Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Donabate R132/R126/M1 Junction + cyclists?
Options
-
03-11-2015 3:32pmJust out of interest ,I seen a motorist giving out reams to a cyclist today at the Donabate R132/R126/M1 Junction at Lissenhall.
I presume because the cyclist had not used the tunnel as the motorist was pointing towards it direction.
I have seen a few near accidents between cars and cyclists at this location,I thought all the routes where covered by bicycle lanes/tunnel's at this junction.
The tunnels are not very well sign posted or for that matter are the existence of bicycle lanes /routes for cyclists on the approaches to this busy junction.
I know there is one tunnel there ,is that it? or is there more ,I know cyclists don't come high up on the agenda on the NRA's priority list and that NCD cyclists are long over due proper bicycle lanes linking ,even Skerries/Rush/Lusk etc.
Actually according to the NRA there is no civilisation ,north of Swords or Malahide.
If ye ever want to have a real near death experience try walking or cycling , from Blake's Cross(R127) to Lusk , or the road of death (R128) Lusk to train station/ train station to Rush.
These routes are dangerous enough in the car , the poor auld cyclist must have nerves of steel to chance them.0
Comments
-
There are 3 tunnels
Under the Hearse road & onslip to the M1S
under the offslip of the M1N (heading to Swords)
under the Onslip of the M1N (northbound from Swords)
There are issues with all of them, but I usually use the one under the Hearse road, and sometimes the one northbound from Swords.
The one under the Hearse road has a blind junction with bikes coming down from the hearse road going to Swords. There's no yield /stop lines marked so it's unclear if cyclists coming down will yield to cyclists on the right coming from the r132
There is also a kerb at a very shallow angle as you leave the road on the r132 to the cycle lane, so if you weren't paying attention, you could take a tumble here.
The design should be that you join the cycle lane at close to a right angle, or at the very least there is a drop down onto the cycle lane.
The tunnel under the M1N offslip has a tight off-camber hairpin and is clearly signed as no entry.
I don't use this as the bike/pedestrian lights to cross the offslip change as soon as you press the button.
The tunnel under the M1N onslip is long and has an off camber bend where it joins the path over the motorway. There's also street furniture right at the bend, and gravel. It also leads you to a pedestrian/cycle light that is red until the next green phase for motor traffic on the roadway.
There is a right angle turn at the path here too, which is badly designed.
If traffic is very heavy or very light I use the road here.
There's no obligation on cyclists to use cycle lanes. and there are no cycle lanes on the bridges over the M1 mainline, as there is no traffic sign RRM023 or RRM0220 -
Join Date:Posts: 71301
I personally never use the cycle lanes across that junction. I always stick to the road, as I actually feel safer. The cycle lanes will get clogged up with rubbish and occasionally can have glass on them. As we move into winter the incidence of ice increases. Getting back onto the hard shoulder at the other end is a bit of a pain also. A lot of guys I know cycle that junction regularly will use the lane southbound but still cut back off the kerb onto the road ahead of the final set of lights. I am aware of very few cyclists who use the cycle lanes northbound
If motorists use the lanes as they are set out there is absolutely no problem (having said that, before they changed the layout I did find drivers sometimes trying to get onto the motorway slip from lane 3 (pushing ahead of others who have queued) and on one occasion had to head slightly onto the slip road myself to avoid being hit by a car doing that manoeuver
As already highlighted cyclists are perfectly at liberty to stick to the road0 -
Now you mention it, there used to be a load of frost down in the hole under the hearse road.
It always feels more hectic and dangerous going South, maybe it isn't so bad if you take the middle lane, Beasty?0 -
Join Date:Posts: 71301
Carawaystick wrote: »Now you mention it, there used to be a load of frost down in the hole under the hearse road.
It always feels more hectic and dangerous going South, maybe it isn't so bad if you take the middle lane, Beasty?
Just thinking again about one of my prior comments. The old layout had 2 lanes on the roundabout and cyclists would stick on the inside which was either straight on or turning onto the motorway. The right lane was straight on only and that was where the car came from. Think the driver was more traumatised than me as when she stopped she sat there just saying sorry, so hopefully they lesson was learned
The current layout allows you to go straight on or down the slip road from the centre lane so that's the only logical option for cyclists. I would not use the road if I didn't feel confident using the centre lane0 -
....I seen a motorist giving out reams to a cyclist today at the Donabate R132/R126/M1 Junction at Lissenhall.....
I use the first southbound one if traffic is already moving through the lights when I approach. I don't use the second part preferring to wait at the lights. I never use the northbound route (well not since the first time I tried it).
Beasty - the southbound first tunnel is much cleaner now than it used to be, No sign of rubbish, glass or excrement for a while now.0 -
Advertisement
-
Join Date:Posts: 71301
Wishbone Ash wrote: »A I was in McNally Swords CC kit and he said he would be contacting the club to report me. I was hoping he would.
