Cork SRR - Cyclist in Middle Lane

Seweryn wrote: »

And when they build a cycle lane on your side of the road, it is quite often useless or even dangerous to use. Pure waste of taxpayers money. You can't expect anyone to use it.

Ah yes. That one looks better (ie worse) in daylight.

If it wasn't so bog-standardly bad it would be a candidate for Cycle Facility of the Month.

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

As I said, there once was a cyclist who cycled in lane one of a dual carriageway, despite there being backroads, hard shoulder, alternate roads, etc...
I marvel at the Irish and their attitude to road safety.
When i was small my mother told me "don't go playing out in the street and keep off the main roads on your bike, or you'll get killed!"
Here, it's "You go off now and use that road, because you are entitled to be there, don't worry, the cars will look out for you".
Being right is not useful when you're dead.
You want to kill yourself?
You're welcome to it.
I was told this strange concept of "common sense" that people here seem completely puzzled by.
They only say "well, nobody told me I couldn't do that"

Well, maybe we should blame Irish mammies rather than Irish engineers and Irish politicians and Irish drivers for the vast majority of road deaths then.

I guess we need to point the figure at some group in particular for (a) the thousands of road deaths over the the last several decades and (b) the parallel decline in the number of people, especially children, cycling and walking, not to mention playing in the street.

In our neighbourhood the mammy's message would be "don't play on the road because there are cars on it, and don't play on the footpaths either because there are cars on them too, and don't play in the driveway because that's for the cars and don't cycle in the cycle lanes because they're for the cars, and don't cross the road at the green man because the cars are in a hurry to get through the red light, and don't try to go around the roundabout because that's full of cars, and don't bother using the dished kerbs because they're for the cars, and don't even think about walking on the grass verges because that space is for the cars too."

At no time have I stated that the cyclist mentioned by the OP was in the right. However, in this and in many other cases (some of which may even have resulted in death or injury) I thinks it's necessary to look beyond the individual and see whether there are any structural issues that need addressing. Victim-blaming is alive and well in discussions of road safety in Ireland, as is the targeting of individuals rather than the implementation of policies at population and institutional level. The RSA, AGS, local authorities and central government are all guilty of this imo.

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

I can't believe there's nearly 100 posts debating the rights and wrongs of the OP .. but in a way it does illustrate once again why driving in this country is the mess it is.

The road in question (I know it quite well myself) is Cork's equivalent of the M50 (without the M). It's 3 lanes of heavy fast-moving traffic and it's absolute lunacy to suggest that cyclist or pedestrian has any "right" to be there REGARDLESS of what some statute (that was probably written long before we even had roads like this) says.

Anyone who thinks otherwise should really hand in their license and stick to buses (and the same goes for the cyclist brigade).

There are lots of reasons why motorists should be made to surrender their licence. This forum alone provides plenty of material in that regard. The "my speed" merchants would be a good place to start, perhaps.

If you know the road in question, can you (a) quantify the effect the removal of the hard shoulder had on accessibility for cyclists, and (b) indicate to what extent the SRR and its recent modifications has created community severance in the area?

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

In any REAL term, a cyclist or pedestrian has no business being there and should either take an alternate route or use another form of motorised transport (public or private)

What you are doing is avoiding the question.

Perhaps a 3-lane highway has no business being there? Or perhaps Cork City Council has no business putting residential estates, commercial developments, services or amenities alongside a 3-lane highway?

Perhaps such "planning" is one reason that Cork had the second highest level of insurance claims for road deaths in the country last year?

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

If the pro-cycling lobby can't see why fast moving traffic, multiple lanes + push bikes and pedestrians is A BAD THING then I don't see the point in even trying to convince them anyway.

On the contrary. Mixing high volumes of fast-moving traffic with vulnerable road users in an urban setting is indeed A BAD THING.

Corkblowin wrote: »

I don't think you are getting the point of this road. This is a new road designed to GO AROUND an urban area. It is not an urban area with a mix of uses, road users etc.

In contrast the roads in the area the SSR bypasses have been modified to urban streets over the last few years to accommodate the mix you describe, and the unnecessary traffic in these areas is directed to the SSR.

I don't know the area at all, but StreetView's suggestion for a 3.5 km cycle route from Elmvale Avenue to Alderbrook appears to include this beauty.

Have the "urban streets" been modified in recent times to provide a different cycling experience? Or is StreetView inaccurate in this case, as it often is?



EDIT: I notice a lot of posters for Alan Kelly's election campaign in the StreetView images. That gives me a bit of a laugh. It seems the Minister is having as big an impact on cycling conditions in Cork as he is in Galway.