Cycling Infrastructure and Safety

Moflojo

ted1 wrote: »

also once again Cllr Ring get in to the action with cyclists.

And Councillor Ring can GO TO HELL getting his wick in about the "30kph speed limit wouldn't have made a difference". How inappropriate is that?! Bottomfeeder. What a waste of oxygen he is.

Moflojo

average_runner wrote: »

Not sure it would help, cause people would still turn left onto Portland Row. So if cyclist is in the blind spot and goes straight on and truck turn left it will still happen, unless you put a yield sign for the cyclists not to go straight on from the cycle lane till its safe

People need to stay aware, drivers check their mirrors and cyclists not dart down the side of cars when the car/truck clearly indicates its going left

Drivers don't always indicate or check their mirrors, and cyclists don't/can't always see the indicators anyway. The solution is infrastructural, not behavioural.

average_runner

Moflojo wrote: »

Drivers don't always indicate or check their mirrors, and cyclists don't/can't always see the indicators anyway. The solution is infrastructural, not behavioural.

It is a good bit of it also.

Yes drivers are very bad at indicating or checking their mirrors.

We could improve the infrastructure but alot the roads aren't wide enough for this.

The best solution is for bikes to have their own traffic lights. So at junction have the following:

Green bike for bikes and red for cars.
Green for cars and red for bikes.
Green man for the walkers.

Also have all junctions with cameras for future accidents and release what cause it.
I hate the way there is car accidents, like going into a ditch and don't release why it happened.

Moflojo

average_runner wrote: »

We could improve the infrastructure but alot the roads aren't wide enough for this.

This is a total fallacy as far as I'm concerned. The majority of the streets in Dublin are wide enough to facilitate two-way segregated cycleways.

The reason people think the streets aren't wide enough? Parking 'lanes'.

When I see a street with a lane, or two, of parked cars and no cycling infrastructure it tells me that my city values empty parked vehicles more than it does a person on a bicycle. The state deploys more money and resources on looking after the empty vehicles of its citizens than it does on childcare.

average_runner

Moflojo wrote: »

This is a total fallacy as far as I'm concerned. The majority of the streets in Dublin are wide enough to facilitate two-way segregated cycleways.

The reason people think the streets aren't wide enough? Parking 'lanes'.

When I see a street with a lane, or two, of parked cars and no cycling infrastructure it tells me that my city values empty parked vehicles more than it does a person on a bicycle. The state deploys more money and resources on looking after the empty vehicles of its citizens than it does on childcare.

There is plenty of roads not wide enough. The green light system is the best approach.

buffalo

average_runner wrote: »

There is plenty of roads not wide enough.

What roads? If you can fit a car on a road, you can fit a two-way cycleway on it.

Moflojo

buffalo wrote: »

What roads? If you can fit a car on a road, you can fit a two-way cycleway on it.

And if a junction has a filter lane, it has room for a two-way cycleway too. How many junctions in Dublin don't have a filter lane of some kind?

Capel Street, for instance, is a "narrow" one-way street in central Dublin with one lane for traffic, no cycling infrastructure at all, and two lanes for parking. Mad Ted.

average_runner

buffalo wrote: »

What roads? If you can fit a car on a road, you can fit a two-way cycleway on it.

Hardly now, lower churchtown rd for example, lower dundrum rd also.

Greenhills rd has a cycle lane both sides and two cars can't pass each other without going into the cycle lanes.

Strawberry beds and the road from Lucan to Clonee is another one.

The newcastle road from lucan to newcastle.

average_runner

Also widening the roads won't improve our junction behaviour, lights might

buffalo

average_runner wrote: »

Greenhills rd has a cycle lane both sides and two cars can't pass each other without going into the cycle lanes.

I don't think you understood my post. You could put a two-way cycleway on the Greenhills Road and still have plenty of room for a one-way car lane. Make it inbound in the morning and outbound in the evening. The other cars can reroute through Ballymount.

average_runner

buffalo wrote: »

I don't think you understood my post. You could put a two-way cycleway on the Greenhills Road and still have plenty of room for a one-way car lane. Make it inbound in the morning and outbound in the evening. The other cars can reroute through Ballymount.

Ballymount couldn't handle it, reroute the bikes through there be a better solution or through tymon park.

Anyhow its junction behaviour that i was mainly talking about.

