Safe Passing Distance Legislation in WA

[flashpixx]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-05/c ... ts/7300670

[roller]

I saw (but didn't click) on an article the west was running

"Motorists will be FORCED (my capitals not theirs) to give cyclists 1m space"



I couldn't think of a worse way to phrase the notion of safe passing legislation, but that's the point isn't it?

[Grev]

Good to hear the Premier admit that he previously had a closed mind on this issue.

[dmwill]

I saw (but didn't click) on an article the west was running

"Motorists will be FORCED (my capitals not theirs) to give cyclists 1m space"



I couldn't think of a worse way to phrase the notion of safe passing legislation, but that's the point isn't it?

It's as stupid as saying motorists are FORCED to stop at a red lights, or FORCED to not drink too much before getting behind the wheel.

IMO, the reality is most motorists do the right thing already and pass with reasonable distance, the issue is your typical Captain Clarkson and Admiral Armadale don't realise they already do and therefore have a massive rant on social media.

[방구 똥]

Maybe the news headlines can be
"Innocent motorists subjected to forceful 0.001 kilometre Sagan-devotee-lycra-brigade passing laws, or forced to come to crawling stop behind slow-moving-non-rego-paying-selfish-lycra-wearing-cyclists"
:D

[roller]

"Your Freedom Under Threat from Freeloading Radicals on Unlicensed Wheels"

"Motorists Could Lose Their Jobs Due to New Passing Laws Making Car Them Late"

[Thoglette]

In the West Australian print edition today (9th April) the letters (p90) contains the first bleat abiout bikes keeping a metre from cars (after all, it's cyclists killing drivers that's the real problem). And naturally insisting that it be an offence for cyclists to ride on the road adjacent to a "cycle path". Of which we have (almost) no cycle paths. I assume Max Ball (of Mosman Park) meant shared path, which of course are not appropriate for high speed cycling.

[softy]

Some funny comments guys, cheers.

it is amazing how people get so worked up about cyclists, group rides and blocking a lane. As if this is a life changing experience.

Why don't they get as emotional about the cardio vascular death rate, or the dangers of diabetes. Or the stress and impact of seperated couple, child custody, job market and how this effects the economy, suicide rates, etc.

But of course sitting behind a group of cyclists is far more stressful and worth ranting over.

[Aushiker]

In the West Australian print edition today (9th April) the letters (p90) contains the first bleat abiout bikes keeping a metre from cars (after all, it's cyclists killing drivers that's the real problem). And naturally insisting that it be an offence for cyclists to ride on the road adjacent to a "cycle path". Of which we have (almost) no cycle paths. I assume Max Ball (of Mosman Park) meant shared path, which of course are not appropriate for high speed cycling.

This sounds like the guy who was banging on a similar manner on 720 ABC. He was about to write a letter to the Police; I wonder if he wrote to the paper instead.

I did see the letter, thought about a reply for a second then decided that it just was not worth the trouble. Maybe some-else who has the patience will do so.

[roller]

Why don't they get as emotional about the cardio vascular death rate, or the dangers of diabetes. Or the stress and impact of seperated couple, child custody, job market and how this effects the economy, suicide rates, etc.

or this

[wellington_street]

http://www.watoday.com.au/comment/new-c ... qe4tf.html

"You won't often read Greens' praise for a decision by this government on a matter relating to transport, health and the environment, so read on.

In a matter of weeks, I expect the government to announce safe passing distance regulations that will require motorists to allow at least a one-metre distance when approaching or overtaking cyclists (and 1.5 metres in 60kmh-plus zones)."

Hopefully this doesn't come with the punitive anti-cycling fine increases that accompanied these in NSW

[citywomble]

Hopefully this doesn't come with the punitive anti-cycling fine increases that accompanied these in NSW

It won't.

All the senior people and pollies that I have spoken to, or corresponded with, are very keen on promoting cycling. Generally regular 'everyday' people cycling, both short trips and part of a multimodal journey, is seen as a solution rather than a problem.

[cj7hawk]

Hopefully this doesn't come with the punitive anti-cycling fine increases that accompanied these in NSW

It won't.

All the senior people and pollies that I have spoken to, or corresponded with, are very keen on promoting cycling. Generally regular 'everyday' people cycling, both short trips and part of a multimodal journey, is seen as a solution rather than a problem.

I'm going to second this - Most people in power in Perth are very pro-cycling.

Even Main Roads, who we many problems with, don't actually target cyclists, per-se. Generally they are supportive and even are pro-cycling - even if they could ( and must ) do better with their road blocks.

There are also elements within WAPOL who seem to go out of their way to make cycling more dangerous, but generally they leave cyclists alone for the same reasons they don't support us in the first place. For that reason alone, it would be very difficult for them to target cyclists too often, but I'm sure we'll still see a Bell Blitz every time Colin Barnett gets overtaken in traffic by one of us. The can't stop filtering - not now we have parking areas at lights and WA police will never let filtering laws come in.

Regards
David.

[mat664]

Just an observation...I notice cyclists demanding the 1M distance passing laws, which is fair. In many cases is a car doing ~50-80km/h passing a cyclist doing 20-40km/h. Today I saw two 'tour de France wannabes' passing a lady with a pram and small child walking next to the pram. They were going in the same direction...the cyclists were doing easily 35-40km/h and brushed the lady as they passed and of course they didnt have bells so would have scarred the crap out of the lady. Pretty sure they mouthed off at the lady too (how dare she be on their PSP!!)

