Fixed Penalty Notices for Cycling by end of year

Jawgap

Glad to see they've the used the years of preparing for this legislation to good effect by making sure it's as clear as possible

cdaly_

thebionicdude wrote: »

My guess is it means that cyclists should sometimes come to a stop before overtaking as opposed to simply veering to overtake an obstacle even if they are ahead of the car in the lane they move into. An example would be when a bus is pulled into a bus-stop or when a car is parked on a cycle-lane ... these are obstacles to cyclists that many find inconvenient. Assumedly, some ignorant cyclists overtake without paying attention to following traffic, which can be dangerous if the car has to brake suddenly or swerve right.

I reckon it means cyclists should merge into the line of traffic earlier and then control the speed of the line of traffic to ensure that their overtaking manoeuvre is no longer dangerous...

Hmmzis

cdaly_ wrote: »

I reckon it means cyclists should merge into the line of traffic earlier and then control the speed of the line of traffic to ensure that their overtaking manoeuvre is no longer dangerous...

That might be the most sensible interpretation of it. I've seen the odd time when a cyclist would pull out at the last second to go round a stopped bus. I've seen that less with parked cars or street furniture.

Potatoeman

Invincible wrote: »

Cycling near Kilmacud last Saturday I noticed the disregard motorists have on cycling lanes, parking in them, forcing cyclists to dismount or head onto road.

I hope the gardai use their cop on. There is nothing wrong with cycling on the path where there is room for a short distance if necessary as long as you are slow and cautious.

Potatoeman

Invincible wrote: »

Cycling near Kilmacud last Saturday I noticed the disregard motorists have on cycling lanes, parking in them, forcing cyclists to dismount or head onto road.

I hope the gardai use their cop on. There is nothing wrong with cycling on the path where there is room for a short distance if necessary as long as you are slow and cautious.

Interceptor

They'll have to catch me first. Slow rozzers lol

'c

ThisRegard

Potatoeman wrote: »

I hope the gardai use their cop on. There is nothing wrong with cycling on the path where there is room for a short distance if necessary as long as you are slow and cautious.

That's the point, there is something wrong with cycling on the path.

tomtucker81

cdaly_ wrote: »

The difference is that drivers of mechanically propelled vehicles are required to carry their driver's license while cyclists are not. Driver's license provides the ID (and the vehicle may be hard to impound).

Sorry I thought that was conmon knowledge. Yes an mpv driver has to have a driving licence with them.
if they don't and no other method of id is available/satisfactory, then the driver is arrested to verify their identity.
With cyclists the rider can not be arrested in these circumstances, rather the bicycle is detained at the garda station pending the cyclist coming in with id.

monument

Potatoeman wrote: »

I hope the gardai use their cop on. There is nothing wrong with cycling on the path where there is room for a short distance if necessary as long as you are slow and cautious.

Sorry, but you could dismount.

Footpaths are for people walking, or in wheelchairs or prams.

amacca

penguin88 wrote: »

How does fining cyclists for offences disproportionally hit the poor?

It is a well known fact that poor people ride more than rich people :pac:

Gerry T

monument wrote: »

Sorry, but you could dismount.

Footpaths are for people walking, or in wheelchairs or prams.

Your right and in most cases I would agree. But my kid (12yr old) has a section of road about 300m long that's very narrow and cars go too fast. She has been instructed that she must go on the foot path, very few pedestrians, no garden gates etc.. so she cycles, otherwise she gets run off the road. Its very dangerous. I honestly don't see the problem with young kids cycling slowly. I would say a person jogging would be more dangerous -- should joggers be banned from using footpaths and told to go to a park ?
Another poster mentioned 14 yr old and again the bike a 14 yr old is probably full frame size and they are easy to see, so they shouldn't be on the path.

You might suggest that she walks that section but that's not practical.

BeerWolf

Aight, fair enough fining for breaking the red light, but being on the footpath is ridiculous which I'd hardly categorise as "Dangerous"...

So a little kid on their bike cycling between their friend's house to theirs on the footpath will get fined?

