Journalism and cycling

Sweeping this traffic under the carpet is not the solution.

A core amount of the traffic on the quays is taxis, commercial vehicles and HGVs.
Diverting this past the Brunner isn't going to help anything. The quays might be safer, but maybe we just moved the danger.

If I'm driving I avoid the quays, because of the traffic.

On the subject of HGVs, yesterday a cyclist and truck were in collision in summer hill. Someone in the article comments piped up that these HGVs should be using the port tunnel.

But from the photo the truck was a twin steer tipper or similar and there is a building site right at the location, so this crazy idea that trucks should vanish from the roads is so unrealistic. Particularly since the same people are clamouring for more urban living and less sub urban sprawl.

Hopefully a realistic balance can be found.

RandomAccess wrote: »

Sweeping this traffic under the carpet is not the solution.

A core amount of the traffic on the quays is taxis, commercial vehicles and HGVs.
Diverting this past the Brunner isn't going to help anything. The quays might be safer, but maybe we just moved the danger.

If I'm driving I avoid the quays, because of the traffic.

On the subject of HGVs, yesterday a cyclist and truck were in collision in summer hill. Someone in the article comments piped up that these HGVs should be using the port tunnel.

But from the photo the truck was a twin steer tipper or similar and there is a building site right at the location, so this crazy idea that trucks should vanish from the roads is so unrealistic. Particularly since the same people are clamouring for more urban living and less sub urban sprawl.

Hopefully a realistic balance can be found.

Studies have found that when you remove traffic lanes, or replace them with bus lanes, footpaths, or cycleways, the traffic tends to "disappear". The converse is also true - if you increase the capacity of a road then more traffic will simply "appear" to fill the new capacity, e.g. the M50. Here's a Wikipedia reference on the phenomenon: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearing_traffic

Regarding HGVs, I think their days of being able to access urban centres are numbered. Frankly I think the idea that vehicles with such massive blindspots are allowed on our streets at all is outrageous, especially when there are viable alternatives available. A simple legislative solution (like the 5-axle ban) could prevent HGVs with unacceptably large blind spots from entering urban centres. See graphic below:

mcgratheoin wrote: »

Isn't that the whole point - it's better to move the danger away from where more people are cycling and walking?

And route it past a secondary school where people are walking and cycling.
I can't blame the locals for being concerned.

Moflojo wrote: »

Regarding HGVs, I think their days of being able to access urban centres are numbered.

How so?
The city centre has large tracts of undeveloped land. I believe we are going to see a spike in heavy traffic within the city centre.

A city safe standard should be introduced in Dublin for those trucks to bring them up to scanias example, but they will not disappear.

I specifically say Dublin because our government is too happy to let the EU or UK take the flak on providing safety standards.

Moflojo wrote: »

Apologies, I should have been more specific - I meant HGVs in their current form, as I alluded to with the blind spot comparison. There will still be a need for HGVs to enter urban areas, but only HGVs that meet the proper safety standards should be allowed to do so, with no exceptions. (The "licenses" that city centre stores have for allowing 5-axle delivery vehicles is bulls**t and a cop out in my opinion - they should be forced to use alternative vehicles.)

HGVs come in many sizes, lengths and formations, HGVs of some sort will have to be allowed into city centres at some stage or else the streets will be clogged up with fleets of white van men. |Yes artics are not practical for a city for both pedestrians and drivers. While nothing is been done here to change the HGV design to counter blind spots the UK are working towards changing the designs, layouts, and safety of city trucks to reduce the blind spots and even have the drivers sitting lower down for better visibility. Once they have something set in stone we will follow.

There will still be a need for HGVs to enter urban areas, but only HGVs that meet the proper safety standards should be allowed to do so, with no exceptions.

Define an urban area? there are plenty of urban areas around Dublin that have industrial estates or manufacturing plants that trucks need to pass through. It would be impossible and unviable to keep HGVs out of urban areas

Chuchote wrote: »

What dastardly actions are these? Earning a living by cycling and providing a colourful service for tourists?

You see, that is the simplicity of the public's perception.
The truth is, many moons ago, when the rickshaws were new on the scene, the gardai were giving them terrible hassle for cycling on Grafton street (a pedestrainised area) and the wrong way up Harcourt street (dropping people to coppers and the likes) and doing tours inside St Stephens Green and impeding the luas my cycling on the tracks and not having any lights on the rickshaws...etc...etc. Anyway, we were all told at Pearse St that the local business comity along with other business owners in the area had expressed great concern over the policing of these rickshaws and as a result to turn a blind eye on their actions. They are clearly good for businesses like restaurants and night clubs but thats about it...nothing colorfull about it.

So as i said its about time something is being done!

Roadhawk wrote: »

Its about time they were done for something. For a long time they have had immunity from being held accountable for their actions but hopefully this might shake them up.

What 'immunity' did they have? Unless they are diplomats moonlighting, they have the same level of accountability as anyone else, including the 80% of motorists who break the speed limit.

Chuchote wrote: »

Shane Ross has leaped into action on cycling (at least one area: regulating cycle rickshaws):

http://www.thejournal.ie/rickshaw-regulations-dublin-3099650-Nov2016/

According to an Irish Independent slice of gossip repeated as fact, "some" rickshaw drivers are selling Class A drugs.

Always good to see our man Ross with his finger firmly on the pulse of road safety.

The high death toll on our roads will clearly plummet once those rickshaw riding maniacs have their wings clipped :pac:

You can easily see the populist approach in his, and his "alliance", characterisation of their interactions with the rest of the government. Being told to do some work on your own job instead of bitching about someone else's is spun as 'arrogance' that they won't put up with much longer. I've no doubt we can look forward to hearing that he couldn't do anything because the rest of the government was dead set against him. Arrogant. Inflexible. Unwilling to listen.

My question is what has he even tried to do with regards to transport?

More about him in IT:

Unless Shane Ross changes his tune pretty smartly Enda Kenny will have no choice but to sack him and take the chance that his minority government will be able to survive the fallout.

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/stephen-collins-shane-ross-is-government-s-achilles-heel-1.2882177

Echoes the Miriam Lord column in suggesting the Independents themselves are baffled by his behaviour.

Someone here mentioned that that takes a bit of time. Two years? I can't remember.

EDIT:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=101245097&postcount=117