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; } } }

Journalism and Cycling 2: the difficult second album

magicbastarder

As the previous thread has gone over the 10k mark

old thread can be found here

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Type 17

Tell me how wrote: »

Dont think there is that room on the road in question without removing the green area and trees.

I'd rather if that didn't have to happen.

There's loads of room (more than in the video above), and everyone has a driveway, so there isn't even heavy demand for parking on the roadway. No need to touch the grass or trees:

Google Street View

Tell me how

Type 17 wrote: »

There's loads of room (more than in the video above), and everyone has a driveway, so there isn't even heavy demand for parking on the roadway. No need to touch the grass or trees:

Google Street View

Theres room if on street parking is prohibited. Not if it isn't.
You'd need three distinct areas, parking, traffic movement and cycle lane.

I think we all know what the reaction would be to remove access to a parking location which has been there for decades.

Type 17

Tell me how wrote: »

... You'd need three distinct areas, parking, traffic movement and cycle lane.

That's exactly the point of a Cycle Street! - the motor traffic movement and cycle lane are the same space, so you only need two distinct areas

Duckjob

breezy1985 wrote: »

What does that actually mean though. Is it no overtaking bikes or something?

It means that the street is explicitly for the use of "people" and cars are only allowed use it on the basis that they are "guests" and behave as such, with good manners. No speeding, no dangerous overtaking, no intimidating, and they sit quietly and respectfully behind a bike the whole length of the street if they have to. It's basically the polar opposite of how Joe and Mary motorist are used to being treated in Ireland.

Ferris

I would have thought that a cycle street would've been worthy of consideration as a possible solution to the Sandymount Strand cycleway.

breezy1985

Tell me how wrote: »

Theres room if on street parking is prohibited. Not if it isn't.
You'd need three distinct areas, parking, traffic movement and cycle lane.

I think we all know what the reaction would be to remove access to a parking location which has been there for decades.

No your not getting it there won't be a cycle lane because you don't need one. The road has no traffic and a restrictive speed limit so cars and bikes can safely share the current road.

I already do what I am proposing the only difference is I have to dismount to rejoin the road

Type 17

Ferris wrote: »

I would have thought that a cycle street would've been worthy of consideration as a possible solution to the Sandymount Strand cycleway.

No way - Strand Road is not a road only used for access to residential areas, it's a busy, through-traffic road.
I'm all for better cycling facilities, but imagine being stuck behind cyclists doing 15km/h for almost 3km.

Thelonious Monk

Type 17 wrote: »

I'm all for better cycling facilities, but imagine being stuck behind cyclists doing 15km/h for almost 3km.

I'll be up all night now, it's a harrowing thought

Type 17

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

I'll be up all night now, it's a harrowing thought

I was waiting for that...

Ferris

Type 17 wrote: »

No way - Strand Road is not a road only used for access to residential areas, it's a busy, through-traffic road.
I'm all for better cycling facilities, but imagine being stuck behind cyclists doing 15km/h for almost 3km.

I cycled it for 2yrs twice every day, the amount of times a car beat me over the 3km I can count on one finger. It’s a joke to drive and pretty much sums up all that is wrong with commuting by car in Dublin. Sooner it’s sorted the better but the residents need to be accommodated and I think the cycle street concept has merit.

Seth Brundle

Every few days the Irish Times publishes a letter from readers who are so offended by the behaviour of a cyclist they once saw or because the nasty councils are trying to impliment infrastructure that will protect vulnerable road users. It's nice to see an opposing view get published but I anticipate a lot of vitriol getting published in the coming days now...

Sharing the roads

Sir – There seems to be a trend emerging on your letters page from various corespondents in relation to cycling. In the last number of months a significant number of negative letters have been published regarding cyclists and bells, breaking red lights, and the audacity of one local authority to provide safe cycling infrastructure.

Where is the alarm with regards to drivers?

According the the Road Safety Authority data, in 2019 drivers killed 27 pedestrians and eight cyclists.

Drivers contribute pollution which, according the Environmental Protection Agency, is responsible for 1,180 excess deaths per year.

Drivers tend to feel entitled to abandon their vehicles on footpaths as they spend “just a minute” at the shops with no regard to those pushing prams or those who are disabled.

