Irish Cycling Legislation

buffalo

Qualitymark wrote: »

So is the suggestion that the councils are breaking the law by putting bike stands on pavements?

They wouldn't be breaking the law, but it sounds like they are facilitating or encouraging the public to do so.

CramCycle

galwaycyclist wrote: »

Come to think of it you appear to be inclined to look the other way yourself.

galwaycyclist wrote: »

It seems to me the way the opening sentence is phrased confirms that footpaths (footways) were not considered a lawful public parking facility and were simply an option of last resort for cyclists who had no other choice.

I am not so convinced, in the absence of legislation, it would appear to be more his opinion than law.

It would appear to be a statement that its not very tidy but it is what it is. I would presume its illegal if the rail or tree was the property of someone else, although I have a vague recollection of DCC asking for "no bicycle" stickers or a warning that they would be removed being a requirement if someone wanted to move bicycles from a publicly accessible railing but this could be just imagination on my part.

One could argue that his wording on guardrails be applied to those in Dublin city centre from basement drops, hence why I don't believe his opinion to be law. Unless of course the document you are using is legal for Galway CC and actually legally based in Galway.

galwaycyclist

CramCycle wrote: »

I am not so convinced, in the absence of legislation, it would appear to be more his opinion than law.

Ok but this is the legislation which it seems applied at the time that this report was written.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1964/si/294/made/en/print#zzsi294y1964a26

Rules for Parking


26.—(1) When parking a driver shall ensure that the vehicle—

<snip>

(h) will not, in such a way as to interfere with the free movement of pedestrians along a footway, be wholly or partly on the footway or projecting over the footway, or (if it is not a pedal cycle) be wholly or partly on a cycle track ;


(i) will not (if it is not a pedal bicycle or a motorcycle without a sidecar) be on a stretch of roadway which has an authorised continuous white line (or two authorised continuous white lines) along its centre.

This law does not distinguish between motor vehicles and pedal cycles with regards to parking on footways (i.e. footpaths/footpads). But interestingly enough the law does allow for cycles to be parked on roadways in situations where motor vehicles are not allowed to park - (i.e where there are continuous centre line markings)

Roadhawk

Captain Chaos wrote: »

But realistically there is no way to enforce any of that, no man power for one and there is nothing to stop a cyclist for just leaving the area and getting away either. Also how do you issue a ticket with a fine to someone with no ID. Most cyclists would not carry any official ID on them most of the time.

Perhaps a mandatory cycling license should be carried by all cyclists? That way the Gardai could confirm the person is who they say they are. For a small fee...€20ish, im sure the government could do with it

buffalo

Roadhawk wrote: »

Perhaps a mandatory cycling license should be carried by all cyclists? That way the Gardai could confirm the person is who they say they are. For a small fee...€20ish, im sure the government could do with it

How much would it cost the government to design and administer such a scheme? I think you'd find they'd haemorrhage money rapidly at €20 a licence.

rubadub

Roadhawk wrote: »

Perhaps a mandatory cycling license should be carried by all cyclists?

And what about pedestrian licences for jaywalkers, and smoking licences in case the gardai catch someone in a no smoking area. Wallets would need to be huge to fit all the possible licences you could think up.

How often would these licences need to be renewed? I know my mate would go mental at having to fork out for licences for his 4 kids, or people who might only go for a spin once a year. And the cost of photos and hassle of applying. The dublin bike scheme is an attraction to tourists, not anymore if they have to get a licence.

CramCycle

Lets just stick a barcode on everyone and be done with it.

Roadhawk

buffalo wrote: »

How much would it cost the government to design and administer such a scheme? I think you'd find they'd haemorrhage money rapidly at €20 a licence.

Thats why i said "ish". Its €40 for a driving license (B License) so i was being generous at €20. Im sure its not too far off the mark.

Roadhawk

CramCycle wrote: »

Lets just stick a barcode on everyone and be done with it.

I know you are being sarcastic but a license plate would go a long way for identifying all those who break light etc.

CramCycle

Roadhawk wrote: »

I know you are being sarcastic but a license plate would go a long way for identifying all those who break light etc.

