Terrible times in traffic for Geelong

Equipment and On Road Behaviour, Laws and Rules. Cycling Promotion and Advocacy

Terrible times in traffic for Geelong

Postby il padrone » Mon Oct 28, 2013 6:41 pm

Geelong cyclists are facing a soaring fatality rate that places them five times more likely to die in a road collision than cyclists elsewhere in Victoria. The roads around Gelong have had little improvement over the past 20 years (but they did build a grand new freeway by-pass link), and it seems the attitudes of drivers in the region are sadly lacking.

And then this comment from the local Bikesafe chairman:

Mr van Laar said the Principle Bicycle Network, developed with authorities, needed investment to make the roads safer for all users. Cyclists were not above the law and many could work on their attitudes, as could drivers, he said.


Relevance ?? I'm not sure whether Mr van Laar has an agenda here, or the Geelong Advertiuser.
Riding bikes in traffic - what seems dangerous is usually safe; what seems safe is often more dangerous.
User avatar
il padrone
 
Posts: 18505
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

by BNA » Mon Oct 28, 2013 7:05 pm

BNA
 

Re: Terrible times in traffic for Geelong

Postby im_no_pro » Mon Oct 28, 2013 7:05 pm

Relevance, given I actually ride here is that Mr Van Laar has a point.

Some of the black spots they have pointed out are pretty on the money. Ghazeepore Rd is a shocker and usually marks the start or end of my rides given its proximity to home.

I would also disagree with your claim that the roads have had little improvement. Major projects such as the ring rd have significantly impacted traffic flow through geelong and a lot of roads that I regularly ride/drive on around here have seen varying levels of improvement from simple resurfacing to adding of proper shoulders etc. There has also been additional off road options for cyclists put in place in the form of the criterium track and off road paths, one of which I only rode for the first time a few weeks ago and found it to be fantastic which surprised the hell out of me, i'm normally one to stick with roads. Never mind that it connects two of the black spots, its a start though. I like the idea of the potential for further argument for funding back on the crash data. Of course I would much prefer the crash data didn't exist given I knew one of the riders whose death is listed the article.

The Advertiser is far from top notch journalism. It is highly locally biased (particularly when it comes to football) but I read this on the weekend and all in all found it to be pretty balanced based on my experiences riding around here.

edit: just followed the link and realised its only an excerpt of the full article I read that was published on Saturday so not everything I have mentioned may relate entirely to what you have read.
master6 wrote: Moderators are like Club Handicappers; I often think they are wrong, but I dont want the job.
User avatar
im_no_pro
Super Mod
Super Mod
 
Posts: 5694
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 9:29 pm
Location: Geelong

Re: Terrible times in traffic for Geelong

Postby il padrone » Mon Oct 28, 2013 7:44 pm

I still think that, in the light of a terrible outcome for cyclists in the Geelong region, one of the major cycling advocates seeming to blame it on a lot of lycra louts is really poor PR. An insult to those who have died; an embarassment at best.

I'm guessing (hoping) that the Advertiser took his words out of context, or even made them up outright.
Riding bikes in traffic - what seems dangerous is usually safe; what seems safe is often more dangerous.
User avatar
il padrone
 
Posts: 18505
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: Terrible times in traffic for Geelong

Postby im_no_pro » Tue Oct 29, 2013 11:08 am

il padrone wrote:I still think that, in the light of a terrible outcome for cyclists in the Geelong region, one of the major cycling advocates seeming to blame it on a lot of lycra louts is really poor PR. An insult to those who have died; an embarassment at best.

I'm guessing (hoping) that the Advertiser took his words out of context, or even made them up outright.


a) IMHO you are reading more into his comment than was actually said and b) I doubt the addy made it up based on below from the bikesafe website:

The basis of our message is we have to get past the us and them approach. We are all in this together. We are constantly experiencing horror stories between cyclists and cars on the road, and it was getting worse in Geelong and the Surf Coast. So our solution was and is to come up with positive ideas of how we can share the roads safely. Some motorists and some cyclists need to change behaviour. And this can be done through an effective community campaign on which we are working and seeking partnerships.


