Letter in today's Irish Times

uberwolf

Letter in today's Irish Times:

Madam, – I would like to bring to your readers’ attention two sections of the Road Traffic (Traffic and Parking) Regulations, 1997 that refer to cyclists.

“Section 14 (3) All pedal cycles must be driven on a cycle track where one is provided.

“Section 47 (1) A pedal cyclist shall not drive a pedal cycle on a roadway in such a manner as to result in more than two pedal cyclists driving abreast, save when overtaking other pedal cyclists, and then only if to do so will not endanger, inconvenience or obstruct other traffic or pedestrians.”

Over the past number of months I have witnessed cyclists cycling on the road right beside a brand new cycle lane. Furthermore, cycling clubs appear to think that it is acceptable to cycle in “race formation” while training. Both these practices are against the law and result in the cyclist being put at unnecessary risk. – Yours, etc,

RICHIE McCORMACK,
Executive Technician,
Palmerston Depot,
Roads Maintenance,
South Dublin County Council,
Cursis Stream,
Old Lucan Road,
Palmerston,
Dublin 20.

this goads me. I'm not as familiar as some here, but is there a distinction between cycle lane and cycle track? In so far as some are prescribed, and others not?
that, in combination with an broadside against the sport of cycling.

mloc123

meh, people that write into the times are one step above youtube comments...

uberwolf

well this is a chap who feels happy to write representing himself as part of the county council roads department. So it's representative of a mindset in there.

seamus

A pedal cyclist shall not drive a pedal cycle on a roadway in such a manner as to result in more than two pedal cyclists driving abreast
...
cycling clubs appear to think that it is acceptable to cycle in “race formation”

This mistake is made constantly, everywhere. How the feck do you get confused by the words "more than two abreast" and assume it means that you must ride in single file?

I very rarely encounter cycling clubs on roads cycling more than two abreast. In fact, I never encounter large groups cycling more than two abreast unless it's an official race.

mloc123

"Executive Technician", I presume that is a "Executive Shovel Technician"

Cookie_Monster

"Executive Technician" = Roadworks shovel guy

when is that law in regards to not having to use the cycle tracks being brought in?

As for the point of big groups of cyclists 3/4/5 abreast I'm afraid I have to agree, its annoying and unnecessary on busy roads

mloc123

http://ie.linkedin.com/pub/richard-mccormack/24/55/b09

seamus

Going by his education, he appears to be mid-thirties, maybe 40. He might be savvy enough to discuss it here with us if someone wants to mail him?

mloc123

seamus wrote: »

Going by his education, he appears to be mid-thirties, maybe 40. He might be savvy enough to discuss it here with us if someone wants to mail him?

I'm mor interested in what he did in between 1996 and 2005... the internet, makes stalking too easy.

tomasrojo

uberwolf wrote: »

Letter in today's Irish Times:


this goads me. I'm not as familiar as some here, but is there a distinction between cycle lane and cycle track? In so far as some are prescribed, and others not?
that, in combination with an broadside against the sport of cycling.

In Irish law there's no such thing as a cycle lane. Both on-road and sidewalk facilities are called "cycle tracks" here. Which is a pity, as there was already a well-established convention in the English language of cycle tracks being sidewalk or off-road, and cycle lanes being on-road.

I like this man's attention to detail. The name on his LinkedIn page is "RIchard McCormack".

He's wrong about the "racing formation". Two abreast is permitted. He's right about the SI that makes cycle tracks compulsory, but since that SI has never been tested in law and the National Cycling Framework of a few years ago conceded that many cycle tracks are badly maintained and hazardous, I wouldn't bet on the SI being upheld should it ever go to court.

tomasrojo

tomasrojo wrote: »

In Irish law there's no such thing as a cycle lane. Both on-road and sidewalk facilities are called "cycle tracks" here. Which is a pity, as there was already a well-established convention in the English language of cycle tracks being sidewalk or off-road, and cycle lanes being on-road.

I like this man's attention to detail. The name on his LinkedIn page is "RIchard McCormack".

He's wrong about the "racing formation". Two abreast is permitted. He's right about the SI that makes cycle tracks compulsory, but since that SI has never been tested in law and the National Cycling Framework of a few years ago conceded that many cycle tracks are badly maintained and hazardous, I wouldn't bet on the SI being upheld should it ever go to court.

If you google "cycle lane cycle track", this is near the top.
http://dublinobserver.com/2010/10/cycle-lane-highlights-in-dublin/

It's one of @monument's articles.