I have yet to meet a cyclist who defends bad behaviour in other cyclists.

Yet whenever I try to bring up the above points with regards to driver behaviour, it is met with anecdote upon anecdote of how one time a cyclist broke a red light at an empty junction without a helmet or insurance and not a cent paid in so-called “road tax”. – Yours, etc,

JOHN LEGGE,
Dún Laoghaire,
Co Dublin.

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/sharing-the-roads-1.4382146

what_traffic

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Every few days the Irish Times publishes a letter from readers who are so offended by the behaviour of a cyclist they once saw or because the nasty councils are trying to impliment infrastructure that will protect vulnerable road users. It's nice to see an opposing view get published but I anticipate a lot of vitriol getting published in the coming days now...

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/sharing-the-roads-1.4382146

Agree. The Irish Times Punch and Judy Show.
It could have its distinct space in the Letters section at this stage.

breezy1985

I bet John Legge is on here somewhere.

If you are fair play to ya

magicbastarder

i wonder if he's a blond.

DoraDelite

magicbastarder wrote: »

i joined the drumcondra social facebook group on the premise of this post and it has been disappointingly/pleasingly positive re the griffith avenue cycle path. almost everyone is polite, and plenty of people quite positive about it. there are a few muppets, of course, but far fewer than you'd get commenting on your average newspaper article about cycling.

It's kicked off again the last couple of days with the sight of a few bollards, it has awoken the "road tax" brigade.

Small observation but most of the foaming at the mouth stuff seems to come from old men, why is that?

magicbastarder

again though, most of the thanks or likes are appearing on the positive posts.
there's an 'i'm alright jack' cyclist there too though; one of those 'well i don't feel threatened cycling on griffith avenue so the lanes are superfluous' types who doesn't seem to appreciate that it's not his sort who the lanes will benefit.

my favourite posts though are the ones along the lines of 'let me tell you, the green party will only be happy when they take all our cars from us, nationalise our houses, impose forced sterilisation on us and change the language to swedish'.

Chips Lovell

They're also going to ban meat and make us drive on the right side of the road.

buffalo

breezy1985 wrote: »

I bet John Legge is on here somewhere.

If you are fair play to ya

I don't think so, we have a couple of mutual friends.

I don't know him personally, but I get the impression he's part of the growing group of people in Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown who don't see themselves as 'cyclists', but appreciate the convenience and environmental benefits of the new cycling infrastructure.

Seaswimmer

buffalo wrote: »

I don't think so, we have a couple of mutual friends.

I don't know him personally, but I get the impression he's part of the growing group of people in Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown who don't see themselves as 'cyclists', but appreciate the convenience and environmental benefits of the new cycling infrastructure.

Yes. And feel free to make a submission. dosent matter if you are in DLR or not. if you cycle then at some stage you may be using some of these proposed new facilities..
https://scanmail.trustwave.com/?c=17268&d=3cbs3yNGtsX8-3L5Cr8gUtQvFSeW6BCo2oBhgGExng&s=70&u=https%3a%2f%2feur03%2esafelinks%2eprotection%2eoutlook%2ecom%2f%3furl%3dhttps%253A%252F%252Fbit%2ely%252FdlrWalkCycle%26data%3d02%257C01%257CRebecca%2eDillonRobinson%2540ramboll%2eco%2euk%257C88bc3a787a1a44fd9a3c08d860a5189d%257Cc8823c91be814f89b0246c3dd789c106%257C0%257C0%257C637365609485277308%26sdata%3ddu24y7q7WW1IvnzqsmdOLs1MdlDjBkaWwL8ryuttB48%253D%26reserved%3d0

breezy1985

buffalo wrote: »

I don't think so, we have a couple of mutual friends.

I don't know him personally, but I get the impression he's part of the growing group of people in Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown who don't see themselves as 'cyclists', but appreciate the convenience and environmental benefits of the new cycling infrastructure.

Tell him Breezy said keep fighting the good fight.
I'm pretty sure my opinion matters to him : )

Mr. Grieves

Ferris wrote: »

I cycled it for 2yrs twice every day, the amount of times a car beat me over the 3km I can count on one finger. It’s a joke to drive and pretty much sums up all that is wrong with commuting by car in Dublin. Sooner it’s sorted the better but the residents need to be accommodated and I think the cycle street concept has merit.

