RiotACT Face Off: Should road rules be the same for motorists and bikes?

Or perhaps not even contemplating costs for parking a bike because of the advantages that cycling has to the community. Bikes don’t take nearly as much space as a car, causing less congestion in the city, because of that small footprint, there’s no major real estate taken up by them either when parked either. That can be chained up to any form of immobile object (street light, power pole, fence, park bench), not to mention the fact they have no emissions (or that of about 40 cents of electricity on the e-bikes, still bugger all really), the weight of them doesn’t fatigue the road surface, and they’re safer in a pedestrian collision than a car. A lighter slower object will cause less harm to pedestrian than a 2t block of metal moving at 80km/h, period. Charging cyclists parking would just be legislation gone mad, and it reeks of sour grapes from car drivers.

If we were mad enough to stoop to any paid options though, I’d happily pay a dollar or two to park my ebike for a couple of hours in a bike locker that had a powerpoint available, I could charge the battery while I do the shopping, etc.

magiccar9 said :

thy_dungeonman said :

If we are going to have equality in rules how about we also have equality in infrastructure. It would certainly cause outrage if there were major roads that came to an end in the middle of nowhere, or if the switched between dirt and bitumen or if a lot of them of them were shared with pedestrians.

We already do share the roads with pedestrians, and cyclists. Also, in your “equality” vision, would you also be slugged $12.50 to park your bike with reduced spaces available (in comparison to demand)? We could also make sure through Civic that cars got their own special “express way” because find it too difficult to share.

Naturally you’d divide that $12.50 among all the cyclists who can squeeze their bikes into the one car space.

Maya123 said :

magiccar9 said :

thy_dungeonman said :

If we are going to have equality in rules how about we also have equality in infrastructure. It would certainly cause outrage if there were major roads that came to an end in the middle of nowhere, or if the switched between dirt and bitumen or if a lot of them of them were shared with pedestrians.

We already do share the roads with pedestrians, and cyclists. Also, in your “equality” vision, would you also be slugged $12.50 to park your bike with reduced spaces available (in comparison to demand)? We could also make sure through Civic that cars got their own special “express way” because find it too difficult to share.

One car spot would hold several bicycles, so even if bicycles were charged a parking fee it would be far less than for one car taking the whole space. I was charged a fee to park my bicycle once in the Netherlands, but it was much less than the cars had to pay and the bike parking was right outside the entrance, while car drivers had to park further away.

Added: The fee to park a bicycle should be reduced even further when compared to a car, because the extra parking room that cars need, as per example, in lanes between rows of parked cars would be much less for bicycles. So it would not only be a matter of how many bikes could be parked in a car spot and dividing the parking fee by that, but also reducing the parking fee even further, by how much less other infrastructure is needed to get the bike to its parking spot.

magiccar9 said :

thy_dungeonman said :

If we are going to have equality in rules how about we also have equality in infrastructure. It would certainly cause outrage if there were major roads that came to an end in the middle of nowhere, or if the switched between dirt and bitumen or if a lot of them of them were shared with pedestrians.

We already do share the roads with pedestrians, and cyclists. Also, in your “equality” vision, would you also be slugged $12.50 to park your bike with reduced spaces available (in comparison to demand)? We could also make sure through Civic that cars got their own special “express way” because find it too difficult to share.

One car spot would hold several bicycles, so even if bicycles were charged a parking fee it would be far less than for one car taking the whole space. I was charged a fee to park my bicycle once in the Netherlands, but it was much less than the cars had to pay and the bike parking was right outside the entrance, while car drivers had to park further away.

thy_dungeonman said :

If we are going to have equality in rules how about we also have equality in infrastructure. It would certainly cause outrage if there were major roads that came to an end in the middle of nowhere, or if the switched between dirt and bitumen or if a lot of them of them were shared with pedestrians.

We already do share the roads with pedestrians, and cyclists. Also, in your “equality” vision, would you also be slugged $12.50 to park your bike with reduced spaces available (in comparison to demand)? We could also make sure through Civic that cars got their own special “express way” because find it too difficult to share.

Dondon said :

HenryBG said :

Huh??? Canberra is one of the least “flat” cities in Australia.

I’ll disagree, in terms of commuter cycling the paths around CBR are very flat with only a few small rises. If you want to include the likes of Mt Stromlo, Black Mountain, Mt Ainslie and Red Hill as part of your commute then yes it is very hilly, however all the paths run along the flat and detour these hilly areas.

The only hills that I would consider to be problematic for a relatively unfit commuter cyclist is riding from the route from Civic to Belconnon and from Tuggeranong up towards Woden.

No, flat is Copenhagen or Amsterdam. Canberra is not flat. Not even remotely.

