(Continued from previous message)



 AW>> to really call freeways, then there aren't any.



 RS> I just meant the stuff immediately to the north of the bridge proper.

 RS> They are a freeway in the strict sense, mainly because of the absence of

 RS> cross streets.



They're a totally innapropriate example for you to use. Being feeders

to the bridge, they're only suitable for vehicles that use the bridge

lanes. The bike lane is on the western side of Milsons Point rail

station, and it's almost impossible to get onto these little 2

kilometre long roads from there anyway.



 AW>> There's no point in riding on these feeders (an illegal and stupid

 AW>> proposition), when there are perfectly viable back roots through

 AW>> Milsons Point.



 RS> Yeah I just meant its best to piss the bikes off completely. It would be

 RS> very undesirable IMO to have bike access in any way on them.



Even if they encouraged bikes to use them no one would, simply

because they're inappropriate roads. There's no point, when the lesser

roads are more appropriate in every way possible.



 AW>> If a number of small areas are attacked over a period of time, then

 AW>> the overall picture for cycle commuters becomes brighter.



 RS> The point tho is that even if the whole bloody lot were done overnight

 RS> the nett improvement would be pretty useless for the total traffic flow

 RS> of sydney.



Of course. But cyclists aren't all going to suddenly start riding bikes

overnight. There would be a considerable ramp-up period.



 AW>> Total traffic flow in Sydney perhaps won't change vastly either way



 RS> And thats why its a waste of time.



Like allowing dogs in the city.



 AW>> but people with a belief in cycle commuting should be afforded some

 AW>> respect and tolerance.



 RS> Bugger them IMO. Mainly because they fuck up the traffic system too much

 RS> already. I'm essentially saying that nothing will produced a good

 RS> complete integration of them so its essentially a waste of time and

 RS> money farting around at the edges to keep the trendoids happy.



Bugger the dogs. They fuck up the parks too much already. It's a waste

of time and money farting around with rangers and signs, just to keep

some dumb dog owners happy.



 RS>> Yeah, no problem with those when they are cheap. But IMO it will have

 RS>> no great impact on sydneys traffic even if you do them all.



 AW>> It might save a few hot headed moments and make life brighter for the

 AW>> cycle commuters though. It's a good example of sensible and sensitive

 AW>> road modifications.



 RS> I dont believe in being sensitive anyway, fuck them |-)



Me either. Fuck all the dog owners in NS ;-)



 AW>> They have a duty to lobby on behalf of their members, who happen to

 AW>> be car drivers.



 RS> I'm just saying the figures added up. Sure they have a duty to publicise

 RS> them, but they didnt fake them. The figures are pretty clearcut.



They obviously didn't cast the overall cost net as far.



 AW>> The German study wasn't done at the behest of any vested interest

 AW>> groups.



 RS> I didnt mean that, just that maybe their situation is rather different

 RS> there and that its not that applicable to our situation. What matters is

 RS> our situation, not theirs.







(continued next message)



--- FMail 0.94