Cycle lanes in Phoenix Park

Membrane · 11-10-2007 11:11am

niceonetom wrote:

would you (membrane) expect a wee tricyclist to continue to use the cycle lane after leaving the park? say down the quays?

I concede the point about nippers on trikes. But there comes a point where they move on to 2 wheels and move at speeds significantly beyond walking pace, at that stage they don't belong on the ped section anymore whilst still being far slower than sportive cyclists, and likely still quite erratic in their behaviour. These are the types that I encounter on the Clontarf - Sutton cycle path at weekends, often with a parent not on foot but on another bike. Yes parents should act as the eyes and ears for such youngsters, keep an eye out for other traffic and position themselves to shield their kids from other users and vice versa. Some do that, but many don't.

It is for us proficient cyclists to deal with potential dangers, regardless of the age of any other cycle path user involved. Kids are an easely identifiable risk factor, and they can safely be dealt with by adjusting our speed.

niceonetom · 11-10-2007 11:52am

Membrane wrote:

It is for us proficient cyclists to deal with potential dangers, regardless of the age of any other cycle path user involved. Kids are an easely identifiable risk factor, and they can safely be dealt with by adjusting our speed.

agreed. i'll even concede that rollerbladers may have a case for using the cycle-path (with consideration obviously), as they're travelling well beyond walking pace. it's really pedestrians that piss me off.

cyclopath2001 · 11-10-2007 6:10pm

niceonetom wrote: »

agreed. i'll even concede that rollerbladers may have a case for using the cycle-path (with consideration obviously),

Rollerbladers? Considerate? Not possible, they weave from side to side. They pay absolutely no attention to following traffic. They don't have lights. They've no more right to be on a cycle track than pedestrians do.

What part of 'cycle track' don't they understand?

niceonetom · 11-10-2007 8:11pm

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Rollerbladers? Considerate? Not possible, they weave from side to side. They pay absolutely no attention to following traffic. They don't have lights. They've no more right to be on a cycle track than pedestrians do.

What part of 'cycle track' don't they understand?

ok. ok.
it's really relative speed that was my main concern here, and on that front they do beat pedestrians. i suppose i was offering rollerbladers leeway in attempt to seem reasonable (i was in danger of seeming like a child hater :eek:), but you are, as ever, right.

two wheels good, eight wheels bad.

monument · 11-10-2007 9:06pm

One of the most counter-productive, while understandable, things in this is cyclists using the road... it nearly gives those walking an excuse.

While uses one on the main avenue a month or two ago while it was close to getting dark, I was cycling passed two pedestrians who asked me where's my light. They funnyly enoufe had no lights and were wearing dark clothing. I had at least a back light, when I wasn't expecting to be out in such dim light.

There's lots of people who run or walk on the track who are quick to get out of the way, and such not the real problem. It's the people who walk in pairs, or on their own in the middle, blocking the path so that you nearly have to stop.

I get a bit angry when I see people with children or dogs strolling along, the police should be stopping them and contacting the social services or the DSPCA.

daymobrew wrote: »

A few years ago I asked a Park Ranger about the issue. He said that pedestrians on the cycle paths was the biggest complaint from cyclists.

I was talking to two of the Rangers recently, they made a few points...

- When the cycle paths were installed they were first told to tell walkers to get off the cycle path.

- This was often followed with indifference or abuse.

- Walkers made complaints against such enforcement.

- A combo of the last two points lead to the stop of attempts of enforcement.

- One of the Rangers also claimed that it was not illegal to walk on the path, and was not against the park's By-Laws (as they have not been updated in ages.

Tánaiste and Minister for Finance ( Mr Cowen ) :

The Office of Public Works is aware that a number of pedestrians tend to use the cycle lanes in the Phoenix park despite the fact that the cycle lanes are clearly indicated both by bicycle symbols imprinted on them and a unique green colour which clearly distinguishes them from the separate black pedestrian paths. A number of initiatives have been introduced to promote greater public awareness.

In places, I'd disagree with how clear the distinctions are. There's a few ending points or road crossing points where it's not clear it's a cycle path.

In other places, I'd add in "can you not understand those symbols?" signs. Or, really, maybe paint in "NO WALKING ON THIS PATH"

Bunnyhopper · 11-10-2007 9:07pm

I live quite close to the Phoenix Park and cycle there regularly, so this has been an issue for me for quite a while. I got to the stage some time ago where I often just don't use the cycle paths on the main road because they're not safe. I once had a jogger play chicken with me - as in he was deliberately dodging over and back in front of me for a laugh. Hilarous - I'd have smacked into him only I didn't want to get blood on the RockShox (only kidding).

