Left turning lane cutting across cycle lane

Trojan

If it's an off-road cycle lane merging into an on-road cycle lane, and the traffic has a slip road, my strong preference would be to cycle in the traffic lane and not use the off-road cycle lane, for safety reasons. What I've done sometimes in similar setups is get into the traffic lane well back from the sliproad.

galwaycyclist

With regard to joining before the junction

J o e wrote: »

The cycle lane and road stretch for over 1km before this, over the Quincentenary Bridge. Cycling on the fast-moving main road instead of the cycle lane for that stretch would be pretty dangerous and there'd be a lot of angry motorists willing to knock me back onto the cycle lane via their bonnet.

And joining just before the junction is still dangerous as cars are still sweeping left at a fair speed and definitely wouldn't expect a cyclist to come down off the raised lane.

Whenever I used this road before it was recently rearranged I would always get off the cycle paths well before the junction. That requires a certain amount of determination. The lights at the previous junction do break the traffic up a bit so you can often time it get a gap not to far from the junction ahead. However it does mean coasting in the cycle path for a while to pick a gap.

I havent tried this yet with the new layout.

J o e wrote: »

Yes from a practical point of view I'll be very cautious of traffic coming across. But unfortunately I go through 3 layouts the same as this on my work day commute, so over 700 times a year... so I'm highly likely to have an incident at some stage with a non-indicating motorist cutting across me and slowing down suddenly. When that happens it will be good to know where I stand (if still standing).

I would be very cautious - I would not assume the cycle lane is any protection. The law on these things is not clear and in any case Irish driver training is not the most advanced either.

Finally even if the law were crystal clear - the Galway city garda do not have a good record when it comes to investigating crashes involving cyclists.

If anything were to go wrong you might find yourself having to fight any case largely from your own resources.

joeKel73

Trojan wrote: »

If it's an off-road cycle lane merging into an on-road cycle lane, and the traffic has a slip road, my strong preference would be to cycle in the traffic lane and not use the off-road cycle lane, for safety reasons. What I've done sometimes in similar setups is get into the traffic lane well back from the sliproad.

Come off the raised cycle lane onto a lane of fast moving traffic? The speed limit over that straight kilometer is 50kph but almost all cars are well over that.

joeKel73

galwaycyclist wrote: »

The lights at the previous junction do break the traffic up a bit so you can often time it get a gap not to far from the junction ahead. However it does mean coasting in the cycle path for a while to pick a gap.

Not bad advice... could use the same approach for timing when you reach the cycle lane, without having to come off the raised kerb.

DaithiMC

Stephen_C wrote: »

With regards the rule mentioned before about cyclist not being allowed to undertake cars that are indicating left, I would interpret that as in the scenario where there is no cycle lane to the left of traffic or where the cycle lane is bundled and hence the car is already driving in it and the cyclist is filtering up the left side of traffic. In a situation where there is a clearly defined cycle lane I would expect the car to check for cyclists on their inside as they would when changing lanes.

I would actually interpret this as being sensible in all situations - as with driving a car, if you are behind, then you should yield. In the case of left turning cars if they are ahead and indicating then I do tend to yield. It gets into semantics about "how far back is behind" etc. but the other rule I mentioned is that "might is right" and as a cyclist you will end up worse off irrespective of your views on what the law is.

galwaycyclist

J o e wrote: »

Not bad advice... could use the same approach for timing when you reach the cycle lane, without having to come off the raised kerb.

Yep. Or with regret, it may be better sometimes to stop and wait at the junction for traffic to stop on red before proceeding yourself. I dont think you'd personally need to to do that but if I was advising a novice cyclist thats what I would suggest.

bambergbike

Stephen_C wrote: »

I'd also add that I much prefer the layout above to some of the ones in Dublin where the cycle lane going straight ahead is kept to the left of a left hand filter lane right up to the traffic lights.

There may be worse designs out there. But this one is still pretty unpleasant and dangerous (regardless of the view one takes on the legal issue of who out to yield) for two reasons:

1) It rejoins the road at (rather than well before) the junction. [Result: cyclists not on motorists' radar.]
2) Turning traffic is not slowed down before the turn. [Result: Major speed differential between cars and bikes - if something goes wrong, it can go very wrong.]

