Irish Cycling Legislation

CramCycle

mackerski wrote: »

If, as a pedestrian on a road, I found a bike bearing down on me, I'd jump out of its way. So I'd like to think that shared tracks might be a little different.

I meant from a how your meant to behave, as in bikes should not be "bearing down" on you. I would suspect that they are meant to give you a wide berth where possible and travel at a safe speed to react to those road users around them. Is there any specific legislation on how road vehicles are meant to behave towards pedestrians eg on roads with no pavements.

Green&Red

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

That would be the idea alright. What I'd like to go for is having an FAQ type opening post, with discussion below. Then update the OP based on what emerges from the discussion.

I've updated the OP with regs on reflectors.

Now, does anyone know if there is any specific legislation applying to road position for cyclists? My understanding is that the same regs apply to all vehicle types, re. staying left.

Can anybody tell me where it says that if you are in a two lane road and the road is splitting and you are going to the right that you should be in the right hand lane. Had a row about this on the way in this morning when a white van beeped us for being in the right hand lane coming up to a junction where we were sticking to the right

Chips Lovell

There appears to be no legal prohibition on a cyclist changing lanes. The same laws that apply to motorised vehicles changing lanes also apply to pedal cycles.

Green&Red

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

There appears to be no legal prohibition on a cyclist changing lanes. The same laws that apply to motorised vehicles changing lanes also apply to pedal cycles.

Sorry that was the one i was looking for

Chips Lovell

S.I. No. 294/1964 - Road Traffic General Bye-Laws, 1964 probably applies here:

12.—(1) An authorised broken white line on a roadway shall indicate the boundary of a traffic lane.

(2) White arrows placed in traffic lanes at an approach to a road junction shall indicate to drivers the direction to be taken by traffic using those lanes, as follows :—

(a) in the case of arrows pointing straight ahead, a driver using the traffic lane in which those arrows are placed shall proceed straight through the junction ;

(b) in the case of arrows pointing or curved to the left, a driver using the traffic lane in which those arrows are placed shall turn left at the junction ;

(c) in the case of arrows pointing or curved to the right, a driver using the traffic lane in which those arrows are placed shall turn right at the junction.[

(3) A white line, terminating in an arrowhead and with an additional arrowhead branching from it to the left or to the right, placed in a traffic lane at an approach to a road junction shall indicate to drivers the direction to be taken by traffic using that lane, as follows :

(a) where the additional arrow branches to the left, a driver using the lane in which the white line is placed shall either proceed straight through the junction or turn left at the junction ;

(b) where the additional arrow branches to the right, a driver using the lane in which the white line is placed shall either proceed straight through the junction or turn right at the junction.

17.—(1) A driver shall drive as near to the left hand side of the roadway as is necessary in order to allow, without danger or inconvenience to traffic or a pedestrian, approaching traffic to pass him on his right and overtaking traffic to overtake him on his right.

(2) Save on a one-way roadway, a driver shall drive to the left of a traffic refuge.

(3) A driver shall not drive from one traffic lane to another without good cause, and without yielding the right of way to traffic in that other lane.

20. A driver approaching a road junction shall observe the following rules, save where a traffic sign requires a different course :

(a) if he intends to turn left at the junction, he shall drive on the left hand side of the roadway;

(b) if he intends to turn right at the junction, he shall drive close to the centre of the roadway, save that, when on a oneway roadway which is wide enough for more than one lane of traffic, he shall drive on the right hand side of the roadway.

Chips Lovell

I should probably note that under the act these bye-laws were drawn up, "driver" includes the rider of a pedal cycle.

Green&Red

Thanks VK, appreciate it

dastardly00

Absolutely great thread.

Can one of the mods add it to the 'popular threads' post in the Charter & FAQ sticky?

Darkglasses

dastardly00 wrote: »

Absolutely great thread.

Can one of the mods add it to the 'popular threads' post in the Charter & FAQ sticky?

