"Cyclists Single File" removed from 1:20

Since 2001, over 90,000 cyclist's have joined Cycling Forums to discuss topics from general cycling to equipment, training, racing and travel or vacation destinations (especially in europe during the tour de france). We also feature an great deals in our online store, 100's of articles, classifieds and product reviews.

Ok, so does anyone know what happened?
Last year they erect cyclists warning signs, soon after the add cyclists
single file signs and just recently single file signs have been removed.
Rumor has it were erected by council responding to a few whining locals but
they may have stepped on VicRoads toes as they contradict the road laws.
Those signs did cause problems as I had retaliation quite a few times from
approaching motorists way back who thought I was riding two abreast where I
was actually just passing another cyclists and was approached by a motorists
at a coffee shop saying they were erected to remind us cyclists riding two
abreast is against the law.
Does anyone here think we need a 5 second add on TV letting the public know
two abreast is legal? i doubt it'll happen as there's not enough of us
getting killed.

JoeDe

JoeDe wrote:
> Ok, so does anyone know what happened?
> Last year they erect cyclists warning signs, soon after the add cyclists
> single file signs and just recently single file signs have been removed.
> Rumor has it were erected by council responding to a few whining locals but
> they may have stepped on VicRoads toes as they contradict the road laws.
> Those signs did cause problems as I had retaliation quite a few times from
> approaching motorists way back who thought I was riding two abreast where I
> was actually just passing another cyclists and was approached by a motorists
> at a coffee shop saying they were erected to remind us cyclists riding two
> abreast is against the law.
> Does anyone here think we need a 5 second add on TV letting the public know
> two abreast is legal? i doubt it'll happen as there's not enough of us
> getting killed.
>
> JoeDe
>
>
There's more than one council involved. The 1 in 20 is divided between
the City of Knox at the Boronia/The Basin end, and Yarra Ranges higher
up. And if you include Montrose/Kalorama, Maroondah as well.
As for advertising, on the (Vic) State Bicycle Committee 20 years ago,
we were told that if we wanted to modify road users attitudes, with less
than a million dollars we were wasting our time. Correct for inflation
and that still holds true.
The facts are, a tiny percentage of motorists are actively antagonistic
(usually male, aged 17 - 39), whilst a larger percentage simply regard
us as an impediment and/or have no idea what the road laws on cyclists
are anyway.
The relevant authorities claim to be encouraging cycling as an
environmentally friendly alternative. The reality is our road system,
particularly in outer areas, is just crap, with little or no provision
for anything other than the Great God Car.
No, in general we don't get killed, as we're experienced and accustomed
to this. But 99 per cent around here don't ride to start with, and
aren't going to while facilities remain at best derisory.
Cheers,
Ray

"ray" <ferret57@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:47ca8200$0$23658$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> JoeDe wrote:
>> Ok, so does anyone know what happened?
>> Last year they erect cyclists warning signs, soon after the add cyclists
>> single file signs and just recently single file signs have been removed.
>> Rumor has it were erected by council responding to a few whining locals
>> but they may have stepped on VicRoads toes as they contradict the road
>> laws.
>> Those signs did cause problems as I had retaliation quite a few times
>> from approaching motorists way back who thought I was riding two abreast
>> where I was actually just passing another cyclists and was approached by
>> a motorists at a coffee shop saying they were erected to remind us
>> cyclists riding two abreast is against the law.
>> Does anyone here think we need a 5 second add on TV letting the public
>> know two abreast is legal? i doubt it'll happen as there's not enough of
>> us getting killed.
>>
>> JoeDe
> There's more than one council involved. The 1 in 20 is divided between the
> City of Knox at the Boronia/The Basin end, and Yarra Ranges higher up. And
> if you include Montrose/Kalorama, Maroondah as well.
> As for advertising, on the (Vic) State Bicycle Committee 20 years ago, we
> were told that if we wanted to modify road users attitudes, with less than
> a million dollars we were wasting our time. Correct for inflation and that
> still holds true.
> The facts are, a tiny percentage of motorists are actively antagonistic
> (usually male, aged 17 - 39), whilst a larger percentage simply regard us
> as an impediment and/or have no idea what the road laws on cyclists are
> anyway.
> The relevant authorities claim to be encouraging cycling as an
> environmentally friendly alternative. The reality is our road system,
> particularly in outer areas, is just crap, with little or no provision for
> anything other than the Great God Car.
> No, in general we don't get killed, as we're experienced and accustomed to
> this. But 99 per cent around here don't ride to start with, and aren't
> going to while facilities remain at best derisory.
> Cheers,
> Ray

Great to hear the signs are no longer there so I'll be copping a smidgin
less abuse while riding up and down this road.

OK, so who made a midnight ride up the 1:20 with a shifting spanner? :-)

<treadly&amp>; "me" <treadlyampme.35s5tb@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com>
wrote in message news:treadlyampme.35s5tb@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com...
>
> OK, so who made a midnight ride up the 1:20 with a shifting spanner? :-)
>
>
> --
> treadly&amp;me
>
>
>
Dunno, but prempted me!

JoeDe wrote:
> <Snip>
> Does anyone here think we need a 5 second add on TV letting the public know
> two abreast is legal? i doubt it'll happen as there's not enough of us
> getting killed.
>
> JoeDe
>

Such ads would only be invested in when "3+ cyclist abreast cameras"
become affordable and GovCo has to justify their widespread installation.

On Wed, 05 Mar 2008 21:52:10 +1100, Sir Lex <SL@no-spam.com.au> wrote:

>Such ads would only be invested in when "3+ cyclist abreast cameras"
>become affordable and GovCo has to justify their widespread installation.

3 abreast is legal when some are overtaking. The camera also needs to
be placed in the lane - from the side of the road can make 2 look like
a lot more.

"Aeek" wrote:
>
> 3 abreast is legal when some are overtaking. The camera also needs to
> be placed in the lane - from the side of the road can make 2 look like
> a lot more.

Also would be no use if it's an overtaking driver's view. Riders may be two
abreast but just some in a bunch on a different alignment, looking like 3
from behind. I've often thought this is why some drivers get on such a high
horse over cyclists two abreast or more. They see a bunch and think that all
will be rigidly in line, like a train track. Real world conditions mean this
may not always be the case.

--
Cheers
Peter

~~~ ~ _@
~~ ~ _- \,
~~ (*)/ (*)