Equipment and On Road Behaviour, Laws and Rules. Cycling Promotion and Advocacy
14 posts • Page 1 of 1
To the left of the above image shows the ending of a bike lane. As you can see it becomes a left turn lane.
My question is this: Say you are in the bike lane, no cars infront and the light goes red. A car behind you wants to turn left and for arguments sake, straight has a red light and left turn has a green light. Where do I stop? Since the left lane is strictly a turning lane, I'm assuming I can't stop here (if it was a straight and turning lane I would have no qualms blocking the car behind as often occurs when I'm in a car)? Would I move as far over to the right as possible since there are no bike squares at the front of the straight lanes? To me it looks like even if I moved as far right as possible, it would still be a squeeze for the turning car. Perhaps pull over on the extreme left in front of the silver station wagon and wait for the green straight light?
Any advice for a road-riding newbie appreciated.
I would take the through lane and move back over to the left after crossing the intersection.
It's not easy for beginners, but you need to develop the confidence to take your rightful position on the road.
Cycle touring blog and tour journals: whispering wheels...
Under the road rules you are legally able to ride in any lane that you need to, so you are free to ride in the middle lane. A left-turn only lane strictly requires you to leave it clear unless you are turning left. I have a lane similar to this on my commute where hardly anyone ever turns left. I sit in the left lane, but if there was someone behind me waiting to turn left I would move over to the next lane (never happens as there is no dedicated left-turn cycle).
At a few other situations I have a left/straight ahead lane and there is a left turn only arrow (go figure?) and I will try to reposition myself (if possible and the driver is not damn rude about it) to let left-turners through. But always do whatever is safe for you.
Riding bikes in traffic - what seems dangerous is usually safe; what seems safe is often more dangerous.
In that picture I would not even be IN the "bike lane". To me it still looks like a "door-zone" and I refuse to ride in them.
Take the actual lane going straight through as you are legally allowed to do.
2010 BMC SLC01
Have another look at that street and its bike lane. It is a very good width - a good 2m+ wide I'd say so easy to stay clear of the doors.
It looks pretty narrow where the silver station wagon is parked; but if going straight you'd want to take the middle lane before then anyhow...
It's one of those faux bike lanes anyway as an inspection of Google Street View shows:
- No continuation dotted line across the earlier intersections
- No signage sayings it's a bike lane after those intersections
So no legal requirement to use it
Helmets! Bells! Rego!
Hi swon38 - you are required by law to move into the middle lane to go straight ahead.
Having said that, it is an absolutely moronic design and the person who implemented it should be fired as they are clearly incompetent at their job. All it requires is a "LLMTL - Bicycles Excepted" sign and road marking to make the situation safe, intuitive and legal.
I see so much utter garbage like this around that I feel like my head is going to explode.
You reckon that one's bad? On a steep hill too.
That's a pretty horrible layout full stop. Although, I feel that they have actually tried to make it a little better for cyclists than the alternative of the left lane becoming a left turn lane.
Looking at the view a bit further back, I think it could definitely use some green paint to clearly define the path of cyclists proceeding straight ahead and reinforcing the requirement for left turning traffic to give way. A small amount of road widening would allow the green cycle lane to continue all the way to the stop line.
What else could you do here that is safer for cyclists but doesn't remove the two left turn lanes?
Also what's with the weird cycle markings further back on Boronia Road? Did they have a shortage of road paint and could only mark 10% of the lane instead of the whole thing?
It'a a sop. It's there to convince some people that the council is doing something about provision of facilities. Worth less than a sharrow IMO.
...whatever the road rules, self-preservation is the absolute priority for a cyclist when mixing it with motorised traffic.
London Boy 29/12/2011
Those markings officially indicate that there is a wider left lane, wide enough for a car and a bike to share the lane safely. MB, in practice they are quite effective as most motorists interpret it as some sort of bike lane and do generally stay out of the left part of the lane. And they are put there by Vicroads, not the local council. I ride this section daily on my commute.
BTW, many Melbourne roadies ride this as part of their training runs to and from the '1 in 20' in the Dandenongs. However they are mostly doing it on the weekend, not in peak hour when the traffic volumes are heavy. I go straight through generally and pulling off that maneuver to the straight-through lane on the far right can be quite challenging. Mostly I ride up int the left-turn lanes and then switch across (illegally crossing the solid lane lines ) when I come to queued left-turn traffic, to stop in the left side of the straight-through lane.
I don't have any magic solution for cyclists. Some lane re-adjustment might allow enough space for a bike lane through, but won't hold my breath as the volume of cyclists out here is very low and the motor car rules
14 posts • Page 1 of 1
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users