Documenting Ireland's cycle lanes

BostonB

That park lane is two way, and it spits you out into the traffic with no space to merge into lane/traffic. Theres also a curb on the other exit from the cycle lane while not massive gives you a fair jolt. Theres usually walkers/joggers using it too.

It makes vastly more sense to be on road before the roundabout, taking up the whole lane if taking the 2nd exit for example. Many serious cyclists do stay on the road. But, very few stick to the limits in the park, its more like 50/60 kmph, theres parking all along it and its perfect for getting doored. The surface is terrible in parts, like massive potholes. Which means you'd need to be very far out for it to make sense. whereas the cycle lane surface is pretty good.

The on/off points of the cycle lanes are just woeful. Everywhere in the park.

blues2

i think a good idea would be to set up a google map of all routes - something similar to what garda.ie did recently with speed camera locations. i would start it except i have only ever put points of interest but i guess it cant be too hard to do.

BostonB

tomasrojo wrote: »

......So, it's not quite as trivial as saying that bad infrastructure is bad.

My point was much more than that.

Let me put it this way. How can a cycle lane that spits the inexperienced cyclist into the middle of a busy junction or roundabout, have any hope of making them feel safe, and encourage them to repeat the experience. It simply can't.

So my point really is, for a cycle lane to make people feel safe. it has to be designed properly. Otherwise, it fails at making cyclists feel safe. Thats before you even get to discussing is it actually safer or not.

monument

davearthurs wrote: »

They are currently spending a fortune on a cycle lane on the canal that will rarely be used and was never in fact needed.

What is needed is safe routes into and around the centre not these sideline routes that go nowhere and serve no-one. and are on spacious roads with no car traffic anyway.

This route is around the centre. The route will go around the canal from the Southside towards the Docklands and into the Northside (even if there are problems with a bridge and getting planning because of local opposition). It's part of the canals strategy and the Sutton to Sandycove route (now apparently Bray to Balbriggan). It's a work in progress still and the outer part of the Grand Canals route has crazy gates on it. It goes a few places and in the longer term it'll go further.

We still have to see how junctions are treated or what kind of pelican lights sequence there will be, but it has good potential [I last said that about the section with the gates ].

This is how it actually look with a kerb:

davearthurs wrote: »

They are even unable to rule on simple routes that involve next to no building but are among some of the most heavily used routes in the City - for example around Stephen's Green, inabilty to cycle to Rathmines directly (by Bleeding Horse Pub) without going circuitous routes, danger of Westmoreland street route ignored etc.,

The city council are also looking at contra flow cycle lanes to solve that and other such problems around the city. It likely depends on national funding.

BostonB wrote: »

That park lane is two way, and it spits you out into the traffic with no space to merge into lane/traffic.

Agree with your other point but it's not designed to be a two-way cycle lane (forget use and poorly / wrongly painted markings).

BostonB

Be good to have have a short clip of how to navigate (on a bike) safely specific junctions in the city, and show the clip between the news and the weather.

Then a few "my cycling commute" films to suggest easy routes around the city on a bike. All the major suburb centers to the city center. Show them as a 3 mins clip regularly on the TV.

Like the Green Cross Code ads or something.

BostonB

monument wrote: »

....Agree with your other point but it's not designed to be a two-way cycle lane....

Where officially does it indicate that?

monument

BostonB wrote: »

Where officially does it indicate that?

Cycle lane markings facing in the directions of normal traffic lanes.



Yes, there are 'stop' markings etc in both directions in places, but these are likely in an attempt to bring some order to cyclists going in both directions.

monument

Only found this or really noticed it recently after starting to do some work in the Docklands.... it's like a strange experiment which went wrong, was allowed to be chopped in bits and fall into disrepair and never cleaned of glass. What I mean by experiment is that it looks closer to Dutch / Danish cycle lanes then I've seen elsewhere in Dublin...

This is the principle -- footpath, cycle lane, and motoring lanes all at different levels:



This looks like it was done post original design? Ends without ramps to make way for bus parking:



And un-policed bus parking is a common feature on the other side of the road:

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5001/5227592744_24d0dac748.jpg

The endings are poor too. Lane endings in a dangerous and unhelpful place at a t-junction:



And at 90 degrees before the junction at the other end:



And a big dip here (not very well pictured) at this gate:



As well as glass all around, there's also poorly maintained surfaces on a few sections:

BostonB

monument wrote: »

Cycle lane markings facing in the directions of normal traffic lanes....

