New traffic regulations affecting cyclists

galwaycyclist

S.I. No. 332/2012 — Road Traffic (Traffic and Parking) (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2012.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2012/en/si/0332.html

I havent gone through it all yet looks like they have made it legal to for cyclists to pass on the left in additionan circumstances

Mycroft H

galwaycyclist wrote: »

S.I. No. 332/2012 — Road Traffic (Traffic and Parking) (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2012.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2012/en/si/0332.html

I havent gone through it all yet looks like they have made it legal to for cyclists to pass on the left in additionan circumstances

They seem to have made more cycle lanes legal (the ones with the shared pedestrain footpath). Yay

buffalo

To save people hunting out the relevant sections, I think these are them all.

16. The Principal Regulations are amended—
(d) in article 10—
(ii) by substituting for sub-article (5) the following:

(b) A pedal cyclist may overtake on the left where vehicles to the pedal cyclist’s right are stationary or are moving more slowly than the overtaking pedal cycle, except where the vehicle to be overtaken—

(i) has signalled an intention to turn to the left and there is a reasonable expectation that the vehicle in which the driver has signalled an intention to turn to the left will execute a movement to the left before the cycle overtakes the vehicle,

(ii) is stationary for the purposes of permitting a passenger or passengers to alight or board the vehicle, or

(iii) is stationary for the purposes of loading or unloading.”,

Amendment of Principal Regulations

16. The Principal Regulations are amended—

(e) by substituting for article 14 (inserted by article 6 of the Regulations of 1998) the following:

“Cycle tracks

14. (1) A cycle track shall be indicated by—

(a) traffic sign number RUS 009 (with-flow cycle track) provided in association with traffic sign number RRM 022 (continuous white line) or RRM 023 (broken white line) which latter signs may be marked on the right hand edge of the cycle track or on the right hand and left hand edges of the cycle track,

(b) traffic sign number RUS 059 (contra-flow cycle track) provided in association with traffic sign number RRM 022 (continuous white line) which may be marked on the right hand edge of the cycle track or on the left hand edge of the cycle track or on both sides, or

(c) traffic sign number RUS 058 (shared track for pedal cycles and pedestrians).

(2) The periods of operation of a cycle track may be indicated on an information plate which may be provided in association with traffic sign number RUS 009, RUS 059 or RUS 058.

(3) Where a cycle track, provided by traffic sign number RUS 009 in association with traffic sign number RRM 022 (continuous white line) or RRM 023 (broken white line), is two-way, pedal cycles shall be driven as near as possible to the left hand side of each lane.

(4) A pedal cycle shall be driven on a cycle track where—

(a) a cycle track is provided on a road, a portion of a road, or an area at the entrance to which traffic sign number RUS 021 (pedestrianised street or area) is provided, or

(b) a cycle track is a contra-flow cycle track where traffic sign number RUS 059 is provided and pedal cycles shall only be driven in a contra-flow direction on such track.

(5)(a) A mechanically propelled vehicle, other than a mechanically propelled wheelchair, shall not be driven along or across a cycle track on the right hand edge of which traffic sign number RRM 022 has been provided, save for the purposes of access to or egress from a place adjacent to the cycle track or from a roadway to such a place.

(b) A reference in paragraph (a) to driving along or across a cycle track shall include a reference to driving wholly or partly along or across a cycle track.

(6) Where a vehicle is parked on that part of a road in relation to which traffic sign number RUS 009 is provided in association with traffic sign number RRM 022 or RRM 023 or traffic sign number RUS 059 is provided in association with traffic sign number RRM 022 or at a place where traffic sign number RUS 058 is provided, in advance of the commencement of the period indicated on an information plate which may accompany traffic sign number RUS 009, RUS 059 or RUS 058, the parking of the said vehicle shall cease and the vehicle shall be removed from that part of the road prior to the commencement of that period save where article 5(5) applies.

