Fixed Penalty Notices for Cycling by end of year

seamus

du Maurier wrote: »

Just as an aside (a few pages back) to refer to seemingly hazardous/difficult junctions to negotiate, but this one on Macken Street usually has a number of car horns blaring and motorists frustrated with cyclists.

There's a left turn signal currently....

I've been going this way for the last few weeks and I wouldn't consider it a particularly bad junction or a "debacle", the same quandry occurs in many other junctions.

The issue really is that of information. Left-only lanes are rarer than right-only lanes, so most people assume that if you're going straight ahead at a junction, you line up in the left-hand lane. The Macken St junction is perpetually busy, so unless you're familiar with the junction you won't see the arrows painted on the road and so you could easily line up in the wrong lane. Cyclists and motorists do it all the time.
All that's needed is a simple roadside information sign showing the correct lane to get into. They should probably also remove the parking on that side of the road.

As a cyclist, position yourself in front of the right lane of traffic. If you find yourself in the middle of the junction with cars going straight in both lanes, you just assert yourself. Hold your position, which will prevent cars in the right-hand lane from overtaking you, wait for the cars in the left hand lane to overtake you on the left and then move into the left-hand side.

galwaycyclist

buffalo wrote: »

What to do?

Fire the people who come up with such junction designs. Not part of our public service culture unfortunately.

galwaycyclist

seamus wrote: »

I've been going this way for the last few weeks and I wouldn't consider it a particularly bad junction or a "debacle", the same quandry occurs in many other junctions.

The issue really is that of information. Left-only lanes are rarer than right-only lanes, so most people assume that if you're going straight ahead at a junction, you line up in the left-hand lane. The Macken St junction is perpetually busy, so unless you're familiar with the junction you won't see the arrows painted on the road and so you could easily line up in the wrong lane. Cyclists and motorists do it all the time.
All that's needed is a simple roadside information sign showing the correct lane to get into. They should probably also remove the parking on that side of the road.

As a cyclist, position yourself in front of the right lane of traffic. If you find yourself in the middle of the junction with cars going straight in both lanes, you just assert yourself. Hold your position, which will prevent cars in the right-hand lane from overtaking you, wait for the cars in the left hand lane to overtake you on the left and then move into the left-hand side.

Providing information might offer a partial solution in that it would theoretically absolve the designer of a duty to design competently.

While some cyclists, myself included, might be able to handle "taking the lane" in a central traffic lane with cars passing either side I don't think it is reasonable to deliberately place cyclists in such a position. It remains in my view an incompetent design.

seamus

Agreed completely, in reality the path of the straight-on cyclist should be laid out very clearly using a lane or whatever and the appropriate yield signage displayed to drivers who would have to cross the cyclists' path in order to turn left.

In the above example, you could also extend the pedestrian island on the left so that it blocks the left lane and forces drivers in the left-hand lane to either turn or merge rather than allowing them to plough straight across. This wouldn't affect any of the other traffic, but would prevent the situation where a cyclist is mid-junction and caught between two cars going straight.

PerrDub

We would just hope that the Gardai will know the actual laws..



Like in this example from the U.S:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shared_lane_marking

Qualitymark

buffalo wrote: »

I find myself pondering this at the south end of St Stephen's Green East, where a single bus/cycle lane serves for both straight on and left-turning traffic, and the light is predominantly green for only left turning traffic.

I don't like to wait at the outside of the lane (as I would if there were split left/straight lanes) because it impedes the ability of buses to turn wide (and they might hit me). I don't like to take the lane, because I'll be holding up the bus traffic. But I have found, when I wait at the inside, that the buses take this as a submissive position, and have stopped and boxed me in. So many messages warn of the dangers of going up the inside of a left-turning vehicle, and yet here's a junction where I feel compelled to put myself potentially in that position. What to do?

I tend to get off my bicycle and lift it onto the path here, and wait out of the way of the buses (which, after all, are carrying 60 people, or capable of doing so); when the lights change, they change to a pedestrian crossing light, so I walk the bike across, remount when I'm past the lights on the other side, and cycle on.

As for the blaring horns, etc, yes, I do encounter this, but usually if you make sure to turn around, make (friendly) eye contact with the driver behind you and indicate which way you intend to go, people are patient; there is, of course, the occasional screaming dolt, but this is so everywhere.

HivemindXX

du Maurier wrote: »

Just as an aside (a few pages back) to refer to seemingly hazardous/difficult junctions to negotiate, but this one on Macken Street usually has a number of car horns blaring and motorists frustrated with cyclists.

