New Site for Western Australian Road Cyclists

[exadios]

Exadios, so you swerve in and out of the brown lane? (staying in the brown bit for longer naturally). I am not sure how much safer this is. A car coming along the road. Clear road, oops, not as clear as I thought as trike pulls out in front of it momentarily..

I use my common sense. That prevents me from pulling out in front of a car.

Exadios, I would like to see you and 40 of your friends on their trikes setting a good example riding along this strecth at 40kms/hr in the brown section. Obviously you can swerve into the lane momentarily to dodge the concrete kerbs if need be.

You may like to pretend that this is rocket science but it is not. If it is necessary to pull out into another lane then I would check behind for vehicles. And, if I cannot do this at 40Km per hour then I would slow down. See, it is just common sense.

But, of course, the roadies in this picture are a cut above the rest of us and do not feel the requirement to obey the law. And you believe that for yourself, don't you FlyinFynn.

[Aushiker]

It is a tough one. If you look at our pic, you will see there are no cars sitting behind us getting irate. We would prefer to sit in the middle of the road if we are cruising along at close to 40km/hr (which is easy on this particular stretch of road). If you get a car coming behind a group of cyclists (40 odd) in single file, and then it starts to overtake us 5 at a time, it would become very dangerous.

If a car is behind us and we are slow and it is safe to do so, we will go single file and slow more to allow the car to pass. But if we are at a decent speed and the car has just arrived there and the stretch of road is nearly up, we will block the car. I find on this stretch of road, it is the cars who impede on the cyclists progress (I also find the scenery along the cafe strip good so I prefer to take it easy .

Exadios, so you swerve in and out of the brown lane? (staying in the brown bit for longer naturally). I am not sure how much safer this is. A car coming along the road. Clear road, oops, not as clear as I thought as trike pulls out in front of it momentarily..

Exadios, I would like to see you and 40 of your friends on their trikes setting a good example riding along this strecth at 40kms/hr in the brown section. Obviously you can swerve into the lane momentarily to dodge the concrete kerbs if need be.

I agree with FlyinFynn here. Having reviewed the Road Code I can't see anything to say that they are in the wrong. However, I am more than happy to be shown otherwise as it would be good to know.

Andrew

[Aushiker]

But, of course, the roadies in this picture are a cut above the rest of us and do not feel the requirement to obey the law.

With the greatest respect, if you are going to talk law Peter, why not back it up with the law?

The DPI is not the law and to date I personally can't find anything to support your claim and it seems that you can't either, so can we be a bit nicer here?

If your view is valid please do show us. I for one would like to know. Also it is not hard to review the Road Code. It is available online you know.

Andrew

[Aushiker]

G'day

Okay, lets talk the LAW, spelt L-A-W not D-P-I From the WA Road Code 2000 (my emphasis).

112. Keeping as far left as practicable
(1) Except where these regulations provide otherwise, a driver shall
keep the vehicle as close as practicable to the left boundary of
the carriageway, except where 2 or more lanes marked on the
carriageway are available exclusively for vehicles travelling in
the same direction.
Points: 2 Modified penalty: 1 PU


129. Driving on or across a continuous white edge line
The driver of a vehicle (other than a bicycle or an animal) shall
not drive on, over or outside a continuous white edge line on a
carriageway unless the driver is —
(a) turning at an intersection;
(b) entering or leaving the carriageway;
(c) entering a part of the carriageway of one kind from a
part of the carriageway of another kind (for example,
moving to or from a service road or an emergency
stopping lane);
(d) overtaking a vehicle that is turning right, or making a
U turn from the centre of the carriageway, and is giving
a right turn signal;
(e) driving a slow-moving vehicle;
(f) stopping at the side of the carriageway;
(g) driving a vehicle that is too wide, or too long, to drive on
the carriageway without driving on or over the edge line;
or
(h) avoiding an obstruction

and to answer the question about riding two abreast or more, the relevant section appears to be Section 130.

130. Riding a 2-wheeled vehicle alongside more than one other
rider
(1) The rider of a motor cycle, moped, power-assisted pedal cycle
or bicycle shall not ride on a carriageway that is not a
multi-laned carriageway alongside more than one other rider,
unless the rider is overtaking the other riders.
Modified penalty: 1 PU
(2) The rider of a motor cycle, moped, power-assisted pedal cycle
or bicycle shall not ride in a marked lane on a carriageway
alongside more than one other rider, unless the rider is
overtaking the other riders.
Modified penalty: 1 PU
(3) The rider of a power-assisted pedal cycle or bicycle shall not
ride on a path alongside another rider, unless the rider is
overtaking the other rider.
Modified penalty: 1 PU
(4) If the rider of a motor cycle, moped, power-assisted pedal cycle
or bicycle is riding on a carriageway that is not a multi-lane
carriageway alongside another rider, or in a marked lane
alongside another rider in the marked lane, the rider shall ride
not over 1.5 m from the other rider.
Modified penalty: 1 PU

If I have missed anything please do correct me. Learning this stuff is good in my view.

