Near misses - mod warning 22/04 - see OP/post 822

p15574

Fighting Tao wrote: »

However, by the time the guard got around to it apparently, a time limit had passed to take the statement!

I'd say that's bull****. Too much paperwork to do their job, more like. How long had passed?

Tombo2001

Fighting Tao wrote: »

This one happened last July. It's the only one that I reported to the guards and that was due to it being right outside a garda station. Scared the crap out of me. Got a pulse number and made myself available to make a statement at any time. However, by the time the guard got around to it apparently, a time limit had passed to take the statement! He did say that the driver was called into the station the day after the incident and ended up in tears.

I was moving at 30kmph at the time, coming around a blind bend (due to vehicles parked) and I was taking the lane.

Excuse the bad hiding of the number plate and face.

OK Crap driving and I wont make excuses for Crap driving.

However

This video is a really good illustration of two things.

(I) why are parked cars given so much priority on city roads. Its something that is rarely if ever spoken about......its quite one thing for drivers to be given priority over cyclists........but its quite another for parked cars to be given priority over both drivers and cyclists.

The road in question could easily accomodate a proper seperate cycle path and leave plenty of room for cars - so that no dodgy overtakes are needed. But instead, parked cars are given priortity? Why = nobody owns a slice of that road. Where does that entitlement come from.....

(ii) Traffic Islands do what exactly? Apart from leading to dodgy overtakes. Would it be too much to let pedestrians walk all the way across in one go.

Finally - if I ever did set up a twitter account, whats a good hashtag for "the person I feel sorry for here is the poor driver, they must be very upset"...

Seth Brundle

Tombo2001 wrote: »

(I) why are parked cars given so much priority on city roads. Its something that is rarely if ever spoken about......its quite one thing for drivers to be given priority over cyclists........but its quite another for parked cars to be given priority over both drivers and cyclists.

The road in question could easily accomodate a proper seperate cycle path and leave plenty of room for cars - so that no dodgy overtakes are needed. But instead, parked cars are given priortity? Why = nobody owns a slice of that road. Where does that entitlement come from.....

Look at the opposition to BusConnects. People want their cars and expect that because they pay motor tax, they should be allowed leave their car on the road for most of the day.

Tombo2001

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Look at the opposition to BusConnects. People want their cars and expect that because they pay motor tax, they should be allowed leave their car on the road for most of the day.

I suppose the difference here is that for local residents, its a matter of convenience.

For cyclists, its a matter of safety.

So why does it seem to matter more to local residents?

The other point - in several of the places above, it seems to be FREE on street parking which I just think is a big NO NO these days except within housing estates.

Tombo2001

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Look at the opposition to BusConnects. People want their cars and expect that because they pay motor tax, they should be allowed leave their car on the road for most of the day.

I suppose the difference here is that for local residents, its a matter of convenience.

For cyclists, its a matter of safety.

So why does it seem to matter more to local residents?

The other point - in several of the places above, it seems to be FREE on street parking which I just think is a big NO NO these days except within housing estates.

Its the same thing in Fairview where they wanted to cut down the trees and put in a proper bike path. Sorry no - we want our trees......more important than cyclists......

Why do cyclists put up with this?

Seth Brundle

Tombo2001 wrote: »

For cyclists, its a matter of safety.

So why does it seem to matter more to local residents?

Because of the "fupp you in your lycra" attitude?

Tombo2001 wrote: »

The other point - in several of the places above, it seems to be FREE on street parking which I just think is a big NO NO these days except within housing estates.

Again, there would be uproar at the local elections and possibly at general election time.

jjpep

Tombo2001 wrote: »

Why do cyclists put up with this?

Some do, some don't.

Some join cycling campaigns or start community projects like bike buses for kids. Some vote based on cycling policies.
But more people who cycle do need to make their voices heard. It's too late now but perhaps on the next local election cycle (no pun intended) the various cycle campaigns should put forward single issue candidates for improving cycle infrastructure safety.

downtheroad

Tombo2001 wrote: »

I suppose the difference here is that for local residents, its a matter of convenience.

For cyclists, its a matter of safety.

So why does it seem to matter more to local residents?

The other point - in several of the places above, it seems to be FREE on street parking which I just think is a big NO NO these days except within housing estates.

Its the same thing in Fairview where they wanted to cut down the trees and put in a proper bike path. Sorry no - we want our trees......more important than cyclists......

Why do cyclists put up with this?

I was cycling through Fairview this morning looking at the trees with yellow ribbons and wondering who was objecting to them being cut down in favour of creating a cycle path. If it was environmentalists who campaigned to save the trees do they not realise that better cycling infrastructure will encourage more drivers out of their cars and on to bikes thereby creating a cleaner environment?

