IE10 and below are not supported.

Contact us for any help on browser support

What would you like to say about the City Bikeways?

9 months ago
CLOSED: This discussion has concluded.

Russted 7 months ago
I ride a recumbent tricycle (like the kids ride in Pedal Prix), because I am disabled (I can't balance on a bicycle). It is wider than a bicycle, naturally. I'm concerned at the proposal to reduce the width of the bike lanes in Frome St. It is such a joy to have room to ride without hindering others for once. And there are many cycles that share my concerns. These days, 'cyclists' aren't just the traditional two wheels and a saddle. There are vehicles like cargo bikes, bikes with trailers etc. in common use. Narrow-thinking (ie. thinking of 'cycles' as 'bikes') designs discriminate against us. Bollards for instance are the bane of my life. Sometimes I simply can't get through. Similarly the crossovers at tram and train lines. The weaving path. Designed so you get off your bike and wheel it through. I simply can’t use them, so am forced to cross at roads. I really don’t expect the world to adapt to me. My disabilities mean I can’t go bushwalking or walk on uneven ground; that doesn’t mean that we should carve out bitumen paths in the wilderness. There are some things some people can do that I can’t. That’s life. My only complaint is when I’ve been thoughtlessly excluded – when there’s no reason/justification why (eg. it’s not coz it was done 100 years ago when people simply weren’t aware) and for little or no extra it could’ve been done differently. The perspective, if not the objective, of traffic planners seems to be to a) smooth flow and decrease travel time of cars, trucks etc. b) do the opposite for cyclists: slow them down, obstruct them etc. Why? I genuinely do not understand. If you make cycling more difficult / less appealing, people, being rational, will do it less. So you'll get more cars, together with all the disadvantages of that. Again, I'm perplexed – why on earth would you want that? In fact, not only want it - *pay* to achieve it? The Frome Rd work is a brilliant piece of infrastructure, and it seems to be achieving exactly what it was designed to do. Why on earth would you want to dismantle it? It *advantages* the city, indeed society, to have people cycle rather than drive their car. It reduces congestion, pollution, etc. etc. as well as makes the whole place more amenable – Adelaide looks good, feels good, to have people cycling (and walking) around it.I hope clear thinking prevails.
ehughes 7 months ago
I think the Frome St as a whole is functioning really well with the current bikeway. This is a major commuting route for cyclists going to the Universities, hospitals (both RAH and WCH) and schools (current and soon to be opened) as well as giving access to a great entertainment precinct. In contrast , it is not a through road for cars. The hard work has been done in getting motorists to use a different route through and around the CBD. To go back to 2 lanes would be a massive retrograde step. Frome St as it is, is available to motorists who are coming TO the city and not clogged up with people who are travelling THROUGH the city. The Frome St bikeway should be kept in its current format and extended north. It does not need to be the same format as other city bikeways because it is unique, in that it has a high throughput of cyclists going to large institutions and it is not a through road for cars. All the bikeways planned for the city do not need to be the same.
gypsy 7 months ago
Frome Rd bikeway should remain, it is unthinkable to remove it.
benzo 7 months ago
Can't believe there is serious consideration to ripping the Frame St infrastructure and using the cycling budget to do so. This is about as backward looking as it could be. We need to be doing more radical things like considering one way roads and much wider bike/shared lanes with traffic light flow.
Glenda Gleeson 7 months ago
Frome Rd, bikeway should be left at the main bike corridor. Cars have multiple options for travel through the city. Adelaide city council needs to make a serious commitment to increase cycle space in peak hour. What a shameful waste of rate payer funds to rip up what has been created in Frome Rd. to change it to a two lane car thoroughfare.
The Appila Kid 7 months ago
Removing / altering / reducing the Frome Street bikeway is sheer madness and backwards looking. Adelaide is so much better with infrastructure such as this in place. We need more, not less. When independent reports show it's had practically no negative impacts, it can only be head-in-sand thinking that seeks to change it. Retain and provide more, please.
Mim 8 months ago
I worked on the corner of Frome and Pirie Street as this bike lane was under construction and listened to a few disgruntled car drivers as they got used to the idea – but since then they have managed to get on with their lives! and I’ve looked out my office window to see so many people of all different ages using the bike lane. When I ride round the city I often go a longer and slightly less direct way in order to use the bike lane where I can relax and feel safe. To think that a decision might be made to spend money on ripping it up to make it narrower seems absolutely ridiculous!? I can’t see any evidence of why this needs to occur and how the money it would cost is justified? The bike lanes are achieving what they set out to achieve. More cyclists and less cars?? What exactly is the problem? In Adelaide we have the luxury of wide streets that can accommodate bike lanes so let’s just get on with it. An embarrassment for Adelaide if we take a step backwards. If we’re aspiring to be carbon neutral and a liveable city etc we know what we need to do. Show some vision & learn from cities where they are making this work.
Saltypete 8 months ago
Use design 1 as it keeps me more in the visual frame of the motorists. This is important for my safety.Please. Please use this opportunity to use permeable paving and grade it to the vegetated area to deal with the stormwater, provide cooler conditions and make the bike way attractive . Please also consider smart lighting to highlight cyclists as they travel on the bikeways at night, further increasing safety.Cheers
angelac 8 months ago
The Frome Street Bikeway is a fantastic initiative, and my daily commute into the city feels a lot safer and enjoyable. I would be very disappointed if it is removed.
sonjar 8 months ago
The bikeway is a small step in the right direction. Don't get scared and turn back now. Changing a city and culture takes time and dedication. Please keep moving forward to improve the cities bicycle paths for a more active, green and healthy future.
trumptowers 8 months ago
Lets keep Frome St Great.
trumptowers 8 months ago
Cant rip out this bikeway. Although not perfect, it is far safer than any other North/South city bike route.Please leave it alone.