(7)(a) A shared track shall be indicated by the provision of traffic sign number RUS 058 (shared track for pedal cycles and pedestrians) and the design displayed on the particular traffic sign number RUS 058 that is provided will indicate if the shared track is a non-segregated track where there is no visual or physical segregation of use between pedestrians and persons driving pedal cycles or if the shared track is a segregated track with a continuous white line on the track or a barrier provided along the length of the track signifying a separate area for use by persons driving pedal cycles and an adjoining separate area for use by pedestrians.

(b) At a location where traffic sign number RUS 058 indicates that a shared track is non-segregated, as described in paragraph (a), pedestrians and persons driving pedal cycles may use that track.

(c) At a location where traffic sign number RUS 058 indicates that a shared track is segregated, as described in paragraph (a), persons driving pedal cycles shall only use the area of the track that is designated on the sign for use by them and pedestrians shall only use the area of the track that is designated on the sign for use by them.

(d) A mechanically propelled vehicle, other than a mechanically propelled wheelchair, shall not be driven along or across a shared track where traffic sign number RUS 058 is provided, save for the purposes of access to or egress from a place adjacent to the shared track or from a roadway to such a place.

(e) A reference in paragraph (d) to driving along or across a shared track shall include a reference to driving wholly or partly along or across a shared track.

(f) The end of a prohibition or of a restriction under this sub-article shall be indicated by the provision of traffic sign number RUS 058 accompanied by an information plate specifying the word ‘Críoch/END’.

(g) In this sub-article, ‘pedestrians’ includes any person using a wheelchair, mechanically propelled, or otherwise.”,

(s) by substituting for article 47 (as amended by Regulation 3 of the Road Traffic (Traffic and Parking) (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2011 ( S.I. No. 673 of 2011 )) the following:

“Pedal cyclists

47. (1) A pedal cyclist shall not drive a pedal cycle on a roadway in such a manner as to result in more than 2 pedal cyclists driving abreast, save when overtaking other pedal cyclists, and then only if to do so will not endanger, inconvenience or obstruct other traffic or pedestrians.

(2) Pedal cyclists on a roadway shall cycle in single file when overtaking other traffic.

(3) A pedal cyclist facing traffic sign number RTS 006 or RTS 007 (cycle traffic lights) in which one lamp is lit and which shows a symbol of a pedal cycle in green, may proceed beyond that traffic sign provided no other road user is endangered.

(4) Where traffic sign number RTS 006 or RTS 007 (cycle traffic lights) is provided, and a lamp in that traffic sign is lit and shows a symbol of a pedal cycle in red, a person shall not drive a pedal cycle past the traffic sign.

(5) Where traffic sign number—

(i) RTS 006 is provided and a lamp in the traffic sign is lit on an intermittent basis showing a symbol of a pedal cycle in green, or

(ii) RTS 007 is provided and a lamp in the traffic sign is lit showing a symbol of a pedal cyclist in amber,

a pedal cyclist may not cross the road unless he or she has begun to do so while a lamp showing a symbol of a pedal cycle in green is lit on a constant basis.

(6) Where an amber lamp in traffic sign number RTS 007 is lit on an intermittent basis, a person driving a pedal cycle may only proceed past the cycle traffic light where right of way is yielded to any pedestrian who has begun to cross the roadway or the cycle track at the traffic lights.”.

RUS 009 (with-flow cycle track):


RUS 021 (pedestrianised street or area)

RUS 058 (shared track for pedal cycles and pedestrians):


RUS 059 (contra-flow cycle track - UK version):

dited

(4) A pedal cycle shall be driven on a cycle track where—

(a) a cycle track is provided on a road, a portion of a road, or an area at the entrance to which traffic sign number RUS 021 (pedestrianised street or area) is provided

Would the above tend to imply that it's no longer mandatory to use off-road cycle tracks?

Blowfish

dited wrote: »

Would the above tend to imply that it's no longer mandatory to use off-road cycle tracks?

That's what I was wondering. It seems to imply that you now only have to use cycle tracks in pedestrian and contra flow situations.

Mycroft H

dited wrote: »

Would the above tend to imply that it's no longer mandatory to use off-road cycle tracks?

