15 yr old cyclist down on Yamba Drive

Anyone else sick of the freakin Dutch being touted as a role model of perfect behaviour? Geebus….

I didn’t finish school THAT long ago, and we had plenty of road safety lessons, which were rolled into our health program, and discussed in depth in other classes as well. Granted I went to a private school for the most part, but even then most schools that I know of offer the road ready course to be done on school grounds to encourage young drivers, my only issue with the road safety program is that it doesn’t cover cyclists.

BicycleCanberra said :

We are looking at adopting the Vision zero policy…

Canberra does have a Vision Zero policy, adapted from the Sweedish model. Have a look a the ACT Road Safety Action Plan 2011-2013 and the ACT Road Safety Strategy 2011-2020, both available online.

BicycleCanberra said :

Dork said :

When people learn to drive they have have to know the laws and know the consequences, kids learn about road safety in school, but nothing to do with when you are riding a bike.

Children in Canberra schools now days learn very little about road safety except what they learn from the back seat of their parents car. The Koala visits now and then but that’s about all. We used to have good road safety training and cycle safety at the the training centre’s in Deakin and Belconnen before they closed them down.
In the Netherlands this type of training still continues today and children sit a road safety cycle test in the last year of primary school as the majority of them cycle to High school.

http://vimeo.com/31545084

Probably has a bit to do with why the stats on fatalities from cyclists not wearing helmets is so low over there. If cycling is a more ingrained part of the daily culture then the basic hurdle of awareness/appreciation between the warring motorists and cyclists has already been overcome before kids get their driving licence.

Gee, better education regarding road use resulting in what appears to be a better outcome for all. Who’d a thunk it.

Dork said :

When people learn to drive they have have to know the laws and know the consequences, kids learn about road safety in school, but nothing to do with when you are riding a bike.

Children in Canberra schools now days learn very little about road safety except what they learn from the back seat of their parents car. The Koala visits now and then but that’s about all. We used to have good road safety training and cycle safety at the the training centre’s in Deakin and Belconnen before they closed them down.
In the Netherlands this type of training still continues today and children sit a road safety cycle test in the last year of primary school as the majority of them cycle to High school.

http://vimeo.com/31545084

dungfungus said :

When you see your cop mate at the weekend, ask him also why the police continue to refuse to prosecute cyclists that still insist on riding on a pedestrian crossing. A lot of comments have been that the law is stupid but it is still the law. I think it is stupid to limit speed on the GDE to 80 kmh but the police and radar will still book me if I break the law by exceeding the limit. There is a bit of a double standard here namely, soak the motorists but don’t touch the peddlers.

I was thinking of this this morning on my commute. This morning I witnessed riders doing things that were not really kosher on the cycle paths. One of the things that bugs me is oncoming riders who wont pass other riders & pedestrians safely (seems to be a Canberra thing because Canberrans cant do it in cars either).

I think education is the key, myself started riding again 4 years ago. Personally I like to explore my activities & understand them better but many people do not. There is literature that can give guidence to people but really sometimes it is face to face education that will get through. After that then enforcement penalties are next.

I had a look at the list of Infringements on the AFP website & it is quite extensive from not riding across the pedestrian crossing, keeping left to passing safely. It surprised me how many infringements there were, there are also infringements for pedestrians.

One of the big things people are forgetting is that while some of these things are a PITA, society is coping with it OK. Yep, there are accidents with the occaisional death but compared to motor vehicles its a drop in the ocean & enforcement is pretty low on the Governents radar.

This is not to say people should not take responsibility for themselves either.

dungfungus said :

qbngeek said :

Jethro said :

Dork said :

On another note, I saw a man on a bike get hit by a car on athlon drive next to melrose high last year. He didn’t dismount his bike to cross the road, though it was the cars fault in this case, if he had have then he wouldn’t have got hit.

I fail to see how a car running a crosswalk and hitting someone would have been prevented if the person on the crosswalk was walking instead of riding.

If you read my original comment on the topic I did mention that one of the problems associated with cyclists stopping at a crosswalk to check it is safe to cross is that cars take this to mean they can ignore the cyclist’s right of way. The problem lies with drivers not giving way when they have to, not whether the person is going across the crosswalk by foot or pedal.

More importantly if the cyclist was riding across the pedestrian crossing, in what world does he have the right of way. My understanding of the matter, and I will check with a cop mate on the weekend, is that cyclist have to dismount as they do not have any rights on a pedestrian crossing. They are required to give way to the cars unless they dismount and walk across.

When you see your cop mate at the weekend, ask him also why the police continue to refuse to prosecute cyclists that still insist on riding on a pedestrian crossing. A lot of comments have been that the law is stupid but it is still the law. I think it is stupid to limit speed on the GDE to 80 kmh but the police and radar will still book me if I break the law by exceeding the limit. There is a bit of a double standard here namely, soak the motorists but don’t touch the peddlers.

I have asked him previously about the lack of action against cyclists, mainly in regards to them not wearing helmets. His response is that he will book cyclists (he is a NSW cop btw), but many cops won’t as they think it is a pain in the butt. He also mentioned that cyclists are not required to carry ID and he has had people give false info to him.

qbngeek said :

Jethro said :

Dork said :

On another note, I saw a man on a bike get hit by a car on athlon drive next to melrose high last year. He didn’t dismount his bike to cross the road, though it was the cars fault in this case, if he had have then he wouldn’t have got hit.

