Another (but different) bike lane question

So, the bike rider is at fault. Who gives a toss.

What does it matter if he has a licence or rides around with a number plate stuck to his forehead. He made a mistake. If a driver did the same and you rang the police with his number plate do you think they’d chase it up?

As for the rego. Here we go again…

Your car rego does NOT cover the cost of the road. Other taxes contribute far more. Including GST payed on bicycles.

The government is also trying to encourage people to take up cycling. Do you think hitting them with red-tape is the answer? When petrol is $5 a litre and parking $2 per hour in 15 years you might have a different view.

We’d all love off road cycle lanes that run parallel to the road but like cop cars on every street, it’s just going to cost money that this Govt does not have.

So if you feel you really need that extra 30 cm lane width on Northbourne I’d suggest you go and learn to drive in a real city where you’re driving along at 80kph with a truck probably less than a metre away from your passenger side mirror.

PsydFX said :

If it had been a car rather than a bike causing the issue I wonder if the camry would have still swerved as excessively?

If a vehicle is coming into my lane, I’ll swerve to get out of its way. Whether that vehicle is a car, a bike, or a semitrailer.

Postalgeek said :

Wow, according to some, it’s perfectly acceptable for white Camrys to fail to anticipate road situations and swerve across lanes to avoid an slow moving object, but not MTB riders, even though the weight difference is about a ton.

So, you believe the 1ton car travelling at 60km/hr should slow faster than the 100kg bike travelling at 20km/hr? ‘Wow’, you must have failed physics or something. A heavier object isnt as easy to control, or stop, hence the reason why in the air or on the water, the larger vehicle *always* has right of way, as the smaller vehicle is more maneuverable.

Clown Killer said :

I was wondering how long it would take before the old ‘if I pay registration and have to have a number plate on my car …” whinge would hit the thread. Here’s an idea – maybe we don’t have it because its a waste of time and money and there’s few votes in pandering to fools.

Having just paid $600 for 12 months registration for the 3rd car in this household, yes I agree with you. We should just scrap all licensing and registration and just make it part of land rates… or we can make our current system more uniform and enforce user-pays across the board. I am curious though Clown Killer, have you ever had an accident and swapped details with the other person involved? Have you ever reported a bad vehicle/driver to the police, by using its numberplate? Im sure both people in that situation would rather prefer you didnt have their details, in the same way as a cyclist would prefer it.

Im not saying everyone who jumps on a bike should be licensed (unlike the laws that say everyone who drives, anywhere, must be licensed), I’m simply saying if you choose to use the cycle lane on the roadway, you should understand and comply with the road rules and be held accountable for breaching them, plus contribute to their cost. If you dont wish to pay for the usage of the roadway facilities, theres generally a sealed path running a very short distance from the bike lane, stay with that.

One fact people seem to be overlooking here, the bike crossed a solid white line, into another lane of flowing traffic. If a car crosses the solid white line, the car is at fault, if a bike does it (according to Clown Killer) the car is still at fault.

Two bikes in the bike lane? Maybe if they are riding little road bikes… The bars on my mountain bike are almost the same width as the cycle lane (definitely the same width as the ultra-narrow section on Belco Way). I’ll head check, and then slowly move right (into the vehicle lane) to overtake a slower travelling bike.

Yossarian said :

As a garden variety mountain bike rider, that wears normal (un-sponsored) clothes, I have found Lycra clad bicyclists to be aggressive and arrogant on the road. Nevertheless, this is beside the point.

Hey cars? Here’s a radical idea. You ready for it?

When you see a bike on the road, be cautious. If you see two bikes, hey, why not go out on a limb and be a little bit more cautious?

P.S. Lycra clad bicyclists: if you see me riding without a helmet, mind your business, keep your lecturing to yourself, and keep riding.

Yossarian – wear a helmet! I don’t want to subsidise Medicare to pay for your cracked skull, just so you can look kewl and not ruin yo mad ‘fo.

BTW – you are not a mountain biker unless you are carving up the dirt – riding a k-mart special, mountain bike styled (which wouldn’t last 5 mins offroad) bike around the city streets won’t qualify you. Get to Stromlo with a helmet.

