Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on [email protected] for help. Thanks :)
Private profiles - please note that profiles marked as private will soon be public. This will facilitate moderation so mods can view users' warning histories. All of your posts across the site will appear on your profile page (including PI, RI). Groups posts will remain private except to users who have access to the same Groups as you. Thread here
Some important site news, please read here. Thanks!

Cycle lanes

  • 23-05-2019 9:05am
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 149 ✭✭ dusty bin


    witnessed a vehicle leaving a housing estate this morning and turning left onto a main road. A continuous cycle lane is on both sides of the main road and it goes through the entrance/exit of the estate.

    A postman was on the cycle lane nearest to the exit coming from the left side (if he was a car he'd be heading the wrong way). There was nearly an accident but thankfully the postman braked when he seen the car turning.

    Myself and the missus were having a debate on who was in the wrong here. She believes the car should have given way to the cyclist as he was on the cycle lane coming towards the exit/entrance to the estate, where as I believe the cyclist should have given way to the driver seeing as he was on the wrong side coming from the left rather than right. The car did stop at the stop signs but was obviously looking right rather than left when turning.

    Apologies if this is posted in the wrong forum.


Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,123 ✭✭✭ amcalester


    Cyclist in the wrong, but he probably would've gotten a big payout if there was a collision.

    Was it an on-road or off-road cycle lane?

    Anyone know if off-road lanes have set directions of travel?


  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 33,799 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Seth Brundle


    amcalester wrote: »
    Cyclist in the wrong, but he probably would've gotten a big payout if there was a collision.

    Was it an on-road or off-road cycle lane?

    Anyone know if off-road lanes have set directions of travel?
    How was the cyclist in the wrong if the cycle lane was along the road (according to the OP) and the car was looking (poorly!) to join the road?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,123 ✭✭✭ amcalester


    Because he was travelling in the wrong direction.

    Similar case here
    A cyclist who was knocked off his bike in a collision with a vehicle when he was cycling in the wrong direction on a bicycle lane sued the motorist yesterday, but the judge said that the cyclist’s injuries could not be visited on the shoulders of the post mistress driving the car.
    Mr O’Callaghan testified that as he cycled along the cycle lane on July 12, 2014, he noticed Ms Carroll emerging from Coach St and he said that he noticed her looking to her right for the possibility of vehicular traffic but not to her left for pedestrians.

    He cycled on the cycle lane and was struck by her car as it emerged onto Sheare St from Coach Lane. The car struck his front wheel, throwing him to the ground and damaging his bicycle.


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 43,464 Mod ✭✭✭✭ magicbastarder


    any link to the junction on google maps, perhaps?
    sounds like the observation from the motorist was inadequate, anyway, regardless of whatever the actions of the cyclist were.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,440 ✭✭✭ cdaly_


    amcalester wrote: »
    Anyone know if off-road lanes have set directions of travel?
    I don't know but I would expect that, in the absence of two-way signage, the lane is one-way. Where a lane is provided on both sides of the road it should definitely be one-way.
    How was the cyclist in the wrong if the cycle lane was along the road (according to the OP) and the car was looking (poorly!) to join the road?
    If the cycle lane was on the road surface then the cyclist was driving on the wrong side of the road and therefore at fault. That said, the driver emerging should be looking both ways (eg. to ancitipate a vehicle overtaking and therefore on their side of the road).

    On the subject of grade-separated (off-road) cycle lanes, our versions suffer badly from loss of priority at every junction/premises entrance etc. Having to anticipate yielding to parallel running traffic at every opportunity gets tiresome quickly and means that it's often preferable and safer to just ride on the road instead...


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 9,002 ✭✭✭ TheChizler


    I think you're supposed to give way to someone already on a road, doesn't matter if they're using it incorrectly. If the bike was a vehicle overtaking another vehicle they'd be in roughly the same position legitimately (if the markings allowed it).

    Someone breaking the law doesn't negate someone not observing correctly.


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 43,464 Mod ✭✭✭✭ magicbastarder


    interesting to note that it was a postman though; would be curious if the route makes it impractical for him to switch back and forth over the road to get in and out of estates or cul-de-sacs.

    the gardai have always turned a blind eye to some of the supposed transgressions of posties on bikes; there's no exception in law to allow them to cycle on the footpath but AFAIK no postman or woman has ever been done for it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 149 ✭✭ dusty bin


    amcalester wrote: »
    Cyclist in the wrong, but he probably would've gotten a big payout if there was a collision.

