Australian Cycling Forums - Bicycles Network Australia

il padrone wrote:
He chose to ride up the left side of the van..

The way I see it, he rode past the white van , and was a car lenght in fron of the van.
The van was behind him, overtook him and cut him off.

It would be a different story, if the cyclist was next to the van .

damhooligan wrote:Not everybody has your personal wide knowledge and experience,so saying to those that don't know this yet that they are a fool, is to me not very nice.

I'm not so interested in being "nice", I'm more keen t advise people on what is good cycling practice.

damhooligan wrote:In the video, the cyclist did nothing wrong.
He did what he tought was the right thing, being in a clearly marked cycling lane.

Srprisingly what we think is the safest thing is not always so. Bike lanes are one of these. H****ts are another

damhooligan wrote:But whats even more ideal, is that other road users, would not put others lifes in danger.

No such thing as an ideal world so we must consider all possibilities. And no. 1 - make sure you stay out of danger, whatever and where-ever that may be. It's the practical approach.

damhooligan wrote:

il padrone wrote:He chose to ride up the left side of the van..

The way I see it, he rode past the white van , and was a car lenght in fron of the van.
The van was behind him, overtook him and cut him off.

I cannot judge this as it is out of shot. However I'd very much doubt he was a "car length" in front. Regardless of this, he would have put a stop to the left-hook by sitting square in front of the van and clearly showing he was going straight ahead.

il padrone wrote:

damhooligan wrote:Not everybody has your personal wide knowledge and experience,so saying to those that don't know this yet that they are a fool, is to me not very nice.

I'm not so interested in being "nice", I'm more keen t advise people on what is good cycling practice.

Aha, but, being nice wil get the advice across ten time more efficiently.
If your goal is to educate, you stil are better off being nice,

il padrone wrote:

damhooligan wrote:In the video, the cyclist did nothing wrong.
He did what he tought was the right thing, being in a clearly marked cycling lane.

Srprisingly what we think is the safest thing is not always so. Bike lanes are one of these. H****ts are another

I agree, looks can be deceiving, but thats why are here to help
But I am saying, he is not foolish for doing what appears at the time to be the right thing.
but, he would be foolish to make the same mistake again.

il padrone wrote:[

damhooligan wrote:But whats even more ideal, is that other road users, would not put others lifes in danger.

No such thing as an ideal world so we must consider all possibilities. And no. 1 - make sure you stay out of danger, whatever and where-ever that may be. It's the practical approach.

true.

il padrone wrote:

damhooligan wrote:

il padrone wrote:He chose to ride up the left side of the van..

The way I see it, he rode past the white van , and was a car lenght in fron of the van.
The van was behind him, overtook him and cut him off.

I cannot judge this as it is out of shot. However I'd very much doubt he was a "car length" in front. Regardless of this, he would have put a stop to the left-hook by sitting square in front of the van and clearly showing he was going straight ahead.

I saw when he overtook the van , plenty of room between van and car, at least a car lenght.
Thats why I was thinking there was plenty of room, but agree, not good to see, speculation.

But even sitting in front of the van , would not have garanteed succes.
It may may have given clear signs to the van, but it would not prevent the van to ignore this,
nor would he have guaranteed the van from preventing to overtake, and repeating the same offense.

No guarantees in this life (except death and taxes), but I'm talking about probabilities and risks - what we assess all the time in life. Plonking yourself on a bike square in front of a car, at close quarters when stopped at the lights will pretty much ensure they stay behind. I do it often with much success. Sure some might try to overtake (badly), someone might just drive over you, but not likely.

il padrone wrote:No guarantees in this life (except death and taxes)

..and hilltop hoods workin' the mic!


technically/legally the cyclist did nothing wrong. experience tells us there was a better way to ensure the cyclists safety.

Was the op riding his motorbike/moped/electric bike in this instance?

I think the other important consideration is how one filters and I treat those green lanes as glorified filtering lanes. If filtering, then for safety, filter to the head of traffic, not in the midst of it. Or be patient and stay at the back of the line.

Taking a 5th and 6th look, that white van is clearly orientated to turn left (even without indicator) and our OP is clearly still within a van length of the front of the van. And no need to argue for the lack of indicator as the cause could range from bad driving to a blown bulb 5mins earlier.

Our OP just needs to learn and be more situationally aware and take the wide open general lane space just right of the two while vehicles. That's all.

Shared bicycle lane for left turn

This arrangement is used at certain intersections to indicate a "shared" lane. As long as a motorist gives way to any cyclists on the "shared" lane, they are allowed to travel on part of a green bicycle lane for a short distance, in order to turn left at an upcoming intersection. The "Share bicycle lane for left turn" sign indicates the point where drivers are permitted to enter the bicycle lane to prepare for a left turn.