I agree with everyone here that commonsense should have prevailed from the cyclist on Northbourne, but failing that some commonsense, observation, and anticipation from the car drivers, would also be nice.

If it had been a car rather than a bike causing the issue I wonder if the camry would have still swerved as excessively?
I think I would also take excessive actions in order to prevent a collision with someone with so little protection.

Wow, according to some, it’s perfectly acceptable for white Camrys to fail to anticipate road situations and swerve across lanes to avoid an slow moving object, but not MTB riders, even though the weight difference is about a ton.

Canberra drivers get more scary every day.

Licensing cyclists….

*yawn* I’m off to bed.

Just to clarify here – there’s a theme in all of these threads that essentially relies upon shifting blame from the people in complete control of the vehicle their driving to someone or something else which is fallacious and just doesn’t wash. The old the … ‘roo just ran out … there was a cyclist … black ice on the road … unexpected off-camber bend … blah, blah, blah is rubbish – Who’s in control of the car?

Seeing as you want to look at this from a liability point of view lets go.

1 cyclist over takes old lady riding in bike lane into first lane of traffic causing car 1 into 2nd lane hitting car 2 both cars go into lane 3 collecting car 3. who’s at fault? and who should pay for damages? old lady for going to slow, cyclist for over taking into lane 1, or car 1,2 or 3?

Neither Old lady or Cyclist. Camry fails to drive in a manner appropriate for conditions (that include cyclists of varying abilities) and three lanes of busy traffic instead ploughing along at or above the posted speed limit. The actions of the cyclists result in the Camry driver taking evasive reaction, unfortunately they have no idea of the dimensions of their car so they over react and causes accident – Camry driver to blame.

#2 cyclist over takes old lady riding in bike lane into first lane of traffic and car 1 hits cyclist then car 2 runs up his arse. who’s at fault the cyclist or car 1 or car 2?

Camry fails to drive in a manner appropriate for conditions (that include cyclists of varying abilities) and three lanes of busy traffic instead ploughing along at or above the posted speed limit. The actions of the cyclists result in the Camry driver failing to take evasive action. Camry Driver to blame.

#3 both 1and 2 happen together??

Yaddah, yaddah, yaddah … Camry Driver to blame

ok clown killer lets just say that there was an accident who is at fault the car driver or the cyclist??? and who should be held liabale???

#1 cyclist over takes old lady riding in bike lane into first lane of traffic causing car 1 into 2nd lane hitting car 2 both cars go into lane 3 collecting car 3. who’s at fault? and who should pay for damages? old lady for going to slow, cyclist for over taking into lane 1, or car 1,2 or 3?

#2 cyclist over takes old lady riding in bike lane into first lane of traffic and car 1 hits cyclist then car 2 runs up his arse. who’s at fault the cyclist or car 1 or car 2?

#3 both 1and 2 happen together??

I hate it when fast canoeists cut me off in my tinny whilst overtaking slow canoeist ..Damn things should be registered, he only gave me 2 minutes for evasive action.

I was wondering how long it would take before the old ‘if I pay registration and have to have a number plate on my car …” whinge would hit the thread. Here’s an idea – maybe we don’t have it because its a waste of time and money and there’s few votes in pandering to fools.

gooterz said :

.

I’d also think that if a bike rider were to use the roads they should register and display some kind of ID like cars have. If a bike rider caused such an accident they would be liabale and identifiable.

totally agree if i have to pay rego for my little buzz box to run the kids to and from school and do the shopping two suburbs away and rarely use “major roads” why shouldn’t cyclist who use these bike lanes.

I think I’d rather risk hitting another car traveling next to me at the same speed, than risk hitting the back of a cyclist at 60kmph.

Any competent road user would have seen the situation coming weeks beforehand and used their right foot to brake early, having observed the scene from afar, and therefore negate swerving erratically into other traffic.

Its a pretty simple everyday situation, not defending the cyclist, but severely over reacting to a situation can cause more danger than the initial situation itself.

