Drivers Offering 'Advice'

humbert

I was cycling through Dundalk today when some driver started beeping furiously behind me. I looked around to see him gesturing vigorously toward one of the new cycle lanes (pictured below). I don't use them because they are utterly stupid and dangerous.

[lengthy description of stupid cycle lates]
On a couple of nice safe wide roads around Dundalk they have moved the parked cars out about the width of a car on each side, delineated by a dashed line of kerb stones, and put a cycle late between the parked cars and the footpath.

This cycle lane then crosses the foothpath where it juts out for pedestrian crossings. Where side roads come out on to this road cars must wait sitting across this cycle lane to see beyond the parked cars and cars turning left off this road must then cross the cycle lane and since there is a line of parked cares between the cycle lane and them there is no possibility of them seeing a cyclist.
[/lengthy description of stupid cycle lates]

It was just after the point in the photo below that the driver started beeping. I'm normally a pretty calm cyclist. Happy enough to stop at traffic lights, let drivers out, I generally don't even get pissed off when pedestrians pop out (unless it's a close call and I've had the **** scared out of me) but his pissed me off and I gave him the finger.

Not very mature but why do drivers feel entitled to scold/advise cyclist? Judging on other threads here they definitely don't appreciate it when cyclists give them advice, even politely.

Ok, that's long and ranty but are there times where giving advice is a good idea (by cyclists or drivers)?

PS. The photo was taken a while ago, the roadworks are finished. Perhaps there has already been mention of these cycle lanes, if there hasn't I'm surprised.

Dermot Illogical

Based on your description of the lane and his behaviour, I'd be inclined to ignore both.

Mycroft H

Because drivers always think that they are right and everybody apart from themselves is wrong.

The next time you get a driver wildly gesticulating in your direction, blow a kiss in their direction and cycle off. Ignore them, they're not worth it.

kuro_man

How dare you delay a motorist - cycles lanes are provided to get cyclists out of the way, you know!

humbert

kuro_man wrote: »

How dare you delay a motorist - cycles lanes are provided to get cyclists out of the way, you know!

That's the thing. The changes have caused such congestion that I was being slowed down by the car in front. It was obviously just the principle of the thing.

Surveyor11

These are 'suggested' lanes (broken line) rather than 'obligatory' lanes (single continouos line). You can quiet happily mix in traffic form the former, but the latter must be adhered to - contition depending, of course. Mind you, if motorists respected either it would be a good start.

Chips Lovell

Every time I see a picture of those cycle lanes in Dundalk I feel like I've taken hallucinogenic drugs.

seamus

I'm convinced that a road planner in Louth got bored in a meeting, started doodling on his printout, and then accidentally submitted that as the final draft.

buffalo

Surveyor11 wrote: »

These are 'suggested' lanes (broken line) rather than 'obligatory' lanes (single continouos line). You can quiet happily mix in traffic form the former, but the latter must be adhered to - contition depending, of course. Mind you, if motorists respected either it would be a good start.

I think we realised this wasn't the case - all cycle lanes with the required signage are legally mandatory for cyclists. The broken white line indicates that you can leave the lane if:

*you have already indicated you want to change direction,
*a bus is letting passengers on or off at a bus stop located beside the track
*a vehicle is parked in the track while loading or unloading

The difference being that with a solid white line you can't leave the lane, even if there's a vehicle parked in it. I think legally you're obliged to crawl underneath it, and drag your bike behind.

Undercover Elephant

kuro_man wrote: »

How dare you delay a motorist - cycles lanes are provided to get cyclists out of the way, you know!

Well I got the same yesterday from a motorcyclist.

Exactly how I was slowing him down wasn't very clear, given the vast expanse of road in which he could have overtaken, and the traffic lights 100m later. Unless you count the bit where he waited in the road to point at the crumbly pink thing which he claimed was a "cycling track".

