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

Cyclists in bus lanes (cut from 'giving way to buses' thread)

bmaxi

The whole idea of bus lanes is to shorten bus journey times, so logically buses coming out of bus lanes should always have priority or any advantage
is lost. As usual in Ireland, these things are introduced in a ham fisted way, more for visual than practical effect, politicians showing how advanced in thinking they are without considering the full picture. It's easy to paint lines on roads when they mean fcuk all, for instance, I can never understand why bicycles are allowed to share bus lanes, they should have a dedicated lane to themselves although, having said that, they probably wouldn't use them. Just the other day I came across three buses stuck behind a bicycle in the bus lane on Stillorgan Road, even though there is a perfectly good cycle lane on the footpath. Proper penalties and a modicum of enforcement would solve a lot of our traffic congestion problems but apparently there are only two road traffic offences on the statute books, ironically the two which are most easily detected with the minimum of effort.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Jawgap

Spook_ie wrote: »

Point 1 What has been proven untrue?

Lets try it algebraically then

.......

Oh God! let's not.....

......but if you insist - how does your model account for re-distributive effects of income and welfare payments?

If 'Average Joe' (I prefer Sean Citizen, it's less American) derives any portion of his income from state handouts or welfare payments then I'm subsidising him (through my income tax, PRSI, etc) to subsidise me!

In summary, what you are proposing is a zero-sum situation which is plainly not a reflection of real life.

Spook_ie

ThisRegard wrote: »

That's my point, taxis currently on hire with someone in it, or on hire by basically being on the way to pick up a customer who has just rang, are only supposed to be using the lanes.

Driving to the shops, dropping the kids off, driving into the city on the way to a rank, driving while waiting to be flagged down, they all still use the bus lane.

Taxis are allowed to use the bus lanes while plying for hire, imagine how many cyclists/buses would get milled out of it if every time an intending passenger had to flag a taxi down that had to cross into the bus lane to then stop and pick and them up, however, I do agree about the driving to shops/dropping kids off/going to their normal jobs etc. a taxi is a taxi not a private use vehicle, perhaps, a start could be made by the GS/revenue enforcing the use of taxis to taxiing and what is termed "incidental" use

Spook_ie

monument wrote: »

This has been proven to be untrue a number of times so I'm presuming you're trolling and you will be infracted and banned if you keep this up.

Also against the rules to discuss moderation.

More trolling so my reply below is just for others

The rate is actually lower -- it was 1.24 per car in 2012 and not higher than 0.01 more in any if the years reported.

It's an adverage which shows that three people in a car is not typical - not even two are.

Point 1 What has been proven untrue?

Lets try it algebraically then

Average Joe = X
Excise on Fuel etc. = Y

X=X ( Average Joe on bike )

X+Y > X (Average Joe in Car )

Therefore Y contribution is in excess of X

It's pretty simple really

Point 2 OK

Point 3 Did you or did you not say in the real world, if it's the real world you don't get fractions of people, that's not trolling that's correcting a glaring mistake

edit FTR

2011 45% of private car journeys were with a passenger
2006 41% " " " "
2002 47% " " " "
1996 59% " " " "
1991 65% " " " "
1986 65% " " " "

Source CSO

ThisRegard

mitosis wrote: »

I would argue taxis hired or available for hire (prove it!) be allowed use the bus lane, but a lad driving his taxi home not.

Taxi drivers don't just drive around aimlessly, generally. You know the cost of fuel, who would?

That's my point, taxis currently on hire with someone in it, or on hire by basically being on the way to pick up a customer who has just rang, are only supposed to be using the lanes.

Driving to the shops, dropping the kids off, driving into the city on the way to a rank, driving while waiting to be flagged down, they all still use the bus lane.

mitosis

Zebra3 wrote: »

The hatred towards cyclists in here is shocking.

A bus gets delayed for a few seconds because of a cyclist. Wow! Why not remove all pedestrian crossings then!!! :rolleyes:

I can only imagine the uproar if every cyclist used a car instead of their bike on the same day.

Certain people in here don't seem to realise the benefits as motorists they get from others choosing to cycle instead.

What do they call it when things get exaggerated to make a point?