Gingko 8 months ago
As a long term Adelaide city resident, I oppose plans to rip up Frome Street bikeway. It encourages cyclists to ride in the city, which reduces traffic. Please use the considerable amount of money it would cost to rip up the bikeway more sensibly (e.g., extending the bikeway, making alterations).
BobH 8 months ago
I wish for the bikeway to remain unchanged. Adelaide suffers an illogical culture of car infatuation. Our landscape, climate and size offer perfect opportunities to transition to a greener, cycling community. Let's honour intelligent foresight and investment in precious decision making and commit to sustainable goals.
fionaryan 8 months ago
I would like the Frome Street bike way to remain as it is. The city of Adelaide is on the way to becoming a bike friendly place. I ride a bike, use a car, use walkways and use public transport. At present cars have priority. I would like to see more bike paths such as this one.Fiona Ryan
mcltlollie 8 months ago
The plan to extend the bikeways and have north south and east west priority areas is a sensible approach, providing the lanes operate at peak hours whe most cyclists and cars are on the road! The critical thing is to suitably separate cyclists and cars and make sure there is a transition to a safe place for cyclists when th lane finishes.I am concerned about plans to rip up the Frome road bikelane - I use it regularly as a safe way to travel to work once I come in from the east, particulalry at peak hour. As a car user, I find the parking bays on the Frome road a little awkward, but like most things have got used to them. As a cyclist, I really appreciate the width of the lane and the safety the palnter boxes provide.In summary - keep being bold with new bike lanes across Adelaide but don't throw baby out with bathwater by removing the best bike lane we have in Adelaide at Frome Road!
KQ 8 months ago
As a long time city resident I think it is ridiculous that the council are planning to rip up the successful Frome St bikeway and replace it with a sub standard version. The whole point of having bikeways are to have more people travelling by bike and less by car, which means less space/lanes for cars. Considering the failure of the Sturt St bikeway, it is terrible to think the council are going to rip up and then replace the current Frome St bikeway. The rate payers are right to think that the council is wasting their money. I travel by car, bike and walk around the city and regularly cross Frome St to get home from work. I do not think that this street is too busy, compared to other streets I cross (Pultney St and King William St). It is actually one of the easiest intersections to cross on my way home. Obviously some people who have private reasons to want four lanes of traffic on Frome St have influence over some city councillors. Considering the current financial situation in our state there are no good reasons to waste this amount of public money on such a ridiculous project. It reflects badly on the local council that they are not very efficient or productive for their community. I sincerely hope that the council reconsiders it’s decision and that something can be done to keep this bikeway open and spend the money on more bikeways (like the east to west one) and not re-doing current bikeways.
Amanda Nettelbeck 8 months ago
Please do not remove the current Frome Rd bikeway! It is the reason I have started riding regularly to work from Parkside to the CBD. It is safe and a pleasure to use. It is a model of the kind of bikeway we should be investing in around the city. Frome Rd does not need another car lane: Pulteney St and Hutt St are nearby parallel roads that provide two-lane traffic. The Frome Rd bikeway is very well utilised by bikes. I can't believe that the Council would invest in so recently building a great, servicable bikeway only to rip it out and invest more money in an alternative plan. Use the money to invest in bike safety elsewhere in the Council district.
Donna Ferretti 8 months ago
The allocation of space is political! Council's decision to reinstate 2 lanes of traffic on Frome Road is utterly counter-intuitive and counter productive to its stated aim of encouraging cycling...rather it indicates that instead, Council wishes to reinforce and re-entrench car based travel. Frome Road carries fewer vehicles than my residential is nonsensical to double its capacity to accommodate cars while reducing its capacity to cater for a diverse cycling population. Please reconsider this flies in the face of Council's efforts to enhance active travel, promote carbon neutrality & provide its residents with better & healthier mobility choices.
RobKing 8 months ago
I use the FSB most days from Unley to the Torrens. I am also a car driver. I have seen increasing bike traffic the past 2 years on the bikeway and minimal traffic congestion. More bike riders means fewer car journeys, so anything that is working to increase the number of active cycle commuters has to be a win for everyone. Yes, there are a couple of safety issues with the current bikeway but not worth the expense of major changes. Instead, put the money saved into sensibly planned bikeway extensions please.
HeatherS 8 months ago
I'd like to see the Council sponsor a process to explore innovative options on separated bike lanes. We know that cost is a limiting factor - so if we can bring down cost, we can build more bike lanes that are safer than the el-cheapo option we have at present, ie a lick of paint and no separation. I would like someone to investigate solar bikeways that are being installed in Holland and Denmark - do they pay for themselves? will the costs fall? could we engage local companies to think through similar designs that suit our roads?
greg_martin 8 months ago
I wish the Lord Mayor would take time from his busy day and stand on the corner of Carrington and Regent Street North during evening peak hour. I believe he would see that the vast majority of cars heading south along Frome turn right into Carrington. He's proposal is to have two lanes of traffic during those peak hours. Why? Only a few cars turn left, so there would be no advantage for the vast majority of motorists who want to be in the right hand lane. Does he want two lanes turning right? This would mean ripping out more of the bike lane and the pedestrian crossing. I suspect there's more to this proposal than meets the eye. Otherwise, it just proves again that ACC has more money than brains.