Not sure how we would respond if he did. Never had to implement the disciplinary policy against a club member yet:pac:0 -
Now that I've looked there are the 3 tunnels , I remember when the junction was being built, people assumed the whole junction was going to be free flow,like on the M50.
Actually I think some have even called these Sargents folly;re the TD from the party that can't be mentioned in polite society.
I am not a cyclist myself , but road safety is everybody's business in my book ,and it is fact and good business that where proper decent cycle lanes are provided they are used,and are a benefit to all concerned.
Recently on RTE's nationwide there was a piece on a disused railways track being turned over
by Iarnród Éireann for a cycle/track / walkway,I think in Donegal,150,000 used it in the first year alone , and created no end of local jobs for tourism etc as well as being brilliant for cyclists, walkers , joggers etc.
One thing that really annoyed me was ye might remember that the grass margin on the left
from Lusk to Blakes Cross was completely dug up by the Gas Company a couple of years back,it would have been ideal for a cycle lane and could have easily have been provided then,but instead was grassed over again when works were completed.
There are also a couple of ''Lost Cycle'' lanes in NCD -gwan guess? - below at the 5 roads/Jordanstown and above in St Margarets adj to the village , if the hedges were't cut ye would never know they there there.On another note see a lad reading an invoice and using a mobile phone and sipping a coffee ,all at the same time,while traversing this junction on Sunday afternoon, now that's multi tasking for ye - will people ever learn.0 -
Leaves are a big problem for cyclists on those underpasses this time of year. Can be lethal.0
-
Wishbone Ash wrote: »I use the first southbound one if traffic is already moving through the lights when I approach. I don't use the second part preferring to wait at the lights. I never use the northbound route (well not since the first time I tried it).
Beasty - the southbound first tunnel is much cleaner now than it used to be, No sign of rubbish, glass or excrement for a while now.
Took the mainline yesterday, it was a lot slower with lots of red light time.
Drove this morning (when I really shoulda hardned up and cycled to save 50 ins off my trip) and a cyclist I passed at the first tunnel was long gone before the lights went green.
The bike lights at the second tunnel (M1 offramp) switch immediately, if the offramp car lights are red.0 -
I often wondered about these tunnels.
I don't cycle much now only up and down to G.A.A club but used to cycle quite a bit when I was working in Sheriff street on Saturdays or Sundays back in 80s, (far less traffic) and regularly cycled to Swords or around north county to football games.
I think the tunnels, if properly maintained should be compulsory. They cost a lot of money to put there and "folly" or not were put there for good reason I believe, to make it easier and safer for everyone to traverse these busy junctions. And I also agree about the cycle lane from Blakes cross to Lusk.
I think also cycle clubs should have a word with some members who are a danger to themselves and other road users. It is great to see so many out cycling on weekends but some are downright careless and it is not unusual to see them 3 or 4 abreast and wavering across lanes. I dont know how we dont have more accidents.0 -
Advertisement
-
....I think the tunnels, if properly maintained should be compulsory. They cost a lot of money to put there and "folly" or not were put there for good reason I believe, to make it easier and safer for everyone to traverse these busy junctions....
I don't understand your point about them costing a lot of money - I don't know any cyclists who asked for this money to be wasted. Can you imagine the controversy there would be if cyclists wasted money designing and constructing a road network without any input from motorists, or if excessive sums of money were spent on a road that no motorist asked for yet were expected to use because someone who doesn't drive decided that it would be safer for them and, as it cost a lot to build, they should be made use it?
A bicycle is defined as a vehicle under road traffic legislation and cyclists are legally entitled to use (non-motorway) roads. Segregating cyclists from motorised traffic just perpetuates the myth that cyclists are second class road users who should not hinder other road users. Instead of dealing with the real issue - incompetent motorists, the RSA, local authorities et al have instead chosen to remove cyclists out of their way, further perpetuating the myth that we shouldn't be anywhere near them.
The vast majority of cyclists are also motorists and those of us who cycle to work are being kind to the environment and freeing up space for other road users. I could be cheeky and say that, as we have a taxed car parked in the driveway for 6 days a week, we are also subsidising other road users!LeoB wrote:I think also cycle clubs should have a word with some members who are a danger to themselves and other road users. It is great to see so many out cycling on weekends but some are downright careless and it is not unusual to see them 3 or 4 abreast and wavering across lanes. I don't know how we dont have more accidents.0 -
Wishbone Ash wrote: »Leo - The problem is that most of these so called 'safety features' for cyclists are designed by motorists who do not cycle and there is little or no consultation with cyclists or cycling groups.
I don't understand your point about them costing a lot of money - I don't know any cyclists who asked for this money to be wasted. Can you imagine the controversy there would be if cyclists wasted money designing and constructing a road network without any input from motorists, or if excessive sums of money were spent on a road that no motorist asked for yet were expected to use because someone who doesn't drive decided that it would be safer for them and, as it cost a lot to build, they should be made use it?
