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

Near Misses Volume 2 (So close you can feel it)

magicbastarder

Dummy opening post

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

VonLuck

buffalo wrote: »

I'm not sure that's true when it comes to the Irish experience.

We have so few fully dedicated lanes that you usually end up being put back on the road at junctions. Junctions are the most likely place for a cyclists to be in a collision IIRC.

When you stay on the road, you can take the lane and position to prevent a left hook from all but the most determined/****ty drivers. When you're off-road, you're out of sight, out of mind for a lot of drivers. Often you'll be put back on the road on the inside of left-turning traffic, which of course is a dangerous place to be at the best of times, but probably far worse when a driver hasn't seen you ahead of them on the road at any point.

I know what you mean, but I still think they're much safer for say your very casual cyclist. Say for instance a family out for a Sunday bike ride. Those lanes are perfect for them. Segregated from road traffic, slow speeds, potential to cycle side by side without being harassed by ignorant drivers. At junctions it's effectively treated as though you're a pedestrian - stop, wait, look left and right, cross. Agree that it would be a major inconvenience for your 30kmph cyclist though.

breezy1985

VonLuck wrote: »

.

Hard to even retort to that because it's not comparable at all. Slower speeds on motorways can be more dangerous and you would need everyone to buy-in for it to really be safer.

I don't know if you're aware of this, but some people value safety over speed when on a bicycle. Up to you which one you prioritise and it doesn't really bother me which one you choose.

It is comparable. You are saying cyclists who can very safely and legally travel on a road at 30kph should move to the path because of dangerous drivers. You then say they should go at a significantly reduced speed in case pedestrians do the wrong thing and walk on the cycle lane.

The cyclists must suffer despite being the only of the 3 groups in the scenario following the rules.

I know someone is gonna come on with "blaa blaa strawman blaa blaa" because it's everyones favorite word now but complaining about a cyclist who was doing nothing wrong and telling him to change his behavior because the motorist broke the law is the same as when people blame the size of the girls skirt and not the rapist

breezy1985

VonLuck wrote: »

. Agree that it would be a major inconvenience for your 30kmph cyclist though.

Funny enough you didn't agree with that earlier

07Lapierre

VonLuck wrote: »

None. Where did I say the cyclist broke any laws? In fact I specifically said that you're allowed to do what you want as long as you don't break any laws!

Yet your only criticism was of the cyclist not choosing to use a cycle lane?

VonLuck

MojoMaker wrote: »

Now you're getting it VonLuck. So if you were to guess, which one of those is the OP?

Thanks for the patronising comment. All of my points to date are still valid, regardless of your attempts to belittle them by immature statements.

breezy1985 wrote: »

It is comparable. You are saying cyclists who can very safely and legally travel on a road at 30kph should move to the path because of dangerous drivers. You then say they should go at a significantly reduced speed in case pedestrians do the wrong thing and walk on the cycle lane.

The cyclists must suffer despite being the only of the 3 groups in the scenario following the rules.

I know someone is gonna come on with "blaa blaa strawman blaa blaa" because it's everyones favorite word now but complaining about a cyclist who was doing nothing wrong and telling him to change his behavior because the motorist broke the law is the same as when people blame the size of the girls skirt and not the rapist

You are just hearing what you want to hear. Very common theme here it seems.

You're blatantly lying by saying that I said "cyclists who can very safely and legally travel on a road at 30kph should move to the path because of dangerous drivers". Please point out when I said that.

I never told anyone to change their behaviour. Once again I'll say that everyone is free to do what they want as long as it's within the bounds of the law.

You're getting into dangerous territory with the rapist argument, but I will give you this example. If you were cycling and saw a car weaving erratically in front of you, would you cycle up alongside it? It's unlikely. You'd assess the risk and make a decision based on that assessment. Some people might just go for it though. The same with using a cycle lane or staying on the road. You assess the risk. It's not as severe as a weaving car, but still you're making a decision based on what you're comfortable with when cycling.

breezy1985 wrote: »

Funny enough you didn't agree with that earlier

Please point out where I disagreed with that.

