Dublin bikes being cycled on the footpath?

Aard

Aard wrote: »

Yes you're right. Try to trace a path from west of Grafton Street to east of Grafton Street by bike. The only legal way involves a ~1km diversion.

Just in answer to my own post above. I recently took a Dublin Bike from Exchequer Street to Wilton Place. This is the shortest LEGAL route below. As somebody who knows the one-way system fairly well, this was still a head scratcher to figure out on the fly. The casual Dublin Bikes user might as well give up before they begin.

jack presley

Aard wrote: »

Just in answer to my own post above. I recently took a Dublin Bike from Exchequer Street to Wilton Place. This is the shortest LEGAL route below. As somebody who knows the one-way system fairly well, this was still a head scratcher to figure out on the fly. The casual Dublin Bikes user might as well give up before they begin.

Isn't there an outbound bus lane on Leeson Street that bikes can use? It would mean dismounting which I know isn't ideal and crossing the road at the corner of the Green but that would knock a bit off the route and wouldn't be too far off the most direct route.

Zillah

jack presley wrote: »

No it's not ok for me to break the rules on foot and if ever pulled up on it, I'll take the consequences.

If you think it is not ok and you do it anyway that makes you a hypocrite. It's also hypocritical to criticise cyclists for doing no worse than you do. Earlier you were making snotty sarcastic remarks about cyclists breaking the rules:

jack presley wrote: »

Is there anywhere I can get a list of the trivial and irrelevant laws that can be ignored, especially where it applies to commuting?

and now you're happy to admit that you'll break the rules too and you intend on doing it and it's up to someone else to catch you. Which other rules do you break and how do you decide which ones you'll break and which you'll follow?

jack presley

Zillah wrote: »

If you think it is not ok and you do it anyway that makes you a hypocrite. Earlier you were making snotty sarcastic remarks about cyclists breaking the rules:


and now you're happy to admit that you'll break the rules too and you intend on doing it and it's up to someone else to catch you. Which other rules do you break and how do you decide which ones you'll break and which you'll follow?

Touché..!!

odyssey06

Clearly there's a moral difference between someone breaking the law who endangers others, and someone breaking the law who endangers only themselves... The majority of pedestrians breaking the law are in the latter category, I think a lot of the pedestrian hostility to cyclists is that the cyclists are endangering pedestrians when cycling on footpaths, or cruising through green men ...

Aard

jack presley wrote: »

Isn't there an outbound bus lane on Leeson Street that bikes can use? It would mean dismounting which I know isn't ideal and crossing the road at the corner of the Green but that would knock a bit off the route and wouldn't be too far off the most direct route.

Yes there are many alternatives that involve dismounting and wheeling the bike through pedestrian crossings.

But think of the logistics of that. You have to slow down and come to a halt, potentially with moving traffic behind you (it's 50kmph around the Green). Then you have to hoist the bike onto the footpath and line up with the pedestrian crossing. Then on Leeson Street share a busy bus lane with no space to be overtaken. And you have to figure all that out in less than two seconds, especially if unfamiliar with the one-way system. It's a recipe for utter confusion.

ezra_pound

Aard wrote: »

I'm not trying to be a pain in the ass, but do you know where it says this? I recently was told that the "red man" traffic light was merely advisory, and naturally enough that really threw me.

EDIT: just saw the above comment.

EDIT EDIT: where it says "shall not" -- isn't that merely advisory? In the UK they make a distinction between "shall not" and "must not"...

Commandment no. 5 thou shall not kill is just a basic recommendation under God s law. In fact all of the commandments should actually be called the recommendations.

The ten recommendations.

magicbastarder

Zillah wrote: »

So no one should ever cross when a pedestrian light is red?

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

i.e. it's only illegal when you reach the other side of the road - i.e. when you pass the light across the road.

RainyDay

Rakish Paddy wrote: »

The behaviour in the above clip by the motorists is horrendous!!

Indeed it is, and you'll see it most days at most junctions in Dublin most of the time.

Aard

ezra_pound wrote: »

Commandment no. 5 thou shall not kill is just a basic recommendation under God s law. In fact all of the commandments should actually be called the recommendations.

The ten recommendations.

I'm not sure what you're trying to get at.

magicbastarder

Zillah wrote: »

No because cars are big and clumsy and heavy and travel at much higher speeds and so are far more dangerous and likely to cause an imposition, traffic jam or safety hazard than a bike.

