Enough is enough

Re: Enough is enough

Postby jet-ski » Thu Dec 13, 2012 5:30 pm

So you've never made a mistake, wellington_street? It's very easy to get on your high horse about 'dangerous riders'... but speed is not the only factor! there are plenty of 'wobblies' that ride two abreast so they can chat, dogs running out wide on their leashes... I had to swerve to avoid a barking, snapping yap-yap the other day without shoulder checking and the rider behind me had a close call too.

For the record I'm not fast and I am also the size of a small hobbit.

If the infrastructure was up to the same standard as we apply to arterial roads then a lot of the conflicts would cease to exist. The example is the South Perth path duplication. Humans being humans make mistakes. Humans being humans, some are arrogant asses, but if the path wasn't so bad it wouldn't be as much of an issue.

As for taking action, I'm frankly sick of being fobbed off. I wrote a complaint to the City of Perth about the lack of bicycle infrastructure on the CBD and all they did was add me to their sodding mailing list. Good luck finding someone with actual decision making power for a ride. Maybe Troy Buswell? He seems to be up for anything? ;)
Xtracycle, Surly Long Haul Trucker, Bike Friday New World Tourist, Giant TCR, 9:zero:7
http://www.perthcyclist.net/blog
User avatar
jet-ski
 
Posts: 1404
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 4:51 pm
Location: Perth WA

by BNA » Thu Dec 13, 2012 5:46 pm

BNA
 

Re: Enough is enough

Postby wellington_street » Thu Dec 13, 2012 5:46 pm

jet-ski wrote:So you've never made a mistake, wellington_street? It's very easy to get on your high horse about 'dangerous riders'... but speed is not the only factor! there are plenty of 'wobblies' that ride two abreast so they can chat, dogs running out wide on their leashes... I had to swerve to avoid a barking, snapping yap-yap the other day without shoulder checking and the rider behind me had a close call too.


Of course I've made mistakes. But the likelihood of an incident happening is low, and the consequences not severe, because I ride appropriately for the conditions.

A path with the hazards you've identified above is not the place to ride quickly or ride in a group if it's going to cause issues when needing to swerve or brake quickly.

If the infrastructure was up to the same standard as we apply to arterial roads then a lot of the conflicts would cease to exist.


I don't think it is a valid comparison. There's only a handful of freeways in Perth which are designed exclusively for high speed traffic - the rest of the arterial roads are shared between traffic of all shapes, sizes and speeds, just like a shared path. You wouldn't tolerate someone driving down Beaufort St at 80km/h so I'm not sure why it's considered acceptable to treat the PSPs in the same way.

If you want to ride fast and there's too many conflicts on the Kwinana PSP use the Cale Street - Labouchere Road - Mill Point Road route.
wellington_street
 
Posts: 994
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 12:25 pm

Re: Enough is enough

Postby jet-ski » Thu Dec 13, 2012 5:50 pm

Beaufort St isn't an arterial!

I don't think you can just write it off as an invalid assumption when there's already a real life example in our very city of how improved infrastructure means that people get far less snarky at each other and can still get where they are going.,

If you expect people to use bicycles as transport then you can't also expect them to do a 10km stretch at 10kmph.
Xtracycle, Surly Long Haul Trucker, Bike Friday New World Tourist, Giant TCR, 9:zero:7
http://www.perthcyclist.net/blog
User avatar
jet-ski
 
Posts: 1404
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 4:51 pm
Location: Perth WA

Re: Enough is enough

Postby Aushiker » Thu Dec 13, 2012 5:57 pm

jet-ski wrote:If you expect people to use bicycles as transport then you can't also expect them to do a 10km stretch at 10kmph.


But is reasonable to expect them to ride to the conditions is it not? Which BTW is a legal requirement just as it is a legal requirement to drive at a speed that is appropriate for the conditions (within the limit set of course). I think we all need to remember that cyclists are subject to the potential of being charged with culpable driving (which as I understand it is the equivalent of manslaughter).

Culpable Driving includes driving/riding a bike in a manner, including speed, that in the circumstances is dangerous to any person.

I hope we can share the path in a responsible manner; a manner that is considerate of ALL users.

