Galway Cycle Bus, Knocknacarra

bobbyss

Galway Bay had a piece about this group recently. School kids cycling to school along with adults. What a marvellous idea. And kudos to the organisers There's a video as well. One advantage from a safety point of view is that there's strength in numbers. Drivers can see a mass of colour moving and can adjust accordingly.

But one query Aren't cyclists supposed to use hand signals to indicate their intentions especially going through roundabouts? From the snippets I saw I wasn't sure the kids were doing this. I hope I am wrong.

irisheddie85

bobbyss wrote: »

Galway Bay had a piece about this group recently. School kids cycling to school along with adults. What a marvellous idea. And kudos to the organisers There's a video as well. One advantage from a safety point of view is that there's strength in numbers. Drivers can see a mass of colour moving and can adjust accordingly.

But one query Aren't cyclists supposed to use hand signals to indicate their intentions especially going through roundabouts? From the snippets I saw I wasn't sure the kids were doing this. I hope I am wrong.

And cars are supposed to use indicators. They are a bunch of primary school kids. Isn't it enough just to get them all on their bikes and out of cars.

xckjoo

bobbyss wrote: »

Galway Bay had a piece about this group recently. School kids cycling to school along with adults. What a marvellous idea. And kudos to the organisers There's a video as well. One advantage from a safety point of view is that there's strength in numbers. Drivers can see a mass of colour moving and can adjust accordingly.

But one query Aren't cyclists supposed to use hand signals to indicate their intentions especially going through roundabouts? From the snippets I saw I wasn't sure the kids were doing this. I hope I am wrong.

It's a fantastic project. Has been running for a while now.

They have adult marshals that cycle with them and provide coverage for the kids. I'm not sure how exactly it works but I'd say this would cover the need for hand signals from a safety point of view. The roads around the city are fairly poor and taking a hand of the handle bars at the wrong time could send you flying if you're not very comfortable with balance on a bike. Probably better to let them learn to cycle before introducing added difficulties.



I know they're looking for volunteers for the marshalling for the coming year if you're (or anyone else) in the area. You could talk to them about introducing the idea of hand signals and stuff to the older/more experienced kids.

Mr_A

Fair play to those involved, the cycle bus is genuinely inspirational.

It's a shame that it's needed, but Galway is so cycle hostile there is little alternative. Hopefully planning standards will improve, people will use bikes if they can do so and feel safe doing it.

Del2005

irisheddie85 wrote: »

And cars are supposed to use indicators. They are a bunch of primary school kids. Isn't it enough just to get them all on their bikes and out of cars.

If you don't teach them the correct way to use the roads from the start then they will never know how to use the road correctly, all car drivers start as pedestrians and cyclists.

xckjoo

Del2005 wrote: »

If you don't teach them the correct way to use the roads from the start then they will never know how to use the road correctly, all car drivers start as pedestrians and cyclists.

There's a progression in learning. Being able to keep your balance on a bike if you hit a bit of crappy road while you only have one hand on the bike is not simple. And some people never learn to cycle but still manage to learn how to use indicators in a car.

bobbyss

Del2005 wrote:

If you don't teach them the correct way to use the roads from the start then they will never know how to use the road correctly, all car drivers start as pedestrians and cyclists.

Yeah this is the way I learn to drive from the motoring school so that no bad habits would start. It's a hugely responsible thing to marshal young kids on the roads and again fair play to those involved.

I would be very hesitant of marshalling kids on busy school mornings who are not confident enough of using hand signals at the risk of losing balance.

But again I'll take my hat off to those that do.

Del2005

xckjoo wrote: »

There's a progression in learning. Being able to keep your balance on a bike if you hit a bit of crappy road while you only have one hand on the bike is not simple. And some people never learn to cycle but still manage to learn how to use indicators in a car.

If you can't keep balance on a road you shouldn't be on the road.

There is a lot to be said for the cycle bus but untrained people shouldn't be using the open roads regardless of the reason. Yes they have marshals but they have no legal authority to control traffic so who will be responsible if there's a crash?

xckjoo

Del2005 wrote: »

If you can't keep balance on a road you shouldn't be on the road.