Where do you think one might find the "brand new cycle lanes" Richard writes of? Probably on his route to work. I bet they're absolute rubbish, like all the others.

Cookie_Monster

tomasrojo wrote: »

http://dublinobserver.com/2010/10/cycle-lane-highlights-in-dublin/

It's one of @monument's articles.

Lol, quality.

tomasrojo

mloc123 wrote: »

meh, people that write into the times are one step above youtube comments...

True enough, though the correspondence doesn't descend into obscenity and name-calling quite so quickly.

At least, I hope it doesn't, as I sent in a brief response.

macken04

We as the consumers of these 'cycling tracks' should write a common response. More chance of getting something published that way

Robertd_07

If nothing else, I think his employers (SDCC) will have an issue with him linking his position in work with a personal opinion. I know I'm going to write a letter to them on this anyway.

mikemac

Is this his own personal opinion or an official statement from SDCC?

If it's just from him, then I doubt his employer will be impressed. You shouldn't claim to speak for somebody without permission

Beasty

Can't see why the "roads maintenance" department should be making any sort of official statement on this (unless they think these cyclists are doing too much damage to the roads:rolleyes:), and hence I think we can safely assume this letter was sent in a personal capacity, with his job being included in an (failed so far as I am concerned) attempt to add some credibility.

If this is the case, I would have thought his employers would not be particularly impressed if they are made aware of this

mloc123

Perhaps an email/letter to sdcc asking if the original letter was in an official capacity?

macken04

i would assume his employers would be very unhappy with being attached to what i consider a personal attack on cyclists. Although he may have a point to some extent, in regards to the law stating 'cycle tracks' must be used, the state and design of many make this dangerous to many.

Beasty, would it be ok if i was to write a reply with a common context from the forum?

Roadtoad

I'll give him full marks for identifying himself clearly, and not hiding behind an alias. Such comments have to be worth way more than any from our anonymous banter.

macken04

identifying himself could well land him in serious trouble. i would never do such a thing. Im sure my boss with run me out of the building, especially if i worked for a public institution, also the one charged with designing and creating these monstrosities

mockler007

if this guy spent more time fixing the roads in palmerstown, instead of sending letters that do nothing, maybe then my nans house would have water in that area, never mind the holes in the road, and the manky cyclelanes, wait there are no cycle lanes in palmerstown, ok at the footbridge there is, all 20 meters of it.
how many times do drivers get held up with there wide tractors etc etc etc

fair play to the guy, he has mastered the fine art of shovel leaning and writing into the times at the same time, who said men cant multi-task:D

English Bob

Drivers who think it's easier to overtake a group of club cyclists in single file are the type of drivers who think it's ok to squeeze so close to get past you they nearly knock you into a ditch (& all for the sake of a few seconds gained! Do these people not realise the danger they put cyclists in?!). Drivers as far as I can tell have very little idea of how to give a cyclist room on the road. In the wet conditions this week I have been gob-smacked at the poor driving I witnessed with cars not being driven with care and attention when overtaking me on the bike.
All drivers should be properly educated in how to give space to cyclists when overtaking.
Also., the 'cycle lane' & hard shoulder is so full of crap you'd need to borrow a shovel to make it through!!!

High Nellie

Seems that he is a 'civil engineer'. Working in that dept. he 'should' know that many of the cycle lanes are highly dangerous.
As he used his work address, which is a public dept., it would seem that it would be reasonable that constructive comment could he sent him at that addrss.
Anyone got his work e-mail address?

airscotty

English Bob wrote: »

Also., the 'cycle lane' & hard shoulder is so full of crap you'd need to borrow a shovel to make it through!!!

Never a truer word said.

High Nellie

High Nellie wrote: »

Seems that he is a 'civil engineer'. Working in that dept. he 'should' know that many of the cycle lanes are highly dangerous.
As he used his work address, which is a public dept., it would seem that it would be reasonable that constructive comment could he sent him at that addrss.
Anyone got his work e-mail address?

Or, better still, the e-mail address of his line manager??

mikemac

If I wrote a letter to the Irish Times and gave my work details I'd be hauled into HR

Wonder if anything will happen the bould Richie

Captain Havoc

macken04 wrote: »

i would assume his employers would be very unhappy with being attached to what i consider a personal attack on cyclists. Although he may have a point to some extent, in regards to the law stating 'cycle tracks' must be used, the state and design of many make this dangerous to many.

Beasty, would it be ok if i was to write a reply with a common context from the forum?

We could write a letter but I don't think we should get boards.ie involved but by all means if someone or some people want to stand over the letter.

copacetic

seamus wrote: »

This mistake is made constantly, everywhere. How the feck do you get confused by the words "more than two abreast" and assume it means that you must ride in single file?

I very rarely encounter cycling clubs on roads cycling more than two abreast. In fact, I never encounter large groups cycling more than two abreast unless it's an official race.

I see it quite a bit out the enniskerry road, often 3 or 4 abreast. Generally it's the bigger groups with 2 abreast at front and back and more in the middle.

Another quite bad bit is on the way up past the Mint out over the M50 where they have narrowed the road to only a cars width and put the cycle lane on the path. Every sat and sun morning loads of people cycle 2 abreast out the road ignoring the lane (which is not a great lane design right enough) It makes it impossible to get by as it's quite busy coming the other way.

Imo this is the kind of riding that really pisses people in cars off, there is a clear cycle lane and people ignore it holding up cars on a road that is only designed to work if people actually use the cycle lane. Although it's annoying I always use the cycle lane here knowing how inconsiderate it is not too...

Beasty

Captain Havoc wrote: »

We could write a letter but I don't think we should get boards.ie involved but by all means if someone or some people want to stand over the letter.

Definitely cannot mention boards without clearing it with the powers that be (Darragh/Dav)

I would agree with Captain Havoc - if individuals want to put their (real) names to a letter, clearly that is nothing to do with Boards (even if you use boards to formulate it)

macken04

Your right beasty,
I reckon we should as a group reply to this statement, more chance of rebuttal being published that way. Maybe i could type up something and link to a google document, leave it up until monday for anyone to sign and then send it off to the editor ??

Would linking be ok beasty, i will not bring boards.ie or anyone connection to the site into the letter

Thanks

Beasty

macken04 wrote: »

Would linking be ok beasty, i will not bring boards.ie or anyone connection to the site into the letter

Thanks

No problem as far as I am concerned (so long as there is nothing that could be considered libelous!)

macken04

oh god no, right gona relax for the night, work 2mo so that will give me some time to write a nice response.
Happy New Year all

paddymacsporran

Hope the work tomorrow isn't wasting public money by using the taxpayers time to attend to personal matters - LOL!

Pretty much what the bold RIchard did... I can see his point re groups 4 or 5 abreast, but the rest of it is at best ill-informed and naive in my opinion.

Happy new year to all!

Tails142

He is gonna get hauled over the coals for signing off an opinion piece as a representative of SDCC. Unless of course it wasnt him at all, anyone ever think of that...

cyclopath2001

Best riposte would be to highlight parts of SDCC's cycle track network that don't comply with road traffic laws (e.g. prescribed signs/road markings) and ask for SDCC to comply with the law.

velopeloton

English Bob wrote: »

Also., the 'cycle lane' & hard shoulder is so full of crap you'd need to borrow a shovel to make it through!!!

This week I have been cycling in Dublin for the first time in 15 years, I have not cycled in any other big city so I am not making a comparison. I have not seen many cycling lanes that are safe to cycle in. Some are very comical like the ones that are designed to make cyclists walk at a roundabout rather than cycle, some are plain dangerous while others like the new one in front of Ikea are an outrageous waste of the citizens money. Even the one along the sea front at Clontarf (which is the only one I would use), separated from the road is mixing with pedestrians and littered with dustbins, polls and sandbags (to stop the road flooding).

It seems to me the the whole point of cycling lanes in the city is to the benefit of car drivers and not cyclists.
As previous posters have said most of the lanes are so full of crap that you would need a shovel to get through them.
What is the point of building facilities that are so terrible, or not maintained, no one will use them?

Mr. Presentable

Or you could just ignore it instead of going all aggrieved villager on him.

Whatever you think of his opinion at least he has the balls to name himself

Captain Havoc

velopeloton wrote: »

This week I have been cycling in Dublin for the first time in 15 years, I have not cycled in any other big city so I am not making a comparison. I have not seen many cycling lanes that are safe to cycle in. Some are very comical like the ones that are designed to make cyclists walk at a roundabout rather than cycle, some are plain dangerous while others like the new one in front of Ikea are an outrageous waste of the citizens money. Even the one along the sea front at Clontarf (which is the only one I would use), separated from the road is mixing with pedestrians and littered with dustbins, polls and sandbags (to stop the road flooding).

It seems to me the the whole point of cycling lanes in the city is to the benefit of car drivers and not cyclists.
As previous posters have said most of the lanes are so full of crap that you would need a shovel to get through them.
What is the point of building facilities that are so terrible, or not maintained, no one will use them?

I think the random white lines have more to do with appeasing the EU, Greens or someone other than cyclists.

ashleey

Isn't everyone missing the point? How much does it delay a car journey to wait to overtake a group of cyclists? Unless you're driving an ambulance I can't imagine it's too significant. It's like saying 'I'm going to drive into those pesky pedestrians who are still crossing when the green man is flashing because I'm in an incredible hurry and I'm far more important than everyone else'. The roads are for everyone and you have to wait for the more vulnerable user. That's life.

Captain Havoc

ashleey wrote: »

Isn't everyone missing the point? How much does it delay a car journey to wait to overtake a group of cyclists? Unless you're driving an ambulance I can't imagine it's too significant. It's like saying 'I'm going to drive into those pesky pedestrians who are still crossing when the green man is flashing because I'm in an incredible hurry and I'm far more important than everyone else'. The roads are for everyone and you have to wait for the more vulnerable user. That's life.

Haters gonna hate

Jawgap

My first reaction to reading this was that it must have been a slow news day in the Irish Times and a slow day in SDCC!!

Is it worth replying to? And what would be the objective of replying? After all, this will be wrapping chips tomorrow night.

There's no cogent argument to rebut and surely corresponding with his bosses will likely get him in trouble - not a proprotionate response in my view.

SDCC have generally been very supportive of cycling so I'm not sure this guy's is implementing any official policy designed to wind cyclists up.

Although I do like his use if the phrase "race formation" - reminds of Red Bull.

cantalach

The Department of Transport announced just over 12 months ago that the Minister was reviewing the law as regards the mandatory nature of cycle tracks and said:

he hopes to remove the current requirement to use cycle lanes, where provided.

Nothing seems to have happened since, unfortunately.

Captain Havoc

As Statler and Waldorf would have put it: That was a medium letter, it wasn't rare and certainly wasn't well-done.

macken04

yea would it be worth the effort of writing a reply, imagine just getting into a to and fro. Maybe we should let him have his moment in the sun chances ae if his bosses see it he'll be in significant trouble as public representatives should not attack a group of society in that way so publicly.

I do not see him placing his contact information on the peace as being gutsy, but rather foolish.

ashleey

As this probably falls outside of the normal boxes to be ticked I would be surprised if his 'bosses' do anything about it. No doubt if they did there would have to be extensive consultation between 'the social partners' and blokes with beards and the government, with a full inquiry chaired by some blokes in wigs and then some legislation to be debated by the three tds that turn up that day before deciding that his identity can't be verified without getting him to produce his driving licence that he got on an amnesty when he was on his fifteenth learner permit... Meanwhile he should be fulfilling his duties as a shovel technician by trying to get running water back to the people that pay his wages

dave.obrien

Whose job is it in SDCC to review articles submitted to the Times by one of their employees to ascertain whether or not the letter upholds the Councils publicly stated opinion? Cause if it's not in their job description, not likely that there'll be anything done about it from that end...

techieelectric

Those were excellent photos in the Dublin Observer article, although this did make me laugh:

"Elsewhere, like on the Berkeley Road, a parking bay starts just around a corner, leaving unaware cyclist to pull on their break fast or pull out into traffic. At least the Mater Hospital is around the corner"

Someone's been wrapping their bars in Weetabix instead of bar tape.

The question was asked already but I don't think there was an answer, what's happening with the law making use of cycle tracks non-compulsory?

BostonB

Anyone who says cyclist should stay in the marked cycle lanes, should be made to cycle to work for a week and see if they can do it.

Beasty

techieelectric wrote: »

The question was asked already but I don't think there was an answer, what's happening with the law making use of cycle tracks non-compulsory?

I think the last update posted by someone here was this

The removal of the requirement to use cycle lanes where provided is one of the undertakings of the National Cycle Policy Framework. My Department is currently awaiting a response from An Garda Síochána in order to finalise some safety aspects of the proposal. Subject to their response I hope to make the necessary amending Regulations by early 2011.

Yours sincerely,

Noel Dempsey

monument

“Section 14 (3) All pedal cycles must be driven on a cycle track where one is provided."

lol

Yes, indeed, but only cycle track as described by the same regulations.

See my post here for the differences in signs. The quick of it is that where there is no sign there is no "cycle track" and this sign is not a cycle track sign and can be duly ignored: