Cycling related signs - good/bad/ugly

[Aushiker]

From Reddit.

Andrew

[cowled]

Not exactly a cycling related sign, but it is blocking the entire bike lane on Brisbane's most popular cycling route, 'The River Loop'. Brisbane City Council have placed this electronic sign in order to advise motorists of parking restrictions during the Brisbane International Tennis Tournament. Pity they never bothered to think about the safety issues this sign poses for cyclists.

I have told the council about this hazard and they said they would conduct a site visit and assess the issue, however, they weren't interested in looking at my video footage.

[Lukeyboy]

I have no issues with that sign. Its the exact same deal if a car or when that boat is parked there at the bottom of the dip. When it comes to giving way the onus would be on the bike rider due to crossing the solid white line. And FYI, it's also not actually a bike lane but the shoulder of the road. When there aren't events on at the tennis centre its usually blocked by car after car. The area is however a BAZ. I always ride on the right side of that line for very obvious reasons.

[cowled]

I have no issues with that sign. Its the exact same deal if a car or when that boat is parked there at the bottom of the dip. When it comes to giving way the onus would be on the bike rider due to crossing the solid white line. And FYI, it's also not actually a bike lane but the shoulder of the road. When there aren't events on at the tennis centre its usually blocked by car after car. The area is however a BAZ. I always ride on the right side of that line for very obvious reasons.

Yeah ok, I take your point Luke. You are correct. Even so, I would expect a safety audit would still identify this as a hazard, particularly as this is a common route for cyclists.

While you might be comfortable with riding on the right side of the line many others would prefer to keep left. Also, if you are riding in a bunch you would typically follow the line of the lead rider so it depends on what they do.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

[Lukeyboy]

Which is why the leader would point out/call obstructions and move to the right. Something which the lead rider in your video didn't do hence the confusion about what you thought they were going to do. I know what youre trying to get at but its legal. It's not a safety hazard. You would have had to have done the same exact thing if a local resident who has a permit to park there during events decided to park their car there (which was the case in the first second of the footage where you passed a red parked car). There would be more potential legal issues with it being on the footpath rather than on the shoulder of the road.

[Aushiker]

Source: Alexander Hinds

Andrew

[citywomble]

Hi,

Saw this sign alongside the Regents Canal in Camden, London.

http://i6.minus.com/jwIWbf3AvGv7g.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This seems to be a much more friendly way to 'permit' cycling without creating a formal shared path.

It is better to say what will be allowed than list what is not allowed. Better than No Cycling or Cyclist Dismount and works well in Camden.

[warthog1]

Good++
On Mt Donna Buang Vic

[trailgumby]

@wh1 I'm not so sure about that being a "good" sign.

As a driver id interpret that to mean cyclists are.to not hog the road and get the heck out of the way of more important Rego-paying vehicles like my car.

That is so setting cyclists up for conflict... where are they supposed to go? There's no shoulder for them to take and the road is narrow with sharp bends.



Sent from my android thingy using Crapatalk

[outnabike]

Hi trailgumby ,
I know it's twisted but it seems as though it's the cyclists are the ones to show care.
May be I am navel gazing or getting paranoid.....

[Aushiker]

As a driver id interpret that to mean cyclists are.to not hog the road and get the heck out of the way of more important Rego-paying vehicles like my car.

That was my immediate thought as well ... it is about cyclists having to share the road, not motorists, not both road users.

Andrew

[kb]

In practice it's a ride with more considerate drivers than most. Probably because it's not really a through route rather than because (or in spite) of the sign.

[warthog1]

Trailgumby and Aushiker I reckon you blokes are being a bit paranoid.
I certainly took it to mean drivers need to watch out for cyclists as they are also using the road.
I think they took it that way as well. As per KB all the motorcycles and cars gave me plenty of room.

[Duck!]

