The Walking and cycling feasibility and options report prepared by AECOM continues on where the strategic work 2012-2014 left off. The ACT Strategic Cycle Network Plan prioritises routes between town and group centre for development. The AECOM report considers the challenges of building a cycle path along these routes.
Paralysis through analysis: the ideas that progress can be halted by yet another study. ACT Transport knows what it needs to do for cycling with over a dozen studies since 2004, but never gets around to making the improvements. The recommendations are all too often never implemented. Take for example, the proposed Civic and Dickson bike path through Haig Park, which has been discussed for over a decade. Here is the history of cycling transport studies.
Separation between car and cyclist are the key to cyclist safety and encourage cycling. Only off road cycle paths meet this requirement. The report prepared for the ACT Government back in 2012 by Spackman Mossop Michaels makes clear that cycle lanes are a mistake. Furthermore, comparison of the 2011 ACT Strategic Cycle Network Plan shows that very little progress has been made building the cycling network in a decade. Cause for concern.
The National Capital Design Review Panel reviewed the Molonglo Group Centre and Surrounds Planning Framework. The recommendations from the first sitting was released 11 June 2021. Much will need to be improved before the Molonglo Group Centre is ready for a development application. Currently, the Framework is in revision.
VicRoads Cycle Notes 21 (August 2013) has advice on the widths of off-road shared use paths. It is not the most recent. Austroads Guide to Road Design Part 6A: Paths for Walking and Cycling (AGRD06A) and the Netherlands CROW publication are more recent. Still, it is worth noting that even back in 2013 VicRoads were aware of what we in Canberra need and still do not have.
Freedom of Information request permit access to ACT Government documents. The documents are then published on the ACT Government website. This request FOI 21-008 (28 Jan 2021) releases the community path priority list from the ACT database on 16 February 2021. The purpose of this article is to explain the reasons that this information was made available.
The general desired to encourage people to cycle to work is hampered by the lack of end-of-trip facilities. End-of-trip facilities is more than bike parking, but rather a package of infrastructure that make the workplace attractive for cycling. That end-of-trip facilities will not be built or added to a commercial building unless mandated. With this in mind, the ACT Government has introduced Territory Plan Variation 357.
Codes and general codes are part of the ACT Territory Plan and apply to development applications and approval thereof. Any code uses a multitude of terms and as the code is a statutory document, it is important to define what it means.
The Australian Standard for Bicycle parking (AS 2890.3:2015 Parking facilities, Part 3: Bicycle parking). As we are moving to end-of-trip facilities in the coming articles, it is timely to look at a few definitions. This glossary is derived from the AS 2890.3:2015.
There are maintenance targets for roads and maintenance targets for paths. How do they compare? We need to distinguish between filling potholes and resurfacing. Resurfacing is better. Similarly, community paths can be repaired superficially, or resurfaced for replaced. Unlike roads, paths are quite thin and replacement and resurfacing are quite similar processes.