I fail to see how a car running a crosswalk and hitting someone would have been prevented if the person on the crosswalk was walking instead of riding.

If you read my original comment on the topic I did mention that one of the problems associated with cyclists stopping at a crosswalk to check it is safe to cross is that cars take this to mean they can ignore the cyclist’s right of way. The problem lies with drivers not giving way when they have to, not whether the person is going across the crosswalk by foot or pedal.

More importantly if the cyclist was riding across the pedestrian crossing, in what world does he have the right of way. My understanding of the matter, and I will check with a cop mate on the weekend, is that cyclist have to dismount as they do not have any rights on a pedestrian crossing. They are required to give way to the cars unless they dismount and walk across.

When you see your cop mate at the weekend, ask him also why the police continue to refuse to prosecute cyclists that still insist on riding on a pedestrian crossing. A lot of comments have been that the law is stupid but it is still the law. I think it is stupid to limit speed on the GDE to 80 kmh but the police and radar will still book me if I break the law by exceeding the limit. There is a bit of a double standard here namely, soak the motorists but don’t touch the peddlers.

I’m not, which I made clear in my previous post. I understand that everybody is different and that people make mistakes, I agree with you about road design. The issue I have is that making one mistake in a situation like this can cause death or serious injury and it’s not uncommon. It seems that we both agree that it needs to be more safe for everybody. All i’m saying is that people need to follow the law to keep themselves safe. What if we do implement the vision zero policy and no one abides by it. Would suggest scraping the policy if this was the case? I doubt that. I suggest better understanding, When people learn to drive they have have to know the laws and know the consequences, kids learn about road saftey in school, but nothing to do with when you are riding a bike.

Ryan said :

Jethro said :

There is no legitimate reason why stopping and then riding across is disallowed.

I see it as a way to discourage cyclists from just hooning straight across the crossing. I often drive along Corinna St in Woden and even traveling below the 40km speed limit, and approaching the crossing with caution. I have had occasion to slam the brakes because some cyclist has zoomed out from between the buildings on either side and hooned straight across the crossing without so much as a glance to their left or right.

That is something I discussed in my original comment on this thread… I figured the law exists in reaction to the dickhead cyclists who don’t so much as slow down at the crossings. These people aren’t going to obey any law, so the law should be sensible, not a reaction to their dickheadery.

Ryan said :

Jethro said :

There is no legitimate reason why stopping and then riding across is disallowed.

I see it as a way to discourage cyclists from just hooning straight across the crossing. I often drive along Corinna St in Woden and even traveling below the 40km speed limit, and approaching the crossing with caution. I have had occasion to slam the brakes because some cyclist has zoomed out from between the buildings on either side and hooned straight across the crossing without so much as a glance to their left or right.

Sorry, should clarify that I’m talking about the crossing near the library. People seem to forget the road rules altogether on Corinna St but that’s a whinge for another day

Jethro said :

There is no legitimate reason why stopping and then riding across is disallowed.

I see it as a way to discourage cyclists from just hooning straight across the crossing. I often drive along Corinna St in Woden and even traveling below the 40km speed limit, and approaching the crossing with caution. I have had occasion to slam the brakes because some cyclist has zoomed out from between the buildings on either side and hooned straight across the crossing without so much as a glance to their left or right.

Sgt.Bungers said :

intaba said :

BicycleCanberra said :

You don’t need to dismount in the Netherlands. Our free left turn slip lanes are such dangerous places for Pedestrians and cyclists.
http://youtu.be/wEXD0guLQY0

Looks like you don’t need helmets either. Do you think the kid with the broken spine and ripped ear would have been better off without a helmet?

????????? You’ve got to be trolling…

Most of these cyclists were moving at speeds which would be comparable to a jogging pace…

http://www.cycle-helmets.com/imgs/helmetsafety.jpg

Yes the Netherlands has a good safety record without the forced introduction of Mandatory Helmet laws. This didn’t happen overnight. Like many countries after the post war period and up to the peak of road fatalities in the 1970’s there was a high price paid for the motorisation of our cities.

http://youtu.be/XuBdf9jYj7o

Dork said :

I wasn’t referring to the article, I was referring to the incident that I saw last year.
I understand where you are coming from. The bike was going faster than a person running would be. I feel that it is unsafe for them to ride through a crossing like this. In any case, not just the one I witnessed. I believe it is the cars fault, but at the same time, I feel that pedestrians seem to have a lot more commonsense than this bike rider. There were a lot of people walking across that road who stopped and didn’t get hit.

You cannot label one biker, motorist and pedestrian on the occasion that you are referring to as an example of everyone at every given time at all intersections! We are all human and make mistakes, some more that others. Good road design for all users can reduce the human error issue somewhat. This has been the case in the Netherlands and Sweden, with their polices like sustainable safety and Vision zero respectively.
We are looking at adopting the Vision zero policy but are reluctant to implement such major reforms, like lower residential speeds.

I have used the intersection you are talking about and have not dismounted. It is about good traffic awareness for everyone one using the intersection. Keeping good eye contact with drivers as they are looking at the oncoming traffic and not at pedestrians and cyclists crossing.

