Runners running in cycling lanes

[eeksll]

I saw it but didn't bother. Isn't it just a roundabout way saying that the pedestrian needs to be facing forwards?

sounds to me like you should walk facing traffic. Never heard of that, but I remember a thread long ago where members where annoyed at pedestrians walking on the right hand side of shared cycle/walk lanes.

One can imagine the mess when 90kg of bike and rider collects a runner accidentally doing the "left right left" shuffle.

wouldn't you just stop? I imagine a runner would move off the lane asap once they saw traffic coming their way.

As a runner myself, I definitely feel safer running on the road in back streets, cars backing out are hazardous. Not so much an issue on a main road as usually there is much more room between path fence, but not always. However, I'd normally run on a back street.

[RonK]

Gee, are the self-same cyclists who moan about self-entitlement when motorists tell them to get "get off their road" now telling others to "get off our road". Seems to be a whiff of hypocrisy in the air.

To clarify the point, I didn't tell anyone to get off the road. What I did say however is that the two sports are generally incompatible with each other especially in peak hour traffic, where you are running towards incoming traffic. Either you're going to get hurt eventually or I am, or someone is going to change their habits and no one is going to get hurt.

All I'm asking is that if you want to run, run with the flow of traffic, that way no one gets hurt and the typical call out of on your left/right works as intended. When you're running towards me or anyone else nobody knows exactly what is going to happen.

I share the road where is practicable but this really isn't practicable or practical. . Yes, I understand that bitumen isn't as hard as concrete and its better on your joints. Yes I have done runs before. However, I've never been that self-entitled that I believe its a good idea to run into incoming traffic in a bike lane. I realise there is some tri riders here, but how hard is it? If you want to run, run with the flow of traffic, and if you see someone moving faster than you either yield the road to them, or maintain a steady line so all the usual road riding protocols apply.

One can imagine the mess when 90kg of bike and rider collects a runner accidentally doing the "left right left" shuffle.

So you express a concern for the runners safety when clearly your objection is against others using your piece of road - in your own words "we finally have a piece of road to ourselves". This is a classic straw man argument.

[fat and old]

Runners are cool. Trophy wives 3 abreast or with a pram are not

[find_bruce]

It annoys me where the government has spent millions of our $ to separate bicycles from pedestrians, but apart from groups blocking the path or running at night in black with no lights, the level of annoyance is slightly more than people with squeaky chains & a bit less than bad coffee. If I was minded to make a list of things that annoy me whilst cycling, it wouldn't be on the first page.

Runners are cool. Trophy wives 3 abreast or with a pram are not

I used to come across a mum with triplets running & pushing a 3 wide pram - I figured she suffered enough.

[Kronos]

So you express a concern for the runners safety when clearly your objection is against others using your piece of road - in your own words "we finally have a piece of road to ourselves". This is a classic straw man argument.

Nothing of the sort, in fact its you engaging in a nice strawman there, you would think you were off to find the Wizard of Oz. What I said is that the way they teach you to run is generally incompatible with cycling.

1. Runners run towards traffic.
2. Cyclists go with the flow of traffic.

If we're engaged in the shot shoe shuffle of who goes left and right, we'll generally end up with a collision eventually. Aside from that fact it is illegal to be on the road where there is perfectly usable pathway, which there was within a couple of meters of the road I was riding on.

Now I (personally) don't care if you want to be on the road (aside from it being illegal go for your life) however if you would be so kind as to run with the flow of traffic in that direction we could engage in the normal communication. "on your left," "on your right." Or in this case I'm just gonna have to call it for what it is "hazard..." Until you get the point.

[AdelaidePeter]

Now I (personally) don't care if you want to be on the road (aside from it being illegal go for your life) however if you would be so kind as to run with the flow of traffic in that direction we could engage in the normal communication. "on your left," "on your right." Or in this case I'm just gonna have to call it for what it is "hazard..." Until you get the point.