Barry Drive isn’t “problematic for the relatively unfit”, it is completely and utterly not an option for 99% of people who might otherwise consider a gentle cycle to work.
And riding from Tuggeranong to Woden or Woden to Civic is not only hard work because of the slope, but each of those two legs is TEN TIMES further than the average commute in Copenhagen.
Which is why so few Canberrans cycle.
Let’s stop wasting ratepayer’s money on flogging the dead horse of bicycling in Canberra.

thy_dungeonman said :

If we are going to have equality in rules how about we also have equality in infrastructure.

If you want equality in infrastructure, it should be accompanied by equality in registration and licensing fees.

A masterpiece of words Mr Henry. Well said.

There is a need for vulnerable road user legislation. Easy really, you mow someone down, you prove you were not at fault! Bet that would change the dynamic.

HenryBG said :

if Copenhagen had any lycra-wearing twits, they would soon be asked to pull their heads in. Here, they have no shame.

Actually, my partner’s spent some time in Copenhagen, and they actually happen to have lycra wearing PEOPLE riding bikes. Just like Australia, it’s for the serious cyclists who want maximum speed/comfort.

Also, they can generally wear what they want without judgement (lycra, latex, whatever really). Take your fashion police nonsense elsewhere. As for telling them to pull their heads in… Why? They’re not hurting anyone.

Road rules should apply to ANY vehicle using the road. Bike or car. Neither of the two are more important than the other. We all need to get where we’re going, safe and sound, and in one piece. The bike lanes and shared paths here are plentiful also. I can’t see them being a waste of ratepayer money seeing how many pedestrians, skateboarders, parents with prams, segways, etc all make use of the investment.

Something should be done about the unprovoked rage from car drivers though. Fair enough if a driver gets upset at a cyclist running a red light, but not all cyclists flout the law. But when you have rednecks that’ll get upset because a cyclist is wearing lycra, then proceed to harass or threaten that cyclist, then I’d strongly recommend a therapist. That hatred of cyclists has to be pathological, and can’t be healthy. Every road user (yes, even the odd bad cyclist running a red light) needs to work together to help make the roads safer, it’s really that simple.

Joelsomething said :

Roughly 25% of people in Canberra identified as having ridden in the last week, and nearly half in the last year.

The allocation of transport funds to cycling (and combined with walking paths) is somewhere under 7%.

Where is this disproportionate funding that Chic Henry is talking about?

What was the total km’s ridden/driven by each and what was the total economic benefit gained from each?

HenryBG said :

Huh??? Canberra is one of the least “flat” cities in Australia.

I’ll disagree, in terms of commuter cycling the paths around CBR are very flat with only a few small rises. If you want to include the likes of Mt Stromlo, Black Mountain, Mt Ainslie and Red Hill as part of your commute then yes it is very hilly, however all the paths run along the flat and detour these hilly areas.

The only hills that I would consider to be problematic for a relatively unfit commuter cyclist is riding from the route from Civic to Belconnon and from Tuggeranong up towards Woden.

Snow_Crash said :

Alright, some interesting points there, but most of Canberra is fairly flat,

Huh??? Canberra is one of the least “flat” cities in Australia.

Snow_Crash said :

and there’s no point mentioning lycra. But I’m sure we’ll see some more lycra related comments. Let’s see how we go. I don’t see lycra, I see traffic, and try and judge it in the here and now.

The lycra is enormously relevant: in Copenhagen, a large proportion of residents use their bicycles to make numerous short trips of <1km, travelling at an average speed of 15km/h.

Here in Canberra, the few morally superior Canberrans who use bicycles to make their 10km+ trips tend to don lycra before taking obvious joy in obstructing traffic and yelling abuse at other users of shared paths.

The cycling mentality in these two different places is entirely different, chiefly for reasons of topography. If Copenhagen had any lycra-wearing twits, they would soon be asked to pull their heads in. Here, they have no shame.

If we are going to have equality in rules how about we also have equality in infrastructure. It would certainly cause outrage if there were major roads that came to an end in the middle of nowhere, or if the switched between dirt and bitumen or if a lot of them of them were shared with pedestrians.

KB1971 said :

“Should road rules be the same for motorists and bikes?”

This is a bit of a silly question. The majority of road rules are the same for cars a bikes. As John Armstrong said, there are some special ones for bike, there are some special ones for trucks, there are some special ones for cars as well.

A better question would be “Do you think there should be the same law enforcement for cars and bikes?”

+1

Pretty sure the laws are the same for cyclists and motorists already – with the exception of a few specific pieces that need to address issues that are bike/car/taxi/bus/heavy vehicle specific. This is not going to be much of a ‘debate’.

HenryBG said :

I’m not sure why people always point to Copenhagen in the context of cycling.