Might as well fine people for skate boarding, roller blading, etc. while we're at it, using the footpath!

rubadub

Brian? wrote: »

I'm wondering how this will be inforced. As there's no requirement to carry ID when cycling, it's basically relying on the honesty of the person stopped to give their correct name and address.

This is how it works with minor drug offences at the likes of music festivals.

If they want to make road safer and make an absolute fortune they should fine dangerous jaywalkers, there are millions in fines begging to be collected there.

ArseBurger wrote: »

You're ok with your kid breaking the law? Fine parenting...

I find most are OK with the breaking of some laws, including my friend whose father and father in law are both ex-policemen, I have seen them both aiding and abbetting their grandchildren's "criminal acts".

Potatoeman wrote: »

I hope the gardai use their cop on.

Fortunately I find most do. They realise why the laws were put in place and not looking for some loophole technicality, like some pedantic arseholes do.

monument wrote: »

Sorry, but you could dismount.

Footpaths are for people walking, or in wheelchairs or prams.

I believe it can be safer to cycle slowly, evidently lots of gardai do too, or maybe just not so unsafe that the see fit to stop somebody. If you are walking with a bike beside you it takes up more space and protrusions like pedals and handlebars stick out more. On grafton street I have seen the same gardai stop idiots racing down the street, and I have seen them allowing people at a snails pace go on by. Cop on, and a realisation of what the law actually set out to prevent.

calistro

Kumsheen wrote: »

What's road tax?

This !

Uploaded with ImageShack.com

check_six

BeerWolf wrote: »

Aight, fair enough fining for breaking the red light, but being on the footpath is ridiculous which I'd hardly categorise as "Dangerous"...

So a little kid on their bike cycling between their friend's house to theirs on the footpath will get fined?

Might as well fine people for skate boarding, roller blading, etc. while we're at it, using the footpath!

I'd imagine that they will be fined about as often in future as they are right now, which is to say never. The method of fining has changed, not what you get fined for (although what the overtaking in a dangerous situation thing is is anybodies guess!).

ScouseMouse

Some gobs**te has just been on the Radio Nova news, from some cycling council, claiming this is not the way to encourage people out of their cars !!!

I hope its on again at noon so I can catch his name.

This ejit seems to think that enforcing the traffic laws is a bad thing.

Maybe to encourage people out of their cars, we should give all cyclists a complete amnesty to do whatever they like.

What an utter, down right FOOL

Just let them cycle on the footpath.

bazza1

What about cyclists on the road and a cycle path 1 m on their left hand side? See this on Nutgrove Ave and Bushy Park regularly.

The cycle lane is too "bumpy" apparently. Get on to your TD's so!

rant over.

bren2001

bazza1 wrote: »

What about cyclists on the road and a cycle path 1 m on their left hand side? See this on Nutgrove Ave and Bushy Park regularly.

The cycle lane is too "bumpy" apparently. Get on to your TD's so!

rant over.

Perfectly legal. A cyclist is under no requirement to use a cycle lane. They can cycle on the road if they wish. Law was changed earlier this year (or end if last).

http://cyclingindublin.com/2012/08/17/irish-cycle-track-law-to-be-revoked/

kenmc

superscouse wrote: »

Some gobs**te has just been on the Radio Nova news, from some cycling council, claiming this is not the way to encourage people out of their cars !!!

I hope its on again at noon so I can catch his name.

This ejit seems to think that enforcing the traffic laws is a bad thing.

Maybe to encourage people out of their cars, we should give all cyclists a complete amnesty to do whatever they like.

What an utter, down right FOOL

Enlighten us so on the correct way to encourage people out of their cars.

kenmc

bren2001 wrote: »

Perfectly legal. A cyclist is under no requirement to use a cycle lane. They can cycle on the road if they wish. Law was changed earlier this year (or end if last).

http://cyclingindublin.com/2012/08/17/irish-cycle-track-law-to-be-revoked/

october 2012 by varadkar. only positive thing he's done in his life IMO.

bazza1

bren2001 wrote: »

Perfectly legal. A cyclist is under no requirement to use a cycle lane. They can cycle on the road if they wish. Law was changed earlier this year (or end if last).

http://cyclingindublin.com/2012/08/17/irish-cycle-track-law-to-be-revoked/

Didnt know that Bren! Pointless having them then! It took 8 months of roadworks to put them in.

kenmc

bazza1 wrote: »

Didnt know that Bren! Pointless having them then! It took 8 months of roadworks to put them in.