Andrew
"Pedal-pounding pounce" - D. Fluellen - West Australian 13/1/14
Image
User avatar
Aushiker
 
Posts: 20152
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 1:55 pm
Location: Fremantle, WA

Re: Enough is enough

Postby jet-ski » Thu Dec 13, 2012 6:04 pm

Sure Andrew, but that's why I think we need to focus more on upgrading infrastructure. If we spend all this energy complaining about 'this group of cyclists' or 'this other group of cyclists' then we really will end up with a path with an effective speed limit of 10kph and kill the growth of cycling in Perth. That is not what anyone here wants.
Xtracycle, Surly Long Haul Trucker, Bike Friday New World Tourist, Giant TCR, 9:zero:7
http://www.perthcyclist.net/blog
User avatar
jet-ski
 
Posts: 1404
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 4:51 pm
Location: Perth WA

Re: Enough is enough

Postby wellington_street » Thu Dec 13, 2012 6:07 pm

jet-ski wrote:Beaufort St isn't an arterial!


Yes it is.

The word arterial refers to the road's function, not its form. Stirling Highway, Canning Highway, South Street (west bit), Shepparton Road and so on are all similar in both function and form.

If you expect people to use bicycles as transport then you can't also expect them to do a 10km stretch at 10kmph.


Can I expect a discussion free from hyperbole?

As I said in the previous post, if you aren't happy with the speed of your commute on the Kwinana PSP, use the roads in South Perth where you can quite comfortably travel at 30km/h+ without the worries of wobblies, joggers and mutts.

Andrew's post above has the right idea.
wellington_street
 
Posts: 994
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 12:25 pm

Re: Enough is enough

Postby wellington_street » Thu Dec 13, 2012 6:14 pm

jet-ski wrote:nice duplicated path on the inland side of the freeway would help - faster riders who are trying to get somewhere could use that and the ones who want to pootle along and enjoy the view could do so on the river side!


This is probably the only realistic solution. Actually, I don't think a path for the greater length is necessary or desirable - if we are talking average speeds of 30km/h+ then cyclists should be on the road rather than on the path. Melville Parade is quiet enough to serve as the commuter cyclist route imho.

The key things required to make it happen are:
- Connection from Narrows east path to Melville Pde north
- Underpass or overpass at Judd St
- Open up the existing maintenance (?) track along the W side of the golf course
- Underpass or overpass at South Tce (due to safety issues with traffic coming off the freeway)
- Path connection south of Cale St to Canning Hwy
- Underpass at Canning Highway and then again at Manning Road (tight fits)
- on-street through Manning
- Path connection from Crowley Vista to Edgewater Road
- Path connection from Edgewater Road to Mt Henry Bridge (merges back to main path at northern abutment)
- Minor improvements to the on-street section to make it clear it is a cycle route, e.g. signage, markings, intersection treatments

Thoughts?
wellington_street
 
Posts: 994
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 12:25 pm

Re: Enough is enough

Postby blkmcs » Thu Dec 13, 2012 8:21 pm

ColinOldnCranky wrote:Without ever being a group or elite rider I accept that there is a genuine need for those fast riders to be there. This seems to be at odds with other (the majority?) here who seem to subscribe to the belief that they just should not be riding fast or in groups.

saying that the path is NOT for them looks a lot to me like peds who believe that cyclists also do not belong on "their" paths. Why does everyone believe that their particular need is the one and only one that needs to be accomodated?
....

Surely this thread is about those groups that ride dangerously not those that ride responsibly.
You seem to be lucky Colin in that you never have problems with groups riding badly, I have two friends who have been knocked off their bikes by group riders, in neither case did the group stop to check on the fallen riders. I have stopped riding before 9:00 a.m. as I constantly came into contact with reckless groups riding two and three abreast.
I don't think anyone is claiming that only their needs should be accommodated only that dangerous riding should be stamped out.
Too old to live, too slow to die.
User avatar
blkmcs
 
Posts: 901
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 1:44 pm
Location: Bayswater, WA

Re: Enough is enough

Postby Aushiker » Thu Dec 13, 2012 10:29 pm

jet-ski wrote:Sure Andrew, but that's why I think we need to focus more on upgrading infrastructure.


I don't disagree, but such changes are realistically a medium to long term strategy. We also have to deal with the now IMO and that means we ALL need to ride responsibly, with consideration of all other users and within the law.

As I see it we need to a two prong approached: campaigning on the path behaviour issue and campaigning on the infrastructure issue.

Andrew
"Pedal-pounding pounce" - D. Fluellen - West Australian 13/1/14
Image
User avatar
Aushiker
 
Posts: 20152
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 1:55 pm
Location: Fremantle, WA

Re: Enough is enough

Postby ColinOldnCranky » Fri Dec 14, 2012 8:24 am

blkmcs wrote:
ColinOldnCranky wrote:Without ever being a group or elite rider I accept that there is a genuine need for those fast riders to be there. This seems to be at odds with other (the majority?) here who seem to subscribe to the belief that they just should not be riding fast or in groups.