Andrew

[exadios]

Sadly, just because it is written on the DPI Web site, it may not be the law. However, in the absence of a legal oppinion or, more definitively, a judgment it is the only guide available.

With no disrespect to the DPI, I prefer to go with the law for the simple fact it is the law. I have searched the road code can found nothing to support your view on either matter, but I am open to correction if someone can be definitive that would be great.

It is not my opinion. It is the opinion of the DPI.

The problem with you view is that you are not a lawyer.

I would go further and say that there is a solid white line dividing the road from the parking area. Riding in and out of parked cars would be stupid in my view and it also legal to ride on the road, the riders where riding on the road, keeping left and it does not appear unreasonably obstructing traffic.

Andrew

But all bike lanes and shoulders are separated from the lane by a solid white line. The spot where they are riding is a no parking zone. It is, without doubt, a shoulder.

[Aushiker]

The problem with you view is that you are not a lawyer.

You are correct Peter I am not a lawyer, but I do have enough smarts to read the Road Traffic Code 2000 which is written in plain English and to me, is pretty straight forward. I have even quoted the relevant sections, so if it comes down to your views (as reflected by the DPI) or the law, guess who has my respect?

Personally I prefer to work with the law and facts in these matters. Somehow turning up in Court and quoting the DPI might look pretty damn stupid. Just a thought.

But all bike lanes and shoulders are separated from the lane by a solid white line. The spot where they are riding is a no parking zone. It is, without doubt, a shoulder.

Okay, whatever. The Road Traffic Code clearly defines a bike lane and what markings are required to designate one. If you choose to not take that on-board so be, there is no point arguing it with you.

I guess all those cars regularly parked along there particularly on weekends are now parked illegally too. Somehow I suspect the Town of Cottesloe has a different perspective on the section of the road.

Cheers
Andrew

Edit: Add comment about the Courts.

[Aushiker]

....

[exadios]

The problem with you view is that you are not a lawyer.

You are correct Peter I am not a lawyer, but I do have enough smarts to read the Road Traffic Code 2000 which is written in plain English and to me, is pretty straight forward. I have even quoted the relevant sections, so if it comes down to your views or the law, guess who has my respect?

As I said before, in the absence of a legal opinion, the view of the DPI is the best we have.

But all bike lanes and shoulders are separated from the lane by a solid white line. The spot where they are riding is a no parking zone. It is, without doubt, a shoulder.

Okay, whatever. The Road Traffic Code clearly defines a bike lane and what markings are required to designate one. If you choose to not take that on-board so be, there is no point arguing it with you.
[/quote]

I am responding to your mention of the solid white line. I am not claiming that they are riding by a bike lane. But they are not riding on the shoulder.

I guess all those cars regularly parked along there particularly on weekends are now parked illegally too. Somehow I suspect the Town of Cottesloe has a different perspective on the section of the road.

No. They are parked in a parking zone and they are about 50 meters behind the last rider.

The section they are riding on is a no parking zone.

[Aushiker]

As I said before, in the absence of a legal opinion, the view of the DPI is the best we have.

Not "we", you. I think I will stick to the law as proclaimed by Parliament. I find that much more reliable.

Cheers
Andrew

[Aushiker]

No. They are parked in a parking zone and they are about 50 meters behind the last rider.

The section they are riding on is a no parking zone.

That is interesting, I will have to go that way on the weekend to see for myself, as I see cars parked all along there (or where I think the photo is taken) all the time.

Andrew

[exadios]

As I said before, in the absence of a legal opinion, the view of the DPI is the best we have.

Not "we", you. I think I will stick to the law as proclaimed by Parliament. I find that much more reliable.

Cheers
Andrew

I think I will stick to the courts' interpretation of the law as passed by Parliament, or a legal opinion, and, otherwise, the interpretation given by the DPI.

I am not confident that you have even identified the "relevant sections" let alone your interpretation of the law.

[exadios]

No. They are parked in a parking zone and they are about 50 meters behind the last rider.

The section they are riding on is a no parking zone.

That is interesting, I will have to go that way on the weekend to see for myself, as I see cars parked all along there (or where I think the photo is taken) all the time.

Andrew

But, from the photo, there are no cars parked to their left. Yet they have not moved over.

[Aushiker]

I am not confident that you have even identified the "relevant sections" let alone your interpretation of the law.

You could be right Peter, I may have missed sections. Which is why I repeatedly ask for others to post relevant sections in case I have. Have you done this Peter? I don't recall you doing so. You see Peter I am happy to be corrected if I have misread the Road Code because I would like to be sure of the Law as I have previously stated.

