Police crackdown on Pyrmont Bridge this morning
Posted: Tue Aug 28, 2012 11:22 am
Usual thing, helmets, red lights.
BNA - For the Australian Cycling Community
http://www.bicycles.net.au/forums/
He should understand that cyclists are legally allowed to ride in the direction we were wishing to go - especially given the fact that there was a bicycle symbol painted on the road not 20m from where he was standing (maybe he was unsure as to whether Darling Drive might be an exclusive feeder for the Harbour Bridge - the only reason I could think of as to why he may have had a legitimate reason to believe we were not allowed on THAT road).What should he have done then?
His statement "you're not allowed to ride on the road" would appear to reflect a view about road rule 247snortin wrote:I and another guy were stopped on the road (left lane) adjacent to the bike lane at Pyrmont Bridge Hotel as the lights were red. one of the police was motioning me and the other guy to "get off the road" (we were going to head east down past darling harbour on Darling Drive - heading straight for the painted bike lane!!!) and onto the bike lane to cross with all the people heading over the shared bridge.
we weren't even wanting to go in the direction he was telling us to go!
even better, as we rode past him (we on the road, him standing just behind the kerb) he called out "you're not allowed to ride on the road"!
WT?????
I would quite happily argue the officers interpretation is wrong - what he was looking at was not a "bicycle lane designed for bicycles travelling in the same direction ..." but rather a bicyle path designed for bicycles travelling in both directions, as defined in rule 239(4). You could also argue that the priority of the lights (& their lack of function on Union St) means that it is impracticable to use the bike lane.Road Rule 247 Riding in a bicycle lane on a road wrote:(1) The rider of a bicycle riding on a length of road with a bicycle lane designed for bicycles travelling in the same direction as the rider must ride in the bicycle lane unless it is impracticable to do so.
Maximum penalty: 20 penalty units.
Note. Rule 153 defines a bicycle lane and deals with the use of bicycle lanes by other vehicles.
(2) In this rule:
road does not include a road related area.
Note. Road related area includes the shoulder of a road—see rule 13.
The symbol for a bicycle lane is quite specific, but it includes the usual bike symbol plus a particular style of arrow. From the bay, on Lilyfield Rd, Anzac Bridge, Union St, Pyrmont Bridge and King St, not one of them use that symbol. So, cycling on the road and ignoring the "bike lanes" is fine.r2160 wrote:I guess it also depends on whether it is a dedicated bike lane or a shared path as well.
If it is a designated bike lane, cyclists are required to use it. If it is a shared path, the cyclist can choose to use it.
cheers
Glenn
find_bruce wrote:His statement "you're not allowed to ride on the road" would appear to reflect a view about road rule 247snortin wrote:I and another guy were stopped on the road (left lane) adjacent to the bike lane at Pyrmont Bridge Hotel as the lights were red. one of the police was motioning me and the other guy to "get off the road" (we were going to head east down past darling harbour on Darling Drive - heading straight for the painted bike lane!!!) and onto the bike lane to cross with all the people heading over the shared bridge.
we weren't even wanting to go in the direction he was telling us to go!
even better, as we rode past him (we on the road, him standing just behind the kerb) he called out "you're not allowed to ride on the road"!
WT?????
I would quite happily argue the officers interpretation is wrong - what he was looking at was not a "bicycle lane designed for bicycles travelling in the same direction ..." but rather a bicyle path designed for bicycles travelling in both directions, as defined in rule 239(4). You could also argue that the priority of the lights (& their lack of function on Union St) means that it is impracticable to use the bike lane.Road Rule 247 Riding in a bicycle lane on a road wrote:(1) The rider of a bicycle riding on a length of road with a bicycle lane designed for bicycles travelling in the same direction as the rider must ride in the bicycle lane unless it is impracticable to do so.
Maximum penalty: 20 penalty units.
Note. Rule 153 defines a bicycle lane and deals with the use of bicycle lanes by other vehicles.
(2) In this rule:
road does not include a road related area.
Note. Road related area includes the shoulder of a road—see rule 13.
In the case of a cyclist continuing down Darling Drive I would strongly argue that it is not only impracticable but also inherently unsafe to be on the bike path and then merge back into the road.
It is wrong:find_bruce wrote: I would quite happily argue the officers interpretation is wrong
The problem here is the definition of a bicycle lane. As per the road rules (NSW),simonn wrote:A bicycle lane is a lane on a road and you are required to ride in it if practicable to do so.
I wouldn't be doing that down here Ox, holding yer ground make local plods fearful for their lives and yer know what happens after that...Oxford wrote:I would stop and ask them to clarify under what law they are making their request. Then tell them I will check that right there and then and give them an opportunity to further clarify their position and then as is the case here, show them they are wrong. All very respectfully and politely. And all being recorded for later use if it gets ugly.