I wasn’t referring to the article, I was referring to the incident that I saw last year.
I understand where you are coming from. The bike was going faster than a person running would be. I feel that it is unsafe for them to ride through a crossing like this. In any case, not just the one I witnessed. I believe it is the cars fault, but at the same time, I feel that pedestrians seem to have a lot more commonsense than this bike rider. There were a lot of people walking across that road who stopped and didn’t get hit.

Dork said :

So, what it looked like was the person in the car was aware of this intersection and knew that the light was about to turn green, the bike speed through the crossing while the pedestrian light was flashing and the car hit him and then the light turned green. In this case it would’ve helped him because if he wasn’t on his bike he wouldn’t have been able to cross at the time. Also, the car would have seen him, he just came out of no where. So, because a bike goes faster than a person, they can go through like this. A pedestrian would have to stop. The law is there for a reason. This is it.

No its not in this case as it is legal to ride this intersection.

intaba said :

BicycleCanberra said :

You don’t need to dismount in the Netherlands. Our free left turn slip lanes are such dangerous places for Pedestrians and cyclists.
http://youtu.be/wEXD0guLQY0

Looks like you don’t need helmets either. Do you think the kid with the broken spine and ripped ear would have been better off without a helmet?

????????? You’ve got to be trolling…

Most of these cyclists were moving at speeds which would be comparable to a jogging pace…

http://www.cycle-helmets.com/imgs/helmetsafety.jpg

Probably not the best example, since the car (in your story, at least) broke the law by taking off while their light was still red. In terms of contributory negligence, the driver would be well ahead of the cyclist in that scenario.

Dork said :

So, what it looked like was the person in the car was aware of this intersection and knew that the light was about to turn green, the bike speed through the crossing while the pedestrian light was flashing and the car hit him and then the light turned green. In this case it would’ve helped him because if he wasn’t on his bike he wouldn’t have been able to cross at the time. Also, the car would have seen him, he just came out of no where. So, because a bike goes faster than a person, they can go through like this. A pedestrian would have to stop. The law is there for a reason. This is it.

What if your are a running pedestrian how is that different to a pedestrian on a bike going at the same speed ?

I’m not trying to say that it was the bike riders fault. Just that incidents like this can be avoided if people follow the laws put in place to protect them.

So, what it looked like was the person in the car was aware of this intersection and knew that the light was about to turn green, the bike speed through the crossing while the pedestrian light was flashing and the car hit him and then the light turned green. In this case it would’ve helped him because if he wasn’t on his bike he wouldn’t have been able to cross at the time. Also, the car would have seen him, he just came out of no where. So, because a bike goes faster than a person, they can go through like this. A pedestrian would have to stop. The law is there for a reason. This is it.

intaba said :

BicycleCanberra said :

You don’t need to dismount in the Netherlands. Our free left turn slip lanes are such dangerous places for Pedestrians and cyclists.
http://youtu.be/wEXD0guLQY0

Looks like you don’t need helmets either. Do you think the kid with the broken spine and ripped ear would have been better off without a helmet?

Real safety for cyclists is all about safe cycling infrastructure and obeying the traffic law. There is far too much focus on helmets. Interestedly pedestrians have a higher rate of head injures as do motor vehicle drivers.
Australia and New Zealand are the only ‘Countries’ to enforce an all ages, all cycling Mandatory Helmet law. It is a wonder why only 1% of us cycle regularly.

intaba said :

BicycleCanberra said :

You don’t need to dismount in the Netherlands. Our free left turn slip lanes are such dangerous places for Pedestrians and cyclists.
http://youtu.be/wEXD0guLQY0

Looks like you don’t need helmets either. Do you think the kid with the broken spine and ripped ear would have been better off without a helmet?

Talk about missing the point, Bicycle canberra was indicating that the degin of the intersection will & does reduce accidents.

qbngeek said :

Jethro said :

Dork said :

On another note, I saw a man on a bike get hit by a car on athlon drive next to melrose high last year. He didn’t dismount his bike to cross the road, though it was the cars fault in this case, if he had have then he wouldn’t have got hit.

I fail to see how a car running a crosswalk and hitting someone would have been prevented if the person on the crosswalk was walking instead of riding.

If you read my original comment on the topic I did mention that one of the problems associated with cyclists stopping at a crosswalk to check it is safe to cross is that cars take this to mean they can ignore the cyclist’s right of way. The problem lies with drivers not giving way when they have to, not whether the person is going across the crosswalk by foot or pedal.

More importantly if the cyclist was riding across the pedestrian crossing, in what world does he have the right of way. My understanding of the matter, and I will check with a cop mate on the weekend, is that cyclist have to dismount as they do not have any rights on a pedestrian crossing. They are required to give way to the cars unless they dismount and walk across.

Yes your are right. This is a long standing issue in the Canberra, Bike vs Car wars. If you want to have a cycle friendly city then making a person riding a bike dismount at every free slip lane Ped. crossing intersection is a bad policy. There are many alternatives that are used in other countries

http://youtu.be/7sYB2SjbkkA (Japan)
http://youtu.be/KkPbTvJZFSI (Holland)
http://youtu.be/vg7mxJvnrrM (Spain)

BicycleCanberra said :

If you are using the bicycle crossing point at this intersection there is problem with the inadequate phasing and timing of these lights. While the ACT Police is suggesting that it may have been the boy crossing on a red signal, you can see in this video that if you cross on a green signal you may find yourself being hit by a motor vehicle as well.

http://youtu.be/52h6vF8HfUY

Yeah, there’s an obvious problem with the apparent assumption that traffic turning right from Launceston St will be clear of the intersection by the time the light turns red. Even putting aside people running the amber (incentivised to do so by the long wait if they miss the light), all of those vehicles are either turning left or stopping again almost immediately, so they’re going to be moving slowly through the intersection.