There is a similar thing at the corner of Thomas Street and Bridgefoot Street. http://goo.gl/maps/mZUPh

The left lane is a bus lane so it should only contain taxis, busses and left turning vehicles. Unfortunately there is a left filter arrow that is green a lot of the time that straight ahead traffic has a red.

As you said you can't stay on the left and if you are in the centre you risk being in the middle of two lanes of traffic when things start moving. Fortunately there is an ASL on this junction so you are ahead of traffic by default and I usually have no trouble getting back to the left hand side.

The problem, like basically every road problem, is assholes. The people who choose to shoot up the inside of the queue of straight ahead vehicles and then rapidly cut across in front of them in the junction.

QueensGael

Pat Kenny & Paddy O'Gorman talking about the on-the-spot fines story now

www.rte.ie/radio

Chips Lovell

"negligent and incompetent road design". Hyperbole much?

Is there anything stopping people signalling and changing lanes?

Lumen

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Is there anything stopping people signalling and changing lanes?

Rage against the machine.

PerrDub

Have a look at this: http://cyclingsavvy.org/hows-my-driving/

Skrynesaver

I reckon I saw ~€1K's worth of fines on the ride in this morning between Finglas and Blackrock, for any Guard looking for revenue raising bonuses (if such exist) I'd recommend Strand Rd. saw about €450 worth of fines there.

kirving

Listening to Pat Kenny, the majority of texters seem to have an issue with cyclist in general. Damien of the Dublin Cycling Campaign is arguing his points well, but Finian McGrath cycling seems to be picking and choosing examples, which were probably complaints from his constituents.

galwaycyclist

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

"negligent and incompetent road design". Hyperbole much?

Is there anything stopping people signalling and changing lanes?

Why should they have to?

droidus

Skrynesaver wrote: »

I reckon I saw ~€1K's worth of fines on the ride in this morning between Finglas and Blackrock, for any Guard looking for revenue raising bonuses (if such exist) I'd recommend Strand Rd. saw about €450 worth of fines there.

I have a similar commute and on average Id see 100+ pedestrians jaywalking (€15 each) and at least a few dozen cars RLJ'ng, speeding and using mobiles (€80 each).

Thars gold in dem thar hills.

radia

buffalo wrote: »

I find myself pondering this at the south end of St Stephen's Green East, where a single bus/cycle lane serves for both straight on and left-turning traffic, and the light is predominantly green for only left turning traffic.

I'm pretty sure that that's one of the rare cases in Dublin where the contraflow is for buses only - it's not a shared bus and cycle lane.

That said, I've been waiting at the lights there on a bike with a Garda car beside me and they didn't say anything. And it's one of the junctions where the road sensors are actually sensitive enough to detect a bike.

Chips Lovell

galwaycyclist wrote: »

Why should they have to?

In order to get in the right lane. Why should any road user have to change lane.

magicbastarder

droidus wrote: »

I have a similar commute and on average Id see 100+ pedestrians jaywalking (€15 each)

do you mean crossing against a red light at a pedestrian crossing? it's not an offence to 'jaywalk' if you're more than (i think) 15 yards from a pedestrian crossing.

buffalo

radia wrote: »

I'm pretty sure that that's one of the rare cases in Dublin where the contraflow is for buses only - it's not a shared bus and cycle lane.

That said, I've been waiting at the lights there on a bike with a Garda car beside me and they didn't say anything. And it's one of the junctions where the road sensors are actually sensitive enough to detect a bike.

There's no such thing as a non-cycle bus lane since October 1st 2012.

edit: And since then they've actually changed it from a sensor-controlled junction to one where the straight-filter light now always goes green on each cycle. kudos!

quozl

It's a bus only contraflow rather than a bus lane - or are we definitely now allowed use it?

Tony EH

TinyExplosions wrote: »

Unless it's got a solid white line separating it from the road you can.

Solid line, cars not allowed in it, dashed line, they can

As far as I'm aware, you cannot park in a cycle lane with a dashed line. You can drive in it, when the road is narrow, or preparing to turn left. But you can't actually park a vehicle there.

buffalo

quozl wrote: »

It's a bus only contraflow rather than a bus lane - or are we definitely now allowed use it?

According to the explanatory note on SI 332/2012:

including change in law to permit pedal cyclists to use contra-flow bus lanes and bus-only streets

Whether that's definite would be up the courts I imagine, but it's good enough for me.

radia

buffalo wrote: »

There's no such thing as a non-cycle bus lane since October 1st 2012.

edit: And since then they've actually changed it from a sensor-controlled junction to one where the straight-filter light now always goes green on each cycle. kudos!

Hadn't realised that! Good to know - thanks.

galwaycyclist

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

In order to get in the right lane. Why should any road user have to change lane.