Smooth and calm application of the break would have been my choice as a motorist.
Waiting behind slower cyclist and observing traffic over my shoulder would have been my option as a cyclist as well…This debate is eternal… Ill leave it to others…

I have just arrived in Canberra from Melbourne and what i can say is that in general cars users here drive very fast and take little notice of other road users.
As we live in a city populated by civil servants who all have an understanding of OH+S i find it amusing that every time i ride (keeping left) up Northborne avenue i nearly get killed by some dope turning left without looking over his shoulder.
The solution is very simple Look Look Look and pay attention you are in several hundred kilos of metal you have a responsibility to other less well protected road users to be aware and observant.
If someone passes another bike how hard is it to apply the brakes.
If you are LOOKING and anticipating hazards as we are all taught to do when learning to drive.
You would see the approaching situation and would have slowed to avoid it.
Forward thinking ? defensive driving ? sounds logical i know.
I think the whole argument can be reduced to 2 points think about others and a show a little courtesy. If we all did this then there would be no problem.

Cletus 2 said :

Yet another rabid cyclist living in their own world…

Ha ha. Not really. Not a rabid one yet anyway 😉

I’m not confident enough to trust any driver with my life so I ride on the bike paths.

But seriously this is just another incident on our roads. One that I’m sure happens many many times a day. Does it really need a discussion like this?

I love these threads –
So a guy on a bike makes a poor decision, it’s compounded by some poor driving but in the end it all amounted to nothing, and here we are 60-odd posts later and there’s still people lining up to confess to everyone just how incompetent they are at driving a car.

Deckard said :

What is the point of this thread anyway??

I saw a car on the parkway the other day change lanes without looking and the car in the right hand lane had to brake to avoid a collision.

OMG!! The sky is falling!!

I think they should ban all cars from the parkway before it happens again.

Yet another rabid cyclist living in their own world…

What is the point of this thread anyway??

I saw a car on the parkway the other day change lanes without looking and the car in the right hand lane had to brake to avoid a collision.

OMG!! The sky is falling!!

I think they should ban all cars from the parkway before it happens again.

Deckard said :

dvaey said :

Also, it may be my imagination, but the problem Ive seemed to have found, is bicyclists seem impatient..

Hahaha

Of course no driver is ever impatient.

Drivers are impatient. The thing is, in rush-hour traffic, the car driver wont ride up the shoulder or in between lanes of traffic to get ahead. The car driver will stop at a red light, even if there is no oncoming traffic, as to not do so is an offence, punishable by losing their right to use the road. If a cyclist runs a red light or cuts another driver off, there is no fear at all of losing their right to use the road, other than the risk of personal injury.

Using the road should be a responsibility, not a right.

dvaey said :

Also, it may be my imagination, but the problem Ive seemed to have found, is bicyclists seem impatient..

Hahaha

Of course no driver is ever impatient.

TheScientist said :

While I agree about keeping left (I’m seriously considering having a “keep left” sign printed onto a T-shirt.) I’m not convinced there’s enough space in the Northbourne bike lane for two cyclists abreast.
there’s not.

Is there not an off-road path fairly close to this said onroad bikepath? Having just checked google streetview, there is a path Id say, less than 5 meters away from the on-road bikepath.

54-11 said :

Ban all bikes from major streets, and paint over these ridiculous bike lanes, so they revert to car lanes. Easy.

and that sort of comment just makes you sound like an incompetent driver, who should hand in their licence for the sake of ALL other road users.

Cutting in front of traffic moving at 80km/hr while youre on a bicycle is not only ‘incompetent’, but also dangerous and bloody stupid anyway. What about riders who behave this way, hand THEIR licence in.. oh, thats right, they dont need a licence, nor any mandatory training in road rules. Maybe this old lady lost her license due to old age, maybe the young lycra-clad hero lost his to road-rage and cutting off other drivers. We dont know, but we do know that if these two people were in a motor vehicle theres at least the chance they could be stopped if/when they do it again. For that matter, if the bike had some sort of identification you could advise the police or the owner, and let them know how stupid their actions were. Im sure if a car cut off a bike, some/most cyclists would note the rego number and report the driver to the police. If drivers see cyclists behave the same way, we just have to deal with it.

Also, it may be my imagination, but the problem Ive seemed to have found, is bicyclists seem impatient.. they dont like to slow down behind slower vehicles, they dont like to stop at traffic lights or dismount before riding across a zebra pedestrian crossing, etc. While this is stereotypical, its the stereotypical attitude that gives the rest a bad name. If I see a cyclist stop at a light or dismount before crossing, it makes me stop and look again, as it seems unusual.

