Cyclists NOT using cycle lanes.

Saruman

I have noticed this recently.. cyclists on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane! Im not even talking about cycle lane on the road! Im talking about a dedicated cycle lane running alongside a pedestrian path. Prime example is Phoenix park. Another is the Ballycoolin area. There is one heading towards Kilshane cross from the airport too.. nice hedge blocking you off from the road.. still cyclists on the road??

Why are they complaining about not enough cycle lanes etc in this country when they refuse to actually use them when they are there?

rob1891

do you care or do you just want to moan?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/searchbt.php?search=cycle+lanes&order=0&user=&scope=4&cat=1&frm=-1

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/searchbt.php?search=cycle+lane+phoenix&order=0&user=&scope=4&cat=1&frm=-1

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2054969927&referrerid=59211&highlight=cycle+lane+phoenix

etc.

egan007

Moron - Roads are for bikes too.
I'm a driver.

Man i hate morons.

tunney

Saruman wrote:

Why are they complaining about not enough cycle lanes etc in this country when they refuse to actually use them when they are there?

Well if the cycle lanes are poorly thought out and implemented they put the cyclists in danger. I refuse to use 8 out of 10 cycle lanes on safety grounds.

csm

i'm not familiar with the lanes you are talking about but i remember the one running on the path along the stillorgan dual carriageway went unused. this was because if you came to a junction without lights (there are a couple of examples of small roads leaving premises but i can't think where they are now, been a while) you had to give way to traffic coming from the minor road if you were cycling on the path, but not if you were cycling on the road.

also there is a lane which veers just off templeogue road which i never use because you can't turn right off it (coming from town) and that's where i live

some lanes just aren't thought out very well

i71jskz5xu42pb

Saruman wrote:

I have noticed this recently.. cyclists on the road when there is a perfectly good cycle lane! Im not even talking about cycle lane on the road! Im talking about a dedicated cycle lane running alongside a pedestrian path. Prime example is Phoenix park. Another is the Ballycoolin area. There is one heading towards Kilshane cross from the airport too.. nice hedge blocking you off from the road.. still cyclists on the road??

Why are they complaining about not enough cycle lanes etc in this country when they refuse to actually use them when they are there?

There's an off road cycle lane on the drumcondra road (between clonliffe and botanic roads). If you cycle on the road (heading north) you have right of way over all of the side roads that join the drumcondra road. If you cycle on the cycle path you

• need to slow down to yield to every single side road (there are about 4 or 5)
• share with pedestrians

So, no I generally don't use it and yes I will continue to complain about the lack of suitable cycle lanes.

If you have a problem with that I suggest you lobby your local TD and/or councillor for the provision of suitable cycle lanes.



PS anybody see the program about Portland on the TV last night - really interesting cycle/public transport friendly city.

Mucco

Saruman wrote:

Why are they complaining about not enough cycle lanes etc in this country when they refuse to actually use them when they are there?

Surely a more appropriate question is 'Why are they refusing to use the cycle lanes that are there?'
These links provide some answers:
http://www.cyclecraft.co.uk/digest/research.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bike_path#The_safety_of_segregated_cycle_facilities

M

Saruman

egan007 wrote:

Moron - Roads are for bikes too.
I'm a driver.

Man i hate morons.

Im assuming i am being called a moron here? Can i ask why? I mean all i did was post a thread wondering why it is that what look to me like perfectly good cycle lanes are not being used by cyclists... how in the name of God is that a moronic question?

I will not stoop to your level and call you any names beginning with "M"

i71jskz5xu42pb

Saruman wrote:

Im assuming i am being called a moron here? Can i ask why?

No good reason - it's a reasonable question with reasonable explanations above.
Cyclists just have a short fuse with motorists (and vice versa I'd say) when it comes to anything (even a question) as to who has a right to the road

Morgan

Saruman wrote:

why it is that what look to me like perfectly good cycle lanes are not being used by cyclists...

Fair enough question, however they're not perfectly good - they're generally pretty bad to very bad. You really have to experience riding on them to appreciate it.