07Lapierre wrote: »

Yet your only criticism was of the cyclist not choosing to use a cycle lane?

Where did I criticise someone not choosing to use a cycle lane?

Honestly people, you need to relax and take a breather. For some reason you're determined to believe that I'm out to get you.

breezy1985

VonLuck wrote: »

Thanks for the patronising comment. All of my points to date are still valid, regardless of your attempts to belittle them by immature statements.

You are just hearing what you want to hear. Very common theme here it seems.

You're blatantly lying by saying that I said "cyclists who can very safely and legally travel on a road at 30kph should move to the path because of dangerous drivers". Please point out when I said that.

I never told anyone to change their behaviour. Once again I'll say that everyone is free to do what they want as long as it's within the bounds of the law.

You're getting into dangerous territory with the rapist argument, but I will give you this example. If you were cycling and saw a car weaving erratically in front of you, would you cycle up alongside it? It's unlikely. You'd assess the risk and make a decision based on that assessment. Some people might just go for it though. The same with using a cycle lane or staying on the road. You assess the risk. It's not as severe as a weaving car, but still you're making a decision based on what you're comfortable with when cycling.

Please point out where I disagreed with that.

Where did I criticise someone not choosing to use a cycle lane?

Honestly people, you need to relax and take a breather. For some reason you're determined to believe that I'm out to get you.

Seems like a lot of us have misunderstood your "kind helpful advice"

A car weaving in front of you is very different to one coming up behind you. No one has ever advocated passing a dangerous car ahead and is very different to "assessing a risk" you can't see

07Lapierre

VonLuck wrote: »

Where did I criticise someone not choosing to use a cycle lane?

Apologies...im confusing you with someone else. carry on..

[Deleted User]

That second one on Nutgrove Ave. passes a couple of bus shelters too if memory serves and by another one coming the other direction after the Bottletower.

OT didn't there used to be a petrol station on the right in that link you posted, haven't lived there in 10 years or so.

[Deleted User]

VonLuck wrote: »

They totally have the right, but that won't stop drivers being pissed off as a result. You might think "so what", but an angry driver is more likely to perform risky manoeuvres like in the video. I'd prefer to be alive instead of right.

An angry driver will always find another excuse for being angry.

Duckjob wrote: »

Another problem with some cycle paths is lack of safe accessibility. By that I mean in some cases getting on to the path while operating within the typical traffic environment could itself be a risky maneuvre.

I tried to point out this concept over on C&T in a thread where certain posters were complaining about people on bikes not using the 100m stretch of cycle path up to the royal canal at North Strand Marino.

I was explaining that if i'm doing 35-40kph in the bus lane towards the canal, with a 14 tonne double decker bus behind me in the bus lane, hot on my heels ( a common enough real world scenario) , the last thing I can do safely is slow my speed in the bus lane down to the 15-20kph which would be necessary to make the somewhat tight turn into the cycle path, over a kerb (where if I get the angle wrong and end up hitting the floor on the bus lane I'm dead), to enter a fairly confined space where people are walking. Therefore, in such instances its simply safer to continue on the bus lane at the speed I'm going up to the lights.

Needless to say my explanations fell on deaf ears with certain posters who, despite having no experience of cycling that stretch themselves, still felt qualified to reject the experiences of someone who cycles it regularly, and make their pronouncements that use of the bike lane is safer.

I think I posted multiple tweets, maybe five tweets from different people showing vehicles blocking the ****ty cycle lane, but that wasn't a good reason for not using the lane either.

07Lapierre

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

An angry driver will always find another excuse for being angry.

I think I posted multiple tweets, maybe five tweets from different people showing vehicles blocking the ****ty cycle lane, but that wasn't a good reason for not using the lane either.

