make it legal for drivers to drive along the footpath.

Because both pushbikes and motor vehicles are considered legal road vehicles.

In other words why should one legal road vehicle be allow on the footpath but the others are banned.

Brizza

At the start of the year Newcastle had a bike path opened including a 400m tunell. It cost several $Million and while there is a constant trickle of cyclists, it receives more use from pedestrians and parents with children. It's a great facility for the public.
I agree that the freeways are the safest.
I think as far as cycling goes Canberra wins.

Chris_L

Here on the Gold Coast they often do anyway. It makes no bloody difference!

__________________
Stop the world...
This is where I get off.