D
dewatf
Guest
On Wed, 4 Jan 2006 11:47:46 +1100, "Peter Signorini"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>I don't mind them allowing quick traffic, I'll just flow through in my lane,
>and if I'm riding uphill at 10kmh I'll still claim the lane - following
>motorists will just have to suck eggs and wait.
Extactly. You will hold up many cars so that you as one cyclist don't
have to be slowed down for what 10 or 20 seconds. And you won't even
consider the inconvience you cause.
>What I can't tolerate is
>being forced to lose my right to the road in this roundabout design.
You don't have a right if the authorities restrict bikes there, just
as they restrict cars, trucks and pedestrians in other places where
appropriate to manage traffic for all competing interests.
<[email protected]> wrote:
>I don't mind them allowing quick traffic, I'll just flow through in my lane,
>and if I'm riding uphill at 10kmh I'll still claim the lane - following
>motorists will just have to suck eggs and wait.
Extactly. You will hold up many cars so that you as one cyclist don't
have to be slowed down for what 10 or 20 seconds. And you won't even
consider the inconvience you cause.
>What I can't tolerate is
>being forced to lose my right to the road in this roundabout design.
You don't have a right if the authorities restrict bikes there, just
as they restrict cars, trucks and pedestrians in other places where
appropriate to manage traffic for all competing interests.
D
dewatf
Guest
On 3 Jan 2006 16:00:59 -0800, "neuroinf" <[email protected]> wrote:
>I don't think there is any law enforcable that would exclude you from
>the roundabout.
If they post a no bicycle sign then you definitely are, that is
clearly set out in the Ausroads rules.
dewatf.
>I don't think there is any law enforcable that would exclude you from
>the roundabout.
If they post a no bicycle sign then you definitely are, that is
clearly set out in the Ausroads rules.
dewatf.
D
dewatf
Guest
On Wed, 4 Jan 2006 10:25:34 +1100, alison_b
<[email protected]> wrote:
>What legal standing does a sign - presumably supported by whichever
>govt put it there - have then? If it says "All Bikes" and an arrow
>pointing the way, is that different to, say, "No animals on freeway"?
>I'd have thought that it had the same authority as other signs such as
>"buses only" ...
Councils are empowered to set traffic rules on local roads and
footpaths, and the police can impose fines if you violate them.
The "All Bicycles" sign directing bikes onto an off road area is a bit
of a grey area. You must obey all road signs. While there is a
specific requirement to ride in a bike lane on the road (where
practicable) in the Ausroad rules there is nothing about "All
bicycles" .
I have heard that interpreted that you are not forced to follow a
direction to be on cyclepath and it seems to be what most cyclists
believe but haven't seen anything official in writing.
You will be fined for riding in a "buses only" lane, it is only a
regular bus lane that you can ride in.
dewatf.
<[email protected]> wrote:
>What legal standing does a sign - presumably supported by whichever
>govt put it there - have then? If it says "All Bikes" and an arrow
>pointing the way, is that different to, say, "No animals on freeway"?
>I'd have thought that it had the same authority as other signs such as
>"buses only" ...
Councils are empowered to set traffic rules on local roads and
footpaths, and the police can impose fines if you violate them.
The "All Bicycles" sign directing bikes onto an off road area is a bit
of a grey area. You must obey all road signs. While there is a
specific requirement to ride in a bike lane on the road (where
practicable) in the Ausroad rules there is nothing about "All
bicycles" .
I have heard that interpreted that you are not forced to follow a
direction to be on cyclepath and it seems to be what most cyclists
believe but haven't seen anything official in writing.
You will be fined for riding in a "buses only" lane, it is only a
regular bus lane that you can ride in.
dewatf.
T
TimC
Guest
On 2006-01-04, dewatf (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
> On 3 Jan 2006 16:00:59 -0800, "neuroinf" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>I don't think there is any law enforcable that would exclude you from
>>the roundabout.
>
> If they post a no bicycle sign then you definitely are, that is
> clearly set out in the Ausroads rules.
Cite?
--
TimC
"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
> On 3 Jan 2006 16:00:59 -0800, "neuroinf" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>I don't think there is any law enforcable that would exclude you from
>>the roundabout.
