Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

If a cycle lane has an arrow, please follow it! A drivers plea

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    BostonB
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    Iwannahurl wrote: »
    BostonB wrote: »



    It's still happening! :)

    Oh no it isn't....;)


  • Options
    #33
    BostonB
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    seamus wrote: »
    ....
    ...The obvious solution is to cycle with the flow of traffic, but not use the cycle lane.

    I realise the following is completely different to the above example. But...

    In the phoenix park around the back of the zoo theres a cycle lane on the road but only on one side. You often see people cycling the wrong way on this, head on to traffic, I assume confused. Perhaps they are tourists used to driving/riding on the other side of the road.

    Just thought I'd share that.


  • Options
    #34
    Iwannahurl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    seamus wrote: »
    Bad cycling, like bad driving is any action which places yourself or others in unreasonable or unnecessary danger and/or requires other road users to take otherwise unnecessary actions to compensate for yours.

    On the topic of the thread, the cycle lane on the left-hand side of the road being in poor condition is not a good enough reason to cycle against the flow of traffic on the opposite side of the road. The obvious solution is to cycle with the flow of traffic, but not use the cycle lane.


    There is something in what you say. :)

    I'd still like to get Lumen's perspective though.


  • Options
    #35
    manwithaplan
    Registered Users Posts: 2,200 ✭✭✭manwithaplan


    I sometimes do not use cycle facilities that are poorly designed and/or dangerous (on-path cycle lanes on each side of the Royal Canal bridge heading towards town on the North Strand being a case in point). I believe, nonetheless, that it's my responsibility to cycle safely regardless of the conditions. I don't always live up to that responsibility but that's no-one's fault but my own.

    I support* initiatives to improve facilities for cyclists but I mostly just get on with going about my business. If I was cycling the wrong way up a cycling path and got sideswiped by a driver, I would be very slow to resort to "but you didn't look" or "the City Council should have done more for me".

    *In my own head - I don't actually go so far as to do anything.


  • Options
    #36
    -Chris-
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,035 ✭✭✭✭-Chris-


    Iwannahurl wrote: »
    I'd still like to get Lumen's perspective though.

    Do you mind me asking why you're addressing Lumen specifically? Is there something in what he said that you don't agree with? Is there something in Seamus or my posts that is incomplete that only Lumen can elaborate on?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Lumen
    Registered Users Posts: 31,021 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    Iwannahurl wrote: »
    I'd still like to get Lumen's perspective though.

    Bad cycling is cycling that is unsafe, inconsiderate or unstylish.


  • Options
    #38
    Iwannahurl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    -Chris- wrote: »
    Do you mind me asking why you're addressing Lumen specifically? Is there something in what he said that you don't agree with? Is there something in Seamus or my posts that is incomplete that only Lumen can elaborate on?

    Because Lumen made this specific point earlier (emphasis added by me).
    Lumen wrote: »
    Having subjectively poor facilities is no excuse for bad cycling.


    Lumen wrote: »
    Bad cycling is cycling that is unsafe, inconsiderate or unstylish.


    I like the "unstylish" part :), but I would suggest that "unsafe" and "inconsiderate" are subjective terms in the present context.


  • Options
    #39
    ashleey
    Registered Users Posts: 2,005 ✭✭✭ashleey


    Whatever the rights and wrongs are is irrelevant. Someone could be in your blindspot at any time either accidentally or stupidly and not just cyclists. Try not to crash into them. If they crash into you it is a different matter. As lumen says that position might change if they are unstylish in any way with say mountain bike shorts on and baggy t shirts for example.


  • Options
    #40
    Lumen
    Registered Users Posts: 31,021 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    Iwannahurl wrote: »
    I would suggest that "unsafe" and "inconsiderate" are subjective terms in the present context.

    No, they're not at all subjective.

    Unsafe means "behaviour which is likely to lead to an accident". If you want authoritative sources, probably some combination of Roadcraft and whatever the defensive cycling book is called (Cycle Craft?).

    "Inconsiderate" means cycling without consideration for other road users. Surprising people, scaring people, not indicating, generally raising other peoples stress levels without just cause. It's an attitude thing.

    IMO, arbitrary law breaking comes under "consideration". Deliberately showing disrespect for the ROTR winds people up, and it's not necessary. Mandatory cycle lanes are an exception for obvious reasons.


  • Options
    #41
    Iwannahurl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    Lumen wrote: »
    No, they're not at all subjective.

    Unsafe means "behaviour which is likely to lead to an accident". If you want authoritative sources, probably some combination of Roadcraft and whatever the defensive cycling book is called (Cycle Craft?).

    "Inconsiderate" means cycling without consideration for other road users. Surprising people, scaring people, not indicating, generally raising other peoples stress levels without just cause. It's an attitude thing.

    IMO, arbitrary law breaking comes under "consideration". Deliberately showing disrespect for the ROTR winds people up, and it's not necessary. Mandatory cycle lanes are an exception for obvious reasons.


    Thanks for that.

    So why "subjectively poor" cycling "facilities"?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    nosedive
    Registered Users Posts: 88 ✭✭nosedive


    -Chris- wrote: »
    How does that significantly differ from the situation the OP was in?

    I never said it did or it didn't. What's your point? (apologies all for the messy quotes - they don't seem to work well on my machine).



    Have you completely absolved the cyclist's responsibility to cycle safely and share the roads (and have manners), or did you just forget to include it in your post?

    You'll note from my first post I refer to the responsibilities of ALL road users. I'm a driver too. My post was not to antagonize or to defend reckless cycling but to put across my feelings that although the cyclist, in this case, would appear to be in the wrong it does would not excuse the driver running him/her over for not checking the way ahead was clear.


