Fed up as cyclists as public enemy #1

tomasrojo

No-one is arguing that Irish cycle facilities are fine. They most definitely are not.

Unfortunately, as I've posted before, the Irish public have made up their mind: no-one takes cycle facilities seriously, one way or the other. From the people who design them badly and without binding standards, to cyclists who eschew them, to taxi-drivers who park on them. They're a joke, and that's the way it currently is.

(According to what I've read, it isn't illegal to cycle on the road in Germany; it's illegal to cycle on the road where there's a blue bike path sign.)

seamus

smeedyova wrote: »

, but you clearly don't know anything about Germany if you think that there are anything more than cycling minor issues.

I think the point is generally that cycling in Germany is by no means perfect, but also that you can't just transplant Germany's system to Ireland for the belwo reasons;

I usually cycled 7km one way to from home to work. I had to stop at two junctions each with bicycle traffic lights

If were to use the 3.5km of grade-separated cycle tracks on my 10km commute, I would have an additional ten junctions to deal with, in addition to a countless number of entrances/exits to homes and businesses where priority if given to traffic.

people cycle one-way so there is no danger of colliding, pedestrians stick to their path and cyclists to theirs.

Irish people don't. Cyclists ride either way down cycle tracks. Pedestrians walk in cycle tracks, whether or not they are on their own or taking up the entire path ten abreast.

The point being that there's more to "proper" cycle tracks than simply sticking down some red brick or tarmac. The German system works not because they know how do cycle tracks properly, but because the general public knows how to use them properly.

smeedyova

seamus wrote: »

The German system works not because they know how do cycle tracks properly, but because the general public knows how to use them properly.

Exactly. I was bewildered by one of the above replies who asked me what separates the cyclists from pedestrians on bike paths in Germany...am, basic intelligence and education.

galwaycyclist

smeedyova wrote: »

Please stick to what you know.

ROBERT SCHNÜLL, DANKMAR ALRUTZ u.a.: SICHERUNG VON RADFAHRERN AN STÄDTISCHEN KNOTENPUNKTEN
Auch BASt-Studie belegt: Radwege an Kreuzungen besonders unfallträchtig

Wichtigstes Ergebnis: An Knotenpunkten sind Radfahrer auf der Fahrbahn oder - außer im Kreisverkehr - auf Radfahrstreifen erheblich sicherer als auf Radwegen. Dies belegt eine Untersuchung zur Führung geradeausfahrender Radfahrer auf städtischen Hauptverkehrsstraßen für die Bundesanstalt für Straßenwesen.

seamus

smeedyova wrote: »

Exactly. I was bewildered by one of the above replies who asked me what separates the cyclists from pedestrians on bike paths in Germany...am, basic intelligence and education.

That was me
But that's kind of my point. It works in Germany, because that's what the German people are like. It doesn't work in Ireland, because the Irish are less concerned about such trivial laws.

Although people in general aren't that different. I'd be interested to know if the number of collisions between peds and cyclists is noticeably higher in Germany than elsewhere.

tomasrojo

smeedyova wrote: »

Exactly. I was bewildered by one of the above replies who asked me what separates the cyclists from pedestrians on bike paths in Germany...am, basic intelligence and education.

You weren't asked that question though. You were asked what separated pedestrians from cyclists on this:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/whetzky/3927543904/

There are good examples that show how effective facilities can be, but you yourself chose this, somewhat undermining your argument.

smeedyova

This information is from 1993!!!!!!!!

smeedyova

tomasrojo wrote: »

You weren't asked that question though. You were asked what separated pedestrians from cyclists on this:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/whetzky/3927543904/

There are good examples that show how effective facilities can be, but you yourself chose this, somewhat undermining your argument.

What's wrong with that?

tomasrojo

The pedestrian part is far too narrow, and the cycle lane passes within one metre of multiple doorways.

seamus

smeedyova wrote: »

What's wrong with that?

There's no separation. See that wheelie bin there? There's no room for a person to get by there without walking on the cycle lane. Imagine someone walking their dog or pushing a buggy, walking two abreast. They will have to take up at least half of the cycle lane to get by. And for the next 20 metres by the look of it, as the path remains too narrow there.

CramCycle

smeedyova wrote: »

What's wrong with that?

