Cyclists - Junction of Dame St/South Great Georges St

ceannair06

Particularly those coming down Sth GG Street and going right towards College Green.

THERE IS A RED LIGHT THERE. YOU HAVE TO STOP.

I walk that way to and from work each day and on average there at least half a dozen cyclists either belting it down Dame Street who couldnt stop if they tried - or those as described above.

Someone is going to be killed one day by your selfish actions and the chances are it will be a pedestrian.

When our light is on green and we are crossing it means you stop! That's not too hard for your tiny brains to cope with is it ?

ballooba

I've recently started cycling and find this junction dangerous to use on the vehicle light sequence. I prefer to take it slow and cross on the pedestrian lights. While having respect for other road users. I've been trying to think of a way to avoid this junction.

SilverLiningOK

A contributing factor to this is reduction of legal safe routes for people using bicycles to get around the city. The city is full of wide one way streets crying out for contra flow cycle lanes. The city council is a afraid to be bold and radically redesign our car centric city. On top of this the existing Luas lines and those in construction don't help one bit. People on bicycles being banned from those routes often when offering large detours as an alternative often understandably take the shortest route.

This junction is important for people cycling from all directions. For me, using Capel Street, it offers a convenient route into that part of town. The return route being a lot more hazardous and crazy. Breaking lights upsets pedestrians big time. Why are they doing it ? To get ahead of the motorised traffic before it tears off perhaps ? The city once again being car centric caters for people walking and cycling poorly. Instead of being given priority over everything else, the have long waits, poor infrastrucure and inconvenient detours.

Padraig Mor

ceannair06 wrote: »

I walk that way to and from work each day and on average there at least half a dozen cyclists either belting it down Dame Street who couldnt stop if they tried - or those as described above.

I don't live in Dublin but am a regular visitor. On my last visit, I was at this crossing (going from George's St side to river side of Dame St). After the traffic lights went red and pedestrian light green, just as people started to cross, a Giro wannabe tore through the crossing heading towards College Green narrowly missing pedestrians stepping off the path. OK, no harm done. What took the biscuit was the guy after him who ended up nearly falling off his bike having to suddenly stop before he wiped out a girl walking across, having just missed several others. His reaction, despite being obviously 100% in the wrong? Roar "stupid ****ing bitch" at the poor girl.

SilverLiningOK wrote: »

A contributing factor to this is reduction of legal safe routes for people using bicycles to get around the city. The city is full of wide one way streets crying out for contra flow cycle lanes. The city council is a afraid to be bold and radically redesign our car centric city. On top of this the existing Luas lines and those in construction don't help one bit. People on bicycles being banned from those routes often when offering large detours as an alternative often understandably take the shortest route.

Didn't take long for the apologists for dangerous cyclists to arrive.....

veryangryman

ceannair06 wrote: »

Particularly those coming down Sth GG Street and going right towards College Green.

THERE IS A RED LIGHT THERE. YOU HAVE TO STOP.

Shout louder on boards, that'll surely stop them. :cool:

Report them.

Seaswimmer

Padraig Mor wrote: »

I don't live in Dublin....

I do and also cycle around it a lot. The problem in Dublin is mainly a complete lack of enforcement for ALL traffic offences resulting in a free for all.

Not trying to excuse cycling red light jumpers but each different cohort (cars, buses, taxis, motorcycles, trucks, pedestrians) are all equally bad at observing basic rules of the road and common courtesy..

AngryLips

ceannair06 wrote: »

Someone is going to be killed one day by your selfish actions and the chances are it will be a pedestrian.

Nobody is going to be killed.

But, you're right, this is a dangerous junction that I cycle through every day - the problem is as much pedestrians crossing against the red man as it is cyclists though. Something needs to be done to reduce the traffic flow on either one of those two streets because there are too many pedestrians using that intersection for what it can handle which is another reason why you find people crossing against the red man. Those pedestrians aren't going to go away so they should look at limiting the through traffic at that junction starting with private cars and taxis. Maybe introduce additional restrictions against left or right turns somewhere.

