Commenting on the story: Sweeping speed limit changes proposed for Unley council area

May I suggest to build proper (raised/segregated) bike ‘tracks’ on the inside of parked cars on said suggested streets.

Not only will they reduce speed but not travel time (odd I know) but they will also reduce the number of cars as more people will ride making it safer and faster for everyone else (including cars)  to get around (this requires more thinking again). Google ‘building bike lanes reduces the speed’ and learn for yourself (assuming the bike lanes are done properly and not just a bit a paint).

If Unley council was ambitious, it would not only do the streets marked in red but also Goodwood, KW, Unley, Duthy and Fullarton Road allowing anyone living in the council as well as within reason south of Cross Road to ride to work/school/shops and to the CBD, easily avoiding driving bumper to bumper every day.

Copenhagen, Paris, Berlin, Amsterdam, Seville, Buenos Aires etc. can do it. So can Adelaide and the change has to start somewhere.

Oh and bike lanes have a positive long term net effect to society and the economy (google that one too if you will). Imagine if all council surrounding the CBD did that! Metropolitan Adelaide is flat, has good weather most of the year and should be perfect for a bit of exercise riding in your everyday clothing like overseas. No excuses really except lack of vision and money.

And then those that really do require a car to get around and for work can keep driving 50 kph because the safety has been increased as what was needed. Win win. Doing the proposed will just impose more rat running in other streets, more demerit points and more frustration. – Kenneth Abraham

I read the article with some interest as one who is generally opposed to speed reductions, except where there is clearly a dangerous situation.

Let’s do some sums. Assuming that their figures allow for peak days and periods as well as lesser periods:

– there are 3 roads with between 3,000 to 7,000 cars a day. Average that to a conservative 5,000 a day, meaning 35,000 a week, which equals 1,820,000 movements a year.

– there are 7 roads with between 7,000 to 13,000 cars a day. Average that to a conservative 10,000, meaning 70,000 a week, which equals 3,640,000 movements a year.

– a sum total of 5,460,000 x 5 years that this report is taken from equals 27,300,000 movements.

– there have been 164 crashes in that 5 year period, which is one crash in 166,463 movements or .061%.

One would think that is an exceptional road safety figure and hardly justification for frustrating people movement by imposing arbitrary lower limits on major routes into and out of the city in particular.

It could be argued that permanent speed cameras and enforcement of current speed limits would be far more effective, but then perhaps I’m not a bicycle rider with a different agenda. – Eric Granger

Commenting on InSider: The fine art of creating a buzz | SACA fashion reveal

It’s not hard to see why the InSider team is divided over the South Australian Cricket Association’s release of its new playing uniforms for the state’s representative teams. I agree with the InSider team members that “At least we aren’t left wondering who the biggest sponsors are!”

As a SACA member, I deplore the so-called design of the new playing kits, the predominant feature being the ubiquitous WEST END logo emblazoned on the uniforms that literally drowns out the other alleged features and messages claimed by SACA.

Undoubtedly this is a marketing coup for the Japanese owners of the brewery, but couldn’t SACA do better than to perpetuate alcohol consumption on the new uniform designs on behalf of its long-time and inappropriate “principal partner”?

SACA’s more recent joint principal partner is the Government of South Australia via its “THINK! ROAD SAFETY” campaign message, which has its logo alongside the WEST END logo on some of the uniforms, although far less obtrusively.

This unholy alliance rates as one of the more hypocritical marketing/advertising and sporting juxtapositions ever dreamt up. What are they thinking in the boardroom of SACA and, for that matter, in the office of the state government minister responsible for road safety? – Philip Groves