I do not know this road/track and on streetview it looks like it is being built so I have no idea of what it looks like.snortin wrote: The painted separated lane along union street does not meet these requirements for a bicycle lane (the sign has a bicycle symbol and the word ONLY under).
That's because you got a cop who was willing to doubt his own understanding (or you're a really good talker). The problem comes when Mr. Plod writes you a ticket anyway and then you have to take a day off work to go and see Mr. Magistrate who may be having a bad day and really doesn't care what Oxford said on the internets about the law. Even if you win, you're out a days pay.Oxford wrote:read my thread on standing up to a traffic cop last week. edumacated him about traffic laws and he couldn't write the ticket as he couldn't validate his reason. but yeah I'm not a fan of the VicPol, jack boots is a description that comes to mind.Mulger bill wrote:I wouldn't be doing that down here Ox, holding yer ground make local plods fearful for their lives and yer know what happens after that...Oxford wrote:I would stop and ask them to clarify under what law they are making their request. Then tell them I will check that right there and then and give them an opportunity to further clarify their position and then as is the case here, show them they are wrong. All very respectfully and politely. And all being recorded for later use if it gets ugly.
A bicycle lane sign is and an end bicycle lane sign is . The observant will note that it must be a sign and not a road marking which are defined seperately.Road Rule 153 Bicycle Lanes wrote:(4) A bicycle lane is a marked lane, or the part of a marked lane:
(a) beginning at a bicycle lane sign applying to the lane, and
(b) ending at the nearest of the following:
(i) an end bicycle lane sign applying to the lane,
(ii) an intersection (unless the lane is at the unbroken side of the continuing road at a T-intersection or continued across the intersection by broken lines),
(iii) if the road ends at a dead end—the end of the road.
A bicycle path sign is while the end bicycle path sign isRoad Rule 239(4) wrote:bicycle path means a length of path beginning at a bicycle path sign or bicycle path road marking, and ending at the nearest of the following:
(a) an end bicycle path sign or end bicycle path road marking,
(b) a separated footpath sign or separated footpath road marking,
(c) a road (except a road related area),
(d) the end of the path.
Note. Road related area is defined in rule 13.
bicycle path road marking means a road marking on a path, consisting of a bicycle symbol, the words “bicycles only”, or both the bicycle symbol and the word “only”.
Note. Bicycle symbol is defined in the Dictionary.
end bicycle path road marking means a bicycle path road marking with the word “end”.
I did, the phone has been loaded but I'd still be iffy about talking back to our finest without a lot of forelock tugging.Oxford wrote:read my thread on standing up to a traffic cop last week. edumacated him about traffic laws and he couldn't write the ticket as he couldn't validate his reason. but yeah I'm not a fan of the VicPol, jack boots is a description that comes to mind.Mulger bill wrote:I wouldn't be doing that down here Ox, holding yer ground make local plods fearful for their lives and yer know what happens after that...Oxford wrote:I would stop and ask them to clarify under what law they are making their request. Then tell them I will check that right there and then and give them an opportunity to further clarify their position and then as is the case here, show them they are wrong. All very respectfully and politely. And all being recorded for later use if it gets ugly.
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=-34. ... 94,,0,7.67Reman wrote:Wrong about the arrow, needs to be "Lane" as find bruce says. I would love to see anywhere this sign is actually used
That's the one - it is even rarer than the sign, in that the lane is continued across the intersection by broken lines.maestro wrote:http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=-34. ... 94,,0,7.67Reman wrote:Wrong about the arrow, needs to be "Lane" as find bruce says. I would love to see anywhere this sign is actually used
you will find them a bit closer to your home, eg Lilifield Rd. Of course with all the trucks, boats buses etc parked across the lane it is pretty easy to establish that it is impracticable to use it.Reman wrote:So there you go, in the remote chance I'm cruising around the middle 'gong area I know I must use that lane
Actually, that's the first bike lane sign up to that point... The section of broken-line bike lane that crosses the road is not actually a bike lane as there is no sign until *after* the intersection.find_bruce wrote: That's the one - it is even rarer than the sign, in that the lane is continued across the intersection by broken lines.
I travel Lilyfield Rd almost everyday, trust me they aren't Bike Lanes that you must use. They are your bog standard paint a line and some bikes on the side of a road so buses and trucks know to park there so you can't actually use themfind_bruce wrote:you will find them a bit closer to your home, eg Lilifield Rd. Of course with all the trucks, boats buses etc parked across the lane it is pretty easy to establish that it is impracticable to use it.Reman wrote:So there you go, in the remote chance I'm cruising around the middle 'gong area I know I must use that lane