Dublin may see contra-flow cyclists

tomasrojo

Dublin City Council is to draw up plans for "contra flow lanes" for cyclists, allowing them to travel in either direction on streets that are restricted to one-way for motor vehicles.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2010/0225/breaking74.html

tomasrojo

But Fine Gael councillor Edie Wynne said the move would have to be given some thought. She said at 3 per cent cyclists were not very representative of modal choice in Dublin. "Ninety-seven per cent are choosing another way", she said.

Fellow Fine Gael councillor Gerry Breen said he would urge caution, remarking that numbers of cyclists in the city were one third of those who chose to walk. He said councillors should remember the 34 per cent of people who made a modal choice to use their car, or those who used rail, bus "or the 9 per cent of people who chose to walk".

I really wish Fine Gael was the smallest party in the Dail.

FG as a party are really making it hard for me to give them any vote in the next election. Anything to do with cycling they seem to be completely negative.

Ignoring FG, I still think the recent initiatives for Dublin are incredibly refreshing.

Anyways, this should be interesting to see what happens. Would be interesting to hear how the contra-flow lanes meet up with the existing routes as always.

BeerNut

It really does seem, on first reading, that FG are a complete shower of reactionary c**ts working to an agenda to make things worse for everyone for no good reason. But I'm sure that's not the case...

Anyway: great common-sense idea, let's have it.

oflahero

There's a contraflow bike lane already in use along Andrew St if I remember right, so that bikes coming from Suffolk St can continue on up to Sth William St instead of having to turn off for College Green with all other traffic. Seems to be working rather well so far, boo yah sucks Fine Gael.

HonalD

Back on the topic - I think the idea that contra flow cyclists would be permitted to cycle against traffic in a one way street. It works on the continent (doesn't everything!) on the basis that the onus is on the driver to watch out for cyclists, contraversal or what!?! Requires legislation etc. etc. etc. :rolleyes:

tomasrojo

But Fine Gael councillor Edie Wynne [...] said at 3 per cent cyclists were not very representative of modal choice in Dublin. "Ninety-seven per cent are choosing another way", she said.

Next time FG kick up a fuss about the 30 zone and the rights of motorists, it should be pointed out to them that "sixty-six percent are choosing another way." (Source of data: Fine Gael cyclist botherer, Gerry Breen)

irishmotorist

I'm usually not a fan of off road cycle lanes, but for this kind of thing I think it would be better to have the lane at least 'kerbed' off from the rest of the road. There's enough difficulty presented by drivers when they're going the same direction as you and have time to see you and behave accordingly, but if you were to be approaching towards them then I don't think we can trust our lives to the hands of typical cycle lane observance.

BeerNut

irishmotorist wrote: »

There's enough difficulty presented by drivers when they're going the same direction as you and have time to see you and behave accordingly, but if you were to be approaching towards them then I don't think we can trust our lives to the hands of typical cycle lane observance.

I'm a regular user of the Bolton Street/Parnell Street one (with its cute upside-down bicycles), and have used the Andrew Street one plenty of times, and I've never had a problem with oncoming traffic. If someone's going to be barrelling down the road at you they'll probably be over the kerb anyway.

hardCopy

Why am I not surprised that Gerry Breen is the first person to complain?

Chips Lovell

tomasrojo wrote: »

I really wish Fine Gael was the smallest party in the Dail.

Dónal wrote: »

FG as a party are really making it hard for me to give them any vote in the next election.

BeerNut wrote: »

It really does seem, on first reading, that FG are a complete shower of reactionary c**ts

Would you vote for this Fred?

ROK ON

el tonto wrote: »

Would you vote for this Fred?

I just had an almighty judder when I saw that. Christ, he makes Lampre man look positively Euro.
Hell he even has Lance type socks on.

sexpot

That picture makes me feel a bit sick

Doctor Bob

Dónal wrote: »

FG as a party are really making it hard for me to give them any vote in the next election. Anything to do with cycling they seem to be completely negative.

The one exception to this would be DCC Cllr Eoghan Murphy, who seems to have a good grasp of some of the issues. Pity he's with a party I wouldn't touch with a bargepole. (And pity he's now decided his support for the 30 km/h zone may have been 'naive' on his part- but I've said my piece on that subject already.)

On topic, similar schemes have been run elsewhere - most recently in Westminster area of London, afaik - with varying degrees of success. Have a look around the 4 minute mark in this video from Paris:
http://www.wat.tv/video/parcours-quotidien-cycliste-1ztzr_1qciv_.html

Designs like this can work, but I fear they'd need a level of enforcement that's somewhat beyond the scope of the relevant authorities in this country.