SeanW

veryangryman wrote: »

Report them.

How? They don't have to carry registration plates, and even if the guards could identify them and be bothered to chase them down, the worst that would happen is a slap on the wrist fine, no penalty points or anything.

And it shows.

?Cee?view

AngryLips wrote: »

Nobody is going to be killed.

I witnessed the accident about 13 or 14 years ago when a guy was killed by a cycle courier who was on the path at the junction of Merrion Row and Pembroke Street. Sure, it was an isolated occurrence, but it can happen.

AngryLips wrote: »

... they should look at limiting the through traffic at that junction starting with private cars and taxis. Maybe introduce additional restrictions against left or right turns somewhere.

Or maybe just start fining pedestrians, cyclists and drivers who break the lights. If people don't have respect, it needs to be taught.

AngryLips

?Cee?view wrote: »

Or maybe just start fining pedestrians

That doesn't solve the problem that the pavements on that intersection are always congested without enough capacity to handle the numbers using it. You just need to accept that pedestrians are a fact of life on city streets and, since they're the most vulnerable road users, responsibility weighs heaviest on those road users that pose the greatest danger ...so heavy vehecles>cars>cyclists in that order. That's why you need a license to drive a car but not to ride a bicycle.

AltAccount

PEDESTRIANS, STOP JAYWALKING WHILE I'M TRYING TO CYCLE OR DRIVE THROUGH TOWN!!!!

Grrrr *shakes fist*

SeanW

AngryLips wrote: »

That doesn't solve the problem that the pavements on that intersection are always congested without enough capacity to handle the numbers using it.

Then how do you propose to deal with the problems of RLJing by unregulated so-called "vulnerable" road users?

schemingbohemia

SeanW wrote: »

How? They don't have to carry registration plates, and even if the guards could identify them and be bothered to chase them down, the worst that would happen is a slap on the wrist fine, no penalty points or anything.

And it shows.

If the cyclist has a drivers licence then I was fairly certain that penalty points could be added to it for offences committed whilst cycling.

Obviously the main issue is that there is little to no enforcement of traffic law for any cohort by AGS.

Amirani

Padraig Mor wrote: »

Didn't take long for the apologists for dangerous cyclists to arrive.....

Should we just have a thread where we rant about people's stupid and erratic behaviour or should we have a thread were we try to examine causality and potentially identify solutions? I know which one I'd find more interesting.

Everyone here is going to agree that people breaking red lights is a problem. This is despite its illegality and successive Garda crackdowns. Having a thread exclusive to people ranting about the issue is pointless.

Oink

ceannair06 wrote: »

Particularly those coming down Sth GG Street and going right towards College Green.

THERE IS A RED LIGHT THERE. YOU HAVE TO STOP.

I walk that way to and from work each day and on average there at least half a dozen cyclists either belting it down Dame Street who couldnt stop if they tried - or those as described above.

Someone is going to be killed one day by your selfish actions and the chances are it will be a pedestrian.

When our light is on green and we are crossing it means you stop! That's not too hard for your tiny brains to cope with is it ?

I wish you had been on Suir Rd around 8:00 this morning to see the 4 cars and 1 bus going through a red light one after the other. By the time the bus went through the light was so red it was almost black.

AngryLips

Diego Simeone wrote: »

Everyone here is going to agree that people breaking red lights is a problem. This is despite its illegality and successive Garda crackdowns. Having a thread exclusive to people ranting about the issue is pointless.

I'm not sure how I feel about this but since I just happen to stumble across it I might as well add this to the discussion. Clearly, not every road authority thinks breaking a red is quite the clear-cut, black and white, civil rights issue of our generation.

AngryLips

schemingbohemia wrote: »

If the cyclist has a drivers licence then I was fairly certain that penalty points could be added to it for offences committed whilst cycling.

My point is they're not required to hold a license because they ride a bike.