Seems like the bike light needs to be longer, or maybe they should get their turn before the right turn traffic instead of after…

qbngeek said :

[
More importantly if the cyclist was riding across the pedestrian crossing, in what world does he have the right of way. My understanding of the matter, and I will check with a cop mate on the weekend, is that cyclist have to dismount as they do not have any rights on a pedestrian crossing. They are required to give way to the cars unless they dismount and walk across.

Which goes back to my original point, which is that the rule that cyclists must dismount is a bad rule. I’m saying the rule should be changed so that cyclists can ride across the crossing. There is no legitimate reason why stopping and then riding across is disallowed.

BicycleCanberra said :

You don’t need to dismount in the Netherlands. Our free left turn slip lanes are such dangerous places for Pedestrians and cyclists.
http://youtu.be/wEXD0guLQY0

No helmets (or lycra) either!

I’ve done a bit of cycling in the Netherlands. The drivers definitely have a different attitude, but then again, so do the cyclists.

BicycleCanberra said :

You don’t need to dismount in the Netherlands. Our free left turn slip lanes are such dangerous places for Pedestrians and cyclists.
http://youtu.be/wEXD0guLQY0

Looks like you don’t need helmets either. Do you think the kid with the broken spine and ripped ear would have been better off without a helmet?

BicycleCanberra said :

You don’t need to dismount in the Netherlands. Our free left turn slip lanes are such dangerous places for Pedestrians and cyclists.
http://youtu.be/wEXD0guLQY0

No that is a thing of beauty…….

Jethro said :

Dork said :

On another note, I saw a man on a bike get hit by a car on athlon drive next to melrose high last year. He didn’t dismount his bike to cross the road, though it was the cars fault in this case, if he had have then he wouldn’t have got hit.

I fail to see how a car running a crosswalk and hitting someone would have been prevented if the person on the crosswalk was walking instead of riding.

If you read my original comment on the topic I did mention that one of the problems associated with cyclists stopping at a crosswalk to check it is safe to cross is that cars take this to mean they can ignore the cyclist’s right of way. The problem lies with drivers not giving way when they have to, not whether the person is going across the crosswalk by foot or pedal.

More importantly if the cyclist was riding across the pedestrian crossing, in what world does he have the right of way. My understanding of the matter, and I will check with a cop mate on the weekend, is that cyclist have to dismount as they do not have any rights on a pedestrian crossing. They are required to give way to the cars unless they dismount and walk across.

BicycleCanberra said :

If you are using the bicycle crossing point at this intersection there is problem with the inadequate phasing and timing of these lights. While the ACT Police is suggesting that it may have been the boy crossing on a red signal, you can see in this video that if you cross on a green signal you may find yourself being hit by a motor vehicle as well.

http://youtu.be/52h6vF8HfUY

Yep, I have encountered that at that intersection. Anothing thing with that intersection is when the bicycle light is gree so is the right turn arrow for cars turning onto Launceston St. I have actually had a car going straight ahead mistake the arrow for all green & start to go as I did which wpoke me up quite a bit.

The whole thing is a dogs breakfast so I avoid it like the plague. The little bit of time I gain not turning onto Curruthers St & using the off road path is lost at that intersection. In fact I actually prefer avoiding Adelaide Ave/Yarra Glen all together. Using the off road path & going through Yarralumla & the Lake is only about 500m longer & saves about 3 minutes. It is a better ride as there are more hills & less cars/glass/punctures to deal with.

Jethro said :

Dork said :

On another note, I saw a man on a bike get hit by a car on athlon drive next to melrose high last year. He didn’t dismount his bike to cross the road, though it was the cars fault in this case, if he had have then he wouldn’t have got hit.

I fail to see how a car running a crosswalk and hitting someone would have been prevented if the person on the crosswalk was walking instead of riding.

If you read my original comment on the topic I did mention that one of the problems associated with cyclists stopping at a crosswalk to check it is safe to cross is that cars take this to mean they can ignore the cyclist’s right of way. The problem lies with drivers not giving way when they have to, not whether the person is going across the crosswalk by foot or pedal.

You don’t need to dismount in the Netherlands. Our free left turn slip lanes are such dangerous places for Pedestrians and cyclists.
http://youtu.be/wEXD0guLQY0

Okwhatever said :

Those bars are not considered safe anymore, it is more dangerous to barricade a pathway at the bottom of a hill than it is to leave it open. The main issues arise at night time, especially when lighting is minimal or even non existent due to a blown lamp post bulb which has led to some nasty incidents. We had one near my place as a kid and the bottom bar had been missing for a while, we would duck under it to through the end of the laneway until one night our visiting cousin went running down the hill just after dark and got coat hangered across the teeth by the top bar. Bar 3 – Teeth 0.

I hear what you’re saying, but your example just sounds like the (often) usual outcome for kids mucking around and taking (fun) risks. I did plenty of that as a lad and have numerous scars to show for it. Losing a couple of teeth, or breaking a bone after hitting a slow down / safety barrier are far better outcomes than ending up in front of or under a car.