You're right to ask runners to show a bit of consideration (as most do). You're wrong to ask them to run with the flow of traffic. As @human909 pointed out on the last page, VicRoads actually tells pedestrians to walk facing oncoming traffic, if there is no footpath.

A better request would be to ask them to run closer to the kerb or off the road if they see a bicycle approaching. Not because they must (though if there is a footpath, it is true that they legally shouldn't be on the road), but because it's the considerate thing to do: a runner can easily step off the road, a cyclist can't.

[warthog1]

A good thread for giving people something to debate.
Another reason to avoid bike lanes/paths.
If you have to try and anticipate what a person is going to do, expect the most counter-intuitive course of action. You wont be disappointed.
In any case don't put your safety in their hands, remove yourself from the situation imo.

[AdelaidePeter]

A good thread for giving people something to debate.
Another reason to avoid bike lanes/paths.
If you have to try and anticipate what a person is going to do, expect the most counter-intuitive course of action. You wont be disappointed.
In any case don't put your safety in their hands, remove yourself from the situation imo.

That reasoning takes me to the exact opposite conclusion ... to avoid roads where possible. Motor vehicles are far more dangerous than pedestrians. We're discussing runners here, but both in numbers and potential danger, they're only a minor irritant compared to cars.

[warthog1]

A good thread for giving people something to debate.
Another reason to avoid bike lanes/paths.
If you have to try and anticipate what a person is going to do, expect the most counter-intuitive course of action. You wont be disappointed.
In any case don't put your safety in their hands, remove yourself from the situation imo.

That reasoning takes me to the exact opposite conclusion ... to avoid roads where possible. Motor vehicles are far more dangerous than pedestrians. We're discussing runners here, but both in numbers and potential danger, they're only a minor irritant compared to cars.

I guess I am coming from a roadie perspective. I like to keep my pace up and I can't do that if I am trying to anticipate which way the next slower moving pedestrian is going to dart.
I try to mitigate the risk on the road with a mirror and route choice. I am lucky, I live in a regional center that allows me that alternative.
You are correct though, it is the motorists that are the real danger.
I just worry about being forced to make a direction change into the path of a passing vehicle because of an erratic jogger.
I am too impatient to be constantly slowing down for other path users. Hypocritical I know

[mikgit]

As a runner and a cycist, I wouldn't normally run in a cycle lane..not that I wouldn't but it depends. reason to run on the road when there is a path is that the road is usually much smoother, less ups and downs and trip hazards especially at night where it can be very hard to spot some things.

But I can tell you as a cyclist, one thing I don't like to encounter (and have) is someone running in the cycle lane, going with the flow instead of what they are supposed to do (run into the traffic), it's bad, real bad. When they/we run into traffic, you can see whats coming. When you go with the flow, they have no idea what going on, till you pass them, they jump and send you out into traffic, no amount of bell ringing, "on your right" helps when theres traffic noise around or there's headphones on...

Always into the traffic flow...

[silentC]

Hmm, seems to me given the speed differential there wouldn't be a lot of difference between a jogger running towards you or away from you.

Having said that I don't encounter it that often and when I do it does seem a bit wrong. But at least they can see you coming. I probably worry more when we are travelling in the same direction with their back to me and I have to go past on their left because you're never sure if they are over there permanently, or have just decided to wander a bit as they often do and are about to lurch back across in front of you.

We did encounter someone running on the left shoulder on Sunday morning bunch ride. Because I was hanging off the back I didn't actually see her until last minute but she was well over and we just exchanged greetings as we whizzed by. In that situation, we tend to ride either side of the fog line because of the amount of debris a metre into the shoulder, so she had stacks of room if she didn't mind running in broken glass and car parts.

Most regular joggers I encounter tend to hold their line pretty well and are aware of their surroundings. It's the perambulators who are the ones to watch out for.

At the end of the day, you can't take it for granted that they will realise you are there or that they will move in a certain direction, and I guess the same thing applies as with cars around cyclists - except I think that cyclists are generally more predictable than peds!