As to interpretation Peter, I have quoted the sections of the Road Code I have referred to. I leave it to others to read the words for themselves. After all they are in plain English. If I have incorrectly quoted them, then please correct me.

Regards
Andrew

[Aushiker]

But, from the photo, there are no cars parked to their left. Yet they have not moved over.

So? Please do provide the relevant section of the Road Traffic Act 1974 or the Road Traffic Code 2000 or case law (not the DPI as I prefer to see the actual source) which says that cyclists must move over to the left of the solid white lane marking and on to the shoulder/parking area/whatever it is. I am not referring to a marked bicycle lane as defined in the Road Traffic Code 2000.

The only section I have been able to find so far is the one previously quoted, which is Section 112. However, I may have missed something and I look forward to that correction if so.

For your information, Section 112 states:

112. Keeping as far left as practicable

(1) Except where these regulations provide otherwise, a driver shall keep the vehicle as close as practicable to the left boundary of the carriageway, except where 2 or more lanes marked on the carriageway are available exclusively for vehicles travelling in the same direction.

Points: 2 Modified penalty: 1 PU

(2) Subregulation (1) does not apply if the vehicle is a motor cycle.
[Regulation 112 amended in Gazette 22 Dec 2006 p. 5820.]

Section 112 is part of Part II, Division 2

Regards
Andrew

[damnchickens]

would you like me to remove the picture from the website. it seems to have caused you guys two pages of concern.

the group was riding at a decent speed through cottesloe and yes they were taking up the majority of the lane. i find that this is the safest way to ride in this situation as it prevents cars from trying to get past the group only to find that there is some other type of traffic island in their way so they swerve out to avoid it. this situation has happened to us before and it is something that i try to avoid.

no the group was not riding in the shoulder even though there were no cars parked there. i know this cause i was sitting in the back of my station wagon when i took the photo. if you look at the bottom of the picture you can see where the parking lines start and there is very little room between that and the white line of the road. it is also well within the radius of a car door opening which happens a lot in cottesloe.

i generally don't like going too fast in cott as it is a highly trafficed area with stupid people that walk straight out or open doors. however, lots of groups ride through there as it is a public road and we are allowed to.

as for us being a cut above the rest and above the law, maybe you should come out with our group and see for yourself. we run a very relaxed group and have designated "go fast" sections on the ride with regroup points afterwards. no i don't think that we are above the law, but i believe that we need to do things that stop cars from just ploughing through the middle of us for the safety of the group. if this means taking up the whole lane then we will. we also go single file and allow room for cars to pass too when it is appropriate. at the end of the day my primary concern is the safety of the group.

[Aushiker]

would you like me to remove the picture from the website. it seems to have caused you guys two pages of concern..

Hasn't caused me a concern and I don't believe the substance of the discussion has been the picture itself, rather the practice shown it, which is followed by numerous groups including the one I ride with sometimes. Of course your reading of the discussion may differ.

Personally, my interest is in the law and how it applies to me as a cyclist. I have found discussions of this nature valuable and frequently a means of learning more about the law, e.g, Matt's posting,

From a personal perspective I find it smarter to learn about the law and how it applies, of course YMMV.

Regards
Andrew

[Aushiker]

as for us being a cut above the rest and above the law, maybe you should come out with our group and see for yourself. we run a very relaxed group and have designated "go fast" sections on the ride with regroup points afterwards.

G'day again

Not sure who you are directing that invitation too, but it might help if you explained who this "relaxed group" is so that whoever the invitation is extended to can consider taking it up

Andrew

[damnchickens]

we run a group in south perth.
all info on the website.

invite probably directed at exadios as he is the one that assumes we think we are above the law.

do a search on south perth rouleurs
(i can't post links as i am too new)

[Aushiker]

we run a group in south perth.
all info on the website.

invite probably directed at exadios as he is the one that assumes we think we are above the law.

do a search on south perth rouleurs
(i can't post links as i am too new)

Thanks ... I assume you are referring to http://www.perthcycling.com.au/southperthrouleurs/

I think average 35 km/h might be a bit more than relaxed

Andrew

[exadios]

I am not confident that you have even identified the "relevant sections" let alone your interpretation of the law.

You could be right Peter, I may have missed sections. Which is why I repeatedly ask for others to post relevant sections in case I have. Have you done this Peter? I don't recall you doing so. You see Peter I am happy to be corrected if I have misread the Road Code because I would like to be sure of the Law as I have previously stated.

As to interpretation Peter, I have quoted the sections of the Road Code I have referred to. I leave it to others to read the words for themselves. After all they are in plain English. If I have incorrectly quoted them, then please correct me.

Regards
Andrew

The reason I have no confidence in your reading and interpretation of the law is because you are not a lawyer. Your opinion with respect to the law is worthless.