There is a lot to be said for the cycle bus but untrained people shouldn't be using the open roads regardless of the reason. Yes they have marshals but they have no legal authority to control traffic so who will be responsible if there's a crash?

It's all road bud. Where do you propose they learn? You can drive a car on the road after only taking a theory test. Much more dangerous no?

P.S Is it actually a legal requirement for cyclists to use hand signals?

Tipsygypsy

I've been out with cycle bus a few times and can assure you that they cycle two abreast with the children stay on the inside close to path with adults on the outside between them and the traffic and they are encouraged and protected very well. Aside from this the marshals do stop at all junctions and signal to drivers that the bus in coming and most traffic are very aware and conscientious of the cycle bus. On busier days (such as the monthly family day) there is often a member of An Garda with them.

Mrs OBumble

xckjoo wrote: »

It's all road bud. Where do you propose they learn? You can drive a car on the road after only taking a theory test. Much more dangerous no?

P.S Is it actually a legal requirement for cyclists to use hand signals?

Learn in the park. A person without basic vehicle mastery should not be on the road.

Learner car drivers need to be accompanied by a licensed adult driver who is in charge of the vehicle.

xckjoo

Jesus the begrudgers are out in force already. I'm not going to reply to any of them directly again because it's a waste of time. Anyone that sees a story about a group of volunteers going above and beyond to provide kids with a means to safely cycle to school and starts moaning about inconsequential things should have a long hard think about who they are as a person IMO.

xckjoo

Tipsygypsy wrote: »

I've been out with cycle bus a few times and can assure you that they cycle two abreast with the children stay on the inside close to path with adults on the outside between them and the traffic and they are encouraged and protected very well. Aside from this the marshals do stop at all junctions and signal to drivers that the bus in coming and most traffic are very aware and conscientious of the cycle bus. On busier days (such as the monthly family day) there is often a member of An Garda with them.

Fair play. I'd love to get involved but I don't live near them. Great to see the Guards involved as well. Presumably they're just there to arrest the kids that don't hand signal correctly though :pac:

bobbyss

Can anyone clarify what the adult is doing at about 1:35 in the video? It's quite short but seems an odd way to enter a roundabout on a bicycle.

biko

From their Twitter

https://twitter.com/cycle_bus/status/1126853581854904321

wily minx

I can't think of any parents I know who would be stupid enough to let their children join the cycle bus without having a good grasp of how to cycle on the road. And thank god the 'but someone might get sued' brigade haven't had an impact on this initiative. Is there anything like the cycling proficiency test (from the uk, Google tells me it's now called 'bikeability') here? I haven't heard of anything through school. In the UK they were part organised through the school and everyone was encourage to take the tests (bronze, silver and gold) to learn the rules of the road.

xckjoo

wily minx wrote: »

I can't think of any parents I know who would be stupid enough to let their children join the cycle bus without having a good grasp of how to cycle on the road. And thank god the 'but someone might get sued' brigade haven't had an impact on this initiative. Is there anything like the cycling proficiency test (from the uk, Google tells me it's now called 'bikeability') here? I haven't heard of anything through school. In the UK they were part organised through the school and everyone was encourage to take the tests (bronze, silver and gold) to learn the rules of the road.

I've heard cycling skills are taught in some schools around 5th or 6th class but don't know the details. I've a feeling it's just an afternoon of going around the yard in a circle but open to correction.

what_traffic

http://www.cycleright.ie/
is now the Irish National Standard. It is modeled on the UK Bikeability
Generally thought from 12+
Under that age, all other road users have a duty of care towards Children.

Mrs OBumble

what_traffic wrote: »

Generally thought from 12+
Under that age, all other road users have a duty of care towards Children.

And over that age, they don't? Really?

Seriously folks. All vehicle users ( any no of wheels) have a duty of care towards all other people especially vulnerable ones.

Parents have a duty of care to get their kids to school, and to ensure their kids aren't placed in situations which are beyond their physical of emotional capacity. Ideally this includes not sending kids to play in the traffic.

at1withmyself

Ah right so the tone of this thread is basically less bikes and more cars on the road. Gotcha!

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

And over that age, they don't? Really?

Seriously folks. All vehicle users ( any no of wheels) have a duty of care towards all other people especially vulnerable ones.