SilverLiningOK

How Traffic Engineers See You City

This illustrates the problem better than any more words. The private car had ruined city centres by marginalising everyone else. Using a car in such an environment makes no sense whatsoever. Every other mode is much more space efficient and can potentially transport far more people.

ceannair06

I honestly don't get the whining on here about "boo hoo it's a car-centric city". No one is saying you can't use the roads but why does that mean you cyclists think the road rules and the Highway Code don't apply to you ?

ceannair06

AngryLips wrote: »

My point is they're not required to hold a license because they ride a bike.

But if they are using the road and causing problems to other users they should be accountable or at the very least identifiable.

Oh and "pedestrianised areas" mean just that - the side streets off the Quays towards Jervis ? Not for riding bikes through.

ceannair06

veryangryman wrote: »

Shout louder on boards, that'll surely stop them. :cool:

Report them.

Sarcasm - why didn't i think of that. That'll surely stop me being hit by a lycra clad nonce at 8am!:rolleyes:

Amirani

AngryLips wrote: »

I'm not sure how I feel about this but since I just happen to stumble across it I might as well add this to the discussion. Clearly, not every road authority thinks breaking a red is quite the clear-cut, black and white, civil rights issue of our generation.

Yeah, I read that a few days ago actually. When I say red light breaking, I mean illegal and dangerous red light breaking. Obviously there's certain scenarios where it may be acceptable.

Seaswimmer

ceannair06 wrote: »

I honestly don't get the whining on here about "boo hoo it's a car-centric city". No one is saying you can't use the roads but why does that mean you cyclists think the road rules and the Highway Code don't apply to you ?

As a cyclist the Highway Code definitely does not apply to me as I dont live in the UK.


I do however try to observe the Rules of the Road..


And the road does not "rule"

Cyclists do (joke)

SilverLiningOK

ceannair06 wrote: »

I honestly don't get the whining on here about "boo hoo it's a car-centric city". No one is saying you can't use the roads but why does that mean you cyclists think the road rules and the Highway Code don't apply to you ?

The infrastructure for people walking and cycling is dominated by the excessive space given to cars. While cars get minutes of green lights, pedestrian barely get 10 seconds, and at some junction this is not enough with the volumes of people. People cycling should be able to bypass many junctions, as have been successfully engineered in many other european cities. Momentum is important for both people walking as well as cycling. Waiting around while the cars get favouritism makes no senses at all.

Unfortunately in English we just have one word "cyclists", whereas in Dutch there are two. Fietsen for ordinary day-to-day cycling, and wielrennen for riding a bike for speed. In our anglophone world, cycling seems to conjur up images of racing, lycra and speed. Everyday cycling is for transport usually at a slower pace in everyday clothes for your destination. The motorist/cyclist/pedestrian bickering somehow always seems to home in on the sporting image rather than the utility transportation one. Wonder why is that ?

cython

SilverLiningOK wrote: »

The infrastructure for people walking and cycling is dominated by the excessive space given to cars. While cars get minutes of green lights, pedestrian barely get 10 seconds, and at some junction this is not enough with the volumes of people. People cycling should be able to bypass many junctions, as have been successfully engineered in many other european cities. Momentum is important for both people walking as well as cycling. Waiting around while the cars get favouritism makes no senses at all.

A pet peeve of mine in a similar vein are junctions where the lights are controlled by sensors that are actually incapable of detecting many bicycles! So a cyclist is left with the choice of either break the law or (at certain times of the day) wait for several cycles of the lights to go for a heavier vehicle to pull up over the sensor. Pure idiocy and ignorance of certain road users, IMHO.

SilverLiningOK wrote: »

Unfortunately in English we just have one word "cyclists", whereas in Dutch there are two. Fietsen for ordinary day-to-day cycling, and wielrennen for riding a bike for speed. In our anglophone world, cycling seems to conjur up images of racing, lycra and speed. Everyday cycling is for transport usually at a slower pace in everyday clothes for your destination. The motorist/cyclist/pedestrian bickering somehow always seems to home in on the sporting image rather than the utility transportation one. Wonder why is that ?