MOD VOICE: I was being sarcastic but truthfully, this discussion has been done to death in other threads and its not really on topic for this thread so I am nipping it in the bud, if you wish to talk about licenses for cyclists please use other threads about it or start another one, do not post about it in here

Roadhawk

CramCycle wrote: »

MOD VOICE: I was being sarcastic but truthfully, this discussion has been done to death in other threads and its not really on topic for this thread so I am nipping it in the bud, if you wish to talk about licenses for cyclists please use other threads about it or start another one, do not post about it in here

You're right, i was off topic. sorry for inconvenience.

Carawaystick

If I take the pedals off, is my bicycle still a pedal cycle? (Semi-serious q)

Lumen

Carawaystick wrote: »

If I take the pedals off, is my bicycle still a pedal cycle? (Semi-serious q)

I think so.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1961/act/24/section/3/enacted/en/html

1961 Road Traffic Act wrote:

“pedal bicycle” means a bicycle which is intended or adapted for propulsion solely by the physical exertions of a person or persons seated thereon;

Although maybe that has been superceded as it would not apply to electric-assist bikes.

Qualitymark

Carawaystick wrote: »

If I take the pedals off, is my bicycle still a pedal cycle? (Semi-serious q)

No, it is a velocipede or draisine.

traprunner

wrote:

1961 Road Traffic Act]
“pedal bicycle” means a bicycle which is intended or adapted for propulsion solely by the physical exertions of a person or persons seated thereon;

So taking the saddle off would mean it's not a "pedal bicycle" because no person can be "seated thereln"?

Cookie_Monster

traprunner wrote: »

So taking the saddle off would mean it's not a "pedal bicycle" because no person can be "seated thereln"?

you can still sit on it, won't be comfortable though (or may be depending...)

CramCycle

MOD VOICE: Cycling licenses are not catered for in legislation and for reasons done to death they are unlikely ever to be in Ireland. Please leave any discussion of licenses out of this thread. POSTS have been deleted. If you wish to discuss the benefits/negatives, do so in a different thread, or start one.

Roadhawk

regarding the infrastructure for cyclists in Ireland would i be right in saying cyclists would have been onto a good thing if Leo Varadkar did not amend the “Cycle Track” laws in 2012. This law previously explained that if there was a cycle track provided that a cyclist must use the cycle track and not the main road. This law then changed to allow cyclists to be legally allowed to use both the main road and cycle at their own decision. Realistically speaking the government has now gotten away from the cost of building new cycle tracks and fixing/maintaining existing cycle track as the excuse is that the cyclist can just use the road. Am i right to think this?

Lumen

No.

tomasrojo

The only people I can recall opposing the repeal of the compulsory use of all cycle tracks was the RSA. If Vechicular Cyclists, Segregationists and Cycle Chic people alike oppose a law, it's definitely not good for cycling.

galwaycyclist

Roadhawk wrote: »

Realistically speaking the government has now gotten away from the cost of building new cycle tracks and fixing/maintaining existing cycle track as the excuse is that the cyclist can just use the road. Am i right to think this?

The "Government" does not bear the costs of maintenance as such. The government often throws money at local authorities to build things without regards to the issue of whether or not there are the resources, or intention, to maintain them afterwards.

ButtersSuki

Hi folks,

New here so apologies in advance if my question has already been asked (and answered) or is in the wrong forum.

Can anyone tell me (with links to sources etc.) what is the legal position re. installing a tracking device on your own bike (which I assume is perfectly fine) with specific reference to any infringement of rights on the part of any who may steal your bike etc.? Are there any Data Protection or other Legal issues that one may fall foul of? Has anyone fallen foul of the law on this? Does the victim have less rights than the perpetrator etc.? Do the Gardai act on information achieved in this way (example: my bike was stolen and from GPS I can tell it's at 123 Main Street - will the Gardai act on this or is it out of bounds for them to do so?).

Any help greatly appreciated!

diarmaidol

I can't see how a thief would gain the upper hand by you installing a tracker on your bike. Look at the find my phone tools for mobiles as an example. I've heard of the Garda using such tools where available to them to locate stolen phones. As long as it's your bike and you are installing a tracker for you then you are well with in your rights. Now, if you installed it on a non-personal bike you'd start hitting Data Protection stuff maybe, but if there is no legitimate 3rd Party Data Protection won't come into it.

CramCycle

All the DB ones have trackers so there is good precedent that installing one is not an issue. Lived with a Garda once who had used one in conjunction with DB to locate a stolen bike (with the thief still a board).

waywardchild

ButtersSuki wrote: »

Hi folks,

New here so apologies in advance if my question has already been asked (and answered) or is in the wrong forum.