Here is an opinion of the DPI given in "CYCLING FACT SHEET No. 6":

On a single lane carriageway, riders must keep as far to the left as practicable. If the road has a sealed
shoulder, it is considered part of the actual carriageway. Because most sealed shoulders are at least 1.5 metres
wide, this means that a bunch not in the process of overtaking or avoiding an obstruction would need to be
almost entirely contained within the sealed shoulder even when riding two abreast. On multi-lane roads, riders
can use the sealed shoulder or the left lane. If a sign-posted designated bicycle lane is available (along parts
of Tonkin Highway for example), the bunch must use it exclusively and not the road. This often means having
to travel in single file.

The DPI, as you may know, is the department charged with the administration of the road code. As you can see their opinion is quite different from yours. They are the professionals. You are an amateur.

[exadios]

[exadios]

would you like me to remove the picture from the website. it seems to have caused you guys two pages of concern.

Even if the riders where not braking the law the behavior depicted is extremely inconsiderate to vehicle drivers. It depends upon what image you wish to project but I would guess that you have a more suitable picture available.

the group was riding at a decent speed through cottesloe and yes they were taking up the majority of the lane. i find that this is the safest way to ride in this situation as it prevents cars from trying to get past the group only to find that there is some other type of traffic island in their way so they swerve out to avoid it. this situation has happened to us before and it is something that i try to avoid.

no the group was not riding in the shoulder even though there were no cars parked there. i know this cause i was sitting in the back of my station wagon when i took the photo. if you look at the bottom of the picture you can see where the parking lines start and there is very little room between that and the white line of the road. it is also well within the radius of a car door opening which happens a lot in cottesloe.

I agree. Where cars are parked on the shoulder it would be unreasonable to ride on that shoulder.

i generally don't like going too fast in cott as it is a highly trafficed area with stupid people that walk straight out or open doors. however, lots of groups ride through there as it is a public road and we are allowed to.

as for us being a cut above the rest and above the law, maybe you should come out with our group and see for yourself. we run a very relaxed group and have designated "go fast" sections on the ride with regroup points afterwards. no i don't think that we are above the law, but i believe that we need to do things that stop cars from just ploughing through the middle of us for the safety of the group. if this means taking up the whole lane then we will. we also go single file and allow room for cars to pass too when it is appropriate. at the end of the day my primary concern is the safety of the group.

I have never had a problem with vehicles on that particular road (I'm talking from the traffic circle approx. 1km to the south to the point at which the picture was taken) other than getting them to pass me. I find that if I give them the opportunity to pass by riding on the shoulder when I can them they want to give way to me.

[sittingbison]

we are caught in a conundrum:

1) Section 112 requires us to keep as far left as possible
2) Section 130 requires us to ride no more than 2 abreast
3) DPI requires us to use "shoulders"

Yet our common sense as espoused by damnchickens is that groups rides must defy these requirements to maintain actual real world safety ie to prevent cars from unsafe overtaking, getting hit by opening car doors and peds stepping out without looking etc etc.

ps like the trike exadios very nifty

[Kalgrm]

From where I stand, I don't think the cyclists are doing anything unsafe (unless those three-wide riders is not overtaking). When I ride that stretch I will take the lane as I deem necessary. Andrew, you and I rode there a few weeks ago, and that was my tactic then too - I was not going to let a car force me into those curbs.

Sittingbison, Section 112 says "as far left as practicable", and that word is the clause which allows us to take the lane if it's not safe to ride on the shoulder.

Damnchickens, the photos is okay (technically) but I'm sure you can do better over time. Keeps your eyes open for a more picturesque setting and I think it will advertise the pastime and your site more effectively.

Personally, I won't be spending time there (I ride MTBs off-road and a recumbent on the road) but I hope your site succeeds for you.

Cheers,
Graeme

[Crankitup]

Even if the riders where not braking the law the behavior depicted is extremely inconsiderate to vehicle drivers.

I think there's a number of issues here. First of all, in most group rides the practice is to yell out 'car' when a vehicle is approaching from behind and everyone makes sure they are over to their left as far as practicable. How can you be sure that this didn't happen several moments after this shot was taken?

The other issue is that the speed limit on that section of Marine Pde is 40 km/h. One of the cyclists in the group has already said they were doing ~ 40km/h which is not difficult to believe at all. It's actually not too difficult to cycle at closer to 50 km/h along that stretch of very smooth road with a nice SW breeze on your back. In a group draft situation, it would be even easier. No need for a car to overtake them if they're doing the speed limit is there?

The road setup itself is fairly non-conducive to overtaking in general with traffic islands at regular intervals. It's a road for people on their way to the beach or the cafes nearby as well as local residents. It's certainly not the road for people in a hurry to get from Freo to Perth.