Is this the "perfectly adequate" (or was it the "more than adequate") bike lane at North Strand?
Given the current weather conditions, that same cycle path will be lethal this week!

CramCycle

Not sure if anyone here has been on the N11 near UCD over the past few months. Just to vent my annoyance at the lazy ass builders doing the works on the cyclepath, bus stop and footpath. They have the temporary hoardings up for a footpath and cyclepath for awhile now but f*ck me, the turn at the end of the bike path is so tight you have to either cut your speed to less than walking pace or bunny hop like Peter Sagan and go up on the grass. It would have been so easy to just extend it by 5 m and have a more gradual merge. Also the tarmacadam they ****ed there as a ramp, has no one pride in their work anymore. Also continuously just parking int he hoarded off area for sh1ts and giggles. Interestingly, no hassle from anyone for taking the lane for 100m. I often find myself at close enough to traffic speed but in general people have been really decent, to the point where the majority of cyclists on that route going onto the N11 main traffic lane, from those on a casual jaunt at 5kmph to the UCD racing team tipping 60kmph. It's almost as if they have realised that even a cyclist at walking pace, isn't really any delay overall in the grand scheme of things.

Wildly Boaring

Not a near miss but an angry man

Cycle paths both sides of road white this morning so I cycled up the road (the inhumanity)

Got lifted out of it by angry little chubby fella

bazermc

Wildly Boaring wrote: »

Not a near miss but an angry man

Cycle paths both sides of road white this morning so I cycled up the road (the inhumanity)

Got lifted out of it by angry little chubby fella

I was hoping for a photo of said angry little chubby fella.

Seaswimmer

CramCycle wrote: »

Not sure if anyone here has been on the N11 near UCD over the past few months. Just to vent my annoyance at the lazy ass builders doing the works on the cyclepath, bus stop and footpath. They have the temporary hoardings up for a footpath and cyclepath for awhile now but f*ck me, the turn at the end of the bike path is so tight you have to either cut your speed to less than walking pace or bunny hop like Peter Sagan and go up on the grass. It would have been so easy to just extend it by 5 m and have a more gradual merge. Also the tarmacadam they ****ed there as a ramp, has no one pride in their work anymore. Also continuously just parking int he hoarded off area for sh1ts and giggles. Interestingly, no hassle from anyone for taking the lane for 100m. I often find myself at close enough to traffic speed but in general people have been really decent, to the point where the majority of cyclists on that route going onto the N11 main traffic lane, from those on a casual jaunt at 5kmph to the UCD racing team tipping 60kmph. It's almost as if they have realised that even a cyclist at walking pace, isn't really any delay overall in the grand scheme of things.

Is it DLR or DCC area?
I find DLR are usually pretty good about responding to these types of issues.
They have a new reporting form which allows you submit pictures and pin point map locations with your submission.(which I haven't used yet)

https://cllrsportal.powerappsportals.com/report-it-frm/

[Deleted User]

Seaswimmer wrote: »

Is it DLR or DCC area?
I find DLR are usually pretty good about responding to these types of issues.
They have a new reporting form which allows you submit pictures and pin point map locations with your submission.(which I haven't used yet)

https://cllrsportal.powerappsportals.com/report-it-frm/

DLR area - Belfield bridge is the border line

VonLuck

Skrynesaver wrote: »

I've been hospitalised off a bike twice, on both occasions I was on Irish dedicated cycling infrastructure.

Once a car turned through a traffic lane and a cycle lane without checking for cyclists and once when the lane was not treated and I lost it on black ice.

I no longer use Irish cycling infrastructure as it is, to generalise, a series of under maintained, poorly designed obstacle courses.

Do you mean that the driver hopped the kerb into the cycle lane? There's not much that can be done about that unfortunately beyond punishing the driver. I don't know if I'd blame the cycling infrastructure, but look, I don't know the details so I can't comment.

hans aus dtschl

VonLuck wrote: »

Do you mean that the driver hopped the kerb into the cycle lane? There's not much that can be done about that unfortunately beyond punishing the driver. I don't know if I'd blame the cycling infrastructure, but look, I don't know the details so I can't comment.