Here are a couple of things to note about cycling in Copenhagen:
– the cycle paths are flat
– the average trip length is less than 1km
– average cycle speed is 15km/h
– virtually nobody wears helmets
– virtually nobody wears lycra
– they have 400km of cycle path
– a population equivalent to Canberra’s within a 4km radius of the city centre
– a population of 2 million within a 16km radius of the city centre
– 50% of the city population are cyclists
– 33% of the greater population are cyclists (see the pattern there?)

Canberra has a similar amount of cycle path total length (Thanks! Canberra Ratepayer!) but it is very under-utilised, for the following very good reasons:
– Canberra’s average commute is >10km
– Canberra is not flat
– Canberra has compulsory helmet laws (actually not a “good reason”, just retarded legislating)
– Canberra cyclists represent 3% of the population.

Canberra’s vanishingly small population of dedicated cyclists make noise (not to mention congest roads) way out of proportion to their numbers.

Let’s not inflict any more costs associated with cycling hobbyists on the Canberra Ratepayer, shall we?

Alright, some interesting points there, but most of Canberra is fairly flat, and there’s no point mentioning lycra. But I’m sure we’ll see some more lycra related comments. Let’s see how we go. I don’t see lycra, I see traffic, and try and judge it in the here and now.

If you take different zones you see different effects and possibilities. In and around the ANU you can see cyclists cars and pedestrians getting by just fine.

Go take a look. A drive, a cycle, a walk, you’ll see it. It works well. (And is a very pleasant area to be in). You might say that area is a sort of “Copenhagen.”

But that might not apply in other areas, fair enough. Still, that’s no reason to say that we should just ignore the possibilities where they can apply, just because we’re not Copenhagen.

Because Copenhagen is the worlds best model for cycling/car co habitation. Yeah, OK the physical stats are not the same but no two cities in the world are alike. What they are saying is look at the model and see if we can use some stuff.

Road congestion? It’s funny you know, whenever I drive to work I find there is more congestion from cars, trucks, motorcycles and pedestrians. I say this when I have a few dedicated riders who live in my suburb.

Riders are not ratepayers? Sh$t, can I get a refund on the $1600 a year I pay the government then?? I swear I am you to get a jersey made up that says “I cycle AND I PAY RATES!”

If I go by your reasoning I can expect to begrudge other parts of society for things I don’t want to pay for. How about smokers health care? That’s a hobby that costs the taxpayer big time.

the problem with this chic henry guy’s rationale is that he thinks that spending money on cycling facilities takes money away from spending money on cars and roads or whatever and that’s all it is – a zero sum game.

But he fails to recognise the benefits to society in general for people riding instead of driving.

I’m not talking about big lofty ideas like less traffic congestion, healthier population, climate change or whatever either. For example, he mentions repeatedly about Canberra’s lack of parking facilities. Okay, well if a cyclist doesn’t ride, it’s not like he/she is just going to stay at home are they? No they’ll likely have to drive their car to work and making the parking situation even worst.

“I think that the motoring public, regularly ripped off by […] the ever-diminishing parking spaces, are not particularly sympathetic to pushy riders”

chic, you’re talking at cross purposes here – you’re ruing the ‘ever diminishing parking spaces’ in the same breath as deriding [pun intended] the pushy riders; who are saving those precious parking spots for you, old son… ya lost me there, i’m afraid.

I’m not sure why people always point to Copenhagen in the context of cycling.

Here are a couple of things to note about cycling in Copenhagen:
– the cycle paths are flat
– the average trip length is less than 1km
– average cycle speed is 15km/h
– virtually nobody wears helmets
– virtually nobody wears lycra
– they have 400km of cycle path
– a population equivalent to Canberra’s within a 4km radius of the city centre
– a population of 2 million within a 16km radius of the city centre
– 50% of the city population are cyclists
– 33% of the greater population are cyclists (see the pattern there?)

Canberra has a similar amount of cycle path total length (Thanks! Canberra Ratepayer!) but it is very under-utilised, for the following very good reasons:
– Canberra’s average commute is >10km
– Canberra is not flat
– Canberra has compulsory helmet laws (actually not a “good reason”, just retarded legislating)
– Canberra cyclists represent 3% of the population.

Canberra’s vanishingly small population of dedicated cyclists make noise (not to mention congest roads) way out of proportion to their numbers.

Let’s not inflict any more costs associated with cycling hobbyists on the Canberra Ratepayer, shall we?

Roughly 25% of people in Canberra identified as having ridden in the last week, and nearly half in the last year.

The allocation of transport funds to cycling (and combined with walking paths) is somewhere under 7%.

Where is this disproportionate funding that Chic Henry is talking about?

“Should road rules be the same for motorists and bikes?”

This is a bit of a silly question. The majority of road rules are the same for cars a bikes. As John Armstrong said, there are some special ones for bike, there are some special ones for trucks, there are some special ones for cars as well.

A better question would be “Do you think there should be the same law enforcement for cars and bikes?”