Reinstatement of mandatory use?

tomasrojo

Ross appears to be pretty complicit in this though. Pretty odd to be overturning a considered decision by the man who is now Taoiseach, but I doubt Varadkar cares about this stuff now.

The RSA and the Gardaí have been pretty determined in reinstating mandatory use. I think they really resented Varadkar ignoring their objections at the time.

nomdeboardie

tomasrojo wrote: »

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ac86d7c6-4c99-11e7-8b46-aeb9dec90269



I guess they've given up the pretence that they're still mandatory use, and are just making them mandatory use again.

I can't see the whole article but Moyagh Murdock of the RSA says that cycling groups "may not be convinced" at this point that rule changes would be in their favour. Yes, well, they did campaign for 15 years to get the mandatory-use requirement overturned, and then the RSA pretended that the requirement hadn't been overturned, so maybe they are a tiny bit vexed by this.

Thanks for this - I didn't realise The Times (UK) had an Irish edition on weekdays...if this is the 'regular' website (which it seems to be(?)) I would expect the article to flag the fact that it refers to Ireland, not UK(?)

ETA: I see "Sean O’Driscoll Ireland Reporter" in the sidebar, but no indication from the URL that it is is some Irish subsection
EtEtA: Ah, going to the homepage, I do see an Ireland subsection, from where the article is linked by an Irish version of the URL, https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/ireland/cyclists-may-be-forced-off-the-roads-rphl7qg9p , though also unfortunately paywalled

tomasrojo

One further contentious point in the bit of the article I can see: I doubt that the doubts expressed by cycling campaigners were limited to cycle lanes being congested sometimes.

magicbastarder

on my commute, the bike lanes i avoid would be limited mainly to the ones around dublin port (lots of building work has them filthy and hard to see) and the leopardstown road.

obviously, we will see a reciprocal action whereby the gardai will clamp down on illegal parking in cycle lanes assuming this is ratified.

nomdeboardie

magicbastarder wrote: »

on my commute, the bike lanes i avoid would be limited mainly to the ones around dublin port (lots of building work has them filthy and hard to see) and the leopardstown road.

obviously, we will see a reciprocal action whereby the gardai will clamp down on illegal parking in cycle lanes assuming this is ratified :rolleyes:.

Fixed that for you

monument

nomdeboardie wrote: »

Thanks for this - I didn't realise The Times (UK) had an Irish edition on weekdays...if this is the 'regular' website (which it seems to be(?)) I would expect the article to flag the fact that it refers to Ireland, not UK(?)

ETA: I see "Sean O?Driscoll Ireland Reporter" in the sidebar, but no indication from the URL that it is is some Irish subsection
EtEtA: Ah, going to the homepage, I do see an Ireland subsection, from where the article is linked by an Irish version of the URL, https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/ireland/cyclists-may-be-forced-off-the-roads-rphl7qg9p , though also unfortunately paywalled

The digital edition has been going for awhile now and, as of last weekend, the Irish edition in print replaced the UK edition which was already sold here.

nomdeboardie

tomasrojo wrote: »

One further contentious point in the bit of the article I can see: I doubt that the doubts expressed by cycling campaigners were limited to cycle lanes being congested sometimes.

True, though I assume this would overlap with a point I was echoing from another poster on another thread recently regarding issues with overtaking

jimmycrackcorm

Are the RSA taking any public comments for this report?

I think cyclists should email them in photos or Google streetview links to unsuitable instances of these mandatory cycle lanes.

nomdeboardie

So I registered to get my 2 free articles/month(or whatever )...

She was speaking at the launch of National Bike Week, which starts tomorrow until June 18, with bike-themed events across Ireland.

I bet that went down well :pac:

tomasrojo

They really know how to celebrate Bike Week. One year, they use it as an occasion to introduce Fixed Penalty Notices, another year to float the reinstatement a detested and counterproductive restriction.

HivemindXX

It's been said before but it is very much worth repeating. If the cycle lanes were actually better/safer/more convenient then there would be no need for laws to force cyclists to use them.

We don't have laws requiring drivers to use the motorway if one is provided.

The thing the RSA and the guards are studiously avoiding looking at (like a motorist caught in the yellow box) is that a lot, if not most, cycle lanes are worse than using the road. Forcing cyclists to use them anyway is pretty despicable.

magicbastarder

i did send an email to the RSA months ago asking what advice they have for cyclists when faced with impossible cycle lane design - they said they'd get back to me but never did.

tomasrojo

I don't think they have an answer. I don't think they really care, but there is no answer, except use the road or walk.

Corca Baiscinn

tomasrojo wrote: »

They really know how to celebrate Bike Week. One year, they use it as an occasion to introduce Fixed Penalty Notices, another year to float the reinstatement a detested and counterproductive restriction.

And of course high viz is always with us on these occasions!

tomasrojo

Corca Baiscinn wrote: »

And of course high viz is always with us on these occasions!

I remember irishcycle.com (in its previous incarnation) calling it Bicycle Helmet Week.

