Hi Tony Advice from Vic Police has only been verbal. They won’t go into writing. I verified this with a friend of mine who is a cop.
They referred me to the penalties listed on the Vic Roads websites that carries a $545 fine for riding on a footpath. This information is freely available. > On 3 Oct 2021, at 2:58 pm, fors...@ozonline.com.au wrote: > Hi Sebastian > Welcome to talk-au > ____________________________________________________________ > A NOTE FOR NON-AUSTRALIANS reading this > a UK pavement or a US sidewalk is an Australian footpath > ____________________________________________________________ > > > I agree with Graeme Fitzpatrick's opinion that blanket bicycle=no on *all* > footpaths is wrong. > > In addition there is Karl Cheng's opinion (Mon Sep 20 talk-au) that "this > whole "Road Rules" regulation only applies to "roads" and "road related > areas". > Only footpaths adjacent to a "road", or any path explicitly designated for > cyclists are considered to be "road related areas". See rules 11-13 of the > Road Rules for details." > > Thirdly there is the issue of ground truth > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Map_what.27s_on_the_ground > "Don't map your local legislation, if not bound to objects in reality > Things such as local traffic rules should only be mapped when there are > objects which represent these rules on the ground, e.g. a traffic sign, road > surface marking. Other rules that can not be seen in some way should not be > mapped, as they are not universally verifiable." I note that if they changed > the legislation, we would have to find and edit maybe a million ways. > > Fourthly (as Graeme Fitzpatrick also notes) you say "Members of the community > have even sought confirmation of permissions from Vic police who have > confirmed to the affirmative that unless a path is specifically signed to be > used by a cyclist, then cyclists are not permitted to use it from a legal > perspective." > You have been asked before but not answered the question, is this verbal or > written advice, if written, can you give a URL? > > Thanks > Tony > >> Hi there, >> >> I?m starting a new thread in relation to recent discussion regarding access >> on footpaths which have bicycle=No >> >> In the Melbourne Bikepath cycling community there has been vigorous >> discussion relating to the strict rules the cyclists must follow and not >> ride on footpaths due to Victorian Road Rules. Victorian cyclists know that >> we are not permitted to ride of footpaths. >> Members of the community have even sought confirmation of permissions from >> Vic police who have confirmed to the affirmative that unless a path is >> specifically signed to be used by a cyclist, then cyclists are not >> permitted to use it from a legal perspective. >> >> In my view, some of the data in OSM is incorrect as a footpath will some >> times have permission bicycle=yes which is incorrect. The majority of the >> time allowed access will have bicycle=unspecified (not defined)which I >> think is fine. >> The issue is that cycling software, apps and gps units used by cyclist >> takes information from OSM and then creates a route based on the permission >> assigned to the road/path in OSM. >> >> I?d be keen to hear from other Victorian cyclists in the OSM community on >> the best way to tag paths so that they do not allow cyclists. >> >> >> >> regards, >> Sebastian _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
