by Kevin Hague
Well it’s not exactly the tragedy of the commons, but roads are intended for all (kinds of) users. Inevitably that means compromises on everyone’s part to ensure that the resource is shared fairly and safely. We’ve seen a fair bit of evidence recently that this is not happening very well.
I see things particularly from a cyclist’s point of view, of course, but like most cyclists I also drive a car from time to time. I do get held up by bunch rides sometimes (with cyclists more than the legally permissible 2 abreast), and I see those other things that some cyclists do which give riders less than perfect PR (a particular bugbear of mine is Wellington cycle couriers carving through pedestrian traffic). But the fact is that on the road, when a motor vehicle and a bike collide it’s the cyclist who is going to get injured. That’s the case irrespective of whose actions caused the collision (although the evidence is that in New Zealand the motorist is held to be at fault in about three quarters of such collisions).
Hopefully, then, even most non-cyclists can understand the feelings of anger and frustration coursing through the cycling community right now as the result of a series of recent events, which seem to be becoming more frequent. The past few months has seen a particularly horrific string of incidents, beginning with the motorist who failed to stop at a compulsory stop sign and ploughed into a line of riders on Tamaki Drive, causing very severe injury. Then we had at least 3 deaths I can think of as a result of riders being struck by a following vehicle: schoolteacher Frank Van Kampen, riding in a cycle lane in Kapiti and hit by a ute driven by a repeat drunk driver, Dr. Graham Robinson killed in Auckland by a driver thought to have deliberately targeted him, and German tourist Mia Pusch, hit by a truck on a straight piece of road with good visibility by a truck.
Campbell Live this week brought to a wider audience an issue that has had cycling website Vorb running hot: a guy in Christchurch, Richard Freeman, claimed on Yahoo to have forced two cyclists into the kerb on Dyer’s Pass Road, and made a series of further threats against cyclists, which he intensified when challenged. After the Campbell Live item went to air he (kind of) apologised, but then the next day Vorb editor Rik Unthank was physically attacked by a car passenger on Dyer’s Pass Road after trying to (politely) bring to the driver’s attention the fact that she had riskily pulled in front of him. Now this morning’s Christchurch Press carries yet another incident, where a car turned in front of elite cyclist Hayden Roulston, causing him to crash into it, seriously injuring an arm.
This simply isn’t an acceptable situation. Even though overall the health benefits of the population cycling substantially outweigh the risks, the existence of these unavoidable risks and the publicity around these incidents will put off many of those who are considering taking up riding, or riding more, or letting their kids ride to school. Yet having more people riding bikes is in everyone’s interests: those who ride will experience substantial health gains, other cyclists will benefit because safety increases when there are more people riding bikes, and even those who don’t end up riding benefit from fewer motor vehicles on the roads.
And for goodness’ sake, those who ride bikes on New Zealand roads are entitled to be there and have the right to be safe when doing so.
I am working with our own caucus and MPs from other parties, as well as cycling organisations to improve this situation if we can. All suggestions welcome.
Published in Environment & Resource Management by Kevin Hague on Sat, January 30th, 2010
Tags: Kevin Hague
More posts by Kevin Hague | more about Kevin Hague
on the trolls and those who are unable to keep on topic
...
I used to cycle everywhere in London , large parts of the UK and heaps in Europe. When I moved to NZ I lasted about a month. I have no idea what is wrong with the psyche of NZ drivers but something seriously is.
And don’t even mention that stupid helmet that we are forced to wear here which thinking about it,is probably only necessary because the driving is so crap
Never ever wore one before I came here and never felt in the least vulnerable
Perhaps the NZ driving test should have an “awareness of other road users” section in it.
Like or Dislike:
11 
1 (+10)
Like or Dislike:
14 
1 (+13)
Thank you for your efforts in talking to caucus and MPs to improve the current situation.
James
Like or Dislike:
4 
1 (+3)
Maybe it would help if we reduced the density of Metropolitan Auckland to something closer to the density of Metropolitan New York.
Like or Dislike:
1 
2 (-1)
Like or Dislike:
5 
1 (+4)
It would be great if the ’1.5m to pass’ became the law. I try very hard to keep left as much as possible but this seems to encourage some motorists to overtake me in an unsafe manner. And very often, the side of the roads are littered with glass—for weeks before they are swept—and sinking gutters.