Danman said :

I agree that the cyclist may have been safer to wait, but the camry driver sounds like they did not know the dimensions of their car and therefore swerved unnecessarily into another lane in order to avoid a non existent risk of collusion. It is funny how far cars go out of their lane when giving more than ample room for passing a cyclist.

Hmmm, I don’t know about that. That’s what I’d do on most roads, but the lanes on Northbourne are pretty narrow. I think I’d rather risk hitting another car traveling next to me at the same speed, than risk hitting the back of a cyclist at 60kmph. I can guarantee you the car driver would suffer fewer injuries than the cyclist.

Done. To. Death.

Stay tuned for next weeks enthralling edition of “I am teh l33t road usexxor mor3 than youse”

The best solution would be to install more speed cameras.

No, it’s totally having like, a thousand marked police cars watching everybody drive, everywhere, all the time.

It would seem that smartassery breeds more smartassery.

Aeek said :

What I hate about red light cameras is that all traffic lights used to be the same. Now a few are enforced and the rest are ‘optional’.

So the law is different at different traffic lights.

“How many cycling deaths on Northbourne? So what is the problem?”

With that attitude I know who is a candidate for being the most recent one, and there have been cyclist and pedestrian deaths on Northbourne. Can you tell me when the last fatal car accident on Northbourne was though? Not near Northbourne but on Northbourne

Here’s a tip for you, even though you sound like the most experienced cyclist in the world. I spent a god 5 or 6 years putting around 20,000km a year on a bike in Canberra. It doesn’t matter how much taller you are, or how much you scan. You will always lose in a battle with a car.

That is the overarching thought I have as I ride around the town today. I dress visibly, use the flashing light thing, ride sensibly and always assume that the motorist hasn’t seen me. That has resulted in only 1 trip to hospital for surgery, as the guy who ran me off the road (actually didn’t see me and didn’t stop) would have done the same to the Titanic running on the side of the road.

And my pet peeve. If there is a bike path running next to and parallel to a road FFS use it. If its good enough for Mick Rogers, TdF rider and former world champ, to do when he’s at home its good enough for everyone else.

Arrogance gets you killed

How many cycling deaths on Northbourne? So what is the problem?

What I hate about red light cameras is that all traffic lights used to be the same. Now a few are enforced and the rest are ‘optional’.

Let’s be honest about the situation on Northbourne Ave which is clearly dangerous.

It’s dumb that we force a bicycle, weighing 15kg, to compete for virtually the same space as a car, weighing 1,500kg.

The solution is in better engineering – put the bikes on a dedicated cycle track, and put the cars on a dedicated motorway.

It’s not that hard, and might even keep a few people alive.

The best solution would be to install more speed cameras.

No, it’s totally having like, a thousand marked police cars watching everybody drive, everywhere, all the time.

and go back to cyclists claiming the whole of the left lane on Northbourne in peak hour.
Alternatively, learn to drive.

I blame Ferris

Aeek said :

Over 20 years of cycling in Canberra, about half of that on the roads. Still alive.

Ah, that proves it beyond a doubt, then. Sorry I retract my previous statements your highness king of the road. Yes you’re obviously more visible than cars, not to mention invincible too.

Aeek said :

I don’t expect drivers to see me, but as a driver its extremely rare that I don’t see a pedestrian, cyclist, or motorcyclist. Why? Because I am scanning as a cyclist, they are all threats. When we scan, we take shortcuts, its how vision works. If drivers aren’t careful, its easy to subconsciously ignore non threats.

Which is exactly what cyclists have to understand and take precautions against. Like I said.

gooterz said :

Going up northborne on most days is bad. the roads are way too narrow geting rid of the cycle lane would improve this.

Personally I think some of the bike lanes they’ve put in are absolutely ridiculous. Northbourne Ave is one of them.

I reckon get rid of them again and go back to having bike lanes off the roads.

Very Busy said :

Aeek said :

Harder to see? Bullsh*t, I’m taller than most other vehicles. More likely to be ignored because I’m not a threat? Yes, but ignoring other road users is hardly good driving.

Aeek, Surely you can’t be serious. If you are, your attitude is a serious danger to your own wellbeing. OMG, I just cant believe you actually posted that.

Apparently he thinks the worst visibility problems are due to drivers looking to high or low, and thus taller is obviously more visible. Like I told you, people like this are off in their own fantasy land. Cars probably look like sparkling unicorns galloping around.

Over 20 years of cycling in Canberra, about half of that on the roads. Still alive.
I don’t expect drivers to see me, but as a driver its extremely rare that I don’t see a pedestrian, cyclist, or motorcyclist. Why? Because I am scanning as a cyclist, they are all threats. When we scan, we take shortcuts, its how vision works. If drivers aren’t careful, its easy to subconsciously ignore non threats.

Aeek said :

Harder to see? Bullsh*t, I’m taller than most other vehicles. More likely to be ignored because I’m not a threat? Yes, but ignoring other road users is hardly good driving.

Aeek, Surely you can’t be serious. If you are, your attitude is a serious danger to your own wellbeing. OMG, I just cant believe you actually posted that.

Aeek said :

Harder to see? Bullsh*t, I’m taller than most other vehicles. More likely to be ignored because I’m not a threat? Yes, but ignoring other road users is hardly good driving.

How is it that most motorcyclists understand that they are less visible to cars, yet cyclists who are smaller and quieter do not?

Keep telling yourself that. Everyone else is just going to make way for you because you’re king of the road.

Harder to see? Bullsh*t, I’m taller than most other vehicles. More likely to be ignored because I’m not a threat? Yes, but ignoring other road users is hardly good driving.

Yossarian said :

“Cyclists abusing car drivers because they believe that some how their non polluting transport gives them the moral right is the topic.”

I don’t think the non-pollution relativism gives bicyclists the moral right. That just gives us a quiet sense of self-satisfaction and self-righteousness.

No, it is the fact that motorists are encased in steel, protected from other vehicles and bicyclists are vulnerable to the whims of drivers. I don’t know, but it seems that when people are behind the wheel they are no longer limited to the normal constraints of being human, but become overzealous androids with an inflated sense of power and might. Once out of their vehicles they once again shrink to their rightful sizes.

So when in your cars thrashing down Northbourne Ave, imagine you are a human and not a machine.

No, you’re wrong mate. Cyclists should be the ones to keep in mind that they’re not encased with steel. And if they believe a car’s “rightful” size is anything other than its actual size, then they should wake up from their deluded fantasy world.

You don’t rely on other people, you have to take personal responsibility for your own life. You’re not going to be able to go road-raging or angrily posting on internet forums about bad drivers when you’re 6′ under. I don’t cycle on the roads but I bloodly look both ways when crossing a zebra crossing or pedestrian traffic lights (and when going through green lights in a car).

You actually don’t hear much about traffic accident statistics unless they involve deaths, but I’d say they’re several orders of magnitude more common. Mostly caused by somebody losing concentration for a second or being a bit careless. Now consider they’re potentially much more serious if a cyclist is involved, and that cyclists are unquestionably harder to see and less common on the roads. Think about that next time you take your bike on the road.

blueberry said :

as far as i know if you are riding on the road it is a legal requirement to use the correct hand signals to indicate your movement in traffic.

There is no requirement to signal left (vehicle without indicators) or to stopping (rider of a bicycle), only right. This is in the the full road rules and also to be found on the Canberra walking and cycling map but NOT in the drivers handbook.

Sgt.Bungers said :

Cyclists over 12 years old are not permitted on the footpath, according to Australian Road Rule 250. The bloke on the mountain bike was in the wrong, as he should have changed lanes as any road user should change lanes, and given way to traffic already in, or approaching in the lane he wanted to change into.

Not true in Canberra. Cyclist may use the footpath so long as they give way to all pedestrians, and not ride within 10m of a shop door.

Its a good law, just not followed by many.

“Cyclists abusing car drivers because they believe that some how their non polluting transport gives them the moral right is the topic.”

I don’t think the non-pollution relativism gives bicyclists the moral right. That just gives us a quiet sense of self-satisfaction and self-righteousness.

