Riding up Oliver's Hill to be barred

rooman Wrote:
sorry to disagree....dedicated bike paths on Hopes Rise is a nadda!

I will let this quote from bycyclingadvocacy AT yahoogroups.com cover
it :-

-Bikelanes provide no safety improvement. No study has ever shown
such a thing. The implication of good study data and some
straight forward logic aguments is that it is unlikely
bikelanes could ever improve safety stats. The data,
some straightforward logic arguments and lessons learned
over 100+ years of vehicle facility design indicate why
poor design ideas like bikelanes are esepcially inadvisible...


Bikelanes provide lots of mis-education about
proper roadway bicycling.-

bike lane??? what bike lane? I think it's great the council have
finally designated car parking lanes - sweet!


--
warrwych

"rooman" wrote in message
...

OppyLock Wrote:
SNIP

..................
What if the planter boxes on the left of the speed humps were removed
and a
bike lane put in their place?
The cars are still slowed ascending the residential, Hopes Rise.
Cyclists
have a dedicated path to take. Win/Win?

.
sorry to disagree....dedicated bike paths on Hopes Rise is a nadda!

I will let this quote from bycyclingadvocacy AT yahoogroups.com cover
it :-

-Bikelanes provide no safety improvement. No study has ever shown
such a thing. The implication of good study data and some
straight forward logic aguments is that it is unlikely
bikelanes could ever improve safety stats. The data,
some straightforward logic arguments and lessons learned
over 100+ years of vehicle facility design indicate why
poor design ideas like bikelanes are esepcially inadvisible...


Bikelanes provide lots of mis-education about
proper roadway bicycling.-


Dubious safety record aside ... I was just hoping to get rid of the speed
humps.

On 2007-03-22, OppyLock (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
"TimC" wrote in message
...
On 2007-03-20, OppyLock (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
The needs of the many (drivers in their thousands each day) outweighing
the
needs of the few (cyclists in their hundreds (optimistically)).
Especially when the cyclists have a viable alternative in Hopes Rise.

Um. /Actually/. We are talking nominally about Saturday morning
here. Try moving one of the zeros between the two sets there.

Ahhh yeah ... different concerns at play here I see.
I'm not considering the regular bunch to be in any (more) danger whatsoever
when compared with the rest of the journey. Any bunch going up the hill is
going to be much more visible than a single cyclist and there will likely be
a few stragglers that give a bit of warning

I like to think of it as "a few stragglers that will be hit first,
alerting the driver to the possibility of more riders up ahead"

I thank one or two particular riders last BR(x) I did for performing
that useful service up steep hill number x

Actually it's a risky proposition from either climb. From Hopes Rise you
can't see immenently turning traffic from Olivers Hill and vice-versa you
can't see merging traffic from Hopes Rise. Hopes Rise traffic must STOP
though at the top. I'd still put Hopes Rise slightly ahead on points as
you'd be at the left of the lane when rejoining Nepean Hwy, whereas if you
climbed Olivers Hill you're in the middle of two lanes with a need to get
over to the left fairly quickly.

No more difficult for the Olivers Hill rider than any other
intersection with an obtuse angle intersection. And Hopes Rise has
hardly any car traffic on it -- I've never had trouble crossing back
into the left lane in the (admittedly very few) occasions I tried it.

--
TimC
If I had encountered Bill Gates today, I would have shaken his hand,
said "hello", and stopped kicking as soon as there was nothing left
but a bloody stain on the floor. -- Shag