In saying that, I have noticed a higher than usual proportion of motorists being very courteous to me lately. Some scoot as far right as they can at the traffic lights, allowing me to filter up front to wait (like an imaginary advance stop box). Others will wait patiently until I ride pass before they turn at the intersections. To these people, I will always wave my appreciation.
Here’s to a good BikeWise Month, everybody! Hopefully the numbers will make a difference on the road.
Like or Dislike:
8 
0 (+8)
If National are hellbent on squandering 11 Billion of borrowed money on RONS… the least they could do is provision bridleways at the same time to enable safe cycling/walking access over the same route(s).
Though that will destroy the already cr@p economics of RONS as people will flock to the better proposition.
Like or Dislike:
9 
1 (+8)
Reducing densities reduces local congestion and congestion is a major cause of intolerant driving behaviour.
Like or Dislike:
2 
11 (-9)
Less fear, more people cycling. Greater numbers improves safety for everyone.
Like or Dislike:
6 
1 (+5)
Here are the two main reasons why roading engineers are to blame for conflict and cyclist death on the roads:
1) So many cycle lanes terminate in mid air; leaving cyclists with nowhere to go except under the wheels of a bus. A perfect example is at the end of Auckland’s Northwest motorway where a new interchange with Hobsonville Rd has been under construction.
Cyclists heading from Hobsonville into Westgate get a skinny lane that draws them towards the motorway onramp, then leaves them with nowhere to go, while two lanes of buses, cars and trucks try to shift left onto the motorway onramp, right over the top of the cyclists.
Whoever designs and implements this sort of thing ought to be charged with manslaughter next time a cyclist bites the dust. I’d love to see a website where we could post pics of cycle lanes coming to a sudden end and forcing cyclists straight into life-threatening situations. It’s time to hold someone accountable.
2) Roading designers have failed to properly allocate adequate road space to cycles.
Over the last 10 years there has been a huge move to create striped paint central median strips which supposedly help cars turn out of their driveways and into moving traffic. This has had the effect of narrowing the car lane so that cars and buses etc have to drive very close to parked vehicles, leaving absolutely no clearance whatsoever for cycles.
This one piece of road engineering in itself is responsible for a large number of cyclist deaths, and needs to be reversed immediately except in areas where separate cycleways are available.
The 1.5 metre clearance needed by cyclists (as highlighted by a recent advertising campaign) has simply been eaten up by these painted median strips.
It is also high time that we fined drivers who fail to give bikes adequate clearance, just as we fine drivers who follow other cars too closely.
Which is worse, a tailgater who dents someones rear bumper, or a driver who clips a cyclist and puts them in hospital?
The motorways are the only places where we should tolerate vehicles having priority over cycles.
Better road manners has to start at the top – stronger legislation to shake bad drivers and bad road engineers out of their complacency.
Like or Dislike:
11 
1 (+10)
Owen, please explain what you mean by ‘density’ (eg number of what per number of what else) and how you want us/government/whoever to change it.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
The NZTA recognises the multiple benefits that come from this arrangement.
Capital, fuel cost and parking savings accrue to the individual along with health benefits. Other road users get freed up parking, increased safety, congestion relief, increased network resilience and reliability, improved energy security. And the environment also benefits! Using a cycle instead of a car for a 5km plus commuter trip to work, can result in individual and community savings of $8,700 per year (Tim Hughes, 2009).
Like or Dislike:
10 
0 (+10)
Too many New Zealand drivers are bad at keeping to speed limits, are bad at signalling, are impatient at traffic lights and junctions, regularly run red lights, they are not that giving to other road users, including other motorists, and lorry drivers often display appalling driving skills and are far too aggressive.
It is of great concern that this intolerance seems unashamed. Recently there was a series of comments in the letter section of the Dominion Post which revealed the deep contempt of too many drivers to cyclists.