It's the same old argument, the method of transport isnt the problem. The twit in control of it is. Twits own everything from cars, to motorbikes, to scooter, to, shock horror, bicycles.
master6 wrote: Moderators are like Club Handicappers; I often think they are wrong, but I dont want the job.
User avatar
im_no_pro
Super Mod
Super Mod
 
Posts: 5694
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 9:29 pm
Location: Geelong

Re: Terrible times in traffic for Geelong

Postby human909 » Tue Oct 29, 2013 1:00 pm

im_no_pro wrote:It's the same old argument, the method of transport isnt the problem. The twit in control of it is. Twits own everything from cars, to motorbikes, to scooter, to, shock horror, bicycles.


And that message alone isn't good enough. The twits don't recognise themselves as twits and keep behaving the same dangerous way. It is as bad as the share the road message when gets interpreted to mean cyclists should hide in the gutter.

There is a problem here and it is about motorists not taking enough care around cyclists.
human909
 
Posts: 4900
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:48 am

Re: Terrible times in traffic for Geelong

Postby im_no_pro » Tue Oct 29, 2013 1:13 pm

human909 wrote:There is a problem here and it is about motorists not taking enough care around cyclists.


I see it a little differently... the more we take your approach the longer the preceived division will remain. Road users are road users, regardless of their chosen method of transport. And asking motorists to take more care of cyclists is a bit rich if you cant acknowledge that cyclists need to take care of themselves in the first place, and that doing so doesnt happen all the time.

There is a problem here and it is about people using the roads not taking enough care of themselves and other people using the roads.
master6 wrote: Moderators are like Club Handicappers; I often think they are wrong, but I dont want the job.
User avatar
im_no_pro
Super Mod
Super Mod
 
Posts: 5694
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 9:29 pm
Location: Geelong

Re: Terrible times in traffic for Geelong

Postby il padrone » Tue Oct 29, 2013 4:19 pm

human909 wrote:
im_no_pro wrote:It's the same old argument, the method of transport isnt the problem. The twit in control of it is. Twits own everything from cars, to motorbikes, to scooter, to, shock horror, bicycles.


And that message alone isn't good enough. The twits don't recognise themselves as twits and keep behaving the same dangerous way. It is as bad as the share the road message when gets interpreted to mean cyclists should hide in the gutter.

There is a problem here and it is about motorists not taking enough care around cyclists.

+1

My experiences cycling in Italy this year revealed to me a different approach to "share the road". In towns and cities there the number one expectation is that motor vehicle drivers, in any situation of doubt, will stop and give way to pedestrians and cyclists, regardless of whether the pedestrian or cyclist is doing "something stupid" or not. The reasons for this are pretty obvious. A good example of this was one-way streets - there are lots of these in Italian towns. We routinely rode (keeping right) the wrong way down any one-way street. They are one-way for cars, because they are too narrow for two-way car traffic, but a bicycle is a different proposition. Any Italians we spoke to about this said "But of course, on a bike this rule does not apply".

Australian drivers can't get beyond the 'just another vehicle' status, and in fact mostly don't even give equivalent vehicle status to someone on a bicycle. They interpret "share the road" as "get over, right next to that gutter so I can get past".

The "sharing" bit is mainly aimed at driver behaviour, and we need to advocate for cyclists and stress the change of behaviour needed. For sure cyclists need to obey the road rules as well, but "sharing" in the context of keeping far left and gutter-hugging is not part of this. Mostly cyclists share the road very well, too well in fact. The publicly derided 'peleton of lycra louts' is a fairly rare thing, and usually cyclists riding two-abreast in a group will be a much safer thing for the riders, and no harder to pass than any other car travelling slow. Drivers need a great deal of education about just what is safe road behaviour for cyclists, and what they require in motorist behaviour (in fact, what is legally reqired).

Some varying viewpoints on this from the land of the red, white & blue - there are safety and practical issues where the road rules are more for motorists than for a person on a bike; but like I said, I advocate following the road rules on a bike.

Then there is this analysis of road collisions (similar details have been given by Victoria Police I believe).

In six out of 10 crashes, the vehicle driver was crossing two or more traffic lanes while turning right.



Should we be criticising 'lycra louts' or demanding more from our motorists ??
Riding bikes in traffic - what seems dangerous is usually safe; what seems safe is often more dangerous.
User avatar
il padrone
 
Posts: 18505
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: Terrible times in traffic for Geelong

Postby im_no_pro » Wed Oct 30, 2013 9:13 am

il padrone wrote:
Should we be criticising 'lycra louts' or demanding more from our motorists ??