    Was it an on-road or off-road cycle lane?

    Anyone know if off-road lanes have set directions of travel?

    i presume it was an off-road one as it is between the path and road and in parts is raised above the road, although it becomes on-road at each junction.
    .


  • Registered Users Posts: 149 ✭✭ dusty bin


    any link to the junction on google maps, perhaps?
    sounds like the observation from the motorist was inadequate, anyway, regardless of whatever the actions of the cyclist were.


    It was on the slane road in Navan, but I cant remember the name of the estate. Just remember the wife closing her eyes expecting a crash.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,123 ✭✭✭ amcalester


    dusty bin wrote: »
    i presume it was an off-road one as it is between the path and road and in parts is raised above the road, although it becomes on-road at each junction.
    .

    Then in that case I have no idea who would be at fault (or most at fault).


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 43,464 Mod ✭✭✭✭ magicbastarder


    dusty bin wrote: »
    It was on the slane road in Navan, but I cant remember the name of the estate. Just remember the wife closing her eyes expecting a crash.
    if the lane was the slane-bound side, it looks like it's all on-road lanes. inbound to navan, it jumps between on-road and off-road lanes.


  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 33,799 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Seth Brundle


    Out of curiosity, what is the legislation in terms of using on-road cycle paths that says you must travel on the left side of the road only?


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 43,464 Mod ✭✭✭✭ magicbastarder


    i live on a busy road with an on-road cycle lane. it irks me when i see people salmoning past the house on bikes, but i would fully accept being an idiot if i managed to crash into one if i was driving.
    anyone who drives expecting all other road users to be behaving correctly (and not allowing for those who aren't) shouldn't be allowed behind the wheel. this is not a statement on who might be wrong in case of a collision though.


  • Registered Users Posts: 149 ✭✭ dusty bin


    if the lane was the slane-bound side, it looks like it's all on-road lanes. inbound to navan, it jumps between on-road and off-road lanes.

    apologies, should have stipulated direction. car was heading for navan town.


  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 33,799 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Seth Brundle


    amcalester wrote: »
    Because he was travelling in the wrong direction.

    Similar case here
    I wonder if that case is an exception in that the cyclist went the wrong way down what appears to be a one way street. This does not appear to be the case for the incident referred to by the OP.
    What I would like to know, is it illegal to cycle on a cycle path right hand side of the road?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 11,221 ✭✭✭✭ Rebekah Nutritious Cub


    Driver has a stop sign so in the wrong. The cyclist is also on the wrong side of the road, doesn't absolve the motorist though. Always look both ways.


  • Registered Users Posts: 149 ✭✭ dusty bin


    Came across this document by cycling ireland.

    http://www.cyclingireland.ie/downloads/ci%20ride%20leader%20-%20guide%20to%20cycling%20on%20the%20road.pdf

    Think i'm right that the cyclist should have given way. rule e of the rules of the road state "ALWAYS cycling in the same direction as the rest of the
    traffic (ie on the left) when on the road or a bike lane". and later on under bike facilities it mentions "Cyclists also need to check all round before moving off a
    cycle path onto or across a road, as vehicles on the road
    have right of way".

    I'm taking this as a win.


  • Registered Users Posts: 149 ✭✭ dusty bin


    Driver has a stop sign so in the wrong. The cyclist is also on the wrong side of the road, doesn't absolve the motorist though. Always look both ways.

    In fairness the car did stop at the stop sign. the cyclist would have been a couple of seconds away to the left. whether he (the driver) was only looking right or looking both ways and just expecting the cyclist to stop at a road crossing, i dont really know.

    thankfully everyone was able to walk away and live another day.


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 43,464 Mod ✭✭✭✭ magicbastarder


    dusty bin wrote: »
    "Cyclists also need to check all round before moving off a
    cycle path onto or across a road, as vehicles on the road
    have right of way".

    I'm taking this as a win.
    but then that can lead to situations like this.

    https://twitter.com/cosaingalway/status/1130762776744529920

    the stretch of road you mention in navan, from a cycling infrastructure point of view, is fractured. the side of the road where the near incident occurred varies between on-road lanes and off-road cycle paths, so at any one time you'll probably find that motorists wouldn't be able to tell you if the cyclist has right of way or not (assuming they're travelling in the right direction).


