The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

open topic, for anything cycling related.

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby herzog » Mon Mar 18, 2013 1:06 pm

redned wrote:I think that the freeway footbridge and the path on the Hector St side are footpaths not shared paths and neither of you should have been riding it.


Now I don't know the area, but its uncommon to have a centerline painted like that where its not a shared path.
User avatar
herzog
 
Posts: 1647
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:50 pm

by BNA » Mon Mar 18, 2013 5:46 pm

BNA
 

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby redned » Mon Mar 18, 2013 5:46 pm

Aushiker wrote:You could be right ... does not change the situation that occurred and the point of video but.

Andrew


Sure.
I reported a motor scooter that I had seen using this foot bridge several times. Police investigated and couldn't be certain who the driver was, but it must have put the wind up him becasue I haven't seen it since.

Herzog: Oddly it is only marked for about 15m at that end of the footbridge. DPI map doesn't show it as a shared path.
redned
 
Posts: 389
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 4:45 pm

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby wellington_street » Mon Mar 18, 2013 6:06 pm

redned wrote:DPI map doesn't show it as a shared path.


DPI map has no basis in law, by the way.

The definition of shared path in the WA Traffic Code is very ambiguous - if citywomble is reading this he might offer an opinion on whether all paths are by default shared paths unless otherwise signed...
wellington_street
 
Posts: 942
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 12:25 pm

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby redned » Mon Mar 18, 2013 6:22 pm

wellington_street wrote:
redned wrote:DPI map doesn't show it as a shared path.


DPI map has no basis in law, by the way.


Sure.

wellington_street wrote:The definition of shared path in the WA Traffic Code is very ambiguous - if citywomble is reading this he might offer an opinion on whether all paths are by default shared paths unless otherwise signed...


I would be surprised. There is no signage for footpaths, but there is for shared paths and separated paths. I would expect paths to be footpaths unless signed.
redned
 
Posts: 389
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 4:45 pm

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby wellington_street » Mon Mar 18, 2013 6:45 pm

redned wrote:I would be surprised. There is no signage for footpaths, but there is for shared paths and separated paths. I would expect paths to be footpaths unless signed.


Clowncils can't grasp the basic concept of shared path signage - see the North Fremantle thread on the WA forum as just one perfect example. Brand new shared path that is apparently a cycle lane. :lol: Many Councils build paths designed, planned and publicised as shared paths but don't provide any signage. Half the paths shown as shared paths on the DPI maps (e.g. Guildford Rd south side through Bassendean) are not signed as shared paths. So what is/isn't a shared path?
wellington_street
 
Posts: 942
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 12:25 pm

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby citywomble » Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:15 pm

Someone called?

Several interesting issues raised here and I will try my best to give a semi-legal response as a non lawyer. This advice is ONLY applicable for WA as it relates to the drafting of the Road Traffic Code 20000

Firstly, local councils do not have the legal authority to install shared path signage, any that they do provide are unlawful but, here is the irony, the way the legislation is drafted the path would become a shared path anyway.

The only body legally allowed to install regulatory shared path signs or path markings is Main Roads WA but, apart from PSPs, MRWA do not sign shared paths. So unless the council erects formal regulatory signs, unlawfully, most paths are not signed.

To be a shared path a sign is not necessarily required. The definition of a shared path also includes "any path where one of its main uses is for cycling". As a result if anything suggests it may have cycling as one of its main uses then it probably is.

In the case of the footbridge this has a PBN bike route sign pointing along it, this effectively confirms the "one of its main uses for cycling" test. Also the presence of centreline would imply cycling as a main use, so again it is reasonable to presume it is an (unsigned) shared path. If its wide and looks like a shared path then I, personally, would not have a problem riding on it.

One caveat to this, if it isn't signed as a shared path and it is not unreasonable to presume it is one, it would be prudent to cycle slowly keeping speeds to about 10 kph. Seems very slow but, for short distances, not unreasonable when sharing a footpath.

Finally, while it is unlawful for councils to erect formal regulatory shared paths signs, it would be OK to provide informal signs which would then confirm a legal shared path.

Probably the greatest irony is regulation 216. This creates the offense of riding on a footpath
216.​Shared paths and separated footpaths
​(1)​The rider of a bicycle who is 12 years of age or older shall not ride on a footpath, that is not a shared path or a separated footpath.

But, at the same time it effectively confirms that one of the main uses for footpaths is for cycling (albeit by under 12s). Untested in law but yet another possible interpretation by which a footpath could be considered shared.