Lumen

"I cycle too but..."

billyhead

I would not worry about it. I get the odd dope in a car or truck shouting out the window at me as they pass. Problay out of frustration or being jealous that they don't have the fitness to get up of their arse and cycle.:D

seamus

There's an unwritten rule anyway that road users of differing formats aren't allowed to speak to eachother under any circumstances. All communication is assumed to be offensive and angry and should be responded to in kind.

Only a road user in the same type of vehicle as you is entitled to speak to you and give you tips or tell you that you've a flat tyre, etc.

rp

I'm always getting advice from drivers on the N4 that I shouldn't be driving on a motorway.
Should they be driving without knowledge of the rules of the road?

Indricotherium

rp wrote: »

I'm always getting advice from drivers on the N4 that I shouldn't be driving on a motorway.
Should they be driving without knowledge of the rules of the road?

The best of this I ever saw was a lad in an artic, that while shouting out the window at me, drove up onto the divide between the M50 ramp and the N4 on the way to town.

Hermy

BX 19 wrote: »

Because drivers always think that they are right and everybody apart from themselves is wrong.

I knew a cyclist once with a similar attitude.

MajorMax

Hang on here a minute, can someone explain to me the reason that cyclists feel that they can ignore cycle lanes and rules of the road?

The cycle lanes are there for a reason, unless you have a valid reason, you should use the cycle lanes.

I guarantee if the OP put his post on the Motors forum you'd get a completely different answer

seamus

MajorMax wrote: »

The cycle lanes are there for a reason, unless you have a valid reason, you should use the cycle lanes

I agree.

Thankfully there are valid reasons for avoiding most cycle lanes, from them being unsuitable for riding on, to putting cylists in dangerous positions.

Chips Lovell

MajorMax wrote: »

Hang on here a minute, can someone explain to me the reason that cyclists feel that they can ignore cycle lanes and rules of the road?

The cycle lanes are there for a reason, unless you have a valid reason, you should use the cycle lanes.

I guarantee if the OP put his post on the Motors forum you'd get a completely different answer

You do know that the government has announced that it is removing the mandatory use provision for all cycle tracks?

Mycroft H

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

You do know that the government has announced that it is removing the mandatory use provision for all cycle tracks?

That's the important bit. We could be quite a while waiting until it turns into law.

Undercover Elephant

MajorMax wrote: »

Hang on here a minute, can someone explain to me the reason that cyclists feel that they can ignore cycle lanes and rules of the road?

In addition to what seamus just said, most cycle tracks are not mandatory anyway. This would include the ones in the original post. The motorist who complained to the OP clearly doesn't actually know the rules of the road.

humbert

MajorMax wrote: »

The cycle lanes are there for a reason, unless you have a valid reason, you should use the cycle lanes.

I think you'll have to expand on this. I gave a lengthy reason. Do you feel it is not valid?

Posting this in motors would be tantamount to trolling.

Lumen

MajorMax wrote: »

The cycle lanes are there for a reason, unless you have a valid reason, you should use the cycle lanes.

I don't think anyone would disagree with that.

Similarly, you must stab yourself in the face unless you have a valid reason not to do so.

rp

humbert wrote: »

I think you'll have to expand on this. I gave a lengthy reason. Do you feel it is not valid?

It's been covered a million times before in this forum, but here are some of the main problems:

• Unless correctly sign-posted cycle paths are pavements (can't cycle on pavements, against the law)
• Many cycle paths put the cyclist into a dangerous position (car-door zone, inside left-turning trucks, into drivers blind-spots)
• Unless of a decent size, they encourage drivers to pass the cyclist without a safe clearence

Dermot Illogical

MajorMax wrote: »

I guarantee if the OP put his post on the Motors forum you'd get a completely different answer

On account of their familiarity with the suitability of cycle infrastructure?

buffalo

Indricotherium wrote: »

The best of this I ever saw was a lad in an artic, that while shouting out the window at me, drove up onto the divide between the M50 ramp and the N4 on the way to town.