  • Registered Users Posts: 36,084 ✭✭✭✭ ED E


    Out of curiosity, what is the legislation in terms of using on-road cycle paths that says you must travel on the left side of the road only?

    RTA 2012
    (b) a cycle track is a contra-flow cycle track where traffic sign number RUS 059 is provided and pedal cycles shall only be driven in a contra-flow direction on such track.
    (3) Where a cycle track, provided by traffic sign number RUS 009 in association with traffic sign number RRM 022 (continuous white line) or RRM 023 (broken white line), is two-way, pedal cycles shall be driven as near as possible to the left hand side of each lane.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 36,084 ✭✭✭✭ ED E


    dusty bin wrote: »
    It was on the slane road in Navan, but I cant remember the name of the estate. Just remember the wife closing her eyes expecting a crash.

    I dont see anywhere on maps (imagery is recent enough) that shows a dual direction lane. If thats the case the cycle was travelling on the wrong side and would probably be found at fault.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 886 ✭✭✭ Anteayer


    I just had a situation where a cyclist going at high speed down the pavement crossed a junction as I was turning right across a busy road. He almost hit me side on! Then started hurling abuse at me.

    There was no cycle lane and he was doing a high enough speed on the pavement to be unable to stop at a junction and was no where near the junction as I was turning.

    Not only that but he was going contrary to the flow of traffic - cycling at high speed on pavement in the right (continental traffic direction).

    I had to slam on while turning across busy traffic. it could have been VERY nasty.

    According to him - I'm 100% in the wrong and should have seen him coming somehow ?!?!

    I'm beginning to think cycling lessons are essential! How the hell can you be cycling at full whack down the pavement on the wrong side of the road, not looking at junctions and then claiming you're in the right!?!


  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 33,799 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Seth Brundle


    Anteayer wrote: »
    I just had a situation where a cyclist going at high speed down the pavement crossed a junction as I was turning right across a busy road. He almost hit me side on! Then started hurling abuse at me.

    There was no cycle lane and he was doing a high enough speed on the pavement to be unable to stop at a junction and was no where near the junction as I was turning.

    Not only that but he was going contrary to the flow of traffic - cycling at high speed on pavement in the right (continental traffic direction).

    I had to slam on while turning across busy traffic. it could have been VERY nasty.

    According to him - I'm 100% in the wrong and should have seen him coming somehow ?!?!

    I'm beginning to think cycling lessons are essential! How the hell can you be cycling at full whack down the pavement on the wrong side of the road, not looking at junctions and then claiming you're in the right!?!
    So you saw him approach but kept driving?
    You saw them going fast (allegedly) but failed to consider the possibilities?
    Where was this?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 886 ✭✭✭ Anteayer


    Basically an urban road with a 60km limit.
    Turning right into a non traffic light junction. You have to turn across short gaps in traffic.

    When I reached the other side and entered the junction this guy came out of nowhere from the pavement at speed and side on into the car, but did not crash or make contact.

    He continued cycling from the pavement at high speed while the car was already in front of him.

    He was cycling at high speed on the pavement, in the opposite direction to road traffic and did not look, yeild or stop when crossing the road. Just cycled straight at the car.

    He didn't look or yield or pay any attention to the road that he was crossing from the pavement.

    The issue was I had to stop hard in a very awkward junction.

    It's a bad road design and there should be a traffic light junction, but cycling the wrong way on a road, at speed and on the pavement is insane.

    If he were cycling on the correct side of the road it wouldn't have happened and if he were cycling on the pavement observing normal pedestrian behaviour it also wouldn't have happened.

    You can't see someone cycling at high speed in the wrong direction in a turn like that and you certainly do not expect a cyclist to just shoot out from the pavement like that.

    The only reason I know the guy was going high speed is he shot out of nowhere. I had absolutely no way of seeing him as he was obscured by parked cars and traffic on the other side of the road (I was crossing traffic from the left to the right) he crossed the intersecting road blind)

    I don't have x-ray mirrors that can see through two rows of cars.

    I'm not saying all cyclists are like this but some people just have absolutely no cop on whatsoever and give everyone else a bad name.

    A bit of road traffic training for everyone in school would be very useful!