Re St Andrew's Street- 9 times out of 10 when I use it or pass by it there's someone parked in it- usually an An Post van. Actually!- given An Post's support for cycling in the country recently (for which, hats off), maybe now's the time to bring the matter to its attention.

tomasrojo

Doctor Bob wrote: »

On topic, similar schemes have been run elsewhere - most recently in Westminster area of London, afaik - with varying degrees of success. Have a look around the 4 minute mark in this video from Paris:
http://www.wat.tv/video/parcours-quotidien-cycliste-1ztzr_1qciv_.html

That Parisian contraflow looks a bit of a squeeze!

Victor

Aside from the city centre, there are a few "No entry except cyclists" signs in Terenure to discourage rat running from Terneure Road West to Terenure Road North.

http://www.bing.com/maps/?v=2&cp=swjgdsgg8jh5&scene=29509163&lvl=2&sty=o

irishmotorist

BeerNut wrote: »

I'm a regular user of the Bolton Street/Parnell Street one (with its cute upside-down bicycles), and have used the Andrew Street one plenty of times, and I've never had a problem with oncoming traffic. If someone's going to be barrelling down the road at you they'll probably be over the kerb anyway.

I've never used either of these myself. WRT Andrew St, it's a short run so I can't imagine there being much of a problem there as cars are just after turning onto it and will be turning off within 100m so I'd imagine observation to be slightly higher than somebody following another car in a stream of cars for ~1km (e.g. Pearse St.) I'm not sure what the Bolton St./Parnell St. one is like.

Like I said, I haven't seen these existing ones - my concern is just a kind of pre-emptive caution.

BeerNut

Motorists generally tend to keep left, even in one-way traffic. When a cycle track is to their right they're not likely to drive in it unless they're squeezed. I agree with Doctor Bob on parked vehicles, though -- that's going to be the real bitch, when you can't merge to get round them.

markpb

BeerNut wrote: »

have used the Andrew Street one plenty of times, and I've never had a problem with oncoming traffic.

My problem with the Andrew St one is the constant problem of parked cars and delivery vans leaving you nowhere to go except the wrong way down a one way street I definitely think they should be kerbed off - my only concern is that the street cleaners wouldn't be able to or or wouldn't bother cleaning them.

Doctor Bob

tomasrojo wrote: »

That Parisian contraflow looks a bit of a squeeze!

The whole video is quite frightening, but then again, I suspect the guy who made it was trying to prove a particular point. Other parts of Paris aren't so bad (though it's a while since I was last there).

Having read the article (as opposed to last night, when I was going by the posts on here only ) I now see that it's not just talking about the type in the video where there's no infrastructure installed. The list covers options that just couldn't happen without full segregation. Contra-flow lanes can work in just about any type of road, but somewhere like Pearse Street needs a high kerb (and maybe bollards, though they bring their own problems), not just a white line.

There should be no possibility for cars to park, regular maintenance (sufficient width to allow a narrow road-sweeper van down the track would do the job- some vans are <2m. wide), careful design, especially at junctions, and enforcement.

If possible, DCC should also look at contra-flow cycling in relation to the locations of the DB stands- many of them are badly sited on one-way streets, encouraging salmoning by quite a few of the users.

Alternatively, take out all multi-lane one-way streets in the city. Then all that's left is the low speed, low volume access streets, which need no infrastructure at all.

Edit: I've just thought- instead of calling the streets 'One way except cyclists' they should call them 'Two way except motorised vehicles'- a subtle but important difference.

seamus

Yeah, kind of messy. Within the city, they would have to be kerbed off otherwise you'll end up with people parking in them and no way to get around with oncoming traffic.

My other concern is cyclists themselves. There's a contra-flow cycle lane on Memorial Rd that allows you to turn left after the custom house and go up Amiens St. In theory, it's quicker and safer to go this way than to go around the back of the custom house.
I used it for a good while but I was constantly encountering other cyclists going the wrong way - i.e. with traffic - down the contra-flow lane. In their defence there's no signage to indicate that it's contra-flow, but I can see this kind of thing occuring a lot.

Ideally they would be two-way lanes, segregated from both traffic and pedestrians by way of kerbs.

doozerie

From the article:

Council staff have drawn up a list of 11 areas where they have suggested "solutions" for cyclists. These include Leinster Street South and Nassau Street; Baggot Street lower and Merrion Row; Parnell Square; Moss Street; Camden Street by the Bleeding Horse pub; the Westmoreland Street and D'Olier Street area; St Stephen's Green; Leeson Street Upper; Watling Street; Steven's Lane and the Clarendon Street area.

