Clontarf to City Centre Cycle & Bus Priority Project discussion (renamed)

The reason cyclists break reds when there's nothing coming is simple:

It takes a lot of effort to get a bike up to speed. Stopping and starting on a push bike is going to be tiring and slow.

There is some benefit to cyclists breaking the reds for motorists, in that you are less likely to end up caught behind a bunch of them at the lights starting off slowly. This ends up in less cars making it through the lights and frustrates drivers more.

Ideal solution is complete segregation of cyclists/motorists via a kerb, or bollards. In this scenario cyclists would stay in their lane and been forbidden from using the road, Everyone gets where they need to go faster (we'd need new laws (14.3) and enforcement though, and that's not going to happen)

I even question how much the lane will be used. There are often many cyclists on the road in Clontarf even though there is a cycle lane available. Same applies to cycle lane between Portmarnock and Baldoyle.

I think the whole cycling thing is coming to head now and is going to tip down now that e-scooters are available. This is going to get very grey very soon.

Some of the e-scooters require an A2 licence as the power to weight ratio exceeds 0.1 kW/kg. Very few of the people with these vehicles have the required licence, tax, insurance or even PPE etc and they are going to be predominantly used in the cycle lanes. which is illegal (14.6.a)

Throw J Walking into the mix too while we're at it shure, loads of folk walk straight across the road without waiting for the green man or not even going to the crosswalk.

What's the five second rule?

The idea that some people have in their heads that they have 5 seconds to get through a set of lights once it turns amber (Tongue in cheek)

I accept that.

But the rules are the rules, Dublin Cycling went into Dublin castle a number of years ago lobbying to say that it was OK for cyclists to break "some of the rules some of the time". They were promptly told by the Garda "They must obey all of the rules all of the time".

No one really likes the rules, especially when they seem stupid, and I get that. But they are there for a reason at the end of the day and in an ideal world everyone will obey them.

They should obey the laws, same as drivers. But the consequences aren't the same if there's an accident.

The Idaho stop would work here in theory, and it makes sense.

I don't have a huge issue with people breaking lights on a bike, if they weigh up what they are doing properly. But I really hate being stopped at a light, and seeing a cyclist flying through, and being very close to hitting crossing pedestrians. Which seems to be happening more regularly.

What is the fascination with cyclists breaking red lights? why isn't every car accident followed by comments about all the far worse things motorists do?

What is the psychology behind it? Is it a case of - these bastards make me have to watch what I'm doing or I'll run them over and hold me up sometimes, and look they don't even stop at red lights?

I can only speak for myself as I'm the only driver I can be sure of but I can speed a lot of the time and be pretty safe that I won't be caught by enforcement, I can often break red lights. I can do lots of stuff whilst driving that is illegal but I am fairly confident I can get away with it but do you know what, I don't do any of them. Why? Because I follow the rules and saying you break a particular rule or rules because you can "get away with it" is a ridiculous excuse. Pure selfishness. To say that it is pure fantasy to expect a cyclist to obey the rules of the road but it's more of a disgrace for a motorist to not do the same is a ludicrous statement. The same rules apply to all road users (please correct me if I'm wrong), whether it's a car, a bus, a bicycle, a HGV, a motor cycle.....you get the idea. I've been to Amsterdam a few times and it's funny how it's not fantasy for cyclists to stop at red lights there. A red light there is the same as a red light here in Ireland.

You may be thinking, "Ah this fella must sometimes speed, everyone does" - I have news for you, not everyone speeds in motorised vehicles. I pass by speed detection vans very regularly and not once in my life have I ever slowed down for one, except of course if the gobshite in front slams on the brakes in an act of stupidity because of a lack of due care and attention. I've actually overtaken vehicles a few times when passing a speed detection van because the driver in front had dropped anchor and slowed wayyyyyyy below the speed limit meaning I can often safely overtake whilst still staying within the speed limit.

Regarding my comforts of being warm and cosy in my car, my commute is either 54km or 112km each way, depending on my starting point. My home is also in an extremely rural area so driving is my only viable option. However, I rarely drive to Dublin during rush house, never pass through Fairview (although I am actually working in Dublin tonight and will be heading to Baldoyle at about 4/5am so I might have a nosey to check out the layout as traffic will be light) and where I commute to is only a few km within the city side of the M50.

I completely agree that where feasible, cyclists should be segregated at suitably laid out junctions so that they can continue when motorists are stopped by a red light. Regarding cyclists who continue to use the roadway even when a cycleway is provided, laws need to be brought in where this is a punishable offence. If you've a cycleway at your disposal and you still insist to use the nearby roadway for motor vehicles, you should be punished.

I also think that we need far more red light cameras as the amount of motorised vehicles breaking red lights has grown massively in recent years. There also needs to be a reduction in the time between the red light illumination on road A and the corresponding green light illumination on road B. Having several seconds of red lights on all roads at a junction simply gives habitual red light breakers another "excuse" to break the red light.

but every motorist breaks the rules of the roads, every footpath is covered in illegally parked cars. Why doesn't this get any attention and people go nuts about cyclists who don't harm anyone?

Not sure if it's possible to quote just a section of a post since the tech upgrade on Boards but I prefer to just your first point:

"The reason cyclists break reds when there's nothing coming is simple:

It takes a lot of effort to get a bike up to speed. Stopping and starting on a push bike is going to be tiring and slow."

Well that's just a part of the nature of cycling and is to be expected. Trying to make this a viable reason to illegally break red lights is pure codswallop! Sure, coming to a halt in my motor vehicle means I'm going to use extra fuel when I accelerate again. Fuel is expensive so if I break the red lights, I will save money.......Now, if I were to say that I should be allowed to break red lights (when safe to do so) in my motor vehicle to save money, I'd be lambasted. The motorist who is hit in the pocket for having to stop and start at traffic lights is a motorists problem. The cyclist who is hit in the thighs/muscles for having to stop and start at traffic lights is a cyclists problem. You just have to accept that sometimes there are negatives

My only gripe with the whole setup is how narrow the inbound lane is. It barely fits a bus and with the metal crash barriers on the inside it's only a matter of time before a cyclist ends up in one. There's been little to no thought put into the safety of cyclists on that section for this work unfortunately.

I've also always wondered why our traffic sequence is green, amber, red, instead of the red, amber, green, seen inost other countries.

It would cause too many accidents here as cars generally don't stop for reds.