‘Absurd’ speed limit lands $460 fines for cyclists. Even joggers overtook them
‘Absurd’ speed limit lands $460 fines for cyclists. Even joggers overtook them
Police were fining cyclists up to $464 on World Car-Free Day for speeding on this Brisbane city bridge.
Bob* was riding across the Kurilpa Bridge into the city on a quiet school holiday Friday morning, also coincidentally World Car-Free Day, when ... BAM, he was $464 poorer.
Oh nice, you got to this just before I could!
I think one of the really interesting things about this article that the journalist seemed to completely brush over, but which Chris Cox mentioned more explicitly on his YouTube Community Tab post linking to this article, was this:
After questions from Brisbane Times, an Energy and Public Works department spokesman said: “the advisory speed limit on Kurilpa Bridge is 10km/h as correctly painted on the bridge surface”.
Emphasis mine. Apparently, these speed limits are supposed to be advisory, not binding. One questions why they use the red circle sign and not the yellow square, but still, this is good to know. It should mean that Bob* and anyone else who has received a fine should be able to get the fines overturned quite easily.
10 km/h is remarkably slow. How exactly is a bike without a speedometer not supposed to exceed that?
If there's people around then go slightly faster than they're walking and you'll be under 10km/h.
If there aren't people around then IMO it shouldn't matter as much as long as you're not taking the piss, just like it shouldn't matter if you're doing a bit over the limit on an empty highway.
If they want a 10kph speed limit they should probably make it a pedestrian only bridge. 10kph is simply way too slow a speed to safely manage a bike.
Yeah at that point put up a 'Cyclists dismount' sign and stop being a dickhead
I'd really like to see the speeding fines formally challenged in some way. You hear stories from cyclists that they or their mates have had them overturned, but I haven't seen any actual evidence of this. Maybe it's the case that police just choose not to proceed when the fines are challenged, and avoid setting a formal precedent in the courts.
It would also be interesting if this specific case was challenged. Like you say, it sounds like the 10km/h is supposed to be advisory, but the sign they have used is a regulatory sign which can be enforced by a literal reading of the rules. Not sure if it would hold up in court, and might come down to the judge's attitude towards cyclists.
but the sign they have used is a regulatory sign
Sort of. As someone astutely pointed out on Facebook:
the signs don’t look like they comply with MUTCD regarding their layout, positioning, dimension’s [sic] etc.
Which could be either an indication that they're intended to be advisory, or just a failure to really think things through.
Thats what the world needs now, more obstacles to choosing not to drive
Big car is scared of bikes, the real personal transportation device
That's what happens when carbrains make the rules for cyclists.
He was nabbed at 26km/h
That's absolutely hooning considering it's a shared space, I suspect he only got a ticket because of that.
Yeah. This basically sounds like you're supposed to dismount and walk across the bridge. The pictures in the article show a walkway shared between pedestrians and cyclists going in both directions. It doesn't look wide enough to be doing 26km/h if there are pedestrians and cyclists about going in both directions.
26 kph or 16 mph is not a difficult speed to hit on a bike, especially if you are in good shape. I am not in particularly good shape and I cruise even on my mountain bike around that speed. If the path is crowded and I'm dodging people, sure I'd slow down considerably, but who's to say they didn't clock him when he had some free air between groups of pedestrians.
I admittedly didn't read the article, but that's faster than I expected from the headline. The title makes it seem like he was at a crawl, but now I'm like, which joggers were running faster than 16MPH?
10km/h is way too slow. But in other hand bike crashed to a person on 15km/h is serious risk. If pedestrian safety is concern better just ban bikes(and scooters) from shared pathways. Use roads or dedicated lines.
You don't need speed limits for this. Cyclists are more than capable of riding to conditions and either slowing down or going around pedestrians. Fine cyclists if they're actually riding recklessly, not if they're going at a perfectly reasonable speed given the amount and proximity of pedestrians. The fact that there have been zero incidents recorded on this bridge pretty clearly indicates it's not a problem area.
better just ban bikes(and scooters) from shared pathways
It's literally called a shared pathway. The entire point of it is to allow active transport of all forms.
15 km/h on a bike lane is pretty slow, and a bicycle crashing into a pedestrian at that speed won't do much harm - if any. But agreed, on a the sidewalk it's still too risky.
I think here in Oslo there is no special speed limit on a bike on a road / bike lane, just the regular speed limit. However, if you are on a pavement or public space like a place etc, basically if you are among people, the limit is 6 kph. So, don’t pass people at over 6 kph. Sort of ok even if very few follow it unless they are forced to because of crowds.
coincidentally World Car-Free Day
Irony, thy name is...