I wouldn't think unless the original statute was removed

dited

BX 19 wrote: »

I wouldn't think unless the original statute was removed

I think that the below indicates that it's replacing the relevant section of the original legislation (SI 182/1997) -

Leo's new laws wrote:

(e) by substituting for article 14 (inserted by article 6 of the Regulations of 1998) the following: ....

buffalo

Blowfish wrote: »

That's what I was wondering. It seems to imply that you now only have to use cycle tracks in pedestrian and contra flow situations.

From what I recall from my correspondence with Leo, he wanted to make sure that if you had a one-way street with a contra-flow cycle track, it wasn't legal to cycle on the road in the contra-flow direction. Down with salmoning!

buffalo

BX 19 wrote: »

I wouldn't think unless the original statute was removed

I've amended my extracts, as dited pointed out, there is some replacement of the old statutes.

youwhoglue

dited wrote: »

Would the above tend to imply that it's no longer mandatory to use off-road cycle tracks?

Open to interpretation IMO

1997:

All pedal cycles must be driven on a cycle track where one is provided.

2012 Amendment:

A pedal cycle shall be driven on a cycle track where—


(a) a cycle track is provided on a road, a portion of a road, or an area at the entrance to which traffic sign number RUS 021 (pedestrianised street or area) is provided, or


(b) a cycle track is a contra-flow cycle track where traffic sign number RUS 059 is provided and pedal cycles shall only be driven in a contra-flow direction on such track

Must is a lot stronger than shall though

Blowfish

If it wasn't replacing the 1997 bit, the 2012 amendment would be completely redundant though, which is what's making me wonder about it.

youwhoglue

Blowfish wrote: »

If it wasn't replacing the 1997 bit, the 2012 amendment would be completely redundant though, which is what's making me wonder about it.

Article 14 is removed from the 1997 Requlations saying you must use the cycle lane but what replaces it doesn't make it clear whether or not you have to use the cycle lane.

Enduro

(4) A pedal cycle shall be driven on a cycle track where—

(a) a cycle track is provided on a road, a portion of a road, or an area at the entrance to which traffic sign number RUS 021 (pedestrianised street or area) is provided, or

I'm wondering about the interpretation of (4)(a)... Is it to be read as

• Any track on road at the entrance to which traffic sign number RUS 021 is provided AND
• any track on a portion of road at the entrance to which traffic sign number RUS 021 is provided AND
• any track at an area at the entrance to which traffic sign number RUS 021 is provided

OR

• any track on a road, AND
• any track on a portion of road, AND
• any track at an area at the entrance to which traffic sign number RUS 021 is provided

Two very different meanings! The second interpretation would make all on road cycle tracks mandatory, which obviously is not a good thing.

Any opinions on which way it should be read?

youwhoglue

Enduro wrote: »

.

Any opinions on which way it should be read?

IMO
must is definite
shall is optional

dited

Enduro wrote: »

I'm wondering about the interpretation of (4)(a)... Is it to be read as

• Any track on road at the entrance to which traffic sign number RUS 021 is provided AND
• any track on a portion of road at the entrance to which traffic sign number RUS 021 is provided AND
• any track at an area at the entrance to which traffic sign number RUS 021 is provided

OR

• any track on a road, AND
• any track on a portion of road, AND
• any track at an area at the entrance to which traffic sign number RUS 021 is provided

IMO the latter interpretation would appear to be correct, unfortunately.

jinkypolly

Enduro wrote: »

I'm wondering about the interpretation of (4)(a)... Is it to be read as

• Any track on road at the entrance to which traffic sign number RUS 021 is provided AND
• any track on a portion of road at the entrance to which traffic sign number RUS 021 is provided AND
• any track at an area at the entrance to which traffic sign number RUS 021 is provided

OR

• any track on a road, AND
• any track on a portion of road, AND
• any track at an area at the entrance to which traffic sign number RUS 021 is provided

Two very different meanings! The second interpretation would make all on road cycle tracks mandatory, which obviously is not a good thing.

Any opinions on which way it should be read?

Second one. 'shall' though is the get out.

