Will motorcyclists get stopped using the new bus priority on College Green?

crocro

mobpd wrote: »

Perhaps Catherine would be kind enought to quote exactly which legislation it is that states this

Section 32 (2) of the Road Traffic (Traffic and Parking) Regulations, 1997.
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1997/en/si/0182.html#zzsi182y1997a32

32 (2) A person shall not enter a bus lane with a vehicle other than an omnibus or a pedal cycle during the period of operation of the bus lane which shall be indicated on an information plate.

markpb

paulysoprano wrote: »

Aye id be up for that , just got this email from the Dept of Transport, i asked them why they banned motorbikes the response was: The College Green priority lane would be a matter for Dublin City Council - customerservices@dublincity.ie
Regards

Stephen Blake
Department of Transport.

EH i thought DCC Said it was a matter for the Dept of Transport

Typical bureaucrat DoT buck passing rubbish. Mail them back and tell them you're asking about the general legislation and not the specific College Green usage.

Run_to_da_hills

crocro wrote: »

Section 32 (2) of the Road Traffic (Traffic and Parking) Regulations, 1997.
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1997/en/si/0182.html#zzsi182y1997a32

Why is O Connell St and Upper Pearse St exempt from this? :rolleyes:

markpb

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Why is O Connell St and Upper Pearse St exempt from this? :rolleyes:

O'Connell St southbound is only half a bus lane so motorcyclists are free to use the second lane. I presume Pearse St is the same.

mobpd

crocro wrote: »

Section 32 (2) of the Road Traffic (Traffic and Parking) Regulations, 1997.
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1997/en/si/0182.html#zzsi182y1997a32

Does this specifically allow for taxis as well?

Run_to_da_hills

markpb wrote: »

O'Connell St southbound is only half a bus lane so motorcyclists are free to use the second lane. I presume Pearse St is the same.

Strangly enough bus lane rules apply to this rush hour "cul de Sac" section for motorcyclists and no private or commercial vehicles are allowed through 24/7.

crocro

mobpd wrote: »

Does this specifically allow for taxis as well?

From the same regulations:

( b ) Sub-article (2) shall not apply to a taxi or a wheelchair accessible taxi which is being used in the course of business.

so yes taxis are specifically allowed in bus lanes when being 'used in the course of business'

Run_to_da_hills wrote:

Strangly enough bus lane rules apply to this section and no private or commercial vehicles are allowed through.

There are two lanes southbound on O'Connell street, one is a bus lane and is demarcated as such, the other allows private vehicles and is accessible from Cathal Brugha Street.

NewDubliner

faceman wrote: »

Is there any class of road user, including cyclists, that can deny the above rule breakers? Saying its unique to bikers is naive.

That's a very good point, except nobody said that bikers were unique in their law-breaking.

faceman wrote: »

I10% of road fatalities are bikers yet bikers only represent 2% of road users.

Bikers and cyclist are about equal in vulnerabilty, yet bikers get into more serious accidents...why is this?

faceman

NewDubliner wrote: »

Bikers and cyclist are about equal in vulnerabilty, yet bikers get into more serious accidents...why is this?

I'll assume you are asking that question seriously.

Cyclists have a lower average speed and cover less miles per year than a motorcyclist on average. You dont hear of many single vehicle collisions either with a bicycle either. PLus Ive already addressed the points regarding government lack of push for motorcycle safety already. Work out the rest yourself dude!

NewDubliner

faceman wrote: »

Cyclists have a lower average speed and cover less miles per year than a motorcyclist on average.... You dont hear of many single vehicle collisions either with a bicycle either.

Interesting, you've just admitted that the accidents are caused by motorcyclists travelling at unsafe speeds, and losing control of their vehicles. You've also, admitted that your statistic is distorted as it did not relate to the number of kilometres travelled.

faceman wrote: »

Work out the rest yourself dude!

I think I just have.

Paparazzo

NewDubliner, I really think you don't have a clue what you're talking about or you're just trolling.
This thread is "Will motorcyclists get stopped using the new bus priority on Collage Green?"
That's been answered. Close thread

seamus

NewDubliner wrote: »

Interesting, you've just admitted that the accidents are caused by motorcyclists travelling at unsafe speeds, and losing control of their vehicles.

No he didn't. He explained that motorcyclists inherently travel at faster speeds than cyclists. That doesn't necessarily mean they're unsafe. A motorcyclist travelling at 50km/h when they impact a car will suffer far more serious injuries than a cyclist travelling at 25km/h (which is a higher average for cyclists). Neither are necessarily moving at "unsafe" speeds.

