Reinstatement of mandatory use?

seamus

LeinsterDub wrote: »

By that logic a Guard could direct you to drive to Kerry and you'd have no choice but to follow it

Trying to find the appropriate legislation, but having a brain fart at the moment. Most of the regulations relate to specific circumstances in relation to the control of traffic for specific purposes rather than a blanket "do everything a Garda says" regulation. But that's from memory.

Amusingly and irrelevantly I did find this in relation to the examination of bicycles in order to ascertain their roadworthiness;

(7) For the purposes of subsection (6) of this section and without prejudice to the generality of the powers conferred thereby, a member of the Garda Síochána may—

(a) drive any pedal cycle for a reasonable time and distance,

(b) require any person in charge of a pedal cycle to drive it or cause it to be driven for a reasonable time and distance in such a direction as the member directs.

galwaycyclist

seamus wrote: »

My understanding is that a "lawful" direction is one which does not require you to break the law to follow.

So directing you to cycle in a cycle lane is a lawful direction. Directing you to cycle on the footpath or down a motorway, would not be.

And also bearing in mind that there is a primary duty on all road users to avoid injury and damage to property - including personal property.

FortySeven

What do we want?

Cycle lanes!

When do we want to use them?

Sometimes!

magicbastarder

well, if we had to use them *all* the time, we'd end up dead from exhaustion within a day or three.

tampopo

godtabh wrote: »

Don't agree with that. As a highways engineer I have to deal with many LA and cycling and related infrastructure is very often top of the agenda. Dun Laoghiare is very proactive. South Dublin are also another good example.

Its national policy to reduce car numbers which is reflected in simple things like the number of car parking spaces can be put in a housing estate, or retailer center etc. Roads must be cycle friendly (the design manual for urban roads and streets has seen a consistent approach on this).

They dont always get it right but to say they are purely car focused is wrong.

This cycle track on Coldcut Road in Dublin is bad, as it's not dished back onto the road.



With the result of me staying on the road or continuing on to the junction ahead and merging back onto the road at the lights and negotiating left turning traffic.

Do you know anyone in SDCC who could fix it?

nomdeboardie

I haven't managed to find the actual press release (as opposed to the claimed quotation of it in the Irishcycle.com article). I'm not being distrustful, but would like to be able to refer to the original source if contacting the minister. Can anyone provide a link?

monument

nomdeboardie wrote: »

I haven't managed to find the actual press release (as opposed to the claimed quotation of it in the Irishcycle.com article). I'm not being distrustful, but would like to be able to refer to the original source if contacting the minister. Can anyone provide a link?

I'm afraid it's good old fashion journalism and there's no press release involved. The quotes from the Department of Transport are all by email via their press office and in response to questions I put to them.

beauf

godtabh wrote: »

Don't agree with that. As a highways engineer I have to deal with many LA and cycling and related infrastructure is very often top of the agenda. Dun Laoghiare is very proactive. South Dublin are also another good example.

Its national policy to reduce car numbers which is reflected in simple things like the number of car parking spaces can be put in a housing estate, or retailer center etc. Roads must be cycle friendly (the design manual for urban roads and streets has seen a consistent approach on this).

They dont always get it right but to say they are purely car focused is wrong.

I'm completely baffled why its so poorly executed, most of the time then.

For example. Cycling from the point to the Samuel Beckett bridge. There is about a 40ft wide pavement. Yet the cycle lane is twisted around parking spots. Disappears at random. Puts cyclists on the road for the only two sets of lights, and also the narrowest part at the Canal Bridge outside the Convention hall. The cyclist is bottom of the agenda, in every instance. That is a common experience all over the city. Everyone is confused, and it causes conflict constantly.

I think they should stop sticking them everywhere regardless if they work, or needed. Some are in the middle of nowhere. Concentrate on better main routes, super cycling highways. Often its easier cycling where there are no cycle lanes. No ones confused then. I do use them though and like using them where they work.

nomdeboardie

monument wrote: »

I'm afraid it's good old fashion journalism and there's no press release involved. The quotes from the Department of Transport are all by email via their press office and in response to questions I put to them.

Thanks monument (Irishcycle.com publisher, I think). What questions had you put to them, and what prompted the questions?

monument

nomdeboardie wrote: »

Thanks monument (Irishcycle.com publisher, I think). What questions had you put to them, and what prompted the questions?