Franknfearless 8 months ago
The Frome St bikeway could have been better designed to ensure cycling and motor vehicles have more equity between then at peak hours etc. You have an opportunity to do this now, saving money. -i.e. Rather than ripping out the bikeway and starting again, please instead simply narrow the bikeway at intersections (and a feasible amount of lane on approach), redirecting the space liberated into turning lanes for traffic. The extra motor vehicle lanes are most important at these junctures. This would resolve the main issues related to traffic congestion and delays, while enabling safe overtaking for bikes and continuing to show positive encouragement cyclists and tangible belief in your strategy for growing carbon neutral city etc.
ladycyler 8 months ago
I oppose ripping up the bikeway. I have used the bikeway to commute to and from work since it opened. I love it and have never understood so called "problems" with it. I feel safe using the bikeway. Don't waste money ripping it up - use it to make other bikeways. We need less cars in the city not more.
field17 8 months ago
Council needs to stop playing politics with cyclists lives. The expert evidence says that there has been no impact on traffic. Having used Frome Rd by both car and bike before and after the installation of the bikeway I can categorically say there has not been any change to the time travelled in the car since the bikeway has been installed. Frome Rd is a dead end road anyway! I ride to work in the City from the Mitcham area and use the Bikeway through Unley, the Park Lands and then Frome Road; it is an important piece of the cycling infrastructure which should be kept in its current form.The money to rip it up should be used to install additional infrastructure elsewhere.
Kasey771 8 months ago
Why does it seem like some ACC Councillors are tilting at windmills here? It seems as soon as some councillors hear 'bicycle' they lose all semblance of logic:( All indications and the independent reports commissioned indicate the FSB has increased cycling participation with no negative effect on car travel times. So why are we still having this discussion? Dont be stupid, just extend it to its full length and reap the rewards.
Kasey771 8 months ago
Rather than waste money trying to 'fix' what isn't broken even according to your own independent report! How about putting that money towards completing the seperated bikeway all the way to North terrace!?
jp123 8 months ago
Please do not remove the Frome Street Bikeway! It is only one of a few of the bike friendly streets in the CBD and it is such a nice ride to come in from the south of town. I really feel safe and happy riding there, I wish there were more Bikeways in town like this!
smo 8 months ago
The construction of the Frome Street bike path was what prompted me to start riding to work each day. It is a safe extension from the southern parklands' shared use path. As a some-time car user along this route, I believe it to be a fair and safe compromise for cyclists and vehicles.
alisons 8 months ago
I ride to work along the Frome St bikeway everyday, between Flinders St and South Tce. It is a fantastic resource for supporting people cycling in the CBD. Rather than spending money scrapping or modifying the bikeway, the funds would be better used replicating the bikeway on an east-west route.I usually ride home during the peak time of 5-6pm, and about the only time I see any build up of car traffic is during the Clipsal car race when other streets at that end of the City are blocked off, which is obviously not a fault of the bikeway. Due to the timing of the traffic lights along Frome St, and that at most intersections the lights give preference to Frome St, vehicle traffic generally flows pretty freely.Please don’t “fix” what isn’t broken.
Joshua 8 months ago
Disappointed to see that the protected bike path on From Street is slated to be scrapped - at considerable expense -in favour of extra motor vehicle lanes, particularly after the independent review concluded that the protected lane had no negative impact.
Jhanoz 8 months ago
I was just notified that there are plans to demolish part of the Frome St bikeway. Please don't do this, I've started riding my bike just because this beautiful road makes it safe and a pleasure to do it. Is not just me, but everyday I see more and more people using it. We should not be thinking about reducing it, we should be thinking about building more and getting people off cars
Kathryn Black 8 months ago
I use Frome Street daily and it certainly is a great way to cycle into work and also when we regularly visit the city for shopping and events (great way to exit Adelaide Oval fast). My only concern with the current design is that the separation of cyclist and car driver is too broad and not parallel, meaning drivers turning left often do not have a good view of cyclists in the bike lane. I do not however believe it is sufficient to justify expending so much money to change, especially when cycling infrastructure elsewhere is so urgently needed.
Ellie Firns 8 months ago
Frome St is awesome as a bike way. A city needs to cater to all of its users. Please do not change Frome St unless it's making the whole of Adelaide more bicycle and pedestrian friendly.
bCxeAsxCF87nPNymjhzw 8 months ago
As a resident in Hume Lane I benefit from the pedestrian crossings the Bikeway created on Regent St North and the intersection with Carrington St. I am concerned that the Council has voted to return Regent St and Frome Rd to two lanes, the creation of a T junction at this intersection is intended to stop this road from being an arterial road, and Residents had been shown a Masterplan to make Regent St a more pedestrian and resident friendly area by removing one of the two lanes, in support of increased residential density. This was welcomed by current residents irrespective of any change in urban density. The bikeway has gone a long way to for fill these promised improvements to our amenity. I strongly urge the Council to rescind it's Motion to return Frome Rd and Regent St North to two lanes.
HydeG 8 months ago
I would like to add my support to leaving the Frome Road Bikeway unchanged.I use it every day and the security and peace of mind it offers compared to the other parts of my ride ( Pirie St- the bike way is hazardous in every conceivable biking sense).It is wide enough for multilpe cycles to use or emergency vehicles if the need be and it is protected from other traffic.Don't forget it is only 600m long- starting and ending in the middle of "nowhere" ( if the designers think that the South Tce to Carrington St constitutes any sort of bikeway they are mistaken.) and away from the CBD hub. Despite this it has proved to be extremely popular.The fact that it is allegedly over engineered seems like a poor excuse to completely dismantle it as such huge cost. Especially given the urgent need for a more complete infrastructure.