Oh for physical separation!

No, they mean that a driver somehow managed to drive over the super-protective-cycle-lane-paint and hit them.

The vast majority of Irish cycle infrastructure is an exercise in giving the illusion of safety. In most cases taking the lane is far safer.

breezy1985

magicbastarder wrote: »

still remains my favourite* cycle path:

https://www.google.com/maps/@53.2753161,-6.1902165,3a,75y,237.86h,81.36t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spw6lbAXTuTO9f7qQttDd-Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

*not my favourite

All its missing is yield signs at every driveway

ED E

magicbastarder wrote: »

still remains my favourite* cycle path:

https://www.google.com/maps/@53.2753161,-6.1902165,3a,75y,237.86h,81.36t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spw6lbAXTuTO9f7qQttDd-Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

*not my favourite

Mine:
https://goo.gl/maps/1ontSWk5YdJAH2bX6

CramCycle

VonLuck wrote: »

Do you mean that the driver hopped the kerb into the cycle lane? There's not much that can be done about that unfortunately beyond punishing the driver. I don't know if I'd blame the cycling infrastructure, but look, I don't know the details so I can't comment.

They often don't need to hop the kerb, often the infrastructure is on the road and they don't notice you or think that the few cm given is fine when it is not. You also have a lot of times where cyclist reaches a junction before the car but the car turns through the cyclist. This happens because of lack of attention but also because the infrastructure puts the cyclist to the side and out of mind. When they get there, they simply don't register it, coupled with wide sweeping curves at the junction which encourage faster lines through the turn. There is a reason that those of us with enough confidence and experience often choose the main road rather than the infrastructure because while it appears more dangerous, it actually isn't. I'd sooner another road user disliked me, noticed me and gave me space, rather than never noticed until its too late.

From personal experience, while some incidences have been my fault, and I hold my hands up. The ones that weren't while driver fault, were added to or actively encouraged by poor infrastructure. Encouraging speeding, poor passing or simply removing me from their frame of reference until it was too late.

CramCycle

hesker wrote: »

https://goo.gl/maps/zk6D6EW4TrDzAxES8

Only one of my favourites. Sheer genius of forethought

The pavement blocked by the wall, which admittedly was there before the pavement but I mean, really, it is concreted on top and hardly of any historical significance that justifies it putting pedestrians in danger.

CramCycle

hesker wrote: »

No, I mean the cycle lane that goes around the signpost on the inside putting you in a blind spot for drivers and then immediately throws you onto the road into their path.

I always go on the outside taking the lane.

Don't worry, I got what you were highlighting, but the whole thing, not just the bike lane is a clusterf*ck. How do these people get jobs. Reminds me of the lecturer in UCD, who said the easiest way to find out who scraped through his classes and barely qualified was not to look through the class lists but go onto the council website and get a list of the engineers/architects employed directly by them.

[Deleted User]

radia wrote: »

I like this one: https://goo.gl/maps/uVB5MVnBPN9XbXsq7

Not content with having cyclists bouncing up and down on a rollercoaster created by driveways, they felt the need to build a special little mini-hill into the cycle track for no apparent reason at all. The road beside it is flat.

That Leopardstown Road was a dreadful effort. I remember my uncle (not cyclist) giving out about how it had been built for cyclists and they weren't using it. I tried to explain but it was a waste of time. I recall a cycling aquaintance saying they should have just given the money to Concern or similar charities. He was right.

Seaswimmer

radia wrote: »

I like this one: https://goo.gl/maps/uVB5MVnBPN9XbXsq7

Not content with having cyclists bouncing up and down on a rollercoaster created by driveways, they felt the need to build a special little mini-hill into the cycle track for no apparent reason at all. The road beside it is flat.

