Hi Lui
Thank you for your comments (left at the bottom for a context)
Although insight SA is not a chat site I believe members of the site may be
interested in some other aspects as our advocacy is not to alienate people
but to look at the broader context as to pedestrian safety.
Back in February march I attempted to collaborate with BikeSA but found
their attitude to be somewhat dismissive & unhelpful. Equally we tried to
engage the Minister without receiving replies & we made a submission but
were not invited by the Citizens Jury to enter into any further discussion.
The process we embarked upon is highly supported by the Pedestrian Council
of Australia. I have also had discussion with senior police (access & social
inclusion plan committee). We have also had dialogue with several councils.
Other issues are the policing , speed restriction & should an accident occur
the aspect of identification, police reporting & insurance. There is no
health guidelines as to who may use a bike or gopher at this stage which
concerns many groups including the police. This is mainly due to the lack of
registration regulation.
Currently there is no compulsory insurance plan & as a letter from the
government stated in April - cycle vs pedestrian on the road or shared
pathway is not a compensable process as bikes are not registered & the onus
is on the pedestrian to gain the cyclists ID, resport to the police & take
civil action re any compensation. We also explored household insurance
indemnity insurance & most stated that cyclists using their bike external to
the house insured are not covered under the policy.
Discussing with the police (they see it as a nightmare to impliment) they
await rules or guidelines as to speed issues, penalty clarification, random
drug & alcohol testing. If they catch a cyclist speeding they also have no
form of identification & cyclists don't have to carry ID on them.
There are a host of other aspects which have not been sorted out as yet.
We also need to consider other people who have a disability who are
pedestrians
Vision
Any aspects where decreased field or acuity exist
Hearing
Any aspects that decrease auditory signal or directional
appreciation
Any issues where vestibular function is impaired
Motor
Post Stoke
Parkinson's
Knee or hip degenerative disorders
Neurological diseases
Crutches post joint or limb trauma
Use of sticks or walking frames to assist balance & mobility
People with decreased reaction times
Cognitive
Dementia
Traumatic brain injury
Asperger's
Autism
Children who tend to have tunnel vision & cannot process the world - easily
distracted
Other
Mothers with toddlers or pushing a pram
Pregnant mothers as centre of gravity is different
People who are less steady when light is suboptimal
Blood thinning medication
One report stated that of the cycling & pedestrian collisions 34% had
traumatic brain injury
Cyclists may be recreational or club in orientation, but which ever there is
lacking a code of conduct & uniformity of bike equipment & rider clothing.
The 2 hour meeting of dialogue we entered into yesterday with government &
the support we gained from GDSA demonstrated the perceived thinking through
some of the issues prior to its introduction by regulation rather than
legislation.
I believe the local government association has also stated that councils
will not be liable if a cyclists falls off on a pathway. Speaking to one
council today I gleaned that budget constrains will not allow road by road
signage as to permission or not to use specified footpaths.
We also tried to engage COTA who has a broader aged interest without
significant success necessitating the CEO of the pedestrian council of
Australia to make further representation to my letter & the initial reply.
David
Dr David Squirrell
* Blind Citizens Australia (Adelaide Branch) President
* Access & Social Inclusion Plan (SA Govt) Committee
* BCA National Policy Development Committee
From: insightsa-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:insightsa-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Lui Palombi
Sent: Friday, 23 October 2015 2:19 PM
To: insightsa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [insightsa] Cyclists on footpaths
Hi David
Thank you for taking up this most important issue. May I provide some
input as a vision impaired person who rides a bike.
As a cyclist, there are times when the footpath is safer than the road.
This often happens where bike paths are non-existent or there are road
works which force cyclists to share restricted roadway with motorists.
However, the appropriate adjustments are made to speed and behaviour as I
consider the risks to both other users and myself within these situations.
I also notice when cycling on the road, wheelchair and pram users, gofers
and even pedestrians using the roadway at times when the footpaths are
unusable, ie roadworks or construction of homes and other works have
blocked access. Often in these situations, it's just a matter of using
common sense, courtesy and showing respect for other users.
I would like to suggest a more collaborative approach be taken with a view
to establishing a working relationship between BCA, government and consumer
groups such as Bike SA. Surely all parties can work together and develop a
set of agreed behaviours and rules that ensure the safety of all users.. As
a cyclist living in Victoria, I learnt particular rules when using shared
paths; example when approaching pedestrians from behind, I would announce
"bike passing" . Pedestrians, being alert for such warnings would simply
step to one side. We were taught to always wear bright jackets, reduce
speed and even announce to other cyclists when slowing or stopping. I do
the same here in SA when using Linear Park etc and in my eight years since
returning to SA have not struck any problems. . I am concerned with the
speed and behaviour of some cyclists which you have also correctly
identified. This is one reason why I suggest BCA SA branch consider
dialogue with all users with a view to establishing agreed common rules and
behaviours when using shared paths, including footpaths. Surely there is
room for all.
Regards
Lui
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - <http://www.avg.com> www.avg.com
Version: 2015.0.6173 / Virus Database: 4450/10871 - Release Date: 10/22/15