Parents have a duty of care to get their kids to school, and to ensure their kids aren't placed in situations which are beyond their physical of emotional capacity. Ideally this includes not sending kids to play in the traffic.

ben.schlomo

at1withmyself wrote: »

Ah right so the tone of this thread is basically less bikes and more cars on the road. Gotcha!

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

And over that age, they don't? Really?

Seriously folks. All vehicle users ( any no of wheels) have a duty of care towards all other people especially vulnerable ones.

Parents have a duty of care to get their kids to school, and to ensure their kids aren't placed in situations which are beyond their physical of emotional capacity. Ideally this includes not sending kids to play in the traffic.

She has a long standing issue with/fear of bicycles. Those attitudes are best ignored really.

what_traffic

ben.schlomo wrote: »

She has a long standing issue with/fear of bicycles. Those attitudes are best ignored really.

I would concur with this analysis.

jace_da_face

I am all for cycling and building cities to accommodate it, but I am sorry to have to say it, this scheme is and quite likely dangerous and an nuisance at best . The adults occupy the roadway and hold up the traffic. I understand they are trying to shield the kids from danger but clearly there is a conflict here.

If the cycle lanes are considered too dangerous for small kids that adults need to chaperone from the road external to the cycle lanes, then its unworkable. It leads to frustrated drivers, who get annoyed at being held up, and the sense of entitlement of cyclist taking over the road when there is a lane available to them. They then try to overtake which leads to gridlock and increases the chance of accidents.

xckjoo

jace_da_face wrote: »

I am all for cycling and building cities to accommodate it, but I am sorry to have to say it, this scheme is and quite likely dangerous and an nuisance at best . The adults occupy the roadway and hold up the traffic. I understand they are trying to shield the kids from danger but clearly there is a conflict here.

If the cycle lanes are considered too dangerous for small kids that adults need to chaperone from the road external to the cycle lanes, then its unworkable. It leads to frustrated drivers, who get annoyed at being held up, and the sense of entitlement of cyclist taking over the road when there is a lane available to them. They then try to overtake which leads to gridlock and increases the chance of accidents.

There'd be more of a hold up on the roads if all those kids were being driven to school instead of cycling.

wily minx

It's a fairly small wait for the car drivers to allow the cycle bus to use the roundabouts. And at that time of day traffic is fairly slow anyway along WDR! And surely the whole point is that by encouraging more to use the cycle bus you're taking more yummy mummies cars off the road?? More of this sort of thing!

what_traffic

xckjoo wrote: »

There'd be more of a hold up on the roads if all those kids were being driven to school instead of cycling.

Always amazes me how people struggle to understand this basic concept.(same applies for public transport)

jace_da_face

what_traffic wrote: »

Always amazes me how people struggle to understand this basic concept.(same applies for public transport)

I doubt the same applies in the case of taking up the road to bicycles so that they may shepherd little cyclists at a snail’s pace. I want schemes like these to work but they need to work well. You saw the video on that Twitter feed some posts back. Check out the cyclist in the road, who’s not in the cycle lane as should be. And check out the motorists eager to overtake.

What gives that cyclist the right to take up the road and slow traffic when a lane is available? If that cycle train can’t keep in the cycle lane and that some of the cyclists need to occupy the road, then either those little cyclists are too young to use cycle lanes or our cycle lanes are just plane dangerous, or both.

Unless we start building cycle lanes that are separated from the roads, those kids should be up on the footpaths. The adults could then safely ride along in the cycle lanes. What they are currently doing is dangerous, will cause resentment and just looks like middle class virtue signaling.

xckjoo

jace_da_face wrote: »

I doubt the same applies in the case of taking up the road to bicycles so that they may shepherd little cyclists at a snail’s pace. I want schemes like these to work but they need to work well. You saw the video on that Twitter feed some posts back. Check out the cyclist in the road, who’s not in the cycle lane as should be. And check out the motorists eager to overtake.

What gives that cyclist the right to take up the road and slow traffic when a lane is available? If that cycle train can’t keep in the cycle lane and that some of the cyclists need to occupy the road, then either those little cyclists are too young to use cycle lanes or our cycle lanes are just plane dangerous, or both.

