"Parking Protected" Cycle Lanes

pj.dublin

schemingbohemia wrote: »

Am I then to abuse and cajole every single car driver that drives in the bus lane/cycle lane? Every bus/car driver that does a close pass?

A lot of cyclist don't realise that a lot of cycle lanes are not for exclusive use by bikes, they don't know the rules of the road.
Broken white line means car can use cycle lane.

Markcheese

pj.dublin wrote:

A lot of cyclist don't realise that a lot of cycle lanes are not for exclusive use by bikes, they don't know the rules of the road. Broken white line means car can use cycle lane.

But a car allowed cross a cycle lane but not drive in it.. it'd be illegal to drive straddling several lanes and because of the width a car would have to drive in a least 2,and possibly 3 lanes...

pj.dublin

Markcheese wrote: »

But a car allowed cross a cycle lane but not drive in it.. it'd be illegal to drive straddling several lanes and because of the width a car would have to drive in a least 2,and possibly 3 lanes...

See Leeson Street Bridge.
Bus must take more than one lane to go over bridge.
See Kiely's Donnybrook
Bus must take more than one lane to go around corner.
See......................

schemingbohemia

pj.dublin wrote: »

A lot of cyclist don't realise that a lot of cycle lanes are not for exclusive use by bikes, they don't know the rules of the road.
Broken white line means car can use cycle lane.

pj.dublin wrote: »

See Leeson Street Bridge.
Bus must take more than one lane to go over bridge.
See Kiely's Donnybrook
Bus must take more than one lane to go around corner.
See......................

I'm struggling to see your point here. Are you suggesting that just because it's not illegal that a bus or car should travel within a foot of a cyclist? Do you know the draft from a bus impacts on a cyclist when they pass that close and it can affect the cyclists control of the bike?
Cyclists have to deal with drains and potholes that could cause them to crash, they need to be given decent width to wobble.
It's all about consideration from everyone on the road. If there isn't room to overtake a cyclist safely then don't do it.

TheExile1878

I appreciate the limitations and agree a decent cycle network would be ideal - when you are trying to cross the Millennium Bridge (cycles prohibited) and walk through the Italian Quarter (pedestrianised) and you are hit by a cyclist and given a mouthful of abuse - it's hard to really sympathise.

cgcsb

TheExile1878 wrote: »

I still do think that if the majority of cyclists who are responsible clamped down on those who routinely break the law, then travel would be safer for all.

At the moment, seeing some of the behaviour of cyclists on my commute home doesn't exactly make you want to support them.

Not all are like that - so the decent ones should make a stand.

We can't even police car drivers effectively. Policing cyclists is a whole other proposition.

TheExile1878

cgcsb wrote: »

We can't even police car drivers effectively. Policing cyclists is a whole other proposition.

At least cars are identifiable and can face penalties.

Rogue cyclists are anonymous and know it.

traprunner

Deleted User wrote: »

Would reducing traffic lanes not just make the city a tad more congested, though, no?

I know this is a cycling forum, so there will be an obvious bias towards cycling, but by and large, the city is used by cars. I can understand the idea of getting people to stop driving unnecesaraily into the city, and doing this is a way of promoting cycling instead of driving, but surely it makes less sense than spending an exquivalent money on public transport, no?

Anyone that's not currently cycling to work, won't be. I think it would be a fair comment that ireland is too cold, wet and windy in general, for the everyday joe soap to bother cycling in. There has to be a will. Obviously on a forum like this, everyone's an enthusiast cyclist and would take great pleasure in removing all traffic minus emergency vehicles from the city, and replacing it with cyclists, but from a realistic point of view, is it not making things a tad worse in the grand scheme (as the majority of users in the city are using car, and regardless of how many bike lanes you put in, they will remain in their cars).


Maybe I'm missing something though. Perhaps this is gonna be one of those things they'll come back to in 3 years and see if it made any difference?


(or am i misreading it altogether? Is it more for cyclist safety in these specific areas, rather than promoting cycling in general?).



(I say this as someone who does a bit of work in the city that involves a lot of driving, but thankfully can choose my hours, so i attend early on sundays when the place is usually dead. Can't stand the city on a 'normal' day, for the most part.)

If that was the case there would be no new cyclists. I started commuting by bike about a year and a half ago. I'm 18 years in my current job and 14 years in the same building. I started from zero cycling to work up to practically every day. Many offices have showers so a little rain or sweat means nothing. A few years ago extra bike racks had to be put in to accommodate new cyclists.

I think when the 'commute to work' question in the census is compared to the previous census then it'll be very evident that cycling is becoming more popular as a mode of transport in the city.

Better infrastructure for cycling will lead to more cycling and less cars. In theory it should relieve some of the congestion that you mention.

magicbastarder

TheExile1878 wrote: »

I still do think that if the majority of cyclists who are responsible clamped down on those who routinely break the law, then travel would be safer for all.

when you're in your car, do you try to run motorists who break red lights off the road?

TheExile1878

magicbastarder wrote: »

when you're in your car, do you try to run motorists who break red lights off the road?

And once again the response to bad behaviour is a knee jerk "ug cars bad ug".

magicbastarder

you understand the concept of an analogy to highlight flaws in your argument?

i am a motorist, btw, for over 20 years. would be kinda odd of me to claim all motorists are idiots.

FixitFelix

Just whats needed, more traffic congestion so cyclist can take up more road space!

pj.dublin

Deedsie wrote: »

It would be some shock for traffic in Ireland if every cyclist decided to drive or get the bus on a designated day. Cyclist strike until we get a fair share of road space.
.

Already happens, its called a cold wet windy winters day.

Roadhawk

Well people who cycle would naturally turn to public transport if they are unable to cycle for reasons such as being sick or injured, bad weather conditions or stolen bike. They would hardly go out and buy a car.

magicbastarder

god forbid a cyclist would also own a car.

Jawgap

Roadhawk wrote: »

Well people who cycle would naturally turn to public transport if they are unable to cycle for reasons such as being sick or injured, bad weather conditions or stolen bike. They would hardly go out and buy a car.

I think you'll find a lot of cyclists own a car - some even own two

......and they pay 'road tax'

Roadhawk

I didn't say that a cyclist could not own a car as well as a bike. Im a motorist and have a a bike too. I just dont use it on a daily basis.