Because they are completely different objects and acting like they're the same is bizarre???

this is it. bikes exist on a continuum, starting at pedestrians, through cyclists, and on to motorists and HGV drivers. bikes are much closer to pedestrians than they are to cars, in terms of danger, pollution created, wear and tear on the roads, and space taken up.
few people seem unhappy that HGVs have more restrictive rules placed on them than cars, but a lot of people get upset with the notion that cars should have more restrictive rules applied than to cyclists (well, maybe better phrased as the converse, that laws should be much less restrictive for cyclists).
the infrastructure we have regularly forces cyclists to behave as pedestrians; the usual example i would give would be for anyone cycling southbound on the N11 who wants to turn right up brewery road into sandyford industrial estate. to do this on a bike, while remaining on the bike, would be to pull out of the cycle lane and cross the bus lane, and two (usually busy) lanes of traffic in a 60km/h zone, to the right turning lane - while cycling uphill.
so most cyclists who aren't at the point where they can enter a race, will have to dismount and cross at a pedestrian crossing. so if the infrastructure forces cyclists onto the path, it's a bit much to give out to the cyclist if he or she chooses to remain on the bike while doing so.

odyssey06

magicbastarder wrote: »

so if the infrastructure forces cyclists onto the path, it's a bit much to give out to the cyclist if he or she chooses to remain on the bike while doing so.

Depends on how safely they are conducting themselves on the pavement... they should remember that they are not supposed to be there and do not have right of way. Just because the infrastructure is inconvenient to them, doesn't give them any rights to conduct themselves recklessly in a pedestrian territory.

Zillah

odyssey06 wrote: »

Depends on how safely they are conducting themselves on the pavement... they should remember that they are not supposed to be there and do not have right of way. Just because the infrastructure is inconvenient to them, doesn't give them any rights to conduct themselves recklessly in a pedestrian territory.

I don't think anyone has claimed it's ok for cyclists to barrel through pedestrians as if they've right of way.

beauf

jack presley wrote: »

Isn't there an outbound bus lane on Leeson Street that bikes can use? It would mean dismounting which I know isn't ideal and crossing the road at the corner of the Green but that would knock a bit off the route and wouldn't be too far off the most direct route.

I used to that. But I'm not entirely sure its legal. As there's a sign saying buses only, but there is a lane marked with a bicycle.

Also the traffic lights half way up never seemed be triggered by the bike. only a bus seems to trigger the lights.

https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.336163,-6.257272,3a,37.5y,117.13h,79.52t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1slPeZhhLzDRA-zLam_P3gDA!2e0

The Alternative is Baggot St which is terrible road for bikes, for a variety of reasons.

Qualitymark

traprunner wrote: »

Simple solution if they are heading straight for you and are going to hit you. Twist the handle bars on them. I find it really stops them good and they will think twice about cycling on a footpath again.....and I am a cyclist!

You may also cause someone to fall and concuss themselves or have other injuries. I hope you have plenty of insurance, and don't mind facing a stretch in the slammer.

punisher5112

Qualitymark wrote: »

You may also cause someone to fall and concuss themselves or have other injuries. I hope you have plenty of insurance, and don't mind facing a stretch in the slammer.

but sure if they cycle into a pedestrial on a footpath then cyclist is to blame.

I have been hit once crossing on a green man and clipped on a path twice by cyclists over the years.

odyssey06

Zillah wrote: »

I don't think anyone has claimed it's ok for cyclists to barrel through pedestrians as if they've right of way.

Nine times out of ten when you see a cyclist upset (in the sense of disturb\distress\bother rather than knock over) a pedestrian on the street, it's for that reason... And it's those cyclists that are causing the toughening up of laws in general for cyclists e.g. on the spot fines. I've never criticised a cyclist on the footpath who was cycling with due care to pedestrians- but too many are not, and in legal terms sorting out the two categories for enforcement is not simple.

So in similar ways - not every driver who uses a phone while driving, or breaks the speed limit marginally, or turns left on a red light is actually endangering anyone, the law is not making such subtle distinctions. Same applies to the legality of cyclists on the footpath. Ideally it would and also in the circumstances noted above for drivers.

Pawwed Rig

odyssey06 wrote: »

Nine times out of ten when you see a cyclist upset a pedestrian on the street, it's for that reason.