There is barely enough room for the pedestrians, if there are two side by side or if they are coming in opposite directions they have to use the bike path, that said over in west Germany I often found people in the cycle lane near junctions, I pulled onto the road, cars let me out and I pulled back in after the junction. There was no shouting, no injuries, no offence, despite the stereotyping of Germans in this thread, their capacity for common sense outside of the main cities seems to be better than the irish but that was my experience and by no means conclusive to fact.

smeedyova

Uff. I have enough. The reason that there are no bicycle lanes to speak of in this country is because most people have no experience of how things are done properly in other countries. Another reason is the low standards that many people here have and the "it'll do" attitude rather than "let's do this the best way we can." Even the cyclists on this forum seem to think that it is fine to cycle within a few centimetres of a moving bus...well, keep it that way...I know where I'll be cycling in comfort and safety, though

tomasrojo

Do you really think that this
http://www.flickr.com/photos/whetzky/3927543904/
is doing things properly?

Do you think this is the end-product of the thought "Let's do this the best way we can?"

smeedyova

I admit that it's not a perfect example, I couldn't find a better one in the time that I had. That said, with a little intelligence it works perfectly and I know that for certain having cycled it many times.

tomasrojo

Fair enough. You seem to be implying that Irish people are unintelligent though. That's the second time you've done it. It's probably more to do with having scant regard for rules rather than a lack of intelligence.

Also, if you cycle briskly (not very fast; say, average 20km/h over total journey), I think that example you gave would result in collisions with pedestrians.

seamus

smeedyova wrote: »

That said, with a little intelligence it works perfectly and I know that for certain having cycled it many times.

The one thing I know is that no matter what system you design, in any context, you cannot rely on human intelligence to compensate for and avoid the flaws in the system.

If anything, you can always rely on humans to discover every flaw in a system because no matter what you do, they will always try to do things the wrong way.

German people are not more intelligent than any other country. As tomasrojo says, I'm looking at that cycle track, and I wouldn't be happy doing any kind of respectable speed on it, no matter how respectful peds were of it. The clearances are too small.

smeedyova

No, it wouldn't, because pedestrians don't walk on the bicycle path in Germany, at least, most of time when I cycle the 7km from home to work I will never come across a pedestrian on the bicycle path.

With that I'm not contributing to this thread anymore...it seems clear to me that most people here like to complain about the Irish system, not do anything constructive about it and attack systems that do work rather than adopt them...

CramCycle

smeedyova wrote: »

Even the cyclists on this forum seem to think that it is fine to cycle within a few centimetres of a moving bus...well, keep it that way...I know where I'll be cycling in comfort and safety, though

It's not fine, thats why you should use good road positioning and leave yourself enough room to move in if it (and most of the time it won't be) is needed. I have found I am given the same amount of room to my right as I have taken from the kerb in almost every situation.

Personally I will be cycling in safety, on the road, in Ireland in a few minutes but thats just how I roll. If you have been in Germany for so long you will realise that there are several parts that have no cycle lanes and some that have unsafe cycle lanes. There are also several parts that have great facilities unfortunately, the few parts of Ireland were these might actually be beneficial do not have the space to implement them or already have them.

blorg

@smeedyova- I have cycled around 600km across Germany, from the French border to Austria. Most of my cycling has been in the south, although I have also cycled in Berlin. I am not entirely ignorant of German cycling facilities. The facilities are unquestionably better than Ireland but from my experience:

- Two-way cycle tracks are very common (e.g. track on only one side of the road.) These were generally sufficiently wide for two bikes to pass easily but not always.
- Cycle paths often took a less direct route than the road. Sometimes this added tens of kilometers; I remember one section where the road was dead straight like an arrow but the cycle path went back and forth from one side to another constantly. I think it was 40km by the road and ended up being 60km by the bike path.
- The surface on cycle paths was often far worse than on the road.
- Cycle paths often suffered from a more severe gradient than the road and went up and down when the road was flat.
- Shared use paths were common and suffered from pedestrian congestion.
- Where cycle paths crossed minor roads the cyclist was expected to yield.
- On-road cycle paths were placed adjacent to the door zone of parked cars.
- Though not as frequent as here, there were examples of bike paths ending in stupid places.