Mostly, yes, they are indeed pointless. The only worthwhile ones are the 1metre strip on the actual road, and even at that they're only occasionally worthwhile. Least you don't get people walking in them though so much, and when you have to go around the inevitable obstacle you don't have to do go down a kerb to get onto the road.

Gerry T

bazza1 wrote: »

What about cyclists on the road and a cycle path 1 m on their left hand side? See this on Nutgrove Ave and Bushy Park regularly.

The cycle lane is too "bumpy" apparently. Get on to your TD's so!

rant over.

And when you get down from bushy park into terenure what happens the cycle lane ? it does a a keith barry like most cycle lanes. then you get squashed trying to get through the village.
If this was a working place the HSA would shut down most roads until there was propper seperation from cars and bikes. Most cycle lanes are a joke, some very good one's but that's the minority.

ScouseMouse

kenmc wrote: »

Enlighten us so on the correct way to encourage people out of their cars.

Are you seriously suggesting that motorists, who get out of their cars, in favour of cycling, should be allowed to flout the basic rules of the road like stopping at a red light.?

Are you?

quozl

bazza1 wrote: »

What about cyclists on the road and a cycle path 1 m on their left hand side? See this on Nutgrove Ave and Bushy Park regularly.

The cycle lane is too "bumpy" apparently. Get on to your TD's so!

rant over.

How come 'bumpy' is in quotes? Did you quiz some of them on it?

You're not one of those eejits who doesn't know the rules of the road and then moans at cyclists who aren't using bicycle lanes, right?

bluefinger

Driving the back road from Castleknock to Chapelizod on Saturday last. A cyclist guard broke two red lights on his way into the park. Have also seen numerous guards cycling on paths in and around town. Really can't see those guys enforcing this.

Scuba_Scoper

bazza1 wrote: »

What about cyclists on the road and a cycle path 1 m on their left hand side? See this on Nutgrove Ave and Bushy Park regularly.

The cycle lane is too "bumpy" apparently. Get on to your TD's so!

rant over.

That cycle path on Nutgrove Ave is my personal favourite as I commute on it every day.

Going towards Nutgrove.
==================
At the bus stop, on more that one occassion I have come close to crashing into a ped as they cannot be seen approaching due to the advertinsing on the bus shelter as they are walking towards you. Just after the bus shelter, there are usually 1 - 2 taxis parked on the bus lane - I assume there is a family taxi business there. Another 50 meters up the road you will usually see a Micra parked on the cycle lane. The next section of cycle lane just before the fire station is a lovely llittle stretch that has a nice little section of undulations that reminds me that one day I must cycle the Paris-Roubaix route except for the glass - why does glass seem so attracted to cycle lanes. Then infront of the fire station, my bike helps me get an upper body workout on the patchwork quilt of a cycle lane. At the traffic lights it seems that left turning drivers are unaware of the fact that if a bike has right of way if they have to cut across them in order to progres.... this issue is apparent also when it comes to the left turn lane up to Nutgrove shopping centre. I always enjoy the game of Russian roulette that I play there every evening.

After the turnoff to Nutgrove the cycle lane that becomes a bus stop then cross a road to a cycle lane that last for about 10m, which then dead ends and becomes an on road bus lane is pure genius.

Progressing beyond the next set of traffic lights onto the cycle lane is the part of my journey that my Ridley Tempo was designed for. Well, it does have a 'Tested on Pave' sticker on it. The number of manhole cover, water mains points, driveways and general tom-fockery is a joy to behold, until you get to the point where the cycle lane ends completely for no reason in front of some ones house. The footpath (which is illegal to cycle on) seems to be the route you are expected to take as at the end of this path there are traffic lights which are both a ped and bike crossing, but I do not really want to try that out as there are going to be fixed penalties for this offence.

Going towards The Bottle Tower.
=========================
I have another set of issues with the cycle lanes on this side of the road but I will not bore you unless you would like to an depth analysis of this side of the road as well.


