East Perth PSP works - 23rd November

[wellington_street]

I accept your view Lozzie but I also accept the view that cyclists should protesting about the terrible detour in whatever way they can - riding over the footbridge is just one part of that. An individual choice imo.

[Scott_C]

Interesting wording coming out of the Roe 8 Supreme Court Case:

In his judgment, the Chief Justice said the EPA took no account of its published policies when it recommended to the State Government the project be approved.

He found the EPA was legally obliged to follow its own policies.

"The court concluded that the EPA took no account of its own published policies at the time it made its decision and provided its report to the Minister," Chief Justice Martin wrote in his judgment.

"The court therefore concluded that the environmental impact assessment undertaken by the EPA was invalid."

While the Roe 8 Project is a topic for somewhere else, I wonder if this judgement would make it possible for a cyclist to obtain an injunction stopping Main Roads from closing the PSP without providing an alternative of equivalent quality as required by their policies?

[nachoman]

Detoured this way to see the new sign and was not disappointed



What do the PTA guards say to those who ride across ? They were positioned on the bridge again this afternoon.

[moosterbounce]

From what I've seen, they point out the signs and ask people to dismount and walk their bikes. Then, again from what I've seen, they get abused. OK, I might have seen a few isolated incidents, but in each the rider was on a pretty speccy road bike in full kit. I tried to repair the damage one rider had done with this abuse by explaining to the transit guard that it really didn't matter what the mode of transport was, there were tossers all over the place. At least he had a laugh at that.

[rolandp]

Interesting wording coming out of the Roe 8 Supreme Court Case:

In his judgment, the Chief Justice said the EPA took no account of its published policies when it recommended to the State Government the project be approved.

He found the EPA was legally obliged to follow its own policies.

"The court concluded that the EPA took no account of its own published policies at the time it made its decision and provided its report to the Minister," Chief Justice Martin wrote in his judgment.

"The court therefore concluded that the environmental impact assessment undertaken by the EPA was invalid."

While the Roe 8 Project is a topic for somewhere else, I wonder if this judgement would make it possible for a cyclist to obtain an injunction stopping Main Roads from closing the PSP without providing an alternative of equivalent quality as required by their policies?

There has to be a policy first. In earlier posts there have been links to a guideline which don't apply to freeways. In my opinion, this is where the cycling groups in WA need to step up and make sure there are policies which are followed. These policies should cover the provision of cycling infrastructure, including when maintenance occurs.

[방구 똥]

"I saw a picture of a bicycle and thought it meant I could ride over"

[wellington_street]

"I saw a picture of a bicycle and thought it meant I could ride over"

That works quite well with your username

[roller]

What do the PTA guards say to those who ride across ? .

A friend told me this morning they threaten riders with a $200 fine.

[Lozzie]

I was told $100 (someone else asked)

Seriously though the ones who ride over give ALL of us a bad name. It sucks it really does but it's just not safe to ride that bridge it's far too narrow.

[roller]

Seriously though the ones who ride over give ALL of us a bad name. It sucks it really does but it's just not safe to ride that bridge it's far too narrow.

it was quite safe before they put up that sign.

[wellington_street]

What do the PTA guards say to those who ride across ? .

A friend told me this morning they threaten riders with a $200 fine.

I was told $100 (someone else asked)

So its just a rather expensive toll bridge then?

[Scott_C]

There has to be a policy first. In earlier posts there have been links to a guideline which don't apply to freeways. In my opinion, this is where the cycling groups in WA need to step up and make sure there are policies which are followed. These policies should cover the provision of cycling infrastructure, including when maintenance occurs.

The policy should still apply here as it is clearly signposted (StreetView) that the section of road the path is next to isn't a freeway.

[rolandp]

There has to be a policy first. In earlier posts there have been links to a guideline which don't apply to freeways. In my opinion, this is where the cycling groups in WA need to step up and make sure there are policies which are followed. These policies should cover the provision of cycling infrastructure, including when maintenance occurs.

The policy should still apply here as it is clearly signposted (StreetView) that the section of road the path is next to isn't a freeway.

