Advertisement
Private Profiles - an update on how they will be changing here
We've partnered up with Nixers.com to offer a space where you can talk directly to Peter from Nixers.com and get an exclusive Boards.ie discount code for a free job listing. If you are recruiting or know anyone else who is please check out the forum here.

'Footpaths are for pedestrians' - new DCC billboard

  • 30-11-2011 9:58am
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 1,545 droidus


    'Cyclists - Footpaths are for pedestrians - obey the rules of the road'

    Anyone seen this? Cant find a picture online. There's one on the corner of the N2/Finglas village - just across the road from a notoriously bad stretch of off-road cycle path...


«134

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 22,087 ✭✭✭✭ Big Nasty


    No but what about it?


  • Registered Users Posts: 24,227 ✭✭✭✭ Cookie_Monster


    but won't someone think of the children dogs, buggies and wheelchairs?


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,208 HivemindXX


    I've seen them for about a month. There's one on Constitution Hill which changes between this and a bunch of other ads and another one on Ballymun Road.

    I like them. Footpaths are for pedestrians.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,545 droidus


    MCMLXXV wrote: »
    No but what about it?

    Seems like a strange use of ever-dwindling resources, and sends a mixed message to cyclists who are simultaneously told to use cycle lanes on the footpath.


  • Registered Users Posts: 24,227 ✭✭✭✭ Cookie_Monster


    but why target cyclist when motorists are much much much worse offenders when it comes to using (parking) footpaths which is effectively ignored.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 11,573 ✭✭✭✭ tomasrojo


    I agree about the mixed message. Footpaths are for pedestrians, except when we have a target to meet for kilometers of cycle track "constructed", in which case we'll hive off half the footpath to make a useless cycle track, thus simultaneously making it illegal for cyclists to use the road there.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 92 ✭✭✭ ondeball


    but why target cyclist when motorists are much much much worse offenders when it comes to using (parking) footpaths which is effectively ignored.

    Not to mention parking in cycling lanes. Ranelagh village is a joke for this. On any given evening there are cars abandoned in the cycling lane just by McSorleys. I wouldn't normally mind but there's plenty of parking in the streets off Ranelagh road and the street is always really busy fo rbikes to be weaving around a parked car and out in front of a bus.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,417 ✭✭✭ reprazant


    droidus wrote: »
    Seems like a strange use of ever-dwindling resources, and sends a mixed message to cyclists who are simultaneously told to use cycle lanes on the footpath.

    Pretty sure they are not referring to cycle lanes.

    The clue is in the bit where they specify footpaths.

    Are people now so sensitive that the council can't put an ad up for what is a problem without people getting annoyed about it?

    They should do something about it. Also, they should go bloody hard on people who cycle without lights at night. The amount of times I have nearly crashed into somebody that appears from nowhere,clad in black and with no lights. They are like rubbish, Kamakazi ninja's.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,545 droidus


    reprazant wrote: »
    Pretty sure they are not referring to cycle lanes.

    The clue is in the bit where they specify footpaths.

    OK sherlock, what do you deduce from this?

    4482327325_136b380ae5_z.jpg

    Located directly across from the billboard in Finglas.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,417 ✭✭✭ reprazant


    droidus wrote: »
    OK sherlock, what do you deduce from this?

    4482327325_136b380ae5_z.jpg

    Located directly across from the billboard in Finglas.

    Ok, sorry.

    It does seem to be the case that people are so touchy that the council now cannot ask for cyclists to stay off the footpaths in case the danger pedestrians.

    My mistake for thinking that we cyclists are actually adults.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 7,070 ✭✭✭ Bluefoam


    I have no issue with the fact that they are promoting the issue of footpaths being for pedestrians, but it does add to the wave of negative publicity aimed at cyclists and only fuels the uneducated view from some motorists that cyclists act as a law unto their own... must wear helmet, may not use the road, must wear special cycling iluminous protection clothing...

    I think the money would be better spent making sure the infrastructure was in place to discourage cyclists from using the footpaths. For instance, good safe cycle lanes, or better integration to allow cyclists to use thye roadway more safely. Or by promoting cycling as a safe and positive alternative to driving and the concept of sharing the road...


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,965 ✭✭✭✭ Zulu


    Im guessing the part with the bicycle is the cycle path, and the part with the man is the footpath. Didn't think it was that hard - what with the pictures and all.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,545 droidus


    reprazant wrote: »
    Ok, sorry.

    It does seem to be the case that people are so touchy that the council now cannot ask for cyclists to stay off the footpaths in case the danger pedestrians.

    My mistake for thinking that we cyclists are actually adults.

