Bayswater - Riverside gardens no bikes

Re: Bayswater - Riverside gardens no bikes

Postby Mulger bill » Wed Jun 18, 2014 11:15 pm

A fiver says the council will deny responsibility and send out a crew. All the hallmarks of vehemence over brains.
A smart "concerned citizen" would have used the internationally recognised symbol...
Image
...whatever the road rules, self-preservation is the absolute priority for a cyclist when mixing it with motorised traffic.
London Boy 29/12/2011
User avatar
Mulger bill
Super Mod
Super Mod
 
Posts: 25544
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:41 pm
Location: Sunbury Vic

by BNA » Wed Jun 18, 2014 11:21 pm

BNA
 

Re: Bayswater - Riverside gardens no bikes

Postby rolandp » Wed Jun 18, 2014 11:21 pm

Scott_C wrote:
casual_cyclist wrote:I'm not sure that's quite correct...

I'm also not an expert so we probably won't come to a definitive conclusion but I'm reasonably confident that Reg 4 (2), which essentially says any reference to a path in the Road Traffic Code only applies to a path that is part of a road, limits the scope of every other definition of a path in the Code to only include paths that are part of a road.
Road Traffic Code 2000 Reg 4(2) wrote:Where a provision of these regulations requires, or prohibits, the doing of any act or thing on a path, that requirement or prohibition only relates to the doing of that act or thing, on the path if the path forms a part of a road.

I have correspondence dating back to Feb-2013 which I pointed out:
Road Traffic Code 2000
Part 2 – Application
4. Scope of regulations
(1) Unless the context requires otherwise, these regulations apply to persons, vehicles and things on roads only, and where a provision of these regulations requires, or prohibits, the doing of any act or thing, that requirement or prohibition relates to the doing of that act or thing, on a road.
(2) Where a provision of these regulations requires, or prohibits, the doing of any act or thing on a path, that requirement or prohibition only relates to the doing of that act or thing, on the path if the path forms a part of a road.

Road Traffic (Bicycles) Regulations 2002
Application
These regulations apply to a bicycle if it is on a road.


Go figure. I haven't checked to see if they have been updated recently.
User avatar
rolandp
 
Posts: 1778
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 10:47 am
Location: Duncraig, Perth, WA

Re: Bayswater - Riverside gardens no bikes

Postby blkmcs » Wed Jun 18, 2014 11:48 pm

wellington_street wrote:
martc101 wrote: I don't agree that prohibition is the best approach to building more cooperative and understanding co-users of the path.


This

+1
Too old to live, too slow to die.
User avatar
blkmcs
 
Posts: 897
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 1:44 pm
Location: Bayswater, WA

Re: Bayswater - Riverside gardens no bikes

Postby ColinOldnCranky » Wed Jun 18, 2014 11:59 pm

Scott_C wrote:The Road Traffic Act defines a road as:
Road Traffic Act 1974- Sect 5 wrote:road means any highway, road or street open to, or used by, the public and includes every carriageway, footway, reservation, median strip and traffic island thereon;


Some trivia on the side - the road under the rail in freo that gives access to the south side of the Freo Harbour used to (maybe still does) close at least once a month to ensure it could not be considered "open to , or used by, the public" on legal advice. It also had to be randomly done, not to a schedule. Apparently there were some downsides for the Fremantle Port Authority if it was designated a road.

https://www.google.com.au/maps/@-32.045118,115.751858,3a,75y,284.08h,89.6t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sE0rTYlg5W0zJ6TjB2d1T-w!2e0?hl=en
Last edited by ColinOldnCranky on Thu Jun 19, 2014 12:11 am, edited 1 time in total.
Unchain yourself - Ride a unicycle .Image
User avatar
ColinOldnCranky
 
Posts: 4623
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:58 pm

Re: Bayswater - Riverside gardens no bikes

Postby ColinOldnCranky » Thu Jun 19, 2014 12:07 am

martc101 wrote:I don't agree that prohibition is the best approach to building more cooperative and understanding co-users of the path.


It isn't. But as long as there are a few or more than a few who will do "anything I damn well like. It's not illegal" then it is probably the only one that will work.

And there is no shortage of riders who ride just like that.

If the council has, indeed, limited access to cycling that reflects, probably legitimately, on the behavior of far too many cyclists I would prefer not be associated with.
Last edited by ColinOldnCranky on Thu Jun 19, 2014 9:35 am, edited 1 time in total.
Unchain yourself - Ride a unicycle .Image
User avatar
ColinOldnCranky
 
Posts: 4623
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:58 pm

Re: Bayswater - Riverside gardens no bikes

Postby casual_cyclist » Thu Jun 19, 2014 12:41 am

Scott_C wrote:
casual_cyclist wrote:I'm not sure that's quite correct...

I'm also not an expert so we probably won't come to a definitive conclusion but I'm reasonably confident that Reg 4 (2), which essentially says any reference to a path in the Road Traffic Code only applies to a path that is part of a road, limits the scope of every other definition of a path in the Code to only include paths that are part of a road.
Road Traffic Code 2000 Reg 4(2) wrote:Where a provision of these regulations requires, or prohibits, the doing of any act or thing on a path, that requirement or prohibition only relates to the doing of that act or thing, on the path if the path forms a part of a road.

It's pretty vague I agree. But I don't think you can read a paragraph in isolation. Regulation 4 is both 4(1) and 4(2) to be read together:
4. Scope of regulations
(1) Unless the context requires otherwise, these regulations apply to persons, vehicles and things on roads only, and where a provision of these regulations requires, or prohibits, the doing of any act or thing, that requirement or prohibition relates to the doing of that act or thing, on a road.
(2) Where a provision of these regulations requires, or prohibits, the doing of any act or thing on a path, that requirement or prohibition only relates to the doing of that act or thing, on the path if the path forms a part of a road.