Undercover Elephant

youwhoglue wrote: »

IMO
must is definite
shall is optional

That's wrong. "Shall" and "must" have the same legal meaning.

dited

youwhoglue wrote: »

IMO
must is definite
shall is optional

Much as I'd like to agree, I think "shall" in this context is synonymous with "must".

Undercover Elephant

The wording is far from clear, but I think it means they just made all cycle tracks compulsory, as long as they have a blue sign and a white line.

NeedMoreGears

In terms of the two interpretations above, I think the second is correct. RUS 021 refers to pedestrianised areas only and it wouldn't seem likely that cycle tracks are restricted to pedestrianised areas as the first interpretation would indicate.

Shall and must are the same - they indicate an obligation.

It seems they intend to tidy up some anomalies as regards cycle tracks on footpaths in that it would appear that all properly marked out and signed tracks are compulsary even those on the footpath. Anybody got a different view?

I seem to recall that footpaths are formally part of the road but I don't remember why. Hence the obligation to use a track provided on the road would cover those on the footpath (if you see what I mean). Does that ring a bell with anyone?

Undercover Elephant

NeedMoreGears wrote: »

I seem to recall that footpaths are formally part of the road but I don't remember why. Hence the obligation to use a track provided on the road would cover those on the footpath (if you see what I mean). Does that ring a bell with anyone?

That's correct - the definition goes back to the Roads Act, 1993:

“road” includes—

(a) any street, lane, footpath, square, court, alley or passage,

(b) any bridge, viaduct, underpass, subway, tunnel, overpass, overbridge, flyover, carriageway (whether single or multiple), pavement or footway,

(c) any weighbridge or other facility for the weighing or inspection of vehicles, toll plaza or other facility for the collection of tolls, service area, emergency telephone, first aid post, culvert, arch, gulley, railing, fence, wall, barrier, guardrail, margin, kerb, lay-by, hard shoulder, island, pedestrian refuge, median, central reserve, channelliser, roundabout, gantry, pole, ramp, bollard, pipe, wire, cable, sign, signal or lighting forming part of the road, and

(d) any other structure or thing forming part of the road and—

(i) necessary for the safety, convenience or amenity of road users or for the construction, maintenance, operation or management of the road or for the protection of the environment, or

(ii) prescribed by the Minister;

But there's a slight problem with this, because it makes that bit about the pedestrianised street redundant. A pedestrianised street is still a "road".

youwhoglue

dited wrote: »

Much as I'd like to agree, I think "shall" in this context is synonymous with "must".

I take your point. The definitions are the same. But why the change from must to shall in the wording? It seems like a weak attempt at relaxing the rule. :rolleyes:

When you e-mailed Leo did you take it that mandatory use of cycle lanes was going?
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=80413160&postcount=122

NeedMoreGears

Thanks UE - just found the relevant section.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1993/en/act/pub/0014/sec0002.html

A pedestrianised street probably gets covered under the definition of "footway", which itself is part of the road. I think the idea is that the term "road" covers everything and the specific signage etc defines how various components of the "road" may or must be used.

But the bottom line is that use of cycle tracks is mandatory (as was always the case) but it's a little clearer (or not!) regarding those on footpaths.

The one I'm not clear about at all are the off-road tracks, which don't seem to form part of the "road" - presumably they are covered elsewhere.

galwaycyclist

NeedMoreGears wrote: »

Thanks UE - just found the relevant section.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1993/en/act/pub/0014/sec0002.html

A pedestrianised street probably gets covered under the definition of "footway", which itself is part of the road. I think the idea is that the term "road" covers everything and the specific signage etc defines how various components of the "road" may or must be used.

But the bottom line is that use of cycle tracks is mandatory (as was always the case) but it's a little clearer (or not!) regarding those on footpaths.

The one I'm not clear about at all are the off-road tracks, which don't seem to form part of the "road" - presumably they are covered elsewhere.

See section 68 of the Act above a cycleway is a road set aside for cyclists or cyclists and pedestrians.