>
> If they post a no bicycle sign then you definitely are, that is
> clearly set out in the Ausroads rules.
Cite?
--
TimC
"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan
OK ppls.. pics taken, uploaded, sorted, and posted..
http://tinyurl.com/be5ra
I actually rode these things tonight while taking pics.. what a nightmare... I'll post this via usenet too if the replication of this doesnt take place fast enough...
cheers,
GPL
http://tinyurl.com/be5ra
I actually rode these things tonight while taking pics.. what a nightmare... I'll post this via usenet too if the replication of this doesnt take place fast enough...
cheers,
GPL
N
neuroinf
Guest
The photos are very good! Many thanks...
The problem here is when you get to vainly attempt to cross the road
after following the "all bicycles" sign. It is precisely the OPPOSITE
of what should happen. Instead of the bicycles (and pedestrians) being
forced to stop and give way to the cars it should be the OTHER WAY
AROUND.
Why? Firstly bicycles and pedestrians are fragile, and cars are not.
Bicycles need encouragement, cars do not.
Secondly all cars are evil, car drivers are evil, and councils that
encourage them should be boiled in oil....aaaaarrrrrrrgghhhhhhhh.....
(sounds of frothing at mouth, runs off into the night, grabs bicycle
starts heading in the direction of Laos, where (as yet) not many
punters can afford cars....)
Why does BV do nothing here? I can't see a coffee bar in sight, since
BV only caters for latte sipping, inner city fake 1km a day cyclists
they won't get near this location.
The problem here is when you get to vainly attempt to cross the road
after following the "all bicycles" sign. It is precisely the OPPOSITE
of what should happen. Instead of the bicycles (and pedestrians) being
forced to stop and give way to the cars it should be the OTHER WAY
AROUND.
Why? Firstly bicycles and pedestrians are fragile, and cars are not.
Bicycles need encouragement, cars do not.
Secondly all cars are evil, car drivers are evil, and councils that
encourage them should be boiled in oil....aaaaarrrrrrrgghhhhhhhh.....
(sounds of frothing at mouth, runs off into the night, grabs bicycle
starts heading in the direction of Laos, where (as yet) not many
punters can afford cars....)
Why does BV do nothing here? I can't see a coffee bar in sight, since
BV only caters for latte sipping, inner city fake 1km a day cyclists
they won't get near this location.
A
Aeek
Guest
On Tue, 3 Jan 2006 15:53:43 +1100, Poiter <[email protected]> wrote:
>We've got a couple of roundabouts in Canberra.
>That treatment works well on some where the bike lane feeds directly to
>the elevated path and then back on to the bike lane on the other side.
>That is of course if there is no side road to negotiate.
and one where an onroad bike lane goes across one side (& the side road).
Tonight, I figured the wind was making me too slow to be safe going straight
over capital hill(parliament house) so I followed the lane to the roundabout.
In the green lane approaching, left turn lane to my left, I enter the roundabout
and I'm over to the right going straight through. The only way I can use
that bikelane is if I have to give way to traffic on the roundabout,
otherwise old instincts takeover, instincts that work coming the other way
where there is no bike lane. Would be confusing for a car just behind.
Andre
>We've got a couple of roundabouts in Canberra.
>That treatment works well on some where the bike lane feeds directly to
>the elevated path and then back on to the bike lane on the other side.
>That is of course if there is no side road to negotiate.
and one where an onroad bike lane goes across one side (& the side road).
Tonight, I figured the wind was making me too slow to be safe going straight
over capital hill(parliament house) so I followed the lane to the roundabout.
In the green lane approaching, left turn lane to my left, I enter the roundabout
and I'm over to the right going straight through. The only way I can use
that bikelane is if I have to give way to traffic on the roundabout,
otherwise old instincts takeover, instincts that work coming the other way
where there is no bike lane. Would be confusing for a car just behind.