I will try again - we seem to be a bit slow today. Why should a cyclist who wishes to go straight ahead be required to signal and change lanes across a stream of following motor traffic to do so?

It is an inherently ridiculous concept.

droidus

magicbastarder wrote: »

do you mean crossing against a red light at a pedestrian crossing? it's not an offence to 'jaywalk' if you're more than (i think) 15 yards from a pedestrian crossing.

Yes, thats exactly what I mean. Its 15 metres.

Chips Lovell

galwaycyclist wrote: »

I will try again - we seem to be a bit slow today. Why should a cyclist who wishes to go straight ahead be required to signal and change lanes across a stream of following motor traffic to do so?

It is an inherently ridiculous concept.

Because it's no great inconvenience to them. Road users need to change lanes all the time. To paint this "negligent and incompetent" is hyperbolic.

galwaycyclist

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Because it's no great inconvenience to them. Road users need to change lanes all the time.

But we are not talking about some idealised "road user". We are talking about people of all ages and abilities on bikes. Children going to school, elderly people, people with three speed step-through frames and shopping baskets.

And you are saying its no great inconvenience to merge across streams of following traffic, including buses and HGVS, and have them passing you on either side, simply in order to go straight ahead.

Disingenuous much?

Chips Lovell

What about all of these poor beleaguered cyclists who need to change lanes when they want to go right or left? It's not rocket science and I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill here.

magicbastarder

to take a more extreme example, not one being discussed above.
if a cyclist going southbound on the N11 wants to take a right onto brewery road (the right hand turn just after john of gods), they have to leave the bus lane, and cross at least two lanes of traffic doing about 60kph, while going uphill, or else get off the bike and become a pedestrian, and cross at the pedestrian lights. the road infrastructure simply does not (and very possibly cannot) cater for cyclists in scenarios like this.

what_traffic

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

What about all of these poor beleaguered cyclists who need to change lanes when they want to go right or left? It's not rocket science and I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill here.

Disagree strongly. This is a design feature for motor vechicles so that left turning vechicles do not slow down the vechicles behind them. Left turn filters are a barrier for novice cyclists.
Maybe fine for fast cyclists on road bikes - but roads should not be designed to facilitate motor vechicles first.

galwaycyclist

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

What about all of these poor beleaguered cyclists who need to change lanes when they want to go right or left? It's not rocket science and I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill here.

Since when should cyclists normally have to merge across a lane of following traffic to get into a left lane?

Again disingenuous much?

A lot of less confident cyclists are very uncomfortable with merging across following traffic to get into a right-turning lane. Many prefer to get off and walk in that situation. Now we are to understand from you, that going straight should be treated the same way and they should get off and walk if they don't like it?

Again disingenuous much?

Tony EH

ashleey wrote: »

I've been overtaken dangerously by about a foot clearance by fast moving traffic while cycling this week in Donegal. Any chance of clamping down on that while they are at it?

I've lost count at how many times I've been overtaken by cars, while I'm overtaking a car.

Perhaps a clampdown on that is needed?

Where are you now Finian?

Lumen

galwaycyclist wrote: »

A lot of less confident cyclists are very uncomfortable with merging across following traffic to get into a right-turning lane. Many prefer to get off and walk in that situation. Now we are to understand from you, that going straight should be treated the same way and they should get of and walk if they don't like it?

Changing lanes and merging left or right into traffic are very basic road skills, whether on a bicycle or in a car.

galwaycyclist

Lumen wrote: »

Changing lanes and merging left or right into traffic are very basic road skills, whether on a bicycle or in a car.

No they are very advanced road skills. They would be level 3 under the UK National Standard for cycling instruction.

droidus

Moving across three lanes of traffic travelling at 60 kph on a bicycle is not a 'basic' skill.

Lumen

galwaycyclist wrote: »

No they are very advanced road skills. They would be level 3 under the UK National Standard for cycling instruction.

Clearly our definitions of "very advanced" differ.

My benchmark for "basic" would be "what you need to be able to do to pass a driving test".

Tony EH

rubadub wrote: »

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.

This is it, though. A fool racing down a crowded pedestrian area or footpath deserves a fine. But if you're cycling slowly and resposibly, then you're no more dangerous than most people with prams.

CramCycle

galwaycyclist wrote: »

Again disingenuous much?

Merging across traffic lanes is a skill that anyone cycling in a city or heavily built up area should really come to terms with. Uncomfortable or not, it is still a skill they will need to commute safely, regardless of road design.