As a motorist you must:

1.Be extra aware of the blind spots of your rear-view and side mirrors. It is especially important to turn your head and check to make sure there are no cyclists in the "shared" lane you are about to enter.
2.Give way to any vehicles (including cyclists) already in the shared lane before entering.
3.Give priority to any cyclists travelling on the shared lane; slow down and keep a safe distance between yourself and any cyclist.Do not speed in order to cut ahead of a cyclist in a "shared" lane.
Do not try to overtake a cyclist by "squeezing" through the left hand side of a shared lane.

As a cyclist you need to:

1.Be aware of the traffic around you – never assume a driver has seen you.
2.If you are planning to turn left at an upcoming intersection, keep to the left hand side of the lane – you do not have to ride on the green portion.
3.If you are not turning left, use the green portion of the lane.

The ute driver is in the clear, but the van driver is clearly in the wrong, and has violated points 2 and 3.
Should the OP make a complaint? No.

RonK wrote:

Shared bicycle lane for left turn
[snip]

The ute driver is in the clear, but the van driver is clearly in the wrong, and has violated points 2 and 3.
Should the OP make a complaint? No.

That's a lovely quote RonK that someone from the Department of Transport and Main Roads has gone to great efforts to write. Just to be clear, my issue isn't with you or others who have referred to that website, but rather to the muppets who published this nonsense on a government website.

The fundamental problem is that there is no such thing as a "shared bicycle lane" in the Transport Operations (Road Use Management—Road Rules) Regulation 2009 (Qld). If you look again at the website you quoted from, you will note that every other statement is backed up by a reference to the road rules I linked to above.

Even if there was a "shared bicycle lane" the sign referred to on the Department's website isn't at this intersection, nor is there a sign saying "Left Lane must turn left, bicycles excepted"

So "find bruce", you are saying that your interpretation of the rules has precedence over what is written in the QLD road rules?
Who says that there is no such thing as a shared bike lane?
What a load of rot.
Stuff like this is why cyclists end up in trouble.
They have an interpretation of the road rules that they make up in their own mind.

There obviously is such a thing as a shared lane as it is noted in the section of the road rules that relates SPECIFICALLY to cyclists as I have quoted a page back.
Stop reading the road rules as they relate to all vehicles and start reading the specific section about bicycles.

Shared bicycle lane for left turn

This arrangement is used at certain intersections to indicate a "shared" lane. As long as a motorist gives way to any cyclists on the "shared" lane, they are allowed to travel on part of a green bicycle lane for a short distance, in order to turn left at an upcoming intersection. The "Share bicycle lane for left turn" sign indicates the point where drivers are permitted to enter the bicycle lane to prepare for a left turn.

Pistols at dawn.

Mods, how do I unfollow a thread?

I believe the relevant rule is r158(2), but it requires a sign. I see no sign on the video.

Interesting concept .

Here in Victoria there is no such thing as a shared bicycle lane - just bicycle lanes. And the bicycle lane is not some space taken out of a left-turn lane, but rather a part of the normal road space - an ongoing road lane. Drivers can make a left turn if there is a slip lane without needing to share a lane, when the road authorities deign to carry the bike lane up to the intersection stop-line (which is happening a bit more nowadays).

We really need to get away from the tokenism that sees bicycle space taken out of the less-needed bits of the road network.

The rule is the same in Victoria. I think it's an ARR. Apologies for not quoting the exact text - posting via phone...

I don't know Kona, if you're still pissed at that tosser driver make a complaint.

Otherwise I'm hanging for the next CCR instalment.

find_bruce wrote:The fundamental problem is that there is no such thing as a "shared bicycle lane" in the Transport Operations (Road Use Management—Road Rules) Regulation 2009 (Qld). If you look again at the website you quoted from, you will note that every other statement is backed up by a reference to the road rules I linked to above.

Even if there was a "shared bicycle lane" the sign referred to on the Department's website isn't at this intersection, nor is there a sign saying "Left Lane must turn left, bicycles excepted"

A shared bicycle lane is a special purpose lane, and the regulations pertaining to motorists are defined in sections 153 to 158.

And such a sign is only present where a left turn is mandatory, i.e. where there is a dedicated left turning lane and/or left turning road markings. There is no dedicated left turning lane at the intersection in the video.

sumgy wrote:So "find bruce", you are saying that your interpretation of the rules has precedence over what is written in the QLD road rules?
Who says that there is no such thing as a shared bike lane?
What a load of rot.
Stuff like this is why cyclists end up in trouble.
They have an interpretation of the road rules that they make up in their own mind.

