Cycling related signs - good/bad/ugly

open topic, for anything cycling related.

Re: Cycling related signs - good/bad/ugly

Postby find_bruce » Tue Feb 11, 2014 6:19 am

il padrone wrote:Easy shopping for cyclists :lol: :lol: :lol:

Be fun with a bakfiets - who needs a wonky cart :D
Image
User avatar
find_bruce
 
Posts: 3723
Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 8:42 pm
Location: Sydney

by BNA » Tue Feb 11, 2014 6:34 am

BNA
 

Re: Cycling related signs - good/bad/ugly

Postby bychosis » Tue Feb 11, 2014 6:34 am

wellington_street wrote:
InTheWoods wrote:In qld that sign is the g9-60, which, belonging to the guide signs does not itself need to be obeyed, although obviously if there's some other rule which says you can't ride further on that needs to be obeyed.


Ditto for NSW:
http://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/cgi-bin/index ... d=g9/g9-60

Just another way roads authorities (un?)intentionally encourage road rage against cyclists. Most motorists (including myself until I looked it up) would think that is a regulatory sign.


I'm sure I've seen one which was "ALT BICYCLES". Much more appropriate given most of these "ALL BICYCLES" signs point you in a direction that you don't want to go.
bychosis (bahy-koh-sis): A mental disorder of delusions indicating impaired contact with a reality of no bicycles.
User avatar
bychosis
 
Posts: 2270
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2012 12:10 pm
Location: Lake Macquarie

Re: Cycling related signs - good/bad/ugly

Postby InTheWoods » Tue Feb 11, 2014 7:12 am

bychosis wrote:
wellington_street wrote:
InTheWoods wrote:In qld that sign is the g9-60, which, belonging to the guide signs does not itself need to be obeyed, although obviously if there's some other rule which says you can't ride further on that needs to be obeyed.


Ditto for NSW:
http://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/cgi-bin/index ... d=g9/g9-60

Just another way roads authorities (un?)intentionally encourage road rage against cyclists. Most motorists (including myself until I looked it up) would think that is a regulatory sign.


I'm sure I've seen one which was "ALT BICYCLES". Much more appropriate given most of these "ALL BICYCLES" signs point you in a direction that you don't want to go.


Maybe somebody "fixed" the sign.
Image
User avatar
InTheWoods
 
Posts: 1448
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 2:34 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: Cycling related signs - good/bad/ugly

Postby wellington_street » Tue Feb 11, 2014 10:34 am

My favourite part is where it says 'Legislative Reference - <blank>' :lol:
wellington_street
 
Posts: 992
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 12:25 pm

Re: Cycling related signs - good/bad/ugly

Postby Aushiker » Sun Feb 23, 2014 1:12 pm

Image

Sourced from YACF

Andrew
"Pedal-pounding pounce" - D. Fluellen - West Australian 13/1/14
Image
User avatar
Aushiker
 
Posts: 20144
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 1:55 pm
Location: Fremantle, WA

Re: Cycling related signs - good/bad/ugly

Postby 15wilsonwu » Mon Feb 24, 2014 6:11 pm

Aushiker wrote:Image

Sourced from YACF

Andrew


No bicycle riding dogs allowed?
I wasn't aware that dogs can ride bike!
I love riding, not training
User avatar
15wilsonwu
 
Posts: 619
Joined: Wed May 23, 2012 9:31 pm

Re: Cycling related signs - good/bad/ugly

Postby Aushiker » Mon Feb 24, 2014 6:18 pm

15wilsonwu wrote:
Aushiker wrote:Image

Sourced from YACF

Andrew


No bicycle riding dogs allowed?
I wasn't aware that dogs can ride bike!


I think that says "DOC" as in Doctors at a hospital. Could be wrong but.

Andrew
"Pedal-pounding pounce" - D. Fluellen - West Australian 13/1/14
Image
User avatar
Aushiker
 
Posts: 20144
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 1:55 pm
Location: Fremantle, WA

Re: Cycling related signs - good/bad/ugly

Postby cycles gitane » Mon Feb 24, 2014 9:02 pm

Image

Location: Glenferrie rd. Hawthorn, Vic.
There is NO room in the shed for the next bike! New shed rqd.
User avatar
cycles gitane
 
Posts: 327
Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2008 8:44 pm
Location: Near the Dandenong Creek cycle trail, Melbourne

Re: Cycling related signs - good/bad/ugly

Postby il padrone » Mon Feb 24, 2014 9:35 pm

No a sign really, but sure is ugly.