I had a driver give me a right squeeze coming off a roundabout. I moved around to his outside while he was in traffic and quite politely asked him would he leave a bit more room next time. He declared he had given me plenty of room (as the traffic started moving), and he told me he was in perfect control of his vehicle... as he drove up onto the kerb.

humbert

rp wrote: »

It's been covered a million times before in this forum, but here are some of the main problems:

• Unless correctly sign-posted cycle paths are pavements (can't cycle on pavements, against the law)
• Many cycle paths put the cyclist into a dangerous position (car-door zone, inside left-turning trucks, into drivers blind-spots)
• Unless of a decent size, they encourage drivers to pass the cyclist without a safe clearence

Oh, I was asking the poster why he/she thought my reason for avoiding the lane wasn't valid. Not whether there were valid reasons for doing so.

doozerie

MajorMax wrote:

Hang on here a minute, can someone explain to me the reason that cyclists feel that they can ignore cycle lanes and rules of the road?

The cycle lanes are there for a reason, unless you have a valid reason, you should use the cycle lanes.

I have a special dispensation note, which reads:

"Dear motorist,
Please excuse doozerie from using cycle lanes today as he is allergic to appalling road design, and collisions with pedestrians and motorists bring him out in a rash. Thanks for your understanding.

Yours sincerely,
doozerie's will to live"

07Lapierre

MajorMax wrote: »

Hang on here a minute, can someone explain to me the reason that cyclists feel that they can ignore cycle lanes and rules of the road?

The cycle lanes are there for a reason, unless you have a valid reason, you should use the cycle lanes.

I guarantee if the OP put his post on the Motors forum you'd get a completely different answer

To be fair, Cyclists must obey the Rules of the Road just like every other "Road user", but Self Preservation takes priority over poorly designed cycle lanes.

billyhead

You still get the odd eejit in their car/truck shouting out the window at you when there passing despite the fact that your not even breaking the rules of the orad on your bike. Its pure frustration on thier part that they can't overtake you without obstructing oncoming traffic. I have encountered it less so cycling in the city but more so on rural roads I use.

galwaycyclist

humbert wrote: »

I was cycling through Dundalk today when some driver started beeping furiously behind me. I looked around to see him gesturing vigorously toward one of the new cycle lanes (pictured below). I don't use them because they are utterly stupid and dangerous.

[lengthy description of stupid cycle lates]
On a couple of nice safe wide roads around Dundalk they have moved the parked cars out about the width of a car on each side, delineated by a dashed line of kerb stones, and put a cycle late between the parked cars and the footpath.

This cycle lane then crosses the foothpath where it juts out for pedestrian crossings. Where side roads come out on to this road cars must wait sitting across this cycle lane to see beyond the parked cars and cars turning left off this road must then cross the cycle lane and since there is a line of parked cares between the cycle lane and them there is no possibility of them seeing a cyclist.
[/lengthy description of stupid cycle lates]

It was just after the point in the photo below that the driver started beeping. I'm normally a pretty calm cyclist. Happy enough to stop at traffic lights, let drivers out, I generally don't even get pissed off when pedestrians pop out (unless it's a close call and I've had the **** scared out of me) but his pissed me off and I gave him the finger.

Not very mature but why do drivers feel entitled to scold/advise cyclist? Judging on other threads here they definitely don't appreciate it when cyclists give them advice, even politely.

Ok, that's long and ranty but are there times where giving advice is a good idea (by cyclists or drivers)?

PS. The photo was taken a while ago, the roadworks are finished. Perhaps there has already been mention of these cycle lanes, if there hasn't I'm surprised.

Hi Humbert

In the 1999 EU commission document "cycling the way ahead for towns and cities" there is a diagram pointing out why this type of design can be dangerous.

Do you have any pictures of the junction layouts? Are there gaps in the parking either side of the junctions so cyclists and motorists can see each other?

From memory the parking needs to stop 30m back from the junction (it could be more)

Have there been other incidents of harrassment or threatening behaviour towards cyclists using the normal road?