Corca Baiscinn

tomasrojo wrote: »

One further contentious point in the bit of the article I can see: I doubt that the doubts expressed by cycling campaigners were limited to cycle lanes being congested sometimes.

I doubt it either. If this comes to anything, the cycling campaigns, cyclist,ie and individual cyclists not affiliated to any of above need to bombard Shane Ross in his constituency office and at DOTTAS with photos of why we can't have mandatory lanes when e don't have mandatory NCPF design or maintenance or enforcement . that's assuming it's still S R but I imagine it will be. Only today Irish Cycle has a story re South D C C building cycling infrastructure around the N 4 that mixes cycling and walking and does not continue at junctions, They can't have it every which way.
Personally I think the congestion is a red herring. if a footpath is congested, as many are, I have to accept that my progress will be slower or else alter my route. Ditto a road, if I'm driving, so I don't accept that cyclists should be able to use the road merely because the cycleway is congested. After all a pedestrian can't run out on the road or a motorist drive on the footpath to avoid congestion. However, before I'm eaten alive I do think cyclists should be able to use the road for other reasons.

tomasrojo

Yeah, someone picked the most selfish-sounding objection and ran with that.

HivemindXX

Corca Baiscinn wrote: »

Ditto a road, if I'm driving, so I don't accept that cyclists should be able to use the road merely because the cycleway is congested. After all a pedestrian can't run out on the road or a motorist drive on the footpath to avoid congestion. However, before I'm eaten alive I do think cyclists should be able to use the road for other reasons.

Pedestrians very frequently step out in to the road to go around obstructions. Where I used to work delivery drivers would frequently (as in multiple times a day) block the footpath completely and every pedestrian would have to go past them in the road. They actually had a little chain they would use to block the footpath, apparently pedestrians using the footpath were getting in their way when they were unloading.

Less frequently, but still regularly enough, cars will go up on the footpath to go around other cars that are waiting to make a right turn. I've seen cars mount the footpath and travel 50+ metres to pass a line of stopped cars because they want to make a left turn and didn't want to wait any more. Of course parking up on the footpath is extremely common.

Aside from that, this is a very different issue. Cyclists are allowed use the road and that is not going to change because there are never going to be cycle lanes alongside every road. So cyclists can use the road over there, but here they can't even if the cycle lane is congested.

I agree with Tomasrojo that this was picked to highlight because it makes cyclists seem greedy and self important. I think "too crowded" would be fairly low down most peoples list of issues with our existing cycle paths. Loss of priority at junctions and difficulty making left turns (or going straight ahead in particularly idiotic cases) are ahead of poor road surface for me, with congestion being a very distant last place.

CramCycle

Positives: This government and/or Shane Ross are unlikely to last this getting past the post.

Negatives:: I now have to decide whether to make a hilarious rip off video of me cycling into the numerous obstructions or justgo to court and make a reasoned argument.

adrian522

Is this not pretty irrelevant anyway? Like pretty much every other law regarding rules of the road, it simply won't be enforced. There'll be an initial attempt at enforcement and it will then be forgotten about.

It may give aggressive motorists and bus drivers another excuse to put lives in danger but won't really change cyclist behavior at all as regards using cycle lanes.

S. Goodspeed

magicbastarder wrote: »

on my commute, the bike lanes i avoid would be limited mainly to the ones around dublin port (lots of building work has them filthy and hard to see) and the leopardstown road.

obviously, we will see a reciprocal action whereby the gardai will clamp down on illegal parking in cycle lanes assuming this is ratified.

Bike lane on that stretch of the N11 is lethal. Aside for the ridiculous pot holes and bumps, it's runs right up against people's gates and have there's regularly cars reversing blindly out of them. Would gladly take the fine (and the abuse from bus drivers, taxis etc) crather than risk using it

CramCycle

adrian522 wrote: »

It may give aggressive motorists and bus drivers another excuse to put lives in danger but won't really change cyclist behavior at all as regards using cycle lanes.

Which would be the biggest issue, forget everthing else.

flatface

adrian522 wrote: »

It may give aggressive motorists and bus drivers another excuse to put lives in danger but won't really change cyclist behavior at all as regards using cycle lanes.

This matters a lot. I think cyclist safety will be greatly improved if a clear message is sent to motorists that cyclists are 'entitled' to use the road.

At the moment motorist feel 'entitled' to punish us with close passes for doing the same

tomasrojo

CramCycle wrote: »

Positives: This government and/or Shane Ross are unlikely to last this getting past the post.

Negatives:: I now have to decide whether to make a hilarious rip off video of me cycling into the numerous obstructions or justgo to court and make a reasoned argument.

Anyone who lives in Ross' constituency should maybe send him a letter (physical rather than email), and let him know how much this makes you feel like not voting for him.

tomasrojo

adrian522 wrote: »

Is this not pretty irrelevant anyway? Like pretty much every other law regarding rules of the road, it simply won't be enforced. There'll be an initial attempt at enforcement and it will then be forgotten about.