Saruman

Well i have actually... the ones in the phoenix park at least. I have not used any of the others i pointed out but i have to ask what is a GOOD cycle lane if not one that keeps a cyclist safe from cars?

Cabaal

Saruman wrote:

Well i have actually... the ones in the phoenix park at least. I have not used any of the others i pointed out but i have to ask what is a GOOD cycle lane if not one that keeps a cyclist safe from cars?

If you checked out the other threads here you'd see its a common problem that people walk in the cycle lanes which makes them far from safe unfortunately....phoenix included

ruprect

If there was a car lane and truck lane and the car lane was littered with oblivious pedestrians I would tend to drive in the truck lane.
The cyclelanes are also terrible, glass and kerbs, I cycled on them on a racer and now never question why people on racers stick to the roads. In another thread I was asking about which hybrid to get, should be sturdy enough but people with them were saying they would not cycle on dublin cyclelanes since they would be destroyed.

kincsem

I try to use cycle lanes but will use the road

1. before 7am if there is little traffic (going out from Dublin)
2. if the cycle lane is an abomination like the stretch just past Foxrock church, where there is a one inch drop and a one inch rise at every house entrance. In a few hundred yards you get hammered X 12 houses.

Saruman

Grand.. now i know there are valid reasons for not using them. Simple question with a simple answer no need for personal abuse and name calling by some posters.

johnnyrotten

Whats the excuse for Cyclists not using traffic lights?
Or should I say ignoring traffic lights

Cabaal

johnnyrotten wrote:

Whats the excuse for Cyclists not using traffic lights?
Or should I say ignoring traffic lights

There is none, I see it every day as I cycle home muppets going through lights.

I think you'll find nobody here will defend those muppets!
There about as smart as the ****wits that drive through red lights!
:mad:

cyclopath2001

johnnyrotten wrote:

Whats the excuse for Cyclists not using traffic lights?
Or should I say ignoring traffic lights

For those cyclists I'd say:

1: Same excuse as motorists who ignore traffic lights
2: The traffic lights are the type that only change for motorists.

But mostly it's '1'.

Civilian_Target

johnnyrotten wrote:

Whats the excuse for Cyclists not using traffic lights?
Or should I say ignoring traffic lights

Usually, none.
Ocassionally, like at the top of my estate, there are induction triggered traffic lights which my bike won't trigger (they'll stay red forever until a car shows up) so if I know the junction and I know it's safe, I'll break them.

Breaking the lights at major junctions is just asking to become a permenant (stationary) road feature!

ruprect

cyclopath2001 wrote:

1: Same excuse as motorists who ignore traffic lights
.

And pedestrians, by far the worst offenders

milod

ruprect wrote:

And pedestrians, by far the worst offenders

Agree! 4 serious tumbles in 6 years, 3 of which involved jaywalking pedestrians :mad:

jman0

I don't know about that.
There is one red light i will break every chance i get.
It's a multi-lane roundabout with lights letting cars on and off it.
Cars prefer to race around it however and the only safe way for me to get to teh 2nd exit is to get a head start on the cars queued behind me at the light.
Therefore i wait til there's suitable gap and enter the roundabout while the light is red.
I'll do it everytime, it's the only safest thing to do.
If I let the light turn green before i enter the roundabout, the cars behind catch up quickly and perform dangerous moves: overtake me on the right and still take the 1st exit (there are 2 lanes on all exits).
I've had enough close calls from inconsiderate motorists.

GlennaMaddy

Can't find much info on cycle lanes in the rules of the road, can any body answer these questions

1. Are cyclists obliged to use a cycle lane if it is provided
2. Can motorists drive on the cyclelanes that 'share' the road

Morgan

GlennaMaddy wrote:

Are cyclists obliged to use a cycle lane if it is provided

Yes, as long as it has the statutory signs and road markings (which many don't). DCC are campaigning to change this rule.