Unless we start building cycle lanes that are separated from the roads, those kids should be up on the footpaths. The adults could then safely ride along in the cycle lanes. What they are currently doing is dangerous, will cause resentment and just looks like middle class virtue signaling.

I think it's more "middle class virtue signalling" to be moaning that a group of kids cycling to school might cause you to take 30s longer to get your multi-thousand euro car to the next traffic jam. The roads are for everyone.
And learn your rules of the road if you're going to be driving a car. There's no requirement for a cyclist to use cycle lanes. So to answer your question about what "What gives that cyclist the right to take up the road and slow traffic when a lane is available?", the law does.

Salary Negotiator

jace_da_face wrote: »

I doubt the same applies in the case of taking up the road to bicycles so that they may shepherd little cyclists at a snail’s pace. I want schemes like these to work but they need to work well. You saw the video on that Twitter feed some posts back. Check out the cyclist in the road, who’s not in the cycle lane as should be. And check out the motorists eager to overtake.

What gives that cyclist the right to take up the road and slow traffic when a lane is available? If that cycle train can’t keep in the cycle lane and that some of the cyclists need to occupy the road, then either those little cyclists are too young to use cycle lanes or our cycle lanes are just plane dangerous, or both.

Unless we start building cycle lanes that are separated from the roads, those kids should be up on the footpaths. The adults could then safely ride along in the cycle lanes. What they are currently doing is dangerous, will cause resentment and just looks like middle class virtue signaling.

There's no requirement to use a cycle lane, once you understand that point you will see that the rest of your post is nonsense.

what_traffic

jace_da_face wrote: »

I want schemes like these to work but they need to work well.

No you don't.

jace_da_face

In response to the previous three posts, I think you’re missing the tone of my post. Perhaps I should have preceded my question with “Allow me to play devil’s advocate here ....”. And why you want to paint me as the guy in the gas guzzling SUV who has something against cyclists, I don’t know? Turn this into a typical polarized debate, as we see all over the internet and social media if you want, rather than a constructive discussion. I want to see more cycling and better lanes. If you stop attacking for a minute you would see that.

So on the issue of the law and regulation, is that true about no requirement to use a cycle lane where one is available? All I can find on this is:

Article 14 of the Road Traffic (Traffic and Parking) Regulations 1997

14. (3) All pedal cycles must be driven on a cycle track where one is provided.

Anyway, I didn’t want to go too far down the law route. I’m sure I could apply the letter of the law, and cycle in the road in such away as to become a nuisance, although I would probably get done for obstruction. Incidentally, it is no 30 second delay getting stuck behind that cycle bus going from the Blake roundabout down to Aldi. Not by a long shot, according to my wife anyway. But hey, she’s just a gas guzzler too, so her and other drivers frustrations don’t matter.

But forgive me for trying to suggest any reasons as to why we shouldn’t try do better with cycle behaviour and infrastructure, and more importantly, safety.

I guess it all comes down to what you think is the highest priority of road user and what the priority is for that road user.

Is it the car driver in a 2 ton car or the kid on a bike?

Is the priority the punctuality of the car user or the safety of the child on the bike?

This project is already expanding to other routes and schools and its only going to get bigger. I'd wager that this will be a normal part of commuting within 5 years in Galway city for most primary schools.

McTigs

jace_da_face wrote: »

. Incidentally, it is no 30 second delay getting stuck behind that cycle bus going from the Blake roundabout down to Aldi. Not by a long shot, according to my wife anyway. But hey, she’s just a gas guzzler too, so her and other drivers frustrations don’t matter.

30 seconds can feel like a long time when stuck behind cyclists.... but really, it's just 30 seconds.

Tell your wife to get up 5 minutes earlier, might save her getting frustrated first thing in the morning.

jace_da_face

McTigs wrote: »

30 seconds can feel like a long time when stuck behind cyclists.... but really, it's just 30 seconds.

Tell your wife to get up 5 minutes earlier, might save her getting frustrated first thing in the morning.

It’s not about my wife. It’s about drivers getting frustrated, rightly or wrongly, and trying to pass. A recipe for accidents.

xckjoo

Deleted User wrote: »

I guess it all comes down to what you think is the highest priority of road user and what the priority is for that road user.