Clear? Not!
citywomble
 
Posts: 300
Joined: Mon May 25, 2009 7:40 pm

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby hannos » Tue Mar 19, 2013 8:01 am

I encountered a first class idiot today...
Walking along a Shared path at Rhodes I turn to the right (there was only about a person width between me and the right side wall anyhow) to go up some stairs to my building. Except, a cyclist decides to try and pass me with no warning. Yep, he hit me. failed to use his bell or his voice. Gave him a good serve on slowing down and using his bell or voice.
User avatar
hannos
 
Posts: 4018
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2010 10:18 am
Location: Sydney

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby VRE » Tue Mar 19, 2013 9:59 am

hannos wrote:I encountered a first class idiot today...
Walking along a Shared path at Rhodes I turn to the right (there was only about a person width between me and the right side wall anyhow) to go up some stairs to my building. Except, a cyclist decides to try and pass me with no warning. Yep, he hit me. failed to use his bell or his voice. Gave him a good serve on slowing down and using his bell or voice.

I occasionally see people like that on shared paths, except it's sometimes cyclists going too fast, and sometimes pedestrians who make right turns with no warning. A cyclist can have trouble avoiding such pedestrians, even when the cyclist is travelling relatively slowly. Regardless of the laws stating that cyclists must always give way to pedestrians on shared paths, pedestrians also need to use common sense and avoid sudden manoeuvres without warning. In other words, sharing the paths has to be done by both parties. Note: I'm not claiming you made any unpredictable move, only saying that sharing and consideration works both ways.
User avatar
VRE
 
Posts: 582
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 9:14 am
Location: Ringwood North, VIC, Australia

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby il padrone » Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:10 am

hannos wrote:I encountered a first class idiot today...
Walking along a Shared path at Rhodes I turn to the right (there was only about a person width between me and the right side wall anyhow) to go up some stairs to my building. Except, a cyclist decides to try and pass me with no warning. Yep, he hit me. failed to use his bell or his voice. Gave him a good serve on slowing down and using his bell or voice.

Hang on a minute. You are the cyclist turning right? But you expect the cyclist overtaking you to give the warning? Did you give the legally-required right turn signal??

And why were you so close to the right side wall? Was it a one-way or two-way path?

Methinks I see a reversal of responsibility happening here :|
User avatar
il padrone
 
Posts: 18157
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby wellington_street » Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:28 am

citywomble wrote:<snip>


Thanks citywomble.
wellington_street
 
Posts: 942
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 12:25 pm

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby redned » Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:38 am

il padrone wrote:
hannos wrote:I encountered a first class idiot today...
Walking along a Shared path at Rhodes I turn to the right (there was only about a person width between me and the right side wall anyhow) to go up some stairs to my building. Except, a cyclist decides to try and pass me with no warning. Yep, he hit me. failed to use his bell or his voice. Gave him a good serve on slowing down and using his bell or voice.

Hang on a minute. You are the cyclist turning right? But you expect the cyclist overtaking you to give the warning? Did you give the legally-required right turn signal??

And why were you so close to the right side wall? Was it a one-way or two-way path?

Methinks I see a reversal of responsibility happening here :|


Walking: Hannos was a ped.
redned
 
Posts: 389
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 4:45 pm

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby redned » Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:39 am

wellington_street wrote:
citywomble wrote:<snip>


Thanks citywomble.


Thanks. That is as clear as it ever going to be!
redned
 
Posts: 389
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 4:45 pm

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby hannos » Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:57 am

il padrone wrote:
hannos wrote:I encountered a first class idiot today...
Walking along a Shared path at Rhodes I turn to the right (there was only about a person width between me and the right side wall anyhow) to go up some stairs to my building. Except, a cyclist decides to try and pass me with no warning. Yep, he hit me. failed to use his bell or his voice. Gave him a good serve on slowing down and using his bell or voice.

Hang on a minute. You are the cyclist turning right? But you expect the cyclist overtaking you to give the warning? Did you give the legally-required right turn signal??

And why were you so close to the right side wall? Was it a one-way or two-way path?

Methinks I see a reversal of responsibility happening here :|



I'm a pedestrian, there are no lane markings oy any sort, the stairs to a path to my building ar on the right and I was about a foot from the wall.
Regardless, who in their right mind would try and fly through a gap that narrow?