If you are using the bicycle crossing point at this intersection there is problem with the inadequate phasing and timing of these lights. While the ACT Police is suggesting that it may have been the boy crossing on a red signal, you can see in this video that if you cross on a green signal you may find yourself being hit by a motor vehicle as well.

http://youtu.be/52h6vF8HfUY

Dork said :

On another note, I saw a man on a bike get hit by a car on athlon drive next to melrose high last year. He didn’t dismount his bike to cross the road, though it was the cars fault in this case, if he had have then he wouldn’t have got hit.

I fail to see how a car running a crosswalk and hitting someone would have been prevented if the person on the crosswalk was walking instead of riding.

If you read my original comment on the topic I did mention that one of the problems associated with cyclists stopping at a crosswalk to check it is safe to cross is that cars take this to mean they can ignore the cyclist’s right of way. The problem lies with drivers not giving way when they have to, not whether the person is going across the crosswalk by foot or pedal.

Dork said :

On another note, I saw a man on a bike get hit by a car on athlon drive next to melrose high last year. He didn’t dismount his bike to cross the road, though it was the cars fault in this case, if he had have then he wouldn’t have got hit.
.

The bloke riding in front of me this morning screamed through the pededstrian crossing at Beazley St without even looking this morning & was nearly cleaned up by a Laser. I just shook my head.

If you didn’t know it was 60 there then there is something wrong. When the road works were on there were signs everywhere. If you aren’t paying attention to speed limit signs then you shouldn’t be driving.

On another note, I saw a man on a bike get hit by a car on athlon drive next to melrose high last year. He didn’t dismount his bike to cross the road, though it was the cars fault in this case, if he had have then he wouldn’t have got hit.

Hope the kid is alright.

Jungle Jim said :

I know we’re getting off topic here, but a quick thought about bikes and road crossings.

Rather than a law that many will either simply ignore or just keep complaining about, why don’t we install the safety bars (not sure what they’re actually called) that I used to see at the bottom of steep paths around the suburbs?

You know the ones – two parallel metal rails that force bike riders to slow right down and negotiate a fairly tight chicane before accessing the roadway.

Maybe someone could enlighten me as to why these don’t seem to be around anymore.

Those bars are not considered safe anymore, it is more dangerous to barricade a pathway at the bottom of a hill than it is to leave it open. The main issues arise at night time, especially when lighting is minimal or even non existent due to a blown lamp post bulb which has led to some nasty incidents. We had one near my place as a kid and the bottom bar had been missing for a while, we would duck under it to through the end of the laneway until one night our visiting cousin went running down the hill just after dark and got coat hangered across the teeth by the top bar. Bar 3 – Teeth 0.

I wasn’t driving slowly, I was doing the speed limit. which is what made the woman’s chastisement all the more ludicrous, because she wanted to roar through the 60 zone – and the 80 zone comes to that and yet bark at me for her desire to disobey quite a few road rules.

I agree that they should paint the speed limit on the roads – then there is no excuse. It’s easy to miss signs sometimes.

Jungle Jim said :

I know we’re getting off topic here, but a quick thought about bikes and road crossings.

Jethro said :

…

The law should simply be that cyclists must come to a complete stop before crossing (maybe as signified by a foot touching the ground while the bike is stopped). Constantly mounting and dismounting a bike is probably more dangerous than simply stopping and then riding across the crossing when it is safe to do so. …

Rather than a law that many will either simply ignore or just keep complaining about, why don’t we install the safety bars (not sure what they’re actually called) that I used to see at the bottom of steep paths around the suburbs?

You know the ones – two parallel metal rails that force bike riders to slow right down and negotiate a fairly tight chicane before accessing the roadway.

Maybe someone could enlighten me as to why these don’t seem to be around anymore.

There’s still at least one set of these in Giralang. But we’re old fashioned out here…

Jethro said :

dungfungus said :

The dismount while crossing law is ridiculous. If 95% of people disobey a law, perhaps it is the law that is the problem, not the 95% of people.

.

OK, a bit OT, but relevant!

And that of course is the problem with the point to point cameras on Hindmarsh Drive. 95% of motorists travel at 90K or a bit above on this stretch of road, because the limit is set too low.

Precisely why Govco have set up the revenue raising cameras.

Still no explanation from Gallagher as to why this road was targetted. From memory, fatalities are restricted to 3 students about 15 years ago, and a truck without brakes a few years later, with a fatality.

This Government could spend a lot more effort in convincing the Feds we are entitled to a greater take from taxes than dreaming up schemes to aquire every last penny from a captive donor, the Canberra motorist.

Ok I saw the 60 signs today (southbound, just past the new emergency entrance to TCH). I pretty much only ever drive that section of road when going to the hospital, I guess I have other things on my mind. Duly noted now for future reference.

No I do not yell obscenities at slow drivers.

Geez I wish that Roads ACT would start marking speed limit changes on the roadway!!

Pestiness said :

He is mostly concerned about missing out on a proposed trip to the coast this weekend.

Hey, good for him! There are better things to do than lie around in hospital.

I broke my back two years ago when I hit a fence when I was riding home from uni. I walked into hospital with some chest pains and a whole lot of grazes and ended up being admitted for a broken back. I think my parents were more worried than I was. For a while, all I could think about was the inconvenience of missing my final exams the next week (hey, I’d been studying!) and not being able to work over the summer to save up for something (I forget what). It took a while to get back to normal, but two years on and the long hospital stay, the endless x-rays, the final exams, and whatever I thought I was saving for, are but a distant memory. No pain and my mobility is the same as before.

It’s easy to hurt yourself on a bike, but for an otherwise healthy kid, full recovery is right on the money

s-s-a said :

everyone still thinks that the 60 zone now in effect at the hospital is still 80

Which 60 zone is that? Sorry, but I’ve driven to and from TCH via Launceston St and Yamba Drive several times a day for the last few days and have honestly not noticed a change from the previous 80 zone.

Pls enlighten me before I get booked. If they have made the stretch of Yamba Drive outside TCH a 60 zone, that is probably a good idea, not least because during yesterday afternoon’s peak hour I watched from upstairs while an Ambulance went all the way up the north bound lane from next to the building where A&E is to Hindmarsh with lights and sirens on.

Ha. You weren’t the person screaming at me from your car were you??? It’s a very strange place to increase the speed-limit to 80 when you have schools, pedestrian crossings, skate parks, ambulances etc. I have always found it nigh on impossible to get to 80k’s there anyway.

Glad to hear he’s doing (relatively) well.

Pestiness said :

Dismounting while crossing roads is NOT ridiculous, if the rider is using the paths. If the cyclist is on the road as a vehicle, they must abide by the same rules as motorists.

I never said dismounting while crossing was ridiculous. I said that the law forcing people to dismount at crossings is ridiculous. There is a difference. Surely a cyclist who has stopped at the crossing and checked if it is safe to cross is perfectly capable of riding across the road.

dpm said :

I love a good ‘bike vs. car/road’ thread…. So many words, so much old ground repeated and repeated…. But let’s hear it all again, in case someone missed either side of this argument the 8 times it was discussed last month! Did someone say registration for bikes yet? Hahahaha!
Anyway whatever the cause of this incident, poor kid. Hope he is OK soon.

Yup, dungfungus started the rant & failed with a tittie joke …..

This is my colleague’s little fellah. There was no hit and run. The poor driver almost had a heart attack and was not in the wrong. The kid was thankfully wearing a helmet, which probably saved him from being critical. He has a few broken bones (foot/ankle and 2 broken bones in his spine that apparently wont affect mobility), a ripped ear, a ruptured spleen, but is expected to make a full recovery. He’s sore and has a lot of grazes but has learned a valuable road safety lesson! He is mostly concerned about missing out on a proposed trip to the coast this weekend.

Dismounting while crossing roads is NOT ridiculous, if the rider is using the paths. If the cyclist is on the road as a vehicle, they must abide by the same rules as motorists.

PHEW for ALL involved. When a bike goes against a vehicle, the rider is seldom so fortunate. For that matter, nor is the vehicle driver.

I love a good ‘bike vs. car/road’ thread…. So many words, so much old ground repeated and repeated…. But let’s hear it all again, in case someone missed either side of this argument the 8 times it was discussed last month! Did someone say registration for bikes yet? Hahahaha!
Anyway whatever the cause of this incident, poor kid. Hope he is OK soon.

I know we’re getting off topic here, but a quick thought about bikes and road crossings.

Jethro said :

…

The law should simply be that cyclists must come to a complete stop before crossing (maybe as signified by a foot touching the ground while the bike is stopped). Constantly mounting and dismounting a bike is probably more dangerous than simply stopping and then riding across the crossing when it is safe to do so. …

Rather than a law that many will either simply ignore or just keep complaining about, why don’t we install the safety bars (not sure what they’re actually called) that I used to see at the bottom of steep paths around the suburbs?

You know the ones – two parallel metal rails that force bike riders to slow right down and negotiate a fairly tight chicane before accessing the roadway.

Maybe someone could enlighten me as to why these don’t seem to be around anymore.

dungfungus said :

…I drummed tit into them … Sorry you missed out.

So am I.

Heaven help us if you ever have children.

I do have children JJ and I they used to ride bikes to school and back via shared bike/pedestrian paths crossing one busy road. I drummed tit into them that they must dismount and walk the bike across the road and they did it every time. They don’t smoke, drink or take drugs; have clean driving records and like me never ride a bike on a road where there are motor vehicles because they, like me, believe it is too dangerous. They are still with us. It is the result of good parenting JJ – Sorry you missed out.

s-s-a said :

everyone still thinks that the 60 zone now in effect at the hospital is still 80

Which 60 zone is that? Sorry, but I’ve driven to and from TCH via Launceston St and Yamba Drive several times a day for the last few days and have honestly not noticed a change from the previous 80 zone.

The stretch of Yamba Dr from Kitchener St to Hindmarsh Dr (basically the bit alongside TCH) was left at 60 after the roadworks/construction last year. The pedestrian crossing halfway along that stretch probably had something to do with it – it has signals, but I can imagine a lot of people would try to run them at 80.

s-s-a said :

everyone still thinks that the 60 zone now in effect at the hospital is still 80

Which 60 zone is that? Sorry, but I’ve driven to and from TCH via Launceston St and Yamba Drive several times a day for the last few days and have honestly not noticed a change from the previous 80 zone.