Image
Riding bikes in traffic - what seems dangerous is usually safe; what seems safe is often more dangerous.
User avatar
il padrone
 
Posts: 18383
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: Cycling related signs - good/bad/ugly

Postby Lukeyboy » Mon Feb 24, 2014 10:00 pm

Looks safe to me...







































...said no one ever.
Image
User avatar
Lukeyboy
 
Posts: 2266
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 2:38 am
Location: Brisbane

Re: Cycling related signs - good/bad/ugly

Postby find_bruce » Tue Feb 25, 2014 9:46 am

A blatant attempt to re-write the road rules & suggest that cyclists & pedestrians should give way to vehicles leaving private land
ImageImage

An employee came up to me while I was taking the photos and was very proud of the signs. He seemed genuinely shocked when I pointed out they were illegal, dangerous and encouraged drivers to breach the road rules. I was invited to speak with his boss. I declined and said I would be speaking to the RMS instead, text of my letter below

I wish to report some recently erected signs at Kennards Hire 69 Victoria Rd Rozelle NSW 2039 and I attach photographs of these signs.

I presume that Victoria Road is under the auspices of the RMS but have copied this email to Leichardt council in case I am mistaken.

The issues that I see with these signs are:

  • They create a dangerous situation in that the signs encourage drivers to ignore Road Rule 74 which requires a driver entering a road from adjacent land to give way to “(c) any vehicle or pedestrian on any road related area that the driver crosses to enter the road”. I note in this regard that Kennards have not erected a give way or other sign to remind drivers of their obligation to give way to pedestrians and cyclists;
  • It attempts to pass itself off as a traffic sign, although it is not contained within schedules 2, 3 or 4 of the Road Rules. It appears to me that the resemblance to a give way sign is not accidental;
  • The location and irregular nature of the sign suggest it was erected without approval from the RMS or Leichardt Council
  • The flashing light is on even when there is not a vehicle in the process of exiting the premises, such as at the time of taking the attached photos.
I look forward to confirmation of the action taken to remove these hazardous and unauthorised signs.
Image
User avatar
find_bruce
 
Posts: 3723
Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 8:42 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Cycling related signs - good/bad/ugly

Postby cowled » Tue Feb 25, 2014 10:08 am

find_bruce wrote:A blatant attempt to re-write the road rules


I hope that Kennards turn the signs 90 degrees to warn motorists.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk
cowled
 
Posts: 314
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 9:33 am

Re: Cycling related signs - good/bad/ugly

Postby find_bruce » Tue Feb 25, 2014 3:59 pm

cowled wrote:I hope that Kennards turn the signs 90 degrees to warn motorists.

Yep - if they had a give way sign for motorists & a flashing light when any bike was approaching, I would have been singing their praises all over town
Image
User avatar
find_bruce
 
Posts: 3723
Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 8:42 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Cycling related signs - good/bad/ugly

Postby InTheWoods » Tue Feb 25, 2014 4:38 pm

find_bruce wrote:
cowled wrote:I hope that Kennards turn the signs 90 degrees to warn motorists.

Yep - if they had a give way sign for motorists & a flashing light when any bike was approaching, I would have been singing their praises all over town


A golf course near me has done something similar. In fact, a recent video I posted was from their driveway.

They "improved" safety recenlty by painting "Caution - Driveway" stencils on the footpath on either side of the driveway. Nothing painted on the driveway facing cars coming out though :evil:
Image
User avatar
InTheWoods
 
Posts: 1448
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 2:34 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: Cycling related signs - good/bad/ugly

Postby bychosis » Tue Feb 25, 2014 4:53 pm

cycles gitane wrote:Image

Location: Glenferrie rd. Hawthorn, Vic.


Good, but bad.
Good: Funding for cycle infrastructure
Bad: Moron Motorists: "$400k on bikes? They don't even pay rego" or similar sentiments.
bychosis (bahy-koh-sis): A mental disorder of delusions indicating impaired contact with a reality of no bicycles.
User avatar
bychosis
 
Posts: 2270
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2012 12:10 pm
Location: Lake Macquarie

Re: Cycling related signs - good/bad/ugly

Postby WarbyD » Tue Feb 25, 2014 5:14 pm

15wilsonwu wrote:
Aushiker wrote:Image

Sourced from YACF

Andrew


No bicycle riding dogs allowed?
I wasn't aware that dogs can ride bike!


They can't! At least, not there.. Didn't you read the sign?!