Andre
once the bike lane leaves the road, it has no force, so stay on the road......AND note: it is not confined to VIC.....I noticed the same type of roundabout up in Wharf Street, Tweed Heads NSW over Christmas, only that one not only forced you up on the kerb with both the bike lane and a sign ( all cyclists etc), if you did follow it you also came face to face with a fence erected to stop you crossing the side street, and forcing a 50 meter ride down the side street, to cross and return ( on the road and into the same round about to turn left)...what a redundant crock of shyte...Peter Signorini said:
methoinks the same guide book for building the anti bike roundabout was opened in Vic too...and/or these traffic engineers who designed this "type" of monstrosity probably delivered a paper at some Local Govt seminar junket and they all came away laughing ready to perpetrate evil.....
its an evil plot by dunderheads who drive weapons of mass destruction and do it because they can ( for a while)....
WE WILL OVERCOME
THINK FREE, SAFE, AEOLIAN and GOAT
gplama said:
Excellent documentation!. Idle thoughts whilst viewing...oh for fcuks sakes... lets promote more cyclist inferiority and possible ped/motorist conflict... oh forgot, most folks out there have their legs painted on... did the traffic engineer obtain their quals via the back of a cornflakes packet... and they've left out the teleporter..etc etc etc.
Contact Manningham Council:
http://www.manningham.vic.gov.au/CA...0-Listing~&2=0-Footer+Links~&3=03-Contact+Us~
Manningham City Council
699 Doncaster Road,
Doncaster, Victoria, 3108
PO Box 1 Doncaster, Victoria, 3108
Tel: 03 9840 9333
Fax: 03 9848 3110
Email: [email protected]
Feedback form:
http://www.manningham.vic.gov.au/Op...tomer Service&S=Customer Service&P=Contact Us
Also cc. any emails/correspondence to BV: [email protected]
and ManninghamBUG: http://home.vicnet.net.au/~mannbug/
email: [email protected], [email protected]
A
Aeek
Guest
On Wed, 4 Jan 2006 20:58:48 +1100, gplama <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>OK ppls.. pics taken, uploaded, sorted, and posted..
>
>http://tinyurl.com/be5ra
bizarre, it looks like a nice small roundabout, ideal for bicycles.
Andre
>
>OK ppls.. pics taken, uploaded, sorted, and posted..
>
>http://tinyurl.com/be5ra
bizarre, it looks like a nice small roundabout, ideal for bicycles.
Andre
AND.. another thing that maybe of interest:
Old Warrandyte Road, Donvale - Reconstruction: (Mitcham Road to Mullum Mullum Creek)
http://www.manningham.vic.gov.au/CA...ad+Projects~&3=20-Old+Warrandyte+Rd,+Donvale~
Old Warrandyte Road, Donvale - Reconstruction: (Mitcham Road to Mullum Mullum Creek)
http://www.manningham.vic.gov.au/CA...ad+Projects~&3=20-Old+Warrandyte+Rd,+Donvale~
E
Euan
Guest
gplama <[email protected]> writes:
> OK ppls.. pics taken, uploaded, sorted, and posted..
>
> http://tinyurl.com/be5ra
>
> I actually rode these things tonight while taking pics.. what a
> nightmare... I'll post this via usenet too if the replication of this
> doesnt take place fast enough...
Excellent work GPLama. Next step is to write to the council explaining
to them why this is appalling road design, ccing BV.
Which council is it? Glad to write the letter if someone points me in
the right direction.
--
Cheers | ~~ __@
Euan | ~~ _-\<,
Melbourne, Australia | ~ (*)/ (*)
> OK ppls.. pics taken, uploaded, sorted, and posted..
>
> http://tinyurl.com/be5ra
>
> I actually rode these things tonight while taking pics.. what a
> nightmare... I'll post this via usenet too if the replication of this
> doesnt take place fast enough...
Excellent work GPLama. Next step is to write to the council explaining
to them why this is appalling road design, ccing BV.
Which council is it? Glad to write the letter if someone points me in
the right direction.