Off-road cycle tracks may well be more pleasant than on-road lanes (when well-maintained and regularly swept), but they are plain dangerous when they rejoin roads right at junctions. If you're not going to integrate cyclists properly with traffic, you need to segregate them properly, so that turning traffic gets a red light when straight-on cyclists have green (this involves cyclist lights) or so that traffic turns and then immediately yields to cyclists (while sitting in a box provided for the purpose). In the current setup, cyclists are just not a key concern for drivers transiting the junction. That will be a worry for cyclists who find themselves sandwiched between a turning truck and another fast-moving high-sided vehicle like a bus going straight on. it's very clear from the dash cam footage that the design does practically nothing to slow the turning traffic before it crosses the cycle lane.

I think it's clear that the junction maximizes "flow" and "capacity" at the expense of minimizing safety, especially the safety of vulnerable road users.

joeKel73

bambergbike wrote: »

If you're not going to integrate cyclists properly with traffic, you need to segregate them properly

Don't get me started on how they handle the cycle lane through the other end of the junction....



[from video]

Stephen_C

I wouldn't say it joins the road right at the junction, there is a decent portion along side the yellow truck in the video that is on road before the junction, I've seen a lot worse. It doesn't help that in the video the car drives across the solid white line to take the turn though.

Stephen_C

DaithiMC wrote: »

I would actually interpret this as being sensible in all situations - as with driving a car, if you are behind, then you should yield. In the case of left turning cars if they are ahead and indicating then I do tend to yield. It gets into semantics about "how far back is behind" etc. but the other rule I mentioned is that "might is right" and as a cyclist you will end up worse off irrespective of your views on what the law is.

I think it goes without saying that if you are in a cycle lane and are behind or even alongside a moving car with a left indicator on you should probably yield and let them make their turn. But I think the law above is in relation to passing vehicles that are stopped in traffic. If I was approaching a juntion with no cycle lane and very little room to filter up the left of stopped cars indicating left I would probably wait behind them where as if there was a cycle lane and they were stopped in traffic I would continue to the traffic light.

bambergbike

Stephen_C wrote: »

I wouldn't say it joins the road right at the junction, there is a decent portion along side the yellow truck in the video that is on road before the junction, I've seen a lot worse. It doesn't help that in the video the car drives across the solid white line to take the turn though.

You're right, it does look much better in the plan than in the video. I think what bothers me about the video is more the speed than anything else, I've never been a big fan of slip roads in built-up areas.

J o e wrote: »

Don't get me started on how they handle the cycle lane through the other end of the junction....



[from video]

Stop making me all nostalgic for the days when I lived in Galway and got to haul my trusty steed across all sorts of obstacles on a daily basis.

Stephen_C

bambergbike wrote: »

You're right, it does look much better in the plan than in the video. I think what bothers me about the video is more the speed than anything else, I've never been a big fan of slip roads in built-up areas.

I used to cummute in the N4 from Lucan to the city centre, before the new m50 junction was bulit, and used to negotiate the slip roads at Liffey Valley, the m50 roundabout and city side of Palmerstown the whole time. The speed of traffic at junctions doesn't really bother me to much after that. You get used to making yourself look big.

rab!dmonkey

seamus wrote: »

That double-fun, the cycle lane switches from off- to on-road at the exact same time that it splits.

err... no it doesn't. For the length of the mandatory (on-road) cycle lane there is no left filter lane. Transitioning an off-road cycle lane to an on-road one like this is considered best practice.

beauf

rab!dmonkey wrote: »

err... no it doesn't. For the length of the mandatory (on-road) cycle lane there is no left filter lane. Transitioning an off-road cycle lane to an on-road one like this is considered best practice.

By who?

If they are going to do it they should do it long before the left turn comes up. So the cyclist is established in the space before the driver has to turn.

DaithiMC

Stephen_C wrote: »

I think it goes without saying that if you are in a cycle lane and are behind or even alongside a moving car with a left indicator on you should probably yield and let them make their turn. But I think the law above is in relation to passing vehicles that are stopped in traffic. If I was approaching a juntion with no cycle lane and very little room to filter up the left of stopped cars indicating left I would probably wait behind them where as if there was a cycle lane and they were stopped in traffic I would continue to the traffic light.

There are situations where it is ok to undertake according to the ROTR. If the traffic in the right hand lane is stopped or moving more slowly (and you are within the speed limit).

A road I commute down, Beaver Row is narrow and almost impossible to get down the left hand side of cars without going on the footpath - which a lot of people do, and, to be honest, I have done on occasion. I try to go down the outside do when I can and when opposing traffic allows.