TLDR - Cycle lanes are bad and optional.

kenmc

superscouse wrote: »

Are you seriously suggesting that motorists, who get out of their cars, in favour of cycling, should be allowed to flout the basic rules of the road like stopping at a red light.?

Are you?

Show me where I said that?

Since you clearly disagree with the person on the radio saying that this will not encourage people out of their cars, I'd like to hear your thoughts on how it could be done?

CramCycle

bazza1 wrote: »

What about cyclists on the road and a cycle path 1 m on their left hand side? See this on Nutgrove Ave and Bushy Park regularly.

The cycle lane is too "bumpy" apparently. Get on to your TD's so!

rant over.

TDs? Really, as if the f'in government don't waste enough time visiting every slightly popular persons funeral instead of doing their job. As Eamonn Ryan said (another reason he wasn't voted in, having common sense) "thats a matter for your local council, I'd recommend contacting them"

AndOne

check_six wrote: »

Yeah, what does that one mean? Is that like going up the wrong side of the road to go past a line of traffic? Or does it mean salmoning up the wrong way on a one-way street?

There is something Fishy about this whole situation it's just not my Plaice to say. I won't be Casting judgement on my fellow Humans.

Gerry T

You won't encourage them, too many problems. First the public service is a joke unless you want to travel directly to city centre (dublin here) and then most office don't have showers so what if your work clothes is a suit... then a lot of people drive to work but possibly pick kids up from creche or do the shop on the way home.
So many reasons people drive, I would love to cycle every day but I need a car at my disposal as I regularly get a call to go somewhere during the day.
Oh also the lazy one's that just couldn't be arsed.

But there is still a hugh amount of cyclists on the roads, and they should have adequate room to cycle. I'm more a "go for a spin" cyclist so typically in the mountains-no issues there !!

Tenzor07

Oul' George Hook and fintan o'toole must be dancing a jigg! :pac:

While most people would agree this is a good thing, it will be interesting to see how this is applied...

If I am cycling along in the dark/evening and get a red light at a pedestrian light in a dodgy area, with no one crossing the road, and I go through the light, will i then face flashing blue lights and my bike being taken??

If I have to hop up on a path for a few seconds for my own safety, to get around a bus or truck stopped into the hard left of the road, will i then be pounced on by the law?

Or as already mentioned, if riding two abreast will both cyclists be fined?

Although this is nothing new, back in the 90's the gards used to stop us cycling on the path around Stephens green West in particular, and take the bikes pretty much as standard if they caught you..

Although there is no shortage of scrots going around town on oul bikes with no brakes/lights and never stop at lights, and always up on paths.. wouldn't consider them "cyclists" as such though...

CramCycle

On a more humourous note, I will sing this every day I see it in action:

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

Potatoeman

monument wrote: »

Sorry, but you could dismount.

Footpaths are for people walking, or in wheelchairs or prams.

I would agree in busy areas but without cyclelanes or proper facilities its what people will do. A few uninterupted cycle lanes would help too. People will go out of their way for a decent one the problem for many are the disappearing ones. Even those that are good have spots where they disappear.
The lane from Fairview to Clontarf on the path disappears and if you go on the cyclelane on the road you are heading directly into traffic on the wrong side of the road. Its a short distance but forces the cyclist onto the footpath.

bren2001

Tenzor07 wrote: »

If I am cycling along in the dark/evening and get a red light at a pedestrian light in a dodgy area, with no one crossing the road, and I go through the light, will i then face flashing blue lights and my bike being taken??

It is your choice where you cycle. Yes, you rightfully should be fined.

If I have to hop up on a path for a few seconds for my ownb safety, to get around a bus or truck stopped into the hard left of the road, will i then be pounced on by the law?

You overtake it the way a car would. If you want to use the footpath, get off your bike and walk.

Or as already mentioned, if riding two abreast will both cyclists be fined?

That is open to interpretation. IMO only one person is in the wrong. I'm sure some people would say both cyclists should be fined.

ashleey

Riding two abreast is not an offence. Neither is three if the third is overtaking the two.

lincoln

I often run red lights when I'm cycling in Dublin because, mostly, I just couldn't be arsed waiting for them to turn green.

buffalo

If I have to hop up on a path for a few seconds for my ownb safety, to get around a bus or truck stopped into the hard left of the road, will i then be pounced on by the law?