Pls enlighten me before I get booked. If they have made the stretch of Yamba Drive outside TCH a 60 zone, that is probably a good idea, not least because during yesterday afternoon’s peak hour I watched from upstairs while an Ambulance went all the way up the north bound lane from next to the building where A&E is to Hindmarsh with lights and sirens on.

Mmm, it has been 60 for at least 2 years now outside the TCH to the intersection of Hindmarsh.

dungfungus said :

Road_Monkey said :

BicycleCanberra, I would wait and see what the police investigation indicates what was the cause. Not saying it was this cyclists fault, but I have seen a lot of cyclists in Canberra ignore the road rules. A few seem to think they can do what they like because it is against the law to drive into a cyclist, just like pedestrians. But it happens because a bad judgement is made. Lets wish this lad a speedy recovery with no long lasting injuries.

This accident is probably the result of ACT Police continually refusing to fine cyclists for riding across pedestrian crossings in front of vehicular traffic. An impressionable, immature 15 year old has seen all other cyclists do it so he believes it is OK. Some Pedal Power members who constantly break the law in this way should also take a long hard look at their themselves.
I also wonder why a 15 yo is allowed to mix it with registered vehicles on a road. Perhaps the minimum age for a cyclist should be the same as that for a motor cyclist or motorist and they should be licsensed accordingly with some sort of insurance. If this lad was in the wrong he has no recourse to claim damages for personal injury. I am also thinking of the trauma that the driver of the car will be experiencing. I hope the lad survives.

Heaven help us if you ever have children.

everyone still thinks that the 60 zone now in effect at the hospital is still 80

Which 60 zone is that? Sorry, but I’ve driven to and from TCH via Launceston St and Yamba Drive several times a day for the last few days and have honestly not noticed a change from the previous 80 zone.

Pls enlighten me before I get booked. If they have made the stretch of Yamba Drive outside TCH a 60 zone, that is probably a good idea, not least because during yesterday afternoon’s peak hour I watched from upstairs while an Ambulance went all the way up the north bound lane from next to the building where A&E is to Hindmarsh with lights and sirens on.

dungfungus said :

This accident is probably the result of ACT Police continually refusing to fine cyclists for riding across pedestrian crossings in front of vehicular traffic.

The dismount while crossing law is ridiculous. If 95% of people disobey a law, perhaps it is the law that is the problem, not the 95% of people.

I can see where the law makers were coming from when they decided upon the dismount law. Too many cyclists are absolute idiots are corsswalks and just ride straight out without even slowing down. However, to make a law that requires cyclists to dismount and push their bike across every crosswalk is overkill.

The law should simply be that cyclists must come to a complete stop before crossing (maybe as signified by a foot touching the ground while the bike is stopped). Constantly mounting and dismounting a bike is probably more dangerous than simply stopping and then riding across the crossing when it is safe to do so.

Of course, as someone who always comes to a complete stop (but rides across when safe), I have noticed that my stopping seems to give a message to drivers that they no longer need to give right of way to me. Most cars will see me slow down and stop and simply drive straight through the crosswalk.

Erg0 said :

imarty said :

I can’t see anywhere in the release that indicates the driver left the scene. In fact the car was still there when I drove past about 1.40 with a smashed windscreen.

Hope you were on your way to get your windscreen fixed.

I see what you did there.

Went past there yesterday when all the police vehicles were still in attendance. A police officer was looking at the bike which was in two pieces – and it was not a big bike – more a bmx style thing from what I saw. I didn’t see a car to be honest, but was concentrating more on my driving at the time.

It’s a funny area there – everyone still thinks that the 60 zone now in effect at the hospital is still 80 – or at least they ignore it on purpose. In fact, just the other day I had a driver scream at me as we finally came side by side to “get out of the fast lane…”. Was a bit non-plussed about what “the fast lane” is on an 60/80 stretch of busy road in use by cars and pedestrians and cycles!! Especially when my speed was at no point under the speed-limit.

Hope the cyclist is ok – wondering if they were going from the pavement across to the skate/bike park and chanced their luck or was just unlucky by a red light jumper….and don’t get me started on those.

obediah said :

This intersection (Yamba/Launceston) is the most annoying and dangerous part of my ride home. The danger is not so much in the design (which is very sound) but with the fact that the traffic light cycle is very slow with numerous times where no-one appears to be getting their chance to go. The result is quite a bit of jay-riding (a cyclist equivalent to jay walking) for a right-hand turn across the intersection between changes. This is a very dangerous place to do this because its difficult to take note of all potential sources of traffic over the right turn. The Northbound Yamba drive traffic is the most dangerous since its usually coming at speed. The danger is made worse by a tendency for some cyclists to follow the leader without making their own evaluation of the conditions.

As a regular user of that intersection, I think you would have to be absolutely nuts to think that this was a good idea. That said, I agree that the intersection itself is not the greatest, largely because the two sets of traffic lights in close proximity cause a lot of waiting for small volumes of turning traffic. If they could realign Wisdom St and turn the whole mess in to a simple four way intersection then everything would flow a lot better.

This intersection (Yamba/Launceston) is the most annoying and dangerous part of my ride home. The danger is not so much in the design (which is very sound) but with the fact that the traffic light cycle is very slow with numerous times where no-one appears to be getting their chance to go. The result is quite a bit of jay-riding (a cyclist equivalent to jay walking) for a right-hand turn across the intersection between changes. This is a very dangerous place to do this because its difficult to take note of all potential sources of traffic over the right turn. The Northbound Yamba drive traffic is the most dangerous since its usually coming at speed. The danger is made worse by a tendency for some cyclists to follow the leader without making their own evaluation of the conditions.