Annie get your Run

average_runner wrote: »

There is plenty of roads not wide enough. The green light system is the best approach.

With respect, we can hardly manage to get people to obey the lights as it is (everyone, that's motorists, buses, trucks, motorbikes, cyclists and pedestrians) without adding another layer to the system.

There are many possible solutions, however, as has been said before possibly the main one is enforcement. There are no consequences in this country for breaking the rules of the road (or certainly very little, who cares about a few penalty points!). The other issue is changing behavior and we can only do that if we start to teach safe road use from a young age. It doesn't help that the RSA, AA and DTT have utter contempt for cyclists and make zero effort to change driver behavior towards them (us).

I hope that girl is going to be Okay and +1 to when is the next protest.

Actually, I saw a suggestion somewhere I thought was an excellent idea, what if everyone who cycled picked one date to leave the bike at home and commute by car/train/bus whatever, it would show the impact of forcing everyone off their bikes would have, might make people think twice including that gobshi*e Shane Ross.

eeguy

Weepsie wrote: »

If you don't see the indicators, you're not looking. If you can't, I must assume there is an obstruction and that should be enough to say wait behind to be sure. But yes that's a behavioural/habitual thing to try and get into.

You can't see the indicators if you're alongside the truck, or they'll do the typical thing of indicating as they make the turn

07Lapierre

eeguy wrote: »

You can't see the indicators if you're alongside the truck, or they'll do the typical thing of indicating as they make the turn

When Cycling, you should NEVER stop beside a truck. Either stop behind the Truck or at least a car length in front.

Alanstrainor

07Lapierre wrote: »

When Cycling, you should NEVER stop beside a truck. Either stop behind the Truck or at least a car length in front.

I make a point of looking at the driver and giving a wave if I stop in front at lights. Only then can you be certain he's seen you.

07Lapierre

Annie get your Run wrote: »

There are many possible solutions, however, as has been said before possibly the main one is enforcement.

+1 that's enforcement of the ROTR for ALL road users, regardless of their chosen mode of transport.

average_runner

07Lapierre wrote: »

+1 that's enforcement of the ROTR for ALL road users, regardless of their chosen mode of transport.

Very true, i saw two incidents today, one was a very good cyclists.


1) 2 lane road, one lane for going left and lane clearly marked saying that. Car turning left, indicating, cyclists in the same lane shoots on the inside, straight by the car and doesnt turn left. Very lucky cyclists.

2) 3 lane road, one lane is for turning left and going straight, truck is turning left, cant see cyclist but is she smart enough to stay back. He never saw her.

07Lapierre

average_runner wrote: »

1) 2 lane road, one lane for going left and lane clearly marked saying that. Car turning left, indicating, cyclists in the same lane shoots on the inside, straight by the car and doesnt turn left. Very lucky STUPID cyclists.

Chuchote

07Lapierre wrote: »

When Cycling, you should NEVER stop beside a truck. Either stop behind the Truck or at least a car length in front.

Now, tell me this. How exactly does her bike being tangled in the truck's front wheels suggest that she stopped beside a truck, rather than suggesting that the truck drove up behind her?

Another woman down in Drimnagh this morning, near Old County Road, with gardaí and fire brigade present.

07Lapierre

Chuchote wrote: »

Now, tell me this. How exactly does her bike being tangled in the truck's front wheels suggest that she stopped beside a truck, rather than suggesting that the truck drove up behind her?

Another woman down in Drimnagh this morning, near Old County Road, with gardaí and fire brigade present.

I never said she did! It was just a general piece of advise for all cyclists that i have learned over the years. I'm not commenting on the incident your referring to.

Stephenc66

[QUOTE People need to stay aware, drivers check their mirrors and cyclists not dart down the side of cars when the car/truck clearly indicates its going left[/QUOTE]

Annie get your Run wrote: »

With respect, we can hardly manage to get people to obey the lights as it is (everyone, that's motorists, buses, trucks, motorbikes, cyclists and pedestrians) without adding another layer to the system.

There are many possible solutions, however, as has been said before possibly the main one is enforcement. There are no consequences in this country for breaking the rules of the road (or certainly very little, who cares about a few penalty points!). The other issue is changing behavior and we can only do that if we start to teach safe road use from a young age. It doesn't help that the RSA, AA and DTT have utter contempt for cyclists and make zero effort to change driver behavior towards them (us). /QUOTE]

I think that these two posts sum it up best of all. It must be about collective responsibility. And the simplest most cost effective way of doing this is enforcement prosecuted to the maximum especially with fines hit people in the pocket. Cyclists and Vehicle drivers alike.

Yes infrastructural changes would help but a behavioral change among all road users would make the biggest change.Starting with respecting the rights of other road users (of all types) to be safe and not put in jeopardy by selfishness

Chuchote

Stephen, behaviour isn't going to change - the only thing that will change it is infrastructure. The number of people commuting by bike into Dublin city centre has doubled in something like two years, and will double again and again faster. And drivers are being whipped up by the Two Minutes Hate of various radio jocks. Infrastructural change - good, roomy, protected cycleways - is the only thing that's going to solve this.

buffalo

average_runner wrote: »

Ballymount couldn't handle it, reroute the bikes through there be a better solution or through tymon park.

Couldn't handle it? Would the roads spontaneously combust? Or do you mean there'd be a lot of congestion... just like there is at present?

CramCycle

Chuchote wrote: »

Stephen, behaviour isn't going to change - the only thing that will change it is infrastructure.

Protected cycleways or not, behaviour must change. Infrastructure will not fix behaviour. Might make it less noticeable but that is about it. It unfortunately won't happen voluntarily so enforcement is where it must come from until it becomes the social norm to follow the rules

Stephenc66

Chuchote wrote: »

Stephen, behaviour isn't going to change - the only thing that will change it is infrastructure. The number of people commuting by bike into Dublin city centre has doubled in something like two years, and will double again and again faster. And drivers are being whipped up by the Two Minutes Hate of various radio jocks. Infrastructural change - good, roomy, protected cycleways - is the only thing that's going to solve this.

Chuchote, I would love to be able to disagree with you on the behavioral change but on reflection you are probably right. The effort involved would be gargantuan.

I do believe however that protected cycle ways are a pipe dream. There are to many vested interests in not allowing them to happen on a scale that would actually make a difference.

And I can't see sense prevailing anytime soon

V-man

Stephenc66 wrote: »

I do believe however that protected cycle ways are a pipe dream. There are to many vested interests in not allowing them to happen on a scale that would actually make a difference.
And I can't see sense prevailing anytime soon

It would only take one man in a certain position.
That man is not Shane Ross.

brendanb586

Stephenc66 wrote: »

And I can't see sense prevailing anytime soon

That is the biggest problem, while we are blaming cyclists, drivers and behaviour. In no other major country would there be a junction with the traffic of Portland Row/Summerhill (as an example) that would not have dedicated off road cycling paths, with dedicated lights. Common sense would indicate that people have died and seriously injured, so we make the changes to stop people dying such as allowing cyclist a 10 second headstart and stopping 10 seconds to allow traffic to pass (like NL), ensuring that all R-roads that cross have a dedicated offroad cycle path through the junction.

Of course, here in Dublin the common sense is to:
a) retain parking for inner city residence and business.
b) ensure traffic get through junctions as fast as possible
c) (for our councilllors) avoid changing the "character" like removing those horrid path/steps/walls on the summerhill side.

that way they can appease the locals who "need" their car (and will never change habits due to ease of this), and all it takes is one or two funerals a year that they can attend and commiserate while putting another 30 km/h speed camera at the junction.

:mad:

magicbastarder

V-man wrote: »

It would only take one man in a certain position.
That man is not Shane Ross.

i think that's a simplistic way of looking at it. a minister for sport and transport cannot change policy to that extent on his or her own, as there are budgetary concerns and other considerable knock on effects.
e.g. it's not ross's responsibility alone to decide to proceed with metro north.

Chuchote

magicbastarder wrote: »

i think that's a simplistic way of looking at it. a minister for sport and transport cannot change policy to that extent on his or her own, as there are budgetary concerns and other considerable knock on effects.
e.g. it's not ross's responsibility alone to decide to proceed with metro north.

It's true; but surely that's why someone is appointed a minister of whatever, because s/he has the ability to plan and make the systems under his or her command?

That given, Transport and Sport is an insane combination of duties.

magicbastarder

why? they share a significant number of letters. a clear match.

