[bikeqld] Cycling across crossings enforcement

[Michael Yeates]

Hi ...

Interesting you should mention the cyclists cycling across against 
the red because yesterday morning that is exactly what happened 
except he cycled across all four of the four crossing legs ... 
carefully in my view but each time breaching the law ... in total at 
least 6 separate times ...!

Arguably not one of those involved danger to him or danger or 
nuisance to anyone else ... which raises the discetionary issue to some extent.

I am waiting for a reply to my email sent to Bruce Flegg on Saturday 
morning ... should be interesting ... and hopefully others sent one also.

My other "complaint about cyclists" occurred on Mt Samson Road as I 
was driving north in one of the 100km/h sections, I was approaching a 
right turn T-intersection where because it is on a bend it has double 
lines in place. It also has a slip lane ... and guess where the two 
cyclists cycling two abreast were cycling?

In the through lane ... on an uphill section ...!

This is pure stupidity if not arrogance/ignorance ... as the approach 
speed was probably around 70-80km/h ... so effectively I was 
approaching these two at about 80km/h ... with relatively poor 
visibility ... when they could and in my view should, have been using 
the slip lane ie keeping left to allow fast vehicles to pass them ... 
as it was I slowed down to "squeeze" past ...

Although I would never do it for fear of the cyclists suddenly 
hearing the vehicle and moving left, I probably could easily have 
passed them to their left at 100km/h in the slip lane ... and if 
questioned, quite legitimately argued that if they were in that 
location, I assumed they might have been going to signal to turn right ...!

Its worth noting that there have been some fatalities in situations 
similar to this in the ACT albeit at least in one case, where the 
cyclist was allegedly waiting to turn right and a car going straight 
ahead 'didn't see" the cyclist.

As for the Witton Road crossing, there really should be GIVE WAY 
signs facing the approaching cyclists as in principle, the bike path 
is not a road (it has some other definition ... something like "road 
related" perhaps?) and any vehicle entering a road gives way to 
traffic on that road (notice Australia Post reporting posties being 
threatened by cars driving out of private property ... across our 
"shared footpaths"?) ...

Witton Road is a place where a decent refuge would also be handy ... 
until we get Dutch influenced traffic lights that automatically 
advance sense and favour cyclists ...!

MY.........................

>  At 09:54 AM 20/04/2009, Christopher Biggs wrote:
>
>
>On 18 Apr 2009, at 8:09 AM, Michael Yeates wrote:
>>
>>So I would not be surprised at all if a local constituent sitting in
>>his car waiting for the lights watched cyclists flouting the law and
>>complained to Dr Flegg about it ... and it would not surprise me if
>>Dr Flegg then asked the police to take some action.
>>
>>But while that is all quite reasonable, it is also all
>>conjecture ... it could equally be someone who was walking across
>>the crossing and was startled by one or more cyclists overtaking in
>>an irresponsible manner ... and reported it to police.
>
>If I had to speculate as to why someone would complain, I would finger
>people turning left at either of the two slip-lane/zebra crossing
>combos.
>
>Its easy enough to spot a ped at the zebra crossing and stop for them,
>but when cyclists speed up to the zebra crossing and shoot across with
>the expectation of priority, it can give drivers a nasty fright.
>I've done it, when racing the red.
>
>Don't get me started on cyclists who 'steal base' against the red on
>moggill and camp in the median pen...those ppl are a motorist- 
>relations deathsquad.
>
>Even if we badger MR into fitting cycle-across lights, I suspect the
>zebra crossings would remain.   I very much doubt MR would plump for
>signalising those two slip-lanes, without blowing it up in to a big
>problem requiring impact study etc.
>
>The whole bloody thing should have been an overpass from the
>beginning.   The money poured down the toilet at toowong (to be dug up
>for the tunnel shortly) would have been better spent there.
>
>And another thing, what about the next (outbound) crossing at witton
>rd?   Can anyone tell me what the law dictates when crossing there?
>
>--chris
>
>_______________________________________________
>bikeqld mailing list
>bikeqld at bikeqld.org.au
>http://www.bikeqld.org.au/
>http://www.bikeqld.org.au/mailman/listinfo/bikeqld
>This list has NO affiliation with Bicycle Queensland.
>
>
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>Version: 8.5.287 / Virus Database: 270.12.0/2068 - Release Date: 
>04/19/09 20:04:00