Actually (and this is speaking as both a leisure and commuting cyclist, as well as a driver), a lot of the worst behaviour that I see from cyclists comes from those that you describe as being associated with transport cycling. My commute is up to 15km each way, and since I have cycling kit I wear it on the commute (which may associate me with the sport aspect in some eyes, though I commute with a pannier). However all too often I see:

• Careless breaking of red lights (i.e. zip through having hardly looked, as opposed to slowing for it, or going carefully through an empty/quiet junction)
• Manoeuvres (lane changes, etc.) made without adequate observation/signalling
• "Shoaling" past other stopped cyclists to get to the top of the queue at a junction, in many cases when they have already been passed by the stopped cyclists and thus force them to overtake again. This is primarily a manners/courtesy thing, but ultimately it creates unnecessary frustration and risk for both cyclists and drivers if the cyclists have to get past the shoaler repeatedly.
• Salmon cyclists, whereby they go the wrong way down one way streets (Merrion Street Lower to name one), or down the wrong side of the road in a cycle lane (Phoenix Park is lethal for this)

By contrast, the only potentially dodgy cycling that I knowingly engage in is that detailed in the first part of my post, when I may amble (and I mean amble!) through a junction on a red light because I know the light will never go green for me alone (SSG and Leeson Street junction used to be one of these). Ideally I would wait till near the end of the pedestrian lights on all entrances to the junction if that is part of the cycle. And even then I will go through very slowly, and always yield to pedestrians who obviously have right of way over me.

Godge

SilverLiningOK wrote: »

The infrastructure for people walking and cycling is dominated by the excessive space given to cars. While cars get minutes of green lights, pedestrian barely get 10 seconds, and at some junction this is not enough with the volumes of people. People cycling should be able to bypass many junctions, as have been successfully engineered in many other european cities. Momentum is important for both people walking as well as cycling. Waiting around while the cars get favouritism makes no senses at all.

Hang on, this is the thing I have a problem with.

How does too much space for cars by the planners excuse a cyclist breaking a pedestrian light and nearly knocking down a pedestrian?

The default excuses from cyclists for any criticism are as follows:

(1) motorists are as bad or worse
(2) cycling is better for your health and the environment
(3) too much road space is given over to cars

Accepting that all three points are true for the purposes of this thread, they are still completely irrelevant to the OP. None of those points excuse rampant red light jumping that startles or injures pedestrians.

italodisco

I'm a cyclist and I have to say I am sick of other cyclists booting through red lights whilst pedestrians are crossing .

Absolute d*heads. Just because I cycle doesn't mean I have to show no regard for others.

Drivers get all the flack but cyclists are getting too messy .

Oh and this thread aint about motor vehicles so leave them out .

AngryLips

Godge wrote: »

Hang on, this is the thing I have a problem with.

How does too much space for cars by the planners excuse a cyclist breaking a pedestrian light and nearly knocking down a pedestrian?

Have you not been following the discussion? The conversation started off about cyclists breaking red lights on this junction, I pointed out that the junction is generally unsafe for the amount of use it gets and that further traffic should be restricted to facilitate the large numbers of pedestrians using it ...which is something you can't control to the degree you can with vehicle traffic and how - since this is a city centre location - pedestrians should be prioritised anyway. What's so difficult to understand?

I guess the question is are we talking about this junction specifically or are we talking about cyclists generally breaking red lights.

No Pants

ceannair06 wrote: »

lycra clad nonce

I don't think the derogatory term helps the discussion.

Daith

AngryLips wrote: »

Those pedestrians aren't going to go away so they should look at limiting the through traffic at that junction starting with private cars and taxis. Maybe introduce additional restrictions against left or right turns somewhere.

Right so the answer to stop cyclists breaking the law and going through red lights is to limit what cars and taxis can do.