TheChizler

downtheroad wrote: »

I was cycling through Fairview this morning looking at the trees with yellow ribbons and wondering who was objecting to them being cut down in favour of creating a cycle path. If it was environmentalists who campaigned to save the trees do they not realise that better cycling infrastructure will encourage more drivers out of their cars and on to bikes thereby creating a cleaner environment?

Maybe they want the trees AND the cycle lanes, and to get rid of all the nasty car lanes!

downtheroad

Tombo2001 wrote: »

The other point - in several of the places above, it seems to be FREE on street parking which I just think is a big NO NO these days except within housing estates.

Also on this point, I recently asked a local councillor about the possibility of implementing pay and display in my area as it is near a dart station and regularly has cars left on it for the day by many drivers and was given this response:

It is not possible to provide for Pay & Display/Permit Parking on an area wide basis such as a 1km Radius. Such schemes are introduced on an individual street basis if deemed suitable under D.C.C. criteria and subject to a majority consensus and followed by a ballot of any proposed scheme.

Fighting Tao

Tombo2001 wrote: »

OK Crap driving and I wont make excuses for Crap driving.

However

This video is a really good illustration of two things.

(I) why are parked cars given so much priority on city roads. Its something that is rarely if ever spoken about......its quite one thing for drivers to be given priority over cyclists........but its quite another for parked cars to be given priority over both drivers and cyclists.

The road in question could easily accomodate a proper seperate cycle path and leave plenty of room for cars - so that no dodgy overtakes are needed. But instead, parked cars are given priortity? Why = nobody owns a slice of that road. Where does that entitlement come from.....

(ii) Traffic Islands do what exactly? Apart from leading to dodgy overtakes. Would it be too much to let pedestrians walk all the way across in one go.

Finally - if I ever did set up a twitter account, whats a good hashtag for "the person I feel sorry for here is the poor driver, they must be very upset"...

It’s Ringsend/Irishtown Aka The Land of the Traffic Cone. So many cones dumped outside houses because they’re “entitled” to park outside their house.

Fighting Tao

p15574 wrote: »

I'd say that's bull****. Too much paperwork to do their job, more like. How long had passed?

6 months. I had plenty of availability to give a statement in that time.

Tombo2001

Fighting Tao wrote: »

It’s Ringsend/Irishtown Aka The Land of the Traffic Cone. So many cones dumped outside houses because they’re “entitled” to park outside their house.

People get very angry if you move those cones.

But it does go to show the sentiment - I live here. Therefore I have more claim to this piece of road than you do.


And the thing is....

They dont.

rushfan

Fighting Tao wrote:

It’s Ringsend/Irishtown Aka The Land of the Traffic Cone. So many cones dumped outside houses because they’re “entitled†to park outside their house.

At one stage I counted 25 comes in our estate. All were the large "Big Foot " type in various conditions. Most were left behind by contractors who never bothered returning for them. Naturally there were no names on the cones. I contacted Fingal CC and requested them to remove them if possible as they were placed on the roadway outside peoples houses and were unsightly. The council succeeded in removing almost half but were prevented from removing all because the various householders told them they owned the cones.

magicbastarder

'i own that cone, and my main storage location for it is on a public road'.

Tombo2001

magicbastarder wrote: »

'i own that cone, and my main storage location for it is on a public road'.

I know its completely off topic....

But......

If you own something, but have no evidence to show you own it.

Say a jacket.

Or traffic cone.

Or indeed a bike.

And you leave it unsecured in a public place.

Say indefinitely.

Or for a week.

Are you not by definition relinquishing your ownership.

If I come along and move that cone, or cycle off on that bike - how can you show that you own it.

Hurrache

Tombo2001 wrote: »

People get very angry if you move those cones.

But it does go to show the sentiment - I live here. Therefore I have more claim to this piece of road than you do.


And the thing is....

They dont.

I was at the end of a very indignant home owner around Drumcondra one evening after I moved 2 bins to park. They knocked on the door of the person I was visiting, demanded to know why I moved them. I just told them I was parking on a public road.

magicbastarder

there's a little road just tucked in behind the met eireann building (does that have an official name?)
there are several signs stating 'resident parking only' and the residents have even marked out spaces for themselves. plus, the road is so narrow they park with two wheels on the footpath. granted, there's extremely little traffic on the road but that takes a bit of chutzpah, but if you said that to one of them they'd probably stare at you blankly.

https://www.google.com/maps/@53.3762344,-6.2695747,3a,75y,81.32h,65.53t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sg6SKC8AjpZIXTPb2zizRrw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3Dg6SKC8AjpZIXTPb2zizRrw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D124.469795%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

xckjoo

xckjoo wrote: »

Had a close pass from a Buslink driver this morning but my camera mount wasn' secure so there's a crazy shake. Anyone able to recommend free stabilization software?