I'm not sure where this quote came from, but where does safety come into this? You're getting around the vehicle for convenience - it'd be safer to just stop behind them. Overtake on the right if you wish to progress past them.

Jawgap

amacca wrote: »

It is a well known fact that poor people ride more than rich people :pac:

Not really, it's just you start out rich then buy a bike, then log on to wiggle.....;)

bazza1 wrote: »

Didnt know that Bren! Pointless having them then! It took 8 months of roadworks to put them in.

......and one winter for it to fall apart.

lincoln wrote: »

I often run red lights when I'm cycling in Dublin because, mostly, I'm selfish, impatient and do get the basic concept of a red light in a busy city just couldn't be arsed waiting for them to turn green.

cdaly_

check_six wrote: »

I'd imagine that they will be fined about as often in future as they are right now, which is to say never. The method of fining has changed, not what you get fined for (although what the overtaking in a dangerous situation thing is is anybodies guess!).

The change in the method of fining means that it is a lot easier for a fine to be issued (on the spot rather than needing a court summons/attendance). On that basis, I'd expect* many more fines in the future than currently.





*For other people obviously, not me...

DirkVoodoo

I have serious issue with fines being handed out for "dangerous overtaking". This could easily be misinterpreted. Quite often taxis will stop abruptly, cars will cut across you...a dangerous overtake is the only way you avoid being thrown headfirst into a rear windscreen.

If these fines are to be handed out, I'm in favour of them, but I'd like to see it being supported on the other side by on the spot fines for dangerous overtaking by cars (where it's seen), parking on cycle lanes, etc.

Tenzor07

bren2001 wrote: »

It is your choice where you cycle. Yes, you rightfully should be fined.
You overtake it the way a car would. If you want to use the footpath, get off your bike and walk.
That is open to interpretation. IMO only one person is in the wrong. I'm sure
some people would say both cyclists should be fined.

Jeezus, letter of the law much?

my point is that the traffic light system in Ireland, apart from the Canal cycle lane is specifically designed for motorised vehicles, and most are not easily triggered by a bicycle wheel. I certainly won't be stopping at an empty pedestrian crossing light in the middle of no-where, esp. if there are dodgy scrots hanging around..

Bo11ox! If i had to jump off the bike each time the cycle lane was blocked by a truck/bus/van then i might as well just walk!! Hoping up onto the kerb for a few seconds is preferable to trying to move out and get clipped by another lane of passing traffic, with the usual beeping... Sure it's only a bicycle eh??

As for the fine for over taking, the amount of times i have overtaking a slower moving cyclist only to find half way through my manouvere that some cnut has come flying up behind me beeping furiously, no way i will be fined for that!!

TheChizler

Tenzor07 wrote: »

Bo11ox! If i had to jump off the bike each time the cycle lane was blocked by a truck/bus/van then i might as well just walk!! Hoping up onto the kerb for a few seconds is preferable to trying to move out and get clipped by another lane of passing traffic, with the usual beeping... Sure it's only a bicycle eh??

In that case the fine is a risk you choose to take.
Seriously overtaking stopped cars isn't that much hassle, you indicate and move into a gap, which you are already aware of if you're observing correctly. If there's none just act like a car and wait for one.

kenmc

TheChizler wrote: »

In that case the fine is a risk you choose to take.
Seriously overtaking stopped cars isn't that much hassle, you indicate and move into a gap, which you are already aware of if you're observing correctly.

Maybe a bit leftfield here, but if someone is not capable of overtaking a parked car, perhaps the correct place for them is actually the path. With stabilizers. and one of these.

bren2001

Tenzor07 wrote: »

Jeezus, letter of the law much?

my point is that the traffic light system in Ireland, apart from the Canal cycle lane is specifically designed for motorised vehicles, and most are not easily triggered by a bicycle wheel. I certainly won't be stopping at an empty pedestrian crossing light in the middle of no-where, esp. if there are dodgy scrots hanging around..

