Can you cycle up a one-way street?

Roadhawk

monument wrote: »

Because there is enough room for both to pass? Because has worked in Irelamd for years and on a wide scale in the Netherlands for longer?

There is a nearby example in Dublin on a narrower roadway which has been in place for years and the only issue is a lack of clarity to motorists that cycling is allowed both ways -- and even with that it's safe and it works.



Allowing cycling both ways as in the pictured example is not hazardous and common as muck in the Netherlands. It's also used in Brussels, Berlin, Paris, London, etc, etc.

It very much so is proper cycling infrastructure.

Pretty interesting:

http://www.iamexpat.nl/read-and-discuss/expat-page/news/amsterdam-netherlands-most-dangerous-city-cyclists-pedestrians

Carawaystick

Roadhawk wrote: »

I think this example is absurd. just looking at the image you can see that there is not enough room for the cyclist and a car. how is this right?

Just from the image you can see there is not room for a car and a person on a bike. How is this right?

The speed limit here is 80kmh, whereas its 50 or 30 in Phibsboro.

monument

Roadhawk wrote: »

Pretty interesting:

http://www.iamexpat.nl/read-and-discuss/expat-page/news/amsterdam-netherlands-most-dangerous-city-cyclists-pedestrians

Why do you think it is pritty interesting in any on-topic way? How exactly is that relevant to the topic or my post? Do you have any point or are you just randomly posting links to irrelevant articles?

That article makes no reference to contra-flow and I made no reference to Amsterdam.

Snickers Man

Roadhawk wrote: »

Both pics from Irishcycle.com
http://irishcycle.com/2015/08/22/contra-flow-cycling-streets-could-be-rolled-out-across-dublin-city/

Looks like Portobello/South Circular Road district in Dublin?

Who has right of way in this scenario? The car or the bike? It looks as if one would have to yield.

monument

Snickers Man wrote: »

Looks like Portobello/South Circular Road district in Dublin?

Who has right of way in this scenario? The car or the bike? It looks as if one would have to yield.

Nobody has the right of way -- exactly the same as on the many narrow two-way residential streets and roads around the city and country.

BTW: The exact address of the street and other examples are in the article.

PS: The concept of "who has right of way" is not part of Irish law.

Snickers Man

monument wrote: »

Nobody has the right of way -- exactly the same as on the many narrow two-way residential streets and roads around the city and country.

BTW: The exact address of the street and other examples are in the article.

PS: The concept of "who has right of way" is not part of Irish law.

Not sure that I'm too confident about this scenario.

I sympathise with the need to facilitate cycling in Dublin city centre and to have some sort of accommodation with cyclists so they do not face the same restrictions as vehicular traffic. But is this the best way to do it?

It's all very well saying that there is no "right of way" in such cases and that it is exactly the same as the many two-way streets where opposing vehicles cannot share the same space at the same time but in those cases priority is ultimately decided by force majeure: the more powerful car wins.

Yes, most people tend to be fairly well mannered about it and pull in if they see an approaching car has no space to pass but the dynamic of one car facing another is not the same as one car/SUV/van/truck facing a bicycle.

Also, in two-way scenarios, drivers are EXPECTING oncoming traffic. In the case of two-way-for-cyclists-only situations they may not be. Especially if (and we are notorious for this in this country) the signage is not sufficiently clear to warn a motorist that oncoming cyclists are to be expected. Furthermore, if it's dark and the cyclist has no lights/hi viz gear (another thing we are notorious for in this country) the consequences could be uncomfortable for cyclists to say the least.

Put it this way, I don't think I'd be comfortable about cycling up a road like the one depicted.

The other point is this looks to be a relatively quiet residential area. ie not the sort of one-way system which is likely to discommode cyclists too much. The real problem tends to be in the city centre. Try getting to Dame St (say) from Baggot St. How would you do it legally on a bike?

You have three choices, two of them horrendously circuitous and the third marginally less so (FitzWilliam St, Merrion Square Sth then left up to Ely Place, then right down to the Green and Dawson St) but you really have to know your way around. It's not at all intuitive.

monument

Snickers Man wrote: »

Not sure that I'm too confident about this scenario.

...
Put it this way, I don't think I'd be comfortable about cycling up a road like the one depicted.

We can't hold back well-proven, effective and safe solutions based on the comfort or confidence of a few people. The solution of contra-flow without lanes on narrow one-way streets is well used across a number of countries and not just the most cycling friendly ones.

Snickers Man wrote: »

I sympathise with the need to facilitate cycling in Dublin city centre and to have some sort of accommodation with cyclists so they do not face the same restrictions as vehicular traffic. But is this the best way to do it?

