I seek feedback on 2 letters from drivers who dislike bicycle lanes. Do cyclists use these bicycle lanes?
One myopic driver thinks parking in a bicycle lane should equate to a parking offence and fine, rather than a cyclist safety issue.
You might consider another AC post at http://www.adelaidecyclists.com/forum/topics/increase-in-cyclist-cr...
http://www.indaily.com.au/?iid=64281&sr=0#folio=9. Letter published in Indaily of 18-Jun-2012 on page 9. Bike lanes boost coffers. Martin Bailey
Peter Davies (Letters, June 14) and Suzanne Adams (Letters, June 6) have a right to be perturbed. One can only conclude from the body of evidence that local authorities are using bike lane legislation to boost their coffers. Fines for parking in bike lanes are generally greater than those applicable to no-parking zones.
Often, bike lanes have no provable relevance, and in many cases do not serve the interests of the cycling community. A good example of this is Transport Avenue, running off Richmond Road. This road is behind the Department of Transport and Infrastructure complex at Netley. Richmond Road does not have a bike lane, yet Transport Avenue has a bike lane at all times. This avenue is a busy access to the Netley complex, with parking extremely limited. Recently, I carried out a survey over two consecutive week days between 8am and 5pm. No bikes! But council contractors, twice a day over the two days, were busy writing infringement notices for the hapless vehicle owners.
http://www.indaily.com.au/?iid=64188#folio=11. Letter published in Indaily of 14-Jun-2012 on page 11. Suburban parking nightmare. Peter Davies
I sympathise with Suzanne Adams (Letters, June 6) about parking in suburban streets. Recently, the state government and local government have installed bike lanes all over the city, which have achieved little apart from irritating local residents.
Running a small business – as we do, just off Tapleys Hill Road in Hendon – we now find our street is crammed with vehicles all day. These are vehicles that used to be parked on the main road, but we now have a you-beaut bicycle lane on both sides of Tapleys Hill Road.
This traffic congestion causes us a lot of inconvenience, as our delivery trucks can’t find room to get into our street, let alone park so they can unload our goods.
Funny thing is, the council regularly patrols the bicycle lane on Tapleys Hill Road, and books anybody who happens to park their car on the road, yet there are virtually no cyclists who use the bike lane. And nobody in their right mind would cycle on Tapleys Hill Road during the day.
Even funnier – the occasional cyclist we do see on Tapleys Hill Road is cycling on the footpath, because they are not stupid. Says a lot about council and government stupidity!
Letter of 6-Jun-2012 is not about parking in bicycle lanes, rather about much car parking in a residential street.
I have to say they have a point. Particularly the writer of the second letter is correct that the bike lanes are seldom used. We all know why that is. The writer does too. As he says, nobody in their right mind would use them. I can understand why local residents would be annoyed at the disruption from a bike lane that is seldom used.
The answer of course is proper bike lanes that people want to use. Separated lanes on main roads that are part of a consistent network across the city that people actually feel safe using.
I applaud any efforts to recognise cycling as a legitimate form of transport but the painted lines we see squashed on the sides of so many busy roads are regrettably inadequate.
+1 Bikes lanes are a puncture paradise! I ride on the white line :p
Daniel, can be best to ride to one side of the white line, in case the painted surface is slippery when forced to brake sharply.
I rarely ride during the times bike lanes are valid for. I find them strange, there seems to be no thought in them, they start and stop randomly. I don't just mean at intersections. There does not seem to be thought on, as an example, getting from the city to northern suburbs. This may be changing soon as more lanes are coming on Main north road.
I often ride on prospect road and coming home when the lane is not active and usually full of cars I usually take the whole car lane. Considering most people like parking their cars about 3 feet from the curb, add in space to stay away from doors and you are a fair way into the car lane. If you don't take the car lane then you will surely get some idiot try to squeeze you. And prospect council promotes itself as some sort of cycling friendly council so I am sure they don't mind me taking the car lane.
Perhaps the bike lanes in question are not used because they don't connect with anything else. Also, disagreeing with the creation of a bike lane in a particular location is no justification for breaking the law with respect to that lane.
Even so, I would like to see penalties for bike lane infringements increased to include compulsory loss of demerit points, whether the infringement is detected/prosecuted by local councils or the police. (As far as I am aware, bike lane infringements are not on the demerit points schedule.)
David, will let you check and post an answer. The following links are in the BUG News Jun-2012. Although an Adelaide BUG member, you have not sent me an email address to receive the newsletter.
The index to the rules http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/sa/consol_reg/arr210
Expiation fees for road rules http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/sa/consol_reg/rtr1999355/sch9.html
Demerit points for each road rule offence
I could not find any reference to bike lane infringements in Schedule 4 of the regulations. Schedule 4 lists demerit points for offences.
AUSTRALIAN ROAD RULES - REG 187
187—Stopping in a bicycle lane, bus lane, tram lane, tramway, transit lane, truck lane or on tram tracks
Expiation fee 187(2) Stopping in bicycle lane $225 + victims of crime levy
Have not looked for demerit points.
Isn't there always people who grizzle if a change inconveniences them?
I wonder if these are the same motorists that thought the introduction of random breath testing was an invasion of privacy?
Or that red light cameras are just about raising revenue after all expecting motorist to be so skilled at driving that they can stop at a red light is clearly unreasonable.
are these the same motorists that think slowing down near schools to give the kids crossing the road half a chance unreasonable.
Next thing it will be expected that motorists stop after an accident to make certain that people where not injured and to swap detains for insurance purposes.
After all if motorists were not in a hurry they would drive sensibly (and be less likely to have an accident) in the first place :-)
After all deaths on the roads is just a small price that has to be paid so they can go fast and arrive less late.
I wonder if these people think a falling road toll is an example of excessive government interference?