I need to make te point of clarity that I originally sated too - when I talk "groups" I differentiate between those loose packs of randoms that come together and disperse constantly - they are the ones that I find dangerous. Those that appear to be organised I treat and assess differently. The "bad" riders I refer to are usually in singles of pairs or in those loose packs. The organised ones I find hold consistent lines and are very predictable.

saying that the path is NOT for them looks a lot to me like peds who believe that cyclists also do not belong on "their" paths. Why does everyone believe that their particular need is the one and only one that needs to be accomodated?
....

Surely this thread is about those groups that ride dangerously not those that ride responsibly.
You seem to be lucky Colin in that you never have problems with groups riding badly, I have two friends who have been knocked off their bikes by group riders, in neither case did the group stop to check on the fallen riders. I have stopped riding before 9:00 a.m. as I constantly came into contact with reckless groups riding two and three abreast.
I don't think anyone is claiming that only their needs should be accommodated only that dangerous riding should be stamped out.

I may be lucky indeed, as there are sure to be other places that the dangers are real and substantial. But within the subset of my riding times on my familiar route my observations are as extensive as anyone else who uses the Kwinana Freeway PSP and far and away too many to countenance them being a statistical aberration.

I *CANNOT* claim that what I see on the Como stretch is the same everywhere. Others may have different experiences elsewhere or on the same stretch at different times.

But, on the Kwinana PSP at busy times, primarily on the way to work in the morning, I have little concern for group rides over and above others and find them highly predictable in line and behaviour. I *DO* see a fair share of people riding against me shaking fists or otherwise signalling the wrongness of them when there is NO realistic threat in them and oftimes seems a little pedantic and less about an unsafe situation.

I *DO* get a rider or more every single day that does do something stupid but it is seldom someone in a group ride.

I *DO* have an issue with those speeding along the the Esplanade RSP. Every forkin day! Slice and dice mostly.

I acknowledge that accidents at speed are inherently more dangerous - the outcomes are going to be more severe.

I *CANNOT* vouch that group rides and faster riders are not an issue on other paths.

I *DO* think that the Kwinana PSP does need to be bought up to spec as there is still an element of unneccesary risk by and to a range of riders good and bad along that stretch.

and I am unwilling to take away the joy and satisfaction that large numbers of riders get even though it is not the sort f riding that I do.

btw I have raised elsewhere and before this thread that the quality of rider went south with increased traffic in the last month or so. I am NOT saying that riding out there is safe and that there is no stupid riding but I seem to see a different problem than many.
Unchain yourself - Ride a unicycle .Image
User avatar
ColinOldnCranky
 
Posts: 4697
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:58 pm

Re: Enough is enough

Postby stealthbike » Fri Dec 14, 2012 4:25 pm

As the OP, I would like to bring this back to one of my main points. I have an issue with groups riding on the PSP. It is irrelevant whether their behaviour is predictable - it is illegal and dangerous unless they ride in single file. Associated with groups on the PSP is their unwillingness to slow for riders to pass coming in the opposite direction - this is what creates the danger. Thirdly, I acknowledge that their are some very good, courteous groups out there (I believe I lead one! :D ) but many groups are just loose associations of riders who meet and then ride/train together (or even form into a group along the path by accumulating riders as they go). These groups do not have group leaders, ergo they are not led. So the sole purpose seems to be to ride fast together, with nobody taking accountability for safety of themselves or other users of the infrastructure.
2010 Specialized Roubaix Elite - Black
"However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results" - Winston Churchill
User avatar
stealthbike
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2009 6:34 pm

Re: Enough is enough

Postby ColinOldnCranky » Fri Dec 14, 2012 7:00 pm

stealthbike wrote:As the OP, I would like to bring this back to one of my main points. I have an issue with groups riding on the PSP. It is irrelevant whether their behaviour is predictable - it is illegal and dangerous unless they ride in single file. Associated with groups on the PSP is their unwillingness to slow for riders to pass coming in the opposite direction - this is what creates the danger. Thirdly, I acknowledge that their are some very good, courteous groups out there (I believe I lead one! :D ) but many groups are just loose associations of riders who meet and then ride/train together (or even form into a group along the path by accumulating riders as they go). These groups do not have group leaders, ergo they are not led. So the sole purpose seems to be to ride fast together, with nobody taking accountability for safety of themselves or other users of the infrastructure.