His point is that motorcyclists represent an excessively vulnerable group on the roads, but this vulnerability is not being taken into account by the authorities.

faceman

NewDubliner wrote: »

Interesting, you've just admitted that the accidents are caused by motorcyclists travelling at unsafe speeds, and losing control of their vehicles. You've also, admitted that your statistic is distorted as it did not relate to the number of kilometres travelled.

I think I just have.

You are clearly just taking the piss now

trellheim

I saw a motorcyclist being stopped this AM by the copper at College Green.

NewDubliner

seamus wrote: »

No he didn't. He explained that motorcyclists inherently travel at faster speeds than cyclists.

And that this was one of the reasons for their higher injury rate of motorcyclists compared compared to cyclists who have similar vulnerability issues.

I think that excessive speed by motorcyclists might be a reason why they were excluded from the College Green cordon.

It will be interesting to see if motorcyclists will respect the law in that area once the current high-profile Garda operation is wound down.

crocro

NewDubliner wrote: »

I think that excessive speed by motorcyclists might be a reason why they were excluded from the College Green cordon.

The reason motorcycles are not allowed in the College Green Cordon is because the cordon is a bus lane and motrcycles aren't allowed in bus lanes as cited previously.

The RSA reasoning for banning motorcycles from bus lanes is :

RSA Motorcycle Safety Action Plan wrote:

3.3 Motorcyclists in bus lanes
3.3.1 The principle of whether motorcyclists should be permitted to use bus lanes has been considered for a number of reasons. Currently, during congested periods motorcyclists filter or pass to the right of stationary traffic. This can present the following problems:
 Potential conflict with oncoming traffic
 The risk of colliding with the opening door of a driver or passenger if passing close to the stationary traffic
 Potential conflict with pedestrians crossing through stationary traffic
3.3.2 Whilst permitting motorcyclists to use bus lanes could reduce the risk of conflict with oncoming traffic, objections to the idea of motorcyclists using bus lanes have also been raised - principally by cyclists who maintain that they will experience increased conflict or that they will feel threatened by additional fast-moving vehicles in the bus lane22. To a lesser extent there is potential for conflict with pedestrians as a result of the potentially higher speeds of motorcyclists and lower complicity. It has also been suggested that the presence of motorcyclists could reduce the benefit to buses.
3.3.3 The use of bus lanes by motorcyclists has been implemented in Bristol and trialled by Transport for London. Interim data from these trials is summarised below23:
 Reductions in motorcycle collisions between 0% and 31% at trial sites with no increase in overall collisions at any site
 Cyclist collisions and near-misses with motorcyclists increased by 3% during the trial.
3.3.4 The initial indications are that the overall safety benefits of permitting motorcyclists to use bus lane lanes are not statistically significant.
3.3.5 The Motorcycle Safety Action Plan supports the continued monitoring of the results of future studies into the benefits and costs of motorcycles using bus lanes, prior to making informed policy decision with regard to this practice.

Run_to_da_hills

crocro wrote: »

The reason motorcycles are not allowed in the College Green Cordon is because the cordon is a bus lane and motorcycles aren't allowed in bus lanes as cited previously.

Could the said department not just "bend the rule" slightly to accommodate motorcycles as they have previously done on O'Connell St and oposite Pearse St Garda Station as previously mentioned.

This particular stretch of road is wide enough to accommodate motorcyclists and it is certainly a lot wider than your "average" bus lane.

What now seems to be the increasing trend among motorcyclists is to manually push their bikes along this stretch of road particularly those trying to reach destinations within the area.

seamus

NewDubliner wrote: »

And that this was one of the reasons for their higher injury rate of motorcyclists compared compared to cyclists who have similar vulnerability issues.

I think that excessive speed by motorcyclists might be a reason why they were excluded from the College Green cordon.

Stop talking about turnips please and focus on the issue at hand.

See, I can pretend that you said something you didn't too. You clearly have a personal grudge against motorcyclists, so your opinion is useless.

zagmund

Ho, ho, ho, those people in the RSA and their sense of humour . . .

Consider these reasons and think about how many of them are actually attributable to motorcyclist misbehaviour and how many are not.

* Potential conflict with oncoming traffic - well yes, but this applies to anyone driving on the wrong side of the road.
* The risk of colliding with the opening door of a driver or passenger if passing close to the stationary traffic - this is down to car users behaviour (opening the door without confirming it is safe to do so, opening the door in traffic in the first place, etc . . .) and would also impact cyclists equally.
* Potential conflict with pedestrians crossing through stationary traffic - they have got to be joking here . . . because pedestrians might cross the road illegally, they decide the safest thing to do is to ban motorbikes to stop them crashing into the pedestrians.

z

Waterfall1975

zagmund wrote: »

Ho, ho, ho, those people in the RSA and their sense of humour . . .