I am sure we see this sort of thing regularly. Cyclists demanding cars give them 1M but then the same cyclists giving pedestrian 1cm when they pass. Makes it hard to take cyclists safety concerns seriously sometimes....

[wellington_street]

Just an observation...I notice cyclists demanding the 1M distance passing laws, which is fair. In many cases is a car doing ~50-80km/h passing a cyclist doing 20-40km/h. Today I saw two 'tour de France wannabes' passing a lady with a pram and small child walking next to the pram. They were going in the same direction...the cyclists were doing easily 35-40km/h and brushed the lady as they passed and of course they didnt have bells so would have scarred the crap out of the lady. Pretty sure they mouthed off at the lady too (how dare she be on their PSP!!)

I am sure we see this sort of thing regularly. Cyclists demanding cars give them 1M but then the same cyclists giving pedestrian 1cm when they pass. Makes it hard to take cyclists safety concerns seriously sometimes....

> 1 individual says something
> 1 completely different individual acts in a manner contradictory to what the unrelated individual says

Good argument, bro

[CycleSnail]

5% of people are just not on the page. Does not matter if they drive a car, walk or ride a bicycle. If we want to build a well functioning society that satisfies those 5% we will not get anywhere. But they dominate the conversation .....

Get over it, do the right thing, lead by example. If you are good, stay good ....

[Sinner]

I was behind a driver today who got quite close to a cyclist and seemed reluctant to use the median strip to overtake as it was marked with a barrier line. The RTC indicates:
116. Keeping to left of continuous dividing lines
Where a carriageway is marked with a dividing line comprising —
(a) 2 continuous lines; or
(b) a continuous line on the left of a broken or dotted line;
or
(c) a continuous line,
a driver shall not permit any portion of the vehicle to travel on, over, or to the right of, the dividing line except for the purpose of making a right turn or a U turn, where permissible.
Points: 3 Modified penalty: 3 PU

Also:
117. Keeping to left of median strip
Where a road is divided by a median strip, a driver shall not drive upon the median strip, or the carriageway to the right of the median strip, unless the driver is —
(a) entering or driving in a median strip parking area; or
(b) required to drive to the right of the median strip by a “keep right” sign; or
(c) using a special purpose lane as permitted by information on the sign applicable to that lane.
Points: 3 Modified penalty: 3 PU

The only get out seems to be if the bicycle is classed as an "obstruction".

[wellington_street]

^ Yep, it is currently illegal to overtake a cyclist safely in such situations. I ignore this stupid road rule as their safety is more important than my compliance with stupid road rules. I think the majority of drivers think the same as the majority do the right thing. Need the road rules changed to make it officially permissible though.

[dmwill]

+1.

I don't have an issue with a motorist going wide over a solid line or painted median if safe to do so. I do it myself.

[rolandp]

http://www.watoday.com.au/comment/new-c ... qe4tf.html

"You won't often read Greens' praise for a decision by this government on a matter relating to transport, health and the environment, so read on.

In a matter of weeks, I expect the government to announce safe passing distance regulations that will require motorists to allow at least a one-metre distance when approaching or overtaking cyclists (and 1.5 metres in 60kmh-plus zones)."

Hopefully this doesn't come with the punitive anti-cycling fine increases that accompanied these in NSW

What happened to the announcement?

[Sinner]

http://www.watoday.com.au/comment/new-c ... qe4tf.html

"You won't often read Greens' praise for a decision by this government on a matter relating to transport, health and the environment, so read on.

In a matter of weeks, I expect the government to announce safe passing distance regulations that will require motorists to allow at least a one-metre distance when approaching or overtaking cyclists (and 1.5 metres in 60kmh-plus zones)."

Hopefully this doesn't come with the punitive anti-cycling fine increases that accompanied these in NSW

What happened to the announcement?

Waiting on a new Minister?

[StevOz]

I'd rather they don't bother wasting our tax payer monies on introducing another meaningless law that most likely will not be enforced, whilst there are already plenty of laws on the books that can be used to deal with unsafe overtaking if they choose to apply them.

[CycleSnail]

I'd rather they don't bother wasting our tax payer monies on introducing another meaningless law that most likely will not be enforced, whilst there are already plenty of laws on the books that can be used to deal with unsafe overtaking if they choose to apply them.

During a recent visit in Tasmania, where they have had safe passing legislation for a few years , I was encouraged how well it worked.

I hope that we will see a similar effort that combines excellent advertising with enforcement here as well.

[Cycleops70]

I'd rather they don't bother wasting our tax payer monies on introducing another meaningless law that most likely will not be enforced, whilst there are already plenty of laws on the books that can be used to deal with unsafe overtaking if they choose to apply them.

There are other laws that can be applied, but from my own experiences (& of others) the WA police use the current "avoid a collision" measure of a safe pass as their justification that the driving was safe (as defined by law) & will not apply other laws such as reckless, dangerous, or careless driving.

This needs to change.

Even if WA police continue to be affected by car orientated bias & are reluctant to apply minimum passing legislation, there is still significant benefit to defining the requirements & getting the message out to some drivers. As well as removing the convenient alibi for inaction by police.

[Thoglette]

This needs to change.

Plus several. Apparently Liz H. was considering this but nothing's happened.