Good idea, done

buffalo

With the recent video of motorcyclist vs cyclist doing the rounds, it might be worth pointing out that while it's probably not smart, it's not technically illegal (afaics) to use a mobile while cycling.

Road Traffic Act 2006, Section 3 - http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2006/en/act/pub/0023/sec0003.html#sec3

3.— (1) A person shall not while driving a mechanically propelled vehicle in a public place hold a mobile phone.

Chips Lovell

Actually, a bike doesn't count as a mechanically propelled vehicle. But I'm sure if the cops wanted to prosecute you, they could use a more broader dangerous driving type offence.

buffalo

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Actually, a bike doesn't count as a mechanically propelled vehicle.

That's what I was implying... I hope!

Chips Lovell

LOL, sorry, I managed to completely misread your post

garancafan

Question for OP:

Is it your intention to incorporate in the thread:-

1. Local authority bye-laws covering e.g. cycling in parks?

2. Definition of electrically-assisted bicycles?

Iwannahurl

mechanically propelled vehicle

What if the cyclist is a mechanic?

CramCycle

garancafan wrote: »

Question for OP:

Is it your intention to incorporate in the thread:-

1. Local authority bye-laws covering e.g. cycling in parks?

I imagine that would cause too much confusion and long windedness. I would imagine it to be more sensible to stick to traffic law only. Only my opinion though

Chips Lovell

garancafan wrote: »

Question for OP:

Is it your intention to incorporate in the thread:-

1. Local authority bye-laws covering e.g. cycling in parks?

2. Definition of electrically-assisted bicycles?

I've a few updates to make based on the last few pages and I'll do them when I get a chance before moving on to new topics.

I'd have to go looking at bye-laws. I know a few people have looked at the Phoenix Park bye-laws and there's precious little mention of cycling in them.

No Pants

Is there anything anywhere on tyres for bicycles? I'm thinking along the lines of a tread requirement. I'm looking through irishstatutebook.ie but I haven't come across anything so far (plenty of interesting misc., but not related to cycling).

Bloggsie

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Following some recent discussions on a few threads, I thought it worthwhile to start a thread to round up all the various bits of legislation related to cycling. It might be useful to try have everything in one place, to serve as a sort of FAQ.

good evening Vladimir,
I applaude your effort in putting this out there. Cyclists can be aware of the rules of the road yet every day while coming from work & going to work in Dublin city centre i see cyclists skipping through red lights & weaving between lanes of traffic flouting the rules!

my issue is that I have been told by professional drivers, (taxi, bus, motor bike couriers, truck drivers) that they KNOW the rules better than me as I am just a cyclist & I am in the wrong regardless of the situation. I really feel that this should set a wider audience rather than just cyclists.

Thanks
bloggsie

bambergbike

Bloggsie wrote: »

I really feel that this should set a wider audience rather than just cyclists.

Thanks
bloggsie

Well, probably, but why not assemble/clarify all the important stuff first and then maybe put out a boardsie press release or whatever?


On the mobile phone non-issue:
Usually when I spot cyclists on the phone it's because I'm stuck behind them as they trundle along sedately. I don't really see "furious cycling" or dangerous driving charges as very likely to stick - most of them would probably be more likely to come a cropper or run into somebody if they weren't on the phone at the time. The cyclist I saw reading from her smartphone screen (one hand on the bars, one holding the phone) as she built up speed on a very steep descent last week was a bit of an exception in that regard, one of the maybe 5% of phone-using cyclists who do deserve to have the book thrown at them (whatever book that might be).

buffalo

Bloggsie wrote: »

my issue is that I have been told by professional drivers, (taxi, bus, motor bike couriers, truck drivers) that they KNOW the rules better than me as I am just a cyclist & I am in the wrong regardless of the situation. I really feel that this should set a wider audience rather than just cyclists.

Tell them to read the thread so. :pac:

Or start a ninja campaign to poster bus/haulage depots, taxi ranks, etc. with copies of common RotR mistakes.

