Does anyone have an idea of the line marking plans the new intersection at Rundle Rd/East Tce? It looks to me like the bike lane (as usual) will terminate abruptly before the intersection. This is quite a busy intersection in the mornings and this is an obvious accident waiting to happen.
It does look like there is an off ramp, but that seems like it is for a left turn or to shuttle all the pesky bikes in with all the other not-car objects.
You looked like you were doing fine! "Where we're going, we don't need roads (or bicycle lanes)" said the Doc to Marty.....
Fine for Doc, Marty and me (and the confident cyclists already using this road). I wouldn't send an unaccompanied 10 year old down there - but I would love infra where I would.
That confuses the issue a little - DPTI and the ACC will both say that that is just temporary and dismiss it. The real issue is that as far as I can see, there is a planned permanent loss of cyclist protection across that intersection.
Do we know anything about DPTI plans for how that intersection will end up being marked ? They could but in a bike box although it would have to be in front of all three lanes so they couldn't run a left green arrow. But maybe they aren't planning to do that.
So what are we supposed to do cycling along there ? At the moment I'm changing across to the right lane like Paul has to go around the left hand lane turners. But I'm never sure in this situation what rule applies. Is it
(1) the cars are crossing the bike lane so need to give way or
(2) the bike lane has ended and the cyclists are undertaking left turning cars and need to give way
Or does it depend on where they end up marking the end of the bike lane ?
EDIT: I guess they might try and put a bike box (aka bicycle storage area) in there somewhere ?
I imagine it's like any other lane merge. Whoever is behind gives way.
So personally, I'd claim the lane in the left lane, and stay in that lane, doing a hook turn if turning right at East Terrace. (Actually, if turning right, I'd avoid the whole mess by riding through that park from the Rundle/Dequetteville corner to the North Terrace / East Terrace corner - or has that park been dug up?)
Peter, the law on merging is more nuanced to what you're suggesting with "whoever is behind gives way".
Both in Australia and overseas, the laws for merging into a lane, is that the vehicle/bike/truck/whatever that is merging into a lane MUST give way to any traffic that is already in that lane, even if ahead of traffic already in that lane (if short distance, not saying give way to vehicle that is 20-30m away, that would also depend on the speed on different vehicles). A vehicle already occupying a lane has no obligation whatsoever to accommodate merging traffic, the example given in the law is that vehicles don't need to slow down, speed up, give way, move over to another lane (where possible).
The exception being for zipper merges when a lane ends. Often but not always at roadworks and especially when zipper merging is recommended through signage, is that cars alternate, with the car in the ending lane and that is further ahead of the car in the continuing lane merge first.
You'd actually be one of the 44% of drivers who need to update their knowledge of the rules... http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/revealed-the-roa...
1 in 3 SA drivers are also quite agro, with 35% reportedly never allowing someone to merge... https://www.sgic.com.au/south-australian-motorists-urged-mind-their...
This is the video from which the photo's were taken
This is from this morning: