nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Cycling on paths and other cycling issues (updated title)

Rogerrabit

Hi cycling in footpaths is very dangerous for pedestrians especially now with this virus pandemic. Every day I witness these events cyclists on the footpaths spewing out germs as they cycle past pedestrians less than two feet from them. If any of these cyclists have the virus the pedestrians have no chance they will pick up the disease. Why do the police allow this carry on. They should be protecting the elderly instead of turning a blind eye to this outrageous carryon. What do yo think out there in Ireland the country whose population do not know how to wear a facemask.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Hurrache

is_that_so wrote: »

And in fairness to her those possible permits have been reduced from 7 to 4 spots. More than a hint of tough on her about this post.

https://twitter.com/Fingalcoco/status/1279340505969680390?s=19

Of course there's idiots complaining this is all because of the cyclist lobby, the Mafia that they are.

[Deleted User]

magicbastarder wrote: »

was that claim made in the thread? i must have missed it.

194 pages littered with people moaning that they have to stop and yield when using cycle lanes and then people, including yourself suggesting that this is why you use the road. While all ignoring that the road has zebra crossings, pedestrian crossings, junctions and yield signs.

You can deny it and I'm not quoting all of it but you don't even need to go further than page 190. You yourself are pointing out the entrance and exit to kealys as a reason to not use the cycle Lane but ignore the pedestrian crossings and junction that exists see the same location.

Hurrache

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

It seems to be that Ireland should introduce cycle lanes that overrule all other users so the cyclist never has to stop or yield regardless of where or how far the journey.

You've a massive comprehension problem, and you double down on it.

[Deleted User]

magicbastarder wrote: »

random aside, but there's a bus lane past our house. it's only happened maybe four times in seven or eight years, but i've had buses drive up my arse and try to bully me out of the bus lane when i'm trying to reverse into the driveway.
i.e. i stop just past the driveway, stick the car in reverse, and the bus behind drives right up behind me and starts flashing at me to get out of the way. has led to some rather farcical exchanges with bus drivers ('you should have stuck your reversing lights on before you passed your driveway, to let me know')

Presumable you had your indicator on?

[Deleted User]

Hurrache wrote: »

You've a massive comprehension problem, and you double down on it.

I don't think so. I pointed out a nice cycle Lane and it was dismissed because it's not absolutely continuous. Was that not correct? 2 users both complained that there's an entrance and exit to a carpark. The entrance bring st the same location as a pedestrian crossing and junction was ignored.

My point remains, all users Ned to stop and yield on their journeys.

So you tell me, what is it that all 194 pages can't be shortened into? What do you want in a cycle Lane? That will it take for you to use them and be happy?

magicbastarder

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

194 pages littered with people moaning that they have to stop and yield when using cycle lanes and then people, including yourself suggesting that this is why you use the road. While all ignoring that the road has zebra crossings, pedestrian crossings, junctions and yield signs.

as per the comment about comprehension above, you are treating a perfectly legitimate 'i don't want to be treated as a second class road user' complaint with 'i want everything and more'.

magicbastarder

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

Presumable you had your indicator on?

of course i did.

[Deleted User]

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

194 pages littered with people moaning that they have to stop and yield when using cycle lanes and then people, including yourself suggesting that this is why you use the road. While all ignoring that the road has zebra crossings, pedestrian crossings, junctions and yield signs.

Just to be clear, what you describe as 'moaning that they have to stop and yield' is actually pointing out the ludicrous nature of a cycle lane with a yield sign every 2m or 3m approx. That's a bit different, isn't it? You've never experienced that as a driver, have you?

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

Ok so, what do you want from cycle lanes?

Why don't we start with what we don't want;

https://irishcycle.com/2015/11/05/images-25-reasons-why-cyclists-dont-use-cycle-lanes/

Hurrache

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

Ok so, what do you want from cycle lanes?

It has been made clear and obvious on numerous occasions on this thread, people have even posted pics and vids of them, but the kool kids are just too chill to look at them. It's been made clear and obvious as to what the issues are with existing ones.

[Deleted User]

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Just to be clear, what you describe as 'moaning that they have to stop and yield' is actually pointing out the ludicrous nature of a cycle lane with a yield sign every 2m or 3m approx. That's a bit different, isn't it? You've never experienced that as a driver, have you?

Why don't we start with what we don't want;

https://irishcycle.com/2015/11/05/images-25-reasons-why-cyclists-dont-use-cycle-lanes/

No, let's not. Let's start with what you do want.

[Deleted User]

Hurrache wrote: »

It has been made clear and obvious on numerous occasions on this thread, people have even posted pics and vids of them, but the kool kids are just too chill to look at them. It's been made clear and obvious as to what the issues are with existing ones.

