East Link Toll Bridge

11.3 SECONDS

I noticed to-day that a sign now requests cyclists to dismount and walk across the Eastlink bridge ?

The sign is a red circular one with a bicycle in the centre of it with a red diagonal stripe across it.

Is this legal ? Alternatively, what is required to give the sign force of law ?

Capt'n Midnight

Does this apply to the footpath or to both footpath and road ?

Wishbone Ash

11.3 SECONDS wrote:

I noticed to-day that a sign now requests cyclists to dismount and walk across the Eastlink bridge ?
Is this legal ? Alternatively, what is required to give the sign force of law ?

AFAIK the Eastlink Bridge is private property and therefore, they can impose restrictions on cyclists if they wish. (I'm open to correction on this).

The lads/ladies in the cycling forum may know more.

11.3 SECONDS

Capt'n Midnight wrote:

Does this apply to the footpath or to both footpath and road ?

Sorry, I should have made that clearer. You are now supposed to dismount and walk across on the footpath. This aplies in both directions.


Good point Wishbone.

MODERATOR you might like to shift this to the cyclists or even to the motor heads (as they seem to know a lot of road traffic law) if you think it best.

Bill McH

Wishbone Ash wrote:

AFAIK the Eastlink Bridge is private property and therefore, they can impose restrictions on cyclists if they wish. (I'm open to correction on this).

The lads/ladies in the cycling forum may know more.

It's an interesting one, this.

It might be worth having a look at the mumbo jumbo in the Local Government (Toll Roads) Act, 1979. This is available at www.irishstatutebook.ie and is fairly short.

It looks to me like the local authority (DCC) have the say on what classes of vehicles are able to use the road, what tolls they would pay, etc. NTR would have to apply to the local authority for a change in the toll or a change in the classes of vehicles who use the road. The thing may be complicated by the fact that bicycles are a class of vehicles which did not have to pay a toll.

robfitz

The Local Government (Toll Roads) Act, 1979 was repealed in 1994, Roads Act, 1993 Part V. Though existing bye-laws based on the 1979 act may still be in force.

In my opinion from reading as many of the laws as possible, cyclists are only excluded from cycling on a road when there is an off roadway cycle track and when the road is a motorway.

Bill McH

robfitz wrote:

The Local Government (Toll Roads) Act, 1979 was repealed in 1994, Roads Act, 1993 Part V. Though existing bye-laws based on the 1979 act may still be in force.

My mistake.

In my opinion from reading as many of the laws as possible, cyclists are only excluded from cycling on a road when there is an off roadway cycle track and when the road is a motorway.

That seems a sensible way to do things.

Though I'm a bit torn on this one. On the one hand it has always been useful being able to cycle across the East Link, and cyclists don't have to take the long southside access route that the cars do, given the presence of the stile beside the rowing club in Ringsend. On the other hand, the bridge is narrow and it has never been a pleasant experience cycling across it, particularly if you're travelling north-south across the bridge and trying to access the stile.

Perhaps the whole thing is intended to take account of an increase in toll bridge traffic after the opening of the port tunnel?

loyatemu

when I used to cycle across it I generally used the footpath - naughty I know, but there's very little pedestrian traffic and the amount of HGVs in that area make the road very scarey.

road_high

Maybe the bike wheels were getting stuck in the ruts on the bridge and there fore dangerous to cycle over.Kinda like the LUAS tracks.

अधिनायक

NTR got 30 years of tolls in exchange for building this skinny bridge in 1984. In 2015, the bridge reverts to the state. Will NTR have its agreement extended in exchange for making the bridge wider as happened on the M50 Westlink?