I find it hard to picture how a contra-flow lane could be safely put in between Baggot Street Lower and Merrion Row - it would have to cut across that horrible turn onto Pembroke Street Lower where traffic coming from opposite directions are already encouraged to mash each other by being given green lights at the same time to turn onto the same stretch of road (with no signs to indicate merging traffic). This makes me wonder whether this proposal has been properly thought through at all and therefore whether it will be yet another poorly planned and poorly implemented effort intended to do nothing more than tick a box on a sheet somewhere (the box that says "We cater really well for cyclists, and other road users, in Dublin. Do we bleedin' rock, or wha'!", which should be located just before the box that says "Sick of hearing from that moany prat Breen").

For a start I wish that they'd push the gardai to do something about the idiots on bikes that already use many one way streets and cycle lanes as their own personal contra-flow routes.

oflahero

doozerie wrote: »

From the article:
For a start I wish that they'd push the gardai to do something about the idiots on bikes that already use many one way streets and cycle lanes as their own personal contra-flow routes.

+1: I'm sick of crossing as a ped around Baggot St Lower & Merrion Row, having half-stepped into the road after checking the traffic, only to have a smug courier twat glide by in the opposite direction in front of my face, arse half out of the saddle ready to take evasive action onto the path if a suit in a jeep tries to 'teach him a lesson'.

Victor

doozerie wrote: »

I find it hard to picture how a contra-flow lane could be safely put in between Baggot Street Lower and Merrion Row - it would have to cut across that horrible turn onto Pembroke Street Lower where traffic coming from opposite directions are already encouraged to mash each other by being given green lights at the same time to turn onto the same stretch of road (with no signs to indicate merging traffic). This makes me wonder whether this proposal has been properly thought through at all and therefore whether it will be yet another poorly planned and poorly implemented effort

Will you let them design it first?

For a start I wish that they'd push the gardai to do something about the idiots on bikes that already use many one way streets and cycle lanes as their own personal contra-flow routes.

Sure, the law needs to be enforced, but the law and its implementation (one-way street with no consideration for cyclists - there are no west bound routes between Leeson Street and Pearse Street) also need to change.

oflahero wrote: »

+1: I'm sick of crossing as a ped around Baggot St Lower & Merrion Row, having half-stepped into the road after checking the traffic, only to have a smug courier twat glide by in the opposite direction in front of my face, arse half out of the saddle ready to take evasive action onto the path if a suit in a jeep tries to 'teach him a lesson'.

Then would it be better for the street to be redesigned so that such things don't happen?

doozerie

Victor wrote: »

Will you let them design it first?

The particular stretch I mention is, on the face of it, going to be extremely difficult to safely incorporate a contra-flow cycle lane into. Part of the reason it'll be so difficult is that the junction at Pembroke Street Lower, as it currently stands, is already a mess. Personally, I find it a danger to both cyclists and car drivers. Unless they resolve the mess that is already there, it seems stupid to me to consider complicating it even further by adding a contra-flow cycle lane into the mix.

So, maybe they do have some very clever design in mind that will result in a safe junction for both cars and cyclists, or maybe they'll just slap in something in addition to what is currently there that is totally inappropriate for cyclists. I hope for the former, but their track record with cycle tracks (such as the cycle tracks along the N11) have often tended to fall firmly into the latter type of solution which doesn't inspire confidence.

Victor wrote:

Sure, the law needs to be enforced, but the law and its implementation (one-way street with no consideration for cyclists - there are no west bound routes between Leeson Street and Pearse Street) also need to change.

There are many instances of roads, junctions, cycle tracks, etc., that seem to have been put in with no consideration for cyclists and perhaps even with a desire to discourage people from cycling on/through them. However, there is also a tendency for some people to consider certain design decisions to be anti-cyclist where that view seems completely misguided. One-way streets are one example of where such a bias can come out. One-way streets are, typically, an inconvenience to all road users and therefore everyone may be able to reasonably argue that they should be allowed to use them both ways.

Whether you are on a bike or in a car, there are probably always going to be situations where a one-way street could save you time and hassle if it allowed traffic the other way. If you are in a car, then (legally) you have no choice but to follow the one-way system - at least on a bike you can walk up the one-way street if you want to. Personally, I don't think that as cyclists we should feel that we are entitled to any greater privileges than car drivers or buses when it comes to one-way streets, in the same way as we shouldn't feel any more entitled to break red lights, travel on the footpaths, etc. We can already use (most) bus lanes which gives us great advantages over cars in some areas. As cyclists, looking for the right to go the wrong way up one-way streets strikes me as being a bit like those people who argue that driving their child the half mile route to and from school is necessary because the alternatives are simply too inconvenient.