ED E

Chuchote wrote: »

Stephen, behaviour isn't going to change - the only thing that will change it is infrastructure. The number of people commuting by bike into Dublin city centre has doubled in something like two years, and will double again and again faster. And drivers are being whipped up by the Two Minutes Hate of various radio jocks. Infrastructural change - good, roomy, protected cycleways - is the only thing that's going to solve this.

Pointless.

We've 100's of KMs of cycle track in the Dublin area, some good, some terrible, but its difficult to find any stretch that hasn't got somebody parking in it.

We need enforcement on our roads for all users. We can have byelaws and SIs out our ears but nothing will change until we actually see enforcement.

Wishbone Ash

Chuchote wrote: »

... Transport and Sport is an insane combination of duties.

Transport, Tourism and Sport.

Chuchote

ED E wrote: »

Pointless.

We've 100's of KMs of cycle track in the Dublin area, some good, some terrible, but its difficult to find any stretch that hasn't got somebody parking in it.

We need enforcement on our roads for all users. We can have byelaws and SIs out our ears but nothing will change until we actually see enforcement.

No. We have painted streaks on many roads, but they're not what we're talking about here. What we're talking about is what they have in

• Vancouver https://vimeo.com/183441272
• Copenhagen https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtX8qiC_rXE
• New York https://www.ted.com/talks/janette_sadik_khan_new_york_s_streets_not_so_mean_any_more?language=en#t-229446

and other cities - separate cycleways protected by barriers so the drivers can't get at you, and with nice surfaces (cheap to maintain, since only used for cycling) and clear and sensible junctions.

kirving

From cycling on Dublin's southside mostly, enforcement of parking is by far the stand out issue for me.

There's also an element of infrastructure, but the most important is education I believe.

Not saying this is related to this particular case, but, there is absolutely no way I would ever cycle up the left of a truck, and if I find myself alongside a truck or bus, I slow immediately and let it pass.

I often have to collect things from a warehouse near my office. When a truck is moving nearby, I stop, stand still, and make sure to make eye contact with the driver, and I stay in place until he's either stopped or gone. Not to bring up the whole 'builder jacket' debate here, but the Safe Pass course is extremely worthwhile doing, even if you never intend to step foot on a building site.

Chuchote

Kevin Irving wrote: »

From cycling on Dublin's southside mostly, enforcement of parking is by far the stand out issue for me.

There's also an element of infrastructure, but the most important is education I believe.

Not saying this is related to this particular case, but, there is absolutely no way I would ever cycle up the left of a truck, and if I find myself alongside a truck or bus, I slow immediately and let it pass.

I often have to collect things from a warehouse near my office. When a truck is moving nearby, I stop, stand still, and make sure to make eye contact with the driver, and I stay in place until he's either stopped or gone. Not to bring up the whole 'builder jacket' debate here, but the Safe Pass course is extremely worthwhile doing, even if you never intend to step foot on a building site.

Mmmmyeah… however, I was nipping from one safe cycle lane to another near Roly's Bistrot the other day when a giant builder's truck came around the corner. I was trapped in the right-hand turn lane, about to go into Beatty's Cottages, I think it's called, and I turned and stared up the 10 feet into the cab, trying to catch the driver's eye. He didn't see me, although I was dressed in the lurid, multi-fluorescent hi-viz gilet I normally wear. He was gazing into space and chewing gum. He drove up beside me.

I got away, luckily, by diving across the road in front of an advancing wall of cars (safer, I thought, than staying near a giant truck whose driver couldn't see me).

Unknown Soldier

eeguy wrote: »

You can't see the indicators if you're alongside the truck, or they'll do the typical thing of indicating as they make the turn

Please don't do that

I know of one boards.ie user who is dead due to going up the inside of a lorry. Left behind a young family. Made a post here about 12:30 one day and was dead before 6PM

Never go up the inside of a lorry/bus etc, unless it is an extremely long, straight and stationary line of traffic with no left turns.

Safety first, always.

magicbastarder

how long ago did that happen?

Annie get your Run

On the whole behavior issue we managed to change attitudes to drink driving, it took a while but it's completely unacceptable now. It can be done but it needs the backing of every government department & relevant agency's, the gardai, the likes of the AA etc.