I think I have been preaching some of what yu just said. "Loose association of riders who meet and then ... or even form into a group along the path by accumulating riders as they go" are the ones that I hope I have clearly differentiated from those other well crafted ones. The ones I have termed a bunch as opposed to a group. Which are the ones that I find issue with and are included in my list of bad riders, not groups.

It is the well crafted ones that I would not like to see painted in a corner or out of the picture because we all bundle them into the same basket as the "loose associations". As peds that I speak to seem to do.

Yes, even the good ones find it difficult however to moderate speed quickly and my response to them is to accommodate them by doing the slowing myself and moving across. Regardless of the legal bits and bobs.

This question may be better in it's own thread if it is highly complex or contentious but here goes - As you have identified yourself as a group rider you may be able to give me an idea of how people *should* get into riding in a group as I have always understood that do do a good job, especially at speed, requires a lot more than just learning the hand signals. How does a group accommodate different capacity riders and for example. I think of group rides a little like a flight of ducks - Each one mirrors the actions in front a moment later so you would not a more powerful duck or one that corners differently in the group. And do riders in a proper (not loosley associated) have very similar configurations? Does a flat bar rider could respond differently timing wise and if so should they be riding only with similar bikes?

btw good thread - it is causing me to think and rethink some of my ideas and understanding.
Unchain yourself - Ride a unicycle .Image
User avatar
ColinOldnCranky
 
Posts: 4697
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:58 pm

Re: Enough is enough

Postby chalkie » Fri Dec 14, 2012 8:44 pm

So what is the point of riding two abreast?
As far as I can see the only advantage is so you can have a chat.
If you ride in single file, sharing the lead, then surely it is more efficient and would be more beneficial as a physical exercise.
If you want a chat, go to the cafe or bar.
If you want a chat pedalling, go to a gym.
chalkie
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2008 11:14 pm

Re: Enough is enough

Postby eldavo » Fri Dec 14, 2012 9:57 pm

If you ask with an Italian accent, I would answer foreplay. Though I find they are better observed head on.
eldavo
 
Posts: 753
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 12:21 am
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Enough is enough

Postby Tornado » Sat Dec 15, 2012 5:01 pm

blkmcs wrote:
ColinOldnCranky wrote:My suggestion to stealthbike is that if the aproaching group is identifiably two-file then it will be probably be an organised group ride who are predictable (though fast) but also far less able to accomodate quick changes to speed than you. In which case accept the situation and move over a bit for the moment. Those groups seldom go anywhere excpet where you can anticipate them going.

On the other hand if they are a motly lot with no discernable order then, like you, my anxiety levels go up.

If they are "...less able to accommodate quick changes to speed..." then they are riding too fast for the conditions.
These are shared paths, not training venues.

They are also in contravention of the WA Road Traffic Code
109. Keeping a safe distance behind vehicles
Except when overtaking and passing, the driver of any vehicle
shall, when following another vehicle, keep such distance
behind it as will enable the driver to stop the vehicle in an
emergency with safety, and without running into the vehicle in
front of him or her.

I'm pretty sure to violate the Road Traffic Code you need to be on the road.

I regularly pass people 2 abreast coming towards me on the Kwinana PSP. It rarely bothers me as 2 people fit easily in the lane most of the time.
Image

2012 Avanti Giro 3
2003 GT Palomar
User avatar
Tornado
 
Posts: 294
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 11:25 am
Location: Mandurah WA

Re: Enough is enough

Postby Aushiker » Sat Dec 15, 2012 6:41 pm

Tornado wrote:I'm pretty sure to violate the Road Traffic Code you need to be on the road.


Footpaths and shared paths fall under the Road Traffic Code ... Maybe something do with them being included in the actual regulations me thinks :)

Andrew
Last edited by Aushiker on Sat Dec 15, 2012 7:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Pedal-pounding pounce" - D. Fluellen - West Australian 13/1/14
Image
User avatar
Aushiker
 
Posts: 20152
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 1:55 pm
Location: Fremantle, WA

Re: Enough is enough

Postby blkmcs » Sat Dec 15, 2012 7:20 pm

Tornado wrote:...
I'm pretty sure to violate the Road Traffic Code you need to be on the road.

I regularly pass people 2 abreast coming towards me on the Kwinana PSP. It rarely bothers me as 2 people fit easily in the lane most of the time.


I'm pretty sure you're wrong!