Personally, I'd rather see the existing examples of poor road, cycle track, and junction, design improved before any money goes into contra-flow cycle tracks. Some of the existing stuff is just plain stupid and dangerous, adding contra-flow cycle tracks without addressing that just seems dumb to me. But then, I'm not really a fan of cycle tracks anyway, as I believe that in many cases it is safer to share the roads with other traffic.

loyatemu

doozerie wrote: »

Personally, I don't think that as cyclists we should feel that we are entitled to any greater privileges than car drivers or buses when it comes to one-way streets, in the same way as we shouldn't feel any more entitled to break red lights, travel on the footpaths, etc.

I don't agree with this at all. One-ways systems, traffic lights, roundabouts etc are all designed to facilitate the efficient flow of large motorised vehicles - they do nothing whatsoever for cyclists and pedestrians and anything that mitigates the inconvenience caused to cyclists and peds by these features is a good thing.

radia

I tend not to like cycle lanes that are physically separated from the road (whether by a kerb or because they're on the pavement). It's more difficult to pass if someone slow is in front of you, and broken glass remains there for ages, whereas on the road it's powdered by heavy traffic such as buses that stray into on-road cycle lanes, or cleared by street sweepers.

However, I agree with some posters above that for safety contra-flow cycle lanes might be best separated from motorised traffic in a highly visible manner, and in a way that doesn't allow them to be used for parking. A cheap and simple solution might be to use the posts that separate the contraflow bus lane from regular traffic on St Stephen's Green. They definitely need to be wide enough to permit a street sweeper to enter, and regular sweeping should be scheduled. This width would also permit them to be two-way for cyclists, and the two lanes should actually be marked out and labelled.

This example of a contraflow cycle lane (kerbed) was posted over on politics.ie recently in this thread (where they complain about the Fine Gaelers too!), and although I don't like kerbed lanes in general, I have to say I was pretty impressed.

johnf&#225 wrote: »

Here is a one way street in central London and an example of what a proper contraflow cycle lane should look like. Let it load until it switches to street view.

tavistock square london - Google Maps

radia

I also love the report (on the same politics.ie thread) that in NYC they're ripping out and recycling parking meters into bike racks. Nice design and great idea!

soulsearcher on politics.ie wrote:

In New York they're currently transforming several hundred parking meters into bike racks. With any luck this is what we'll be doing here in dublin. More info here:

NYC to Slash Parking Meters to Make Bike Racks | Inhabitat

doozerie

loyatemu wrote: »

I don't agree with this at all. One-ways systems, traffic lights, roundabouts etc are all designed to facilitate the efficient flow of large motorised vehicles - they do nothing whatsoever for cyclists and pedestrians and anything that mitigates the inconvenience caused to cyclists and peds by these features is a good thing.

I am certainly aware of some roundabouts, usually large multi-lane ones, that are dangerous to use as a cyclist. I am also aware of some junctions with traffic lights that make life difficult as a cyclist too. However, it's a huge leap from there to say that as a rule they, and other traffic control measures, do nothing whatsoever for cyclists and pedestrians. Cyclists are traffic so fundamentally we suffer/benefit from traffic control measures as much as other road users.

As regards traffic lights in particular, I have no love for the numerous and slow (in some cases) traffic lights on my commute for example, but despite the way that many people seem to routinely ignore them, if they were not there at all at the various junctions I suspect I'd have been squashed a long time ago. Are they an inconvenience? Yes they are, when I am cycling or driving. Do they do a useful job for me as a cyclist? Absolutely.

monument

A few points:

The percentage cycling figure quoted seems to be the national figure. Dublin is higher (will look for the percentage when I get to my laptop on Monday) and, numbers of cyclists entering the canals at the morning peek has grown 75% in the last four years. This is nothing new as national figures are quoted by anti-public transport groups too. Anyway this is about future cyclists as much as it is about today's cyclists.

Map on Irish Times article here: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/0227/1224265276561.html

It is city and national level policy to promote cycling, walking, and public transport over other modes of transport.

The issue of law enforcment and constructing new lanes have little to do with each other.

Comparing breaking traffic lights and wanting contra-flow is nonsence. One is breaking the law, and one is not. Contra-flow is more like being allow to turn on a red light as works in the US.



Traffic flow mesures -- such as one-way streets, bans on left or right turns, etc -- have little to do with cyclists and no benfit for cyclists. Other traffic flow mesures -- such as slip roads/turns -- increase the level of danger for cyclists. Also roundabouts in genral -- bar very low speed ones -- increase the level of danger for cyclists. And diffrent road traffic controls affect or effect diffrent road users in diffrent ways or levels, far from each just as much as the next type of user.

Victor

monument wrote: »

The percentage cycling figure quoted seems to be the national figure. Dublin is higher (will look for the percentage when I get to my laptop on Monday) and, numbers of cyclists entering the canals at the morning peek has grown 75% in the last four years. This is nothing new as national figures are quoted by anti-public transport groups too.

Data from Census 2006 www.cso.ie

Note colour scales vary between maps.