The OP doesn't say how long the delay was, and there were three buses. Neither do I see any "hatred" of cyclists, just the usual nonsense polarisation of views - caused ironically enough by the same lack of consideration or empathy road users hold for each other.

beauf

I don't really have a problem with taxi's using the bus lane. But stopping in them yes. Theres a problem all over with taxi's stopping in dangerous locations, or causing traffic jams by stopping with no consideration of others. Likewise inconsiderate cyclists. But cyclists in bus lanes is critical to easing congestion and facilitating cycling.

Jawgap

Zebra3 wrote: »

The hatred towards cyclists in here is shocking.

A bus gets delayed for a few seconds because of a cyclist. Wow! Why not remove all pedestrian crossings then!!! :rolleyes:

I can only imagine the uproar if every cyclist used a car instead of their bike on the same day.

Certain people in here don't seem to realise the benefits as motorists they get from others choosing to cycle instead.

You make a solid point and one often overlooked by many motorists - if cycling was perceived to be safer and more convenient then more would cycle, freeing up more road space. I think this would be particularly the case for a lot of the short journeys such as school runs etc.

Cycling around Dublin is quite safe and enjoyable, but the perception is that it is not - in much the same way there is a perception that the city has many kilometers of 'perfectly good' cycle paths - it doesn't.

There is also a perception that someone on a bike is on a bike because they can't afford a car. In my own case - and I suspect in a significant number of other cases - if I wasn't commuting by bike I'd be in the car taking up a lot more road space with four wheels than I do with two.

The mouthy-shouty brigade seem intent on maintaining the perception that cycling is dangerous, inconsiderate, selfish etc in the vain hope that it will drive cyclists from the roads and magically all the city's traffic problems will be solved. Put simply, they lack the imagination to appreciate that more people cycling is, generally, a good thing and something to be embraced and encouraged.

mitosis

ThisRegard wrote: »

Are empty taxis allowed to use bus lanes ? How many are actually on their way to jobs or have current fares and not just driving around aimlessly like the majority are ? If such taxis kept out of the lanes there'd be less congestion in them (unlike the ridiculous argument that cyclists blocking them up).

I would argue taxis hired or available for hire (prove it!) be allowed use the bus lane, but a lad driving his taxi home not.

Taxi drivers don't just drive around aimlessly, generally. You know the cost of fuel, who would?

mitosis

monument wrote: »

1.55

That's the car occupancy rate for cars crossing into Dublin city centre. That's the real world of most traffic in our cities and towns -- not your car with three people in it.

I am reluctant to debate this further - it is off topic, and entertaining the derailment of the thread by some through making it a car vs bike argument. Which it is not - it is about road users respecting the right of others to use the road. But here goes

OK, but the illustration used is slanted to show as many cars as possible. Each with only one occupant - well short of your attested average. My point is what was posted was little more than propoganda and bore only 45% truth.

smackyB

I too would be interested to hear the justification for allowing taxis to use bus lanes (occupied or not) - they're currently banned from using them in Belfast (though this may change soon) so I'm wondering is Dublin out of step with other cities or is this the norm?

ThisRegard

Spook_ie wrote: »

taxis don't block the bus lanes otherwise you wouldn't have people complaining about taxis pulling out of bus lanes all the time to over take buses and causing them to jam on, usually mentioned alongside no indicators! You really need to stick to one argument at a time

Are empty taxis allowed to use bus lanes ? How many are actually on their way to jobs or have current fares and not just driving around aimlessly like the majority are ? If such taxis kept out of the lanes there'd be less congestion in them (unlike the ridiculous argument that cyclists blocking them up).

monument

Spook_ie wrote: »

Point 1

Takes a deep breath... because this seems to be non understandable by yourself, but I'll try once more

You have a standardised unit, this unit is Average Joe, this units net contribution is set as zero or a base line

You have a standardised unit, this unit is Average Joe using a car, his net contribution is zero PLUS whatever taxes are from the car

I really don't see how much more simplyfying of it I can do for you!

Point 2 I know this is the commuting and transport forum, it says so on the top, however, as this subject has been specifically removed from a previous thread and specifically renamed by yourself perhaps you need to reconsider why you split it away in the first place

This has been proven to be untrue a number of times so I'm presuming you're trolling and you will be infracted and banned if you keep this up.