However , it isn’t just drivers who misbehave, this letter of mine was published in the Dominion Post in July 2008
Dear Sir/Madam
I was sorry to read the letter about one cyclist’s inconsiderate actions causing injuries to an elderly pedestrian. Five months ago I started cycling to work in Wellington, and I agree, I see too many aggressive fellow cyclists – they ride across pedestrian crossings, jump red lights and fail to observe road rules, weave in and out of traffic and treat pavements and pedestrians as a mountain bike course. They give all us cyclists a bad name. But many car (and bus and truck) drivers behave no better, and a thousand kilograms of car are rather more dangerous than ten kilograms of bicycle. Cycling in Wellington is not pleasant and, as two recent deaths show, often perilous. Of great benefit would be a 40 kph limit on main streets, with side streets and residential streets reduced to 30 kph. Overseas experience confirms major reductions in serious injuries and deaths with these speed limits. Put a New Zealander in charge of some wheels – cars, buses and trucks, cycles, skateboards, or whatever – and their behaviour seems to change, invariably for the worse, so also of benefit would be a bit more maturity and responsibility from all road users.
Yours faithfully,
Cycle Aware are doing a great job of trying to promote cycling, and cycling awareness in other road users. There are lots of solutions out there that could be used, but certainly in Wellington you are dealing with a fossilised council and transport planning committee and their continued capitulation to the motoring lobby is still almost total. New Zealanders’ pathological attachment to the motor vehicle shows no sign of abating, roll on oil depletion and $200 per barrel oil.
It needs a sea-change of opinion to deal with – I really don’t know the answer, there is in transport planning in New Zealand an unbelievably conservative and backward looking culture that is simply not going to change that quickly. The advert on TV for an insurance company illustrates this contempt for cycling in NZ perfectly, it show some poor sweaty fellow on his cycle who had inadequate insurance, whilst his smug neighbour pulls up in her yuppiemobile, all bright eyed and fashionably attired, shopping in the boot – the message is pretty strong, in NZ, cycling is for wimps and failures.
Like or Dislike:
9 
1 (+8)
I rarely rode in peak-hour traffic, and frequently my recreational riding was in areas of low-density traffic, or ‘off-road’, such as Mt Vic hill, or along the waterfront, where cyclists and pedestrians have marked lanes.
However, friends of mine who were serious cyclists, getting up to motorway speeds on big rides (wellington-rimutaka hill-lake ferry and return…) were constantly on the lookout for dangerous motorists, and had a few pieces of wisdom for me – watch parked cars for those rapid-opening road-side doors; don’t switch lanes into traffic too early; don’t try to ‘draft’ trucks or buses until you’re very proficient at city riding; always carry water, a phone, and a first-aid kit for small ‘offs’; plus some cash for incidental food if you’re doing a big ride!
I never got up to the heights of those young men, some of them fans of the Kennett Bro’s Makara Peak mountain-biking trails, some of them contenders for the national road-race cycle team at various stages, but I learnt from them to seize the day, get out in the fresh air, and live in the moment of joy that a good afternoon cycling brings.
Yes, I have a few shin and knee scars, but they’re hardly enough to put me off the experiences I gained on my bike.
I still have many friends who ride regularly & I sometimes see a cyclist swoop past & regret giving up my bike; my hope is that not just the sporting fraternity, but also the casual cyclists, will back the efforts to get cycle lanes, efficent policing of dangerous motorists, and also the support from one cyclist to another that is needed for cycling to continue to be one of our favourite recreational activities – so join CAN, or Cycle Aware, or if there’s nothing in your community, set up a support group for local cyclists, and create the initiative to lobby your own local body for cycling supportive by-laws.
Like or Dislike:
6 
2 (+4)
Well spoke!
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
One can tell oneself things like feet before autos rites of passage etc, but the intimidation remains. Someone suggested how a big dose of tolerance for others would be useful for all road users. Mandatory would be better. Mebbe a job for keen-eyed cyclists..umn.
Like or Dislike:
4 
0 (+4)
Like or Dislike:
4 
1 (+3)
grew up in chch, biked throughout, everywhere, work, shopping, uni, etc, and enjoyed it immensely. traffic was never really an issue and i biked on or across half the main arterial roads daily. until 2002, i didn’t have any issues at all. Seoul was a totally different beast, no cycle lanes on the roads, crazy and eratic driving, far too many close shaves with trucks and cars sent me to commute on (excellent) subways and bike riding exclusively on the paths and tracks away from the city in the early morning.
since returning home (chch) i’ve all but given up riding anywhere i used to. there’s less space, the corners are practically death traps, as the vehicles approach them at higher speeds, and the quiet country roads i used to bike along seem to have someone trying to set a land-speed record each weekend.
my theory is that cars are becoming more and more “capable”, higher speeds, faster cornering, greater stopping power, and driving skills are adjusting to the abilities of the cars. my car’s 20 years old and i’ve always got someone tailgating me around corners and round-a-bouts. blaming drivers seems valid, but surely the cars have something to do with it. i’d feel safer biking in a city of Hillman Hunters.