My post was not about responsible riders riding to the conditions but about groups riding carelessly, recklessly dangerously, stupidly, etc.
Too old to live, too slow to die.
User avatar
blkmcs
 
Posts: 901
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 1:44 pm
Location: Bayswater, WA

Re: Enough is enough

Postby Tornado » Sat Dec 15, 2012 7:30 pm

Aushiker wrote:
Tornado wrote:I'm pretty sure to violate the Road Traffic Code you need to be on the road.


Footpaths and shared paths fall under the Road Traffic Code ... Maybe something do with them being included in the actual regulations me thinks :)

Andrew

Maybe. So being WA are we talking hoon laws and confiscations?
Image

2012 Avanti Giro 3
2003 GT Palomar
User avatar
Tornado
 
Posts: 294
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 11:25 am
Location: Mandurah WA

Re: Enough is enough

Postby Aushiker » Sat Dec 15, 2012 7:40 pm

Tornado wrote:
Aushiker wrote:
Tornado wrote:I'm pretty sure to violate the Road Traffic Code you need to be on the road.


Footpaths and shared paths fall under the Road Traffic Code ... Maybe something do with them being included in the actual regulations me thinks :)

Andrew

Maybe. So being WA are we talking hoon laws and confiscations?


No maybe about it ... You may find the Road Traffic Code 2000 as amended interesting reading :)

No idea about the hoon laws ... separate from the Road Traffic Code 2000which I am most familiar with. I suspect the hoon laws fall under the Road Traffic Act 1974 or another Act of Parliament.

Andrew
"Pedal-pounding pounce" - D. Fluellen - West Australian 13/1/14
Image
User avatar
Aushiker
 
Posts: 20152
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 1:55 pm
Location: Fremantle, WA

Re: Enough is enough

Postby Tornado » Sat Dec 15, 2012 10:00 pm

There's rules about everything isn't there? Won't be long and we will be being asked for our "Papers" as we travel on the bike paths. WA=Nanny State.
Image

2012 Avanti Giro 3
2003 GT Palomar
User avatar
Tornado
 
Posts: 294
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 11:25 am
Location: Mandurah WA

Re: Enough is enough

Postby ColinOldnCranky » Sun Dec 16, 2012 11:48 am

Tornado wrote:There's rules about everything isn't there? Won't be long and we will be being asked for our "Papers" as we travel on the bike paths. WA=Nanny State.

Those rules are to protect me from you, not to protect you from you. That takes it out of the realm of Nanny state.

I know that you are just being flippant. But cries of Nanny State are just a variation of that other utterance that gives ride to the application of Godwin's law. Your arguments elsewhere are far more persuasive than the old Nanny chestnut. :)
Unchain yourself - Ride a unicycle .Image
User avatar
ColinOldnCranky
 
Posts: 4697
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:58 pm

Re: Enough is enough

Postby Tornado » Sun Dec 16, 2012 4:28 pm

ColinOldnCranky wrote:Those rules are to protect me from you, not to protect you from you.


It's ok Colin. You don't need to be protected from me. I mean no harm and will stay on my side of the line as we pass in opposite directions. Which we may of the other day. I passed a unicyclist as I crossed Cranford Ave Thursday. I know you travel SOR, but not sure if you are around that area.

If it was "Hi"
Image

2012 Avanti Giro 3
2003 GT Palomar
User avatar
Tornado
 
Posts: 294
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 11:25 am
Location: Mandurah WA

Re: Enough is enough

Postby ColinOldnCranky » Sun Dec 16, 2012 5:57 pm

Tornado wrote:
ColinOldnCranky wrote:Those rules are to protect me from you, not to protect you from you.


It's ok Colin. You don't need to be protected from me. I mean no harm and will stay on my side of the line as we pass in opposite directions. Which we may of the other day. I passed a unicyclist as I crossed Cranford Ave Thursday. I know you travel SOR, but not sure if you are around that area.

If it was "Hi"


Yeah - that's me - heading down towards the esplanade and then towards Canning Bridge and the rest. Gimme a shout or wave me down. I'm seldom in a hurry.
Unchain yourself - Ride a unicycle .Image
User avatar
ColinOldnCranky
 
Posts: 4697
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:58 pm

Re: Enough is enough

Postby grbelja » Mon Dec 17, 2012 11:01 am

One word STRAVA
grbelja
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 9:45 am

Re: Enough is enough

Postby Marty Moose » Mon Dec 17, 2012 11:07 am

grbelja wrote:One word STRAVA

Yep before strava there were no fast two abreast groups........... Trying to be a bit controversial me thinks.

Sent from my MB526 using Tapatalk 2
Marty Moose
 
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 6:00 pm
Location: W.A

PreviousNext

Return to Western Australia

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: flashpixx, NewStew



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