A footway is that part of a road that is provided for pedestrians not being the roadway. A pedestrian street is a road from which vehicles are excluded.

nomdeboardie

Whoa - and right at the bottom, as an "Explanatory Note", he spells out what I was hoping was implied (reading between the lines):

new and amended requirements for use of cycle tracks (only use of contraflow cycle track and of any cycle track in pedestrianised area is mandatory)

dited

youwhoglue wrote: »

When you e-mailed Leo did you take it that mandatory use of cycle lanes was going?
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=80413160&postcount=122

Yes. Although his reply to me was a little vague, there were other indications that he intended to fully rescind mandatory usage:

Dáil &#201 wrote: »

Deputy Seán Crowe asked the Minister his plans to remove the mandatory use requirement for cycle lanes; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

Deputy Leo Varadkar: This is an easy one. The Deputy asks if there are plans to remove the mandatory use requirement for cycle lanes. The removal of the requirement to use cycle lanes where provided is one of the undertakings in the national cycle policy framework. Subject to finalising some safety aspects of the proposal, I hope to make the necessary amending regulations later in the year.

Where a cycle lane is provided, cyclists are required to use it, even if it is damaged or in a bad condition or inappropriate to use it. The Government agrees that the regulation should be changed and it will be.

Edit: And so he has! Well-spotted, nomdeboardie!

Undercover Elephant

So that suggests it ought to be read as:

a cycle track is provided on:
(i) a road,
(ii) a portion of a road, or
(iii) an area -
at the entrance to which, in each case, traffic sign number RUS 021 (pedestrianised street or area) is provided

Plastik

My brain hurts. I think I'll just continue as I have been.

kenmc

So according to the little blurb at the bottom of the link in the first post, as and from 1 Oct 2012, we no longer are obliged to use a cycle track unless it is contraflow, and/or in a pedestrianized area.
Finally.

youwhoglue

nomdeboardie wrote: »

Whoa - and right at the bottom, as an "Explanatory Note", he spells out what I was hoping was implied (reading between the lines):

Hurrah!

(This note is not part of the Instrument and does not purport to be a legal interpretation)

but it is the most logical.

buffalo

ha! Thanks to those who spotted the explanatory note. I think my brain has been conditioned to ignore "Terms and Conditions" notices.

nomdeboardie

kenmc wrote: »

... the little blurb at the bottom ...

Yeah - truly a case of "Where's Waldo?"

nomdeboardie

So the next question is: how to ensure this is publicised, including to the Gardai?!

In the meantime, I suppose I should print the document, with relevant bits and explanatory note highlighted, to wave at aggressive motorists and the aforementioned law enforcers?

Enduro

nomdeboardie wrote: »

Whoa - and right at the bottom, as an "Explanatory Note", he spells out what I was hoping was implied (reading between the lines):

Woooohoooo!

Finally!

nomdeboardie

galwaycyclist wrote: »

S.I. No. 332/2012 — Road Traffic (Traffic and Parking) (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2012.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2012/en/si/0332.html

...

+ Well-spotted by galwaycyclist!

Hmm...wonder if Varadkar et al. would be just as happy if we didn't find out that it had finally happened... :rolleyes:

monument

It's about time. Waiting for this for some time -- at least the last time they said soon they were true to their word.

nomdeboardie

Bonus! We're allowed to use bus contraflow lanes now, apparently:

(3) A person shall not enter a contra-flow bus lane with a vehicle
other than a large public service vehicle or a pedal cycle.

and, from the Explanatory Note at the bottom:

(including change in law to permit pedal cyclists to use contra-flow bus lanes and bus-only streets)

(I know it was previously prohibited for the lane on Stephen's Green East, anyway; wonder if the sign will be amended)

galwaycyclist

(3) A person shall not enter a contra-flow bus lane with a vehicle other than a large public service vehicle or a pedal cycle.

Looks like its now legal for cyclists to use contraflow bus lanes.


Edit nomdeboardie beat me to it on the bus lanes

Also Cyclist.ie was looking for a statement that motorists could cross a solid white line to pass cyclists. Minister Kelly had indicated he was in favour - any sign of this one in there?

galwaycyclist

There are also new traffic signs regulations

S.I. No. 331/2012 — Road Traffic (Signs) (Amendment) Regulations 2012.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2012/en/si/0331.html

Looks like they have legalised the use of small traffic lights for cyclists

Traffic lights for pedal cyclists


36A.(1) Traffic sign numbers RTS 006 and RTS 007 shall, by mechanical means, control the crossing of a road by pedal cyclists.