Is it the car driver in a 2 ton car or the kid on a bike?

Is the priority the punctuality of the car user or the safety of the child on the bike?

This project is already expanding to other routes and schools and its only going to get bigger. I'd wager that this will be a normal part of commuting within 5 years in Galway city for most primary schools.

Hopefully ya. The amount of car traffic generated by the school runs these days is crazy. Areas near schools are a chaotic mess of cars and frustrated drivers. And there's all the moaning about traffic that we have to listen to. Then we see some programs like this that are actively reducing car travel (the largest contributor to traffic delays by a massive margin) and you still have people complaining.

Now excuse me while I jump in my car to avoid the rain while wallowing in my own hypocrisy

jace_da_face

Deleted User wrote: »

I guess it all comes down to what you think is the highest priority of road user and what the priority is for that road user.

Is it the car driver in a 2 ton car or the kid on a bike?

Is the priority the punctuality of the car user or the safety of the child on the bike?

This project is already expanding to other routes and schools and its only going to get bigger. I'd wager that this will be a normal part of commuting within 5 years in Galway city for most primary schools.

This getting rolled out on a big scale would likely be a good thing. It would be akin to a large protest. It would bring about a national debate. It would frustrate a lot of drivers on a national scale. It would probably force governmental change to improve infrastructure.

jace_da_face

jace_da_face wrote: »

This getting rolled out on a big scale would likely be a good thing. It would be akin to a large protest. It would bring about a national debate. It would frustrate a lot of drivers on a national scale. It would probably force governmental change to improve infrastructure.

Yup

beardybrewer

I think what I find funny is the focus on their right to be in outside the cycle lane coincidentally on one of the few roads in Galway that actually has one. Now obviously when I'm cycling in traffic I don't want to annoy anyone and if there is a cycle lane I take it and if not I try to stay reasonably close to the curb out of the way. But I have every right to "take the lane" in order to turn right say. If I'm crossing Wolf Tonne bridge, again, I absolutely have the right to "take the lane" aka smack in the middle so no eejit can try to pass me so I can safely use the road too.

Remember, you're inconvenience is inside an air conditioned car, sipping a coffee, listening to the radio, and keeping dry. Don't expect the cyclists to feel bad for you if they hold you up for a few second while making a turn. Try and hold back and not pass within inches of our elbows or push us against the curb (which happens too often). We're totally exposed out there.

As far as the cycle bus goes I think common decency and sense should rule the day and probably only here does it not. Give them room, keep them safe, and adjust your time/route if you are inconvenienced.

what_traffic

jace_da_face wrote: »

Anyway, I didn’t want to go too far down the law route. I’m sure I could apply the letter of the law, and cycle in the road in such away as to become a nuisance, although I would probably get done for obstruction. Incidentally, it is no 30 second delay getting stuck behind that cycle bus going from the Blake roundabout down to Aldi. Not by a long shot, according to my wife anyway. But hey, she’s just a gas guzzler too, so her and other drivers frustrations don’t matter.

But forgive me for trying to suggest any reasons as to why we shouldn’t try do better with cycle behaviour and infrastructure, and more importantly, safety.

Wont forgive you as you are not playing Devils advocate - your just missing the point again and again.
Your Wife is NOT getting delayed because of the Cycle bus- she is getting delayed because of ALL the other cars (plus herself in the car) on the roads of Galway City. Electric Car, Gas guzzler SUV etc who cares. They all take up vast amounts of space.

The Cycle bus is NOT a traffic creator - it is a CAR traffic buster.

Don Juan II

jace_da_face wrote: »

So on the issue of the law and regulation, is that true about no requirement to use a cycle lane where one is available? All I can find on this is:

Article 14 of the Road Traffic (Traffic and Parking) Regulations 1997

14. (3) All pedal cycles must be driven on a cycle track where one is provided.

Anyway, I didn’t want to go too far down the law route. I’m sure I could apply the letter of the law, ...