No reversal of responsibility at all.
User avatar
hannos
 
Posts: 4018
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2010 10:18 am
Location: Sydney

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby il padrone » Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:59 am

:oops: Damn, must get those eyes checked again!
User avatar
il padrone
 
Posts: 18157
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby Mulger bill » Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:19 pm

hannos wrote:I encountered a first class idiot today...
Walking along a Shared path at Rhodes I turn to the right (there was only about a person width between me and the right side wall anyhow) to go up some stairs to my building. Except, a cyclist decides to try and pass me with no warning. Yep, he hit me. failed to use his bell or his voice. Gave him a good serve on slowing down and using his bell or voice.

Why were you pedding anyway? Lets the tribe down badly if you aren't on the scoot :P
You did at least wave the ol' Zefal HPX under his dumb as dogsh nose I hope...
User avatar
Mulger bill
Super Mod
Super Mod
 
Posts: 25552
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:41 pm
Location: Sunbury Vic

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby hannos » Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:55 pm

Mulger bill wrote:
hannos wrote:I encountered a first class idiot today...
Walking along a Shared path at Rhodes I turn to the right (there was only about a person width between me and the right side wall anyhow) to go up some stairs to my building. Except, a cyclist decides to try and pass me with no warning. Yep, he hit me. failed to use his bell or his voice. Gave him a good serve on slowing down and using his bell or voice.

Why were you pedding anyway? Lets the tribe down badly if you aren't on the scoot :P
You did at least wave the ol' Zefal HPX under his dumb as dogsh nose I hope...



Because I'm soft. had to bring the laptop in to work today and I really dont like carrying one on my back for 33km. and the SLC01 has no points to put panniers on...
User avatar
hannos
 
Posts: 4018
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2010 10:18 am
Location: Sydney

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby malnar » Wed Mar 20, 2013 8:11 am

Pre dawn this morning I came across two lightless cyclists on the un-lit shared path. Must be hard to enjoy your ride when you can't see where you're going. Hopefully they got past the pedestrians safely.

Later, I was walking on Princes bridge in the city. It has pedestrian and cyclist sections which are separated by a white line. I was on the pedestrian section & I heard a cyclist coming from behind dinging repeatedly. There was a pedestrian walking in the opposite direction on the cyclist's section. The cyclist was dinging and pointing very demandingly. The cyclist slowed down and basically insisted that the pedestrian move across. Thought it was a very harsh way to try to 'educate' someone. There was very little traffic about at the time so there was no actual danger of collision.

I looked at the pedestrian's expression and she didn't seem too fussed (she had headphones on).
malnar
 
Posts: 233
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 2:46 pm
Location: Melb - Werribee - City

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby il padrone » Wed Mar 20, 2013 8:21 am

malnar wrote:Later, I was walking on Princes bridge in the city. It has pedestrian and cyclist sections which are separated by a white line. I was on the pedestrian section & I heard a cyclist coming from behind dinging repeatedly. There was a pedestrian walking in the opposite direction on the cyclist's section.

SMIDGAF :roll:

malnar wrote:The cyclist was dinging and pointing very demandingly. The cyclist slowed down and basically insisted that the pedestrian move across. Thought it was a very harsh way to try to 'educate' someone. There was very little traffic about at the time so there was no actual danger of collision.

I looked at the pedestrian's expression and she didn't seem too fussed (she had headphones on).

Personally I think if more people did just this we might start to get people educated into how the roads and footpaths are meant to work (spelt out in the road rules and all), and then there might be more safety and value in cycle lanes and paths that would encourage people to cycle more.
User avatar
il padrone
 
Posts: 18157
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby jasonc » Wed Mar 20, 2013 8:21 am

roma st this morning about to turn left into roma st parklands and there's a salmon. I gave him some what for
jasonc
 
Posts: 5598
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2011 2:40 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby g-boaf » Wed Mar 20, 2013 8:26 am

il padrone wrote:
malnar wrote:Later, I was walking on Princes bridge in the city. It has pedestrian and cyclist sections which are separated by a white line. I was on the pedestrian section & I heard a cyclist coming from behind dinging repeatedly. There was a pedestrian walking in the opposite direction on the cyclist's section.

SMIDGAF :roll:

malnar wrote:The cyclist was dinging and pointing very demandingly. The cyclist slowed down and basically insisted that the pedestrian move across. Thought it was a very harsh way to try to 'educate' someone. There was very little traffic about at the time so there was no actual danger of collision.

I looked at the pedestrian's expression and she didn't seem too fussed (she had headphones on).

