Cycling on paths and other cycling issues (updated title)

LeinsterDub

Better Than Christ wrote: »

And I'm legally entitled (contractually obliged, tbh) to stop at bus stops - even if I've just overtaken a cyclist who has chosen to use the bus lane. Some cyclists on here seem to have issues with that. Is there a course they could do to resolve those issues?

Don't over take cyclist just before stops so? Why would you add the stress of mamuvering a bus around a cyclist only to pull in a few seconds later?

meeeeh

Hurrache wrote: »

Oh, you've changed tact again from being flippant to serious?

I was being truthful that's all.

Casey78

Hurrache wrote: »

But sadly this is the behaviour that threads like this leads to, roads are full of cowards, reflective of these type of threads.

https://twitter.com/SafeCyclingEire/status/1278238610899304449

Hope the younglad is ok of course before I'm accused of condoning what happened, but what you posted is ridiculous even for this thread.

Hurrache

Casey78 wrote: »

Hope the younglad is ok of course before I'm accused of condoning what happened, but what you posted is ridiculous even for this thread.

This is the issue, people think there's no association between peoples attitude to cyclists and ultimately violence towards. It's not, and it either manifests itself in dangerous driving around cyclists, or physical violence.

I of course don't know the reason here, I was being pretty Maude Flanders'ers, but it's not unheard of, and naïve to think otherwise.

AndrewJRenko

TaurenDruid wrote: »

So, I get the "some cycle lanes are so **** I'm safer on the road" argument - for some cycle lanes. What about (to coin a phrase!) the ones that aren't? What about the ones where it's demonstrably safer to use the segregated cycle lane?

Case in point: North Strand Road, inbound. Approaching the canal and railway bridge, steep enough hill, with a two lanes. One is a bus lane. There's a segregated cycle lane, behind a wall, from the entrance to Costcutter all the way up to the traffic lights. This morning (and many morningS), there's a guy huffing and puffing his way up the hill, in the middle of the bus lane, with two full double deckers following him at something like 5kmh.

I'd totally get it if there wasn't a cycle lane, but there is, and it's perfectly fine and unobstructed, and much safer. He's possibly one here now, wondering why some buses get so aggressive with some cyclists...

Do you mean this cycle lane, which seems to be designed for particularly skinny cyclists ?


https://twitter.com/Nialltoner/status/1131545713085751297?s=19


https://twitter.com/chaarlone/status/1121476665337626624?s=19

Can anyone think of any possible reason why cyclists might not choose this lane?

https://twitter.com/AlanDub13/status/1152945554382557184?s=19

Anyone at all?

https://twitter.com/moran_anto/status/1060454647066955776?s=19

Last call for suggestions?

https://twitter.com/SkepticalSeamus/status/1169224858779230208?s=19

07Lapierre

TaurenDruid wrote: »

Case in point: North Strand Road, inbound. Approaching the canal and railway bridge, steep enough hill, with a two lanes. One is a bus lane. There's a segregated cycle lane, behind a wall, from the entrance to Costcutter all the way up to the traffic lights. This morning (and many morningS), there's a guy huffing and puffing his way up the hill, in the middle of the bus lane, with two full double deckers following him at something like 5kmh.

I'd totally get it if there wasn't a cycle lane, but there is, and it's perfectly fine and unobstructed, and much safer. He's possibly one here now, wondering why some buses get so aggressive with some cyclists...

Its crap! its a pavement with a white line painted on it.

this is a bike lane:

https://youtu.be/By1DoD3X4Go

FinnC

07Lapierre wrote: »

this is a bike lane:

https://youtu.be/By1DoD3X4Go

That looks class.

TaurenDruid

I must actually find out how this multiquote thing works at some point.

But:

Yes, I mean that cycle lane, Andy and magic.

I know you may find this hard to believe, Andy, but just because a vehicle is photographed somewhere, it doesn't get frozen in place! There were no lorries, trucks, vans, cars, helicopters, jeeps, roadworks, pathworks or anything else blocking the cycle lane.

There were no pedestrians.

There were a couple of other cyclists.

It did look a little like that guy, as it happens.

There are traffic lights at the top, and a cyclist can see them, and can tell when it's safe to enter the road. Which is just before the lights, so if he's going to get hit by left-turning traffic (inbound) that traffic is already taking out any pedestrians at the crossing, and the traffic light, and if it's right-turning traffic (outbound) then they have a filter light.

It's not a terrible design, in other words.

The one at Lombard Street is - I dunno wtf they were thinking with that.

I don't think anyone came back about to my question about how come the lobby/activist groups aren't actively invited to be involved in design decisions. It hopefully isn't that they never got invited back after being so incredibly negative about everything... "You're giving us a segregated cycle lane, separated from the traffic by a wall, but sometimes people might step on it or have to make deliveries? YOU MONSTERS!"

ewc78

07Lapierre wrote: »

this is a bike lane:

https://youtu.be/By1DoD3X4Go

That would be ideal for running on!!