This the best solution for the issues of narrow one-way streets with low flow and low speed.

Snickers Man wrote: »

It's all very well saying that there is no "right of way" in such cases and that it is exactly the same as the many two-way streets where opposing vehicles cannot share the same space at the same time but in those cases priority is ultimately decided by force majeure: the more powerful car wins.

Yes, most people tend to be fairly well mannered about it and pull in if they see an approaching car has no space to pass but the dynamic of one car facing another is not the same as one car/SUV/van/truck facing a bicycle.

I was not thinking about cars vs car or car vs truck, I was thinking car vs bicycle.

BTW: I'm not too sure if you're clear on the example: In most cases in the example a bicycle and car will be able to pass each other without one or the other having to pull in. Both just go slow and negotiate.

Snickers Man wrote: »

Also, in two-way scenarios, drivers are EXPECTING oncoming traffic. In the case of two-way-for-cyclists-only situations they may not be. Especially if (and we are notorious for this in this country) the signage is not sufficiently clear to warn a motorist that oncoming cyclists are to be expected.

That's a reason for good signage, not a reason not to roll out the idea. Motorists will get used to the idea. In reality motorists should already be expecting cyclists on such streets.

Snickers Man wrote: »

Furthermore, if it's dark and the cyclist has no lights/hi viz gear (another thing we are notorious for in this country) the consequences could be uncomfortable for cyclists to say the least.

Do you think our bicycle light compliance is high among those currently cycling the wrong way down such streets? If many legal here, do you think the bicycle light compliance would be much lower than in, say, France?

Snickers Man wrote: »

this looks to be a relatively quiet residential area. ie not the sort of one-way system which is likely to discommode cyclists too much. The real problem tends to be in the city centre. Try getting to Dame St (say) from Baggot St. How would you do it legally on a bike?

You have three choices, two of them horrendously circuitous and the third marginally less so (FitzWilliam St, Merrion Square Sth then left up to Ely Place, then right down to the Green and Dawson St) but you really have to know your way around. It's not at all intuitive.

The detour in the example we're talking about is ~500 metres. Other issues elsewhere is not a good reason not to use a proven solution.

Other locations, such as your example, will have to include protected contra-flow cycle lanes / paths; turning pockets and toucan crossing or other measures which allow bicycle users to bypass restrictive turns etc etc

Snickers Man

Can I just bump this after many years to announce how pleased I am with the introduction of a cycling-only contraflow on Sth Leinster Street.

This is a fine example of using common sense to allow cyclists to get around Dublin City centre without being subjected to ALL the circuitous one-way restrictions imposed (rightly) on vehicular traffic while keeping the pavements safe for pedestrians.

We should have many more.

cgcsb

Snickers Man wrote: »

Can I just bump this after many years to announce how pleased I am with the introduction of a cycling-only contraflow on Sth Leinster Street.

This is a fine example of using common sense to allow cyclists to get around Dublin City centre without being subjected to ALL the circuitous one-way restrictions imposed (rightly) on vehicular traffic while keeping the pavements safe for pedestrians.

We should have many more.

The Nassau st - Pearse st - Leeson st - Merrion row area is terrible for this. It creates a wall of imperiability for cycle journies. Recently this changed for Nassau st and the difference is nothing short of a revolution, shaving massive chunks off cycle journey times.

Snickers Man

cgcsb wrote: »

The Nassau st - Pearse st - Leeson st - Merrion row area is terrible for this. It creates a wall of imperiability for cycle journies. Recently this changed for Nassau st and the difference is nothing short of a revolution, shaving massive chunks off cycle journey times.

I think we may be talking about the same stretch?

South Leinster Street and Nassau Street are both parts of the same road that borders the south wall of Trinity College.

trellheim

Does it just end at Dawson st ? I found it difficult to figure out if it continues on or not.

MJohnston

trellheim wrote: »

Does it just end at Dawson st ? I found it difficult to figure out if it continues on or not.

At Dawson St I think you're supposed to dismount, cross at the lights, and then you can continue westwards on the street around to College Green.

Oscar Madison

Battery Kinzie wrote: »

I've often heard that they're bringing in a law that says cyclists can go the wrong way up a one way street. Has that been brought in yet, or is it something we can expect to come in soon?

But aren't they doing it anyway in the cycle lanes! :mad:

Snickers Man

Oscar Madison wrote: »

But aren't they doing it anyway in the cycle lanes! :mad:

New to this thread, aren't you?

It does go back several years, admittedly.