Trailgumby and Aushiker I reckon you bloke blokes are being a bit paranoid.
I certainly took it to mean drivers need to watch out for cyclists as they are also using the road.
I think they took it that way as well. As per KB all the motorcycles and cars gave me plenty of room.

That's how I read it too.

[warthog1]

Yes it's not the sort of road you have bunches on as it's a long climb. You could maybe read it as don't ride 2 abreast if it was not on a long climb I guess.

[trailgumby]

I disagree with it being paranoid - it is in fact how many if not most drivers interpret that type of sign.

I have been yelled at by motorists on several occasions now to "Share the road! :× " when claiming the lane due to it being too narrow to permit safe passing.

I didn't understand why until I read of one locality in the US - maybe Portland Oregon - (Aushiker, correct me on this) that has withdrawn the "Share the Road" sign because they acknowledge that it sends precisely this mixed message.

So now they have "Cyclist may occupy whole lane" and similar instead. A vast improvement that reflects both the legal situation and the safety needs of the vulnerable road user.

Sent from my android thingy using Crapatalk

[warthog1]

I disagree with it being paranoid - it is in fact how many if not most drivers interpret that type of sign.

I have been yelled at by motorists on several occasions now to "Share the road! :× " when claiming the lane due to it being too narrow to permit safe passing.

I didn't understand why until I read of one locality in the US - maybe Portland Oregon - (Aushiker, correct me on this) that has withdrawn the "Share the Road" sign because they acknowledge that it sends precisely this mixed message.

So now they have "Cyclist may occupy whole lane" and similar instead. A vast improvement that reflects both the legal situation and the safety needs of the vulnerable road user.

Sent from my android thingy using Crapatalk

That may be the case without the massive lettered caution along side the picture of a bicycle, above it.
To me that says to drivers be careful there are cyclists on the road. It doesn't say cyclist be careful you might get squashed. We already know that.
I've been up that climb half a dozen times now. Never any angst.

[Aushiker]

I didn't understand why until I read of one locality in the US - maybe Portland Oregon - (Aushiker, correct me on this) that has withdrawn the "Share the Road" sign because they acknowledge that it sends precisely this mixed message.

So now they have "Cyclist may occupy whole lane" and similar instead. A vast improvement that reflects both the legal situation and the safety needs of the vulnerable road user.

Details here. As an aside it is interesting to note that the #4 top blog post at the Urbanist (Crikey) in 2013 was "Are cyclists ‘mere obstacles’ to motorists?"

Being paranoid? I don't think so.

Andrew

[warthog1]

I didn't understand why until I read of one locality in the US - maybe Portland Oregon - (Aushiker, correct me on this) that has withdrawn the "Share the Road" sign because they acknowledge that it sends precisely this mixed message.

So now they have "Cyclist may occupy whole lane" and similar instead. A vast improvement that reflects both the legal situation and the safety needs of the vulnerable road user.

Details here. As an aside it is interesting to note that the #4 top blog post at the Urbanist (Crikey) in 2013 was "Are cyclists ‘mere obstacles’ to motorists?"

Being paranoid? I don't think so.

Andrew

Andrew I don't disagree with the sentiment in those 2 links. I have had more than my share of dangerous passes and other stupid impatient behavior from motorists. I cycled 17k km last year with 5-10k of that in bunches, closer to 10k than 5. I agree that many motorists do not consider us valid road users and am familiar with the Richard Pollet case.
However you are clearly not familiar with Mt Donna Buang.
The context of those two links in a heavily built up urban environment is completely different to this lightly trafficked road.
This passage from your first link emphasizes that point;

So please lets remember that cyclists are legitimate road users, they can use the full lane in most circumstances, the do not have to hug the kerb and frankly shouldn’t do so as it is dangerous, simply because it encourages dangerous passing and finally a road shoulder is not a bike lane. A bike lane has to be signed as per the Road Traffic Regulation 2000.