;)
WarbyD
 
Posts: 527
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 12:13 pm

Re: Cycling related signs - good/bad/ugly

Postby ldrcycles » Tue Feb 25, 2014 6:16 pm

Aushiker wrote:Image

Sourced from YACF

Andrew



When man invented the bicycle he reached the peak of his attainments- Elizabeth West.
User avatar
ldrcycles
 
Posts: 6647
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2010 2:19 pm
Location: Kin Kin, Queensland

Re: Cycling related signs - good/bad/ugly

Postby trailgumby » Tue Mar 04, 2014 6:08 pm

Go Norman! :lol:

Sent from my android thingy using Crapatalk
"People have a right to their own opinions, but not their own facts. Evidence must be located, not created, and opinions not backed by evidence cannot be given much weight." -- James W Loewen

http://www.facebook.com/Drive2WorkDay
User avatar
trailgumby
 
Posts: 10301
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 4:30 pm
Location: Northern Beaches, Sydney

Re: Cycling related signs - good/bad/ugly

Postby DuncanS » Tue Mar 25, 2014 6:07 pm

Can anyone explain this?

Heading north on Tonkin Hwy from Hale Rd in on-road bike lane. Bike symbol printed on road; sign on the left says no bikes on Tonkin Hwy.

Freaked me out, so we back-tracked and took a huge detour along Hale and Welshpool Roads.

Image
DuncanS
 
Posts: 93
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2009 10:30 pm

Re: Cycling related signs - good/bad/ugly

Postby bagelonabike » Tue Mar 25, 2014 7:50 pm

This is a newly 'renovated' $1 million roundabout in Point Cook, West Melbourne.
Hmm how would you recommend approaching this one and living to tell the tale? Go into the left turning lane, but don't turn left like the cyclist in the photo? It's also a motorway offramp...

Image
bagelonabike
 
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 12:06 pm

Re: Cycling related signs - good/bad/ugly

Postby phineas » Tue Mar 25, 2014 7:58 pm

Image not on the road, but spotted on the noticeboard at Newcastle Uni


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
phineas
 
Posts: 77
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 8:24 pm

Re: Cycling related signs - good/bad/ugly

Postby wellington_street » Tue Mar 25, 2014 8:16 pm

DuncanS wrote:Can anyone explain this?

Heading north on Tonkin Hwy from Hale Rd in on-road bike lane. Bike symbol printed on road; sign on the left says no bikes on Tonkin Hwy.

Freaked me out, so we back-tracked and took a huge detour along Hale and Welshpool Roads.

Image


I noticed this the other day while driving past, including another sign which says "Cyclists prohibited on Tonkin Highway, use Abernethy Road". I have no idea how you are meant to get to Abernethy Road from this point without using Tonkin Highway!

Based on the physical restrictions, it seems you can ride along Tonkin to the Abernethy off-ramp and then take that. However, that seems to contradict the signs.

Looking on the Gateway WA site, they have actually posted a handy detour map:
http://gatewaywa.com.au/files/2013/12/C ... -2013c.jpg (did not embed as it is huge). I hope that helps
wellington_street
 
Posts: 992
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 12:25 pm

Re: Cycling related signs - good/bad/ugly

Postby wellington_street » Tue Mar 25, 2014 8:18 pm

bagelonabike wrote:This is a newly 'renovated' $1 million roundabout in Point Cook, West Melbourne.
Hmm how would you recommend approaching this one and living to tell the tale? Go into the left turning lane, but don't turn left like the cyclist in the photo? It's also a motorway offramp...

Image


It is illegal to go straight from the left lane, so the obvious answer is use the through lane. Not sure if I would be using that "cycle lane" in the roundabout either as it looks like prime SMIDSY territory and as it is not actually a cycle lane (no sign) you are not obliged to use it, regardless of whether you think it is safe or not.
wellington_street
 
Posts: 992
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 12:25 pm

Re: Cycling related signs - good/bad/ugly

Postby bagelonabike » Tue Mar 25, 2014 8:32 pm

wellington_street wrote:It is illegal to go straight from the left lane, so the obvious answer is use the through lane. Not sure if I would be using that "cycle lane" in the roundabout either as it looks like prime SMIDSY territory and as it is not actually a cycle lane (no sign) you are not obliged to use it, regardless of whether you think it is safe or not.

That sounds right to me. Madness painting on a cycle lane symbol there though!
bagelonabike
 
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 12:06 pm

Re: Cycling related signs - good/bad/ugly

Postby il padrone » Tue Mar 25, 2014 8:55 pm

The bike lane is a continuation of the bike lane painted coming in from the right. Dependent on signs it may be a legal bike lane (although they do generally end at intersections). The left-hand bike lanes through roundabouts are a terrible idea - basically turning your roundabout passage with priority, into a hook turn where you must give way to all.
Riding bikes in traffic - what seems dangerous is usually safe; what seems safe is often more dangerous.
User avatar
il padrone
 
Posts: 18383
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

PreviousNext

Return to General discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: BentleyO, Bing [Bot], Derny Driver, lobstermash, Majestic-12 [Bot], Scott_C, zhangief



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

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

> FREE BNA Stickers
> BNA Cycling Kit