That'll be expanded on in a follow up article.

nomdeboardie

monument wrote: »

That'll be expanded on in a follow up article.

Thanks

traprunner

beauf wrote: »

For example. Cycling from the point to the Samuel Beckett bridge. There is about a 40ft wide pavement. Yet the cycle lane is twisted around parking spots. Disappears at random. Puts cyclists on the road for the only two sets of lights, and also the narrowest part at the Canal Bridge outside the Convention hall. The cyclist is bottom of the agenda, in every instance. That is a common experience all over the city. Everyone is confused, and it causes conflict constantly.

https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.347482,-6.2388995,3a,75y,257.18h,67.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLVcu9ipAjgSODdmoT85Avg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

This is the stretch. I use this a lot. It looks like it forces bikes out onto the road for bus stops but there are no signs that the bike track ends. The lights on the ground appear to mark the track going through the bus stop (where buses open their doors without checking their mirrors and people plonk out onto what is or may not be a bike track. It reappears further on where its always full of pedestrians and then forces cyclists out onto the road just to rejoin on the far side of that canal raising bridge. Incidentally I'm quite sure that the bridge does not work and can't open any more. The river side of it should be covered to widen the footpath and provide a cycle track over it. https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.3475629,-6.2402428,3a,75y,257.18h,67.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sM5cRjGMbJycS81Wv0YA1Gw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

One major annoyance for me is that the bike lights coming over Samuel Beckett bridge going onto Guild St. are operated by a button crossing. The opposite side coming from Guild St. to Samuel Beckett bridge has one of those weight sensors that are in the ground. I can't figure out why there is a change of design here compared to the rest of the canal that I've seen. https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.3473882,-6.2411717,3a,75y,21.88h,77.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqrNUN8w_xIVHHT1YKSNcvQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

magicbastarder

beauf wrote: »

I'm completely baffled why its so poorly executed, most of the time then.

there was recent rejigging of some of the roads beside the blanchardstown shopping centre a yearr or two ago, which resulted in some bizarre and entirely avoidable cycle lane design errors. e.g. the cycle lane going on road, off road, on road, for no apparent reason, then dumping you off a high kerb right as the road meets a roundabout.

beauf

They make a lot of inexplicable decisions. They do stuff like widen a road, remove trees, kerbs etc. Only to bring it back to a one lane bottleneck with road markings, lights etc. Create a cycle lane where none is needed only to make it unusable by some weird, kerb or junction.

The only logical conclusion, is that its looks great on paper, but whomever designs and executes in real life has no experience of cycling, perhaps even driving either and is unfamiliar with the traffic flow in the area. If they do, then are just simply bad at design.

A lot of it is expensive work too.

josip

The inconsistency within relatively short distances baffles me and I'm convinced that whoever designs the cycle lanes hasn't ridden a bike since primary school. Yesterday going along the Leopardstown road with kiddo in the carrier I followed the path across this junction feeling secure (although doing an obligatory life-saver).



but then 200m up the road at the next junction I found myself rapidly running out of track while being directed towards a lamppost without any ramp down to road level



What level of incompetence is needed to design and sign off on something like this?

HivemindXX

In that second photograph, I would assume that every car turning left around that nice round curve, designed to allow them to maintain speed, will assume that they have priority. Common sense requires you to treat this as a yield, one which you wouldn't have if you were on the road.

Of course in the first example there is still an issue, although must lesser. Some motorists will either fail to notice a cyclist that is not on the road, or will assume that they will yield even though they will be on the road when it comes time to cut across in front of them.

Conor20

josip wrote: »

The inconsistency within relatively short distances baffles me and I'm convinced that whoever designs the cycle lanes hasn't ridden a bike since primary school. Yesterday going along the Leopardstown road with kiddo in the carrier I followed the path across this junction feeling secure (although doing an obligatory life-saver).

All of these instances are in Shane Ross' constituency. I've had conversations with one of the head engineers in DLR to raise your point - that the engineers designing cycle tracks in DLR clearly are motorists and have no idea as to how to design a usable cycle track. I offered to assemble a group of volunteer cyclists with engineering experience who could give free, non-binding feedback on cycle track designs to avoid them needing to spend money re-engineering cycle tracks that are built and then not used. He declined.

This is another example in Shane Ross' constituency, just beside Sandyford Industrial Estate. I'd be interested to hear his interpretation as to whether use of this cycle track is mandatory:


Feel free to include this when commnicating with Shane Ross.