Like or Dislike:
6 
0 (+6)
Hopefully the local version of FixMyStreet will be launching soon so that we can report all these inadequacies.
Like or Dislike:
7 
0 (+7)
A way to possibly solve this problem would be to remove on-road parking spaces on major roads within our cities and replace them with bicycle lanes. For the same reason, I am somewhat concerned about the mixed bus/bicycle lanes.
“For goodness sake, get rid of the compulsory helmet law!!”
If memory serves, prior to the compulsory helmet law being introduced, there were several incidents where cyclists were left permanently brain damaged after incidents. I for one am not keen to see my tax dollars being spent on things that could be easily avoided if such laws were kept in place.
Like or Dislike:
5 
2 (+3)
Please please spend some time reading through the info in the link I posted before tossing in comments like that. By that same logic it makes far more sense for all motorists and pedestrians to wear a helmet: far more money would be saved if they did. Do you wear a helmet while driving? No? Why not then? The main thing cycle helmets have done in NZ and Australia has been to reduce the number of cyclists – that in itself is a much higher cost to society in both health and transportation.
Like or Dislike:
5 
3 (+2)
The sudden termination of cycle lanes makes them dangerous and frustrating.
The fix-my-street idea sounds neat. If we can pictorially highlight the problems we may be able to get some changes, and a shift in engineers thinking when these roads are at the design/repair stage.
I want to see the painted median strips disappear too…they force cars to travel too close to parked vehicles.
Like or Dislike:
5 
1 (+4)
The most rapidly growing demand for cycling routes is to serve the needs of recreational/fitness cyclists (many of whom are retired or near retirement) and the separate needs of commuter cyclists.
We try to provide the same routes for both. Genuine commuter cyclists fit in with commuting motorists quite well.
Social groups, often in packs of ten or twenty don’t.
New Town developments in Houston and the like have separate cycle routes along the levees and through the parks than link housing neighbourhoods to parks and pools and bush and so on. And schools so that kids cycle to school. No focus on employment centres and busy radial routes at all.
Works much better and safer and encourages kids to cycle from an early age.
Like or Dislike:
6 
2 (+4)
Last year I saved about $200 in petrol alone, riding to gym (6km), my bank (5km), Panmue (10km), round trips.
Like or Dislike:
7 
1 (+6)
Your idea that a NZ city could provide 2 different types of cycle routes seems an incredible luxury: me, I’d love just one.
There is no good cycle route from Wellington Central to Karori – despite a large number of Karori bike commuters, and Karori having Makara Peak Mountain Bike Park, and the route through Karori being part of the popular road-cycle-sport Makara Loop. Glenmore St is the best, but frankly the tunnel sucks.
Motor traffic (and the busses are the worst) get impatient of bikes going uphill, and the hilliest sections of Wellington’s streets are also the windiest and narrowest.
Like or Dislike:
4 
0 (+4)
They are a selling point like my walks around my managed park.
I found I was selling health.
It’s not a luxury if you accept that commuter cyclists need little pavement.
It’s the kids and the social groups that do and cause most of the aggravation between motorists and cyclists.
I suggest you look at some examples by Prefurbia – from Rick Harrison site Design.
Go to: http://www.RHSDplanning.com/
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
…a city of immense urban sprawl in a desert, where cycle commuting is impractical because of distance and climate…
That’s interesting, but I wouldn’t want to draw too close a comparison to NZ. We aren’t Texas.
Like or Dislike:
3 
1 (+2)
If we need so little, then why don’t we get it? Where’s my cycle lane, dammit?
Like or Dislike:
9 
1 (+8)
One big problem is drivers not following the basic road rules (stopping at red lights, not entering an intersection until there is a clear way out etc). Also cars pass way to close, like less the 0.5 of a metre, not giving way to cyclists turning, so people like me have to sit in the middle of a lane when it is a right turning and straight ahead lane otherwise i will never get to turn right. The other big one is police not doing anything if you report anyone breaking road rules and causing a danger to other users, they only bother with complaints from cyclists if an ambulance turns up to a cyclist involved accident and then most often let the driver off anyway.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Even if the 1.5m campaign doesn’t result in a law change, certainly running a ‘safe overtaking’ promotion would be good. I’ve had a number of close shaves recently that make cycling a high-rick activity.