TaurenDruid

Also - amazing how quickly Andy came back with a pic of where I meant.

Do you have the whole of Dublin's cycling lanes all indexed by tweet, youtube upload and facebook post, with matching photos and videis?! Let's try another... North Circular Road, junction of Russell St. Aaaand... GO!

Hurrache

TaurenDruid wrote: »

Also - amazing how quickly Andy came back with a pic of where I meant.

Do you have the whole of Dublin's cycling lanes all indexed by tweet, youtube upload and facebook post, with matching photos and videis?! Let's try another... North Circular Road, junction of Russell St. Aaaand... GO!

When pretty much all cycling infrastructure in the city is ****e, you don't need to go looking for any issues, they're there all day, every day.

Hurrache

A rather coincidental story pops up today in Forbes, maybe experts are even watching from afar

Some motorists object to the presence of cyclists on roads, claiming a reduction in speed causes traffic snarl-ups. However, a study said to be the first to use on-road speed measurement data, has found that the loss of time to be “negligible.”

“Bicycles are not likely to lead to reduced passenger car travel speed, despite their differences in performance capabilities,” says the study, conducted in Portland, Oregon, on roads without bicycle lanes.
........

overtakes by motorists desperate to get past, even in dense traffic, when motor vehicles are likely to get stuck ahead anyway. The “must get in front” maneuver, or MGIF, is well known to regular cyclists.

The Portland study was published June 12 in the Transportation Research Record, the journal of the National Academy of Sciences’ Transportation Research Board.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2020/07/01/cyclists-dont-cause-congestion-must-get-in-front-maneuvers-by-motorists-pointless-finds-study/#1f9036b21e3e

LeinsterDub

07Lapierre wrote: »

Its crap! its a pavement with a white line painted on it.

this is a bike lane:

https://youtu.be/By1DoD3X4Go

Now now its fairly simple. Cycling in the footpath is reckless and dangerous, unless someone randomly painted a white line on it in which case it becomes reckless and dangerous not to use it

LeinsterDub

Hurrache wrote: »

A rather coincidental story pops up today in Forbes, maybe experts are even watching from afar



https://www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2020/07/01/cyclists-dont-cause-congestion-must-get-in-front-maneuvers-by-motorists-pointless-finds-study/#1f9036b21e3e

And in shocking and surprising news. Traffic caused by cars which are the traffic. Shocked for sure

Better Than Christ

Hurrache wrote: »

The issue that you like to provoke by admitting to purposely obstructing them because they're in the bus lane?

I'm not purposely obstructing them; I'm just doing my job, and not showing them the added courtesy that I show towards the majority of cyclists (i.e. the ones who don't feel the need to use bus lanes).

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Don't over take cyclist just before stops so? Why would you add the stress of mamuvering a bus around a cyclist only to pull in a few seconds later?

You mean don't overtake a cyclist, full-stop? Because there's always a bus stop within a few hundred metres. If there is enough space to overtake and also pull back in safely, it's not stressful at all.

LeinsterDub

Better Than Christ wrote: »

You mean don't overtake a cyclist, full-stop? Because there's always a bus stop within a few hundred metres. If there is enough space to overtake and also pull back in safely, it's not stressful at all.

No it's fairly clear. Don't overtake if you'll have to pull in pretty much directly after overtaking. As a professional driver you'll know the difference.

Better Than Christ

LeinsterDub wrote: »

No it's fairly clear. Don't overtake if you'll have to pull in pretty much directly after overtaking. As a professional driver you'll know the difference.

Once I'm back in the bus lane, having safely cleared the obstruction, it is perfectly legal to pull in at the next bus stop. Just like it's perfectly legal to cycle in a bus lane.

Hurrache

Better Than Christ wrote: »

I'm not purposely obstructing them; I'm just doing my job, and not showing them the added courtesy that I show towards the majority of cyclists (i.e. the ones who don't feel the need to use bus lanes).

I do think you're talking nonsense too. If there's a road with a bus and cycle lane, all cyclists on the road will be in the bus and cycle lane. There's no cyclists who will cycle in the adjoining traffic lane rather than the adjacent bus and cycle lane.

You've yet to show us the number of bus only 'bus' lanes?

LeinsterDub

Better Than Christ wrote: »

Once I'm back in the bus lane, having safely cleared the obstruction, it is perfectly legal to pull in at the next bus stop. Just like it's perfectly legal to cycle in a bus lane.

It's not perfectly legal to overtake and then come to an immediate stop. There are two different situations at play here. Fish hooking is illegal

Better Than Christ

Hurrache wrote: »

I do think you're talking nonsense too. If there's a road with a bus and cycle lane, all cyclists on the road will be in the bus and cycle lane. There's no cyclists who will cycle in the adjoining traffic lane rather than the adjacent bus and cycle lane.

You've yet to show us the number of bus only 'bus' lanes?

I'm talking about stretches of road like this, where there is a cycle lane and also a bus lane.

