The word ‘ignorance’ has many shades of meaning in the English language, and today it seems that ‘ignorance’ is a good key word to describe the planned severing of the cycle path:
- The ‘ignorance’ of the RMS, in the sense of deliberately not paying attention to or ignoring the multiple submissions and complaints to them earlier in the year.
- The ‘ignorance’ of the RMS, in the sense of foolishness or stupidity, for the ridiculous and dopey cycle path alternatives they put forward in the current EIS.
- The ‘ignorance’ of the public, in the sense of not being aware of what the RMS is planning to do.
I have just come back from the path where I’ve been chalking up pointers to this website and talking to people as they passed. It was a pretty quiet mid afternoon on a hot summer weekday, but the dominant response I got from the few people I talked to is that they either had no idea that the bypass was coming, or that they assumed the cycle/foot path would be retained as an underpass, and they were shocked to see the multiple traffic light crossings being proposed.
In this fight, ignorance is not bliss. We need to get the word out and get our voices heard.
Well done Lachlan. The chalkings have spread to my Facebook feed and brought me here. I was in your latter category – knew the bypass was coming, lamented the inevitable loss of the “unofficial” mountain bike paths I grew up riding, but thought for sure the “official” path would be maintained as an underpass.
This is a dramatic severing! Cutting off the park from non-motorists West of the great divide? With the eventual success of the Glendale Wallsend cycleway, and the commendable work to promote the cycle links East of the university, where is the sense in building a 4 lane, 3 traffic light wall right in the middle of it all? It’s like the left hand doesn’t know what the right is doing.