Conflicting Sign/Markings?

Patrickof

Hi,

Had a bit of a row about this one, the 2 parked cars are clamped.

I think wrongly, but my other half thinks rightly.

Earlier in the day, about 20+ cars were parked along this stretch. Probably at mass in the adjacent church on Stephens Green.

The white line is a marked cycle lane, new enough I think. Now, I know the rules say that for a solid white line bike lane, you cannot park on it.

However, the clearway sign indicates that the clearway is not 24Hrs, leading one to assume that it is not a clearway for 2 day hours Mon-Sat and all day Sunday.

Should that not be a 24Hr clearway sign as the bike lane (without any time related signs) should be assumed to be 24hrs also?

markpb

I presume there are separate cycle lane signs somewhere nearby. Presumably they have different hours to the clearway? It doesn't make much sense to have limited clearway hours but unlimited cycle lane hours (i.e you could stop but not park in the cycle lane) but the law doesn't have to make sense to be enforced.

cast_iron

What offence were the cars clamped for?
A cycle lane sign should have accompanying times on it - if it doesn't, I don't see how it is assumed to be 24 hrs.

cython

cast_iron wrote: »

What offence were the cars clamped for?
A cycle lane sign should have accompanying times on it - if it doesn't, I don't see how it is assumed to be 24 hrs.

Really? I don't know what gives you the idea about the bolded, since that is exactly the way that bus lanes work, and regarding cycle lanes, the RTA says the following (emphasis is mine, on the relevant part):

“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.”,

To me this means that the hours of operation are optional, in which case in the absence of any hours the only logical assumption, IMHO, is that it is 24 hours, especially since this is how bus lanes are managed as mentioned.

Patrickof

cast_iron wrote: »

What offence were the cars clamped for?
A cycle lane sign should have accompanying times on it - if it doesn't, I don't see how it is assumed to be 24 hrs.

The offence was "Parked on Cycle Track"

There were no signs indicating any time limits/bounds on the cycle lane, so as someone else said in this thread, its assumed a 24Hr cycle track in that case.

But the clearway signs should not be there, they are redundant, and incorrect with a time on them, they should either not be there at all, or be there but marked as 24Hr clearways.

Strictly speaking though, I guess the cars had the right penalty notice and were in breach of the cycle lane, though the clearway signs are also incorrect.

2 wrongs don't make a right though I suppose.

whisky_galore

Have seen double yellow lines in 'loading' parking bays. The yellow lines look slightly scuffed and faded but no attempt made by city council to remove or conceal them.

roverrules

whisky_galore wrote: »

Have seen double yellow lines in 'loading' parking bays. The yellow lines look slightly scuffed and faded but no attempt made by city council to remove or conceal them.

That's because you're supposed to be unloading not parked, I think I read somewhere that even on double yellows you can stop to load/unload for 30 minutes

Carawaystick

The mind boggles at the Corpo preventing cars parking on Cycle lanes by preventing cars moving away from cycle lanes....

cast_iron

cython wrote: »

Really? I don't know what gives you the idea about the bolded, since that is exactly the way that bus lanes work, and regarding cycle lanes, the RTA says the following (emphasis is mine, on the relevant part):

I see that now, and would agree with you.
If the cycle track sign (no times) was on the same post as the clearway sign (with times), then maybe you could argue those times were "in association" with the cycle track. However, that doesn't apply in this case. Looks open and shut.

Valetta

As far as I know, a clearway means (in layman terms) "No stopping at all" . This is separate to parking and relates to dropping someone off, taking a call etc.

I would think, therefore that the existence of the clearway and cycle lane are compatible; also the cars were correctly clamped as they breached the " no parking" on a cycle lane.

monument

Patrickof wrote: »

There were no signs indicating any time limits/bounds on the cycle lane, so as someone else said in this thread, its assumed a 24Hr cycle track in that case.

But the clearway signs should not be there, they are redundant, and incorrect with a time on them, they should either not be there at all, or be there but marked as 24Hr clearways.

It's posable that the clearway predates the upgrading of the cycle lane to a solid white lined one.

Carawaystick wrote: »

The mind boggles at the Corpo preventing cars parking on Cycle lanes by preventing cars moving away from cycle lanes....

Towing is very costly. Clamping, of the type pictured, is a good deterrent -- it's unlikely that most drivers will reoffend quickly.

Del2005

Patrickof wrote: »

Hi,

Had a bit of a row about this one, the 2 parked cars are clamped.

I think wrongly, but my other half thinks rightly.

Earlier in the day, about 20+ cars were parked along this stretch. Probably at mass in the adjacent church on Stephens Green.

The white line is a marked cycle lane, new enough I think. Now, I know the rules say that for a solid white line bike lane, you cannot park on it.

However, the clearway sign indicates that the clearway is not 24Hrs, leading one to assume that it is not a clearway for 2 day hours Mon-Sat and all day Sunday.

Should that not be a 24Hr clearway sign as the bike lane (without any time related signs) should be assumed to be 24hrs also?

With all the "talk to Joe" hysteria a few years ago about people getting clamped in Galway going to mass it's now illegal to clamp illegally parked church goers, doesn't matter where you leave it once you're going to a church, obviously the two other motorists saw all the holy joes parked illegally and though it was OK to park but as they where most likely shopping not praying they were fair prey.

Victor

Patrickof wrote: »

Should that not be a 24Hr clearway sign as the bike lane (without any time related signs) should be assumed to be 24hrs also?

The signs are correct, the motorists were in the wrong. The 2 hour window is to allow goods vehicles to do deliveries.

Icepick

Clearway - don't stop at all (except for emergencies) - during said times in this case
Cycle lane - don't park

stop

How come the cycle lane from Rathmines to Rathgar becomes a parking lane evenings/weekends. I end up cycling in the middle of the road, away from them doors.

monument

stop wrote: »

How come the cycle lane from Rathmines to Rathgar becomes a parking lane evenings/weekends. I end up cycling in the middle of the road, away from them doors.

Because it's only a part-time cycle lane.

John_C

Would the drivers have been OK if they left the cycle lane clear and parked in the general lane?

Victor

John_C wrote: »

Would the drivers have been OK if they left the cycle lane clear and parked in the general lane?

No. When parking, you are mean to park within 450mm(?) of the kerb.