--
Cheers | ~~ __@
Euan | ~~ _-\<,
Melbourne, Australia | ~ (*)/ (*)
P
persia
Guest
Rather than expect BV / Harry to automatically deal with every road
development in the state, why not:
a) contact Manningham BUG: http://home.vicnet.net.au/~mannbug/ and see
if they've done anything about it
b) write to the City of Manningham and explain why you hate this
treatment
c) cc BV, so they know what's going on
Persia
development in the state, why not:
a) contact Manningham BUG: http://home.vicnet.net.au/~mannbug/ and see
if they've done anything about it
b) write to the City of Manningham and explain why you hate this
treatment
c) cc BV, so they know what's going on
Persia
P
persia
Guest
Euan
These `bicycle facilities' appear to stink, but that doesn't mean that
all do, or that they are a plot to get us off the road. You & I can
cope with most road and traffic conditions, but a lot of potential
cyclists are deterred by them. While I agree with you that they are
deterred by a perceived threat that isn't really there, they are
deterred nonetheless. On road lanes and off road paths provide a range
of facilities to enable the less confident and experienced to give it a
go. Badly built facilities like this one are no good, but well-designed
ones can have a real effect on cycling numbers, safety, etc.
Persia
These `bicycle facilities' appear to stink, but that doesn't mean that
all do, or that they are a plot to get us off the road. You & I can
cope with most road and traffic conditions, but a lot of potential
cyclists are deterred by them. While I agree with you that they are
deterred by a perceived threat that isn't really there, they are
deterred nonetheless. On road lanes and off road paths provide a range
of facilities to enable the less confident and experienced to give it a
go. Badly built facilities like this one are no good, but well-designed
ones can have a real effect on cycling numbers, safety, etc.
Persia
P
persia
Guest
Why does BV do nothing here? I can't see a coffee bar in sight, since
BV only caters for latte sipping, inner city fake 1km a day cyclists
they won't get near this location.
Bullsh*t.
Why don't YOU do something instead of slagging off people you know
nothing about?
(Echoing silence)
Yeah.
BV only caters for latte sipping, inner city fake 1km a day cyclists
they won't get near this location.
Bullsh*t.
Why don't YOU do something instead of slagging off people you know
nothing about?
(Echoing silence)
Yeah.
cfsmtb said:
This one's actually a Vicroads Road/Issue
queried with em 6 months ago as to when the 'Pari-roubaix' section was gonig to finish so we could enjoy our BR...
B
BrettS
Guest
TimC wrote:
> On 2006-01-04, dewatf (aka Bruce)
> was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
>
>>On 3 Jan 2006 16:00:59 -0800, "neuroinf" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I don't think there is any law enforcable that would exclude you from
>>>the roundabout.
>>
>>If they post a no bicycle sign then you definitely are, that is
>>clearly set out in the Ausroads rules.
>
>
> Cite?
>
From the Australian Road Rules
252 No bicycles signs and markings
(1) The rider of a bicycle must not ride on a length of road or
footpath to which a no bicycles sign, or a no bicycles road
marking, applies.
Offence provision.
Note: Footpath, length of road and no bicycles road marking are defined
in the dictionary.
(2) A no bicycles sign, or a no bicycles road marking, applies to a
length of road or footpath beginning at the sign or marking and
ending at the nearest of the following:
(a) a bicycle path sign or bicycle path road marking;
(b) a bicycle lane sign;
(c) a separated footpath sign or separated footpath road
marking;
(d) a shared path sign;
(e) an end no bicycles sign;
(f) the next intersection.
--
BrettS
> On 2006-01-04, dewatf (aka Bruce)
> was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
>
>>On 3 Jan 2006 16:00:59 -0800, "neuroinf" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I don't think there is any law enforcable that would exclude you from
>>>the roundabout.
>>
>>If they post a no bicycle sign then you definitely are, that is
>>clearly set out in the Ausroads rules.
>
>
> Cite?
>
From the Australian Road Rules
252 No bicycles signs and markings
(1) The rider of a bicycle must not ride on a length of road or
footpath to which a no bicycles sign, or a no bicycles road
marking, applies.
Offence provision.
Note: Footpath, length of road and no bicycles road marking are defined
in the dictionary.
(2) A no bicycles sign, or a no bicycles road marking, applies to a
length of road or footpath beginning at the sign or marking and
ending at the nearest of the following:
(a) a bicycle path sign or bicycle path road marking;
(b) a bicycle lane sign;
(c) a separated footpath sign or separated footpath road
marking;
(d) a shared path sign;
(e) an end no bicycles sign;
(f) the next intersection.
--
BrettS