Bo11ox! If i had to jump off the bike each time the cycle lane was blocked by a truck/bus/van then i might as well just walk!! Hoping up onto the kerb for a few seconds is preferable to trying to move out and get clipped by another lane of passing traffic, with the usual beeping... Sure it's only a bicycle eh??

As for the fine for over taking, the amount of times i have overtaking a slower moving cyclist only to find half way through my manouvere that some cnut has come flying up behind me beeping furiously, no way i will be fined for that!!

Well that is the law.

Yeah, most traffic lights are not calibrated to detect a bicycle. However, most junctions have a set sequence and pedestrian lights stay green unless there is a pedestrian. There is never an excuse for breaking a red light (I do it a lot of the time). Some junctions, i.e. in housing estates, require a car to be present, you could make a case in that instance, you'd lose tho.

I hop up on the path in one or two places but it is to avoid a bad road surface and I don't see the need to annoy other road users. If there is an obstruction, you just move out and overtake it. No need to use the path. You are taking the risk.

I assumed you were talking about two people cycling two abreast to have a conversation. Yeah, if you are overtaking then I don't see the issue at all.

Tenzor07

TheChizler wrote: »

In that case the fine is a risk you choose to take.
Seriously overtaking stopped cars isn't that much hassle, you indicate and move into a gap, which you are already aware of if you're observing correctly. If there's none just act like a car and wait for one.

My point is that nothing is ever as black&white as these laws seem to suggest...there are plenty of times when situations present themselves which turn you into a outlaw for the sake of your own safety..

While we are on the general subject, I would like to see penalty points/fines brought out for motor vehicles which overtake a cyclist with less than 1.5meters clearance. And for the throwing of objects/shouting from a moving vehicle with intent to cause the cyclist harm by making them fall off the bike.

quozl

kenmc wrote: »

Maybe a bit leftfield here, but if someone is not capable of overtaking a parked car, perhaps the correct place for them is actually the path. With stabilizers. and one of these.

Seriously, yes.

I learnt to ride a bike in May and I can over-take parked vehicles without going on the path.

How is it difficult? It is mildly annoying but it's hardly difficult or dangerous - those are two different things.

Tenzor07 you might find http://www.cyclecraft.org/ helpful. I really did. It's an excellent book on how to cycle in traffic.

Diarmuid

I had the misfortune of hearing Tina Koumarianos the social editor of Image Magazine who was on Radio 1, on the John Murray show (Miriam really). this morning. I'd recommend giving it a listen when it here (6 minutes in http://www.rte.ie/radio/utils/radioplayer/rteradioweb.html#!rii=9%3A10164788%3A4502%3A18%2D07%2D2013%3A)

Among things, she complained about being forced to perform dangerous overtaking maneuvers that only affect those living "down the country" (ie working in Dublin, living in Wicklow). She called cyclists arrogant, which is rich from someone complaining about being held up for 20 seconds.

But the best part was calling cyclists "good organ donars" and that everybody (in cars) "say to each other 'I felt like running them off the road'" A real classy woman. Naturally Miriam didn't challenge her.

I think Miriam wanted to talk about the fines for jumping lights but Tina didn't seem to be too interested. She wanted fines for riding 2 abreast, I guess there are no RLJs in Rathdrum

And to top it off, here's a quality article by Tina. http://www.image.ie/Life-Work/Rant/Spandex-Bums/

cdaly_

Potatoeman wrote: »

The lane from Fairview to Clontarf on the path disappears and if you go on the cyclelane on the road you are heading directly into traffic on the wrong side of the road. Its a short distance but forces the cyclist onto the footpath.

You're going the wrong way. That's a lane from Clontarf to Fairview, not the other way around...

bren2001 wrote: »

Yeah, most traffic lights are not calibrated to detect a bicycle.
Some junctions, i.e. in housing estates, require a car to be present, you could make a case in that instance, you'd lose tho.

The lights at the end of my road only change for a car on the sensor pad. If I press the pedestrian button, the lights will change to pedestrian lights and then back to green for the main road. I won't get a green for my road until a car appears. I have, on one or two occasions' run that light but there is allowance made for a 'stalled' light.