“Artists, philosophers, urban planners and architects have been dreaming, writing about and drawing ‘ideal cities’ for hundreds of years…In most of these visions the pedestrian is the measure of ideal urban spaces.” From European Cooperation in Science and Technology (Methorst 2010, p.34)
Tracy D. Writes.. “Council have not provided the proper facilities for walking and cycling on Doncaster Hill which is a fundamental requirement for an Activity Centre. The proposed walking path, shown in pink in plan two, was previously a widened footpath, shown in blue in plan one. It was to be shared with cyclists but has been “quietly” scrapped because it had failed to meet safety standards. Why it is now designated as a useless walking route on existing footpaths, is puzzling. I suppose it might be useful for those not familiar with the area who might want to walk around the Doncaster Hill perimeter or a more cynical explanation might be that it was hoped no one would
notice the change and give the false impression that the shared path had been retained, especially for those who might not refer to the legend, thereby minimise the embarrassment of having spent so much of ratepayers resources on engaging engineers, and consultants and the glossy publications on its promotion. Apart from the original shared path through the sports ground towards Ruffey Lake and a shared path from the Civic Centre to Westfield Shopping Centre there is very limited opportunity for cycling unless riders want to share bus lanes”
There was strong opposition to the shared paths plan because of pedestrian safety, when it was released back in 2003. The street gradients throughout the Doncaster Hill area were well in excess of the 3% maximum slope recommended by the State Authority who were never consulted. It took more than 7 years of petitions and letters before it was finally cancelled.
Below are detailed drawings showing the shared Pedestrian & Cycling route and the streets to be narrowed to make way for wider footpaths. For example Short Street in Precinct 2 would have been reduced to 5.86 metres!
According to material I have read, road environments in Activity Centres must not only accommodate all modes of traffic but also provide a pleasant, comfortable and safe environment for pedestrians and cyclists. Unfortunately this is not happening on Tram Road, where, apart from the pedestrian lights at the Doncaster Road intersection, there are no opportunities for pedestrians to safely cross except for the subway at the eastern freeway more than a kilometre away from Doncaster Road. While there are plenty of bus stops on either side of the road, it is extremely dangerous to cross and access them because of the high volumes of traffic which is also causing cyclists to ride on the footpath because there are no bicycle lanes. It is interesting to note that Tram Road is supposed to be part of the proposed metropolitan cycling route. Vic Roads bicycle network in Manningham.
According to Victoriawalks….Walking should be favoured as the realistic and preferred form of transport for short trips. Currently, in many road situations the pedestrian who is using less of the road, less of the planet’s resources, less imported oil that depletes our balance of trade, that emits less noise and pollution, is not rewarded. Preference goes to single occupants in cars, whose unsustainable choices are favoured when pedestrians and cars meet. The constant provision of more car parking spaces is a classic example of how poor strategy simply favours one choice over another. We need facilities and urban design that support and promote the pedestrian over other transport modes, in those locations where walking is the most cost effective and efficient form of moving people.
An Australian child is therefore almost twice as likely to be killed as a car passenger than as a pedestrian, and more than four times as likely to be killed as a car passenger than as a cyclist