GlennaMaddy wrote:

2. Can motorists drive on the cyclelanes that 'share' the road

If it has a broken white line to the side - yes.

blorg

One of the problems of choosing not to use the cycle path is that a small minority of drivers feel they have the automatic right to try to kill you. Happened to me just this lunchtime.

Drapper

Saruman wrote:

Well i have actually... the ones in the phoenix park at least. I have not used any of the others i pointed out but i have to ask what is a GOOD cycle lane if not one that keeps a cyclist safe from cars?

MAn most of the cycle lanes are full of pedestrian in the PArk ! take the park twice a day and have given up on them!!

BY the WAy ROads are for Bikes Cars tractors buses...................... ! Cycle lanes are optional ;-) and can be more dangerous than on the road! i.e.

GRannys, Wanders, ipod arm waving BOP girls and Nisan Primera drivers!!

i71jskz5xu42pb

Drapper wrote:

Cycle lanes are optional ;-)

Stricly speaking I don't think you are correct here
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=51885794&postcount=38

cyclopath2001

GlennaMaddy wrote:

Can't find much info on cycle lanes in the rules of the road, can any body answer these questions

The rules are presently only available in a statutory instrument.

The new draft of the Rules of the Road attempts to cover this but gets it wrong.

GlennaMaddy wrote:

1. Are cyclists obliged to use a cycle lane if it is provided

Yes mostly, that is if they lane complies with the legal requirements for signage and surface markings (refer to the statutory instruments for details).

There are some exceptions if it's got a broken line to the right, in which case you can move outside: A>If turning right and you've indicated. B>If overtaking a legally parked car. These are the only provided exceptions. Absurdly, you may be committing an offence if you try to overtake an illegally parked car.

GlennaMaddy wrote:

2. Can motorists drive on the cyclelanes that 'share' the road

For lanes with continuous white lines, mostly no. Yes if bounded by a broken white line - this change was introduced by the PDs in 1998 to encourage greater competition on the roads.

Drapper

PaschalNee wrote:

Stricly speaking I don't think you are correct here
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=51885794&postcount=38

em buddy how do I shift the walkers on the cycle paths ? read the law out as I pass?

daymobrew

GlennaMaddy wrote:

1. Are cyclists obliged to use a cycle lane if it is provided
2. Can motorists drive on the cyclelanes that 'share' the road

Any volunteers to sticky the answers to these questions. They've come up multiple times in the last few days.

Idleater

Drapper wrote:

em buddy how do I shift the walkers on the cycle paths ? read the law out as I pass?

Drapper, I think we are on a lost cause here. Most of the car driving public have no concept of what it is like to take a bike to the roads these days.

Helas I don't cycle as much as I used (or should) but my personal argument against me using cycle lanes was primarily that my average speed on a road bike on a typical journey into town would be 20kmph. On a Sunday spin the speed averages more. I have been involved in three incidents with pedestrians (directly) and they have been exceptionally lucky not to have been injured more than they were.

A bicycle is a dangerous pointy weapon. Cycling down a cycle path (next to a foot path) is extremely dangerous, and to illustrate this, I would ask any car driver how "safe" they would consider it to drive down a footpath at 25-30 kmph.

To be honest, I have been told more times to get off the footpath than to get onto the cyclepath.

I just used to cycle in the bus lane, and move out into the traffic lane to allow the busses and taxi's by. When there was no buslane I'd cycle 1m -1.5m minimun out from the edge of the road. Car drivers see you out there, they give out but they dont hit you.

L.

blorg

Drapper wrote:

em buddy how do I shift the walkers on the cycle paths ? read the law out as I pass?

You need a bell, albeit a loud one. I actually got one specifically once I started cycling out the Howth cycle lane. Was not loud enough. Alternatively I tend to shout "overtaking watch out" as loud as I can. Generally the Howth lane is wide enough that you can manage if nobody is coming in the opposite direction, obviously this doesn't work with the 1m wide cycle lanes. I am always careful with pedestrians/children/joggers/rollerbladers in the cycle lane, try to maintain speed but always give warning and hand on brakes ready to stop.

