Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Patrick O'Kane on January 4, 2011 at 7:00

We don't need people like Road Repair to report hazards for us. If a hazard is bad enough we can/should report it ourselves. Personally i don't know if RR was a well meaning advocate for cyclists or someone with a particular gripe that he became obsessed with to the point that some would choose to ignore, or ridicule him.

Many advocates become so involved in their cause that they can become too narrowly focused on small issues, such as grass clippings on Anzac Hwy, or a clearly visible grate on Aust Post private property. Cry wolf too many times and no one is listening when a real problem needs addressing.

Just my 2c

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by David Bowler on January 4, 2011 at 13:33

While I don't think RR was crying wolf as there were real problems being reported,  I can see some could see reporting too many minor faults could dilute advocacy for rectifying more significant problems with the risk of drowning them out in the noise.  On the other hand where there is an issue worth reporting, many people will not report it, whether it is because they are too busy, can't be bothered, or don't know who report to.   I think we are better off having people like RR who are will to go to the effort to report and follow up the problems even if they occasionally get a little carried away.   Who knows what serious accidents may have been prevented by the reporting of some of these issues.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by heather on January 4, 2011 at 12:12

Patrick I hear your point of view.

Perhaps the difference is that I report many cycling hazards but make few public. Usually a brief email to the appropriate authority. In 2010 I reported 240 cycling hazards + 77 pedestrian hazards + 4 damaged stobie poles + 1 broken asbestos in gutter = 322 hazards. Fifteen council areas of Adelaide, Charles Sturt, Elizabeth, Gawler, Holdfast Bay, Mitcham, Norwood Payneham St Peters, Onkaparinga, Port Adelaide Enfield, Prospect, Salisbury, Unley, Walkerville and West Thebarton.

Some authorities thank me, eg an email from DTEI today. Most hazards are fixed within a reasonable time. Although some authorities dawdle, even when highly hazardous.

Envestra (gas) told me they would fix a hazard in January 2010 after waiting 4 months, but another 12 months later and still waiting. SA Water are so slow that even DTEI Road Hazards acknowledge it. Last summer I resorted to writing to the then Minister for Water plus Minister for Road Transport, but did not bring results. Pending another letter to report SA Water hazards that I sighted in the last 12 months. That is, 83 cycling hazards from cover-lids + 64 cycling hazards from blue RRPMs / cat eyes + 7 pedestrian hazards = 152 hazards.

Re the grate that Road Repair reported. He corrected a false impression of its location – it is in the public car park of a shopping centre. He later posted a clear picture of the grate in situ, showing the remedy of extra metal added. This is the solution used by Prospect Council many years ago when I reported a similar grate. Years ago I reported a hazardous grate that had just been installed in the Northpark Shopping Centre, Prospect, near the left kerb where cyclists are channelled. Still not fixed. Austroads recognises that grates installed with the slot parallel to bicycle travel can be hazardous. I know a person who has not cycled since a bus forced him onto a grate which grabbed his wheel.

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Clive Palfrey on January 4, 2011 at 13:42

Heather. I think it would be a good idea for all cyclists to report any perceived road hazard to the appropriate authority. I also think it's quite a good idea to post a copy of any such report to this web site. However I don't think it's a good idea to report the same hazard or videoed incidents repeatedly, further more I think one should consider just how hazardous the hazard really is. Grass clippings, hazardous, questionable. I suppose if there was a sudden downpour of rain they could be a little slippery and become hazardous to skinny wheels at high speed but no more so than the leaf litter that one finds 365 days a year in any leafy suburb. Under such conditions one should ride to the conditions, in the same way if riding on a shared path, ride to the conditions and consider the unpredictability of others sharing the same facility. 

And that was the problem with RR's reports. Repetitive, often ill considered and all too often presented in a somewhat rabid manner.

I also wonder about some of your own reports. You mentioned blue RRPM's, I don't have an issue with these, in fact when they first started appearing I thought what a brilliant idea, if ever your house or a neighbours house should catch fire no doubt you will be thankful that the fire men can source the water quickly. I don't recall ever seeing these blue reflectors near the kerb, they usually seem to be out near the crown of the road, what's the problem. I regret to say that given the number of hazard reports you've made the authorities have quite possibly and of course unofficially labelled you as a serial pest. I don't know the nature of the hazards you have reported but if you are not getting appropriate responses perhaps you should reconsider your tactics. If you see a serious hazard why not report it here first, with a photo, precise location and ask if there are any cyclists living within the vicinity that would be prepared to report it to the appropriate authority and local council. If you get no response that might suggest that nobody else considers it to be as hazardous as you feel, alternatively you may find that it might prompt more than one cyclist to report the hazard and increase the pressure on the authorities to act or direct the appropriate authority to act.