There obviously is such a thing as a shared lane as it is noted in the section of the road rules that relates SPECIFICALLY to cyclists as I have quoted a page back.
Stop reading the road rules as they relate to all vehicles and start reading the specific section about bicycles.

Shared bicycle lane for left turn

This arrangement is used at certain intersections to indicate a "shared" lane. As long as a motorist gives way to any cyclists on the "shared" lane, they are allowed to travel on part of a green bicycle lane for a short distance, in order to turn left at an upcoming intersection. The "Share bicycle lane for left turn" sign indicates the point where drivers are permitted to enter the bicycle lane to prepare for a left turn.

There doesn't seem to be a lot of careful reading happening in this thread.

Sumgy - unless the quotes are getting mixed up, what you quoted is not part of the queensland road rules, its just something somebody put up on the TMR website. That does not make it a road rule. And as already pointed out, for it to be a shared bicycle lane, it needs a sign to be present to say that it is a shared lane. And there is no sign there. So it isn't.

Secondly, why is everybody calling it a bike lane? Its not a bike lane. Its a bit of road painted green, which is NOT what it takes to make a bike lane. See rule 153 for a definition of a bike lane. There is no mention of green paint magically creating a bike lane - the rules require a lane marked on the road AND a sign (on a post) saying "bicycle lane". There is no sign post. So its not a bicycle lane.

Thirdly, as it wasn't a bike lane, the ute driver could park himself wherever he liked on it.

Personally, depending on what was coming up behind me, I would have passed on the right and waited to the right of the ute. The van has that look about it of "prepare yourself for my left hook".

I am assuming that if somebody from the TMR put it up under a section called ROAD RULES then it is most probably right (but I will check it with my sources from the QPS).
I hate to say it but a sign post does not automatically mean it is a bike lane any more than a painted picture of a bike means it is a bike lane.
If you like I can take pictures of signs stating bike lane with cars parked all ovr them and no yello lines or otherwise to stop them.
Again by association this is a shared lane.

However, I agree with the rest of your post.

The van driver broke the law because he didn't give way to the bicycle in the green bicycle lane.

As a motorist you must:

Be extra aware of the blind spots of your rear-view and side mirrors. It is especially important to turn your head and check to make sure there are no cyclists in the "shared" lane you are about to enter.
Give way to any vehicles (including cyclists) already in the shared lane before entering.
Give priority to any cyclists travelling on the shared lane; slow down and keep a safe distance between yourself and any cyclist.

biker jk wrote:The van driver broke the law because he didn't give way to the bicycle in the green bicycle lane.

As a motorist you must:

Be extra aware of the blind spots of your rear-view and side mirrors. It is especially important to turn your head and check to make sure there are no cyclists in the "shared" lane you are about to enter.
Give way to any vehicles (including cyclists) already in the shared lane before entering.
Give priority to any cyclists travelling on the shared lane; slow down and keep a safe distance between yourself and any cyclist.

Ummm yes, I think everyone agrees on that point.

InTheWoods wrote:Secondly, why is everybody calling it a bike lane? Its not a bike lane. Its a bit of road painted green, which is NOT what it takes to make a bike lane. See rule 153 for a definition of a bike lane. There is no mention of green paint magically creating a bike lane - the rules require a lane marked on the road AND a sign (on a post) saying "bicycle lane". There is no sign post. So its not a bicycle lane.

Did the video show the beginning of the bike lane? Because the sign only needs to be at the beginning of the lane, not continuously along it. There also needs to be an 'end bike lane' sign where the lane terminates (this will not normally be at the intersection stop line).

I kinda think it may be a real bike lane, with all the painting effort and such, but no evidence. The OP may be able to confirm it.

sumgy wrote:I hate to say it but a sign post does not automatically mean it is a bike lane any more than a painted picture of a bike means it is a bike lane.

Legally, the presence of the sign, together with the lane line is what delineates a bike lane. You can find it in your road rules.

This argument over 'shared lanes' is a red herring. Ultimately all bike lanes are shared lanes as drivers are allowed to travel in them for up to 50m to turn onto or off the road, and in some cases to park. There are very few 'bike-only' lanes about.

il padrone wrote:Did the video show the beginning of the bike lane?

Yes it does. Its only 10 meters long and the video starts well before the green bit of road.

Ahah. OK, check your local definitions. We have something like these in Victoria and they may be with a bike lane or independent. Called a bicycle storage area (also known as advance stop line sometimes) they have a a different definition and a sign is not required:

bicycle storage area means an area of a road before an intersection with traffic lights—
(a) that has painted on it one or more bicycle symbols;
and
(b) that is between two parallel stop lines, regardless of whether the lines are of equal length—
but does not include any stop line