RainyDay

blorg wrote:

Alternatively I tend to shout "overtaking watch out" as loud as I can. Generally the Howth lane is wide enough that you can manage if nobody is coming in the opposite direction, obviously this doesn't work with the 1m wide cycle lanes. I am always careful with pedestrians/children/joggers/rollerbladers in the cycle lane, try to maintain speed but always give warning and hand on brakes ready to stop.

I find that waiting until you are about 2 inches from their ear before shouting the warning is much more effective. They won't walk in that spot again.

Drapper

RainyDay wrote:

I find that waiting until you are about 2 inches from their ear before shouting the warning is much more effective. They won't walk in that spot again.

lmao! thats the way to do it ! :D

Morgan

cyclopath2001 wrote:

For lanes with continuous white lines, mostly no. Yes if bounded by a broken white line - this change was introduced by the PDs in 1998 to encourage greater competition on the roads.

janullrich

As per previous thread I cycle on the road in the Phoenix Park and nobody bothers me. I have had little problems or crashes with motorists in the past. As for traffic lights it is down to common sense. If there is no car or pedestrian in the area then go on ahead. I have never had problems before though I do see bikes comitting kamikaze almost going past a red light when the car has right of way. The car has to stop but was in the right. That is certainly wrong. I am a motorist as well but at the end of the day it is all about common sense.

blorg

RainyDay wrote:

I find that waiting until you are about 2 inches from their ear before shouting the warning is much more effective. They won't walk in that spot again.

I used to be like this but honestly these days I am more considerate, I only shout that for their own safety and wave when they move. Point is, if you just paint a cycle path on a footpath you _will_ get pedestrians, and "shared use" paths are often a bit of a joke (although I am fond of the one out to Howth.)

Having said all that having been to Amsterdam I understand the consequences of walking on the cycle tracks!

Civilian_Target

Ding ding *OW*:)

garrath

A cyclist in England was convicted for holding up traffic by cycling on the road when a cycle lane was made available:
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/green/story/0,,1853536,00.html
This sets a pretty ugly precedent if it stands. In England, there is no mandatory use of the cycle lane law, as there is here (if I'm not mistaken). There is apparently a new highway code coming out over there which had this mandatory policy in a previous draft.

I think most people would be happy to use cycle lanes if

1. they were thought out properly. No abrupt stops at the end where the cyclist has to merge into traffic, or only put them on roads where there are few side roads.
2. they are well maintained. Many are covered in glass or debris from the road which can make things a bit precarious.
3. pedestrians actually respected the cycle lane.

Drapper

1. pedestrians actually respected the cycle lane.

this I think is the main problem !! :p

Trojan

I avoid 2 cycle lanes on my route south from Fairview to town.

1) up the North Strand to the canal - it's bumpy, always has pedestrians in it, and it's hard to re-merge to traffic at the top

2) immediately after the canal there is a really dodgy cycle lane which has these wonderful features:

- it's downhill, so cyclists are moving fast
- it crosses 3 (count 'em!) road or estate entrances at which a cyclist must yield
- it is very busy with pedestrians, and finally,
- it has several busy bus stops, and get this, the disembarked passengers must cross the cycle lane to get to the pedestrian side, but that's not an issue, because they don't realise that there is a cycle lane there...
- again, it's dangerous to merge with traffic at the end.

What the government calls "cycle paths" in this country are a sham, these are ill-thought out, dangerous, and unsuitable. I'll stick to the road, thanks.

blorg

garrath wrote:

A cyclist in England was convicted for holding up traffic by cycling on the road when a cycle lane was made available:
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/green/story/0,,1853536,00.html
This sets a pretty ugly precedent if it stands.

It's outrageous all right. The CTC/CDF have apparently already raised over £8,000 from cyclists to help pay for an appeal. This was the same judge that acquitted an off-duty policeman for driving at 159mph without lights/siren on a public road, on the argument he was "familiarising himself with his vehicle." The judge praised him as the "creme de la creme" of police drivers. So I think you can see where this particular judge is coming from (that particular case was appealed by the CPS and is due for a retrial.)

cyclopath2001

Trojan wrote:

I avoid 2 cycle lanes on my route south from Fairview to town.