Just to clarify - this was changed in 2018:
https: //irishcycle.com/2018/08/18/cyclists-dont-have-to-use-cycle-lanes-new-legislation-confirms/
The "letter of the law" does not state it is mandatory for a cyclist to use a cycle lane

(I can't post the URL)

jace_da_face

what_traffic wrote: »

Wont forgive you as you are not playing Devils advocate - your just missing the point again and again.
Your Wife is NOT getting delayed because of the Cycle bus- she is getting delayed because of ALL the other cars (plus herself in the car) on the roads of Galway City. Electric Car, Gas guzzler SUV etc who cares. They all take up vast amounts of space.

The Cycle bus is NOT a traffic creator - it is a CAR traffic buster.

And you are just being obstinate my friend! So what is the point I keep missing? That adding more and more cars adds more and more congestion? Is that your big point? Wow! That’s so clever.

Pitting cyclist and motorist against each other will achieve nothing. We keep hearing the same old arguments day after day on the radio, on TV, and nothing changes. Dublin hosted the Velo City cycle conference back in June. Did you hear how that went? It was berated by international attendees as not only were our streets and lanes deemed congested, disorganized and dangerous, but that they were exactly the same 10 years ago and nothing had changed.

Lots and lots of people have no choice but to get into their cars to commute in this city. It’s not the Netherlands out there. There are no other choices for many people. If you take the attitude that it doesn’t really matter if drivers are discommoded so long as we take a few cars off the road, then you will never achieve anything long term and worth while. If instead we think of ways of having cyclists and motorists both accommodated and add to that great public transport, then we have a city that moves. That’s how the Dutch think. It ain’t a competition to them. And eventually when people see how good it is to cycle or travel on public transport, they do so willingly. If you build it they will come.

If a group of cyclists cannot get safely down the WDR and keep in their lane, then it is not fit for their purpose. The lane needs to be segregated from the road. That’s not rocket science. If they can pull up trees in Dublin to put in extra bus lanes, I think we could take out a little bit of the grass verge to put in a better lane don’t you think?

Jace_da_face - motorist & cyclist.

xckjoo

jace_da_face wrote: »

And you are just being obstinate my friend! So what is the point I keep missing? That adding more and more cars adds more and more congestion? Is that your big point? Wow! That’s so clever.

Pitting cyclist and motorist against each other will achieve nothing. We keep hearing the same old arguments day after day on the radio, on TV, and nothing changes. Dublin hosted the Velo City cycle conference back in June. Did you hear how that went? It was berated by international attendees as not only were our streets and lanes deemed congested, disorganized and dangerous, but that they were exactly the same 10 years ago and nothing had changed.

Lots and lots of people have no choice but to get into their cars to commute in this city. It’s not the Netherlands out there. There are no other choices for many people. If you take the attitude that it doesn’t really matter if drivers are discommoded so long as we take a few cars off the road, then you will never achieve anything long term and worth while. If instead we think of ways of having cyclists and motorists both accommodated and add to that great public transport, then we have a city that moves. That’s how the Dutch think. It ain’t a competition to them. And eventually when people see how good it is to cycle or travel on public transport, they do so willingly. If you build it they will come.

If a group of cyclists cannot get safely down the WDR and keep in their lane, then it is not fit for their purpose. The lane needs to be segregated from the road. That’s not rocket science. If they can pull up trees in Dublin to put in extra bus lanes, I think we could take out a little bit of the grass verge to put in a better lane don’t you think?

Jace_da_face - motorist & cyclist.

I felt that your original post read as very much "get them off the road" too so maybe your wording didn't portray your intentions fully. Unfortunately we will have to discommode (new word for me so thanks for that :pac:) private car users to increase public transport and bike usage. It's tough to walk passed your car every day to stand at a bus stop. I think the only thing that'll change this is if it takes longer to drive than to take the bus.

The Dutch are an interesting example here. A big reason they have good cycling infrastructure is from the Stop de Kindermoord (stop the child murder) Protests of the 60's/70's where people took to the streets over the high levels of children being hit and killed by people driving cars. Lets hope it doesn't come to that here!

what_traffic

jace_da_face wrote: »

If a group of cyclists cannot get safely down the WDR and keep in their lane, then it is not fit for their purpose. The lane needs to be segregated from the road. That’s not rocket science. If they can pull up trees in Dublin to put in extra bus lanes, I think we could take out a little bit of the grass verge to put in a better lane don’t you think?