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by heather on January 4, 2011 at 14:42

Clive, most authorities take me seriously and fix the hazards. As I said, some even take the trouble to thank me. But then I report most hazards in a private low-key manner without emotive words, and without a strong tone that Road Repair sometimes used.

Re clippings or leaves. There is a repeated hazard each autumn of fallen thick wet slippery leaves on a shared path. The first time I came across it, I skidded and almost hit a stone wall. That was at low speed on town n country tyres. The lighting does not meet Australian Standards -- I have informed Prospect Council a couple of times but have given up. I now take another route in autumn at night. However, it is a hazardous if a cyclist does not know about it, as indicated in the daylight by tyre skids ending close to the stone wall.

Re SA Water. I repeat that even DTEI acknowledges that SA Water is slow to fix its cycling (and pedestrian) hazards. There is a technical standard for the installation of the blue RRPMs and at times the standard is not followed. These are the locations I have recorded. I have seen RRPMs placed in bicycle lanes. In fact we both know a BISA member who suffered a broken arm when he hit a blue RRPM in a bicycle lane. When Pedal Update reported trying to do something about it, I realised I had passed similar cycling hazards. Took an interest in the matter, got a copy of the pertinent technical standard, and wrote a letter to authorities with Sam Powrie's support. Sam, DTEI & I offered to consult with SA Water on why improper installation was occurring and to decrease the incidence. No response.

As for non-flush cover-lids, I know a cyclist who encountered one in a bicycle lane, resulting in injuries requiring surgery. Fortunately while laying on the road, he was not run over by a passing vehicle. He did not seek reimbursement of his medical costs but was dismayed that 10 months after his injuries, SA Water had not remedied the hazardous cover-lid.

It takes time to record and report hazards. It would take even more of my time to photograph hazards and ask cyclists to help, so do this rarely. Did publicise Morphett Street on AC when ACC did not initially comprehend my complaint. When an AC cyclist produced a video (I do not have a camera), ACC understood, made some immediate changes, and further changes planned in this financial year.

Many of the hazards I report, I refer to Austroads publication. It has guidelines on grate placement, non-flush steps, potholes, etc. Road authorities often like to fix potholes to save money in the future. Water ingress into the asphalt via a pothole deteriorates the road further.

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Patrick O'Kane on January 4, 2011 at 15:56

A cyclist coming to grief on an RRPM, a cyclist coming to grief on wet leaves, a cyclist coming to grief on a non flush cover-lid, poor lighting. I'm sure all are worth reporting and good on you for taking the time to do so. I'm sure all could be avoided by riding to the conditions and reading the road ahead.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by heather on January 4, 2011 at 20:57

Patrick, thanks for the positive feedback.

I did say that the mat of wet slippery leaves cannot be seen at night on the shared path due to poor lighting that does not meet Australian Standards.

Some hazards are not obvious at night. Other times it can be difficult to avoid a hazard in a bicycle lane when you are expected to cycle in a bicycle lane and vehicles channel you towards the hazard. For example on the corner of Jeffcott Street and Wellington Square was a smooth and potentially slippery cover-lid. One could intend to cycle further out from the kerb, to be overtaken by a faster moving car and forced onto the cover-lid. Think of recent cyclists' complaints of vehicles cutting the corners on Whitmore Square. One AC cyclist reported recently that he was knocked by a vehicle on such a corner. Fortunately SA Water replaced the smooth cover-lid in Wellington Square in 2010, but not before I reported it several times over 12 years.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Zed on January 5, 2011 at 10:28

Heather and RR - keep up the great work. Without people like you, we would all be living/riding in the stone age. Cycling infrastructure needs to be improved to the point where the majority of riders, of all skill levels and noting that any one over the age of twelve must ride on the road; can take a ride and be confident that on the whole, it's going to be a pleasant experence. The more people riding, the better it is for everybody else and that requires quality infrastructure.