Something to do with the roots of the trees maybe??

https://www.google.com/maps/@53.2768154,-6.1873541,3a,75y,166.22h,86.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQMNcFfxKByL5ilfUyEqvWg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

blackvalley

My serious near miss was several years ago back before artic trucks were banned from Dublin city center. For many years i cycled the complete lenght of the quays from Heuston station to point depot in the morning and returning in the evening. Got to know several people on nodding terms and occasionally got a helpful hand on the back or a shout to " sit in " if struggling hard into a headwind.
Heading home one evening, traffic busy about 5.30 as I approached Capel St bridge traffic lights went red . Lights go green and I moved off . Now anyone familiar with that rout will know that the road is particularly narrow for about one hundred meters before widening at civic offices.
Just before road widened I felt a felt a small push , jolt from behind and immediately thought " someone messing , saying hi " but when I looked over I was staring at the front bumper of an artic truck . Luckily the road widened at that spot and I pulled sharply to my left .
None the better from the experience I pulled over and stopped and to this day I can see the white / grey road dust from the bumper on my shorts .
As close calls go they dont go much closer than that .:eek::eek:

CramCycle

I always presumed the hump was there long before the road and they dug out the road to meet the N11.

fryup

Seth Brundle wrote: »

I think the driver here would be better off being carless to be honest!

by the looks of things he's also brainless

McGrath5

CramCycle wrote: »

I always presumed the hump was there long before the road and they dug out the road to meet the N11.

I had to change my route away from that road, the "cycle lane" would destroy your bike if you build up any speed, then drivers will actually run you off the road so they can get to the traffic lights 5 seconds faster.

CramCycle

McGrath5 wrote: »

I had to change my route away from that road, the "cycle lane" would destroy your bike if you build up any speed, then drivers will actually run you off the road so they can get to the traffic lights 5 seconds faster.

Same here, thankfully there are a few alternative routes but that lane would actually throw the bike from under you in parts, I say this as someone who rides off road a bit, it's insanity how poor it is.

Breezer wrote: »

I specifically remember cycling Leopardstown Road when I was about 16 (I’m from DLR, but not near enough to have been cycling that road regularly, so it sticks out). From memory, the works had been completed in the last year or two. To this day I swear I can feel my brain rattling around in my skull when I think back on it, and I can remember thinking “why on Earth do people cycle?” It was another 15 years before I’d take up cycling again in any serious fashion.

I remember my brother in law driving that way and he started giving out about a cyclist on the road. My partner tried to inform him, having heard it from me, why that might be. He ignored it and ranted on. A few years later he took up cycling. The smug satisfaction as I heard him giving out about the cycle lane there and that you had to ride on the road. Perspective is a wonderful thing.

Seaswimmer

CramCycle wrote: »

Same here, thankfully there are a few alternative routes but that lane would actually throw the bike from under you in parts, I say this as someone who rides off road a bit, it's insanity how poor it is.
I remember my brother in law driving that way and he started giving out about a cyclist on the road. My partner tried to inform him, having heard it from me, why that might be. He ignored it and ranted on. A few years later he took up cycling. The smug satisfaction as I heard him giving out about the cycle lane there and that you had to ride on the road. Perspective is a wonderful thing.

I tried out the new "report it" form on the DLR website. I raised all the multiple issues with the Leopardstown Road cycle lanes and asked them was there any plans to repair/upgrade or redesign them. Given that generally they are doing a lot of positive work on cycling infrastructure in the DLR area I would be surprised if they don't eventually do something with it.

Edit:(quick response below)

RE CRM 215016 Leopardstown Road cycle route

Dear xxx,

I note your request to improve the cycle route on Leopardstown Road.

We have obtained funding to improve this route in 2021 under the NTA Sustainable Transport Measures Grants (STMG) Programme 2021.
We hope to progress a design later in the year but I don’t have a timeline at this time.