Both are appropriate at times (substituting the lycra louts jibe for cyclists of course). Which is kinda my point, neither is 100% right 100% of the time. Pointing that motorists have shortcomings without accepting the same goes for cyclists smacks of elitism for mine, which is exactly how many motorists percieve cyclists. If we dont change that, we dont change motorists. You could argue motorcyclists face similar challenges, although over different issues,
master6 wrote: Moderators are like Club Handicappers; I often think they are wrong, but I dont want the job.
User avatar
im_no_pro
Super Mod
Super Mod
 
Posts: 5694
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 9:29 pm
Location: Geelong

Re: Terrible times in traffic for Geelong

Postby il padrone » Wed Oct 30, 2013 10:18 am

Well, I guess I really don't ascribe to the 'blame the victim' mentality that came across in Mr Van Laar's comment

Criticising both groups is all very well, but I'm much more interested in focusing on safety for all road users. Cyclists cause some safety hazards, however the level of fault and responsibility lies much more heavily upon drivers of motor vehicles as far as I can see.
Riding bikes in traffic - what seems dangerous is usually safe; what seems safe is often more dangerous.
User avatar
il padrone
 
Posts: 18505
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: Terrible times in traffic for Geelong

Postby human909 » Wed Oct 30, 2013 11:45 am

im_no_pro wrote:Both are appropriate at times (substituting the lycra louts jibe for cyclists of course). Which is kinda my point, neither is 100% right 100% of the time. Pointing that motorists have shortcomings without accepting the same goes for cyclists smacks of elitism for mine, which is exactly how many motorists percieve cyclists. If we dont change that, we dont change motorists. You could argue motorcyclists face similar challenges, although over different issues,


Yep. Just like when we have those domestic violences campaigns we should balance them with other advertisements saying that women shouldn't nag. :shock: :roll:

There are silly drivers and silly cyclists. But the big problem isn't either of them. The big problem is the dangerous and aggressive drivers thinking it is OK to deliberately endanger cyclist lives.
human909
 
Posts: 4900
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:48 am

Re: Terrible times in traffic for Geelong

Postby im_no_pro » Wed Oct 30, 2013 12:17 pm

il padrone wrote: Cyclists cause some safety hazards, however the level of fault and responsibility lies much more heavily upon drivers of motor vehicles as far as I can see.


No argument from me on that part :wink:

human909 wrote:Yep. Just like when we have those domestic violences campaigns we should balance them with other advertisements saying that women shouldn't nag. :shock: :roll:


Comparing a cyclist breaking a law to someone (regardless of their sex) nagging isnt a realistic comparion now, is it.... last time I checked there werent laws against nagging.

:roll: indeed.

edit:
human909 wrote:The big problem is the dangerous and aggressive drivers thinking it is OK to deliberately endanger cyclist lives.


have you actually looked into the accidents in the Geelong area that drive this article? Not one of them has even a suggestion let alone any evidence of intent to deliberately endager cyclists. There has been only one reported incident in the area that I am aware of, and the driver responsible for that was appropriately charged, found guilty and sentenced.
master6 wrote: Moderators are like Club Handicappers; I often think they are wrong, but I dont want the job.
User avatar
im_no_pro
Super Mod
Super Mod
 
Posts: 5694
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 9:29 pm
Location: Geelong

Re: Terrible times in traffic for Geelong

Postby human909 » Thu Oct 31, 2013 1:33 am

im_no_pro wrote:Comparing a cyclist breaking a law to someone (regardless of their sex) nagging isnt a realistic comparion now, is it.... last time I checked there werent laws against nagging.

:roll: indeed.

You obvious are happy to blame the victims.

That attitude is what has lead to Australia's woeful cycling safety.
human909
 
Posts: 4900
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:48 am

Re: Terrible times in traffic for Geelong

Postby im_no_pro » Thu Oct 31, 2013 8:53 am

human909 wrote:You obvious are happy to blame the victims.


And theres my cue this discussion has run its course. I've said my bit, now im outta here before it descends into another thread that just goes round and round in circles and gets personal a la MHL/Strict Liability/frame material/diet threads.
master6 wrote: Moderators are like Club Handicappers; I often think they are wrong, but I dont want the job.
User avatar
im_no_pro
Super Mod
Super Mod
 
Posts: 5694
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 9:29 pm
Location: Geelong


Return to Cycling Safety and Advocacy

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

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

> FREE BNA Stickers
> BNA Cycling Kit