1) up the North Strand to the canal - it's bumpy, always has pedestrians in it, and it's hard to re-merge to traffic at the top

2) immediately after the canal there is a really dodgy cycle lane which has these wonderful features:

Neither of these so-called cycle lanes are legal.

1-Has an unlawful 'cyclist & pedestrians' sign and has no surface markings.

2-Has surface markings but the RUS009 sign was taken down by the city council has not been replaced.

You use both at your own risk & may be breaking the law by doing so.

It's only lawful (and compulsory) to cycle on a path which has the legally defined signs and surface markings.

garrath

cyclopath2001 wrote:

Neither of these so-called cycle lanes are legal.

1-Has an unlawful 'cyclist & pedestrians' sign and has no surface markings.

2-Has surface markings but the RUS009 sign was taken down by the city council has not been replaced.

You use both at your own risk & may be breaking the law by doing so.

It's only lawful (and compulsory) to cycle on a path which has the legally defined signs and surface markings.

Do you mind me asking where I can find this information(on cycle path signage etc)? I'm quite interested in learning a bit more about it.

cyclopath2001

garrath wrote:

Do you mind me asking where I can find this information(on cycle path signage etc)? I'm quite interested in learning a bit more about it.

It's not in the current 'Rules of the Road' and they've got it wrong in the new draft.

You need to read the following statutory instruments:

Signs:
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/ZZSI181Y1997.html

Mandatory use, parking and traffic regs:
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/ZZSI182Y1997.html
and amended by:
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/ZZSI274Y1998.htm

Bob the Builder

tunney wrote:

Well if the cycle lanes are poorly thought out and implemented they put the cyclists in danger. I refuse to use 8 out of 10 cycle lanes on safety grounds.

I agree, and racing bikes have very delicate tyres. One chip, or one pot hole can cost a rider up to €400 for a new wheel

garrath

cyclopath2001 wrote:

It's not in the current 'Rules of the Road' and they've got it wrong in the new draft.

You need to read the following statutory instruments:

Signs:
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/ZZSI181Y1997.html

Mandatory use, parking and traffic regs:
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/ZZSI182Y1997.html
and amended by:
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/ZZSI274Y1998.htm

Thanks cyclopath!

Bob the Builder

Trojan wrote:

I avoid 2 cycle lanes on my route south from Fairview to town.

1) up the North Strand to the canal - it's bumpy, always has pedestrians in it, and it's hard to re-merge to traffic at the top

2) immediately after the canal there is a really dodgy cycle lane which has these wonderful features:

- it's downhill, so cyclists are moving fast
- it crosses 3 (count 'em!) road or estate entrances at which a cyclist must yield
- it is very busy with pedestrians, and finally,
- it has several busy bus stops, and get this, the disembarked passengers must cross the cycle lane to get to the pedestrian side, but that's not an issue, because they don't realise that there is a cycle lane there...
- again, it's dangerous to merge with traffic at the end.

What the government calls "cycle paths" in this country are a sham, these are ill-thought out, dangerous, and unsuitable. I'll stick to the road, thanks.

Amen, I would think hard of walking on those cycle paths

rubadub

cyclopath2001 wrote:

It's not in the current 'Rules of the Road' and they've got it wrong in the new draft.

You need to read the following statutory instruments:

Signs:
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/ZZSI181Y1997.html

Mandatory use, parking and traffic regs:
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/ZZSI182Y1997.html
and amended by:
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/ZZSI274Y1998.htm

On the stretch from whites cross to foxrock church on the N11 there is a sign saying cycle track. Then there is only one line along the path and then the kerb (should there be 2 lines?). But this line is only on about 1/3 of the track, worn away in parts and no evidence of any line on other other parts. What is the story there? are you legally supposed to be going up and down from road to cycle track?