So, that's 2 users asked a direct question and both can only reply with more complaints.

[Deleted User]

magicbastarder wrote: »

as per the comment about comprehension above, you are treating a perfectly legitimate 'i don't want to be treated as a second class road user' complaint with 'i want everything and more'.

Again, how is the cycle Lane at the airport not acceptable?

Hurrache

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

So, that's 2 users asked a direct question and both can only reply with more complaints.

It's all in thread, your questions have been answered.

Hurrache

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

Again, how is the cycle Lane at the airport not acceptable?

It was explained to you, you're forced by the letter of the law to get off your bike, push a button, wait for a green man, walk across a couple of roads, then get on your bike again. Ironically on the street view there's a lady cycling on the pedestrian crossing which would outrage people. And that's just that one junction.

[Deleted User]

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

No, let's not. Let's start with what you do want.

OK then. We want cycle lanes that don't look like these ones, and aren't covered with parked cars, broken glass, mushy leaves and dogs being walked on extendable leads;

Or if you want to explore a specific example, follow this thread;

https://twitter.com/dlrcycling/status/1278987904610717696

meeeeh

So all the whinging about how bad it is for cyclists and how terrible infrastructure is and at the same time claiming that your interest groups are successful in their approach and that dumping images and twitter links in the thread works.

Obviously. I think we'll have flying cars before you manage to achieve something.

Hurrache

meeeeh wrote: »

So all the whinging about how bad it is for cyclists and how terrible infrastructure is and at the same time claiming that your interest groups are successful in their approach and that dumping images and twitter links in the thread works.

Obviously. I think we'll have flying cars before you manage to achieve something.

It's bad when you have to make stuff up to try bolster an argument you're trying to make.

Best you bow out of the thread to save yourself from further embarrassment.

[Deleted User]

meeeeh wrote: »

So all the whinging about how bad it is for cyclists and how terrible infrastructure is and at the same time claiming that your interest groups are successful in their approach and that dumping images and twitter links in the thread works.

Obviously. I think we'll have flying cars before you manage to achieve something.

You haven't seen what's happened on the North Quays then, or Blackrock, or the plans for Dundrum villiage or Seapoint?

Casey78

meeeeh wrote: »

So all the whinging about how bad it is for cyclists and how terrible infrastructure is and at the same time claiming that your interest groups are successful in their approach and that dumping images and twitter links in the thread works.

Obviously. I think we'll have flying cars before you manage to achieve something.

Would be better to spend money on funding flying cars,sure then the MAMILs would have the roads to themselves!

Hurrache

A tabloid reader in the belief that all cyclists are male and middle aged shocker.

Casey78

Hurrache wrote: »

A tabloid reader in the belief that all cyclists are male and middle aged shocker.

It was a joke. Are you as easily triggered in everyday life?

meeeeh

Hurrache wrote: »

It's bad when you have to make stuff up to try bolster an argument you're trying to make.

Best you bow out of the thread to save yourself from further embarrassment.

Your insults got a lot more personal lately. I like it when hypocrisy is gone and true personality is revealed.

dashcamdanny

Casey78 wrote: »

It was a joke. Are you as easily triggered in everyday life?

Fanatical behavior .

ewc78

is_that_so wrote: »

It's parked at a bus stop with an advertising poster, that's what they do. Common sense suggests he'll next get out and replace it or has just done so. Not disputing the others but all road users have to deal with that nonsense. No journey is as simple as pointing a wheel or wheels in the direction you want to go.

I'm truly astounded that the Gardai aren't doing more to stop people who are working at a bus stop parking at that bus stop, or men working cutting a hedge parking with all their work equipment at that hedge.
I mean the Kinahane and Hutch fued has nothing on these guys....

I was out for a run this morning and I saw a couple of Electricians parked up changing bulbs in street lights, there was a woman walking on the same side of the road. I gasped in horror wondering what would happen next...then...she crossed the road to the path on the other side of the road and went about her business....

Tarabuses

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Lr Kilmacud Road Part 2

Thank you for posting the photos of the Lower Kilmacud Road. I walk from Drummartin to Stillorgan at least 3 times a week and am very familiar with the inconvenience caused by this inconsiderate parking. Why is it that you always encounter another pedestrian walking in the opposite diection at the very point where these vehicles are parked on the footpath?

I have to say that there has been a large reduction in the number of cyclists I have encountered on the footpath recently but the incidence of vehicles parked on the footpath is increasing. It seems that many motorists think that they must have at least two wheels on the footpath to park properly.

