Several points of views raised, and appreciated. I would say:
Regarding bikes on paths:
1) Work to have Group B (Ref. Thoglette 7-Nov-2017) riding behaviour allowed on footpaths (NOT footpaths only!)
2) Promote pedestrian-cyclist path sharing education.
Here we will have several groups and causes sharing the same goal, for examples: commuters, the Greens, parents, local councils, health promoters, cycling promoters.
3) Work to have more shared paths –easier with local councils (than with State etc).
Focussing on just 1) and 2) above…
- Good point about driveways being uncontrolled intersections. BUT pedestrians and <12 y.o. riders and posties are already using footpaths. Are they to be stopped? When allowed we can choose to either join them on the path or stay on the road. Motorists/cyclists/pedestrians are all to be educated in this case.
NSW change.org petition focuses on ‘children, age >12’. I really disagree with classification by age. Some 16 y.o. may ride more sensibly or more terribly than some 35 y.o.
Would you agree that defining by riding behaviour (such as speed) make good sense?
Group-B riders will have options: road or footpath.
While we don’t like rules we need at least a set of guidelines.
- It’s part of education on both sides.
It will assuage fears pedestrians have of misbehaving riders (they exist!)
It will make the case more likely to be accepted.
QUESTIONS: Characteristics or guidelines for ‘Group B riding on footpaths’ are ….??
- Speed <= ? (Please continue the debate)
Give way to ...
Sound bells when- - -
(Such cases as for drivers backing out of driveways already apply in regards to pedestrians.)
Any apparel I think will be non-compulsory, but how about say in poor visibility? Just encouraged?
How about ‘lights’ and ‘bells’?
To be the same as or different from when on shared-paths?