Draft DoT/WALGA Shared Path Design Guidelines Open for Comment

[Scott_C]

Browsing through the DoT website I came across this draft guideline, released last Friday, apparently for public comment:

http://www.transport.wa.gov.au/activetr ... elines.asp
(you need to click on 'Designing and Constructing Share Paths')
or use this direct link (54 page 2.8MB pdf) to the document.

Reading through the document, it seems to hit all the right notes in providing good quality cycling paths including

• separated cyclist and pedestrian paths where there are high volumes
• setbacks from road edges
• path priority at low vehicle volume road crossings
• recognition that a 20kph design speed is insufficient for commuting cyclists
• requiring traffic signals located on shared paths to have cyclist lanterns so we don't have to dismount or break the law

Other than the obvious comment of "why come up with a guideline for local government when MainRoads can't get most of this stuff right" it seems to be a good step in the right direction.

There is no direction as to where feedback on the guideline is meant to be sent but I recommend having a read of it when you get a chance and see what you think of it.

[rolandp]

For those who will be putting in a response, responses closing 28 February 2017.

That's just two weeks away.

Just finishing my response, in time for this deadline.

[Thoglette]

Looks pretty good. Missing a "really, really busy high speed route" but that's MRD's problem. And they're not listening anyway

[Scott_C]

One last bump to remind people that comments close today.

I put my comments in yesterday mainly concentrating on how the apparent lack of any requirement to follow the guidelines makes them practically useless, how any requirement to dismount on permanent or temporary paths is contrary to universal access principles for mobility impaired cyclists and that grade separated treatments (bridges and underpasses) were missing from the guidelines.

[rolandp]

I also responded on the behalf of WATCAC. Headings included:
Conformance of the Shared Path Design – Technical Guidelines - there are already several 'guides' from Federal, State and in some cases Local, which aren't being followed so how will a new set of guidelines be enforced
Other Types of Cycling Infrastructure - document only focused on shared paths - what about cycle lanes, dedicated cycle paths, on-road etc
Guidelines must apply to all, not just Local Government - document only referenced Local Government - State and Private are also responsible for cycling infrastructure
Sightlines - only briefly mentioned - example of non-confirming being Halo-On-Mount where CoP modified the REQUIRED 3m setback of this building to be 0m, which then interrupted the sightlines for those on the PSP
1m Distance from Hazards - gave plenty of recent examples where State and Local government failed to follow this guideline, which is already in AusRoads guidelines
Cycling Infrastructure Scope, Funding and Timing examples given of what was scoped/funded/timed was not provided/costed extra/not to time
Car Dooring - minimise the risk
Lighting - too many sections of PSP do not have lights
Grade Crossings
etc
18 page response