Is that a legal marking? or to a specific standard or something?

monument

BostonB wrote: »

Is that a legal marking? or to a specific standard or something?

It is a legal marking... it's one of the two standard cycle lane markings in the legislation which covers cycle lanes (the other is the cycle lane signs on a poll). Although what it means on private lands owned by the OPW is another thing.

tomasrojo

BostonB wrote: »

My point was much more than that.

Let me put it this way. How can a cycle lane that spits the inexperienced cyclist into the middle of a busy junction or roundabout, have any hope of making them feel safe, and encourage them to repeat the experience. It simply can't.

So my point really is, for a cycle lane to make people feel safe. it has to be designed properly. Otherwise, it fails at making cyclists feel safe. Thats before you even get to discussing is it actually safer or not.

Yes, that's really the worst of both worlds. Narrow on-road cycle lanes also deter novice cyclists, as they implicitly encourage close passes by motorists.

tomasrojo

monument wrote: »

Only found this or really noticed it recently after starting to do some work in the Docklands.... it's like a strange experiment which went wrong, was allowed to be chopped in bits and fall into disrepair and never cleaned of glass. What I mean by experiment is that it looks closer to Dutch / Danish cycle lanes then I've seen elsewhere in Dublin...

This is the principle -- footpath, cycle lane, and motoring lanes all at different levels:

@monument, where is that cycle lane?

monument

tomasrojo wrote: »

@monument, where is that cycle lane?

Sorry, forgot to say and link -- it's Lower Sheriff St -- Should be mapped here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/cianginty/sets/72157625516565890/

davearthurs

This route is around the centre. The route will go around the canal from the Southside towards the Docklands and into the Northside (even if there are problems with a bridge and getting planning because of local opposition). It's part of the canals strategy and the Sutton to Sandycove route (now apparently Bray to Balbriggan). It's a work in progress still and the outer part of the Grand Canals route has crazy gates on it. It goes a few places and in the longer term it'll go further.

But the point is there is no great need for such a route at all.
There has always been minimal car traffic and wide enough roads on the inside canal roads. It is clearly for PR reasons only.

I just do not understand why they don't prioritize the routes that are actually heavily in need and in use, and get them sorted out first. i.e. routes into and around the city center.

The idea that a main arterial road in the center of the city - Westmoreland Street - that divides the North from South and is the main cycling route used by hundreds of cyclists daily should be allowed to remain so dangerous with 4/5 one way lanes of freewheeling (dangerous) buses and cars and NO cycle lane is just incredible.

The city council are also looking at contra flow cycle lanes to solve that and other such problems around the city.

They have been saying that for over 10 years, so I wouldn't hold my breath.
But the idea that they would force bike traffic that needs to get to Rathmines/Ranelagh to run directly alongside a Luas line (beside the POD on Harcourt St) on a very tight two lane road with no space for manouever is again amazing. Priorities and safety just seem to be out the window as per usual.

Doctor Bob

The Phoenix Park lanes are bi-directional.

Roads in the Park are not public roads; they are private roads in the stewardship of the OPW and, as such, it can do what it damn well likes with road markings. Standard legislation and guidance for public roads has no bearing at all.

tomasrojo

davearthurs wrote: »

The idea that a main arterial road in the center of the city - Westmoreland Street - that divides the North from South and is the main cycling route used by hundreds of cyclists daily should be allowed to remain so dangerous with 4/5 one way lanes of freewheeling (dangerous) buses and cars and NO cycle lane is just incredible.

It is an initimidating road, but I'm not aware that it has a bad safety record. The nearby southern quays, on the other hand, has one of the worst safety records in the state. I find the North Circular Road a worse place to cycle. At least on Westmoreland Street you can command a lane without somebody freaking out and trying to muscle around you.

I'm also not sure what a cycle lane could do on Westmoreland Street, unless a completely separate light sequence was introduced for cyclists. A cycle lane alone would just place cyclists to the left of left-turning traffic. The street probably needs a fundamental redesign. Again, we'll be waiting a long time for that.

davearthurs wrote: »

But the idea that they would force bike traffic that needs to get to Rathmines/Ranelagh to run directly alongside a Luas line (beside the POD on Harcourt St) on a very tight two lane road with no space for manouever is again amazing. Priorities and safety just seem to be out the window as per usual.

Yeah, it would be good to have a contraflow running up to Rathmines from the Bleeding Horse. In fact, you can see plenty of cyclists doing it illegally already. Maybe take away one traffic lane. It's actually a part of the city has enough cyclists to justify taking a traffic lane.

davearthurs

I'm also not sure what a cycle lane could do on Westmoreland Street, unless a completely separate light sequence was introduced for cyclists. A cycle lane alone would just place cyclists to the left of left-turning traffic. The street probably needs a fundamental redesign. Again, we'll be waiting a long time for that.

I dunno, I've found it very dangerous that as soon as you turn around the BOI corner you face a wall of buses pulling in and out at 100mph. It's basically a free for all with bicycles trapped in the middle. I certainly wouldn't like to be travelling that route every day.
IMO they could easily control the traffic better at next to no cost just by more clearly defining the lanes.
If they were to put in a cycle lane they just need to extend the kerb out and place the lane in between. Plenty of space for this.

Yeah, it would be good to have a contraflow running up to Rathmines from the Bleeding Horse. In fact, you can see plenty of cyclists doing it illegally already.

Exactly. The junction you are forced to use as well, past the Odeon to turn right to Rathmines is extremely dangerous to cross. The only way to do it safely is to break the lights ahead of the traffic behind you.

Everyone uses the bus lane to get around Stephen's Green to head to Harcourt/Lesson street but apparently cycling is technically not allowed on this road at all so basically you can't cycle around the green 'legally' at all. You are supposed to head all the way down Baggot street to the Canal and then turn right. Pretty crazy. It's high time they put a cycle lane on Stephens Green's super wide pavements. Again, everyone cycles on them anyway.

tomasrojo

davearthurs wrote: »

I dunno, I've found it very dangerous that as soon as you turn around the BOI corner you face a wall of buses pulling in and out at 100mph. It's basically a free for all with bicycles trapped in the middle. I certainly wouldn't like to be travelling that route every day.
IMO they could easily control the traffic better at next to no cost just by more clearly defining the lanes.
If they were to put in a cycle lane they just need to extend the kerb out and place the lane in between. Plenty of space for this.

I assume 100mph is a bit of an exaggeration!

The real problem is that you have to be quite assertive and get to the right side of the left-turning traffic. But once you do that, it's generally fine.

I agree it could be better.

I'm guess from extending the kerb out, you mean cyclists essentially join the pedestrians on the left and wait for a bike-specific traffic light, or the pedestrian light?

You might be looking at a loss of a traffic lane with that approach, which would result in a lot of kneejerk criticism, but might be worth it to reassure novice cyclists. The alternative is to lose some of the footpath, which is not an approach I'd favour, as pedestrians have had enough space taken away from them already in the city centre.

I guess you could as an alternative kerb off left-turning traffic so that cyclists could safely be on the left of straight-ahead traffic, with left-turning traffic further left again, behind a kerb. Cyclists would still have to negotiate through to the right side of left-turning traffic, but at least you'd know then that no-one could cross your path thereafter, as the kerb would block them.

davearthurs wrote: »

Exactly. The junction you are forced to use as well, past the Odeon to turn right to Rathmines is extremely dangerous to cross. The only way to do it safely is to break the lights ahead of the traffic behind you.

I can't gainsay your experience, but I wouldn't say it's dangerous, though, again, it can be intimidating, and if you don't cycle vehicularly, it's certainly more hazardous.

If you take the lane and queue up with the cars then you can turn the corner quite safely. Relatively few cyclists do this perhaps; placing yourself to the left of traffic in the left lane results in conflict with cars turning left.


However, a direct route up to Rathmines would be much better anyway.

davearthurs wrote: »

Everyone uses the bus lane to get around Stephen's Green to head to Harcourt/Lesson street but apparently cycling is technically not allowed on this road at all so basically you can't cycle around the green 'legally' at all. You are supposed to head all the way down Baggot street to the Canal and then turn right. Pretty crazy. It's high time they put a cycle lane on Stephens Green's super wide pavements. Again, everyone cycles on them anyway.