Hilary Hamnett 8 months ago
When considering east west cycle routes the west terrace/Sturt St intersection should be a priority.. The two way path narrows to less than 1 metre at the traffic lights while at the,same time having to accommodate storage for waiting to cross. It's great to have a bike light here but there needs to be safe space for three way cycle traffic, especially as it feeds the Sturt Street community school. There are now 6 vehicle lanes since the busway. Most of the time the nearside lane is empty. There are only 3 through lanes on approach (plus bus and right turn) and three after the lights. If bikes,are factored into the peak hour traffic the intersection should be reconfigured to make it safe for cyclists in all directions.
missbonnie 8 months ago
What a waste of money to change something that isn't broken.The Frome Street bikeway as it is is fantastic - it is the only part of my ride to work where I feel safe. As soon as I turn onto Flinders street, I have to deal with cars that open doors/ change lanes/cut me off without checking for cyclists. Use the budget to plant trees along bikepaths, & to extend the Frome Street bikeway towards North Terrace.Install bike lanes on Grenfell Street & North Terrace. (I am terrified whenever I have to ride down those streets)Take steps to encourage more people to ride their bikes, as opposed to changing the road to encourage more people to drive in the city!
Matteo 8 months ago
As an Adelaide CBD resident, I use the bikeways every day and find them to be an asset to both cyclists and motorists in the city. I would not change a thing about the Frome Street bikeway in particular; it makes both driving and riding down From Street feel safer and more efficient. Please do not alter the Frome Street bikeway that currently exists!
AdamF 8 months ago
I am amazed to learn that the current Frome Rd bike track will be reduced. As a piece of infrastructure designed to reduce congestion as well as create the first step towards sustainable transport going forward for this city - it is totally illogical and at odds with both common sense and factual data, that money will be wasted to reduce the bike lane. To re-instate a car/truck/bus lane which will increase traffic and congestion. Please plan for our future in this city and leave the Frome st. bike lane.
j4jo 8 months ago
Please don't change the Frome St bike way. I go out of my way to use this bike way on my commute because it is safe. It is one of the few areas in Adelaide where bike riders are truely catered to. It makes me feel like I live in a great city.
accanne 8 months ago
I am disappointed to learn that the current Frome Rd bike track will be reduced. Not only is that a huge waste of money, but the current lanes appear to me to be very well serving its purpose of encouraging more cyclists to ride into the city without seriously disadvantaging motorists.
Feathers 8 months ago
As someone who rides the full length of the bikeway (through north adelaide to sth tce) every day on the way to and from work, I would be extremely disappointed to see it altered in it's current form. The extra width makes me feel much safer on cold dark and wet winter days. I ride all year round and really appreciate the part of my ride along from in the current bikeway as it's the only part where I really feel safe. I would love to see it extended all the way from north adelaide. Heading south along medindie rd is not great and heading north along frome past pirie st can be frightening in peak hours!
jjepson001 8 months ago
Why are the interests of only the car drivers considered in this plan. I walk every day along side the bike path. Why are not walkers considered important in the Adelaide council area. I would much prefer to walk along side bikes than four lanes of car traffic. This seems to be a total waste of money.
danjamesmick 8 months ago
Do not waste money modifying things to please car drivers, their plight will only get worse every year regardless of what you do, and they will never be happy with the hard limits on traffic space and flow. Giving them back extra space on a road that doesn't even travel all the way north and south provides only a small percentage of drivers with a very small amount of utility. That utility that you give them back now will simply diminish every year the number of car drivers increases until its essentially back to zero for them. On the other hand you can can keep or give permanent utility gains to an increasing number of cyclists by leaving Frome Street as it is.
sir_binkalot 8 months ago
I use the current Frome Bikeway most days in a week and find it the safest way to travel across the city in a North-South direction. It has definitely also given confidence to my partner to join me in some rides too - she does not like riding 'on the road' mixed in with other cars.I welcome the decision to extend the bikeway to North Adelaide (finally! It is dangerous at the moment where the bikeway suddenly ends), but I strongly believe that the existing section of the bikeway should NOT BE TOUCHED. It is doing an excellent job as it is, and that part of Frome St is not sufficiently busy for car traffic to warrant returning it to four car lanes (see your own report for details).With regards to the new section of the Frome Bikeway, I understand that it is a busier section of road and hence I would not be averse to a narrower bikeway there if it were designed well. That is, sloped curbs/low curbs/ no curb on the right hand side to maximise available effective width.Finally, I would like to say that I support the upgrading of street landscaping along with the installation of bikeways. Not only will landscaping give the bikeways better chance at being accepted by the community, but if trees are planted as part of the landscaping it will help to shade the bikeways themselves into the future, which is critical considering how hot and damaging our sun is.Thank you, and I am looking forward to the new bikeways!
StevieW 8 months ago
I totally agree that Council will be wasting money and reducing user safety with the removal of the Frome St separated bike paths... Such a shame that motorists are once again the fundamental concern of Council rather than the people who walk, live and cycle through the city making it a more friendly, active capital city for all. Spend money to improve the infrastructure not to increase CO2 in town.