No Pants

bambergbike wrote: »

whatever book that might be

An ebook, obviously. That they can read on their phone.

buffalo

bambergbike wrote: »

one of the maybe 5% of phone-using cyclists who do deserve to have the book thrown at them (whatever book that might be).

Surely it should be ...the phone book? :pac:

bambergbike

buffalo wrote: »

Tell them to read the thread so. :pac:

Or start a ninja campaign to poster bus/haulage depots, taxi ranks, etc. with copies of common RotR mistakes.

You don't need big posters, either - just little stickers with QR codes that the people you want to reach will scan in on their phones if you dot them around the place strategically.

I met a ninja activist a few weeks ago who showed me "his" QR codes attached to Sheffield stands. Cyclists who scan them out of curiosity while parking get to read Bernd Sluka's "10 commandments of safe cycling" on their phones:

1. You are in charge of a vehicle.
2. See and be seen - in that order.
3. Avoid cycle paths where possible.
4. Avoid footpaths.
5. Use the space on the road that you're entitled to.
6. Back roads are more problematic than main roads.
7. Make your intentions clear and predictable.
8. Ride offensively on the outside, defensively on the inside.
9. No inferiority complexes!
10. Inspect your bicycle regularly.

Easy enough to adapt the idea to any other ninja campaign and target group.

buffalo

Is it an offence to walk in a cycle lane?

Bloggsie

buffalo wrote: »

Is it an offence to walk in a cycle lane?

depends on what your wearing! (sorry its silly half hour in my office at the moment)

rubadub

You need to have a red rear reflector on your bicycle at all times.

Some rear lights, when turned off, would act as a reflector. So I wonder does this cover you if your light is always on the bike

Because you could argue the reflector is integrated into the light, so it is both. Some appear to have both on the one unit

CramCycle

buffalo wrote: »

Is it an offence to walk in a cycle lane?

Would it be the same as Jaywalking technically?

Chips Lovell

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1997/en/si/0182.html#zzsi182y1997a46

I think this is what you're looking for.

rubadub

CramCycle wrote: »

Would it be the same as Jaywalking technically?

They jaywalking laws here take into account how close you are to a traffic light, i.e. if you are reasonably close to one you must use it, probably might include flyovers & zebra crossings.

buffalo

Oscar Gateaux wrote: »

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1997/en/si/0182.html#zzsi182y1997a46

I think this is what you're looking for.

Thanks. Were cycling lanes defined in law by 1997 as part of the 'roadway'? If so, 46 (4) seems to apply:

(4) Subject to sub-article (5), save when crossing the roadway, a pedestrian shall use a footway if one is provided

Though I imagine dedicated cycling infrastructure is ill-defined, and potentially not a roadway.


Also, I like 46 (2):

(2) A pedestrian facing a traffic light lamp which shows a red light shall not proceed beyond that light.

Conjures up images of people stopping where they're standing because they're facing a red light, then walking forward on green, then freezing on red. I wonder would they try to leg it past the traffic light on amber?

Chips Lovell

In Irish law, "roadway" is defined as "that portion of a road which is provided primarily for the use of vehicles".

"Road" has a much broader definition and includes stuff like footpaths and hard shoulders

larryone

NamelessPhil wrote: »

Flashing lights on bicycles

S.I. No. 487/2009 - Road Traffic (Lighting of Vehicles) (Amendment) Regulations 2009

3. In these Regulations “Principal Regulations” means Road Traffic (Lighting of Vehicles) Regulations 1963 ( S.I. No. 189 of 1963 ).


4. Article 29 of the Principal Regulations is amended by inserting after sub-article (4) the following:


“(5) In this article, ‘lit’ means the emission of a continuous light or a light that flashes not less than 60 times in each minute.”.


5. The following is substituted for Article 42 of the Principal Regulations:


“42. (1) Subject to sub-article (2), no lamp (other than direction indicators) fitted to a vehicle shall show or be constructed or adapted so as to be capable of showing a flashing light unless such light is invisible to persons outside the vehicle.


(2) This article does not apply to a lamp fitted to a pedal cycle in accordance with article 29.”.