Puggy

Joe,

The car driver needs some lessons, it looks terribly like they cut into the cycle lane over a continuous white line. The speed looked way to fast as well. Sounds like they didn't indicate as they moved into the right hand side lane at the traffic lights. I can see why your concerned at that junction:P

The junction looks horrible for cyclists and motorists, regardless of who has right of way. My approach, when I'm not angry, is that its really hard when a car hits you, so I try to avoid it at all costs. I'd always look over my shoulder and give any approaching cars the right of way if they force the issue. Easier said that done, but I guess maybe 50% of car drivers will also do the same. No point having the law on your side when your laid up.

Some examples from the Rules of the Road. Sorry could not find the Irish language version.

Taking care with cyclists
If you are at a junction where there is an advanced stop line for cyclists, you should allow cyclists to move off ahead of you. When turning left, all drivers, especially drivers of heavy goods vehicles, must watch out for cyclists and motorcyclists going ahead or turning.On left turns, watch out for cyclists and mopeds close to the kerb in front of you or coming up on your left. Do not overtake a cyclist as you approach a junction if you are turning left; the cyclist might be continuing straight ahead.

Page 122 Right of way at junctions
Motorists should watch for cyclists emerging from the end of a cycle track and mopeds and motorcycles emerging from junctions who might be difficult to see because of their small size. It is important to understand that the right of way is not an absolute right of way. You must proceed with caution, having regard for other road users.

Page 189 for cyclists
Keep clear of the kerb – riding clear will make you more visible and help reduce unsafe overtaking.

Oh and of course you are entitled to use the left traffic lane on that road, as the cycle track is not mandatory;

REMEMBER
Cyclists must use any cycle track provided as part of a pedestrian street or area, or as part of a contra flow cycle track.

CramCycle

DaithiMC wrote: »

A road I commute down, Beaver Row is narrow and almost impossible to get down the left hand side of cars without going on the footpath - which a lot of people do, and, to be honest, I have done on occasion. I try to go down the outside do when I can and when opposing traffic allows.

It is a horrible road, commute down it daily but going on the footpath there is not a good idea, the foot path is barely wide enough to walk, cycling on it is just plain rude (and illegal). When traffic is heavy, it is slow enough that any cyclist of any speed can slot into it after the road narrows. I admit though I am impatient and overtake on the right when the lights change at the end or in the middle as you will normally get a 60 second break of no oncoming traffic.

JazzyJ

I've seen a lot of intersections like this with signs stating that the cyclist has right of way, i.e. http://www.flickr.com/photos/kludge/3426299112/lightbox/, so it would sense to apply that for similar junctions across the board.

In practice, as a cyclist I'd be very very wary of cars - sign or no sign - and assume they'd try to cut you off. As a driver I'd keep an eye out for cyclists and give way to them - sign or no sign.

TOMs WIFE

I know this thread is a little old, but it's still valid.

DaithiMC wrote: »

as with driving a car, if you are behind, then you should yield. In the case of left turning cars if they are ahead and indicating then I do tend to yield. It gets into semantics about "how far back is behind" etc. but the other rule I mentioned is that "might is right" and as a cyclist you will end up worse off irrespective of your views on what the law is.

Puggy wrote: »

Some examples from the Rules of the Road.
Taking care with cyclists
...Do not overtake a cyclist as you approach a junction if you are turning left; the cyclist might be continuing straight ahead.

galwaycyclist posted this useful post :
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=86937090&postcount=59

The Road Safety Authority has stated the following in it's "cycle safely" publication:

Turning left
 Never cycle between another left turning vehicle and the kerb. Stay well behind it and let it go. Then turn and don’t swing out into the road.
 Never pass a vehicle on the inside when it may turn left.

Now that, to me, means that if I am driving along a road with a cycle lane on the left of me, and I am turning left, I am entitled to take the left without waiting and yielding for a bike behind me. Obviously I wouldn't cut across one if it was adjacent to me, but I'm not going to wait there like a dummy holding up all the traffic behind me that's going straight ahead.

However, some cars do this - literally wait to go left for ages to let loads of bikes going straight and a traffic jam quickly ensues.

How do people feel - would they accept the RSA advice as being appropriate - and as other posters have stated, if the bike is behind they should allow a car in front turn left, and if the bike is ahead, then the car shouldn't race up and cut it off.

Fighting Tao

There's always a chance that a vehicle will be turning left as they often don't indicate. Sounds like they never want bikes to pass motor vehicles on the left at all. Wouldn't expect anything less from the RSA.

NS77

A simple "Left turning vehicles yield to cyclists" sign might go some way to lessen the confusion.....

beauf

Should move in line with cyclists before turn so they can't under take. Then turn.