Got a very nice response from Buslink today that thanked me for making them aware of it and a promise that they'd bring it to the attention of the driver. Satisfied with that. Fair play to them

magicbastarder

seems buses are linked with closer passes; as are painted cycle lanes:

Relative to sedans, 4WDs had a reduced mean passing distance of 15 cm (Q1: 12 cm, Q3: 17 cm) and buses had a reduced mean passing distance of 28 cm (Q1: 16 cm, Q3: 40 cm)

passing events on roads with a bike lane with no parked cars had a reduced mean passing distance of 27 cm (Q1: 25 cm, Q3: 29 cm), and passing events on roads with a bike lane and parked cars had a mean lower passing distance of 40 cm (Q1: 37 cm, Q3: 43 cm).

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0001457518309990

buffalo

magicbastarder wrote: »

there's a little road just tucked in behind the met eireann building (does that have an official name?)
there are several signs stating 'resident parking only' and the residents have even marked out spaces for themselves. plus, the road is so narrow they park with two wheels on the footpath. granted, there's extremely little traffic on the road but that takes a bit of chutzpah, but if you said that to one of them they'd probably stare at you blankly.

Funnily enough, I only noticed this morning near the Angler's Rest that there's a sign on the front door* of a house there saying "Residents' Parking Only". Presumably they mean on the footpath, because the same van and a car were parked exactly like this:

https://goo.gl/maps/N5McKqJ27EoZJ8Ee7

I also noticed the double yellow lines aren't continuous, and wondered whether it was because it was requested, or they couldn't be painted due to vehicles parked in the area at the time.

*the black one with the golden knocker

magicbastarder

or maybe, they park there so much the tyres have worn away the outer line!
the line also fades away outside the little cottage just downhill.

blackwhite

buffalo wrote: »

Funnily enough, I only noticed this morning near the Angler's Rest that there's a sign on the front door* of a house there saying "Residents' Parking Only". Presumably they mean on the footpath, because the same van and a car were parked exactly like this:

https://goo.gl/maps/N5McKqJ27EoZJ8Ee7

I also noticed the double yellow lines aren't continuous, and wondered whether it was because it was requested, or they couldn't be painted due to vehicles parked in the area at the time.

*the black one with the golden knocker

It looks like someone took a power hose and tried to blast the 2nd yellow away :pac:

Hurrache

Hurrache wrote: »

I was at the end of a very indignant home owner around Drumcondra one evening after I moved 2 bins to park. They knocked on the door of the person I was visiting, demanded to know why I moved them. I just told them I was parking on a public road.

I just remembered the repercussions! They called the gardai later that night to complain of loud noise from a non existent party! We invited the gardai in for a look around, I got the impression that it wasn't the first call over something nonsensical from that particular house.

Pinch Flat

One of those coned estates near here I live.

https://goo.gl/maps/P2E5YX43N354TiqMA

Coolmine station is close by, So I'm sure they;re inundated with free parkers. "I'm only allowed park my car here on this public road, not you".

rubadub

Pinch Flat wrote: »

One of those coned estates near here I live.

https://goo.gl/maps/P2E5YX43N354TiqMA

Coolmine station is close by, So I'm sure they;re inundated with free parkers. "I'm only allowed park my car here on this public road, not you".

the balls of them to do it, but the absolute balls of a butchers dog to do it with what is presumably stolen garda property!
https://goo.gl/maps/jmC6a5nMbfLYaKBu7

downtheroad

A lad across from me puts out 2 traffic cones but doesn't even move them to park there himself. He has a driveway. So he basically doesn't want anybody at all parking outside. Must report it on fixmystreet as litter.

magicbastarder

rubadub wrote: »

the balls of them to do it

to be fair, given that they live so close to the railway station, 'fly parking' probably reaches levels that are antisocial.
i've heard stories of people who live near DCU nearly getting trapped in their driveways on a regular basis by parking which can best be described as hopeful in its accuracy, and more fairly classed as utterly careless.

Pinch Flat

Must put a cone outside my house for my bike. Or even just leave my bike shed out on the public road outside my house. It's smaller than the average car, and I'm sure it'd be acceptable, given parking a 1.5 tonne vehicle on public property seems to be.

Hurrache

rubadub wrote: »

the balls of them to do it, but the absolute balls of a butchers dog to do it with what is presumably stolen garda property!
https://goo.gl/maps/jmC6a5nMbfLYaKBu7

In fairness I can understand why to an extent. Their residential road is probably mobbed from all hours in the morning with people leaving their cars there while they get a train. I know it's hypocritical given my previous post, but in my example it was nowhere near a train station and was visiting someone living on the street.