No, it is the fact that motorists are encased in steel, protected from other vehicles and bicyclists are vulnerable to the whims of drivers. I don’t know, but it seems that when people are behind the wheel they are no longer limited to the normal constraints of being human, but become overzealous androids with an inflated sense of power and might. Once out of their vehicles they once again shrink to their rightful sizes.

So when in your cars thrashing down Northbourne Ave, imagine you are a human and not a machine.

shiny flu said :

Despite the rather “interesting” calls to license/illuminate/horn-enable/air-condition bicycles… (to those beautiful people: take your bike, put a bag of bricks on it and see just how much fun it is!), I shall actually stay on topic.

Rubbish. It is on topic. A horn and mirror are not a brick. People weaving into following traffic is the topic. Cyclists abusing car drivers because they believe that some how their non polluting transport gives them the moral right is the topic.

We are cyclists here us roar
in numbers too great to ignore

Clearly the lycra clad biker was in the right. Atleast, that is what the attitude of most lycra clad bikers seems to be.

Pretty simple really. The faster cyclist should have looked and passed when safe.

An event that probably happens once a minute on Canberra’s roads. Even by those vehicles with indicators, brake lights, mirrors and licensed drivers.

The driver of the Camry should have performed a community service and elimited the lower life form. I believe in survival of the strongest even if it is assisted by a bit of metal around you.

Strong lol – nothing strong about intentionally running over a road user… Pretty weak actually… Happy trolling.

Despite the rather “interesting” calls to license/illuminate/horn-enable/air-condition bicycles… (to those beautiful people: take your bike, put a bag of bricks on it and see just how much fun it is!), I shall actually stay on topic.

Just as you see people lane switching in cars in order to get somewhere marginally faster (lets say 30sec-2min) and people driving 10km below the speed limit, the same can be achieved by bicycle.

Mr. Swerving Commuter should have ringed his bell to see if Mrs. Flowery Basket would be so kind as to move to the left to allow him to pass without really moving onto the ‘divider’.

However as is the case in this day and age of people who don’t bother learning simple things they ought to… some people take the sign of a bell as “oh, you’re there- Tally ho I shall continue trundling along without altering my course” (these would also be the persons unable to use hand signals). If this was the case, Mr Swerving Commuter should – as stated earlier – check to see if it’s clear to move into the left hand lane to pass her.

From my time living and commuting by train/car/bike in Berlin, this happens all too often. You’ve got far more (bad) drivers, a lot of slow bike riders and so on. Drivers expect fast cyclists to swerve around slow cyclists. Cyclists expect trucks/cars/vans/busses to cut them off. It’s annoying for all parties but it works- most of the time.
Canberra is in a special situation where the car is/has been boss (NB: creating 4/5 satellite city not the smartest choice) that is slowly changing due to a culmination of reasons. Fact is, everyone is going to have to get used to it.

Why would anyone want to ride their bike along there is beyond me- I avoid it at all costs (too many lights=slow commute). There are enough smaller side streets that run parallel and a scenic bike path to hop on from dickson into the city. Sure it’s not the most direct route but it’s far more pleasant. A proper solution would be a bus lane and much like the UK/EU allow bicycle use in those bus lanes. Hence giving plenty of space for overtaking and bus commuters a faster route into the city.

That last bit will have the NRMA brigade up in arms I’m sure. Oh yes, light rail down the middle *ding ding*.

This incident actually highlights, in a way, just how beneficial the bike lanes on Northbourne Ave have been to everyone’s road safety since they were installed. Previously, the situation described by the OP arose EVERY TIME a car in the left lane had to pass a cyclist, because there was insufficient room in that lane to safely pass the bike while remaining fully in the lane, and so cars were forever swerving into the centre lane, forcing other cars into the right lane etc etc. So dangerous conditions were created countless times every day. So although things are not perfect now, given that there is insufficent space in the cycle lane for a rider to pass another, they are none the less dramatically safer than they were before these lanes were installed.

The solution? Cyclists please keep as far left in the cycle lane as possible, and check carefully before pulling out to overtake. Motorists, please be aware that cyclists sometimes need to pull out to overtake and that opportunities to do so are limited in peak periods. Planners and engineers, please build future roads with expected busy cycle traffic with wide-enough bike lanes for two cyclists to fit within the lane.