On the other hand if a lane is designated cyclists only, which many of them are, well it's a no-brainer really.

[fat and old]

I am too impatient to be constantly slowing down for other path users. Hypocritical I know

Yes, but honest

Like

[fat and old]

Runners are cool. Trophy wives 3 abreast or with a pram are not

I used to come across a mum with triplets running & pushing a 3 wide pram - I figured she suffered enough.

But was she a trophy wife? They’re a plague down here this time of the year. Extremely righteous and stunning.....a bad combination

[warthog1]

Yes, but honest

Like

[macca33]

I come across runners quite a bit in outer metro / country areas. They don't seem to cause me any issues when they are running towards me, ie against the traffic and as advised by the legislation.

Some simply do not like running on the crappy footpaths, as they present a myriad of trip-hazards and people doing odd things, at times...ie, when it is impractical to use the footpaths.

We can all share the road if we all act responsibly and accommodate one another...

[Kronos]

Now I (personally) don't care if you want to be on the road (aside from it being illegal go for your life) however if you would be so kind as to run with the flow of traffic in that direction we could engage in the normal communication. "on your left," "on your right." Or in this case I'm just gonna have to call it for what it is "hazard..." Until you get the point.

You're right to ask runners to show a bit of consideration (as most do). You're wrong to ask them to run with the flow of traffic. As @human909 pointed out on the last page, VicRoads actually tells pedestrians to walk facing oncoming traffic, if there is no footpath.

A better request would be to ask them to run closer to the kerb or off the road if they see a bicycle approaching. Not because they must (though if there is a footpath, it is true that they legally shouldn't be on the road), but because it's the considerate thing to do: a runner can easily step off the road, a cyclist can't.

OK then I'm also right to consider this person inconsiderate and tell them to just get off the road and use the footpath less than a couple metres drop off from the road.

Hmm, seems to me given the speed differential there wouldn't be a lot of difference between a jogger running towards you or away from you.

A person tends to be far more erratic when they are moving towards oncoming things. Deer in the headlights effect and all. I don't want to proclaim ownership of the road but in this case it would be much more safe if the runner was using the provided path. In my case this involved swerving on to the road, which did not have traffic on it at the time... But in the case that it did... I'd have the choice to collect the runner, or veer off into the trees. Probably the later is going to have a better ending than the former but still. I shouldn't have to make that choice in the first place when there is a properly serviceable pathway within metres of where you're running.

[DavidS]

Well I'm still going to object to pedestrians on the road. I'm riding in the inner city and get a few on some streets, where there is a perfectly good footpath. On one road in particular there is a footpath on one side and a park on the other side, yet they run on the road. I don't get it at all. If they want to run on the road maybe they should try Nepean Hwy, if that doesn't suit then maybe running on a suburban street isn't a good idea either.

There is good reason why roads are for road vehicles and footpaths are supplied. There is simply no comparison between a bicycle (road vehicle) on a road and a pedestrian (not a road vehicle) on a road - can you see the difference?

By the way, BJL, I have no problem with you running around a US Army Base, they shouldn't be in this country anyway. I tried this once, unfortunately they arrested me for my trouble

DS

[AdelaidePeter]

There is good reason why roads are for road vehicles and footpaths are supplied. There is simply no comparison between a bicycle (road vehicle) on a road and a pedestrian (not a road vehicle) on a road - can you see the difference?

In my book, it's akin to the "bicycle must ride in the bicycle lane" or "bicycle must keep left" rules - there's an "if practicable" caveat: pedestrians must use the footpath... if practicable. I'm happy to trust a runner to use their own judgement for their own safety, and use the road if they feel the footpath is less safe; as long as they face oncoming traffic, and give way to oncoming traffic (including bicycles).