Most cyclists are doing well to climb Donna in under an hour and many will do it considerably slower. 1080m in 16.8 km means travelling at an average of 16.8 kph to achieve this, obviously slower on the steeper pinches. To claim the lane for the length of of the climb at that slow speed is not necessary and would indicate a severe sense of entitlement. Cyclists and drivers alike would be giving you justified angst for doing so. Similarly bunch riding is not going to take place on a climb like this. Those who are fit enough to climb at a reasonable pace aren't likely to be attending so they can leisurely climb the mountain chatting to their friends. They will be there for the challenge of the climb. In any case the place is quiet enough to chat to someone on your wheel if you must, the speed is slow enough to eliminate wind noise.

Here is some feedback from those who have enjoyed the mountain;


Tooraj

Just recently when I rode there I think I only saw half a dozen cars and that was mid to late morning. You can hear them coming from a mile away. I’d say it is safe. It was so quiet and serene I could even hear bikes descending. That is only from the C507 turn off though. Warburton Hwy is pretty full on. I parked in the Woori Yallock shopping centre and I rode up to Warburton Hwy (I think that was 17 km). From memory, there is a decent shoulder all the way to Warburton.

Indra

Thanks and are there many cyclist on weekend. Also is it safe.

Paul

I found the section before cement creek fairly tough going, but the second half was really nice, felt fairly similar to the 1/20 without all the cars.

From someone who has ridden the climb multiple times and therefore has a different perspective to you, the sign is fine.
In the context it is placed, it's message is clearly to warn drivers of the presence of cyclists.
It is clear to me and others, as evidenced by the comments I posted, that drivers also see it in that context. The road is narrow and windy in places but I have always been given plenty of room by passing vehicles
Kudos to the local council for placing the sign and embracing cyclists
Cant wait to visit again.

[human909]

To claim the lane for the length of of the climb at that slow speed is not necessary and would indicate a severe sense of entitlement.

You must be amazingly skilled if you can tell a person's personality and outlook them simply riding in the middle of a traffic lane.

[Aushiker]

However you are clearly not familiar with Mt Donna Buang.

You are quite correct. I simply posted the information in response to TG request.

Andrew

[warthog1]

To claim the lane for the length of of the climb at that slow speed is not necessary and would indicate a severe sense of entitlement.

You must be amazingly skilled if you can tell a person's personality and outlook them simply riding in the middle of a traffic lane.

Go back and read the entirety of the post. It is a 16.8 km climb ridden and generally driven IME at low speed. It is lightly trafficked and traffic behaviour is generally courteous.
There is no need to claim the lane and to do so would unnecessarily inconvenience and annoy others.
That is the basis of my assertion.
Go and ride it then tell me differently.
It's not far from you and is a fantastic place to cycle

[Aushiker]

Explanation at A View from the Cycle Path

Andrew

[il padrone]

Trailgumby and Aushiker I reckon you blokes are being a bit paranoid.
I certainly took it to mean drivers need to watch out for cyclists as they are also using the road.

+1. Over-analyzing.

Having ridden that bit of road often enough I know that drivers just need a bit of a reminder that it is a popular cycling route, and most drivers up there are pretty reasonable about 'sharing' the road. The sign might be better reading simply "caution - cyclists on road", but it is at least a 'warning of presence' sign, so a good start.

[il padrone]

I disagree with it being paranoid - it is in fact how many if not most drivers interpret that type of sign.

I have been yelled at by motorists on several occasions now to "Share the road! :× " when claiming the lane due to it being too narrow to permit safe passing.

I'd suggest you are mainly talking about urban settings.

Mt Donna Buang is not this. It is a narrow, winding forest climb on a scenic tourist route, usually with fairly low traffic volumes. Anyone who 'claims the lane' while climbing that is a fool or tosser.

I do claim the lane fully on the descent though (at 60-70kmh). Essential for safety, the cars can sit behind till safe to pass (which is usually on the last straight before Warburton Hwy)