Paul May 8 months ago
• There is no justification for major changes to the existing Frome Street bikeway. Other posters have explained this at length. Residents along this part of the bikeway would also have to contend with more (and faster moving) traffic, plus the loss of convenient parking.• For the design of new bikeways, option 3 or 4 would be strongly preferred, with the kerb on the left low and/or chamfered to allow maximum use of the available width. Treatment 1 can be used in places to allow existing drainage to be used, but care must be taken to ensure that cars cannot use these places to park on the bikeway. Width should not drop below 2.2m for more than a few metres at particularly restrictive locations. 2.5m+ should be provided wherever possible.Much of Frome Road going north already has a lot of mature street trees - it should be possible to narrow the divider and not plant additional trees where this is the case in order to make a little more space. Choice of trees and other planting should be made to avoid encroachment onto the bikeway and minimum maintenance.• I would prefer to see Grote / Wakefield as the east-west corridor, as it is both more direct, and serves important destinations better. Pirie Street is unsuitable without either converting to one way or removing parking. Neither of those options is likley to be politically feasible.• Linkages through the parklands east and west are important, especially where crossing the ring-route. Separation between pedestrians and cyclists is important for the convenience and safety of both. No-one likes shared paths better than properly separated footpaths and bikeways.• This whole scheme only really works as stage 1 of a proper CBD network of bikeways. As envisaged, the current scheme will still leave us with large parts of the CBD between North Terrace and Currie / Grenfell unpleasant and unsafe to access by bike from most directions. This includes access to Rundle Mall, the station/casino, much of North Terrace and Uni SA's City West campus. At least 3 north-south and 3 east-west routes are needed, plus a central route into North Adelaide are needed if Adelaide is to become truly accessible by bike. These routes will also have to link seamlessly into high quality routes into the inner suburbs.• Please quietly drop the bikeshare scheme - it won't work with mandatory helmet legislation. Brisbane and Melbourne have the lowest utilisation rates of any scheme worldwide, the other notable scheme subject to MHL in Seattle has just been wound up. The scheme as envisaged is also too small to have any real impact.
Hide Replies (3)
bobandbunny 8 months ago
Agree with most of these points, but I would disagree with the bikeshare comment in this email. Instead of dropping it - why can't we have a serious look at the helmet legislation and how this can mitigated - i.e. if you're on a city bike, then you don't require to wear a helmet. International and other casual users would be seriously deterred using this bikeshare if they had to wear a smelly old rented helmet (unless you're giving them away?)
Hide Replies (2)
Paul May 8 months ago
I did think of suggesting the alternative argument: proceed with the bikeshare, and when it proves an embarrassing failure, start dismantling the helmet legislation, but no-one really wants to start that debate here...The other point I wanted to make is that there is a lot of potential for improving traffic flow (for ALL modes) by simply changing how a lot of the CBD's traffic lights are sequenced. At the moment they don't really serve anyone, least of all pedestrians and cyclists. There is more than one way to manage congestion.
Hide reply (1)
StevieW 8 months ago
The east-west and west-east traffic light sequence is absolutely terrible after 8am and then after 5:30pm. This really needs a review... And greater responsivity to bikes on bike traffic mats.
Paul Coldrey 8 months ago
All options seem like a waste of the "bikeway" budget and, notably not outcome is in anyway related to a better outcome for bikes. Option 7 in the "treatments" is just beyond stupid and is a worse outcome that returning the street to its pre-bikeway configuration.
Hide reply (1)
Paul May 8 months ago
Option 7 is only intended for use in the Parklands. Even so, you wouldn't catch the Danes or the Dutch building this kind of thing without a separate footpath in an urban or suburban setting.
Jorgy 8 months ago
Removing and replacing the current bikeway is a waste of money. I ride there every day and car traffic would not be improved, but cycling amenity would be reduced. New bikeways should be based on Danish standards which have been perfected over 40 years (why reinvent the wheel?)
kennes 8 months ago
Nothing to be said that hasn't been already. Was such a great step by Adelaide towards a more cycle friendly CBD and would be a huge waste of time, money and resources to rip it up.
JohnR 8 months ago
Perhaps the Frome St bikeway does need a little revamping, but not demolition. The latter would be a ridiculous waste. Some modification could be made to the width of the concrete barriers so that it could be practicable to extended to North Tce. Money would be better spent on other access roads to the city - especially the east-west corridor. . That's how I would like my rates and parking fine money spent.
jellyfishsalad71 8 months ago
Please don't waste any more money on downgrading the Frome Street bikeway. The money would be much better spent on extending the bikeway further north and also building an east west bikeway too. Protected bikeways are excellent for new cyclists, children, women and the more risk averse among us. I regularly use it when i cycle into town with my children (8 and 9) but its scary how it just dumps us into traffic after lulling the children into a false sense of security. We need many more protected cycleways in order to encourage more people to cycle not fewer or downgraded cycleways. In 2017 we shouldn't be giving over the small amount of space allocated to bikes to cars which already dominate 99% of the roadways in the cbd. Also the unprotected bike lanes situated wholly in the doorzones of parked cars are really dangerous and should be converted to protected bikeways or removed altogether.
bobandbunny 8 months ago
Please don't touch the existing part of the Frome bikeway. Right from the start, I have never seen much car traffic use that part of Frome Road as it isn't a through road and so I can't see how returning this to two lanes would benefit anyone.
arman.michael 8 months ago
I find it very hard to believe that Council is considering using limited cycling infrastructure funding to remodel Frome Street. Leave it as it is, and focus on extensions. I support Grote Street/Wakefield for the east-west link. I use Pirie St regularly and the narrow width and slow vehicle speeds already create good conditions for cyclists.