A cycle street is only for streets without through traffic and hence very low volumes of cars. To make Strand Road a cycle street would require putting bollards at some point to prevent through traffic - very appealing but not the solution residents opposed to the cycle lane are looking for.

I'm not sure sure if this was shared here before, but it gives a nice overview of how Dutch concepts of single function roads massively benefits pedestrians and cyclists without always needing dedicated cycle lanes:

https://robertweetman.wordpress.com/2019/03/19/i-want-my-street-to-be-like-this/

zell12

Truck driver charged after ramming cyclist in central Christchurch NZ

The truck can be seen following the cyclist closely throughout the video, which lasts for nearly two minutes.
The cyclist was not using the dedicated cycleway that runs along St Asaph St. The NZ Transport Agency recommends cyclists use cycle lanes or paths when they are available, but they do not have to do so.

CramCycle

That was terrifying. Had similar once from a Bus Eireann bus. I looked behind and he is so close I couldn't get out of the way. Literally the fear that the slow in forward speed if I changed direction would mean I would get pulled under. I would have been out of the way in about 5 seconds. I don't know how the guy in the video didn't get flattened after that, that was insane.

Duckjob

zell12 wrote: »

Truck driver charged after ramming cyclist in central Christchurch NZ

I'm speechless, but not only because of the actions of the driver (which are appalling).

I'm speechless because of what the video demonstrates yet again - that logically, our societies have been so soft on bad driver behavior , to the point where driving is seen as such an inalienable right, that people like that driver feel so empowered and comfortable in their right to drive that they can use their vehicle to do that to a human being.

Lifetime driving ban + prison term. Examples need to be made. It's the only way.

[Deleted User]

Not really the point but "The cyclist was not using the dedicated cycleway that runs along St Asaph St" Didn't see much of a cycle lane in the video? Few parked cars, a left turn lane, and some Sheffield stands in addition to the regular footpath. I can see why he was on the road there as I would be and taking the lane.

Truly sickening and pure red mist stuff on the part of the driver born out of entitlement.

Thelonious Monk

This is wonderful to see, especially in the West of Ireland. Wouldn't it be great if there was a nationwide push to get kids cycling to school? The health of the nation would improve as would traffic.

https://mobile.twitter.com/ennisns/status/1317149807501336576

Duckjob

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

This is wonderful to see, especially in the West of Ireland. Wouldn't it be great if there was a nationwide push to get kids cycling to school? The health of the nation would improve as would traffic.

https://mobile.twitter.com/ennisns/status/1317149807501336576

Badly needed.

I'm also firmly of the belief that a nationwide network of safe cycle paths connecting rural towns and villages would do wonders to breath new economic life into those areas.

magicbastarder

Deleted User wrote: »

Didn't see much of a cycle lane in the video?

the cycle lane is on the inside of the parked cars:

https://www.google.com/maps/@-43.5363658,172.6383246,3a,75y,123.63h,86.57t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sz-DGWcX2OeLfvr2h1wmugg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

breezy1985

zell12 wrote: »

Truck driver charged after ramming cyclist in central Christchurch NZ

He is being charged with dangerous driving but surely that comes under some sort of assault. That was a clear attempt to cause serious injury

check_six

breezy1985 wrote: »

He is being charged with dangerous driving but surely that comes under some sort of assault. That was a clear attempt to cause serious injury

Yeah. He's signalled his intention to do harm. He's taken a few runs at it, and finally he's made his assault. He wasn't driving too fast or recklessly beyond his limitations, he took a cold look at the situation and decided that an assault with intent to do damage was his chosen course of action. Seems clear cut to me.

However, we all know that you can do whatever you like to someone if you're driving a motor vehicle and have a good chance of getting away with it. If this fellow even approaches getting a ban I would be amazed. He'll plead that he needs to drive for work and that'll be the end of it.

My opinion is that if someone needs to drive for work (or drives professionally for a living) and they carry out an attack like the one in the video then they should get as long a ban as is permitted under the law. They spend much longer on the road and are therefore a much higher risk of reoffending and should be held to a higher standard.

You're going to lose your job? Probably should have thought about that before committing an assault on a vulnerable person.