No Pants

ceannair06 wrote: »

they should be accountable

They are accountable.

L1011

No Pants wrote: »

They are accountable.

If you can catch them, identify them, and they actually have a cent due to being uninsured. Couldn't get anything from the person who did a few hundred of damage to my bumper with a pushbike as they cycled off and have no plates.

It'd be a rare, rare day that I don't see more cases of obvious dangerous illegal behaviour by cyclists than cars along the quays despite there being many more cars. Must upload some dashcam footage sometime. Actually, it'd be a rare day I don't see more of both illegal and dangerous individually - seperating what might be legal but nuts and what's illegal but not risking your life.

AngryLips

Daith wrote: »

Right so the answer to stop cyclists breaking the law and going through red lights is to limit what cars and taxis can do.

Now you're just intentionally misunderstanding what I said :rolleyes:

Godge

AngryLips wrote: »

Have you not been following the discussion? The conversation started off about cyclists breaking red lights on this junction, I pointed out that the junction is generally unsafe for the amount of use it gets and that further traffic should be restricted to facilitate the large numbers of pedestrians using it ...which is something you can't control to the degree you can with vehicle traffic and how - since this is a city centre location - pedestrians should be prioritised anyway. What's so difficult to understand?

I guess the question is are we talking about this junction specifically or are we talking about cyclists generally breaking red lights.

I don't disagree with you that pedestrians should be prioritised but what has that got to do with cyclists running the red light at that junction. If you give pedestrians more priority, you have more red light time for cyclists to jump the lights.

Daith

AngryLips wrote: »

Now you're just intentionally misunderstanding what I said :rolleyes:

Nope. Even if it was for pedestrians and cyclists you would still have traffic lights and you would still have cyclists going through red lights.

AngryLips

Godge wrote: »

I don't disagree with you that pedestrians should be prioritised but what has that got to do with cyclists running the red light at that junction. If you give pedestrians more priority, you have more red light time for cyclists to jump the lights.

I know, but you seem to think I'm defending cyclists jumping the lights which I don't. I cycle through that junction every day and I never do it. My point about giving pedestrians more priority is that it would improve the general safety of that junction. As I already mentioned, I often come into conflict with pedestrians at that intersection who are crossing the road when the man has already turned red - that's just another symptom of the dangers posed on that stretch of road. Of course, the more space you devote to pedestrians (and if properly demarcated) the more you encourage other road users to exercise caution when navigating shared space. It won't eliminate people breaking red lights but it will encourage people to be more mindful of each other. At the moment this particular junction looks like it was built for road traffic first and pedestrians second - that may be part of the reason why you see cars and cyclists flying through it at speeds which are probably unsafe given the extreme likelihood you'll encounter people veering off the footpath and into traffic in that area.

John_C

MYOB wrote: »

It'd be a rare, rare day that I don't see more cases of obvious dangerous illegal behaviour by cyclists than cars along the quays despite there being many more cars.

It's very rare to see a car obey the 30kph speed limit on the quays unless traffic forces them to.

Come to think if it, it's rare to see any road user obey the laws on that stretch of road.

bigar

I think I will start a thread each time I see cars or pedestrians breaking the law. Be prepared for a daily post which will include sentences in all caps, exclamation points and generalisations.

No Pants

bigar wrote: »

I think I will start a thread each time I see cars or pedestrians breaking the law. Be prepared for a daily post which will include sentences in all caps, exclamation points and generalisations.

That sounds like a great idea. When posting, could you also generalise as much as possible, tarring great swathes of the population based upon their mode of transportation? Thanks.

LXFlyer

Let's be honest about this - there is a substantial number of people who just do not observe the law when it comes to being on the road.

They are across the spectrum, pedestrians, cyclists, drivers, and anyone trying to suggest otherwise here is not in the real world.

It needs enforcement but we as a nation seem incapable of doing that.

Irish Steve

lxflyer wrote: »

Let's be honest about this - there is a substantial number of people who just do not observe the law when it comes to being on the road.