As for the junction mentioned earlier, I did not think it was left turn only (will look when I go into work later). I thought it was left and straight on. The left filter is really short and often gets blocked by a straight ahead driver. If a cyclist stays to the right and at the ASL. The ped lights go next, and then it goes to a straight ahead green. So no need to freak out about merging, will check it out later though.

droidus

Clearly our definitions of "very advanced" differ.

My benchmark for "basic" would be "what you need to be able to do to pass a driving test".

Yeah, the difference being is that motorists are more likely to yield for other motorists, that motorists can consistently travel at 60kmph, and that motorists aren't automatically killed if they (or another driver) makes a mistake during the manoeuvre.

Moving across multiple lanes of high speed traffic is possible, but its tricky and dangerous. Moving across multiple lanes of low-medium speed traffic (such as on the quays) is much easier.

Lumen

droidus wrote: »

Moving across three lanes of traffic travelling at 60 kph on a bicycle is not a 'basic' skill.

Sixty kilometres an hour! That's terrifying. How do people ever manage to cross a road on foot?

Maybe, given all the pedestrian deaths, we should have "advanced pedestrians skills" courses, with "crossing the road" deferred to level 8 black-belt, one level below "walking down stairs whilst carrying a tea tray".

droidus

Lumen wrote: »

Sixty kilometres an hour! That's terrifying. How do people ever manage to cross a road on foot?

Maybe, given all the pedestrian deaths, we should have "advanced pedestrians skills" courses, with "crossing the road" deferred to level 8 black-belt, one level below "walking down stairs whilst carrying a tea tray".

:rolleyes:

They stop and wait for a gap. Which is what most cyclists do as well. That is not the same as changing lanes, as well you know.

And of course, it's worth mentioning that on any 60kmph road, most drivers are breaking the limit and are probably closer to 70.

manwithaplan

droidus wrote: »

70.

The good lord bless us and save us. Is there no end to the madness?

magicbastarder

Lumen wrote: »

My benchmark for "basic" would be "what you need to be able to do to pass a driving test".

so cyclists should need to be able to pass a driving test to be able to perform basic manouevers?

magicbastarder

Lumen wrote: »

Sixty kilometres an hour! That's terrifying. How do people ever manage to cross a road on foot?

you're moving the goalposts.

droidus

manwithaplan wrote: »

The good lord bless us and save us. Is there no end to the madness?

Apologies. I know that you pros have no problem travelling at 80kmph down the N11, cutting across multiple lanes with ease like a swallow swooping through the air on a warm summer night, but the rest of us mere mortals are obviously less gracefully superhuman in our cycling ability.

CramCycle

droidus wrote: »

Moving across multiple lanes of high speed traffic is possible, but its tricky and dangerous. Moving across multiple lanes of low-medium speed traffic (such as on the quays) is much easier.

droidus wrote: »

Moving across three lanes of traffic travelling at 60 kph on a bicycle is not a 'basic' skill.

Where was this a scenario, we were talking about one junction where at most it was one lane, and in most scenarios it is moving from the right of a lane to the left of the same lane, the minimum required if turning the other way. In this scenario, the traffic is either moving from stopped or at a highly reduced speed due to the road layout (let alone the law) forcing a speed reduction. I am very confused

manwithaplan

droidus wrote: »

Apologies...but the rest of us mere mortals are obviously less gracefully superhuman in our cycling ability.

That's OK. I understand.

magicbastarder

CramCycle wrote: »

Where was this a scenario

post #330.

droidus

CramCycle wrote: »

Where was this a scenario, we were talking about one junction where at most it was one lane, and in most scenarios it is moving from the right of a lane to the left of the same lane, the minimum required if turning the other way. In this scenario, the traffic is either moving from stopped or at a highly reduced speed due to the road layout (let alone the law) forcing a speed reduction. I am very confused

to take a more extreme example, not one being discussed above.
if a cyclist going southbound on the N11 wants to take a right onto brewery road (the right hand turn just after john of gods), they have to leave the bus lane, and cross at least two lanes of traffic doing about 60kph, while going uphill, or else get off the bike and become a pedestrian, and cross at the pedestrian lights. the road infrastructure simply does not (and very possibly cannot) cater for cyclists in scenarios like this.

See also, the N2, and I believe the Malahide road (northbound at Clare Hall) was another example cited recently.

Lumen

magicbastarder wrote: »

you're moving the goalposts.

No I'm not. Using a road involves dealing with fast moving things.

Fortunately, millions of years of evolution have given us a central nervous system commanded by billions of neurons, capable of amazing body-brain feats such as catching a sliotar and standing on one leg.

Amazingly, that same set of physical capabilities allows us to sit on a bicycle and move amongst streams of vehicles with little difficulty.