Borderfox

Cyclocross perhaps

NiallBoo

josip wrote: »

Are those unbroken white lines in the cycle lane across the junction? Wouldn't that mean that no non-cyclists are allowed to turn at the junction?

nomdeboardie

josip wrote: »

The inconsistency within relatively short distances baffles me and I'm convinced that whoever designs the cycle lanes hasn't ridden a bike since primary school. Yesterday going along the Leopardstown road with kiddo in the carrier I followed the path across this junction feeling secure (although doing an obligatory life-saver).



but then 200m up the road at the next junction I found myself rapidly running out of track while being directed towards a lamppost without any ramp down to road level



What level of incompetence is needed to design and sign off on something like this?

I sent a photo-rant to DLRCOCO several years ago about Leopardstown Road. (A section farther on from this has been re-jigged a bit recently, though I haven't yet cycled it since the changes...not hopeful :rolleyes:). I described the latter junction above to them as follows:

Here, and at each of the other side-roads, the cyclist loses priority to entering or exiting motor traffic. They are directed around to the left, first turning their back to traffic…

...…and in this case coming head-on into a pole that obstructs entrance to the piece of lowered kerb by which they are supposed to cross (after yielding to motorists, and, presumably, any pedestrians who might be present)!

ETA: In retrospect, I should have added the word "presumably" before "supposed" - it's all a matter of guesswork and tentative interpretation :P

tomasrojo

Conor20 wrote: »

All of these instances are in Shane Ross' constituency. I've had conversations with one of the head engineers in DLR to raise your point - that the engineers designing cycle tracks in DLR clearly are motorists and have no idea as to how to design a usable cycle track. I offered to assemble a group of volunteer cyclists with engineering experience who could give free, non-binding feedback on cycle track designs to avoid them needing to spend money re-engineering cycle tracks that are built and then not used. He declined.

It's fascinating to find a professional with so little interest in end-user feedback. Of course, the real end-user is the motorist, and they are interested in their feedback, I'm sure.

Tigger

The cycle paths that are on footpaths always have pedestrians on them
Is it an offence to walk in the cycle lane or an instruction or just part of the stupid situation

Thinkingaboutit

I should have taken a photo but on the cycle lane in the village of Mulranny, Mayo, signs for the cycle lane are nearly in the middle of it. That's either an uphill or downhill. I really wouldn't fancy running into them at speed.

Skrynesaver

Has anyone who contacted Ross got a response?

nomdeboardie

monument wrote: »

nomdeboardie wrote: »

Thanks monument (Irishcycle.com publisher, I think). What questions had you put to them, and what prompted the questions?

That'll be expanded on in a follow up article.

Any update, monument?
(Nothing on http://irishcycle.com/ yet; last post (unrelated) was 17th, mandatory use posts were 12th)

tomasrojo

Skrynesaver wrote: »

Has anyone who contacted Ross got a response?

Was wondering this earlier. Nothing yet for me.

cdaly_

Skrynesaver wrote: »

Has anyone who contacted Ross got a response?

This is what I got thus far...

Many thanks for your email. I have referred this issue to the relevant
division within the department. We will be in touch with you with an
update.

Kind regards,

buffalo

Skrynesaver wrote: »

Has anyone who contacted Ross got a response?

I got an ack, but the usual time for a meaningful reply is 3-4 weeks in my experience.

monument

nomdeboardie wrote: »

Any update, monument?
(Nothing on http://irishcycle.com/ yet; last post (unrelated) was 17th, mandatory use posts were 12th)

Waiting on replies from from RSA and DoT. Within normal time for both still, as I just asked follow questions in the last few days.

To be clear and fair to them: not all the delay is them, I've a day job etc so I don't always get my follow up questions out to them as quick as I could. And both bodies have given extra comment since the first story but I've looked for clarification on those comments and other elements.

nomdeboardie

monument wrote: »

Waiting on replies from from RSA and DoT. Within normal time for both still, as I just asked follow questions in the last few days.

To be clear and fair to them: not all the delay is them, I've a day job etc so I don't always get my follow up questions out to them as quick as I could. And both bodies have given extra comment since the first story but I've looked for clarification on those comments and other elements.

Thanks, but it's the initial reasons for your communication with them that I'm curious about (post 130), i.e. what were the questions you put to them to elicit their strange statements on the statute documents.