I have no problem with cycle paths, as long as they are not compulsory. The German network is often very pleasant, especially if you are just pottering along rather than trying to keep up a reasonable speed.

What it comes down to, is there are different types of cycling. The German cycle network is suitable for your type of cycling. It is not suitable for others. As long as it is optional, there is no problem.

CramCycle

smeedyova wrote: »

With that I'm not contributing to this thread anymore...it seems clear to me that most people here like to complain about the Irish system, not do anything constructive about it and attack systems that do work rather than adopt them...

Most people want it changed (ie the repeal of mandatory use etc.) but they do not want it replaced with a system that will not work with current infrastructure. You can't implement the german system here because of lack of space and the inherent dangers it will place on drivers and cyclists alike by restricting views and increasing the number of junctions, therefore, by proxy the amount of times a collision at a junction is likely to occur.

tomasrojo

blorg wrote: »

What it comes down to, is there are different types of cycling. The German cycle network is suitable for your type of cycling. It is not suitable for others. As long as it is optional, there is no problem.

That's one thing I've never got a satisfactory answer for: why did the Netherlands and Denmark (and Germany, where there's a blue sign) make use of facilities compulsory? It's not as if cyclists using the road causes havoc in other countries, and I assume the vast majority of cyclists would be more than happy to continue to use the facilities rather than the road.

galwaycyclist

smeedyova wrote: »

This information is from 1993!!!!!!!!

Correct! We are not talking about quantum physics here we are talking about long recorded, and repeated, observations of established patterns in traffic conflicts. Irish engineers looked at the roadside cycle path concept in 1975 and noted the issue of junction conflicts and noted the need for separate traffic lights.

And, as an aside, they questioned whether Irish cyclists would even use such a system if it was built.

The main issue for us in Ireland is that this infomation was available before the Dublin Transportation Office starting pushing their arguably unworkable segregation model in 1998.

tomasrojo

The other business in Germany I find a bit odd is that unless you have a light racing bike, you must have lights fixed to your bike. I can see that probably reduces Ninja cycling, but it also means you can't have very good lights, since you have to have them attached to your bike and therefore vulnerable to vandalism and theft. Having used bottle-dynamo lights for years before getting stronger, quite expensive LED lights, I'd rather not go back now.

daddydick

Ah quieten down and get in off the road

doozerie

smeedyova wrote:

A cyclist in Germany would be stopped by the police for cycling near traffic because it's so dangerous and here we're expected to!

The issues around cycle paths have already been well covered in previous posts so I'm not going to comment on that topic other than to say that I share the views of the shortcomings/limitations of cycle paths generally. What I do wish to ask though is why cycling near traffic is so dangerous, as you describe it in your post above? And if you really believe this to be the case does this mean that in your view cyclists should never venture out on roads outside of cities where no cycle paths exist? That may not actually be what you are implying but unfortunately it is a mindset that the prevalence of cycle paths can foster in the most narrow minded of motorists - for such people if a cycle path does not exist on the road then no cyclists should be on the road, full stop, and this mindset is one of many things that contributes to the dangers posed to cyclists.

Jawgap

Some nice photos of a cycle lane in Toronto that's about to be removed.....

http://wvs.topleftpixel.com/11/07/14/

Incidentally, I think cycling in Dublin is fine - a bit of common sense and cop-on go a long way to making it enjoyable. It's as dangerous as you want it to be. Simply taking your time, showing some courtesy and being occasionally assertive makes for a positive experience.

Yes, it could be better, but it could also be worse - and trying to retro-fit decent infra-structure to our road network is like watching two elephants shagging - it's a lot of work, it's very noisey, takes a very long time to produce any kind of decent result and in the end you're left wondering what all the fuss was about in the first place.

blorg

tomasrojo wrote: »

That's one thing I've never got a satisfactory answer for: why did the Netherlands and Denmark (and Germany, where there's a blue sign) make use of facilities compulsory? It's not as if cyclists using the road causes havoc in other countries, and I assume the vast majority of cyclists would be more than happy to continue to use the facilities rather than the road.

As far as I know, it was done very early in Germany (1920s) not out of any concern for cyclists, but to get them out of the way so they would not be an inconvenience for motorists. They were only made compulsory in the Netherlands under Nazi occupation, although the earlier motives behind construction had been similar:

first Dutch Roads Congress, 1920 wrote:

After all, the construction of bicycle paths along the larger roads relieves traffic along these roads of an extremely bothersome element: the cyclist.

- From the timeline here

tomasrojo

Jawgap wrote: »

Some nice photos of a cycle lane in Toronto that's about to be removed.....

http://wvs.topleftpixel.com/11/07/14/

Is it the bit to the right that's the lane? I thought it was the entire part the cyclists are in, but then I thought they're occupying the whole road as a protest.

That Ford guy is an unpleasant character.

tomasrojo

blorg wrote: »

They were only made compulsory in the Netherlands under Nazi occupation

Have to be careful not to Godwin the thread!

It must be said that most people I've talked to in the Netherland and Denmark are very happy with the facilities. Tree roots breaking up the surface was a complaint though. I've a friend in Aachen who complains that the traffic-light sequences strongly favour the road over the cycle facilities.

tomasrojo

BTW, when does the Rathmines-Fairview facility open? I'm cautiously optimistic about that.

Saw it in this the other day:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVIseiDBslc

blorg

Just a couple of pics I took of the German infrastructure, showing the good and the bad.

My favourite parts of the network were small farming roads rather than specifically constructed cycle tracks. I think these were restricted to motor vehicles other than tractors (which were themselves rare.

On the other hand, this was probably the most comically stupid German cycle path (note it is also a two-way shared use path.)

monument

smeedyova wrote: »

Here is an image of a typical bike path there, note that it is totally separated from traffic by the kerb:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/whetzky/3927543904/

smeedyova wrote: »

What's wrong with that?

That's a fairly poor example of a bicycle lane -- it would be seen a very poor design. In general Germany can be a very mixed bag and standards overall are below Dutch and Danish standards.

smeedyova wrote: »

Uff. I have enough. The reason that there are no bicycle lanes to speak of in this country is because most people have no experience of how things are done properly in other countries. Another reason is the low standards that many people here have and the "it'll do" attitude rather than "let's do this the best way we can." Even the cyclists on this forum seem to think that it is fine to cycle within a few centimetres of a moving bus...well, keep it that way...I know where I'll be cycling in comfort and safety, though

I have experience of cycling in Copenhagen, Berlin, Paris, and other cities and have researched cycle lanes in the Netherlands.

The example you gave shows that you don't get it.

I'd welcome Copenhagen-style bike lanes here on some of the main routes with heavy and sometimes faster traffic, but people like you need to start cycling now to add to the critical mass to justify such a reallocation of road space. Cycling here is already safe, the lanes would be [for] more comfort and to bypass congestion.

smeedyova wrote: »

Cramcycle: you're obviously not used to proper bicycle paths if you think it's okay, safe and acceptable for cyclists to weave in and out of traffic like that. A cyclist in Germany would be stopped by the police for cycling near traffic because it's so dangerous and here we're expected to!

It's clearly not as dangerous as you're making out -- the amount of people cycling is increasing and the small amount of accidents has decreased.

smeedyova

blorg wrote: »

Just a couple of pics I took of the German infrastructure, showing the good and the bad.

My favourite parts of the network were small farming roads rather than specifically constructed cycle tracks. I think these were restricted to motor vehicles other than tractors (which were themselves rare.

On the other hand, this was probably the most comically stupid German cycle path (note it is also a two-way shared use path.)

Those paths are to allow cyclists to WALK their bikes up or down steps, not CYCLE. How many steps in Dublin do you know of where there is such a provision?

galwaycyclist

blorg wrote: »

My favourite parts of the network were small farming roads rather than specifically constructed cycle tracks. I think these were restricted to motor vehicles other than tractors (which were themselves rare.

Yes this is one of the German features that Cyclist.ie wants replicated here. Its in the Cyclist.ie policy document.

H2.3 Routes for local traffic only
Figure: German plate creating
Residents/Cyclists-only street

In Germany and France, an established traffic reduction measure for local roads in both rural and urban areas is to prohibit any through traffic that does not have business there: in France, the ‘sauf riverains’ sign; in Germany, the ‘Anlieger frei’ and similar signage. This immediately eliminates rat runs without any physical re-engineering. The roads remain open to cyclists, who benefit from traffic-free routes that also provide short cuts unavailable to other commuters. In rural areas, these regulations permit the creation of extensive cycle routes where the only other traffic is local residents and farmers accessing their land. There is a need for similar “Residents/Agricultural traffic only” regulations in Ireland.

CramCycle

smeedyova wrote: »

Those paths are to allow cyclists to WALK their bikes up or down steps, not CYCLE. How many steps in Dublin do you know of where there is such a provision?

Are there many or any places where this would be necessary?

Doctor Bob

CramCycle wrote: »

Are there many or any places where this would be necessary?

Alternatively, can you think of any flights of steps that wouldn't be improved by putting ramps or running tracks for bike, pram or buggy wheels? Must they be 'necessary'? Is it not enough that it's a cycle-friendly adaptation of the urban realm?

Such a feature should be part of every flight of steps by default, unless there is a strong case for not doing it.

galwaycyclist

CramCycle wrote: »

Are there many or any places where this would be necessary?

Yes (at the risk of sounding smart) anywhere where there is a destination for cyclists accessible by steps.

In Galway, the city council put cycle paths on the Quincentenary bridge crossing the Corrib but provided no direct means of accessing them from the University campus on one side or the adjacent residential areas on the other side of the river.

The students themselves dug informal ramps into the embankments. Years later, the council came back, on one side of the river only, and put in steps but declined to provide any wheeling ramps for cyclists using the steps. Thus spending tax money to replace an informal arrangement with something to a lower level of service. A couple of years back, the Uni finally put in steps with wheeling ramps on their side.

HivemindXX

Doctor Bob wrote: »

Alternatively, can you think of any flights of steps that wouldn't be improved by putting ramps or running tracks for bike, pram or buggy wheels? Must they be 'necessary'? Is it not enough that it's a cycle-friendly adaptation of the urban realm?

Such a feature should be part of every flight of steps by default, unless there is a strong case for not doing it.

In general steps are used where the incline is too steep for a ramp to be used safely. Should each stairwell in a building be half steps and half ramp? Would you consider that safe?

CramCycle

Doctor Bob wrote: »

Alternatively, can you think of any flights of steps that wouldn't be improved by putting ramps or running tracks for bike, pram or buggy wheels? Must they be 'necessary'? Is it not enough that it's a cycle-friendly adaptation of the urban realm?

Such a feature should be part of every flight of steps by default, unless there is a strong case for not doing it.

I was more thinking are there enough places to make it compulsory (which in terms of the ramps I think it already is for new steps for wheelchair access), I was honestly asking where? the only place I can think of is in Temple Bar either at the entrance from the Ha'penny bridge or beside the central bank and Ha'penny bridge itself and I presumed there were issues with doing it at either or else they would have already for wheelchair users or pram users (there is no need to do it for cyclists at any of these points).

Basically, there isn't a need to make it for cyclists because there is nowhere in Dublin this is an issue, but there should be ramps on every staircase for prams/wheelchair users etc. I just don't know why it hasn't been done in the few places it should have been.

Anyway, way OT

CramCycle

galwaycyclist wrote: »

Yes (at the risk of sounding smart) anywhere where there is a destination for cyclists accessible by steps.

In Galway, the city council put cycle paths on the Quincentenary bridge crossing the Corrib but provided no direct means of accessing them from the University campus on one side or the adjacent residential areas on the other side of the river.

Apologies, I though I made it obvious I was talking about in Dublin, it's pretty flat in the city centre. I don't know of any cycle paths in Dublin that have steps along them (though I could be wrong). The few places I mentioned can be easily circled by bike and only add mere minutes on (in fact potentially quicker than dismounting and going through the pedestrian area). It's been awhile (and I don't remember it well) since I have been in Galway.

seamus

Indeed, there are very few steps in Dublin city and in general we've always tended to opt for sloped streets instead of steps, especially compared to other european cities.

The only one I can really think of is the transition from Temple Bar to the Ha'penny bridge, and I imagine that one annoys wheelchair users too. Though the millenium bridge accomodates both.

Hermy

smeedyova wrote: »

What's wrong with that?

I wouldn't care to be a wheelchair user for one thing.

Doctor Bob

HivemindXX wrote: »

In general steps are used where the incline is too steep for a ramp to be used safely. Should each stairwell in a building be half steps and half ramp? Would you consider that safe?

Apologies if I wasn't clear: I'm not talking about riding a bike on the slope, I'm talking about a ramp to facilitate wheeling up/down steps where the only other option is to carry it (or take a long detour). It's a standard feature in many European cities (Amsterdam, Copenhagen, Berlin...), but almost entirely absent here. The proportion of width (50/50 split? Probably not...) is a matter of detail; I'm more concerned with the principle.

And there are lots of steps around Dublin, flat and all as it may be- every train station has them, to take just one example.

CramCycle

Doctor Bob wrote: »

And there are lots of steps around Dublin, flat and all as it may be- every train station has them, to take just one example.

Most of them have lifts as well, I carry mine up the stairs because i can and people who can't have the lift or escalator as an alternative, although the ones you find in many european cities are handy (the steel rail, one for bikes going up and one for bikes going down) and take up little space, although undoubtedly you'll have some scummer in dublin either tripping for a lawsuit or just damaging them in general.

I'm just saying we don't have an urgent need for them (or in my opinion any need) for bicycles.

galwaycyclist

CramCycle wrote: »

I'm just saying we don't have an urgent need for them (or in my opinion any need) for bicycles.

Yes we arguably don't need them where our cycling model is based on simply moving fit young adults. But when we start trying for a range of utility journeys with a range of cyclists abilities and carrying luggage of various kinds we start creating a need for them.

What happens when you have people who are cycling in their ordinary/business clothes and don't wish to hoist a bike on their shoulder and jog up the steps?

@Monument not trying to hijack your thread do we move this?

CramCycle

galwaycyclist wrote: »

Yes we arguably don't need them where our cycling model is based on simply moving fit young adults. But when we start trying for a range of utility journeys with a range of cyclists abilities and carrying luggage of various kinds we start creating a need for them.

Like I said, in Dublin there are few steps and those mentioned above can either be easily circumnavigated or in the case of at train/DART stations there are lifts and escalators which can be used. It maybe different in Galway, I can't comment on Galway but in Dublin, I don't see the need, regardless of type of cyclist.

On a separate note, anywhere there are steps for public access I believe there should be a ramp for prams/wheelchairs etc, I just don't think such things are needed for bikes but they should be there for other reasons.

What happens when you have people who are cycling in their ordinary/business clothes and don't wish to hoist a bike on their shoulder and jog up the steps?

Carry it at their sides or use the other facilities mentioned?

@Monument not trying to hijack your thread do we move this?

Also good point on moving this as we are kind of hi jacking this thread.

blorg

Wheeling ramps make perfect sense and are common on overpasses etc here in China. They are invaluable with a loaded touring bike, any time I have had to take it up or down steps without a ramp has been torture. I imagine even carrying a normal bike would be tough too if you were a bit older/more frail, never mind you might have shopping. I have no issue with wheeling ramps, they are super.

What was comical about that German path is it left the (quiet, small) road to go down a steep incline it was difficult to get the bike down, run along a narrow shared use path behind some houses, through a pool of mud and some barriers to stop motorbikes and then meandered back up to join the same road about 300m later. It was utterly pointless from any standpoint. The only plus point was that there were no peds (or indeed other cyclists) as there was no reason whatsoever for anyone other than a tourist who didn't know better to go down there.

monument

In Copenhagen, these rails are used (Google Street View) on steps outdoors and in stairwells in buildings like train stations.

Outdoors, the preference is of course to provide bicycle ramps where cyclists stay on their bikes, but that's not always possible given space and practical reasons (such as low demand, or another route not to far away). Useful for retrofitting under/overpasses but not an excuse to not provide a cyclable ramp on, for example, a new build motorway overpass.

tomasrojo

In answer to my own question, it seems the Rathmines-Fairview route will open in September.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/magazine/2011/0716/1224300627383.html

(ALONG THE GRAND CANAL: Cycling )

And the time on the still-to-be-finished route? Thirteen minutes from Portobello Bridge to the Grand Canal Theatre. By car it would take at least twice that in normal daytime traffic. Barring road crossings, it’s also some of the most pleasant city cycling available. The final route is expected to open in September.

It'll be interesting anyway.

This thread is really derailed now, isn't it?

Korvanica

Video Showing its not only Cyclists that do stupid things...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QE2xNtjJeC0