TaurenDruid

You go away from boards for a day and there's another few pages! Luckily most of the posts were from Andy! So looking at Andy's holiday snaps, I'm going to take it on faith there were phones in most of those photos. Your camera is not as good as you think it is. And using a dash-mounted phone for navigation is not illegal. https://www.rsa.ie/Documents/Campaigns/Mobile%20Phone/RSA_Mobile_DL.pdf (and jaysus, that really needs an update!)

No excuse for the majority of the parking on footpaths/bike lanes, obviously, but jaysus, Andy, how exactly would you propose they do the hedge-cutting? Double the workforce and put in a one-lane contraflow with stop-go signs?! Pedestrians can use the coned-off road. Cyclists can use the road, like, y'know, they often do.

There I go again, being all reasonable and agreeing with Andy!

But I will finish off with "But sure at the end of the day nobody was hurt," as is now traditional, such as when a deliveroo cyclist on the phone (phone in hand, not forearm mounted, not handlebar mounted, apparently this matters for cyclists but not drivers?) and cycling on the footpath suddenly has to brake when he realises there's someone in front of him not getting out of the way...

[Deleted User]

ewc78 wrote: »

I'm truly astounded that the Gardai aren't doing more to stop people who are working at a bus stop parking at that bus stop, or men working cutting a hedge parking with all their work equipment at that hedge.
I mean the Kinahane and Hutch fued has nothing on these guys....

I was out for a run this morning and I saw a couple of Electricians parked up changing bulbs in street lights, there was a woman walking on the same side of the road. I gasped in horror wondering what would happen next...then...she crossed the road to the path on the other side of the road and went about her business....

The initial responsibility on relation to JC Decaux fans lies with Dublin Bus, as they contract JCD to provide the service. It should be a clear requirement within the contract for JCD vans not to impede the bus services.

But there is certainly a broader issue about blocking of bus services. Pre lockdown, any day I travelled through Camden/Wexford/Aungier/Georges St, there were multiple commercial vehicles blocking the bus lane. So hundreds, probably thousands of bus passengers are held up on their commutes for the convenience of a couple of drivers.

This absolutely is a significant traffic flow issue, worthy of Garda attention.

If you think that parking at bus stops is a trivial matter, you might want to engage with disability organisations to find out the impact on wheelchair users;

Here's a sample; https://twitter.com/search?q=bus%20stop%20parking%20wheelchair&src=typed_query

In relation to works like the hedge cutting and bulb changing, there are safe and legal ways to do this. If any contractor needs to take public space to do commercial works, whether road or path or bike lane, they need to apply for a road closure order. As part of this, they submit a plan for providing alternative routes, signage, management of traffic.

That's how you do these works safely, minimising the impact on people who need footpaths and don't have the flexibility to hop out into the road - older people, wheelchair users, parents pushing buggies, people using walking frames and more.

[Deleted User]

TaurenDruid wrote: »

You go away from boards for a day and there's another few pages! Luckily most of the posts were from Andy! So looking at Andy's holiday snaps, I'm going to take it on faith there were phones in most of those photos. Your camera is not as good as you think it is. And using a dash-mounted phone for navigation is not illegal. https://www.rsa.ie/Documents/Campaigns/Mobile%20Phone/RSA_Mobile_DL.pdf (and jaysus, that really needs an update!)

Yeah, not the best pictures all right. I save the best ones for the Gardai, and none of these were good enough quality for that, so I'm happy to share them here instead.

And yes, it's not illegal to be tapping the dash mounted phone, or to be having a Facetime chat or Zoom call on a dash mounted phone, which is absolutely insane, and needs urgent addressing.

TaurenDruid wrote: »

No excuse for the majority of the parking on footpaths/bike lanes, obviously, but jaysus, Andy, how exactly would you propose they do the hedge-cutting? Double the workforce and put in a one-lane contraflow with stop-go signs?! Pedestrians can use the coned-off road. Cyclists can use the road, like, y'know, they often do.

I suppose the first question is why do you need to plonk a jeep and trailer on a path to cut a hedge. Can you not use ladders?

If you used a ladder, it would take up most of the footpath, but not the bike lane. So you could route pedestrians onto the bike lane (making sure they have a dropped kerb to go up and down, for wheelchair users, and either coned off section of the road as a bike lane, or just closed the bike lane.

To be honest, it looks it was the handiest parking for them to do the job, which is completely unacceptable.

Hurrache

meeeeh wrote: »

Your insults got a lot more personal lately. I like it when hypocrisy is gone and true personality is revealed.

Cool, can I book myself in with you for a counselling session?

[Deleted User]

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Thanks for asking. The point is that the frequency and extend of illegal pavement parking is a much more significant inconvenience and danger for pedestrians than the pavement cycling mentioned by the OP.

Ah. So it's more whataboutery. Thanks.