Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

N/A | National Road Diets: What will they mean to riders?

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by cjvfr, Aug 30, 2015.

  1. In the USA discussion is occurring amongst road designers about re-arranging urban roads to provide bicycle lanes or seperated cycle tracks by narrowing road lanes and parking spaces. Standard road lane width in the USA is 12foot (3.66m) or in inner roads 10foot (3.05m). The additional space would be used for bicycle lanes. Parking space would be narrowed from 8 foot (2.44m) to 7 foot (2.133m) As a comparison Australian standard road lane size is 3.5m (11foot 6 inches)

    The argument goes that narrower lanes psychologically slow people down, there is a greater feeling of risk in drivers so natural reaction is to drive slower. The plan would allow extra road space for separated bicycle lanes or tracks.

    Will this affect riders? Narrower roads and narrower parking lanes would suggest that the chances of being doored would increase and the opportunities for lane filtering would be reduced. Designers "state" that this has no effect on road carrying capacity, this would seem to be counter intuitive so I would like to see the supporting studies.

    If this is going to happen here it will be local councils that will drive it. Already here in Melbourne some councils, in association with public transport staff, have enforced some very anti vehicle traffic management practices. Streets like High Street Northcote have by Super tram stops and speed restrictions placed the public at risk by restricted access for emergency vehicles.


    The Three to Two Diet

    The Four to Three Diet

    Bike Lanes to Cycle Track

    Forty Footer Lane Insertion

    • Informative Informative x 2
  2. Sydney is going the other way, ripping up bicycle lanes...
  3. Interesting what is their justification? Melbourne seems to be in the other side of the cycle bicycles are king particularly with some of the inner hippy councils. :)
  4. would hate to see two trucks pass side by side on narrow roads like that
    • Agree Agree x 4
  5. the rationale seems to be that "less bikes use the paths than cars could use the road"
    how many business suit kiddies would want to cycle to work in CBD anyway?
    then again, you have to start somewhere.. if the infrastructure is never built, people won't consider cycling

    LW, you'd hope they'd either only do that where trucks don't go, or would prevent trucks from using those roads..
    then again.. buses are just as bad as trucks

    the "no change to carrying capacity" could be to do with moving turning twits from normal lanes, into the dedicated centre lane.. so they hold up less traffic :D
    first vid said reduction in injury crashes (ie, crashes at lower speed)... but no comment on total number of crashes

    I like the idea of moving cycle lanes to the other side of parked cars.. but there will always be a lot of resistance to change..
    it costs money, less lanes for cars to have traffic jams etc etc... and many Aussie roads are just not wide enough for a change like that.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. True re road widths, Sydney has issues with Road widths by the nature of its geography. Melbourne although generally having wider roads has Tram hippopotamuses occupying a couple of lanes on their own. Councils here are very pro bicycle though. It would be good if they studied road flows prior to some of their implemented plans.
    • Like Like x 1
  7. it would be nice if bike used as much residential road as possible, you dont need to ride down main roads if there is some rat race back road to use with no traffic and roundabouts
    • Agree Agree x 3
  8. US lanes are way wider already. This has nothing to do with Australia. Our roads are already anorexic
  9. US standard lanes are 12 foot or 10 foot ours are 11 1/2 foot so not a great difference. We are talking about Urban roads rather than Interstates.
  10. If Parramatta road is 11 and a half feet, ill eat my helmet
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Funny Funny x 1
  11. These are requirements for modern designs by Austroads Guide to Road design Part 3 Older roads may not comply. There are many older roads in Sydney that probably don't comply, Sydney by terrain and age as our oldest city has its own particular design problems.
  12. Let's not beat around the bush - the motivation for this is AT LEAST as much to create obstructions for motorised transport and commerce as it is to provide convenience and safety for cyclists. Perhaps even more so. Anything that will obstruct motorcycles will get the tick of approval from the social engineers in charge.
    • Winner Winner x 1
  13. 2.8 metres (9.2 foot) in many areas.
    • Informative Informative x 1
  14. I'm in favour of slapping whoever is responsible for this farce. There are roads out there cut to ribbons and people are buggerizing around with urban roads? Wtf?
  15. I've seen some roads already where trucks are touching both white lines of their lane.
  16. Really depends on the extent. If it's just the CBD I'd say it's too wide.

    I, myself, would turn the entire Northern half of Sydney's CBD into a 10km/h shared pedestrian, cycle, vehicle zone. City's are for people, not cars.
  17. As long as I can run them over I've got no problem with narrower roads

    Ibast would of course be first with his idiotic idea to make it a 10kph zone
  18. this makes about as much sense as the logic that deliberately obstructing the sight lines at intersection makes people slow and take a look before they pull out.
    • Agree Agree x 3
  19. Surely if the road is designed to slow traffic down there is only but one result. Slower traffic equals decreased flow rate. Decreased flow rate equals decreased capacity. Yet they say there is no decrease???
    • Agree Agree x 1