It's not perfectly legal to overtake and then come to an immediate stop. There are two different situations at play here. Fish hooking is illegal

I never said anything about coming to an immediate stop.

LeinsterDub

Better Than Christ wrote: »

I never said anything about coming to an immediate stop.

I did. Perhaps you reply to what I actually said

AndrewJRenko

TaurenDruid wrote: »

Yes, I mean that cycle lane, Andy and magic.

I know you may find this hard to believe, Andy, but just because a vehicle is photographed somewhere, it doesn't get frozen in place! There were no lorries, trucks, vans, cars, helicopters, jeeps, roadworks, pathworks or anything else blocking the cycle lane.

There were no pedestrians.

There were a couple of other cyclists.

You might find this hard to believe, but if you find that your route is regularly blocked by illegally parked vehicles, you're probably going to choose a different route in future.

TaurenDruid wrote: »

I don't think anyone came back about to my question about how come the lobby/activist groups aren't actively invited to be involved in design decisions. It hopefully isn't that they never got invited back after being so incredibly negative about everything... "You're giving us a segregated cycle lane, separated from the traffic by a wall, but sometimes people might step on it or have to make deliveries? YOU MONSTERS!"

Lots of these designs are historical, so there was probably no consultation at the time. There is consultation around new developments, and they get loads of feedback, most of which they ignore.

No-one 'has to make deliveries' on a cycle lane. There are always other options, legal options, safe options - even if these might involve a slightly longer walk for the delivery crew.

Hurrache

Better Than Christ wrote: »

I'm talking about stretches of road like this, where there is a cycle lane and also a bus lane.

It's bad when you refer to the N11 cycle 'lane' as a back up to your argument.

I also refer you to this
https://goo.gl/maps/FzaH2LuaLEjpcQrL9

micar

Better Than Christ wrote: »

I'm talking about stretches of road like this, where there is a cycle lane and also a bus lane.



I never said anything about coming to an immediate stop.

This is what we are talking about

https://twitter.com/HughManning/status/1230155661398487040?s=19

Hurrache

Based on what the poster has been saying, I wouldn't be a bit surprised if that was him driving. It's a dick move that fits in exactly what this guy describes.

Casey78

https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2020/0701/1150834-road-deaths-eu/

I guess Greece is the place to go if you want to cycle, surprised The Netherlands and Denmark are so high for cyclists deaths considering how they are famed for their cycling infrastructure, especially in the Netherlands. Yes there is a higher percentage of people cycling but I assumed it would also be a safer place to cycle because of all the brilliant cycling infrastructure.

Anyway it's good to see Ireland as one of the safest countries in Europe even if one death is too many of course.

Better Than Christ

LeinsterDub wrote: »

I did. Perhaps you reply to what I actually said

It's irrelevant because I don't do it. Here's what I do when I get stuck behind a bike on a road like the Stillorgan dual carriageway and it's possible to safely overtake - I indicate, fully change lanes when it's safe to do so, and when I've cleared the obstacle, I indicate again and pull back in. Having already completed the overtake (i.e. I am now in front of the bike), I indicate again and pull in at the bus stop further down the road. I accept that it must be very annoying for the cyclist, but it's perfectly legal, just like cycling in a bus lane.

Hurrache wrote:

It's bad when you refer to the N11 cycle 'lane' as a back up to your argument.

The bus lane is no better. Full of potholes and as you can see here, nowhere near wide enough for moving buses.

Based on what the poster has been saying, I wouldn't be a bit surprised if that was him driving. It's a dick move that fits in exactly what this guy describes.

Nope. That driver didn't give enough space while overtaking in the first place, and was already on the brakes before clearing the cyclist. I always make sure I'm well in front before stopping. I've never had any complaints either.

Hurrache

Better Than Christ wrote: »

The bus lane is no better.

Ah it is when you're on a bike, the token cycle lane is like a rollercoaster with all the ups and downs.

There's always a tweet...
https://twitter.com/BicesterBug/status/1278022669754085377

LeinsterDub

Better Than Christ wrote: »

It's irrelevant because I don't do it. Here's what I do when I get stuck behind a bike on a road like the Stillorgan dual carriageway and it's possible to safely overtake - I indicate, fully change lanes when it's safe to do so, and when I've cleared the obstacle, I indicate again and pull back in. Having already completed the overtake (i.e. I am now in front of the bike), I indicate again and pull in at the bus stop further down the road. I accept that it must be very annoying for the cyclist, but it's perfectly legal, just like cycling in a bus lane.

Why would that be annoying? I'm able to share the road.

Better Than Christ

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Why would that be annoying? I'm able to share the road.

I would've thought losing momentum and having to start all over again was annoying. That's why, on roads where there is no bus or cycle lane, I tend to stay behind the cyclist, regardless of whether or not there is an opportunity to safely overtake. This road (along with its state-of-the-art cycle lane) on the 145/155 route between Bray and Shankill is a good example of that.