Theresa Fletcher 8 months ago
-I'm disgusted that my rates are being wasted on something that is working. It's so frustrating to see council spend my money on consultation that they then ignore. Spend the money on extending the bikeway. -there must be a reason why cities like Melbourne are becoming much more bike friendly, it's the way of the future-It will be terrible for businesses to not have any parking at peak hour.-i think the Wakefield/Grote pathway would be the best for the east /west corridor
MatI 8 months ago
I rode on the Frome street bike way to work for the first time today and loved it. I was riding fairly slow so it's great that there's space for other cyclists to get past safely. It would be great if it extended all the way down to north terrace. It would be an absolute shame to see it downgraded because I think it's up there with other great bike infrastructure that I've ridden on in Europe.
loff 8 months ago
- Please don't mess with the existing Frome St Bikeway; instead spend the money extending it.- In all Bikeway planning, ensure 2.5m width is the minimum provided (1m per cyclist plus 0.5m separation).- Prioritise Bikeway investment, bearing in mind that it assists with other Council goals (reduced emissions; cleaner air; reduced traffic congestion; pleasant city living that attracts more City residents).
michael reid 8 months ago
I'm shocked that the Adelaide City Council is considering spending a further $2 million of rate payers money on the same section of Frome Road bikeway. Adelaide cyclist numbers are increasing according to ACC's own data (ACC Permanent Counter data) and we should be investing in further bikeways not reducing them.As someone who works in the city and enjoys my near daily commute down the Frome Rd bikeway, this decision is trash.
paul johnston 8 months ago
I think that the Council should leave the existing Frome St. Bikeway as it is & extend it north & south. To rip it up & replace it with a narrower version is absolutely bewildering! Bike usage is increasing, & the new High School will increase it even more. The council should congratulate itself that it has produced a bikeway that works. It is encouraging cyclists. It is safe. It still allows for vehicles and for parking. To spend $2 million of bikeway money to make a narrower, substandard bikeway is a shocking waste. As a rate payer I find this totally unacceptable. Please spend the bikeway budget in making bikeways, not unmaking them.
ruddager 8 months ago
It is starting to look like certain councilors are slightly obsessed with having the "last say" on the Frome Street bikeway by reducing its width to add another lane of vehicular traffic. All reports indicate that there is indeed absolutely no need for this, so instead of wasting time and money on egos I hope the council focuses on completing the project.Furthermore, the comments about difficulty overtaking with a reduced width are correct, and keep in mind that, unlike when driving, the speed differences between cyclists can be dramatic and thus it's important to facilitate overtaking. It can already be challenging to overtake a rider that is not completely over to one side, so if this becomes even harder you'll end up driving people away from the best piece of cycling infrastructure we have. Not money well spent.
fionajohnston 8 months ago
As a cyclist, I love the Frome St Bikeway as it is, as a car driver I don't need 2 lanes each way in peak hours and as a ratepayer I do not want my rates to be used for the foolish idea of changing the Frome Bikeway. I am shocked to hear that the Council has decided to spend cycling money on changing the current Frome St Bikeway for the benefit of cars! if this change must happen the money should come out of the roads budget, not the cycling budget.
Peter Lumb 8 months ago
I appreciate that the City Council had declared this to be an open consultation, and not one limited to commenting on 6 street designs with bikeways included at 2 metres wide.The State government and the City Council have statements of intent for a better city with less CO2 contributions which I support. The proposed Bikeways could be significant contributors to realising these fine intentions.The 30-Year Plan for Greater Adelaide 2016 states 'improve, prioritize and extend walking and cycling infrastructure by providing safe and universally accessible and convenient connections to activity centres, open spaces and public transport.' To do this in the City, the state government through DPTI allocates $6m for bikeways.The Adelaide City Council Annual Report 2015-2016, (page 20) desires A city of well-connected places that is easy to get around and where streets are for people with pedestrians and cyclists taking priority and there is quality public transport. I’m an enthusiastic supporter also of the Carbon Neutral Adelaide Action Plan 2016-20121 which is a joint State Government and City Council plan. There are expected benefits of implementation of the Plan. One is ‘Improving conditions for pedestrians and cyclists and enhancing public transport services will grow total visitors to the city’ while a measure of success for the Plan is ‘Double the number of cycling trips in the city by 2020’ (p28).Is there serious intent behind these statements, or are they simply ‘feel good’ ideas?Of the options shown in Park 23 my preference is for Option 3, providing the width is generally 2.7 metres plus. But it is probably the most expensive option – I’ve heard estimates of maybe $3 to $4 million a kilometre for city bikeways. The City Council has $6 m on the table but to date the Lord Mayor says, the existing bikeway has to be torn up to accommodate more lanes of traffic and a reduced bikeway width. That’s $2m gone out of the $6m. Then the Lord Mayor has committed another $1 million to further development of a bike share scheme. That leaves $3 million, or about one kilometre of street design improvements with bikeway. With the state governments $6 million we may get up to two more kilometres. This is less than half the required length of the proposed north south and east west bikeways.We may get three kilometres of attractive street design improvements with a possible separated bike lane of inadequate width. In my view this doesn’t sit well with ‘pedestrians and cyclists taking priority’ or ‘doubling cycling in the city by 2020’.Ambitious state government and Adelaide City Council statements of intent are not supported with adequate funding for cycling – or for pedestrians and street greening makeovers. I like the sound of John Handley’s suggestion 'It is better to build a full bicycle network at once, rather than a little bit at a time'. It can be done – here’s how.Compare what the SA government allocates to car-ways compared to bikeways? (they have the bigger money bags). Recently or currently $896m was allocated to the Torrens to Torrens project (4.4 kms) Northern Expressway $985m (15kms), Southern Expressway upgrade $400m (21 kms), Darlington Interchange $620m (3.3kms), South Road Superway $812 (4.8 kms) TOTAL $3.7 billion on 48.5 kms at an average of $77 m per kilometre. The 30-Year Plan also aims to 'reduce reliance on cars'! As Reb indicates in this forum, if you provide easy car use, you get more cars!I know that walking and cycling will be integrated into these huge motor vehicle projects, but big recurrent budgets in DPTI and the City Council are necessary over the next few years if the aspirations of the 30-Year Plan (2016) or Carbon Neutral Adelaide are to be meaningful on the ground. Let's reallocate $15 million pa from big road projects for 5 years to City cycling and show we are serious about street for people, a carbon neutral Adelaide and reducing car dependence. That allocation is just about equal to the cost of one kilometre of new road spend (then there’s the massive maintenance budget too). Re-allocate one kilometre's worth of new road budget and we would be the best cycling city in Australia by a long shot. Just one km - that's all it takes. The City Council also needs to build a recurrent budget for cycling, rather than accepting one off lump sums. Think of the political kudos for the politicians who are prepared to take this on!In short – nice designs, at Park 23 (especially option 3) but they have inadequate width for the only ‘cycling main roads’ currently out for consultation in Adelaide. A feature of this consultation process is that the State and the City have discovered the cost of cycling infrastructure, and found out about necessary widths to accommodate the cycling numbers, but they are still to recognise all the benefits (reduced CO2, reduced traffic congestion, less noise and air pollutions, better health outcomes, lower road maintenance costs etc.). What we know is that separated city cycle lanes costs a whole lot less than new roads, and the benefits on investment in bikeways are higher.