Let me be the first to say that a summary of the above could read, “This intersection is perfectly safe, we cyclists just routinely break the law making it unsafe.” But I think road designers and builders routinely take such things into consideration when improving roads.

The north-south bike path through Phillip/Woden does an excellent job of keeping cyclists off the roads and out of the way of any traffic and as a bonus has no stops/lights/intersections with the exception of the right turn onto Launceston street which is only used for Southbound travel, Northbound is a total breeze with beautiful underpasses to get past the Yamba roundabout. It would cost a great deal but adding a cyclist&pedestrian bridge or underpass to complete the Southbound route would keep cyclists off the road and improve things greatly for all.

dungfungus said :

Road_Monkey said :

BicycleCanberra, I would wait and see what the police investigation indicates what was the cause. Not saying it was this cyclists fault, but I have seen a lot of cyclists in Canberra ignore the road rules. A few seem to think they can do what they like because it is against the law to drive into a cyclist, just like pedestrians. But it happens because a bad judgement is made. Lets wish this lad a speedy recovery with no long lasting injuries.

This accident is probably the result of ACT Police continually refusing to fine cyclists for riding across pedestrian crossings in front of vehicular traffic. An impressionable, immature 15 year old has seen all other cyclists do it so he believes it is OK. Some Pedal Power members who constantly break the law in this way should also take a long hard look at their themselves.
I also wonder why a 15 yo is allowed to mix it with registered vehicles on a road. Perhaps the minimum age for a cyclist should be the same as that for a motor cyclist or motorist and they should be licsensed accordingly with some sort of insurance. If this lad was in the wrong he has no recourse to claim damages for personal injury. I am also thinking of the trauma that the driver of the car will be experiencing. I hope the lad survives.

Maybe the driver just ran a red light? Thats a pretty common occurance too.

Road_Monkey said :

BicycleCanberra, I would wait and see what the police investigation indicates what was the cause. Not saying it was this cyclists fault, but I have seen a lot of cyclists in Canberra ignore the road rules. A few seem to think they can do what they like because it is against the law to drive into a cyclist, just like pedestrians. But it happens because a bad judgement is made. Lets wish this lad a speedy recovery with no long lasting injuries.

This accident is probably the result of ACT Police continually refusing to fine cyclists for riding across pedestrian crossings in front of vehicular traffic. An impressionable, immature 15 year old has seen all other cyclists do it so he believes it is OK. Some Pedal Power members who constantly break the law in this way should also take a long hard look at their themselves.
I also wonder why a 15 yo is allowed to mix it with registered vehicles on a road. Perhaps the minimum age for a cyclist should be the same as that for a motor cyclist or motorist and they should be licsensed accordingly with some sort of insurance. If this lad was in the wrong he has no recourse to claim damages for personal injury. I am also thinking of the trauma that the driver of the car will be experiencing. I hope the lad survives.

BicycleCanberra, I would wait and see what the police investigation indicates what was the cause. Not saying it was this cyclists fault, but I have seen a lot of cyclists in Canberra ignore the road rules. A few seem to think they can do what they like because it is against the law to drive into a cyclist, just like pedestrians. But it happens because a bad judgement is made. Lets wish this lad a speedy recovery with no long lasting injuries.

Looks like someone has misjudge a light here, the cycle light which has a short phase, I hope traffic signals adjusts them properly with a longer phase for both pedestrians and cyclists.

I passed by the car mid afternoon, and was hoping the state of the windscreen didn’t mean that a cyclist or pedestrian had been hit.

I hope the cyclist makes a full recovery.

imarty said :

I can’t see anywhere in the release that indicates the driver left the scene. In fact the car was still there when I drove past about 1.40 with a smashed windscreen.

Hope you were on your way to get your windscreen fixed.

Haha, I’ve been put in my place at least five times now.

My mistake.

Let’s hope the kid makes a full recovery in any case.

If the driver had stopped and offered assistance and/or called the ambulance it would have been put down as negligent driving with a small fine and demerit points.

Now it’s a full blown goddam crime.

Sure hope the driver is proud.

Holden Caulfield said :

Wow, knocking down a kid and then pissing off.

Happy new year to you too jerkoff!

Umm… Where in the press release does it say that the driver left the scene?

Holden Caulfield said :

Wow, knocking down a kid and then pissing off.

Happy new year to you too jerkoff!

Absolutely, and Win News will focus on whether he was wearing a helmet or not.

Pissing off? I don’t see anything about it being a hit and run there. Only a call for witnesses – presumably to validate the statement from the driver, rather than identify him/her.

Holden Caulfield said :

Wow, knocking down a kid and then pissing off.

Happy new year to you too jerkoff!

I’m pretty sure it doesn’t say anywhere in the report that the motorist fled the scene. I think they just want to corroborate or poke holes in his or her story.

Hope the kid is okay.

I can’t see anywhere in the release that indicates the driver left the scene. In fact the car was still there when I drove past about 1.40 with a smashed windscreen.

Where does it say that this was a hit and run?

My understanding from reading previous comments on here is that it’s OK as long as the kid was wearing lycra

Wow, knocking down a kid and then pissing off.

Happy new year to you too jerkoff!