pedestrians and cyclists

Tamyka Bell Wrote:

Interesting that they would rather you ring a bell at them tha
politely
ask them to move.

yep, I get use a bell drummed into me and then I occasionally share th
path with horses. I have this dim recollection that I shouldn't rin
bell, shout or even use the airhorn around horses

--
aeek

"flyingdutch" wrote
in message
DRS Wrote:

The law gives pedestrians priority over everyone else. Ergo,
pedestrians
don't need their brains.

Does it really? in B+W i mean?

Pretty much, yes. Car aren't allowed to run them over even if they're
dancing nekkid in the middle of the road, ditto bikes and paths. See the
Victorian Road Rules for details.

Surely there must be some form of precedent if its a 'shared' path.
Wont surprise me if its not, but hey one can dream

Rule 250 Riding on a footpath or shared path (3) The rider of a bicycle
riding on a footpath or shared path must— (b) give way to any pedestrian on
the footpath or shared path.

--

A: Top-posters.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

Tamyka Bell Wrote:
People who take risks like that are giving cyclists a bad name and
putting us all in danger. If you nearly take someone out at high speed
because they were walking too slow and blocking you, do you think
they'll be patient next time they see a cyclist on the road? Do you
think they'll make a conscious effort to give way? Doubt it.

T

not happy,

also not hippy

Cripes, this made me remember a less than charming incident on Swansto
Drive about three years ago. Riding up St Kilda Rd, just got past th
intersection of Flinders/Wellington when a tweed coated gent walkin
across near St Pauls decided to stop, I repeat, stop, in front of me
He had plenty of room and time to either move to one side or finish th
short journey. Instead he kept eye contact, stood in front of me as
attempted to brake and called me a f***ing sl*t. Don't know what th
hell brought that on...previous relationship problems. We can onl
guess...?

Anyway what the tweed coated gent didn't expect was the small cyclis
he insulted to drop her bike and take off after him. Virtually collare
the twit, but what was amusing was other pedestrians reactions, the
moved back as if a full on stouch was gonna take place. Some peopl
don't know their place, it hasn't been dug yet

--
cfsmtb

cfsmtb Wrote:
Cripes, this made me remember a less than charming incident on Swansto
Drive about three years ago. Riding up St Kilda Rd, just got past th
intersection of Flinders/Wellington when a tweed coated gent walkin
across near St Pauls decided to stop, I repeat, stop, in front of me
He had plenty of room and time to either move to one side or finish th
short journey. Instead he kept eye contact, stood in front of me as
attempted to brake and called me a f***ing sl*t. Don't know what th
hell brought that on...previous relationship problems. We can onl
guess...?

Drunk arsehole? Sounds like he needed all 670mm of riser bar inserted
rectally.. and don't even think about removing the bar-ends first!

hipp

--
hippy

I regularly walk on the Riverside Bikeway early in the morning and have done
so for 2 1/2 years as part of my rehab following an accident (not on a
bike!) Some of the riders are just plain scary! I started off on Corro Drive
but gave it away as too dangerous.

Riders and walkers need to be aware that these are shared facilities and if
you need to slow down or stop so be it.

You cannot criticise drivers on the road while displaying the same oafish
behaviour on the bikeways!

"Tamyka Bell" wrote in message
...
I have given myself two days to calm down about this, but now I have to
say it.

Now, I hate dumb pedestrians as much as the next cyclist (note, "dumb"
not "all" or even "ignorant" pedestrians) but what is with that hurry
seen in the Coro Drive bike path users? Yep, peak hour, it's slow,
pedestrians get in the way. Deal with it. You know you won't be able to
stay at 30km/h the whole trip. Don't pretend otherwise.

Don't duck through little itsy bitsy gaps. If a cyclist is sitting out
from the edge a bit, don't immediately complain as you pass them, maybe
they were trying to avoid the glass. If I'm overtaking a pedestrian so
that my lane is temporarily blocked, and you're approaching from the
opposite direction, it's probably smart to not cross to my side of the
path. If I slow down until it's safe to pass a pedestrian, and I'm
holding you up, TOO F'ING BAD!

People who take risks like that are giving cyclists a bad name and
putting us all in danger. If you nearly take someone out at high speed
because they were walking too slow and blocking you, do you think
they'll be patient next time they see a cyclist on the road? Do you
think they'll make a conscious effort to give way? Doubt it.