You've seen cyclists hitting pedestrians on the footpath 10 times? Can't say I ever witnessed it

RainyDay

odyssey06 wrote: »

So in similar ways - not every driver who uses a phone while driving, or breaks the speed limit marginally, or turns left on a red light is actually endangering anyone, the law is not making such subtle distinctions. Same applies to the legality of cyclists on the footpath.

That's generally true. But what you're missing is that drivers kill 200 people each year and maim thousands of others. Cyclists dont.

punisher5112

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

You've seen cyclists hitting pedestrians on the footpath 10 times? Can't say I ever witnessed it

I wouldn't say 10 times myself but have seen it quite a lot to be honest.

And of course not always cyclist fault either where pedestrian walks out in front of them.

I am in a job where I see lots of things some good but mostly bad.

People on phones and listening to musice are the worst.

traprunner

Qualitymark wrote: »

You may also cause someone to fall and concuss themselves or have other injuries. I hope you have plenty of insurance, and don't mind facing a stretch in the slammer.

It's self defence from an assault. I'd much prefer the cyclist injured than me. They were the one cycling where they are not permitted to and not giving right of way to pedestrians.

Qualitymark

I've never seen a cyclist hit a pedestrian, and I have often (too often) seen people cycling on pavements.

Locally, maybe because of the demographics of where I live, quite a few of the path-cyclists are from abroad, and it may be that this is normal and legal where they live, and they don't realise that it isn't here.

Others cycle on the path because they don't feel safe on a particular stretch of road. (I've even been known to use the path for the last 50 metres before home myself during a glaring winter sunset when drivers are blinded by the sun; the path is sheltered by shrubs and trees. But I cycled very slowly.)

Dublin - Ireland generally, but especially Dublin - badly needs a proper cycling infrastructure like, say, Hamburg, where cyclists are mostly completely separate from cars and pedestrians.

odyssey06

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

You've seen cyclists hitting pedestrians on the footpath 10 times? Can't say I ever witnessed it

Ah I realise now upset was not a good choice of word - I meant upset in the sense of to disturb or distress, rather than to overturn completely...

elric

magicbastarder wrote: »

i.e. it's only illegal when you reach the other side of the road - i.e. when you pass the light across the road.

You're only allowed to cross a pedestrian crossing if the light is green. From the 'Rules for Pedstrians' section of the 1997 Road Traffic regulations (S.I. No. 182/1997):

(3) A pedestrian about to cross a roadway at a place where traffic sign number RPC 003 or RPC 004 [pedestrian lights] has been provided shall do so only when a lamp of the facing pedestrian lights is lit and emits a constant green light.

And if I'm interpretting them correctly, the following rules mean that pedestrians are also required to obey the regular traffic lights:

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

(5) At a road junction where traffic is controlled either by traffic lights or by a member of the Garda Síochána, a pedestrian shall cross the roadway only when traffic going in the direction in which the pedestrian intends to cross is permitted (by the lights or the member) to proceed.

LeinsterDub

punisher5112 wrote: »

I wouldn't say 10 times myself but have seen it quite a lot to be honest.

If someone gave me less than 10 m&m's I wouldn't save I had quite a lot of m&m's

punisher5112

LeinsterDub wrote: »

If someone gave me less than 10 m&m's I wouldn't save I had quite a lot of m&m's

Quite obvious if I said I had 10 or more nobody would believe it.

Wow took longer then I thought for a sneeky dig......

LeinsterDub

punisher5112 wrote: »

Quite obvious if I said I had 10 or more nobody would believe it.

Why is your experienced number is so much higher than everyone else? I cycle in and out of town everyday and have seen 0 .You've seen more than 10 .

beauf

Probably on a different route.

Some locations have such abysmal layout and design to they actually increase the amount of crossing of cyclists and pedestrians. The quays from IFSC to the point are a perfect example. The cycle lane is psychotic, and puts pedestrians and cyclists in each others path constantly. Phoenix Park another. Lots of points along the Grand Canal cycle route from Rathmines to Mount Street.

Pawwed Rig

Saw a guy today on Stephens Green cycling with his daughter in the basket of a Dublin Bike :eek:. She was about 5 or 6

beauf

On the road or on the pavement. Or was it the lack of a helmet tax?