Unknown Soldier

Annie get your Run wrote: »

On the whole behavior issue we managed to change attitudes to drink driving, it took a while but it's completely unacceptable now. It can be done but it needs the backing of every government department & relevant agency's, the gardai, the likes of the AA etc.

We have the ability, we don't want to use it.

Next year is 2017.

For something as simple as Traffic laws etc we need to invest in HD cameras and change the laws to suit.

We live in a country that still allows cars to use bus lanes, bar when there is a "human" law enforcer there.

In Scotland there are Cameras on certain motorways sections and if you get to a certain point too "soon", then they calculate that you did that by speeding. Fine issued.

But with something like drink driving, well... sure you know how it is.

That's pretty much how we roll.

Corca Baiscinn

That's true re drink driving, also re smoking ban and plastic bags and smokeless fuel to a great extent but all backed up by legislation and enforcement. Think approach has to be multi-pronged. Definitely infrastructure too.

Chuchote

Unknown Soldier wrote: »

Please don't do that

I know of one boards.ie user who is dead due to going up the inside of a lorry. Left behind a young family. Made a post here about 12:30 one day and was dead before 6PM

Never go up the inside of a lorry/bus etc, unless it is an extremely long, straight and stationary line of traffic with no left turns.

Safety first, always.

Did you see the boards.ie user cycle up the inside of a lorry? It is often said that someone has done this, when in fact the lorry has driven up the outside of the cyclist.

Corca Baiscinn wrote: »

That's true re drink driving, also re smoking ban and plastic bags and smokeless fuel to a great extent but all backed up by legislation and enforcement. Think approach has to be multi-pronged. Definitely infrastructure too.

Enforcement to some extent, but I think more important is the societal acceptance of these laws. There isn't a garda waiting at the supermarket door to see if you've paid for your plastic bags. But it's much more acceptable by the community to use shopping bags - a change that only happened after the ban.

Smokeless fuel; a neighbour has a visitor from Wexford, and he said that as soon as he got to the city centre he started getting a gritty feeling in his lungs - he says Dublin is getting much more polluted lately.

We need to make unnecessary driving just as societally unacceptable as smoking or strewing plastic bags across the countryside. 40% of journeys are under 4km; we need those made by bike. The News today said we were using more wind power and yet polluting more - it blamed electricity generators for buying more coal and oil because they're cheap now, but surely the pollution given off by cars is equally huge.

Beasty

Posts moved from Cyclist down thread

Please do not use incidents like that to start wider discussions on cycling safety. Any questions PM me - do not respond to this post in-thread

Thanks

crosstownk

Chuchote wrote: »

There isn't a garda waiting at the supermarket door to see if you've paid for your plastic bags. But it's much more acceptable by the community to use shopping bags - a change that only happened after the ban.

My guess is the 22c cost for the bag was as good as the Garda at the door.

Chuchote wrote: »

We need to make unnecessary driving just as societally unacceptable as smoking or strewing plastic bags across the countryside. 40% of journeys are under 4km; we need those made by bike.

Why should driving be societally unacceptable? It's a perfectly acceptable mode of transport.

Harmony between all modes of transport is what is needed. No us, No them.

Leroy42

crosstownk wrote: »

Why should driving be societally unacceptable? It's a perfectly acceptable mode of transport.

Harmony between all modes of transport is what is needed. No us, No them.

They said unneccessary driving, not all driving. The 40% within 4kms should be frowned upon. Of course there will be times when it is necessary, but if people are honest with themselves that i many cases it is just lazy.

They we need to build/provide parking spaces at either end. Think of all the wasted space that is taken up by parking spaces. They could be used to create better pavements or wider cycles tracks.

As a society we have yielded completely to the car. I've banged this drum before but go to any row of shops and there will always be parking available but usually nothing for bikes.

Many pubs have car parks but you are lucky to get even a basic bike rike.

Close to where I live, the main raod is almost impassable because on both sides people park their cars. If you want a car provide your own parking space. If that means losing your front garden then so be it. It would certainly put people off having two, three, even four cars in one household.

tomasrojo

Whatever about "acceptable", I think that many aspects of driving are substantially "mispriced", to use the economists' term. The cost of driving doesn't reflect the negative externalities in the case of pollution, not just NOx emissions but also CO2, or the starkly inefficient use of road capacity at times of peak use in urban settings.