T

not happy,

also not hippy

"always" is a generalisation. Cyclists on shared paths and roads ar
often 2 to 3 wide also. It is almost impossible to hear a bike comin
up fast from behind and when I see a bike approaching it makes sense t
me to keep walking in the direction I am walking in rather tha
deviating greatly, to avoid the rider having to predict which way I a
going to move. You sound like a motorist unwilling to share the roa
with cyclists

Courtancer Wrote:
Another one I hate is when there's a specially built shared cycle
walking path built away from the road to provide a safer alternativ
for bikes and people. Pedestrians always seem to walk side by side wit
a dog or two on a lead and pretend not to hear / see you coming u
behind them. They just expect you to go around them onto the gras
often where there are cat head burrs that puncture your tyre i
seconds. You'd think pedestrians could show a bit of consideration an
'share' the path rather than see how much of it they can take up an
how far they can make a cyclist ride around them

--
roscoe1963

Lotte wrote:
...snip.....

I got told the other day to "get a bell".

Must be a rash of it going around. I was told the same thing after passing a woman a week or so ago, I'd not passed very close, as
she was walking down the middle of a road at the time there was plenty of the space. I also had HID lights on which were causing
most pedestrians to turn around to see what was coming when I was more than 50m away.

Parbs

Parbs wrote:
I also had HID lights on which were causing
most pedestrians to turn around to see what was coming when I was more than 50m away.

One night on Camden bike path, I was running the 50W stuff and crested a
small hill to see paddy wagon and a couple of coppas having a chat to
someone. One of the coppers starts screaming "slow down, slown
down"..... then big Oh,

He wasn't quite expecting such bright lights on a bicycle {:-)

Thankfully, almost all desert the riverside bike path after dark. Makes
for a nice, though short, ride.

"Lotte" wrote in message
...

Well said Tamyka. Too true. The same goes for cyclists who run red
lights. I cannot control my sheer frustration when I see this and
often scream at people who do this.

I got told the other day to "get a bell". All I did was ask a bunch of
pedestrians, walking 6 abreast in the city Botanical Gardens, if I could
please get through. Just a simple question, asked nicely. Anyway,
considering all 6 of them were overweight females with plenty of flesh
(read: stretch marks, celliulite, bellybutton that would fit a
watermelon) on show, I figured it must have been a huge energy
expenditure for them to move 2 steps across.

I know the feeling... trundling along a gravel road a few days ago, ringing
my bell and yelling "Bicycle noises!" at a bunch of tweedledees and
tweedledums walking abreast. I stopped behind them (coz I couldn't get
through) and was roundly abused. Their position was that they shouldn't be
expected to hear my bell and yell while they are wearing their headphones!

I figured I'm not going to win in the face of that, so just trundled off.

I wonder if the way shared path users (bikes, walkers, runners, dogs,
kids... etc) use shared paths is because they are promoted (perhaps
intended) as recreational paths. Commuters are not taking recreation, so
they are using the paths in a different context from most users, hence the
conflict.

When I look at the way many shared paths are laid out (scenic, winding,
etc.) the paths seem to be built more for enjoyment than for commuting. I
sometimes ride into Fremantle (WA) after work for a coffee. If I take the
path it's about 15km. If I take the road it's about 12. That's because the
path meanders through pretty bits. That points to it being intended for
recreation rather than efficient commuting. If that's the case, should I
expect people to adhere to regimented rules and enjoy their recreation less
to enable me to ride uninterrupted? Or should I stick to the road when I'm
using my bike as a vehicle as distinct from a recreational device. I know it
can be both at once, bu that's to me, not necessarily to others...

Just a thought.

Frank

Plodder Wrote:


[snip]

When I look at the way many shared paths are laid out (scenic
winding,
etc.) the paths seem to be built more for enjoyment than for commuting
I
sometimes ride into Fremantle (WA) after work for a coffee. If I tak
the
path it's about 15km. If I take the road it's about 12. That's becaus
the
path meanders through pretty bits. That points to it being intende
for
recreation rather than efficient commuting. If that's the case, shoul
I
expect people to adhere to regimented rules and enjoy their recreatio
less
to enable me to ride uninterrupted? Or should I stick to the road whe
I'm
using my bike as a vehicle as distinct from a recreational device.
know it
can be both at once, bu that's to me, not necessarily to others...

Just a thought.

Frank

uh-oh, you're making too much sense By and large, I find 'commuter
walkers are much more aware, predictable and left-keeping. Otoh
'recreational' walkers, i.e., with kids, dogs, large groups of ol
people, tend to be less aware, unpredictable and often walk abreas
_all the way_ across the path (not sure how that is 'sharing').

Most of the time, if you want to go fast, use the road. If not, just b
patient and live with the occasional inconvenience on the share
path...

Ritc

--
ritcho