Consider these reasons and think about how many of them are actually attributable to motorcyclist misbehaviour and how many are not.

* Potential conflict with oncoming traffic - well yes, but this applies to anyone driving on the wrong side of the road.
* The risk of colliding with the opening door of a driver or passenger if passing close to the stationary traffic - this is down to car users behaviour (opening the door without confirming it is safe to do so, opening the door in traffic in the first place, etc . . .) and would also impact cyclists equally.
* Potential conflict with pedestrians crossing through stationary traffic - they have got to be joking here . . . because pedestrians might cross the road illegally, they decide the safest thing to do is to ban motorbikes to stop them crashing into the pedestrians.

z

Your three points are covered by the 'protective mammy' position adopted by the RSA, who are really only trying to put the best safety interests of bikers first.

cyclopath2001

zagmund wrote: »

Potential conflict with oncoming traffic - well yes, but this applies to anyone driving on the wrong side of the road.

In the city, it is mostly motorcyclists that do this.

zagmund wrote: »

this is down to car users behaviour (opening the door without confirming it is safe to do so, opening the door in traffic in the first place, etc . . .)

But also points to a lack of defensive behaviour by motorcyclists, keeping a safe distance while passing and moderating speed in high-risk areas.

zagmund wrote: »

and would also impact cyclists equally.

Except that motorcyclists have a higher speed and momentum.

[QUOTE=zagmund;61376840they have got to be joking here . . . because pedestrians might cross the road illegally,[/QUOTE]You're implying that all road-crossing by pedestrians is illegal, when it is not.

Run_to_da_hills

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

In the city, it is mostly motorcyclists that do this..

Reason being that motorcyclists are forced into use the outside lane. :rolleyes:

In the days prior to cycle lanes it was common to see cyclists filtering through gaps in wall to wall traffic often on the outside lane facing oncoming traffic. Now that they have their own space the attitude by many cyclists seems to be fu*k you jack im ok.

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

But also points to a lack of defensive behavior by motorcyclists, keeping a safe distance while passing and moderating speed in high-risk areas.

Except that motorcyclists have a higher speed and momentum.

A door opening suddenly in front of a motorcyclist doing 5 or 10 mph is enough to cause serious injury including broken bones if the cycle falls over on top of him. Have you ever had a car door open suddenly in front of you? you obviously haven't done much cycling.

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

You're implying that all road-crossing by pedestrians is illegal, when it is not.

It should be illegal if pedestrian crossings are within the vicinity and they don't use them. Also J walking offenses should be enforced and you should agree with this one.

cyclopath2001

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Reason being that motorcyclists are forced into use the outside lane. :rolleyes:

Forced? They choose to do it.

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Have you ever had a car door open suddenly in front of you? you obviously haven't done much cycling.

Yes I have, but I travel more slowly and am prepared to stop if I cannot pass within a safe distance of a possible opening door. It's called 'defensive' riding. So, instead of zipping along at high speed and blowing my horn at people who get in my way, I anticipate and modify my trajectory to suit others. There are only a few places where this is really necessary.

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

It should be illegal if pedestrian crossings are within the vicinity and they don't use them.

And what is the size of this 'vicinity', in metres or car lengths? Do you know it?

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Also J walking offenses should be enforced and you should agree with this one.

As should 'driving without consideration for others'.

Run_to_da_hills

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Forced? They choose to do it .

Im talking of motorcyclists that refuse to use the bus lanes. they have no choice :rolleyes:

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Yes I have, but I travel more slowly and am prepared to stop if I cannot pass within a safe distance of a possible opening door. It's called 'defensive' riding.
.

The average experienced motorcyclists know a hell of a lot more about defensive driving than any cyclists. His life is at the mercy of some reckless idiot.

Apart from car doors opening in congested traffic, we have to be prepared for reckless cyclists, cycling without lights or reflective clothing, constantly weaving in and out of traffic without indicating, breaking traffic lights and other road signs.

Quint

So, with all the good reasons that motorcycles should use bus lanes, has anyone come up with a reason that motorcycles shouldn't use bus lanes?

cyclopath2001

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Im talking of motorcyclists that refuse to use the bus lanes. they have no choice :rolleyes:

How about obeying the rules of the road?

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

The average experienced motorcyclists know a hell of a lot more about defensive driving than any cyclists.

Not born out by statistics put forward by other motorcyclists. They say that motorcyclists have a higher than average injury rate.

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

we have to be prepared for reckless cyclists....

But not drivers and other motorcyclists? Clearly, you have an incomplete view of all of the risks.

BTW The answer to the pedestrian crossing question is 15 metres. That's roughly 5 car lengths either side of a pedestrian crossing. In any case, you must give way to pedestrians who have started crossing, legally or otherwise.

Run_to_da_hills

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

How about obeying the rules of the road?
.

We already went throough this, there is absolutely nothing wrong with motorcyclists filtering through traffic on the outer lane provided they obey the rules of the road and use common sense.

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Not born out by statistics put forward by other motorcyclists. They say that motorcyclists have a higher than average injury rate..

Already explained by another poster. They are more vulnerable and exposed to injury than any other form of transport on the road.

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

But not drivers and other motorcyclists? Clearly, you have an incomplete view of all of the risks. BTW The answer to the pedestrian crossing question is 15 metres. That's roughly 5 car lengths either side of a pedestrian crossing. In any case, you must give way to pedestrians who have started crossing, legally or otherwise.

I understand but as you know your self what about those pedestrians that walk out between the gaps of busses and high roofed vehicles without looking.

cyclopath2001

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

We already went throough this, there is absolutely nothing wrong with motorcyclists filtering through traffic on the outer lane provided they obey the rules of the road and use common sense.

Which they don't do.

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Already explained by another poster. They are more vulnerable and exposed to injury than any other form of transport on the road.

For which they don't adapt their own behaviour. Instead, absurdly, you blame cyclists more than any other kind of road user for the high injury rate among motorcyclists. The biggest risk to motorcyclists is their own behaviour.

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

I understand but as you know your self what about those pedestrians that walk out between the gaps of busses and high roofed vehicles without looking.

And for which it is necessary to make allowances...see 'driving with due care and consideration'

To come back on topic, the City Council wants to favour cycling and public transport and make Dublin city centre more pleasant. It seems that the current behaviour of motorcyclists has made their presence in College Green undesirable.

faceman

This thread should be closed, its pointless and way off topic. This Cyclist vs Motorcyclist bollocks is schoolyard stuff.

Some motorcyclists break the rules of the road regularly
Some cyclists break the rules of the road regularly

Deal with it kids.

Run_to_da_hills

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Which they don't do.

For which they don't adapt their own behaviour. Instead, absurdly, you blame cyclists more than any other kind of road user for the high injury rate among motorcyclists. The biggest risk to motorcyclists is their own behaviour.
.

You haven't a clue what you are talking about, Again the statistics: 70% of road accidents involving bikers are due to the fault of other road users. MAG Ireland can provide more details on this statistic. http://magireland.org/

cyclopath2001

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

You haven't a clue what you are talking about, Again the statistics: 70% of road accidents involving bikers are due to the fault of other road users. MAG Ireland can provide more details on this statistic. http://magireland.org/

Where is this statistic backed up on the MAG website? Can you provide a direct link? In any accident, there is a primary cause and there are contributory factors. In how many of these accidents was there contributory negligence by the motorcyclist?

Are there also statistics concerning legal compliance by motorcyclists? After all this is far more relevant to the reasons for their exclusion from College Green.

Run_to_da_hills

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Where is this statistic backed up on the MAG website? .

http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roadsafety/research/rsrr/theme5/indepthstudyofmotorcycleacc.pdf

Carawaystick

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roadsafety/research/rsrr/theme5/indepthstudyofmotorcycleacc.pdf

That's research published by a foreign government, presumably about their country not ours.

Run_to_da_hills

Carawaystick wrote: »

That's research published by a foreign government, presumably about their country not ours.

That foreign country is the UK where the Government there puts a lot more into the research and safety of the motorcyclist unlike here where they don't seem to give a damn. Im sure the statistics would be pretty much the same.

zagmund

This thread really has run its course . . . it has been a "I'm a cyclist and I hate motorcyclists and their silly motorcycles and the silly way they drive them and the silly noise they make and don't get me started on the silly helmets they wear . . ." thread for a few pages at this stage.

As above, let it go lads . . .

There has been no strong argument put forward to explain why they should be banned from the route, apart from 'arguments' that could be used to ban them from *all* roads. I haven't seen anything that explains specifically what it is about College Green that is so lethal to motorcyclists but that doesn't warrant banning them from (say) Dawson Street.

z

Calina

Yeah, I agree.

Lockdown at this stage.