  • Options
    #43
    BostonB
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    ashleey wrote: »
    ...if they are unstylish in any way with say mountain bike shorts on and baggy t shirts...

    Hey steady on...

    Its called relaxed fit. Useful as an airbrake on fast descents...


  • Options
    #44
    Cunning Alias
    Registered Users Posts: 782 ✭✭✭Cunning Alias


    The area I am talking about is on the N11 between Cabinteely village and Loughlinstown. I will take a pic next time I am walking out.


  • Options
    #45
    Jawgap
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    Cunning Alias wrote: »
    The area I am talking about is on the N11 between Cabinteely village and Loughlinstown. I will take a pic next time I am walking out.

    a pic? - how very 20th century of you :)- will Streetview demonstrate the issue?


  • Options
    #46
    morana
    Registered Users Posts: 2,097 ✭✭✭morana


    going home now just want to make sure I dont drift into anybodys blind spot on purpose who cant look 360 deg...or even 180 deg...:D


  • Options
    #47
    -Chris-
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,035 ✭✭✭✭-Chris-


    Probably somewhere along here.
    http://goo.gl/maps/vGV8

    To be honest, I can see why someone would cycle the wrong way down that lane, there aren't many places to cross the road, and you've probably been on that cycle track since before Foxrock Church when you were avoiding the shambles of a track between White's Cross and Cornelscourt.


  • Options
    #48
    Cunning Alias
    Registered Users Posts: 782 ✭✭✭Cunning Alias


    This is the one


  • Options
    #49
    the_syco
    Registered Users Posts: 37,295 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    Cunning Alias wrote: »
    The area I am talking about is on the N11 between Cabinteely village and Loughlinstown. I will take a pic next time I am walking out.
    I'm guessing you mean here, in which case the cyclist was totally in the wrong, for a number of reasons.
    a) not following the flow of traffic (they would be going against it; heck, it's akin to going the wrong way on a one way street!)
    b) not obeying the traffic light

    /edit
    Just saw your post when I posted.
    Cunning Alias wrote: »
    This is the one
    The cyclist is going the wrong way on a duel carriageway. Is the f**ker suicidal, or just brain-dead?


  • Options
    #50
    Cunning Alias
    Registered Users Posts: 782 ✭✭✭Cunning Alias


    I figure the main reason people do it because it is shorter to cycle past there if you are heading up to the tullyvale apartments or the business park.

    If you were on the proper side of the road, you would have to go up and over the bridge.


  • Options
    #51
    the_syco
    Registered Users Posts: 37,295 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    Cunning Alias wrote: »
    I figure the main reason people do it because it is shorter to cycle past there if you are heading up to the tullyvale apartments or the business park.

    If you were on the proper side of the road, you would have to go up and over the bridge.
    Not only will the cyclist be going the wrong way, but they'll be going the wrong way next to a bus lane (as opposed next to a hard shoulder which would mean a gap between cyclist and traffic). The "shortcut" will cost someone a limb, or loss of life. If going fast enough, the sudden "push" of air going around the bus will surely send them into the grass, or a lamppost?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    -Chris-
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,035 ✭✭✭✭-Chris-


    95% percent of that cycle track is segregated from the road (by the kerb). Only the bits that cross driveways/estate entrances are at "road level".


  • Options
    #53
    the_syco
    Registered Users Posts: 37,295 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    -Chris- wrote: »
    95% percent of that cycle track is segregated from the road (by the kerb). Only the bits that cross driveways/estate entrances are at "road level".
    :o My bad. Still, though, I do wonder what the traffic laws say in regards to people going against traffic in the cycle lanes, when crossing junctions such as this one, which is also on the N11.

    I would also like to hear from cyclists if a bus passing them at speed affects their balance?


  • Options
    #54
    -Chris-
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,035 ✭✭✭✭-Chris-


    I'm sure it's legally dubious, but if you're careful and observant you shouldn't have any problems (unfortunately the cyclist in the OP was neither careful now observant).


  • Options
    #55
    Iwannahurl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    I don't know the stretch of road/"cycle lane" mentioned by the OP, so recent posts referring to the possible layout in question are just confusing me (eg I see no "cycle track").

    If this is the kind of setup (bog standard cycle lanes) then IMO any cyclist travelling in such a lane against the flow of traffic is a nutty kamikaze eejit.


  • Options
    #56
    -Chris-
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,035 ✭✭✭✭-Chris-


    Iwannahurl wrote: »
    I don't know the stretch of road/"cycle lane" mentioned by the OP, so recent posts referring to the possible layout in question are just confusing me (eg I see no "cycle track").

    If this is the kind of setup (bog standard cycle lanes) then IMO any cyclist travelling in such a lane against the flow of traffic is a nutty kamikaze eejit.

    You'll see it here:
    Cunning Alias wrote: »
    This is the one


  • Options
    #57
    Iwannahurl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    Sorry, all I can see there is the usual red strip cycle lane, and on a very busy 4-lane road at that.

    Cycling against the flow of traffic on such a setup is just daft.


  • Options
    #58
    bah1011
    Registered Users Posts: 66 ✭✭bah1011


    Not sure if this has been said already but if there is a cycle lane at only one side of the road should you use that or just cycle on the correct side


  • Options
    #59
    Iwannahurl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    Cunning Alias wrote: »
    I figure the main reason people do it because it is shorter to cycle past there if you are heading up to the tullyvale apartments or the business park.

    If you were on the proper side of the road, you would have to go up and over the bridge.

    I raised a similar issue earlier, but answer came there none.

    What is the situation at either end of the cycle lane, or at key points along the route? Are there roundabouts or other junction types that ignore or intimidate cyclists?

    It's a dual carriageway. How are cyclists facilitated to traverse junctions and access local residential areas, services, etc?


Advertisement