Regarding the comment about bikes having break lights and indicators, as far as i know if you are riding on the road it is a legal requirment to use the correct hand signals to indicate your movement in traffic.

Straight arm out to the right or left to indicat intention to turn.

Either arm held to the side with the forarm up at 45 to indicate stopping.

I’m not sure how many people follow this correctly but i have seen a fair few riders using the turn signal.

Jivrashia said :

The grey Mazda shoulda done a Duke of Hazzard and drove up onto the grass, floored the gas, done a burnout, and sped off into the sunset.

“Respek”

As a garden variety mountain bike rider, that wears normal (un-sponsored) clothes, I have found Lycra clad bicyclists to be aggressive and arrogant on the road. Nevertheless, this is beside the point.

Hey cars? Here’s a radical idea. You ready for it?

When you see a bike on the road, be cautious. If you see two bikes, hey, why not go out on a limb and be a little bit more cautious?

P.S. Lycra clad bicyclists: if you see me riding without a helmet, mind your business, keep your lecturing to yourself, and keep riding.

Some bikes should have mirrors because the bikers think they move the fastest and thus cant be hit from behind.

Going up northborne on most days is bad. the roads are way too narrow geting rid of the cycle lane would improve this.

I’d also think that if a bike rider were to use the roads they should register and display some kind of ID like cars have. If a bike rider caused such an accident they would be liabale and identifiable.

The best solution would be to install more speed cameras.

The driver of the Camry should have performed a community service and elimited the lower life form. I believe in survival of the strongest even if it is assisted by a bit of metal around you.

If bikes are to share the road with other vehicles they should be equipped with the same safety equipment to allow the operator to determine that it is safe to change lanes without endangering themselves and other road users. A rear view mirror. They also need a horn capable of alerting other road users. I haven’t made up my mind yet about the necessity of a brake light and indicators. Why should some road users receive favoritism?

Sgt.Bungers said :

Is consistency too much to ask for on ACT roads?

Yeap

Cyclists over 12 years old are not permitted on the footpath, according to Australian Road Rule 250. The bloke on the mountain bike was in the wrong, as he should have changed lanes as any road user should change lanes, and given way to traffic already in, or approaching in the lane he wanted to change into.

The person driving the Camry should have been driving in a proactive manner. If they’d been paying attention they would’ve seen this coming and begun to slow before it happened. Of course, according to the Gubbiment so long as the driver of the Camry was travelling no faster than 60km/h, there’s no way that person could improve their driving in the slightest.

Though it has to be said, why are those cycle lanes there in the first place? Overseas studies have shown that when the outside/slow lane of a multi lane road is widened to make room for cyclists, *without* a white line being painted to create a separate cycle lane, then drivers of motor vehicles leave significantly more room when passing cyclists than when the line is there. Boils down to creating a more uncertain environment for motorists. When a line is there, so long as the motorist has their vehicle on one side of the line, then in their eyes they’re doing the right thing, even if they’re passing within an inch of the cyclist on the other side of the line. No line, less certainty regarding where the cyclist may ride so the motorist is more cautious and leaves more room for error. Cheaper too, no white lines to paint. That’s the way it was done on Hindmarsh Drive between Canberra Ave. and the Monaro highway. Is consistency too much to ask for on ACT roads?

forgot to note for the second comment: but it’s a pretty obvious troll 🙂

niftydog said :

Clearly the white Camry should have just flattened the dude and taught him a lesson.

While I agree about keeping left (I’m seriously considering having a “keep left” sign printed onto a T-shirt.) I’m not convinced there’s enough space in the Northbourne bike lane for two cyclists abreast.

there’s not. as the polite cyclist said above, that’s perfect procedure. For me personally i just wait until the left hand car lane is clear, in the interim being patient behind the slower rider. otherwise you’re just going to run into problems and likely to get hurt (car/bus/truck vs cyclist = dead cyclist)

54-11 said :

Ban all bikes from major streets, and paint over these ridiculous bike lanes, so they revert to car lanes. Easy.

and that sort of comment just makes you sound like an incompetent driver, who should hand in their licence for the sake of ALL other road users.

