Legal situation with traffic lights at on-path cycle lanes.

AndrewJRenko

Folks

I'm wondering about the legal position with traffic lights at on-path cycle lanes, like this one on the N11.

If you look at the road markings, the on-path cycle lane actually stops before the lights. The cycle lane is on the top section of a T-junction.

What happens when the traffic light is red on the road? Are cyclists legally required to stop? Obviously if there are pedestrians around, you would give way and make sure they're not at risk.

But are you really, really supposed to sit on the path and wait for the lights to go green?

In these situations I've always taken the attitude that because I'm not 'inside' the lights they don't apply to me anymore than they would to a pedestrian.

28064212

But the cycle lane ends before the lights - by the time you actually reach the lights, you should be on the road, no?

EDIT: What I said above was incorrect. As pointed out by other users, the blue circle sign means that when the cycle lane ends, the path becomes shared use, and it is perfectly legal to continue to cycle on the path (while giving way to pedestrians)

magicbastarder

The sign would imply that the path ahead is a shared pedestrian/cycle path though? I.e. that cyclists don't drop onto the road.

Padre_Pio

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119096962#Comment_119096962

But cyclists arent allowed on the footpath. Do you either move onto the road, or dismount and walk to the next section of cycle lane?

Squidgy Black

Not familiar with the junction at all (but it looks absolutely dreadful design wise), but do you continue on the path once you come to the end of the cycle lane?

If so traffic lights wouldn’t apply, but if you were merging back onto the road into the bus lane then I’d abide by the lights.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119096950#Comment_119096950

It looks like there’s no transition back onto the road though, ideally the lane should merge back into the road but it just comes to a dead stop and there’s a high enough curb

DaveyDave

This is an interesting question. Personally I don't stop as the bike lane is off road, I don't see why the lights would apply to a path. In my experience there's usually no way for bike traffic coming from the right side to join the path, at least not around the immediate area of the junction so no real risk of collision plus you'd see them joining up ahead to merge in.

magicbastarder

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119096970#Comment_119096970

I'm curious as to what the sign means. It's not an 'end of cycle lane'sign, so my initial reading of it is that cyclists are allowed on the path. As mentioned above, from a cyclist's point of view it's very poor design anyway.

Squidgy Black

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119096985#Comment_119096985

It’s a shared space sign, so legally cyclists are allowed use the path even though there’s no marked cycle lane

28064212

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119096974#Comment_119096974

It looks like there’s no transition back onto the road though, ideally the lane should merge back into the road but it just comes to a dead stop and there’s a high enough curb

Which is why I wouldn't use that cycle lane, or any others that come to "dead ends".

maestroamado

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058246902/legal-situation-with-traffic-lights-at-on-path-cycle-lanes

What that sign means for me is the footpath is shared to that point... i think cyclists can continue to cycle on the path... however the yield sign means if path is busy with walkers they have priority and bikes use the road...

Fighting Tao

It’s a shared path sign and to yield to pedestrians. I’m fairly confident that the lights don’t apply to the shared path.

28064212

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119096962#Comment_119096962

Good point, missed that. Shared use path, so just continue on, giving way to pedestrians. I don't believe the traffic lights have any effect in that scenario

ted1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119096950#Comment_119096950

No, the cycle lane becomes a shared space

breezy1985

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119096974#Comment_119096974

That's the standard design being used around Limerick in the suburbs even on brand new roads.

RobertFoster

I've the same question for these lights. They span the cycle track and there's a stop line about 5 or 6 bike lengths after them, but do they apply to the track?

https://goo.gl/maps/jJqrkJZVQFabzenb8

Economics101

The inverted triangle is generally a Yield sign. Confusing if it also has another meaning i.e. "shared space". Also the lights may well apply to pedestrians if they incorporate a pedestrian crossing, It is not clear to me if they do in this case.

Overall some rather bad and unclear design. Nothing surprising there.

maestroamado

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119097037#Comment_119097037

Yes but if the path full of walkers and there is no room on the path the bikes move to road...