I see the UK are also starting a campaign to push for a European form of Strict Liability now as well.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
gsv_nfa – that “Strict Liability” link was a real eye opener.
Kind of makes you wonder why one single person sitting comfortably inside a 1 ton sardine tin on wheels is considered more important and worthy of protection than one single person saving the planet by riding a bike.
It’s a no-brainer really – the car is a killing machine unless you give the cyclists road priority.
Why should a gun user who kills someone get a harsher penalty than a car user who kills someone??
There has to be a move to make car drivers face the danger they cause for other people.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
- “Where’s my cycle lane, dammit?”
Where’s the cyclist road tax, dammit?
Like or Dislike:
1 
7 (-6)
Not a lot of point taxing cycles when you consider the difference in weight, damage and killing power between cars and bikes.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Like or Dislike:
0 
11 (-11)
Let’s assume that the components justifying road tax are road wear, causing injuries that ACC has to cope with, and delay to other motorists.
Road wear scales with the fourth power of axle weight, so cyclists’ component will be pretty small.
(somewhat relevant link: http://cedb.asce.org/cgi/WWWdisplay.cgi?0201135)
I would think that cyclists on roads rarely cause injuries to others without causing them to themselves, so they have a self-preservation motive in their ACC burden, which doesn’t apply in the same way to drivers. I don’t know whether this shows in the stats.
I don’t know what the relative throughput of a cycle lane and a car lane are. If the bikes get more throughput per pavement area, then (assuming things magically reach the long-run state immediately, which is common in economics) they may be reducing your delay.
If it could be shown that the net cost of cyclists on drivers was negative, would they deserve paying to cycle?
Like or Dislike:
5 
0 (+5)
There’s also the current (LTSA – can’t remember and too late to go linky searching) estimate of $2-4 BENEFIT per cyclist per Km. That, combined with my taxes, AND the fact that I also own a car and therefore pay road tax anyway seems to cover all bases.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
And oh, don’t rule out taxing pedestrians as well if they are to expect safe footpaths and crossings.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
In my opinion it is dealing with this obsession which needs to be at the heart of changing they way we get around. We may have more success in making positive change if we give psychologists more of a role in transport planning. ( No, I am not one ).
Even among cyclists and cycle advocates in New Zealand , there is a predominant and prevailing expectation that cycle planning should be done to facilitate ‘flat out’ cycling for ‘commuters’.
Virtually nothing is being done to advocate the needs of what should be the broadest demographic of cyclists who, like the 86million everyday utility cyclists in Japan , would chose to ‘slow-cycle’, riding their ‘shopping bicycles’ effortlessly sharing ‘footpaths’, safely segregated from what is so obviously ( to them ) the ‘combat zone’.
http://urbanbicycles.googlepages.com/whyutilitycyclingcan%27thappeninnz
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
Alan – thats a very good point that many cyclists will be happy to co-exist slowly with pedestrians.
My own preference is to focus on acceptance of electric bikes as commuter tools, which means co-existence with cars, rather than risking co-existence with foot traffic.
Really there are very few opportunities for cyclists of any description to go about their business without suffering conflict with other traffic (be it foot traffic or road traffic).
I think there is so much that can be done to use reserves and public parks etc, as well as encouraging requirements in new subdivisions to facilitate a broader uptake of cycling.
It’s good for tourism, good for energy use, good for health, good for air quality and good for bringing back a slower form of living – I think we’ve lost something by constantly being on the treadmill.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
The cost to cyclists of having to repair frequent punctures caused by motorists throwing empty beer bottles onto roads should also be taken into account.
Since virtual nationwide liquer bans have been introduced, most drinking is done in moving vehicles. Thus empty bottles are heaved out to break and produce tiny shards which cause ultra thin nylon tyres to flatten.
Does anyone know where I can get solid rubber tyres.