Also against the rules to discuss moderation.

Spook_ie wrote: »

How can you quote 1.55 and then say that's the real world people don't come in 1.55's unless you have some butcher chopping off the legs or something!

More trolling so my reply below is just for others

The rate is actually lower -- it was 1.24 per car in 2012 and not higher than 0.01 more in any if the years reported.

It's an adverage which shows that three people in a car is not typical - not even two are.

Zebra3

The hatred towards cyclists in here is shocking.

A bus gets delayed for a few seconds because of a cyclist. Wow! Why not remove all pedestrian crossings then!!! :rolleyes:

I can only imagine the uproar if every cyclist used a car instead of their bike on the same day.

Certain people in here don't seem to realise the benefits as motorists they get from others choosing to cycle instead.

Cookie_Monster

Spook_ie wrote: »

Average Joe on a bike contributes tax 1 Without any contribution to infrastructure, Average Joe in a car contibutes tax 1 + x ( x = partial contribution to infra structure ), Average Joe on Public Transport contributes tax 1 plus y ( y = fare costs which incorporate a degree of costs in the fare towards infrastucture), therefore Average Joe the cyclist is paying less tax.

I own a car, pay tax for it etc
I cycle to work, and only use the car for leisure or shopping in general.
How do I fit into your narrow minded argument?

I pay less fuel tax sure but I've also paid extra VAT on the bike and all the bits, VAT on parts and service for it and produce less emissions & pollution, less wear and tear on the roads and don't add to congestion than if I drove to work everyday.
The bike is also worth more than the car so so the VAT was not insignificant.

All the cycling means I've lost a pile of weight and am much healthier as well so reduced future health costs than otherwise.

beauf

Spook_ie wrote: »

Can always tell when people are losing arguments by how desperate they get with suggestions

Yes cyclists are losing this argument...

PAUL MELIA – 26 OCTOBER 2009

BUS journey times through Dublin city centre have fallen by half since the controversial bus gGate started operating last July.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/bus-gate-halves-journey-times-in-capital-26576538.html

Then theres the Dublin Bikes...

Dublin was the 17th city to implement such a scheme,[2][4] and it is considered one of the most successful bike sharing schemes in the world

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dublinbikes

Spook_ie

beauf wrote: »

Sure there is buses don't only move in bus lanes. Bus pulls up to a queue of cars, they all have to pull over to let the bus past. It pays more tax, it carries more people. What blocks buses more than anything is cars.

If you want more buses you need less cars. If you want something that doesn't get caught in road traffic congestion use a bike or the train.

Can always tell when people are losing arguments by how desperate they get with suggestions

Aard

This thread has descended into a comedy goldmine. I can no longer tell where naivete ends and parody begins.

beauf

Sure there is buses don't only move in bus lanes. Bus pulls up to a queue of cars, they all have to pull over to let the bus past. It pays more tax, it carries more people. What blocks buses more than anything is cars.

If you want more buses you need less cars. If you want something that doesn't get caught in road traffic congestion use a bike or the train.

Spook_ie

beauf wrote: »

Why not have car yield to buses at all times also. You see a bus behind, you have to pull over.

Because there's no need, you only need to give way to buses entering or leaving a buslane for it to work.

You could put the icing on the cake and for buses that are behind you when you're traveling at a snails pace, such as JCBs Tractors Cyclists Grannies etc. being fined for holding them up for longer than say 2 mins without pulling over to enable them to pass

beauf

Why not have car yield to buses at all times also. You see a bus behind, you have to pull over.

Spook_ie

John_C wrote: »

Instead of showing a person's county, maybe number plates could show your tax band. That way we'd know who should yield to whom at junctions etc...

Would it not be far easier that you yield to vehicles in the bus lanes and that you didn't unnecessarily hold up public transport.

Spook_ie

monument wrote: »

Please explain how you think "Average Joe on a bike" is "Without any contribution to infrastructure" while the others do?

You have yet to explain this and yet to explain away the context of what other have said about (1) cyclists paying PRSI, (2) motor tax on car/s they mostly or sometimes leave at home, (3) roads being paid by general tax pool and not motor tax, (4) motorists not covering the costs of motoring and (5) public transport being highly subsidised -- uses can't pay more than cyclist if public transport costs vastly more than the user pays.