It's badly drafted but I think that "Unless the context requires otherwise" gets around the road thing. You would need a lawyer to apply the interpretations act, which I can't do. I do know that judges can over rule bad drafting if the intention is clear and apply the intention. If you read the path related requirements such as helmets etc, it's pretty clear that the intention is that those regulations apply to paths that do not form part of roads. My point is that if I was busted for not wearing a helmet on a shared path, I would not be confident arguing to a Magistrate that 4(2) gets me off.
<removed by request>
User avatar
casual_cyclist
 
Posts: 7171
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 10:41 am
Location: Kewdale

Re: Bayswater - Riverside gardens no bikes

Postby blkmcs » Thu Jun 19, 2014 9:24 am

ColinOldnCranky wrote:
blkmcs wrote:I don't agree that prohibition is the best approach to building more cooperative and understanding co-users of the path.


It isn't. But as long as there are a few or more than a few who will do "anything I damn well like. It's not illegal" then it is probably the only one that will work.

And there is no shortage of riders who ride just like that.

If the council has, indeed, limited access to cycling that reflects, probably legitimately, on the behavior of far too many cyclists I would prefer not be associated with.


Need some work on your quoting skills Colin; although I agreed with the above quote I didn't write it.

In general I agree with you that too many riders behave badly on the shared paths, however I just don't see reckless riding in that particular spot, I do see it in the nearby Baigup Wetlands.
Too old to live, too slow to die.
User avatar
blkmcs
 
Posts: 897
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 1:44 pm
Location: Bayswater, WA

Re: Bayswater - Riverside gardens no bikes

Postby ColinOldnCranky » Thu Jun 19, 2014 9:36 am

[quote="blkmcs"]Need some work on your quoting skills Colin; although I agreed with the above quote I didn't write it./quote]
Oops. Corrected now. :oops:
Unchain yourself - Ride a unicycle .Image
User avatar
ColinOldnCranky
 
Posts: 4623
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:58 pm

Re: Bayswater - Riverside gardens no bikes

Postby Hugor » Sun Jun 22, 2014 5:58 pm

OK so someones painted grey over all the "no cycling" markings on the PSP. Council or BNA move?
Image
Hugor
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Tue Oct 22, 2013 7:56 am
Location: Maylands, Perth

Re: Bayswater - Riverside gardens no bikes

Postby blkmcs » Tue Jul 01, 2014 7:02 pm

New pedestrian only signs were being installed this morning.
Too old to live, too slow to die.
User avatar
blkmcs
 
Posts: 897
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 1:44 pm
Location: Bayswater, WA

Re: Bayswater - Riverside gardens no bikes

Postby ColinOldnCranky » Tue Jul 01, 2014 10:19 pm

Has anyone any idea how, why and from which budget/agency this path was funded?

Was there a council resolution and any form of consultation, advice etc?

While it's way off my normal routes and I am not giving an opinion on whether it is a good move, I would still like to know that things like this are not done simply on representations from one set of stakeholders without reference to others.
Unchain yourself - Ride a unicycle .Image
User avatar
ColinOldnCranky
 
Posts: 4623
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:58 pm


Re: Bayswater - Riverside gardens no bikes

Postby just4tehhalibut » Wed Jul 02, 2014 1:16 am

ColinOldnCranky wrote:Has anyone any idea how, why and from which budget/agency this path was funded?


Well it's in that document that you've found from 2002:
"As part of the Federal Government’s Building Better Cities Program, the City of Bayswater received funds in 1994 to redevelop the Swan River foreshore from a wasteland to a recreational amenity. One component of the redevelopment included three kilometres of lit, wheelchair accessible, dual-use footpaths. These were completed in 1997".

So, dual-use paths, this means walkers and dogwalkers perhaps? It then goes on to say that they tried to increase healthy usage of the reserve with the focus on walkers on those self same 3km of path, including doing on-the-spot interviews with walkers about their opinions on the park and of other users. I couldn't see where they stopped cyclists for their opinions. In the last survey, of 74 walkers this was said:
"Bike riders’ etiquette was a concern for four respondents. Two mentioned that bikes were travelling too fast on the walk trails and one stated that their dog had been hit by a bike. Another suggested put a walk sign on one side of the path or a dash in the middle".

As to actual metal signs being installed to ban bikes if that's the case it's a step beyond the original intent of the reserve or the funding.
just4tehhalibut
 
Posts: 853
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 4:02 am
Location: Spearwood, WA

Re: Bayswater - Riverside gardens no bikes

Postby blkmcs » Wed Jul 02, 2014 9:56 am

Look again at the map posted by Red Rider, the path that is being signed was never a dual use path.
There is a dual use path nearby and that still exists, the signs are merely reinforcing the status quo.
Too old to live, too slow to die.
User avatar
blkmcs
 
Posts: 897
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 1:44 pm
Location: Bayswater, WA

Re: Bayswater - Riverside gardens no bikes

Postby ColinOldnCranky » Thu Jul 03, 2014 9:02 pm

blkmcs wrote:Look again at the map posted by Red Rider, the path that is being signed was never a dual use path.
There is a dual use path nearby and that still exists, the signs are merely reinforcing the status quo.

Good call.
Unchain yourself - Ride a unicycle .Image
User avatar
ColinOldnCranky
 
Posts: 4623
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:58 pm

Previous

Return to Western Australia

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users



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



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