Thanks for the link it took me to a view of the Graham Farmer FREEWAY.

Regardless, the only linked document provided so far is a GUIDELINE.

And even if I'm wrong and MainRoads are in breach, there what is our cycling groups doing to resolve?

Currently list of blockages around the CBD area that I'm aware of:
Riverside Drive RSP now going on for 8 MONTHS and we are diverted onto, in my opinion, non standard shared path with poorly timed signal crossings
Perth Arena PSP - blocked this morning - no warnings that this was to occur
Riverside Drive Shared Path - Plain Street to Causeway November 25 to December 14 Due to a water main upgrade, the path will be closed in this section with a detour is in place via Point Fraser. Cyclists may have to dismount for short sections.. Text copied from MainRoads website, and should have read 'Cyclists HAVE to dismount ...'
Both sides of the Graham Farmer Freeway

Potential NONE of these confirm to the guidelines, and yet here we are. Again I ask, what are our cycling groups doing to minimise and ensure these outages allow for cyclists to safely travel through them?

[cj7hawk]

I suggest we arrange for a well-timed protest at a city-based site, all riding on the road, with a safety vehicle following us. At peak hour. And that we randomly arrange protests like this until they do something about it. Cyclists riding on the road every 30 seconds apart - I'm pretty sure 10 to 20 cyclists would be enough to bring the city to it's knees.

Would anyone else be up for that? We could wait for the next egregious violation of their policy and arrange a peak-hour ride claiming lanes to protect the lack of cycling infrastructure.

Otherwise I doubt anything will change.

David.

[Kalgrm]

I don't think 20 cyclists riding through the city will even be noticed. We'd be delayed by all the cars in front of us.

(Cyclists often move through city traffic faster than the traffic itself.)

Cheers,
Graeme

[cj7hawk]

I don't think 20 cyclists riding through the city will even be noticed. We'd be delayed by all the cars in front of us.

(Cyclists often move through city traffic faster than the traffic itself.)

Cheers,
Graeme

Riding these?



OK, you got a good point there -

David.

[citywomble]

There is a potential conflict of interest here too which could prove interesting if it ever gets 'legal'.

My understanding, see links below, is that the CEO of the PTA, who are undertaking the works and presumably would bear the cost of any diversion, is none other that the same person who is also the Commissioner for Main Roads. Any policy or even guidelines should be applied to works that involve the closure of such a critical piece of infrastructure, irrespective of cost to the initiating party. Conflict of interest anyone?

Even richer is that fact that the same person that the PTA and MRWA report to is, unbelievably, that same person who is also the DG Transport. This may explain a lot.

Here it is: http://www.transport.wa.gov.au/aboutus/ ... ucture.asp

Click on Structure of the Department.

He concurrently holds the positions of Director General of the Department of Transport, Commissioner for Main Roads WA and Chief Executive Officer of the Public Transport Authority.

[cj7hawk]

I spoke to the Technical Services Coordinator at main roads for Vulnerable Road Users & Speed Zoning. We discussed the detours in detail, the notice and other events around this matter, and they readily acknowledge that the initial attempts at establishing things were pretty bad, and that the solution they applied in the end was the best way they could see out of it. They didn't want to see multiple detours ( though I think a separate warning and detour at the Mt Lawley subway for cyclists would have been better ) and they realize the issues with riding over the railway bridge, which was apparently one of the original ideas for a detour. Beyond that though they aren't really acknowledging fault or suggesting fixes for future issues.

Long story short, they said the lines are going down on the path today, and it will be fixed by tomorrow sometime, and open to riders and pedestrians once again.

I'd like to say it's a good outcome, but I think it's kind of the default, though they did say they are watching to make sure it's finished tomorrow or there will be trouble.

I had a chat about some other issues. They only deal with shared paths on new ( or remade ) road sections, and it's DoT that are responsible for others. Also there's road works on the PSP along the northern side of the freeway so avoid that area. I asked about a path block I had encountered on my way there, and they thought it was a council matter, but when I spoke to the PTA guys fixing it up, it was apparently a main roads matter - but there was no workaround, so I might mention to them that I'll keep track of the ones I see in future.