Can anyone tell me (with links to sources etc.) what is the legal position re. installing a tracking device on your own bike (which I assume is perfectly fine) with specific reference to any infringement of rights on the part of any who may steal your bike etc.? Are there any Data Protection or other Legal issues that one may fall foul of? Has anyone fallen foul of the law on this? Does the victim have less rights than the perpetrator etc.? Do the Gardai act on information achieved in this way (example: my bike was stolen and from GPS I can tell it's at 123 Main Street - will the Gardai act on this or is it out of bounds for them to do so?).

Any help greatly appreciated!

It's your bike you are entitled to protect it in anyway you see fit once you don't endanger anyone else (i.e. Run several hundred volts through it). The Garda will use legitimate information supplied by the public to apprehend criminals

Beasty

Discussion on bike tracker options moved to new thread

The GMan

This is a great reference to have

Could I suggest an amendment to the "Cycling Two Abreast" section


The relevant legislation is
S.I. No. 332/2012 - Road Traffic (Traffic and Parking) (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2012.
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2012/si/332/made/en/print
The Original legislation was 1964, amended in 1997 and again in 2012.

Each of these say exactly the same thing in slightly different language.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2012/si/332/made/en/print
S.I. No. 332/2012 - Road Traffic (Traffic and Parking) (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2012.
Section 47 of this legislation states

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.


The important words to keep in mind are "more than 2".

The statements in the acts above state that a cyclist

(1) must not cycle "more than 2 abreast"
except when over taking another cyclist
and even if they are over taking another cyclist they cannot be "more than 2 abreast" if it would endanger, inconvenience or obstruct other traffic or pedestrians.

(2) must cycle in single file when passing other traffic.


In simple language the acts state
a) In general cycling
a.1) Cyclist cannot cycle more than 2 abreast
a.2) Cyclist can cycle 2 abreast

b) Cyclists when overtaking
b.1) When overtaking other traffic - must cycle in single file.
b.2) When overtaking other cyclist - can be more than 2 abreast as long as they do not inconvenience or obstruct other road users.



No matter what part of the sentence you interpret the conditions to apply to the effect is still the same in relation to cycling “more than 2 abreastâ€

Interpertation 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 and then only if to do so will not endanger, inconvenience or obstruct other traffic or pedestrians.

Interpertation 2
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.




Original Legislation 1964
Amended 1997 & 2012

Original Legislation 1964

---

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1964/si/294/made/en/print
S.I. No. 294/1964 - Road Traffic General Bye-Laws, 1964.

PART IV. CYCLE TRAFFIC.

29 Driving two abreast

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.


Ammendment 1997

---

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1997/si/182/made/en/print
S.I. No. 182/1997 - Road Traffic (Traffic and Parking) Regulations, 1997
Section 47 of this legislation states

47. (1) A pedal cyclist shall not drive a pedal cycle on a roadway in such a manner as to result in more than two 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.

Ammendment 2012

---

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2012/si/332/made/en/print
S.I. No. 332/2012 - Road Traffic (Traffic and Parking) (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2012.
Section 47 of this legislation states

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.

The term "inconvenience" is so vague as to mean anything. Many people would claim that having to slow down or overtake is an inconvenience.

Beasty

Would have thought that in most cases if it's safe to overtake 2 abreast it's equally safe (and indeed quicker) to overtake 3 abreast. A motorist will need to go into an overtaking or opposite lane (if available) to safely undertake either manoeuvre

monument

galwaycyclist wrote: »

Ok but this is the legislation which it seems applied at the time that this report was written.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1964/si/294/made/en/print#zzsi294y1964a26



This law does not distinguish between motor vehicles and pedal cycles with regards to parking on footways (i.e. footpaths/footpads). But interestingly enough the law does allow for cycles to be parked on roadways in situations where motor vehicles are not allowed to park - (i.e where there are continuous centre line markings)

I know galwaycyclist isn't here anymore, but, it's worth noting the following:

S.I. No. 182/1997 - Road Traffic (Traffic and Parking) Regulations, 1997, states:

REVOCATIONS

Part I

Road Traffic General Bye-Laws, 1964 ( S.I. No. 294 of 1964 )

Just to be clear: The link and quote galwaycyclist posted were referring to SI 294 of 1964 and that's revoked.