ARTICLE: City cyclists get a rough deal

monument

Good article by Harry McGee in Weekend Review in the Irish Times yesterday. But I may be a bit biased with its somewhat prominent mention of the danger of your bike getting nicked, something I've experienced again all too recently.

Anyway, the article is City cyclists get a rough deal, and this is a key part to knowing if the Government are truly changing...

The Minister has promised to put cycling at the heart of his National Cycling Policy and of his sustainable transport plan - both are due to be published by the end of the year. Both will tell a lot about whether Dempsey's ambition of a 10 per cent modal share is realisable or a pipe dream.

cyclopath2001

"The Minister has promised to put cycling at the heart of his National Cycling Policy ......"

I wonder if this means that cycle 'facilities' will now be for the benefit of cyclists?

Podge_irl

Its a good article, though I feel he makes cycling out to be somewhat more dangerous than it actually is.

Many of the nastiest sections of road for cyclists are devoid of cycle lanes. There are no cycle lanes on most of the bridges. Nor are there any on large stretches of the north and south quays, where you take your life into your hands trying to squeeze in the slither of space between parked buses and speeding cars. Or along Pearse Street, where four lanes of traffic have been accommodated but cyclists have been provided with the steeply-cambered gutter and the drains.

I have issue with this bit as well, as he really shouldn't be squeezing into slithers of spaces, but rather taking a position in the middle of the lane - especially in the case of Pearse St where there are plenty of other lanes for the cars to use to pass you out if they so wish. Describing it the way he does is just going to put off those who don't cycle because its "too dangerous".

paddyb

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

I wonder if this means that cycle 'facilities' will now be for the benefit of cyclists?

i wouldnt hold my breath!

monument

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

I wonder if this means that cycle 'facilities' will now be for the benefit of cyclists?

It's the least we can hope for.

On the other hand putting cycling at the centre of the sustainable transport plan -- ie stuff like a real promotion of cycling, all one way street to be made cycling both ways, more bike parking, and allowing bikes on the Dart, Commuter trains, the metro, and even the Luas off peak -- would be amazing. But at the moment it's all dreamland.

Podge_irl wrote: »

Its a good article, though I feel he makes cycling out to be somewhat more dangerous than it actually is...

I have issue with this bit as well, as he really shouldn't be squeezing into slithers of spaces, but rather taking a position in the middle of the lane - especially in the case of Pearse St where there are plenty of other lanes for the cars to use to pass you out if they so wish. Describing it the way he does is just going to put off those who don't cycle because its "too dangerous".

I'd agree with you on how he makes cycling look somewhat more dangerous than it is in general, but he has a point about wide streets like Pearse St -- at busy times cyclists have the choice of staying behind cars in gridlock or going into "gutter and the drains", or at less busy times they can assert their position or go into the "gutter and the drains". And asserting your position can open your self to abuse from drives...

Anyway, none of these current ways are going to help convince the wider public to pick up cycling.

Húrin

Another well-thought out phrase

Dublin will need to do more than a modest public bike scheme and a few cycle lanes to get commuters on to the saddle and off the roads

closet motorist? where are we supposed to cycle?

Fair play though he does point out how Ireland's affluenced has encouraged the docile majority to think there is no alternative to the car.

monument

Easly fixed by changing the word 'commuters' to 'moterists' (and, who knows, it may have been changed the other way somewhere between McGee submitting it and the paper running of the presses).

cyclopath2001

monument wrote: »

On the other hand putting cycling at the centre of the sustainable transport plan -- ie stuff like a real promotion of cycling, all one way street to be made cycling both ways, more bike parking, and allowing bikes on the Dart, Commuter trains, the metro, and even the Luas off peak -- would be amazing. But at the moment it's all dreamland.

We do have a contra-flow in Andrew street, but cars are allowed park and drive down the cycle track in the opposite direction to cyclists, who then have nowhere to go. And we also have the laws which limit cycle tracks to daylight hours and which even then permit motorists to use them as they please. We need to get the laws right by undoing the damage done by the PDs back in 1998 when they strangled pro-cycling legislation at birth.

Next, bicycle parking has to be taken seriously, indeed it's possibly a more important need than 'cycle tracks'.

unionman

The Minister has promised to put cycling at the heart of his National Cycling Policy

What the f*** else would you put 'at the heart of a national cycling policy'?

Hopefully the economy is still at the heart of the government's economic policy.

monument

unionman wrote: »

What the f*** else would you put 'at the heart of a national cycling policy'?

He wrote: The Minister has promised to put cycling at the heart of his National Cycling Policy and of his sustainable transport plan... but currently cycle lanes aren't just for cyclists, so...

unionman wrote: »

Hopefully the economy is still at the heart of the government's economic policy.

The question here is "to who's benefit?"

unionman

monument wrote: »

He wrote: The Minister has promised to put cycling at the heart of his National Cycling Policy and of his sustainable transport plan... but currently cycle lanes aren't just for cyclists, so...

Yeah, I know, wilfully selective editing on my part, but it was too silly to let it pass without a withering shake of the head. Surely it would have made more sense to say "The Minister has promised to put his National Cycling Policy at the heart of his sustainable transport plan."

The question here is "to who's benefit?"

Well, hopefully everybody, but that remains to be seen.

DirkVoodoo

Well, here's hoping we get some tangible developments from this.

If they can just sort out this damned wind we will be sorted!

Slight tangent here, but I was just remembering heading out on the saturday spin, I generally stick to the bus lane on my road bike. The only time I got beeped was ironically by a young lad using the bus lane as his own personal "fast lane". Changing attitudes in this country towards cyclists will be hard i imagine.

cyclopath2001

From the Department of Transport's PR on Velocity 2005

Minister Callely spoke of the commitment of the Government to the development of cycling in Ireland. He pointed out that in the Programme for Government a commitment had been give to expand "... the national network of cycleways in order to encourage more people to cycle and to promote cycling as a safe and healthy mode of travel". The Department of Transport is co-operating with Local Authorities to provide cycling facilities in Dublin and in other cities throughout the country. In the case of Dublin, total investment in cycling facilities and associated studies over the past decade has reached nearly €30 million.

Given the state of cycling in Dublin, I think the bulk of the alleged €30m must have been spent on 'associated studies'.

rubadub

Húrin wrote: »

Fair play though he does point out how Ireland's affluenced has encouraged the docile majority to think there is no alternative to the car.

Yes, while cycling this morning, even in the wind & cold I was thinking that if somebody offered me a ferrari, with all expenses paid, but only to commute in, I would still cycle.