I think there is an approach with pedestrians where you don't put in sidewalks, but let pedestrians wander over the grass for a few months and then concrete over the worn grass. Desire lines, I think they're called. It would be worth studying how cyclists currently cycle illegally and try to find a legal way of accommodating them.

tomasrojo

Speaking of "desire lines" (if that is the correct term), a blog I occasionally read, non-cycling-related, had an aside on that concept when discussing an analysis of the Lyon bike share.

http://memex.naughtons.org/archives/2010/12/02/12385

The data also shows that bike journeys between two points are shorter in distance than the corresponding journey by car. There are no bike lanes in Lyon so this suggests that cyclists use other techniques to make short cuts, say Jensen and co. Their shocking conclusion is that cyclists often ride on the pavement, along bus lanes and the wrong way up one way streets.
That kind of information will be useful for urban planners. For the first time they have real data to show where to build cycle lanes and how well they will be used…

monument

@ davearthurs -- Multi-lane roads can be problematic, but cycle lanes don't fix the main problems and current cycle lanes just don't work in major bus stop areas like Westmoreland Street. These problems need to be addressed if the councils and government are serious about promoting cycling, but in the meanwhile have you read Cyclecraft? -- http://www.cyclecraft.co.uk/

davearthurs wrote: »

They have been saying that for over 10 years, so I wouldn't hold my breath. But the idea that they would force bike traffic that needs to get to Rathmines/Ranelagh to run directly alongside a Luas line (beside the POD on Harcourt St) on a very tight two lane road with no space for manouever is again amazing. Priorities and safety just seem to be out the window as per usual.

As per Cyclecraft -- take the lane! If a car or bus can't pass safely within the lane then you should cycle in the middle of the lane... and generally cycle a bit away from the kerb.

davearthurs wrote: »

But the point is there is no great need for such a route at all.
There has always been minimal car traffic and wide enough roads on the inside canal roads. It is clearly for PR reasons only.

It's not at all clearly for PR reasons. As I said, I have reservations about how well it will work, but the idea is sound.

This is a route into and around the city. It links the Fairview Park and Clontarf coastal cycle tracks (and the Sutton one, with another missing link) into the Docklands and around to southside areas such as Rathmines and Ranelagh, and much more in-between.

If the canals strategy progresses it could easily also be linked with the current (even if it is flawed) Grand Canal cycleway between Inchicore and Adamstown (which passes areas like: Lucan, Clondalkin, Park West, the Kylemore Road areas etc). In the mid/longer term, on the Northside, it can be linked with the Royal Canal tow-path (Croke Park, Drumcondra, Phisborough, Glasnevin, Cabra, Finglas, Royal Canal Park, Ashtown, Castleknock, Blanchardstown etc).

EDIT: See this map here.

So, it kind of does go a few places, and should go to a lot more in the future

davearthurs wrote: »

There has always been minimal car traffic and wide enough roads on the inside canal roads... I just do not understand why they don't prioritize the routes that are actually heavily in need and in use, and get them sorted out first. i.e. routes into and around the city center.

It's a two-way cycleway, which there was not enough room before this was built -- a load a car parking had to be taking out and a boardwalk put in to make room in places.

Doctor Bob wrote: »

The Phoenix Park lanes are bi-directional.

Roads in the Park are not public roads; they are private roads in the stewardship of the OPW and, as such, it can do what it damn well likes with road markings. Standard legislation and guidance for public roads has no bearing at all.

Regardless of them having any legal merit*, the design of the Phoenix Park cycle lanes at least on the main avenue implies that they were not planned to be bi-directional. From the direction of the bicycle marking to the directions of the on / off ramps in places.

* if a mandatory sign is used on private land it does not -- in my view -- lose all meaning. It loses some meaning, sure, but not all meaning.

tomasrojo

As I often say, I have a scan of a Galway Cycling Campaign leaflet that sums up the key points of Cyclecraft. PM me for a copy.

davearthurs

Multi-lane roads can be problematic, but cycle lanes don't fix the main problems and current cycle lanes just don't work in major bus stop areas like Westmoreland Street. These problems need to be addressed if the councils and government are serious about promoting cycling

It's not a question of promoting cycling IMO it's about the liability of the Council and NRA to have roads that are safe to travel on first of all.
And especially those that are clearly among the most heavily used in the City.

At the very least they could mark the 2nd or 3rd lane red with cycling markings as they do on many dual carraigeways to make buses and drivers more aware, and help keep the cyclists to a direct route and help them feel secure. As it is you end up floating in the centre of up to 5 lanes of very heavy traffic, especially in rush hour, with buses forcing the cyclist out into the center of the road and a very definite feeling of vulnerability and danger for the cyclist from behind, the left, and the right.

[IMG][/img]

This is a route into and around the city. It links the Fairview Park and Clontarf coastal cycle tracks (and the Sutton one, with another missing link) into the Docklands and around to southside areas such as Rathmines and Ranelagh, and much more in-between.

I wouldn't be so sure - the right hand side of the canal is already the easiest main direct way to cycle more easily from down the canal all the way to baggot, st, haddington road, ringsend, east wall. The current plan hops in and out of cycle lanes and busy junction roads and around buildings in odd ways and is not that direct. They just need to sort a better lane system around ringsend to fairview or east wall.
I think they are more interested in getting a few tourists on a sunday cycling by the canal than any routes that actually are used in large numbers where people need to go i.e. into the center of the actual city, and around it, during the week. Sure, put in a cycle lane eventually but the point is that the priorities should be the heavily used central routes into the city and around it. Be they with cycle lanes or other solutions. Stephen's Green should be a central south side cycling link step rather than being currently locked off altogether to cycling.

tomasrojo

davearthurs wrote: »

It's not a question of promoting cycling IMO it's about the liability of the Council and NRA to have roads that are safe to travel on first of all.

davearthurs wrote: »

As it is you end up floating in the centre of up to 5 lanes of very heavy traffic, especially in rush hour, with buses forcing the cyclist out into the center of the road and a very definite feeling of vulnerability and danger for the cyclist from behind, the left, and the right.

As I said before, I'm not aware that Westmoreland Street has a bad safety record for cyclists, and, unlike some streets, it does have a lot of cyclists so perhaps it is quite safe already. The feeling of vulnerability you mention may not translate into a definite lack of safety.

I'm open to correction though. Absence of proof is not proof of absence after all. My personal experience is that the street is ok, and has improved since the Bus Gate was imposed.

davearthurs wrote: »

At the very least they could mark the 2nd or 3rd lane red with cycling markings as they do on many dual carraigeways to make buses and drivers more aware, and help keep the cyclists to a direct route and help them feel secure.

Sharrows maybe. If they put in cycle lanes, as things stand, you have to use the cycle lane and not any adjacent lane. The council has a very poor record of lane placement at junctions, with an almost unerring sense of the worst place to put cyclists. Novice users may feel more secure with a cycle lane, but given the poor placing of lanes in Dublin, it may be very much a false sense of security.

I don't think we use sharrows anywhere in Ireland right now, but they have the advantage of specifically saying that cyclists will be sharing the lane. Cycle lanes say that cyclists won't be sharing the lane, but be off to one side.

davearthurs

A simple red marking might help :

I'm not aware that Westmoreland Street has a bad safety record for cyclists

Well now, how would you get that information exactly?

petethedrummer

a red marking would not help. Every inexperienced cyclist would stick to it religiously whether it was safe or not. I have to travel up the right hand side of westmoreland street to get home and if I was not on your red path I would get beeped and bullied* across by drivers who think I should be there.

(*well they could try)

niceonetom

davearthurs wrote: »

A simple red marking might help :

That photo belies a dangerous ignorance of how to ride in those situations safely.

"Splinting the lane" is what Americans call it, and there it is illegal. It also happens to be less safe. DON'T try to ride on the lines between lanes - all that does it invite cars and buses to squeeze past you on either side. Ride slap bang in the middle of whatever lane is most appropriate to where you need to go at the next junction, exactly as you would do in a car.

tomasrojo

davearthurs wrote: »

Well now, how would you get that information exactly?

There's this site:
http://273k.net/cycling/accidents.html

Westmoreland Street: no fatalities
The Quays: three fatalities, as far as I can see.

I think robfitz runs this site. He doesn't seem to have updated it since the start of this year.

The Gardai also have stat.s, but I don't have a link handy.

Anyway, as I said, perhaps it's a bad street for injuries, but it doesn't feature in fatality stats. Accurate cyclist injury stats are nearly impossible to get.

I agree about splitting the lane. Just take the centre of the lane, don't keep to the left of the lane, or ride along the line. If you need to be further right, work your way over one lane at a time.

Have a read of Cyclecraft. It's very clear on how to deal with streets like this. As I said, I have a scan of a leaflet that covers the fundamentals, so PM if you want a copy.

Captain Havoc

RSA Site:
Pedal Cyclist 1998-2008
Road Collision Facts 2008
Road Collsions
Safety Performance in Irish Cities

monument

dited

If you get rid of the google maps thing in the bottom right hand corner the death zones suddenly makes much more sense ...