  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 33,799 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Seth Brundle


    Firstly he didn't come out of nowhere. You failed to see him because you didn't look sufficiently. You assumed that the road was clear to drive down when it obviously wasn't.
    If you had seen his speed then you saw him. If you didnt see him then how do you nkow his speed? You just assumed that he was going to stop for you, which he did.
    You also criticise him for cycling on the wrong side of the broad but your argument repeats that he was on the pavement. Which was it?
    You blame him for you not seeing him. *You* failed to see him. He wasn't hiding just waiting to pop out in front of you.
    Is there a cycle path on the pavement?

    I'm not saying that he is in the right: it Does sound like he shoukd have used more caution but I don't have all the facts. I'm just saying that it could have been a small child that ran out in front of you.
    Expect the unexpected and all that!

    Lastly in terms of training, do you really think that drivers are sufficiently trained? How many do they manage to maim and kill each week? Compare those numbers to the number of mains and kills made by people on bikes!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 886 ✭✭✭ Anteayer


    Actually, if it were a small child nothing would have happened as they wouldn't have been travelling at 25 to 50kmh and I was only moving at about 10km/h max.

    I had stopped, indicated, waited for a gap in traffic, turned right and wasn't exactly going fast as I had just started to move into the junction.

    He literally cycled at me while I was in the junction. I didn't cross his path as he wasn't on the road at all. He left the pavement and entered the junction and basically almost into the side of a car.

    So he was cycling along the pavement at speed without stopping at junctions with roads. Just cycling straight across them at relatively much higher speed than a pedestrian.

    I turned into the junction. He shot off the pavement and stopped just short of the side of my car and started yelling at me.

    He was cycling on flat pavement which runs for several km so was going a fair speed based on how fast he entered the junction and his inability to stop.

    He was not cycling on the road, but on the footpath. However, in the footpath in opposite direction to traffic on that side of the road.

    So basically he crossed one arm of a junction at speed from right to left coming from the pavement but in the opposite direction to where you'd expect bikes or cars to be coming from.

    Obviously if a bike came down the road in the correct direction, I would have had tons of visibility.

    If it were a pedestrian, I would have had loads of time and so would they because they simply don't move quickly. Even a jogger would have.

    He clearly saw my car enter the junction and didn't stop but just cycled at the side of it then noticed or was going so fast towards the road that he was unable to stop in time, in which case he was cycling far far too fast to approach a road at all.

    There's no way you can see someone who shoots out at speed from behind parked cars.

    There is also no cycle path there. There is only a narrow, but flat footpath. Again, I don't actually have a major issue with someone cycling on the pavement, provided they cycle sanely.

    A) He shouldn't be been cycling at speed on a footpath
    B) You don't blindly cycle across roads at speed.
    C) You don't cycle in the opposite direction to traffic if you're going to be interacting with it at junctions.
    D) You should be aware of the fact that you're not going to be very visible if you shoot our from behind parked cars into a junction.

    I actually cycle myself and I don't even object to people using footpaths for cycling, if they do it sanely and observe what's going on around them.

    There is such a thing as reckless use of the road by all forms of road users.

    This guy was hurtling along not paying any attention to traffic or anything else by the looks of it.

    All I'm saying is that there needs to be proper cycle training and road use training in school and in public information campaigns. Road users have to be able to interact in predictable, visible ways.

    Cars are bigger and more dangerous but reckless use of any vehicle or even just running out into traffic as a pedestrian is incredibly dangerous.

    It's fairly clear though that there's absolutely no point in arguing as you're just going to retort with "driver always wrong".

    As a cyclist, a driver and a pedestrian I am not angry but concerned. It would reduce cyclist fatalities if people observed the rules of the road more consistently.

    Safety on the roads is about predictably, consistency and awareness of what other people can and can't see.

    Unless we get to the stage where we've proper cycle lanes absolutely everywhere (and that's unlikely to be anytime soon) cyclists, cars and pedestrians have to interact. Even with lanes they have to interact at junctions and crossings.

    Bolting across a road without looking is idiotic and nobody with any common sense does that.

    Proper road use education in school should be about how to interact safely with other road users and why the rules are there. Not just about arbitrary learning rules.

    I don't really see the point of defending totally reckless cycling anymore than defending someone doing tip and run. It's needlessly endangering their own life and safety.


Advertisement