Not much chance of anyone who needs votes pricing it correctly though. A congestion charge is just about imaginable, maybe.

Leroy42

But you don't even have to go that far as a congestion charge.

Just make it illegal to stop and park on a road. Straight away the school run will be knocked on the head. Spread out the payed parking zones to further out and get rid of all parking on main roads. For example, why is there car parking on Fairview Strand on the way out of town? It makes no sense. It holds up buses,means cyclists have to cycle out of the cycle lane for fear of being doored etc.

But it is there for the convenience of car drivers. It is this social cost that is never taken into account. Car ownership is only seen as the cost to buy and run the car, but society pays a much higher price than that. If you remove these conveniences suddenly the hassle of car ownership becomes far more apparent. Would you take to the car to the local shops if you knew the possibility was that you would be waiting ages for the few parking spaces still left or run the risk of getting a ticket? No, you'd walk of cycle.

And before anybody gives examples of how it couldn't possibly work, of course I acknowledge that there has to be some leeway and that one size doesn't fit all, but its amount changing the mindset from the car being seen as the ultimate convenience to the actual hassle item is should be.

tomasrojo

Taking away parking spaces is politically risky too. At the very least, you'll get lobbied aggressively for trying.

I quite like the "carbon credits"-style idea of trading car-road-use credits. Those who drive indirectly pay those who don't. I haven't though it through though.

crosstownk

I do agree that too much road space is afford to motorised vehicles - especially when it comes to parked cars on public streets. Surely private off street car parks are a better answer and the parking charges associated with them.

I also agree that many <4km journeys by car could be made by other means - walking, cycling, public transport. But if someone chooses to drive because they simply prefer that means of transport then they are fully entitled to do so. Encouraging some of these <4km folks to take alternative forms or transport is the key.

There's no easy answer. People like their cars and to the majority it's a much better choice to sit in the car with the heater on listening to the radio rather than taking another form of transport. Why? Well I don't know because I prefer to be out on the streets commuting by bike.

The idea of applying BIK to company parking is something that might help - an enhancement to BTW of sorts.

Chuchote

magicbastarder wrote: »

how long ago did that happen?

When did what happen? If you were asking about my post and the big building truck, it was the week before last; I think the truck was going down to that big building project on the Dodder. I'd looked at the truck and worked out that it couldn't possibly get up beside me and I'd be safe to go into the right-hand lane to cut into Beatty's… Lane(?), next thing the damn thing was up beside me and looming over me and way up above the driver was gazing away into space while I waved frantically.

Annie get your Run wrote: »

On the whole behavior issue we managed to change attitudes to drink driving, it took a while but it's completely unacceptable now. It can be done but it needs the backing of every government department & relevant agency's, the gardai, the likes of the AA etc.

http://www.independent.ie/breaking-news/irish-news/road-accident-death-toll-reveals-devastating-effect-of-drinking-34764996.html

Road accident death toll reveals 'devastating effect' of drinking
01/06/2016

Drink played a part in almost 40% all fatal road accidents in a five-year period, research has revealed.
Analysis of forensic reports from crashes between 2008 and 2012 found alcohol was a factor in collisions in which 366 motorists, their passengers, motorbike users, pedestrians and cyclists were killed.
And the study showed men are far more likely to get behind the wheel after drinking and were involved in nine out of 10 alcohol-fuelled accidents.

average_runner

Ideas all sound good but you got get the following in place beforehand

1)Public Transport for 4k distance should cost a family of 8 return ticket, no more than 5 euro if not free. Buses also need to run every 5 mins.

2)All housing estates and apartment blocks must have a playground facility within 10 mins walk. Reason for Fairview Park road park is because its a park that is used alot by people.

3) Shops, chemists, doctors etc should be no more than 5 mins from houses

4) And the big one for schools, only go to the schools in your parish boundary. Not a religion boundary just the parish area.

jive

Some of the bike lanes in Dublin should actually be removed, they are not fit for use and cause motorists to become less tolerant resulting in close passes, beeping, etc.

Dublin needs to look at introducing more segregated cycle lanes like the one on the canal. It's good and literally every cyclist uses it unless they need to exit the cycle lane to turn off at a junction.

Why we even persist at putting down a strip of white paint and painting a bicycle inside the white line is beyond me. I'd rather save the money on 100s of those for a handful of proper cycle lanes.