I suppose it depends whether this a complete reversion to the previous situation, where cycle tracks were mandatory to use (1998-2012, I think). That was blanket compulsion, bar a few minor exceptions. It was never (or virtually) never enforced, but I think cyclists were sometimes told to get off the road and use them by the Gardaí.

(3) (a) Subject to paragraph (b), a pedal cycle must be driven on a cycle track where one is provided.



(b) Paragraph (a) shall not apply in the case of a cycle track on the right-hand edge of which traffic sign number RRM 023 has been provided,


(i) where a person driving a pedal cycle intends to change direction and has indicated that intention, or


(ii) where a bus is stopped in the cycle track at a point where traffic sign RUS 031 (bus stop) is provided, or


(iii) where a vehicle is parked in the cycle track for the purpose of loading or unloading.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1998/si/274/made/en/print

I think that allowed you to make right turns, and get around cars, buses and trucks in the cycle track. Doesn't allow you to avoid being crushed by traffic turning left though, or avoid motorists reversing out of driveways, etc.

Interestingly, the loading/unloading bit is a reference to people being allowed to park in cycle tracks with a broken white line boundary for the purposes of loading/unloading. Obviously, no-one would ever illegally park on a cycle facility, so this didn't require addressing, and if it did happen (never would, but let's hypothesise) you would just wait for an hour or so for the car owner to return.

Note also how the (perhaps now-abandoned) DTTAS interpretation that Varadkar's changes left cycle tracks compulsory to use means that the original legislation was LESS restrictive, as it had exemptions.

monument

adrian522 wrote: »

Is this not pretty irrelevant anyway? Like pretty much every other law regarding rules of the road, it simply won't be enforced. There'll be an initial attempt at enforcement and it will then be forgotten about.

It may give aggressive motorists and bus drivers another excuse to put lives in danger but won't really change cyclist behavior at all as regards using cycle lanes.

Where it matters:

Enforcement (cyclist) -- there might never be wide-spread enforcement but enforcement far more likely with on-the-spot fines (and there's indications that some gardai are using the "Cyclist driving a pedal cycle without reasonable consideration" for things which are covered under different laws but aren't in the fines system).

Enforcement (motorist) -- Even if the motorist is to blame, the question will be asked why you were not using the cycle track. This already happens a bit but if the law clearly said cyclists must use cycle tracks, it would be even stronger.

Damages from collisions -- If you have a bike written off or a life-changing injury after a collision the insurance won't pay up and, even if the motorist is in the wrong, the courts will at least take some of the damages off the judgement or accept a lower agreement offer as more than reasonable.

Mindsets -- Doing something which is seen as illegal will leave some motorists less caring and others more stubborn in terms of them being in the right over punishment passes or other close calls.

tomasrojo wrote: »

Note also how the (perhaps now-abandoned) DTTAS interpretation that Varadkar's changes left cycle tracks compulsory to use means that the original legislation was LESS restrictive, as it had exemptions.

The current legislation if viewed as including cycle tracks as compulsory also includes all types of cycle tracks -- including dashed lined cycle tracks and shared footpath surfaces which seem to be legally classed as a type of cycle track rather footpath. Although maybe not cycleways.

tomasrojo

And it also takes off what little pressure there is to create something that people actually want to use.

tomasrojo

That's a great point about the fixed-penalty notices. In fact, this whole re-examination of the mandatory issue seems to have followed on from the Garda? wanting to issue FPNs for cyclists using the road where cycle tracks were provided. So, I think, rather than an issue with Varadkar's wording, this whole issue stems from the Garda?, with the approval of the RSA, wishing to get cyclists off the road wherever possible.

Comparisons with how things were with the previous mandatory-use statutory instrument are probably invalid, because there were no FPNs back then, and Garda? wouldn't be bothered doing all the paperwork for a court visit.

1eg0a3xv7b82of

the cycling infrastructure in most parts of the country outside dublin is in a terrible state, the lanes for the most part are inappropriate and in need of repairs. the mistake was actually marking out cycle lanes in the first place. Their is villages with cycle lanes that start from nowhere and end abruptly without warning. Cycle lanes in rural ireland are not needed.
if you are an adult go on the road, if you are a child or a nervous adult go on the footpath and if you a pedestrian show care.

The real issue with motorists v cyclists is in dublin as traffic congestion is brutal, it would drive the most sane person mad.
They should pedestrianise the city centre, cyclists allowed too, subsidise fully functioning shuttle buses with the aid of employers from the commuter towns and then when that is fully working introduce a congestion charge to get past the M50 either way.
The M50 and dublin city are in danger of becoming nothing more then car parks.

tomasrojo

The way the Garda? have gone about getting what they want also highlights (and it's not as if we never knew it) a general problem with attitudes in the Garda?. They didn't read the legislation and say, regrettably, the way it's written means cycle tracks are still compulsory; they went looking for some way to subvert Varadkar's decision, because they don't agree with it.

Cycle tracks are a trivial matter for most of the population, but this attitude is not trivial.