Add comments on motions for BAC in comment boxes below.

 

Agenda Item 4- summary of (previous) resolutions .

BAC 36/10. Balmain Rd at CWL- crossing.
What is meant by “precedence” over Catherine St? Could move thatoptions be identified, even if detailed design is not undertaken.Also, that line marking in Balmain Rd N of L/F Rd be altered togive wider bike lanes. Traffic lanes currently 3.6 m.

39/10- Callan Park. hopefully will be answered in item 15, p108. Otherwise would be good to ask about plans for Balmain Rd onroad, childrens cct, criterium event, active transport loop.

47/10. The Crescent Bus Shelter. Move that the advertising panelbe removed as previously decided. It is the major problem wrt sightlines. Also that bypass be extended to make the deflection anglesmaller and to remove the square ends of the added path.

Agenda Item 5-BAC Tech Sub Cttee

Move that the Council be thanked for their efort in holding themeeting and hope that future meetings will be held as required

re Mullens St,p 20, move that some matters raised by LBUG in anemail to Vithya be referred to the person doing the safety auditrequested by the LTC on 3 May. In particular the need to reduce thetraffic flow to one lane westbound at the bicycle crossing toreduce crossing exposure. Also, is the All Bicycles sign needed onthe kerb crossing neasr Mullens St, and query the warning signchosen for the slip lane off Mullens St into Roberts St. Also tonote that the plan was altered to retain parking on north side- isthe moving of the centre line a good enough solution to the squeezepoint?

p 21. One Way streets. List given to Council. or see link toVeloplano at http://tinyurl.com/1waysts.Included Renwick Lane, Wetherill St, McCleer St, Burfitt Lane,Church St (near Callan Park),Macauley St, Bruce St (upper), NelsonSt (West), Ewell St.

 

p 22. Car parking indentations. Examples- The Crescent betweenNelson St and Johnston St. Lilyfield Rd near Lamb St (at corner oncrest).

p 23. Bicycle Traffic Counts- do through BV and Super Tuesday?

p 24 Utility companies and road surfaces- Move to say criteriashould include not just unsafe but also unpleasant to ride on.

p24. Sight lines at intersections on bikie route in Rozelle(Crescent/Moore/Goodsir/Evans Sts). See link to Veloplano athttp://tinyurl.com/velohazrds

Agenda Item 6 Greenway

?

Agenda Item 7- CWCL

p 34. “Journey ambience” in a tunnel? Oh well. I better staymute. I would like on road alternatives to be considered too, likeLyall/Allen/Moore/Catherine/Brenan etc. Dont know how to word thiswithout seeming to be undercutting the CWCL.

Object to wording about improved network efficiency by reducijngcyclists on the road. This might appeal to some people(RTA/pollies)  but sends the wrong message IMHO.

Agenda Item 8- CPT

Should ask that the DG’s requirement that the new road shouldnot preclude provision of a bicycle route be mentioned. Could movethat Council ask Sydney Ports to identify the route and the type offacility- path or on road- so they know what not to preclude.

Agenda Item 9- Bay Run

Move that the light pole on the new path near Waterfront Driveleading to KGV Park be removed and the kerb ramps widened. Alsothat the bollards be removed at the entry to KGV Park and also atthe entry to the new path at the west side of the oval- on thegrounds that vehicles can access the path via the open grass areaat side of nearby building.

also move or request that hump across path visible in Figure 10,p 53, be removed.

 

Agenda Item 10

Rebadging the Bicycle Strategy as an Active Transport Plan.

First thoughts are that I am not in favour- will lose focus oncycling as a form of vehicular transport requiring specific designand policies. Maybe a motion would be to keep the Bicycle Strategyas a separate category under the broader Active Transport umbrella.Council needs a Bicycle Officer as recommended by the Euro guide toplanning for bicycles, http://ec.europa.eu/environment/archives/cycling/cycling_en.pdf

 COS 2 way paths- ideology or based on evidence?

Motion: that a study outlining pros and cons of COS style 2 waypaths be undertaken. Recent conference on safety (ACRS Sept 2010)-consultant Ccameron Munro (SKM)from Melbourne said evidence waspoor that 2 way paths are safer. Seehttp://www.acrs.org.au/srcfiles/Munro.ppt

Motion: Waiting times for cyclists at traffic lights on 2 waypaths are inordinately long- 6 secs out of 100. Experience so farin City is that the times are strongly weighted against cyclistsand lead to a lot of non compliance.

Motion:  that one way bike paths or adequate bike lanes onboth sides of a street (with lower speed limits) are generallypreferable to 2 way bike paths on one side only. Exceptions inLeichhardt, where one side has no residential parking – Darley Rd,Balmain Rd at Callan Park. Maybe Norton St to get to the Plaza- ifparking was removed.

Motion: that speed management, better surfaces, removal ofsqueeze points and other low cost traffic calming and managementare just as important as separation from traffic.

Agenda Item 11- Integrated Transport Plan.

Seems good, if lacking in detail- parking obviously a big issuefor councillors. Possible motion- to look at streets where parkingcan be removed on one side or for certain sections to find spacefor bike lanes or paths.

 

Agenda item 13 Works Plan

 For 2012/13, add Balmain Rd (Wharf Rd to Cecily St) andDarley Rd?

No bike lanes /shoulder lanes on Evans, Mort, Thames Sts (RouteNS3), nor on Pipeer St or Trafalgar St.

 

 

 

 

Skip to toolbar