Personally I think if more people did just this we might start to get people educated into how the roads and footpaths are meant to work (spelt out in the road rules and all), and then there might be more safety and value in cycle lanes and paths that would encourage people to cycle more.


That's the way it should be done - and what I do as well now. Otherwise they won't learn. Keep left unless overtaking or turning and if you are going to turn or move, look before you do and don't do it suddenly.

The problem is that some cyclists HERE actually defend pedestrians rights to be unpredictable.
Last edited by g-boaf on Wed Mar 20, 2013 8:28 am, edited 1 time in total.
g-boaf
 
Posts: 3823
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2011 6:11 pm

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby ZepinAtor » Wed Mar 20, 2013 8:28 am

il padrone wrote:SMIDGAF :roll:


Bbbbwwwwwwaaaaahhhhhh :lol: :lol: :lol:

jasonc wrote:roma st this morning about to turn left into roma st parklands and there's a salmon. I gave him some what for


That's a bit fishy ? Maybe you should have scaled back the abuse a bit. Perhaps his herring is a little poor ?
User avatar
ZepinAtor
 
Posts: 1437
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2010 6:46 pm
Location: Brizzzzbane Everton Hillzzzz

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby zero » Wed Mar 20, 2013 9:06 am

g-boaf wrote:
The problem is that some cyclists HERE actually defend pedestrians rights to be unpredictable.


The only dangerous thing is the cyclists momentum, and only the cyclist has access to the bicycles brake lever to control the momentum, and as cyclists are typically faster than pedestrians, virtually all the interactions between pedestrians and cyclists involve a pedestrian that was in plain view of the cyclist, the cyclist is the person in prime position to make the interactions safe.
zero
 
Posts: 2617
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 1:54 pm

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby jasonc » Wed Mar 20, 2013 9:42 am

ZepinAtor wrote:
jasonc wrote:roma st this morning about to turn left into roma st parklands and there's a salmon. I gave him some what for


That's a bit fishy ? Maybe you should have scaled back the abuse a bit. Perhaps his herring is a little poor ?


it was 7:30 - 7:45. there was lots of traffic. moving over into the traffic lane was not my preferred option.
jasonc
 
Posts: 5598
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2011 2:40 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby ZepinAtor » Wed Mar 20, 2013 10:15 am

jasonc wrote:
ZepinAtor wrote:
jasonc wrote:roma st this morning about to turn left into roma st parklands and there's a salmon. I gave him some what for


That's a bit fishy ? Maybe you should have scaled back the abuse a bit. Perhaps his herring is a little poor ?


it was 7:30 - 7:45. there was lots of traffic. moving over into the traffic lane was not my preferred option.


You may have missed my key words & I may have missed the sarcasm emoticon :?

"Fishy"......."scaled"......"Herring"

I have no idea what the acronym for Salmon is :? Or is that what Salmon is the acronym for :?
User avatar
ZepinAtor
 
Posts: 1437
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2010 6:46 pm
Location: Brizzzzbane Everton Hillzzzz

Re: The Dumb Cyclists and Pedestrians thread...

Postby il padrone » Wed Mar 20, 2013 10:22 am

zero wrote:
g-boaf wrote:
The problem is that some cyclists HERE actually defend pedestrians rights to be unpredictable.


The only dangerous thing is the cyclists momentum, and only the cyclist has access to the bicycles brake lever to control the momentum, and as cyclists are typically faster than pedestrians, virtually all the interactions between pedestrians and cyclists involve a pedestrian that was in plain view of the cyclist, the cyclist is the person in prime position to make the interactions safe.

Perhaps you don't understand the situation on Princes Bridge. It is a signed bikes-only path, on a divided footpath. In theory the continuation of the busiest bicycle route in Melbourne :idea:
Image

The dangerous action was the person willfully walking in the bike path :roll: It happens all the time :x Most cyclists wind up resorting to squeezing through on the road - hence placed at greater hazard because of rude ignorant pedestrians.
User avatar
il padrone
 
Posts: 18157
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

PreviousNext

Return to General discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: casual_cyclist, Dragster1, jasonc, Matthewb, rpmspinman



Popular Bike Shops
Torpedo 7 Torpedo7 AU
Ground Effect Ground Effect NZ
Chain Reaction Cycles CRC UK
Wiggle Wiggle UK
Ebay Ebay AU



InTouch with BNA
“Bicycles BNA Twitter
“Bicycles BNA Facebook
“Google+ BNA Google+
“Bicycles BNA Newsletter