The traffic lights nothing to do with this so use as normal...

magicbastarder

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119097140#Comment_119097140

looks like the cycle track dumps you out onto the road just after the junction, so the thinking might be that cyclists heading through the junction should stop at the red so as not to interact with motorists coming from their right who have the green.

Wishbone Ash

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119096983#Comment_119096983

Perhaps they apply to the path if the lights are at a pedestrian crossing? - i.e. pedestrians may run across and into the path of a cyclist that they aren't expecting to be there.

magicbastarder

this is a junction where i think the intention is clear, but i wouldn't be surprised if some cyclists ignore the lights - they won't interact with traffic coming from the right because the cycle lane is kerb protected, so in terms of running a red there's in theory no danger on that front - but it is a pedestrian crossing too, so running a red would result in danger there.

https://www.google.com/maps/@53.3875198,-6.2581393,3a,69.6y,310.13h,89.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sg9YvA3MlfvN9Zao6W42boQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

since that street view was taken, they've added one of those cyclist specific green lights which goes green a second before a general green - albeit now hidden by foliage from the tree - but there's no need for it. those lights are intended to allow cyclists get away from the junction slightly quicker (as far as i understand); but there's no benefit to that in a protected cycle lane.

maestroamado

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119097214#Comment_119097214

You just made me think of something... if there is an incident involving a bicycle and a pedestrian on any of these routes causing injury is there insurance...

Sleeper12

It looks like the cycle lane ends. It then becomes a footpath for pedestrians. Obviously you can't cycle on the path so you should move out onto the bus lane, I would have thought.

breezy1985

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119097263#Comment_119097263

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119097169#Comment_119097169

The triangle does not have 2 meanings and does not mean shared space.

The blue sign on the lamppost on the left means shared space. So yes you can cycle on that "path"

Wishbone Ash

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119097263#Comment_119097263

Did you miss the blue round sign indicating a shared space?

busy bee 33

Sure they don’t obey the lights anyway Joe. And they don’t even pay road tax.

breezy1985

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119097637#Comment_119097637

That's the spirit caller.

Sleeper12

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119097585#Comment_119097585

Yes I did 👍

sam t smith

As a pedestrian this is a ridiculous design. Just encourages cyclists to illegally cycle on other footpaths.

Wishbone Ash

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119097969#Comment_119097969

Not to mention that, even when it is a legally shared footpath, many pedestrians do not seemed to be aware of the signage and just assume you are cycling illegally on the footpath anyway.

Seth Brundle

There is another one on Bóthar Katharine Tynan with the junction to Fettercairn. A continuous cycle lane which is mostly on the footpath but reduces to road level at the junction...

https://maps.app.goo.gl/kVKmE5VdfGLQEffp8

Padre_Pio

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119098430#Comment_119098430

Regardless of the intent, the design is very poor. There's hardly room for a cyclist and a buggy to pass with the number of signposts and lamp posts on that pavement. Honestly, I'd say it's irresponsible for someone to cycle on that path as it would be difficult to do it safely.

sam t smith

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119098420#Comment_119098420

Of course it does. I see cyclists illegally cycling on footpaths every day. Half of them don’t realise it is an offence, the other half don’t give a ****.

maestroamado

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119097585#Comment_119097585

I also think its shared space but the pedestrians have priority as after all it was originally a foot path... its an absolutely stupid design but thats not a big surprise...

magicbastarder

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119098511#Comment_119098511

i know i'm like a stuck record mentioning this example, but this is a shared path, and fully bi-directional - in essence, it carries all foot traffic that might be heading past dublin airport to and from swords or other towns north of the airport - and is also a cycle lane which in theory caters for northbound and southbound cycle traffic on the same route.

https://www.google.com/maps/@53.4324523,-6.22992,3a,75y,336.7h,74.73t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sj4sYFh-jcSrvQjr7DNqlhQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3Dj4sYFh-jcSrvQjr7DNqlhQ%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D41.862907%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

Padre_Pio

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119098679#Comment_119098679

The illegally parked van is the cherry on the cake.

ted1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119097260#Comment_119097260

The Lights apply to the road if you move into it.

ted1

Just as a FYI. the cycle path further down has had a upgrade

Del2005

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119098420#Comment_119098420

What law is a pedestrian breaking if they walk in a cycle lane? The law is vehicles can't use cycle lanes nothing about pedestrians.