[DavidS]

There is good reason why roads are for road vehicles and footpaths are supplied. There is simply no comparison between a bicycle (road vehicle) on a road and a pedestrian (not a road vehicle) on a road - can you see the difference?

In my book, it's akin to the "bicycle must ride in the bicycle lane" or "bicycle must keep left" rules - there's an "if practicable" caveat: pedestrians must use the footpath... if practicable. I'm happy to trust a runner to use their own judgement for their own safety, and use the road if they feel the footpath is less safe; as long as they face oncoming traffic, and give way to oncoming traffic (including bicycles).

Uh no, bicycles are road vehicles and have a right to use the road, pedestrians are not road vehicles and don't. The law does specify cyclists should use a bike lane unless it isn't practicable, the rule for pedestrians is they can only use the road if there is no footpath. There's a world of difference there. Not willing to trust runners as I see too many of them running along a road, where there is a perfectly good footpath, and they don't even look where they're going.

Now I have no problem with disobeying laws as an act of civil disobedience, but there is a very good reason why pedestrians are obliged to use a footpath, roads are just not made for pedestrians, they are made for road vehicles.

DS

[ColinOldnCranky]

just a thought, runners may not run on the footpath because it can be unsafe to do so with cars backing out.

That, and more...

As an ex-after-work-runner and evening runner, any surface that has lots of small changes to ground elevation, such as sloping crossings, varied heights of curbs at every intersection to trap me as I am looking left and right just results, eventually, in jarring the back, potentially seriously. Cycle lanes are mostly level, consistent firmness of surface and basically predictable.

If there had been cycle lanes when I biked I would not have found it a great inconvenience if I had to pass the occasional runner.

It would just require me to show a little patience and delay my progress by a small bit. Much as we so often ask of motorists.

[AdelaidePeter]

There is good reason why roads are for road vehicles and footpaths are supplied. There is simply no comparison between a bicycle (road vehicle) on a road and a pedestrian (not a road vehicle) on a road - can you see the difference?

In my book, it's akin to the "bicycle must ride in the bicycle lane" or "bicycle must keep left" rules - there's an "if practicable" caveat: pedestrians must use the footpath... if practicable. I'm happy to trust a runner to use their own judgement for their own safety, and use the road if they feel the footpath is less safe; as long as they face oncoming traffic, and give way to oncoming traffic (including bicycles).

Uh no, bicycles are road vehicles and have a right to use the road, pedestrians are not road vehicles and don't. The law does specify cyclists should use a bike lane unless it isn't practicable, the rule for pedestrians is they can only use the road if there is no footpath. There's a world of difference there.

ARR 238: "A pedestrian must not travel along a road if there is a footpath or nature strip adjacent to the road, unless it is impracticable to travel on the footpath or nature strip."

[MichaelB]

Seriously, how many runners to we all see running in the bike lane towards us ?

I have NEVER seen one in the last 10 years. I've seen one runner in the cycle lane going the same way in that time. Just one.

And whether it's against the law or not, is it really not that hard to avoid them, just like other ninja riders, salmon riders or other obstacles in the cycle lane .....

[RonK]

Uh no, bicycles are road vehicles and have a right to use the road, pedestrians are not road vehicles and don't.

Uh no, nobody has a "right" to use the road. Road use is a privilege and may be withdrawn under certain circumstances.

[baabaa]

Seriously, how many runners to we all see running in the bike lane towards us ?

I have NEVER seen one in the last 10 years. I've seen one runner in the cycle lane going the same way in that time. Just one.

And whether it's against the law or not, is it really not that hard to avoid them, just like other ninja riders, salmon riders or other obstacles in the cycle lane .....

Yup, and this discussion is a great indication of why the Super Commuter type of rider continues to be the least liked group in the cycling community.

[warthog1]

Yup, and this discussion is a great indication of why the Super Commuter type of rider continues to be the least liked group in the cycling community.

Whilst we're arguing, I really like the super commuter type of rider

Basically when it comes to advocacy, as a group, we are screwed