Cycle lanes? cycle against traffic flow?

Chimichangas · 27-05-2015 9:52pm #1

Are there any rules saying that cyclists should cycle with the direction of traffic, and not, where there are 2 cycle lanes provided on opposite sides of the road, cycle against the flow of traffic?
Its an accident waiting to happen. Or accidents waiting to happen..

I always thought a cycle lane is unidirectional with the flow of traffic, unless there is a dashed line indicating 2 lanes alongside each other.

salmocab · 27-05-2015 9:58pm

Pretty sure they are with flow only unless it says otherwise,I see people cycling at traffic quite regularly especially in the suburbs and its very dangerous. To be fair its generally kids/teenagers or people that look very like they don't cycle much. Often see people doing it for short stretches from a gateway to a set of lights or something like that as they didn't feel the need to cross the road for just 50 mts of cycling.

galwaycyclist · 27-05-2015 10:01pm

Chimichangas wrote: »

Are there any rules saying that cyclists should cycle with the direction of traffic, and not, where there are 2 cycle lanes provided on opposite sides of the road, cycle against the flow of traffic?
Its an accident waiting to happen. Or accidents waiting to happen..

I always thought a cycle lane is unidirectional with the flow of traffic, unless there is a dashed line indicating 2 lanes alongside each other.

In terms of getting hit by cars, cycling on the wrong side of the road is one of the most risky things you can do on a bike. There are reports of up to 11 fold increases in risk of collision at junctions if using a roadside cycle track to go in the wrong direction.

At one time I think the 1997 regulations stipulated that cyclists use cycle tracks in the same direction as the flow of the lane beside them. If I recall correctly, this was dropped in 1998 and replaced with the use of directional arrows.

But - just because a council engineer has put an arrow on a cycle track it does not follow that it is a good idea to use it in that direction.

JBokeh · 27-05-2015 10:03pm

There's contra flow cycle lanes in the UK which go against the traffic, not sure about Ireland because I've never seen any myself, but i'm a bogger that doesn't go into Dublin.

There's a cycle lane in cork on Anglesey street that is on the footpath, which has "to" and "fro" lanes

I've never seen someone going backwards up a cycle lane myself, but I'd say that it happens, and it could make a serious mess too

Hunterbiker · 27-05-2015 10:04pm

If its on the road a cyclist must follow the flow of traffic.
A cycle lane on the pavement is more of a suggestion to do so rather than telling you to

beauf · 27-05-2015 10:06pm

I've wondered this myself. I assume otherwise all cycle lanes is assumed to be with flow (of the traffic) unless there's a sign for a contra flow.

But I can't find anywhere that definitively states this.

That said common sense would dictate some lanes it would be dangerous to cycle against the flow.

TheQuietFella · 27-05-2015 10:09pm

I think common sense should be the answer to the obvious.

ted1 · 27-05-2015 10:09pm

You must cycle in the direction of traffic.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1964/en/si/0294.html#zzsi294y1964a28

Section 28,1,A

beauf · 27-05-2015 10:22pm

Does that say that?

I think that says "shall be driven on the cycle track only" which I think is now been reversed. So if a cycle lane exists you don't have to use it.

I'm not sure that says you have to cycle in a specific direction in a cycle lane.

ted1 · 27-05-2015 10:25pm

beauf wrote: »

Does that say that?

I think that says "shall be driven on the cycle track only" which I think is now been reversed. So if a cycle lane exists you don't have to use it.

I'm not sure that says you have to cycle in a specific direction in a cycle lane.

It says:
every pedal cycle being driven on that stretch of road (in the direction in which traffic on the side of the road adjacent to the cycle track is required to travel)

I read that as you must travel in the direction

Kaisr Sose · 27-05-2015 10:41pm

The reason I prefer cycling on the road, rather than cycle lanes (on pavements) is because the flow of traffic on roads is governed by a clear set of rules as to what direction you should be going (drive on left). On these type of cycle lanes people, not just cyclists, but pedestrians, joggers, dog walkers etc are coming at you from all sides.

salmocab · 27-05-2015 10:44pm

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

The reason I prefer cycling on the road, rather than cycle lanes is because the flow of traffic on roads is governed by a clear set of rules as to what direction you should be going (drive on left). On cycle lanes people, not just cyclists, but pedestrians, joggers, dog walkers etc are coming at you from all sides.

I think the OP meant the cycle lanes that are part of the road not the free for alls beside the pavement that have no rules or etiquette

Kaisr Sose · 27-05-2015 11:12pm

salmocab wrote: »

I think the OP meant the cycle lanes that are part of the road not the free for alls beside the pavement that have no rules or etiquette

Good point, meant to say those on pavements. Post edited to clarify. The ones on the road are fine, but it annoys me when cars park in them or use them as undertaking lanes (referring to those with continuous white line, or with a period of exclusive cyclist use). Very dangerous and you never can tell if a car will do it until they are across your path....

Chimichangas · 27-05-2015 11:29pm

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

The reason I prefer cycling on the road, rather than cycle lanes (on pavements) is because the flow of traffic on roads is governed by a clear set of rules as to what direction you should be going (drive on left). On these type of cycle lanes people, not just cyclists, but pedestrians, joggers, dog walkers etc are coming at you from all sides.

Not just the pavement cycle lanes where people are coming from all directions...

salmocab wrote: »

I think the OP meant the cycle lanes that are part of the road not the free for alls beside the pavement that have no rules or etiquette

Yes I did mean the cycle lanes on the roads.

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

Good point, meant to say those on pavements. Post edited to clarify. The ones on the road are fine, but it annoys me when cars park in them or use them as undertaking lanes (referring to those with continuous white line, or with a period of exclusive cyclist use). Very dangerous and you never can tell if a car will do it until they are across your path....

I find a lot of the cycle lanes on roads are used by (some) cyclists,joggers, walkers, in the wrong direction. Its unbelievably dangerous.
I think I saw a person waling a pram on a cycle lane going contra traffic flow when there was a footpath to use.
What happens when a cyclist is going the right way and they come across a lazy cyclist, jogger, walker who thinks they have a right to be in the same cycle lane? as a truck with poor visibility comes on the scene at the same time.?
Wouldnt happen would it...

:mad:

Kaisr Sose · 28-05-2015 12:07am

^^^ If there is a cycle lane on the road, then all cyclists should be going in he same direction as those in cars/trucks etc.
As for pedestrians, pram walkers etc , we'll they should be on the pavement. They would hardly walk or wheel a pram down the middle of the road, so what makes a cycle lane any different ? Though if you apply logic to some peoples behaviour or try to understand it, you are only going to end up totally confused!!

Wishbone Ash · 28-05-2015 12:16am

Hunterbiker wrote: »

If its on the road a cyclist must follow the flow of traffic....

The on-street cycle track on the northern end of Capel Street (Dublin 1) is marked southbound for cyclists but is a one way northbound for motorised traffic. If memory serves me correctly, there's a similar contra flow cycle track on St Andrew Street (Dublin 2) which is a one-way for motorised traffic.

Kaisr Sose · 28-05-2015 12:22am

Actually, good point. At the top of Camden Street ( Bleeding horse ) to Portobello. They have just made a bus lane and cycle lane that goes contra to the flow of traffic. But it's not just cycle lane. Overall, I would say this was a good idea as it eliminates the run around by Harcourt Street if going Rathmines way.

ezra_pound · 28-05-2015 12:26am

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

Actually, good point. At the top of Camden Street ( Bleeding horse ) to Portobello. They have just made a bus lane and cycle lane that goes contra to the flow of traffic. But it's not just cycle lane. Overall, I would say this was a good idea as it eliminates the run around by Harcourt Street if going Rathmines way.

There's a contra flow cycle lane at the end of Parnell street when you take the left fork (cycle lane comes against you on one way street from Bolton St college back to parnell St.

Wishbone Ash · 28-05-2015 12:29am

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

Actually, good point. At the top of Camden Street ( Bleeding horse ) to Portobello. They have just made a bus lane and cycle lane that goes contra to the flow of traffic. But it's not just cycle lane. Overall, I would say this was a good idea as it eliminates the run around by Harcourt Street if going Rathmines way.

The combined contra-flow bus/cycle tracks are more common alright.

(Good to hear about that new set-up (South Richmond Street??). Never liked doing that loop around by the Luas track.)

Wishbone Ash · 28-05-2015 12:31am

Edit

SomeFool · 28-05-2015 1:14am

JBokeh wrote: »

There's contra flow cycle lanes in the UK which go against the traffic, not sure about Ireland because I've never seen any myself, but i'm a bogger that doesn't go into Dublin.

There's a cycle lane in cork on Anglesey street that is on the footpath, which has "to" and "fro" lanes

I've never seen someone going backwards up a cycle lane myself, but I'd say that it happens, and it could make a serious mess too

Contra flow lanes in Cork on Western Rd, South Main St, Probys Quay and Popes quay. There's a small kerb between them and the street in most places.

Shep_Dog · 28-05-2015 5:44am

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

If memory serves me correctly, there's a similar contra flow cycle track on St Andrew Street (Dublin 2) which is a one-way for motorised traffic.

True, but the cycle lane is often used for car parking.

tomasrojo · 28-05-2015 10:02am

ezra_pound wrote: »

There's a contra flow cycle lane at the end of Parnell street when you take the left fork (cycle lane comes against you on one way street from Bolton St college back to parnell St.

Found that one a bit hazardous in the early days (no-one expecting cyclists to be coming the other way and pulling out as you approached), but I haven't used it in ages.

CramCycle · 28-05-2015 10:18am

Surely this is common sense, with the flow of traffic unless clearly signed otherwise. Most have a bike the right way up if your travelling the right direction etc.

The only time contra to traffic is the right thing is if you a pedestrian on a road with no footpad.

I realise that sense is not common to everyone but for most of us.

tomasrojo · 28-05-2015 10:28am

CramCycle wrote: »

The only time contra to traffic is the right thing is if you a pedestrian on a road with no footpad.

Or to allow cyclists to legally go the wrong way up a one-way street. I realise I just said that I found one such facility hazardous, but there are lots of one-way streets where a bicycle contra-flow could be safely accommodated. Or even just allow an exemption for cyclists on some one-ways. Windsor Terrace is a one-way street that cyclists have been flouting in as far as I can tell complete safety for years (it "joins" -- if you disregard legalities -- the Grand Canal cycle route to Harold's Cross).

loyatemu · 28-05-2015 10:38am

tomasrojo wrote: »

Or to allow cyclists to legally go the wrong way up a one-way street. I realise I just said that I found one such facility hazardous, but there are lots of one-way streets where a bicycle contra-flow could be safely accommodated. Or even just allow an exemption for cyclists on some one-ways. Windsor Terrace is a one-way street that cyclists have been flouting in as far as I can tell complete safety for years (it "joins" -- if you disregard legalities -- the Grand Canal cycle route to Harold's Cross).

one-way streets are there to improve vehicular traffic flow, they do nothing for cyclists but make life difficult. The council should allow contra-flow cycling anywhere it's safe - they don't even need to paint a lane, just put up a sign saying "Keep left" (and maybe warning signs at junctions)

ford2600 · 28-05-2015 10:47am

SomeFool wrote: »

Contra flow lanes in Cork on Western Rd, South Main St, Probys Quay and Popes quay. There's a small kerb between them and the street in most places.

They seem potentially dangerous to me.

A motorist for example who is used to emerging onto road from a private entrance/junction will primarily be watching out for pedestrian on footpath, crossing his path, and traffic from his left.

A cyclist coming from his right at 30km/h, contra to traffic flow, is a recipe for disaster. At some locations the sight lines are such that a motorist has to emerge onto bike lane at least partially for a decent view(assuming he does looking right for a cyclist).

CramCycle · 28-05-2015 10:48am

tomasrojo wrote: »

Or to allow cyclists to legally go the wrong way up a one-way street. I realise I just said that I found one such facility hazardous, but there are lots of one-way streets where a bicycle contra-flow could be safely accommodated. Or even just allow an exemption for cyclists on some one-ways. Windsor Terrace is a one-way street that cyclists have been flouting in as far as I can tell complete safety for years (it "joins" -- if you disregard legalities -- the Grand Canal cycle route to Harold's Cross).

Or as I said, where clearly signed otherwise. There are a few one way streets where there is barely room for cars let alone contra flow traffic of any sort but there are quite a few, like in Belgium where a sign with no entry except bicycles and at the car entrance end, a warning sign that there maybe contra flow bicycles. This could be accomodated in current legislation by simply putting a contra flow path on one side of the road.

Chimichangas · 31-05-2015 7:25pm

CramCycle wrote: »

Surely this is common sense, with the flow of traffic unless clearly signed otherwise. Most have a bike the right way up if your travelling the right direction etc.

The only time contra to traffic is the right thing is if you a pedestrian on a road with no footpad.

I realise that sense is not common to everyone but for most of us.

Thats it exactly, 'common sense' is often not as common as one might think!

I was only talking about cycle lanes on roads that are open to the road, i.e. no kind of barrier on it.

I see too often cyclists going the wrong way, possibly and probably as a short cut since they are too lazy to cross the road, but I think it is very dangerous, especially when the cycle path cuts across entrances to housing estates or other side roads. When I come up to a junction the last place I expect someone to be approaching at speed is to my left hand side against the flow of traffic!

There should be direction arrows painted in cycle paths for those who do not share the same 'common sense' approach of the majority.
Also I think some cyclists can be foreign students and perhaps the traffic rules/common sense are perhaps a little less organised or enforced in those countries. I dont blame them for being confused in a new country learning a different language but I do think there are a number of accidents waiting to happen.

Agent Smyth · 01-06-2015 7:45am

During May while cycling through the Glen of the Downs I've seen a cyclist more then once cycle on the hard shoulder against the traffic.
I can only guess he is too lazy to cross over at the flyovers.

I've noticed recently yield signs for cyclists been put at bus stops not all bus stops just the ones where the bus has to pull into the stop from the road, surely the bus should yield to the cyclist ??

cython · 01-06-2015 8:53am

Agent Smyth wrote: »

During May while cycling through the Glen of the Downs I've seen a cyclist more then once cycle on the hard shoulder against the traffic.
I can only guess he is too lazy to cross over at the flyovers.

I've noticed recently yield signs for cyclists been put at bus stops not all bus stops just the ones where the bus has to pull into the stop from the road, surely the bus should yield to the cyclist ??

Just one of the litany of major design flaws associated with the majority of "dedicated" cycle infrastructure in this country. Similar to the Phoenix Park cycle lanes (don't get me started on salmon cyclists in those!), whereby right of way is taken away from cyclists when crossing entrances on Chesterfield Avenue, whereas if they were on the road the traffic in the entrance must yield (e.g. https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.35285,-6.308661,3a,75y,259.16h,65.66t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sFEpVydqt0EYFefIUOWw89Q!2e0?hl=en). Now to be fair, a lot of drivers yield to cyclists if they see them, but having this official double standard just discourages cyclists from using lanes.

Cycle lanes? cycle against traffic flow?

Comments