I emailed the OPW at the time and asked what they could do about the pedestrians on the cycle path. I also asked whether or not the cycle lanes had any legal status at all (Road Traffic Act or even Park bye-laws). The reply I got ignored the legal questions (as I expected). The relevant part of the response was:

"With regard to pedestrians on cycle routes, this issue is being examined at the moment. Our rangers will be patrolling the park on bicycles from the week after next and part of their role is to supervise the cycle paths. Hopefully this should have a positive impact on the pedestrians."

That email was sent to me on 4 July 2006.

I can't say I've noticed any improvement since (and I can't say I'm surprised).

cyclopath2001 · 11-10-2007 9:28pm

niceonetom wrote: »

i suppose i was offering rollerbladers leeway in attempt to seem reasonable

There is nothing unreasonable in asking people to obey the law.

But, before we go further, has anyone checked what kind of road signs are in use?

If they're not the legally defined RUS009 or RUS009a, then the debate about pedestrians or roller bladers in these alleged cycle tracks may be moot.

tenandtracer · 14-10-2007 2:51pm

How about campaigning to get the footpaths resurfaced with that lovely green tarmac - that's what has joggers, runners, bladers, tricylists, bicyclists, boulevardiers and pedestrians of all ages totally mesmerized.

P_1 · 14-10-2007 4:07pm

tenandtracer wrote: »

How about campaigning to get the footpaths resurfaced with that lovely green tarmac - that's what has joggers, runners, bladers, tricylists, bicyclists, boulevardiers and pedestrians of all ages totally mesmerized.

Thats probably the only thing that will solve this situation I think

SerialComplaint · 14-10-2007 8:32pm

I drove through the park today, which was extremely busy with all kinds of people enjoying the great weather. There was a huge queue of people waiting to get into the zoo around 3pm.

I'm assuming the cycle lane is the path nearer the road, though I couldn't see any markings from the car. There were certainly a fair quantity of pedestrians also on these lanes. I saw 3 seperate groups of OPW rangers on bikes, though I didn't see what happened (if anything) when they encountered pedestrians.

Dirk Gently · 14-10-2007 8:40pm

I hate that bit near the zoo, always families all over the track and you can't even shout at the cnuts because I'd feel guilty shouting at mammy and daddy infront of a small kid.

regarding rollerbladers, as much as I want to gut them when they're in my way I do feel some sympathy for them. It must be a pain in the ass trying to find somewhere to use their blades.

niceonetom · 14-10-2007 10:22pm

clown bag wrote: »

regarding rollerbladers, as much as I want to gut them when they're in my way I do feel some sympathy for them. It must be a pain in the ass trying to find somewhere to use their blades.

[JOKE]
Q: what's the hardest thing about rollerblading?

A: telling your parents you're gay.
[/JOKE]

and as for the idea of organising some sort of 'Action' to clear the lanes in the park, well i think that would quickly descend into a shouting match, possibly escalating into a punch-up :eek:. if you don't think so then have a look at what happened when the issue was raised in the athletics area. most cyclists have all the upper-body strength of a 6 year old so we'd probably lose too

.

Sean02 · 14-10-2007 10:41pm

Like Serial I drove down the "Chichester Ave". 2 day and also noticed that the cycle lane was very busy with cyclist and pedrestrians and roller blader's. As I said before I hate off road cycle lanes because of the dangers to both pedrestrians and cyclists. Then there's the problem of junctions, openings, bus stops and shelters and glass and debris on the vast majority of the rest.
In my opinion its far safer and sensibile to ignore cycle lane option in many cases.

Sean02 · 14-10-2007 10:59pm

Here's an interesting one for your comments Cyclopath "(7) No bicycle, tricycle, or other vehicle shall be ridden or driven at any time on or across any footpath in the Park." 1926 Bye Laws for Park. Has this Bye Law been abolished?. Also What is the Irish Road Trafic Act that says cyclists must use cycle lanes.

rubadub · 15-10-2007 12:18pm

monument wrote: »

I was talking to two of the Rangers recently, they made a few points...

- When the cycle paths were installed they were first told to tell walkers to get off the cycle path.

- This was often followed with indifference or abuse.

- Walkers made complaints against such enforcement.

- A combo of the last two points lead to the stop of attempts of enforcement.

- One of the Rangers also claimed that it was not illegal to walk on the path, and was not against the park's By-Laws (as they have not been updated in ages.

I can imagine abuse, but were walkers making actual offical/formal complaints about not being allowed on them? Wonder what the wording was like? That would be like me complaining to a garda about pedestrians on grafton street being in the way.- bizarre.

Even if it is not technically illegal, it is simple common sense not to walk on them.

I do like the idea of there being having signs with walkers and a big X on them. I once was thinking it would be an idea to paint a big "€1000 fine for walking on cycletrack". Should also have a big sign in the phoenix park "52pedestrians injuried walking on cycletracks since 2007"

(Aside: what happened to the other thread discussing people running on cycletracks?)

most cyclists have all the upper-body strength of a 6 year old so we'd probably lose too

Off with the quick release front wheel and you have a very good weapon in the forks.

daymobrew · 15-10-2007 2:00pm

rubadub wrote: »

(Aside: what happened to the other thread discussing people running on cycletracks?)

Deleted my a moderator (not me).

monument · 15-10-2007 2:25pm

rubadub wrote: »

walkers making actual offical/formal complaints about not being allowed on them?

That's what the ranger's were claiming.

cyclopath2001 · 15-10-2007 10:04pm

Sean02 wrote: »

Here's an interesting one for your comments Cyclopath "(7) No bicycle, tricycle, or other vehicle shall be ridden or driven at any time on or across any footpath in the Park." 1926 Bye Laws for Park. Has this Bye Law been abolished?. Also What is the Irish Road Trafic Act that says cyclists must use cycle lanes.

I don't know about that bye-law. It would not surprise me if the park was a mess of legal contradictions.

The compulsory use of cycle tracks is not contained in a Road Traffic Act. It is contained in a statutory instrument, no.182 of 1997.

Statutory instruments don't have to be debated in the Dáil.

Now, can someone say what, if any road sign, appears at the beginning of the alleged cycle tracks?

If it's not RUS 009 or RUS 009A, then there's nothing that can be said against the runners, walkers or joggers or motorists. We must instead ask why the authorities cannot follow their own laws.

Bunnyhopper · 18-10-2007 4:45pm

If RUS 009 and RUS 009A refer to the white-on-blue circular signs then, to the best of my recollection, they don't appear in the Park.

(Is there a link anywhere that lists all the road signs and markings with descriptions and/or images?)
[EDIT: found some of them in SI 181 of 1997]

There is a reference to cycle paths in the Roads Act, 1993 - section 68.
See here:
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1993/en/act/pub/0014/sec0068.html

And you'll find SI 182 of 1997 here:
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1997/en/si/0182.html

The Park's bye-laws you'll find here:
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1926/en/si/0006.html

Again, to the best of my recollection, that's the version of the Bye-Laws displayed on signs in the Park itself.

cyclopath2001 · 18-10-2007 5:43pm

Bunnyhopper wrote: »

If RUS 009 and RUS 009A refer to the white-on-blue circular signs then, to the best of my recollection, they don't appear in the Park.

SI274/1997 defines what and where cycle tracks are on public roads and footways. RUS009 is the white bike on blue background and RUS009a is a black bike on white background within a red circle. Both have the same use and meaning. To the best of my knowledge these are the only legally-defined road signs for the purpose of indicating a cycle track.

If the park is not using the legally defined signs and has not amended its bye-laws to use local alternatives (or to define what a cycle track is), then, the alleged cycle facilities are a 'free-for-all' and not suitable for serious cycling.

This regulation may be applicable to parking on the alleged cycle tracks:

(4) No vehicle shall remain stationary on any road in the Park except at such places thereon as the Commissioners shall authorise and shall specify in a notice exhibited at such places.

Unless you're travelling at less than 10kph, I'd recommend cycling on the roadways.

Dandelion6 · 18-10-2007 6:01pm

Well here's the Minister's reply to my follow up question:

The Office of Public Works has introduced a bicycle ranger unit in the Phoenix Park to patrol the cycle lanes and promote greater public awareness of these. In addition an updated map of the Phoenix Park will be published shortly, which will clearly indicate all footpaths and cycle lanes. The use of cycle lanes will be continually monitored.

I won't hold my breath :rolleyes:

GreeBo · 18-10-2007 6:23pm

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Rollerbladers? Considerate? Not possible, they weave from side to side. They pay absolutely no attention to following traffic. They don't have lights. They've no more right to be on a cycle track than pedestrians do.

What part of 'cycle track' don't they understand?

Well the weave from side to side is just that, a weave its not a zig-zig, they weave pretty much the same distance each time.

Rollerbladers then have no place to blade except a skate park.

cyclopath2001 · 18-10-2007 6:36pm

GreeBo wrote: »

Well the weave from side to side is just that, a weave its not a zig-zig, they weave pretty much the same distance each time..

Until you get a pair of them and one zigs while the other zags...you'd have to be an expert in wave-theory to figure out when to pass.

There's nothing (other than law-abiding joggers and pedestrians) to stop them using footpaths.

daymobrew · 19-10-2007 11:20am

Dandelion6 wrote: »

Well here's the Minister's reply to my follow up question:

The Office of Public Works has introduced a bicycle ranger unit in the Phoenix Park to patrol the cycle lanes and promote greater public awareness of these. In addition an updated map of the Phoenix Park will be published shortly, which will clearly indicate all footpaths and cycle lanes. The use of cycle lanes will be continually monitored.

I won't hold my breath :rolleyes:

I've seen these guys pass pedestrians on the cycle lanes and not say a word to them. :mad:

Victor · 20-10-2007 9:56pm

Sean02 wrote: »

Here's an interesting one for your comments Cyclopath "(7) No bicycle, tricycle, or other vehicle shall be ridden or driven at any time on or across any footpath in the Park." 1926 Bye Laws for Park. Has this Bye Law been abolished?. Also What is the Irish Road Trafic Act that says cyclists must use cycle lanes.

There have been calls for reform since at least the 1970s on various grounds, hasn't happened.

Be The Holy · 22-10-2007 3:45pm

As somone who uses the park cycle lanes on a regular basis, i can see both sides. It is truly annoying having to swerve for people but then my parents (in their 70's) walk in the cycle path for safety reasons. The park is not a safe place at any time of the day.

Anyhow, it occurred one day, that a cyclist shouted abuse at my parents for walking in the cycle path. Lets get some perspective here, it's a minor irritant, no more. It takes a big man to shout abuse at elderly people.

Ghost Rider · 22-10-2007 4:00pm

Of course abusiveness is unacceptable but, with all due respect, considering there are bikes clattering along the cycle path at 20-35kmph, I don't see how walking on it could be safer than walking on the footpath.

Be The Holy wrote: »

As somone who uses the park cycle lanes on a regular basis, i can see both sides. It is truly annoying having to swerve for people but then my parents (in their 70's) walk in the cycle path for safety reasons. The park is not a safe place at any time of the day.

Anyhow, it occurred one day, that a cyclist shouted abuse at my parents for walking in the cycle path. Lets get some perspective here, it's a minor irritant, no more. It takes a big man to shout abuse at elderly people.

rubadub · 22-10-2007 4:05pm

Be The Holy wrote: »

my parents (in their 70's) walk in the cycle path for safety reasons. The park is not a safe place at any time of the day. .

Walking in the path is unsafe, I am not sure which is more unsafe. If the park is really that bad I would prefer if my parents walked somewhere safer, and not on cycletracks

Be The Holy wrote: »

Lets get some perspective here, it's a minor irritant, no more.

It can be quite dangerous, a cyclist could swerve out and hit a "legitimate" pedestrian, -certainly not fair on the cyclist or "legitimate" pedestrian.

jaycummins · 22-10-2007 6:50pm

get over it. do you really want to spend a whole year just so people will get off the path. no matter what you do anyway, they will continue walking on it. just cycle straight by them and they'll get the message. and plus they cant complain if you cycle by them fast because they are the ones 'breaking the law'. just act like they're not there and soon enough they wont be there.
if there is no other place for them to walk then its just a matter of walking againts the flow of cyclists so they can see them and get out of their way.

skidpatches · 24-10-2007 3:15pm

jaycummins wrote: »

just cycle straight by them and they'll get the message. and plus they cant complain if you cycle by them fast because they are the ones 'breaking the law'. just act like they're not there and soon enough they wont be there.

another case of might thinking it's right, and bullying the lesser road user.

while we cyclists get all self righteous about our rights and complain about motorist intimidating and bullying cyclists, pedestrians have to put up with this attitude from us.

next time you're riding on the road because you (rightly) think that the cycle path is inconvenient or dangerous, imagine the pr1ck in the SUV using your words but replacing "cycle" with "drive".

Cycle lanes in Phoenix Park

Comments