Also can I get a rebate on the fuel tax I don’t pay when I use my bike, and offset that against my use of footpaths instead of broken beer bottle filled gutters – which is where most motorists prefer I ride.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Would it not be better to have cyclists on the footpath?
genji, here you go, start an import and distribution company.
http://www.alibaba.com/product-gs/242949747/bicycle_airless_inner_tire_tube.html
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
In Tokyo cyclists have to use footpaths, where they exist. Difference is that Japanese motorists are incredibly courteous to all road users. You don’t have to arrogant to succeed. Japan is and has been for some time the second largest economy on the planet. And did I mention Honesty, Crime, Rapes, Murder. We sure can learn a lot from Japanese way of life.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Genji, that’s complicated. May I recommend “The Enigma of Japanese Power” by Karol van Wolferen?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
You should visit Japan.
I spend a month there every year.
Took a moutain bike one year.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Nice Little article in the Melbourne age as to Victoria’s new stratergy for Raod congestion…
…>http://www.theage.com.au/national/transport-revolution-to-get-city-moving-20100206-njxf.html
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Try
http://www.theage.com.au/national/transport-revolution-to-get-city-moving-20100206-njxf.html
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Su Yin said “@greengeek: Here is my example of a silly cycle lane (with a signpost in the middle) terminating dangerously, …”
To comply with international practice cycle lanes should terminate 100 metres before any signalised intersection and the cyclelane should abut the carriageway at a 45 degree angle so that cyclists can easily check that the way is clear and motorists can more easily see cyclists prior to the merge manuevre.
From SUNflower+6 – An extended study of the development of road safety in
Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the Netherlands.
SWOV research in the 1980s showed that cycle paths along urban through roads were
safer for cyclists than cycle lanes, and that cycle lanes were less safe than no bicycle
facilities (i.e. cyclists on the carriageway). In the same research it was also found that on
through-roads intersections, paths were less safe for cyclists than separate lanes or no
facilities. This led to the recommendation to terminate (truncate) cycle paths some distance
from an intersection. These results were completely different for mopedists, which resulted
in the recommendation for the ‘moped on the carriageway’ measure in 1999.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I’m a car driver and occasional (recreational) cyclist (not one of the arrogant Lance Armstrong/Spiderman-wannabe lyrca-wearing nobs). My cycling is confined to cycle paths and the rural road I live on near Nelson. As a cyclist, I am acutely aware of cars and ALWAYS move to the shoulder whenever I hear a car coming. If riding with my girlfriend, when we hear a car approaching, we NEVER continue to ride two abreast, and immediately move to the shoulder and ride single file until the car has passed. We do this out of common curtesy, safety, and self preservation. “Curtesy and safety” because at the lesurely pace we ride at (10-20km/hr), cars are going to have to pass us, and we don’t want to have to force them out into the other lane. As a driver, I have had too many close calls on rural roads coming around a blind corner at 50km/hr only to find an arrogant group of the above mentioned lycra clad “social” wannabes riding 2-4 abreast at 15km/hr. In one case there was a large dump truck in the on-coming lane and I only avoided running down the whole lot of idiots by going into a full panic stop (luckily I have antilocking brakes and the road was good seal). This was totally irresponsible behavior and I was obeying the posted speed limit and “driving to the conditions.” Arrogance and irresponsible behavior by some cyclists is definitely causing car driver road rage and anticycle behavior. The law which allows cyclists to legaly ride 2 abreast on narrow roads is unsafe. If cyclists what to “chat” with each other while riding, they should buy cheap two-way radios fit them in their helmets with boom mikes, ride singel file, and not endanger themselves and car drivers.
Like or Dislike:
0 
1 (-1)
Last time I read the relevant piece of law, and I don’t promise that it was New Zealand law, it said that:
– on an unlaned road, you had to drive so as to stop in half the distance you could see
– on a laned road, you had to drive so as to stop in the distance you could see
It sounds like you were complying with the law, but only just.
Yes, I know that no night driver on an unlit open road, with dipped lights and oncoming traffic complies.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
What would happen if a car driver came around the same corner and found an ambulance officer attending a fallen motorcyclist in the middle of the road?
At least the cyclists are moving away at 15km/hr, whereas the ambulance officer would be staionary.
Car drivers (yes, I am one) need to realise that their vehicle is just as dangerous as a gun. There is no road rule that says a car driver is somehow more important than a cyclist. Let alone two cyclists riding side by side.
Perhaps the whole arrogant anti-cyclist mentality has it’s roots in the law that says two cyclists abreast is less important than a single car driver. Two people more important than one??
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)