    I agree with the sentiment, but as mentioned above, it gives mixed messages as there are many miles of cycle lanes located (unsafely) on the footpath, it portrays cyclists in a negative light and is a questionable use of resources given the actual danger cyclists pose.

    Incidentally, I cycle on the route above everyday. If I ignore the (illegal and unsafe) cycle lane and cycle on the road I get buzzed and abused by bus drivers. I see a lot of cyclists on the path where there is a tight on-road bus/cycle lane (Drumcondra for example). I'd say a significant percentage of them think that's where they're supposed to be as thats where the infrastructure tends to put them.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,545 droidus


    Zulu wrote: »
    Im guessing the part with the bicycle is the cycle path, and the part with the man is the footpath. Didn't think it was that hard - what with the pictures and all.

    Try again.

    Where is the cycle lane located? On the footpath or on the road?


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,573 ✭✭✭✭ tomasrojo


    Zulu wrote: »
    Im guessing the part with the bicycle is the cycle path, and the part with the man is the footpath. Didn't think it was that hard - what with the pictures and all.
    It's a footpath with paint on it. The lanes are too narrow, and it's quite clear that pedestrians don't even notice it. Have you ever used one of these? Do you find that pedestrians keep to their painted half-metre? You might think in theory this is different from cycling on the footpath, but in practice it's exactly the same.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,606 Jumpy


    Can we please use the correct term.

    Its "footpad".


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,208 HivemindXX


    There is an issue with telling cyclists to keep off the footpath unless we've splashed a bit of vaguely bicycle shaped paint on it and/or possibly a couple of signs at some point. I think these new posters would be a good spur for a letter writing campaign to ask the revlevant authorities to consider how poor off road cycle lanes conflict with this initiative. The picture Droidus posted is a perfect example. That is not wide enough to be a proper shared use facility, they are telling people (and in fact legally requiring people) to interact in a way that the new posters are saying is bad.

    However this is a seperate issue. Plenty of people still cycle on the footpath whenever it suits them and it's not due to confusion it's due to either ignorance of what they are supposed to do or that quality I like to refer to as simply "being a dick".

    On my new commute I notice a crazy number of people cycling on the footpath when there is a perfectly good road right next to it. Since this is near DCU I blame students. I was under the impression that all students drove these days but maybe times are so hard in the country now that parents can no longer afford to buy cars for their children. I wonder if this will mean good things for cycling in the future.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,573 ✭✭✭✭ tomasrojo


    droidus wrote: »
    I agree with the sentiment, but as mentioned above, it gives mixed messages as there are many miles of cycle lanes located (unsafely) on the footpath, it portrays cyclists in a negative light and is a questionable use of resources given the actual danger cyclists pose.

    Incidentally, I cycle on the route above everyday. If I ignore the (illegal and unsafe) cycle lane and cycle on the road I get buzzed and abused by bus drivers. I see a lot of cyclists on the path where there is a tight on-road bus/cycle lane (Drumcondra for example). I'd say a significant percentage of them think that's where they're supposed to be as thats where the infrastructure tends to put them.
    Coupled with the long-running road-side "Garda message to cyclists" campaign on the parking info boards, it does give the impression that cyclists are an enormous problem in the city, compared with, say, speeding motorists.

    Just bring in fixed-penalty notices and stop the negative advertising.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,965 ✭✭✭✭ Zulu


    droidus wrote: »
    Try again.

    Where is the cycle lane located? On the footpath or on the road?
    No you TRY again :rolleyes:

    I get what you are trying to say, but I don't agree. In that picture there is a footpath & cycle lane side-by-side. They even appear to have used different surfaces to aid in the distinction, as well as the simple paint markings.

    I'd suggest that you have little to be getting your knickers in a twist about, but... :o


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,520 Duke Leonal Felmet


    If only cyclists would take heed. I'm tired of walking to and from work, constantly looking over my shoulder for some cyclist who thinks its perfectly ok to speed past someone, leaving inches of room for space.

    And yet these same hypocrites complains about cars that do the same.

    Laughable.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 516 ✭✭ rich.d.berry


    Zulu wrote: »
    Im guessing the part with the bicycle is the cycle path, and the part with the man is the footpath. Didn't think it was that hard - what with the pictures and all.

    So, Zulu, do you reckon that you would consider it safe to cycle down this section of "cycle path" at a fast pace, say 30-35 km/h.

    What do you think the pedestrians who legitimately use their allocated space would have to say about the cyclists who fly past them? Would it make them happy to share the space? Does the council really believe that this is an adequate shared facility?

    What about the motorists who feel that they are entitled to all the roadway because a compulsory (solid white line) cycle path has been provided and therefore cyclists should not be on that section of road?