(2) Traffic sign number RTS 006 shall consist of a set of 2 lamps and comply with the following conditions:


(a) it shall face the pedal cyclists whose movements it is intended to control;


(b) one lamp shall show, when lit, a symbol of a pedal cycle in green on a black background, indicating that pedal cyclists may cross the road;


(c) the lamp referred to in paragraph (b) may be illuminated on an intermittent basis indicating that pedal cyclists already in the course of crossing the road may continue to do so but otherwise pedal cyclists shall not cross the road;


(d) the other lamp shall show, when lit, a symbol of a pedal cycle in red on a black background indicating that pedal cyclists shall not cross the road;


(e) the lamps shall be arranged vertically, the lamp showing a display in red when lit being arranged above the other;


(f) each lamp shall be separately illuminated and the diameter of the lens of each shall be between 200 millimetres and 215 millimetres or between 80 millimetres and 110 millimetres;


(g) the centres of the lenses of lamps with a diameter between 200 millimetres and 215 millimetres shall not be more than 380 millimetres apart and the centres of the lenses of lamps with a diameter between 80 millimetres and 110 millimetres shall not be more than 150 millimetres apart;


(h) each lamp shall be lighted and extinguished in turn at intervals determined by an automatic or manually-operated device;


(i) subject to paragraph (j), when the lenses of the lamps have a diameter that is between 200 millimetres and 215 millimetres, the lower edge of the lower lamp shall not be not less than 2.1 metres and not more than 3.05 metres above the surface of the ground in the immediate vicinity and, when the lenses have diameter that is between 80 millimetres and 110 millimetres, the lower edge of the lower lamp shall be between 1.5 metres and 1.7 metres and not more than 3.05 metres above the ground in the immediate vicinity;


(j) when traffic sign number RTS 006 is provided at a place where roadworks are being carried out or is provided for other temporary traffic management purposes, the lower edge of the lower lamp shall not be less than 1.1 metres and not more than 3.05 metres above the surface of the ground in the immediate vicinity.


(3) Traffic sign number RTS 007 shall consist of a set of 3 lamps and comply with the conditions set out in paragraphs (a), (f), (g) and (h) of sub-article (2) and with the following conditions:


(a) one lamp, when lit, shall show a symbol of a pedal cycle in green on a black background, indicating that pedal cyclists may cross the road;


(b) a second lamp, when lit, shall show a symbol of a pedal cycle in amber on a black background indicating that pedal cyclists may not cross the road unless they have already begun to do so while the lamp described in paragraph (a) was lit;


(c) when the second lamp described in paragraph (b) is lit on an intermittent basis, it indicates that pedal cyclists may only proceed past the cycle traffic lights provided that right of way is yielded to any pedestrian who has already begun to cross the roadway or cycle track;


(d) a third lamp, when lit, shall show a symbol of a pedal cycle in red on a black background, indicating that pedal cyclists shall not cross the road;


(e) the lamps referred to in paragraphs (a), (b) and (d) shall be arranged vertically, the lamp showing a display in red, when lit, being uppermost and the lamp showing a display in green, when lit, being lowermost;


(f) subject to paragraph (g), when the lenses of the lamps have a diameter that is between 200 millimetres and 215 millimetres, the lower edge of the lowermost lamp shall be not less than 2.1 metres and not more than 3.05 metres above the surface of the ground in the immediate vicinity and, when the lenses of the lamps have a diameter that is between 80 millimetres and 110 millimetres, the lower edge of the lowermost lamp shall be between 1.5 metres and 1.7 metres and not more than 3.05 metres above the ground in the immediate vicinity;


(g) where traffic sign RTS 007 is provided at a place where roadworks are being carried out or is provided for other temporary traffic management purposes, the lower edge of the lowermost lamp shall not be less than 1.1 metres and not more than 3.05 metres above the surface of the ground in the immediate vicinity.

youwhoglue

nomdeboardie wrote: »

So the next question is: how to ensure this is publicised, including to the Gardai?!