hnimmo 8 months ago
If the Adelaide City Council rescinded the July 2016 motion to return that section of Frome Street to four lanes of traffic during peak hours then they wouldn't need to spend 2 million dollars to rip up safe separated bikelanes that are working well for cyclists and motorists. I call on the Lord Mayor and Councillors to justify this retrograde step. And where is the State Government and the Minister for Transport on this issue? Carbon Neutral City? I don't think so.
greg_martin 8 months ago
My recommendation is to leave the Frome Street Bikeway the way it is, and get one with extending it to the River. And planning for an East/West Bikeway. You have a success on your hands with the increased number of cyclists using Frome Street. Why not celebrate that success rather than thinking up ways of introducing more cars into the city. And wasting ratepayers money.
MarjonMartin 8 months ago
Why waste our money allocated to increase safety for cycling by using the money to increase width of car lane so that drivers have an additional 630 metres of 2 lanes each way in Frome St ending in a T junction?It's not good economics; its not encouraging more people to ride into and out of and across the city, so helping to reduce the city's carbon footprint (the purpose of the money allocation); it's not rectifying a problem for car drivers as there is no congestion problem and it has not been shown to be necessary by various assessments of the configuration of the street. Marjon Martin
Wendy Bell 8 months ago
As a ratepayer, cyclist and car driver I fully support keeping the Frome Street bike way as it is and am opposed to Council spending nearly $2m removing it after spending so much to create it initially. The removal to introduce 4 lanes of traffic when Councils own reports do not support this cannot be justified. Wendy Bell
the reading room 9 months ago
I second the comments by John and Reb below - as a commuter from the Anzac Highway direction, where the tramline bike path delivers me to the parklands really well, I would be ill-served by the Eastern North/South route and would definitely need one on the Western side of the city.The other main issue is bike theft - so provision of good bike storage is essential, both privately and publicly. A Lock-up within the market precinct would be a great location for this.Bike repair stations are a great idea too, but these need to be regularly maintained.
Hide reply (1)
Hilary Hamnett 8 months ago
There is a lock up at the market but it is so badly located and signed that I don't think anyone knows it's there - at the top of the escalator coming in through the east arcade from Victoria Square!!There's also one in the carpark at Topham Mall. Ever seen a sign to it? I haven't, unless you drive in to the carpark!
Hilary Hamnett 8 months ago
Why is council still insisting on ripping out the existing section of bikeway to allow two-way peak hour traffic on a non-arterial road when all evidence shows that, since construction, this traffic has reduced in volume, dispersing across alternative routes with no perceptible increase on these routes? Peak hour traffic also includes cyclists, who clearly need more space at these times too, especially when a new high school is going to be built directly on the route of the bikeway. The existing bikeway width is already at the minimum for current cycling use at peak hour. Allowances should be made for future increase in cycling volume. Also, juggling lane function from parking to motorised traffic movement is not only confusing but will require monitoring. Has this been factored in? Is this seriously proposed for future sections of bikeway?I object to my rates being wasted on pulling up something that is working. The current bikeway may not be perfect but it can provide lessons for later stages. As a rate payer I am also appalled at the possibility of a significant portion of the $6m which has been allocated for improvements to cycling and construction of the bikeway to actually be spent on making cycling less safe and more stressful for cyclists by reducing the existing bikeway width to below standard, and spending it on demonstrably unnecessary ‘improvements’ for vehicle traffic.
John Handley 8 months ago
You know this really isn't just about bikes or bike lanes. For some reason bike stuff becomes the touchstone and flashpoint of urban street renewal and redesign.We know that the car has been extraordinarily over-represented in the transport mix, and no more than in Adelaide over the last 20 years. Public transport, cycling and walking have all been subsumed in the path of the motor vehicle. That will have to change, and change is always controversial, always political. Reprioritising streets and public space involves every single person, and each with their own interest in the game.I know the City of Adelaide transport team has a copy of Janett Sadik-Khan's "Streetfight" It is well worth a read, especailly the preface where she outlines clearly the overview and philosophy of rebuilding the streets into something much more effective while keeping all users (as much as possible) onside. Her success is legendary, and there's lots to be learned from her approach.
dsfgsf 8 months ago
The main problem I have with the existing infrastructure is that it is not continuous. The Frome st bike lanes need to be extended all the way through to create a proper corridor.Also throughout the city I would support more of the green boxes at lights, hook turns for bikes, and other infrastructure but it needs to be implemented in more places so that there aren't gaps
chapmangiles 9 months ago
My prefered east west route is along the Torrens as I can avoid car traffic and pollution. The existing transport priority appears to be for a geriatric population who use large polluting wheel chairs, each weighing hundreds of kilograms.If transport choices were made for speed of movement, health and environmental impact would there be such a bias in favour of cars?Why do I have to leave my bike at street level when I use the central city library, yet if I drive a car I can park on the same level as the library?
bobandbunny 9 months ago
1. Please do not touch the existing Frome bikeway. It is both attractive and functional. I like using it and I feel safe whilst doing so and I think it encourages others do to the same.2. Please extend the existing Frome Street bikeway to the North. Please make this a protected bikelane, as it will encourage non-confident bike riders to use this. 3. The extension should allow for overtaking. You need to make it safe to overtake - i.e. low pavement heights and wide enough to allow.3. Anecdotally, conversation with lady at work about riding was 'oh you're brave'. This isn't how it should be.