DaveyDave

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119098462#Comment_119098462

I stop for this one because the lane is on the road, inside the width of the traffic light.

tnegun

I often wondered that here too, the cycle lights are sync'd with the pedestrian lights and not the traffic lights so you must dismount and walk around the fencing hit the button and walk back to your bike and wait for a green light to do it legally! I contacted the council about it and it's by design! It's one of the many "issues" with the cycle lanes in Maynooth.

maestroamado

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119098732#Comment_119098732

I was asking in relation only to the pic in OP where for me the footpath is shared and part up to yield sign has bike lane...

If say a person wanders into bike lane or if a boke hits on footpath... Likely nice bill for DCC... looks crazy for me...

Wishbone Ash

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119098814#Comment_119098814

A bicycle is a 'vehicle' under the road traffic acts.

Breezer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119098893#Comment_119098893

How on earth did the council phrase that?

”I have to perform this mad, seemingly unnecessary dance to continue through this junction on a bicycle.”

”Yes, that was our intention.”

🤔

yesto24

I would have thought it was obvious that the cycle track has a yield on it (the triangle) and beyond that the round blue sign shows shared cycletrack and footpath. The cycle path picks up again just past the junction and bus stop. Cyclists just have to slow down a bit here be mindful of the other footpath users and are then on their way again. They don't have to stop at the lights.The footpath is too narrow to have both a cycle track and footpath. So it's a good compromise.

The road beside it was a two lane dual carriage way originally. It is now too narrow bus lane and two driving lanes.

It was originally built about 1977 replacing a 1950s road. All things considered it's about as good as you are going to get there.

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119099042#Comment_119099042

In practical terms, I'd fully agree with you.

My question is whether the law takes this practical approach or not.

maestroamado

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119099011#Comment_119099011

I dont think vehicles are allowed on footpaths is in OP...

tnegun

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119099012#Comment_119099012

I complained about several aspects of the junction, traffic light polls and ESB boxes left in the middle of the new bike lane and they just sent me a generic reply stating that it was designed to best practice, by qualified engineers following DMURS with no specific reference to any of the issues I highlighted.

maestroamado

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119098893#Comment_119098893

That post makes no sense to me... if you are cycling straight ahead you go with the traffic... why would you need get off the bike...

Also how do cyclists manage in other direction as i do not see any cycle route...

macvin

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058246902/legal-situation-with-traffic-lights-at-on-path-cycle-lanes

I just can't see how this is not understood. It has both signage and pavement markings.

Signage - clearly states shared space for pedestrians and cyclists. In a shared area you reduce speed and be extra vigilant for pedestrians.

Road marking - very clearly has a break on the forward line. That indicates you move though that line break to proceed ahead.

If the cyclist was to move into the bus lane, the lane would vere to the right with a yield sign at the end of the cycle lane and a sign with a line through a bicycle would be there instead of the sign that very very clearly shows a shared space.

My guess is because it has obstacles for a short period, it is not possible to have separate cycle and pedestrian delineation and that the separate cycle lane continues no long after the obstacles have been passed

And I'm not a cyclist

Btw - if a garda stopped you, I'd be suggesting to that garda to go back to templemore and learn the very basic principles behind road signage

maestroamado

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119100843#Comment_119100843

The very fact that a bicycle is allowed to share the same space as a pedestrian is crazy... tor me the yield sign is pedestrians have priority and if footpath busy cyclists will have to walk until its safe...

I was talking to a guy a few years ago and he said a lot of our Irish roads were built for bikes by the brits 100 years ago when only a few of us had bicycles... He said for the last 50 years these same roads have trucks cars tractors and now the bicycles want to take the roads back for themselves.. This conversation in west of Irl...