Jace_da_face - motorist & cyclist.

ITS NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE HENCE THE CYCLE BUS!
Now you are getting to the crux of the issue.

Do we wait for the next Generation of School Kids for this to happen?
City Council In 2010 costed this at only €10,000,000 for a City Smarter Travel Submission to upgrade full length of WDR for Bus Lanes and Cycle Paths similar to Seamus Quirke Road

If all those children on the Cycle were been driven to School - your wife would just hit that CAR traffic Q's a little earlier.

what_traffic - pedestrian, cyclist, public transport user and motorist, not involved in the CycleBus but support what they are doing.

what_traffic

jace_da_face wrote: »

Pitting cyclist and motorist against each other will achieve nothing. We keep hearing the same old arguments day after day on the radio, on TV, and nothing changes. Dublin hosted the Velo City cycle conference back in June. Did you hear how that went? It was berated by international attendees as not only were our streets and lanes deemed congested, disorganized and dangerous, but that they were exactly the same 10 years ago and nothing had changed.

Read all about Velo City 2019 in Dublin - IrishCycle.com was covering it in detail.

jace_da_face

The cycle bus is a symptom , not a solution. I just look at it and see danger. If they are costing it at €10,000,000 they are going over the top. Surely at that money they are talking about completely digging up the WDR like they did on the Seamus Quirke which is not needed. All they need do is add a path that integrates with the pedestrian crossings.

beardybrewer

Seriously guy, you're just being belligerent and stirring at this point.

You are daft to conflate the cycle bus with the city's traffic issues. It's an education/fitness programme. As pointed out already, if anything it is a net positive by taking cars off the road.

Much of the city does not have cycle lanes and guess what, you might have to deal with cycle buses there too hopefully soon. And they have every right to take the road.

what_traffic

jace_da_face wrote: »

The cycle bus is a symptom , not a solution. I just look at it and see danger. If they are costing it at €10,000,000 they are going over the top. Surely at that money they are talking about completely digging up the WDR like they did on the Seamus Quirke which is not needed. All they need do is add a path that integrates with the pedestrian crossings.

Are just been obtuse now?
Cycle bus is a citizens led solution.
And I thought the Council were bad for short term thinking.............:eek:

Mr_A

There is some interesting logic at play in this thread.

Cycle bus may delay motorists.
Motorists may therefore become frustrated and behave recklessly.
Therefore the cycle bus is a bad thing and should not be on the road rather than drivers whose reaction to a fairly insignificant delay is to endanger others.

It is amazing how low the bar is set by some for driver behavior!

jace_da_face

Hold your horses there guys. Did we or did we not agree that the cycle path on WDR is not fit for purpose, as in suitable for schools kids? If so, do we not then identify a need to upgrade it? Or is the goal just to obstruct cars? Get real guys or nothing will be achieved. We are just going around in circles.

There are schools along the WDR. Students would like to cycle, and parents would like to have to have their kids cycle. I think we have identified a need for safely allowing small kids to travel on their bikes. If you’re idea of doing that is to shield them from traffic, rather than build appropriate infrastructure, then what are you trying to achieve? To get one over on cars, or build a safe
long term solution?

jace_da_face

Mr_A wrote: »

There is some interesting logic at play in this thread.

Cycle bus may delay motorists.
Motorists may therefore become frustrated and behave recklessly.

Whatever about your conclusion, those two points are spot on. The safest and best way to design any traffic system around cyclists and motorists is to just assume drivers are reckless ass*****. Only then can you start to design a system that works.

xckjoo

jace_da_face wrote: »

Whatever about your conclusion, those two points are spot on. The safest and best way to design any traffic system around cyclists and motorists is to just assume drivers are reckless ass*****. Only then can you start to design a system that works.

That's a fair point. Safety needs to be built in, not regulated for after the fact, when clearly human nature is to act a different way (as we can all see from how people drive). The main problem is the speed cars travel at and peoples impatience at anything they perceive to be stopping them going as fast as they can. The roads should be designed to force people to travel at safer speeds. But nobody wants to hear that