Reb 9 months ago
I am relieved that a city-wide bike infra project is being investigated by council, however, it cannot exist in isolation. Broader ACC support for cycling is necessary. As an elected rep for a body of people I would think that providing safe and efficient means of movement would be basic. If an elected rep could provide this, which definitely includes cycle infra, it would reduce the burden felt by residents who feel they "need" to own a car. It is quite plain that cars are a burden on not only our cities (so much of our public space is used for the storage of private vehicles) but also on us as people. Liberating residents from their cars frees up so much weekly money which usually churns straight into the local economy. In the same vein, while it is often rallied against by traders, reducing parking on-street on roads adjacent to shops does us all a service. If bike lanes were adjacent shops and cars were parked in rear parks or the like, we could all actually see the storefronts. We could reduce the garish signage we see on many roads and encourage foot traffic along wider footpaths which increases the likelihood of additional purchases. In addition to this- with bike lanes and great bike parking near shops, it is more likely that spontaneous shopping would take place as it is possible to view goods in windows while riding and find a quick place to park. This is uncommon to be able to do this.while driving a car.We all know it; provide for ease of car use and get more cars, not more satisfaction or efficiency or happy residents who don't understand the bigger things at play. Development applications should address end of trip bike facilities in the buildings as well as bike storage and parking.It is time to properly commit to cycling as a realistic and common means of transport.
Heather01 9 months ago
+1 'Have courage. Go big.'
John Handley 9 months ago
It is excellent, and well overdue, that City of Adelaide is addressing cycling issues. Given its perfect climate and topography, and legacy of well-planned wide streets, squares and parklands, Adelaide ought to be Australia’s premier cycling city. Your aim ought to be having at least 30% of commuting trips into the CBD by bicycle by 2020. However I fear your effort may be a little half-hearted, albeit with the best of intentions. To really make an impact on cycling numbers in the city a more wholistic approach is indicated, because that brings a rapid uptake in numbers and therefore safety, as well as the political capital of having invested and seeing a return quickly. To restrict yourselves to just a small project limits the potential usage, and therefore reduces future successes. More on that later.Re the East/West route:Clearly Grote/Wakefield must be the preferred option, as it links two major routes either side of the CBD and therefore also facilitates through-town traffic for cyclists with the least fuss.Ultimately however, just one cycling route East/West will not be enough, and planning should be happening now for cycling options along Currie/Grenfell – and yes that would have to take into account the importance of those streets for the bus traffic. It might be necessary to make those routes available only to pedestrians, bus travelers and cyclists, with allowance for taxis and deliveries.Sturt/Halifax provides the other East/West options for a preferred cycling route into or through the CBD.This way you provide a major route through the centre of the CBD rectangle, and two alternative routes for those travelling through to the North or South sides of the City.Re the North/South route:As mapped this provides a very good North/South route on the Eastern side of the CBD. However a similar North/South route will also be required on the Western side of the CBD, and planning for that should also be taking place now. The obvious candidate for this route is Morphett St.Diagonal traffic:Your plans appear to have ignored diagonal movement altogether, however there ought to be consideration for cyclists travelling diagonally across the CBD, whether from Glen Osmond, Anzac, Port, or Payneham roads. Perhaps the small squares such as Light or Whitmore could be utilised, or traffic light turn options for cyclists to assist in diagonal movements along a preferred route could work well. At the least, priority lights and signage to direct bike traffic into the "perpendicular" grid would be a minimum.It is better to build a full bicycle network at once, rather than a little bit at a time. This has been shown to be extremely effective in the Seville model, where they increased cycling from 0.5% to 9% in a period of just a few years. As soon as it was built, it was successful. Likewise with bikeshare schemes. If you start with a small, limited, scheme it is doomed to fail. If you start with the full scheme in place it enjoys massive success, as in Paris and New York. Australian bikeshare schemes are also hamstrung by mandatory helmet laws.I would encourage the City of Adelaide to take encouragement from the previous Lord Mayor of London, who in his reflections on his time in that position, regrets not doing a lot more, a lot quicker to increase cycling in his city:“They’ve [Transport for London] done an amazing job, considering how difficult it is in London to take road space and give it to cycling,” he says. “It’s very, very politically difficult. But it’s the right thing to do.”“Looking back on it, yes. If I had my time again, and if I knew then what I know now, I would have gone straight in with a massive programme of segregated cycle superhighways. I probably wouldn’t have been re-elected, unfortunately. That’s one thing to consider. But that would have been the right thing to do.” Boris Johnson March 2016. There is always a political backlash (or “bikelash”) as described eloquently by Commisioner for Transport Janette Sadik-Khan in her book: People get over it. And once everything is up and running, they like it. Have courage, go big.
michael pilkington 9 months ago
i like the Wakefield St/Grote St alignment the best for the proposed bikeway, as it goes through the market precinct and is the most direct connecting Kensington Road and Sir Donald Bradman Dve/airport.