• ApeNo1
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    I found on many government sites that a fairly common consensus was that safe bike speeds for areas shared with pedestrians should be around 12km/h to 25km/h, one even said 15 to 25, so being fined $400+ for doing 22km/h was unnecessary. I still believe having speed limits defined for these types of areas is important to ensure public safety, but agree 10km/h, which is essentially just a jogging pace, is unreasonable, with a more appropriate fine being say sub $100 for people doing 30km/h+ in a shared zone.

    The complication I also saw is that few people would have a speedometer on their bike so it would need some common sense and judgement. People could use their phones for this but it would make more sense that they are looking at their surroundings and what is up ahead rather than looking down at a phone screen.

    • Zagorath@aussie.zoneOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      which is essentially just a jogging pace

      It’s slower than a slow jog.

      The complication I also saw is that few people would have a speedometer on their bike so it would need some common sense and judgement

      This exactly. But you don’t need speed limits to do that. Just enforce the usual reckless driving/riding laws.

      Police like speed limits because they’re lazy as fuck and can just set up a trap without having to do any real work. They like it against cyclists especially because they’re arseholes who hate cyclists. (As evidence for this, I submit the fact that they regularly do “bell blitzes” despite the fact that bells are a completely useless implement when you have a voice, as well as how they enforce these ridiculous speed limits. And the fact that they refuse to ever prosecute dangerous driving by drivers when reported by cyclists with video evidence.)

      • ApeNo1
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think saying it is slower than a slow jog underplays it a bit. 10km/h is a 6 min km which is a common running speed for amateur runners and a reasonable speed, 12km/h is a 5 min km which requires above average fitness, and 15km/h is a 4 min km which is an elite amateur pace. Anything approaching 20km/h is elite professional athlete level.

        I think the point is still the same though. You have now introduced another new term to me. “Bell Blitz”. Really going after those worst of crimes.

        • Zagorath@aussie.zoneOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m a runner and personally, my slow easy runs might go as slow as 5:30s, at the extreme end, which is why I said that 10 km/h is slower than a slow jog. 5:00s is more my usual slow run pace for runs less than 12 km in distance. But yeah, I guess it’s mainly a semantic point. The important thing is that when running, one can easily exceed the supposed speed limit on that bridge, which is just crazy.

          The bell blitzes strike me as the same kind of stupid as when they crack down on “jaywalking” by pedestrians in the CBD. In a better world, our entire CBD would be a shared-use zone where cars can drive if they need to, but pedestrians always have right of way. Likewise, the bell law should just be done away with. But our politicians are so car-brained the idea of these is abhorrent to them.

          • abhibeckert@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            In a better world, our entire CBD would be a shared-use zone where cars can drive if they need to, but pedestrians always have right of way

            Pedestrians do have right of way, at least in QLD. There’s no situation where it’s acceptable to run over a pedestrian except if it was literally impossible to avoid doing so (e.g. if a pedestrian sprints across the street unexpectedly and the driver has no time to swerve or hit the brakes).

            That doesn’t mean it’s legal for pedestrians to obstruct traffic. J-walking leads to traffic jams which leads to situations where pedestrians/cyclists/etc are more likely to be run over and killed. When someone j-walks on a busy streat they are placing lives of other pedestrians in danger.

            • Zagorath@aussie.zoneOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Pedestrians do have right of way, at least in QLD

              Incorrect. Yes, a driver will get in trouble if they recklessly run into a pedestrian, but the driver still has right of way when continuing along a straight road, or when at an intersection where the pedestrian has a red light.

              I’m not interested in that semantic argument some people like to get into about the difference between “right of way” and “must give way to”. One is just the inverse of the other. No more, no less.

              It’s not the same as a fully pedestrianised mall, like Queen Street, or a mixed-use area like Albert Street between Adelaide St and Burnett Ln. That latter is what I’m chiefly talking about here. That’s how the CBD should be designed.