 

The motorcar industry doesn't have any problems with critising the roads and nor should cyclists:

http://www.redspotsurvey

http://www.raa.com.au/page.aspx?TerID=1329

http://www.raa.com.au/page.aspx?TerID=1110

 

Have a look at Bicycle Victoria's "BikeScope" surveys - scroll down page:

http://www.bv.com.au/general/bike-futures/40568/

 

Councils actually pay for these surveys, where cyclists are invited to mark potholes, poor bike lanes, lack of parking, etc, on to a map. Councils then attempt to make improvements given the usual constraints of politics and funding. In the case where the Council is not the responsible authority, they can only lobby for improvements like the rest of us, albeit with a bit more clout. Additionally these surveys help educate Councils on what needs to be done. For those interested, Adelaide Cyclists has a map that can be used for the same sort of purposes:

http://www.adelaidecyclists.com/group/bicycleblackspoteradication

 

It's pretty simple. Improvements only occur when the Public lobby for them and the more that do so, all the better.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by heather on January 5, 2011 at 14:47

Zed, thanks for the positive feedback. Thanks for reminding cyclists that it is considered acceptable to complain that roads need improving for drivers. Think of how much effort the RAA puts into lobbying for road upgrades.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dahondude on January 5, 2011 at 15:09

wow what an interesting read this is! I'm with Heather and RR. Reporting a small pothole hopefully means a quick and cheap(er) fix, than leaving it until car drivers start complaining by which time the amount of cost/time for a road maintenance crew has escalated. Grass clippings on ANZAC hwy are surely a hazard. Anyone who rides up Anzac hwy between Sth Rd and Greenhill rd on a wet autumn/winter morning with all the wet rotting leaves in the bike lane will attest to that. Railway Terrace South in Wayville is a pot-hole nightmare...I think Jeremy Miller destroyed a rim on one of those beauties. I've been meaning to write to the council to ask them to reseal this section of road for years, but our "serial pest" RR beat me too. A hazard can be a very individual-specific thing. The less proficient the cyclist the more hazards there are, but the more proficient the cyclist, perhaps the greater the consequences of a hazard (hitting a pothole at 90km/h on a descent for example) so its swings and round-a-bouts. I think cyclists and pedestrians are one group who can legitimately claim that poor road surfaces/conditions are actually dangerous. People like RR and Heather arent asking for every road and bike path to be beautiful smooth hotmix with no obstructions, just that easy-and-relatively-cheap-to-fix problems are dealt with.

Most of us dont have time (or simply cant be bothered) going through all the hassle of writing to and chasing up councils etc to get things fixed, but people like Heather and RR do an admirable job of "snapping around the heels" of the people whose job it is to maintain our roads and keep hazards to a minimum.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Brian Jenkins (BJ) on January 7, 2011 at 20:40

Heather, I support and thank people who report hazards.  I reckon I met RR once briefly - impression from that was a likable and dedicated chap.  I didn't like the phrasing in the statement that upset RR, but nor have I liked the strong terms he has used on occasions.  My view is that we should be working with and helping Councils as much as we can - and leave out emotive statements and talk of possible compensation.  Budgets are getting tight with both Councils and Government, and are likely to get tighter.  That said, I haven't put in the countless hours that RR and yourself have being frustrated by Councils.     On the road, we are by far a minority compared to commuting motorists.  Sometimes we've got to take our lumps on smaller issues, but keep persisting in a positive way.

 

PS re the bike path on the western side of the showgrounds.  There is reflective tape on the bollards at the Rose Tce end - reckon that dates back before Christmas.  Still no tape at the Leader St end as of the start of this week - there is a light at that end on the building, but have yet to check it's effectiveness. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by heather on January 8, 2011 at 0:19

Brian, thanks for the feedback.

It is surely cheaper for a council to fix hazards than deal with compensation litigation when someone is injured.

Road Repair was a member of my group Prospect BUG, which he left along with Bicycle Blackspot Eradication and Adelaide Cyclists. He was one of the few who came to Parliament House steps for the presentation of my cycling petition. So I appreciated his support. It was a windy day with brief showers but he made the effort. Considering it was lunch time, thought more who worked in the city could have been there. He greeted me, saying we had met when he signed the petition. I do not recall 3,000 faces and names. That day I learnt his first name but have no other details to contact him since he quit his gmail.

Re Unley Council. It is a while since I cycled that path. Based on an AC post with photos, I encouraged cyclists to report the hazard again. A later AC post said the bollards were back which I had not viewed at night to check the effectiveness of the light. So I politely emailed the council and explained how the bollards could be hazardous even during the daytime to anyone (cyclist or pedestrian) with yellow colour-blindness (not as common as green-red). Nice that the council heeded my warning. What colour are the bollards at the Leader St end? Can you post a photo? Or will you contact Unley Council at pobox1@unley.sa.gov.au?

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page