They've mentioned how to get maintenance matters addressed, and a few other things. But perhaps the most important lesson learnt - If you email the ministers office, you will get a very formal response from Main Roads.

Overall, while Main Roads aren't saying anything about future issues, I hope it's likely that they will think more of cyclists and on matters of notification around other disruptive events and the people I spoke to there are cyclists - so I hope we can get them pre-empting more of our issues in the future.

Beyond that, there is a greater focus around changing more traffic signals to bike-friendly crossings and they are reviewing traffic light timing at the moment, so if you have an example of a particularly bad traffic light, send them details at the moment.

Another positive outcome - They've indicated a willingness to discuss issues directly with cyclists in the future, so I think that's something worthwhile.

I realize many will want to see more out of this, however there are people within Main Roads who may become more effective advocates of cycling-related matter in the future that we can achieve from a purely external perspective and I hope this may help to resolve some future issues more quickly. That much I see as pretty positive.

David.

[cj7hawk]

I did forget to add one thing. There were only around 6 complaints received by Main Roads for this closure - And I'm pretty sure all of those complaints originated from people on this forum.

David

[mikedufty]

I was told $100 (someone else asked)

It sucks it really does but it's just not safe to ride that bridge it's far too narrow.

Dismounting generally requires walking alongside the bike. If the bridge is too narrow you'd be better off riding at a safe speed (possibly walking pace) and stopping whenever necessary.

[NewStew]

I did forget to add one thing. There were only around 6 complaints received by Main Roads for this closure - And I'm pretty sure all of those complaints originated from people on this forum.

David

My guess is that they only got 6 complaints as the vast majority just got annoyed and took the car to work.... I felt there was a significant reduction in the cycle traffic leading into and out of the detour (given people often detoured different ways) and an almost cessation of pedestrian traffic. Well done Main Roads, encouraging people into cars so you have to build more roads yet again.

[cj7hawk]

I did forget to add one thing. There were only around 6 complaints received by Main Roads for this closure - And I'm pretty sure all of those complaints originated from people on this forum.

David

My guess is that they only got 6 complaints as the vast majority just got annoyed and took the car to work.... I felt there was a significant reduction in the cycle traffic leading into and out of the detour (given people often detoured different ways) and an almost cessation of pedestrian traffic. Well done Main Roads, encouraging people into cars so you have to build more roads yet again.

The two people I spoke with acknowledged they felt that everyone was annoyed, but they were both cyclists and one of them even rode through the original detour and shared similar thoughts as we all had. Ironically, they were also the first person to receive many of the complaints we sent in.

But Main Roads is a big place, and I guess if they only get 6 complaints, others within the organisation might well consider that a normal amount of unhappy people and consider that the benefits outweighed the issues. Getting more complaints into the mix may well be critical to improving things.

I think that, as an effective form of protest, we need to get that number well up. Methods such as leaving contact cards at the start of each location with complaint details might be one way to achieve that. I'm sure someone will come along later and remove them, but putting more back would be easy enough. Even taking a morning out on the first few days after we notice a bad roadblock and have someone handing out flyers promoting complaining for a half-hour would probably be effective.

I'm sure it would be easy enough to even promote a campaign asking Main Roads to add another process to their guidelines requesting that they have details for people who want to complain so they don't have to figure it out - Making it difficult to lodge protests is one of the most effective forms of stopping people from complaining.

Also, having people sign a petition requesting more consideration for cyclists in future planning would be useful too. Though we would need to think out exactly what we wanted them to do in the event of such an issue.

And one of the problems I have, is I'm not exactly sure what they should have done in this case? Can anyone suggest a better solution than the one they did eventually come up with?

There's 6 more months of works in the area, but there should be no more works on that particular PSP.

Regards
David

[wellington_street]

The simple answer is divert the path onto the shoulder, exactly as was done at Mt Lawley and the Baldivis service centre. The guard rail etc is being removed for the road widening anyway so its not like there was a significant extra cost associated with it.

[1talian.steel]

Woo-hoo! It's open

[rusty842]

Good to know. I avoided this area completely. Was waiting for someone to say it's over.