Macy0161

NS77 wrote: »

A simple "Left turning vehicles yield to cyclists" sign might go some way to lessen the confusion.....

It's a slightly different set up, but they have one of these signs at Fosters Avenue in bound the last few years. It does, imo, seem to have had some effect on driver behaviour at that junction.

Did see a close call at this junction this morning (from the car), but it was a bit 50-50 - cyclist was coming from a long way back, at speed. In general I find vehicles take into account the signage at that junction.

As mentioned earlier in the thread (years ago!) the N11 has loads of them. A lot of them on downhills. They're not great for cyclists or motorists imo, given the speed it's easy to pick up on the bike.

Seaswimmer

Macy0161 wrote: »

It's a slightly different set up, but they have one of these signs at Fosters Avenue in bound the last few years. It does, imo, seem to have had some effect on driver behaviour at that junction.

Did see a close call at this junction this morning (from the car), but it was a bit 50-50 - cyclist was coming from a long way back, at speed. In general I find vehicles take into account the signage at that junction.

As mentioned earlier in the thread (years ago!) the N11 has loads of them. A lot of them on downhills. They're not great for cyclists or motorists imo, given the speed it's easy to pick up on the bike.

I suggested this when the Frascati Road/Blackrock bypass was being upgraded. (even if I did send them an image of a sign from America!!)

Although I am pleasantly surprised as most motorists seem fairly good at waiting for cyclists when turning left at the various junctions with straight ahead cycle lanes since the bypass was redesigned.


Dear xxx,

There is a problem for cyclists going straight when meeting left turning vehicles all along Frascati Road in both directions. A simple sign advising motorists to yield to cyclists (which they are legally obliged to do as they are crossing the lane) would be a huge help..

ED E

Are CoCo's and the NRA allowed to erect traffic signs that arent part of the RS list?

magicbastarder

NS77 wrote: »

A simple "Left turning vehicles yield to cyclists" sign might go some way to lessen the confusion.....

Cyclist's coming from which direction though? And is such an instruction legal?

jive

TOMs WIFE wrote: »

How do people feel - would they accept the RSA advice as being appropriate - and as other posters have stated, if the bike is behind they should allow a car in front turn left, and if the bike is ahead, then the car shouldn't race up and cut it off.

I disagree. I think it should work as if you were crossing oncoming traffic at a junction. You wait for a gap and then you go, otherwise in the event of a crash it becomes very grey 'I was ahead of you' blah blah.

Also, cyclists behind you won't expect you to brake and they also won't wait behind you. One cyclist stops, car will think it's ok to go and then another cyclist will plough into the side of the car.

It's grand for the RSA to say if they are in front and indicating let them go but in practice it just won't happen; largely because nobody knows that rule of the road in addition to most people not bothering their arse with indicating anyway!

average_runner

J o e wrote: »

Pulling into the main traffic here would be fairly unsafe here because

1. The cycle lane is raised from the main road until just before this so you'd be coming down off a kerb.
2. The traffic in that lane can by very fast moving. Especially when then left slip road is empty or green at the end of it and motorists are racing to get through.

So, who has right of way; left turning motorists or straight-ahead cyclists?

Doesn't matter who has the right away, the cyclists will come out the worst.

As a driver i will always check the cycle lane before turning into it.

Carawaystick

The National Cycle Manual section 4.5 wrote:

The re-established cycle-lane must be continuous, clearly marked and legible so that vehicles weaving left across it know they must yield to cyclists who may be continuing straight ahead.

seems to be clear, cars moving left across a cycle lane have to yield to bikes.

joeKel73

TOMs WIFE wrote: »

The Road Safety Authority has stated the following in it's "cycle safely" publication:

Turning left
 Never cycle between another left turning vehicle and the kerb. Stay well behind it and let it go. Then turn and don’t swing out into the road.
 Never pass a vehicle on the inside when it may turn left.

Now that, to me, means that if I am driving along a road with a cycle lane on the left of me, and I am turning left, I am entitled to take the left without waiting and yielding for a bike behind me.

Those instructions were not in relation to cycle lanes...

TOMs WIFE wrote: »

I'm not going to wait there like a dummy holding up all the traffic behind me that's going straight ahead.

However, some cars do this - literally wait to go left for ages to let loads of bikes going straight and a traffic jam quickly ensues.

If there are loads of bikes using the cycle lane then cutting across them will surely cause a big traffic jam of bikes in that lane?