In the meantime, I suppose I should print the document, with relevant bits and explanatory note highlighted, to wave at aggressive motorists and the aforementioned law enforcers?

From Oct 1st:

1) Fit 21 pages of the amendment onto A4 sheet double sided,
2) Roll up 3 or so for back pocket per trip
3) Identify driver who doesn't know the law (listen for beep and/or see hand gesture)
4) Pop said sheet under driver's wiper when stopped at light (you'll probably catch up)
5) Smile and wave cheerily

If queried say it's public service announcement :pac:

NeedMoreGears

NeedMoreGears wrote: »

In terms of the two interpretations above, I think the second is correct. RUS 021 refers to pedestrianised areas only and it wouldn't seem likely that cycle tracks are restricted to pedestrianised areas as the first interpretation would indicate.

Doh! - very happy to have got this one a$$ways.

When will this come into force or it is already in force?

Blowfish

NeedMoreGears wrote: »

Doh! - very happy to have got this one a$$ways.

When will this come into force or it is already in force?

October 1st, so already in force.

ezra_pound

youwhoglue wrote: »

IMO
must is definite
shall is optional

That's why God used the shall form when he gave Moses his law to pass on to His chosen people.

Thou shall not kill - that commandment was definitely optional!

Chips Lovell

I'm both relieved and delighted that they followed through on the previous government's commitment to change the law. The longer it went on, the more I began to worry that they might row back on it.

buffalo

nomdeboardie wrote: »

+ Well-spotted by galwaycyclist!

Hmm...wonder if Varadkar et al. would be just as happy if we didn't find out that it had finally happened... :rolleyes:

I've emailed Leo to say thanks, and ask him to publicise it a bit.

cantalach

So, just so I'm clear, are we saying that in the light of the explanatory paragraph at the end of the new regulations, the correct answer to Enduro's question is the one I've highlighted in bold?

Enduro wrote: »

I'm wondering about the interpretation of (4)(a)... Is it to be read as

• Any track on road at the entrance to which traffic sign number RUS 021 is provided AND
• any track on a portion of road at the entrance to which traffic sign number RUS 021 is provided AND
• any track at an area at the entrance to which traffic sign number RUS 021 is provided

OR

• any track on a road, AND
• any track on a portion of road, AND
• any track at an area at the entrance to which traffic sign number RUS 021 is provided

cdaly_

As in 'neither'?...


I'd say, given that the explanatory note explicitly claims not to be legal interpretation, that it depends on the mood of the judge on the day.

Now all we need is a bit of enforcement...

Chips Lovell

buffalo wrote: »

I've emailed Leo to say thanks, and ask him to publicise it a bit.

http://www.businesspost.ie/#!story/Home/News/Varadkar+abolishes+requirement+for+cyclists+to+use+cycle+lanes/id/19410615-5218-5085-7ae6-7b87b0401760

It's a start.

dubmess

"(b) A pedal cyclist may overtake on the left where vehicles to the pedal cyclist’s right are stationary or are moving more slowly than the overtaking pedal cycle, except where the vehicle to be overtaken—

(i) has signalled an intention to turn to the left and there is a reasonable expectation that the vehicle in which the driver has signalled an intention to turn to the left will execute a movement to the left before the cycle overtakes the vehicle,

(ii) is stationary for the purposes of permitting a passenger or passengers to alight or board the vehicle, "

Does this mean that if I get doored by someone getting out of a taxi it's my fault?

Chips Lovell

dubmess wrote: »

Does this mean that if I get doored by someone getting out of a taxi it's my fault?

Bearing in mind that it was technically illegal to cycle up the inside of any traffic before, I'd guess that it depends on the context. If the driver has signalled and pulled over properly to let someone off and you cycle up their inside, then you're probably in the wrong. If they're letting someone out without pulling in, then they probably are.

opti0nal

dubmess wrote: »

...except where the vehicle to be overtaken (i) has signalled an intention to turn to the left

And, if, as is often the case, the driver does not signal....? .