What this means:

These Regulations make it legal for pedal cyclists to use the flashing front and rear lamps that are in common usage.

So flashing at a frequency of 1Hz is allowed, but not below. How rare.

buffalo

larryone wrote: »

So flashing at a frequency of 1Hz is allowed, but not below. How rare.

No mobile discos with strobes allowed on the road.

seamus

buffalo wrote: »

No mobile discos with strobes allowed on the road.

Actually it says the opposite, it has to flash once per second or more.

Strobe lights for everyone!

buffalo

seamus wrote: »

Actually it says the opposite, it has to flash once per second or more.

Strobe lights for everyone!

My physics classes from 12 years ago have failed me!

Jimbob1977

Last weekend, I was driving near my home in County Limerick.

I came across a cycling club (possibly 30 riders) that were approximately 5 or 6 abreast.... similar to a pelaton in the Tour de France.

I was able to safely overtake them after two kilometres. They had zero intention of moving for oncoming cars and generated a mini traffic jam.

If it's not a road race, are they obliged to cycle single or double-breasted? I wanted to be sure about the correctness of their cycling.

buffalo

Jimbob1977 wrote: »

If it's not a road race, are they obliged to cycle single or double-breasted? I wanted to be sure about the correctness of their cycling.

Welcome to the first post:

Oscar Gateaux wrote: »

Cycling Two Abreast

What the law says:

Originally Posted by S.I. No. 294/1964 - Road Traffic General Bye-Laws, 1964
29.—(1) A pedal cyclist shall not, save when overtaking other pedal cyclists (and then only if to do so will not endanger other traffic or pedestrians) drive a pedal cycle on a roadway in such a manner as to result in more than two pedal cycles driving abreast.

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

What this means:
You may cycle two abreast. You can cycle three abreast while overtaking, but only when a.) the overtaking cyclists are cycling in single file and the overtaken cyclists are two abreasts and b.) the overtaking manoeuvre is not endangering other road users.

seamus

They may cycle two abreast in normal circumstances. 3 abreast is permitted where overtaking is occurring.

5 or 6 abreast is probably exaggerating a little, you would need to take up both sides of the carriageway to fit 5 or 6 abreast. However, 3 abreast with very poor group discipline could easily look like 5 or 6 abreast to an observer from the back.

In future if that occurs, the best thing you can do is make a note of the name of the club (most of the riders will be wearing club jerseys), and contact the club chairman to make a complaint.
If you can't identify the club or they're causing major hassle on the road, then a phone call to the local Garda station to send a squad car out is probably best.

RainyDay

seamus wrote: »

Actually it says the opposite, it has to flash once per second or more.

Strobe lights for everyone!

No consideration for people who are photo-sensitive or may have epilepsy then - between 5Hz and 30 Hz are generally the danger zones

Jimbob1977

seamus wrote: »

They may cycle two abreast in normal circumstances. 3 abreast is permitted where overtaking is occurring.

5 or 6 abreast is probably exaggerating a little, you would need to take up both sides of the carriageway to fit 5 or 6 abreast. However, 3 abreast with very poor group discipline could easily look like 5 or 6 abreast to an observer from the back.



In future if that occurs, the best thing you can do is make a note of the name of the club (most of the riders will be wearing club jerseys), and contact the club chairman to make a complaint.
If you can't identify the club or they're causing major hassle on the road, then a phone call to the local Garda station to send a squad car out is probably best.

Hi Seamus,

The riders were taking up a position from the road edge to the broken white line in the centre of the road. One rider had encroached a few inches onto the opposite side of the road. It was a 'R' grade regional road, so it is reasonably wide.

They were arranged in approx six rows from leader to back riders.

One row was comfortably five to six abreast.

As they were members of a cycling club, I'd guess they should have familiarity with the Rules of the Road?

seamus

Jimbob1977 wrote: »

As they were members of a cycling club, I'd guess they should have familiarity with the Rules of the Road?