    So, while I agree that cyclists should not be on footpaths, I think that the council is irresponsible for placing these slogans adjacent to such an obviously inadequate facility.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,398 Paparazzo


    Amazing how touchy some cyclists are over it and getting pedantic. Stay off footpaths, and if it's a share path/cycle lane, stay in your half. Simple!

    Incidently, one of the messages a sign has on the Naas road at Bluebell every morning is "Beware of Traffic". Why thank you Mr. Sign, I never thought of that. I think that sign has saved many lives.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,545 droidus


    Zulu wrote: »
    No you TRY again :rolleyes:

    I get what you are trying to say, but I don't agree. In that picture there is a footpath & cycle lane side-by-side. They even appear to have used different surfaces to aid in the distinction, as well as the simple paint markings.

    I'd suggest that you have little to be getting your knickers in a twist about, but... :o

    The cycle lane is located ON the footpath. Its as clear as day. Splashing some paint on the footpath does not change the fact that it is a footpath.

    I dont think this is a particularly difficult principle to grasp, but it I guess it takes all sorts.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,965 ✭✭✭✭ Zulu


    tomasrojo wrote: »
    It's a footpath with paint on it. The lanes are too narrow, and it's quite clear that pedestrians don't even notice it. Have you ever used one of these? Do you find that pedestrians keep to their painted half-metre? You might think in theory this is different from cycling on the footpath, but in practice it's exactly the same.
    This cut's both ways, there's a similar set up (but with far more room) along the cost between Sutton & Clontarf. I've had numerous cyclists ring there bell at me to get out of their way even though I've been on the footpath.

    Futher along that road, the cycle lane moves over to the road, and there is a narrow footpath. I've had some of the ignorant twats sign in discontent when I've been too slow moving myself and dog out of their way (on the footpath). I believe the cycle lane on the road isn't suitable for them.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,573 ✭✭✭✭ tomasrojo


    droidus wrote: »
    I see a lot of cyclists on the path where there is a tight on-road bus/cycle lane (Drumcondra for example). I'd say a significant percentage of them think that's where they're supposed to be as thats where the infrastructure tends to put them.

    On the stretch passing the bishop's palace, that's exactly where the infrastructure is. On the bishop's side of the road it doesn't feel that much like a converted footpath, but it does on the other side, by the Blue Lantern, or whatever it's called. Both are incorrectly signposted, so not legally binding.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,417 ✭✭✭ reprazant


    droidus wrote: »
    The cycle lane is located ON the footpath. Its as clear as day. Splashing some paint on the footpath does not change the fact that it is a footpath.

    I dont think this is a particularly difficult principle to grasp, but it I guess it takes all sorts.

    I would have said that the cycle lane is beside the footpath.

    The markings on it specify the difference.

    By your logic, there is no such thing as a cycle lane, it is either the footpath or the road.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,965 ✭✭✭✭ Zulu


    So, Zulu, do you reckon that you would consider it safe to cycle down this section of "cycle path" at a fast pace, say 30-35 km/h.
    No, I don't.
    What about the motorists who feel...
    What about whataboutary?
    such an obviously inadequate facility.
    It may well be inadequate, I don't deny that. It is however, very clearly a cyclepath (albeit inadequate).
    droidus wrote: »
    I dont think this is a particularly difficult principle to grasp, but it I guess it takes all sorts.
    Clearly it does, you can't seem to recognise that which is right in front of you, even though it has a different surface & is clearly marked.


  • Registered Users Posts: 516 ✭✭ rich.d.berry


    Zulu wrote: »
    This cut's both ways, there's a similar set up (but with far more room) along the cost between Sutton & Clontarf. I've had numerous cyclists ring there bell at me to get out of their way even though I've been on the footpath.

    Perhaps they're being courteous and announcing their approach so as not to scare you when they pass on the cycle path.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,965 ✭✭✭✭ Zulu


    reprazant wrote: »
    By your logic, there is no such thing as a cycle lane, it is either the footpath or the road.

    I reckon (s)he's driving at a system similar to what I've seen elsewhere where there is a kerp between the road & the cyclepath, creating an additional mini road between the road & the footpath.

    I've no idea where (s)he thinks the money for such a massive & expensive undertaking would come from though.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 10,965 ✭✭✭✭ Zulu


    Perhaps they're being courteous and announcing their approach so as not to scare you when they pass on the cycle path.
    Perhaps, but they never looked like they were going to pop down the kerb onto the road & pop back up again.

    ....but these are only a few people. And small amounts of people tend to be dicks regardless of what they are doing.


Advertisement