Not defending the cyclist here but I have seen Action buses do pretty much the same thing. Bus did not want to stop behind another bus in the left lane so cuts into second lane forcing bus in 2nd lane to cut into the 3rd almost wiping out a line of cars. One of the most idiotic pieces of driving I have ever seen.

Ban all bikes from major streets, and paint over these ridiculous bike lanes, so they revert to car lanes. Easy.

Uhh when you say ride the lane divider were you referring to the white strip that divides the cycle lane from the road.

If he was riding on that, I daresay there was still a 2ft or so gap between the cyclists most right point and the cars most left point.

I agree that the cyclist may have been safer to wait, but the camry driver sounds like they did not know the dimensions of their car and therefore swerved unnecessarily into another lane in order to avoid a non existent risk of collusion. It is funny how far cars go out of their lane when giving more than ample room for passing a cyclist.

Additionally, if said little old lady was just meandering in th elane, then perhaps it would be a safer option for her to ride on paths if she can not keep a reasonable pace in order to minimise danger to other users.

I could keep the pace easy on Northbourne, but I chose not to, due to the attitude I see of drivers toward cyclists.

Regular polite cyclist’s perspective:

If I wanted to pass a slower rider in a bike lane, I’d look behind to see if I had the option of passing in the traffic lane. Regardless, I’d inform the rider ahead of both my presence and my intent by saying “passing”.

If there was room in the traffic lane, or the polite rider in front of me moved over a tad, I’d give a hand signal that I was moving out right and overtaking. The signal right is both to cars behind and to riders behind.

I’d then say thanks to the rider I’d passed.

Agree with Toriness that passing on Northbourne Ave bike lanes is hard, that makes the rules far more important.

Communication and predictability are key – in cars and on bikes.

niftydog said :

Clearly the white Camry should have just flattened the dude and taught him a lesson.

While I agree about keeping left (I’m seriously considering having a “keep left” sign printed onto a T-shirt.) I’m not convinced there’s enough space in the Northbourne bike lane for two cyclists abreast.

ditto

ricketyclik said :

1. The little old lady should have been to the left of the path. Almost all bike path accidents are a direct result of people not keeping to the left.

2. As she wasn’t, the big mountain bike rider should have waited until there was a safe opportunity to change lanes to overtake, rather than just ploughing in to the (fast moving) traffic lane. Ideally, he would have had a bell to politely signal to the little old lady that he wanted room to overtake.

Both of the above points are covered in the road rules.

/end thread

Obviously the Camry driver was afraid that cyclist entrails would stain his nice white car. Easy solutuion to this situation:
Ban All White Cars

Clearly the white Camry should have just flattened the dude and taught him a lesson.

While I agree about keeping left (I’m seriously considering having a “keep left” sign printed onto a T-shirt.) I’m not convinced there’s enough space in the Northbourne bike lane for two cyclists abreast.

The grey Mazda shoulda done a Duke of Hazzard and drove up onto the grass, floored the gas, done a burnout, and sped off into the sunset.

Bad mountain biker, shouldn’t have overtaken until it was safe and not crossed the line, just like the road rules say.

Next we’ll be hearing how there’s no need for mountain bikes on city bike lanes, how there’s no need for such big bikes in an urban environment etc etc ;->

Reckon the mountain biker was in the wrong. He’s free to overtake the LOL in the car lane, but it’s his responsibility to make the lane change safely. He should have waited till the outside car lane was free for him to enter, overtake and go back in the bike lane.

1. The little old lady should have been to the left of the path. Almost all bike path accidents are a direct result of people not keeping to the left.

2. As she wasn’t, the big mountain bike rider should have waited until there was a safe opportunity to change lanes to overtake, rather than just ploughing in to the (fast moving) traffic lane. Ideally, he would have had a bell to politely signal to the little old lady that he wanted room to overtake.

Both of the above points are covered in the road rules.

Sounds like the mountain bike rider did something silly to me. You can ring your bell behind the lady with basket, and go by safely.

It would be refreshing to have a week where RiotACT doesn’t discuss bicycles on roads.

But, my opinion here is that the Lycra clad mountain bike hero is at fault and shouldn’t be allowed anywhere near a road. And probably Lycra.