This is the commuting and transport forum -- all sorts of transport is taken into account in discussion -- even when that is not convenient for some. You seem to have no problem discussing the merits of other transport vs cycling when you think it suits you.

Point 1

Takes a deep breath... because this seems to be non understandable by yourself, but I'll try once more

You have a standardised unit, this unit is Average Joe, this units net contribution is set as zero or a base line

You have a standardised unit, this unit is Average Joe using a car, his net contribution is zero PLUS whatever taxes are from the car

I really don't see how much more simplyfying of it I can do for you!

Point 2 I know this is the commuting and transport forum, it says so on the top, however, as this subject has been specifically removed from a previous thread and specifically renamed by yourself perhaps you need to reconsider why you split it away in the first place

Spook_ie

monument wrote: »

1.55

That's the car occupancy rate for cars crossing into Dublin city centre. That's the real world of most traffic in our cities and towns -- not your car with three people in it.

How can you quote 1.55 and then say that's the real world people don't come in 1.55's unless you have some butcher chopping off the legs or something!

John_C

Instead of showing a person's county, maybe number plates could show your tax band. That way we'd know who should yield to whom at junctions etc...

monument

Spook_ie wrote: »

Average Joe on a bike contributes tax 1 Without any contribution to infrastructure, Average Joe in a car contibutes tax 1 + x ( x = partial contribution to infra structure ), Average Joe on Public Transport contributes tax 1 plus y ( y = fare costs which incorporate a degree of costs in the fare towards infrastucture), therefore Average Joe the cyclist is paying less tax.

Please explain how you think "Average Joe on a bike" is "Without any contribution to infrastructure" while the others do?

You have yet to explain this and yet to explain away the context of what other have said about (1) cyclists paying PRSI, (2) motor tax on car/s they mostly or sometimes leave at home, (3) roads being paid by general tax pool and not motor tax, (4) motorists not covering the costs of motoring and (5) public transport being highly subsidised -- uses can't pay more than cyclist if public transport costs vastly more than the user pays.

Spook_ie wrote: »

But again you are disregarding the thread, Cyclists in bus lanes (cut from 'giving way to buses' thread) none of your arguments or trying to drag taxis into will sway the fact that so far cyclists do hold up buses in bus lanes

This is the commuting and transport forum -- all sorts of transport is taken into account in discussion -- even when that is not convenient for some. You seem to have no problem discussing the merits of other transport vs cycling when you think it suits you.

bigar

Jack Kyle wrote: »

Are you even reading other people's posts before inflicting your views on us?

I'm talking about cyclists BLOCKING a road while there's a perfectly good cycling lane off the road - i.e. motorists being completely obstructed unnecessarily. Cyclists who do that are the inconsiderate ones and deserve to be blasted out of it with the horn. And if the same cyclist gets mangled in an accident, well it's a tragedy of course, but he/she has brought it on themselves with their "holier than thou/we own the road" bullsh1t.

Maybe time to bring up the many cars parked or "just stopping for a minute" on bicycle lanes, bus lanes, double yellow lines (and sidewalks) holding up plenty of traffic. Very often they do it very close to a legal parking spot. Now who is inconsiderate and has a holier than thou approach?

monument

mitosis wrote: »

That's all fine and well (and OT), but when I had my car out today there were three of us in it, a bag of spuds, two large bags of groceries, a suitcase and a carry-all. All your illustrations are actually worthless in the real world.

1.55

That's the car occupancy rate for cars crossing into Dublin city centre. That's the real world of most traffic in our cities and towns -- not your car with three people in it.

beauf

TheChizler wrote: »

My point exactly. I was parodying spook's post.

ah lol I'm still thinking of that fry earlier.

beauf

mitosis wrote: »

That's all fine and well (and OT), but when I had my car out today there were three of us in it, a bag of spuds, two large bags of groceries, a suitcase and a carry-all. All your illustrations are actually worthless in the real world.

Hardly a typical daily load of a average bus passenger.

Irish emigration maybe.

TheChizler

beauf wrote: »

The Land Rover also consumes more of the resources. It's net contribution may be less than the Micra.

:-)

My point exactly. I was parodying spook's post.