Most of not all of them would be drivers too, so they'd have the same familiarity with the rules as anyone else. They would not have any additional familiarity just by virtue of being members of a cycling club. To be fair, you had to ask the rules here, so they similarly may not be aware of the rules

Like I say, the chairman of the club is the man to speak to as most clubs are acutely aware of how their conduct on the road affects their local reputation.

monument

buffalo wrote: »

Though I imagine dedicated cycling infrastructure is ill-defined, and potentially not a roadway.

It could be viewed as a roadway of its own.

Much like when there's access road running along side the main roadway but separated by kerbs/grass verges/footpaths/walls/etc.

PeadarCo

Jimbob1977 wrote: »

Hi Seamus,

The riders were taking up a position from the road edge to the broken white line in the centre of the road. One rider had encroached a few inches onto the opposite side of the road. It was a 'R' grade regional road, so it is reasonably wide.

They were arranged in approx six rows from leader to back riders.

One row was comfortably five to six abreast.

As they were members of a cycling club, I'd guess they should have familiarity with the Rules of the Road?

Just one word of caution on that sometimes it can look like that cycling can be 6 abreast from behind even when they are 2 abreast as the riders may not line up directly behind each other and the difficulty seeing this from a distance.

If what you say is the case its no harm reminding the club. As Seamus says clubs would insist on the rules of the road being followed by their members. Contact details for clubs would be available on the cycling ireland website.

curiosity

Just read the thread, couldn't find a clear answer, so I'll ask...

If a cyclist is approaching a pedestrian on a footpath, is the cyclist obliged to slow/stop/dismount?

A cyclist was coming towards me as I was walking on the footpath earlier today. I stopped him, and pointed out the cycle-lanes on both sides of the road. He said that he was entitled to cycle on the footpath, and that he planned to go either side of me (the footpath would take two people walking abreast).

CramCycle

curiosity wrote: »

He said that he was entitled to cycle on the footpath, and that he planned to go either side of me (the footpath wold take two people walking abreast).

He wasn't

Darkglasses

curiosity wrote: »

Just read the thread, couldn't find a clear answer, so I'll ask...

If a cyclist is approaching a pedestrian on a footpath, is the cyclist obliged to slow/stop/dismount?

A cyclist was coming towards me as I was walking on the footpath earlier today. I stopped him, and pointed out the cycle-lanes on both sides of the road. He said that he was entitled to cycle on the footpath, and that he planned to go either side of me (the footpath would take two people walking abreast).

He definitely cannot cycle on a footpath, unless it's signposted as being for shared use (which it sounds like it wasn't)

Idleater

Darkglasses wrote: »

He definitely cannot cycle on a footpath, unless it's signposted as being for shared use (which it sounds like it wasn't)

Or under 12?

curiosity

Darkglasses wrote: »

He definitely cannot cycle on a footpath, unless it's signposted as being for shared use (which it sounds like it wasn't)

Regular footpath, grass verge, clearly marked cycle-lane (in cinder-colour). The same setup on the other side of the road.

He was far older than 12!

Chips Lovell

curiosity wrote: »

If a cyclist is approaching a pedestrian on a footpath, is the cyclist obliged to slow/stop/dismount?

A cyclist was coming towards me as I was walking on the footpath earlier today. I stopped him, and pointed out the cycle-lanes on both sides of the road. He said that he was entitled to cycle on the footpath, and that he planned to go either side of me (the footpath would take two people walking abreast).

He's not alloyed cycle on the footpath in the first place, let alone have to dismount.

What the law says:

S.I. No. 294/1964 - Road Traffic General Bye-Laws, 1964 wrote:

15.—(1) A driver shall not drive wholly or partly along or across a footway.

(2) This bye-law does not apply to a pram, an invalid carriage not mechanically propelled, or a vehicle being driven across a footway (either to a roadway from a place adjacent to the footway, or from a roadway to such a place).

The Road Traffic Act of 1961, which the above bye-law was drawn up under, makes clear that a “driving” includes managing and controlling and, in relation to a bicycle or tricycle, riding, and “driver” and other cognate words shall be construed accordingly;