They are across the spectrum, pedestrians, cyclists, drivers, and anyone trying to suggest otherwise here is not in the real world.

It needs enforcement but we as a nation seem incapable of doing that.

And where does it start? In too many cases, it starts in the schools, where the requirement to get a class of children to an event that's not happening in the school requires the children to be escorted en masse to the venue. If that journey requires a road crossing, you may be very sure that the teacher in charge of the group will stand in the middle of the road, preventing traffic from moving off after the green pedestrian phase, while screaming at the children to "hurry up and keep together", while conveniently forgetting completely about the little matter that they are encouraging inappropriate behaviour, thus emphasising the already rampant culture of "the rules don't apply to me".

There are 2 issues. First, a person in authority is encouraging children to disregard systems that are designed to ensure safety, and secondly, they are condoning breaking the law, It's no wonder that those children then go on to become cyclists that have a "red doesn't apply to me" mentality, and those cyclists then go on to become drivers who's attitude to red lights is that "shoire, twas only pink".

Maybe if the staff at schools were a little more responsible with their attitude to the encouraging of children to ignore the rules, we might see a more responsive attitude from them as they get older.

OK, that might mean that crocodiles of children being moved to or from a school will need extra supervision to ensure that if they can't all cross in one cycle, there's a responsible adult with both groups, but surely that has to be better than encouraging a wrong attitude in young impressionable minds.

monument

Irish Steve wrote: »

...and those cyclists then go on to become drivers who's attitude to red lights is that "shoire, twas only pink".

A good bulk of the commuter cycling population in Dublin at present were motorists for a long time before cycling as adults.

beauf

ballooba wrote: »

I've recently started cycling and find this junction dangerous to use on the vehicle light sequence. I prefer to take it slow and cross on the pedestrian lights. While having respect for other road users. I've been trying to think of a way to avoid this junction.

what's your general route.

you can always dismount cross with green light then get back on the other side.

beauf

There's no enforcement across the city for a lot multitude of offences. They have to at least do that before anything else is tried.

beauf

Garda should make cyclists speeding stop and tell them they are going too fast for that location.

No Pants

beauf wrote: »

Garda should make cyclists speeding stop and tell them they are going too fast for that location.

Can cyclists speed? Non-motorised and all that.

beauf

No Pants wrote: »

Can cyclists speed? Non-motorised and all that.

I'm taking about using a bit of cop on for the conditions.

If you want to nickpick over what precise charges could be applied go right ahead. For me that's really a minor detail.

No Pants

beauf wrote: »

I'm taking about using a bit of cop on for the conditions.

If you want to nickpick over what precise charges could be applied go right ahead. For me that's really a minor detail.

Fair enough, it wasn't really clear what you were saying. What you're saying now makes more sense. It's not nitpicking when you use the words Gardai and speeding in the same sentence, it automatically springs to mind.

beauf

The concept of going too fast so that you cant stop or will do serious harm if you hit or clip someone should be obvious. Doing through a red light and with pedestrians crossing hits every branch on the stupid tree.

desertcircus

Attention drivers! I saw three drivers yesterday at one junction break the red light! What's up with that? Why are drivers so careless and dangerous?

monument

To be clear: I don't support cyclists breaking red lights and 99% of the time the excuses for doing so are weak -- if people want street design or law changes, they should campaign for them.

Daith wrote: »

Nope. Even if it was for pedestrians and cyclists you would still have traffic lights and you would still have cyclists going through red lights.

Why exactly do you think that?

In the Netherlands and elsewhere, at junctions where there's only cyclists and pedestrians there's usually no traffic lights. The same goes for where there's low motor traffic flows.

Traffic lights were only needed to be used widely after moves towards mass motoring.

On Dame Street the current setup makes conditions poor for both pedestrians and cyclists, and often creates a buildup of both. The little time pedestrians are given makes it all that much worse that anybody infringes on that time.