A bicycle is defined as a vehicle under road traffic legislation and cyclists are legally entitled to use (non-motorway) roads. Segregating cyclists from motorised traffic just perpetuates the myth that cyclists are second class road users who should not hinder other road users. Instead of dealing with the real issue - incompetent motorists, the RSA, local authorities et al have instead chosen to remove cyclists out of their way, further perpetuating the myth that we shouldn't be anywhere near them.
Underpasses are a very common feature in NL as are segregated cycle paths (proper cycle paths that is where cyclists have the same rights as cars crossing minor roads)Wishbone Ash wrote: »The vast majority of cyclists are also motorists and those of us who cycle to work are being kind to the environment and freeing up space for other road users. I could be cheeky and say that, as we have a taxed car parked in the driveway for 6 days a week, we are also subsidising other road users!
You won't find any cyclist disagreeing with you there. But what about motorists who are a much greater danger to themselves and other road users? I can recall only one occasion where a cyclist caused a fatality to another road user. Whereas on the other hand..........
One question that I'm asking out of curiosity without looking to blame anyone is why would you cycle on the overcrowded and dangerous main route rather than the quieter and safer backroads? - When I'm cycling I usually stick to the backroads as it's much more pleasant.0 -
One question that I'm asking out of curiosity without looking to blame anyone is why would you cycle on the overcrowded and dangerous main route rather than the quieter and safer backroads? - When I'm cycling I usually stick to the backroads as it's much more pleasant.0
-
Join Date:Posts: 71301
Particular problem with some backroads is they are often quite narrow with blind bends, often resulting in some motorists making dangerous manoeuvres to overtake.
Roads like the Old N1 are much more spacious with plenty of room and some decent hard shoulder (although some bits along the edge of the road are badly worn or repaired to a poor standard and a lot of the road itself is long overdue a resurface) (Blakes Cross Southbound can be quite dangerous when having to move back across to the inside lane because of the traffic joining from the Lusk road)0 -
Wishbone Ash wrote: »Leo - The problem is that most of these so called 'safety features' for cyclists are designed by motorists who do not cycle and there is little or no consultation with cyclists or cycling groups.
I don't understand your point about them costing a lot of money - I don't know any cyclists who asked for this money to be wasted. Can you imagine the controversy there would be if cyclists wasted money designing and constructing a road network without any input from motorists, or if excessive sums of money were spent on a road that no motorist asked for yet were expected to use because someone who doesn't drive decided that it would be safer for them and, as it cost a lot to build, they should be made use it?Wishbone Ash wrote: »A bicycle is defined as a vehicle under road traffic legislation and cyclists are legally entitled to use (non-motorway) roads. Segregating cyclists from motorised traffic just perpetuates the myth that cyclists are second class road users who should not hinder other road users. Instead of dealing with the real issue - incompetent motorists, the RSA, local authorities et al have instead chosen to remove cyclists out of their way, further perpetuating the myth that we shouldn't be anywhere near them.
I would say the issue of incompetent drivers is dealt with far more often than incompetent cyclists.
I would encourage people to cycle more be it to school or sports events. The amount of kids getting dropped off to school is crazy when 5 minutes on a bike would do them. But I drive from Balbriggan to Skerries to Rush every morning and it is frightening both the driving of some people in cars and young people going to community college or St. Josephs with not a sign of a light or high viz jacket. Schools should be involved here ensuring their students have reflective strips on their bags.Wishbone Ash wrote: »The vast majority of cyclists are also motorists and those of us who cycle to work are being kind to the environment and freeing up space for other road users. I could be cheeky and say that, as we have a taxed car parked in the driveway for 6 days a week, we are also subsidising other road users!Wishbone Ash wrote: »You won't find any cyclist disagreeing with you there. But what about motorists who are a much greater danger to themselves and other road users? I can recall only one occasion where a cyclist caused a fatality to another road user. Whereas on the other hand..........
But on the tunnels there should be more of them and along our motorways and canals, just like Holland we should have cycle lanes as part of the build. This would educate people and get them thinking about cyclists when they get back into their cars?0 -
I don't think the money was wasted it is a good feature and I don't mind who they consult with once they get it right. These tunnels cost money and the idea is good. Turning into a them (motorists) and us (cyclists) thing is not good and who designs what is irrevelant. They were built to I would say to protect cyclists more and there should be more safety features like them on all major roads.
One of those was at the tunnels under the M1, due to the bad engineering there.A bicycle may be defined as a vehicle under R.T.L and noone is saying cyclists should not be allowed to use roads, nor are they second class road road users but my experience of SOME cyclists on local roads is not good.
I would say the issue of incompetent drivers is dealt with far more often than incompetent cyclists.
A incompetent cyclist is one who can't ride a bike; there is a legal definition of a competent motor vehicle driver: somebody who passes their driving test.I would encourage people to cycle more be it to school or sports events. The amount of kids getting dropped off to school is crazy when 5 minutes on a bike would do them. But I drive from Balbriggan to Skerries to Rush every morning and it is frightening both the driving of some people in cars and young people going to community college or St. Josephs with not a sign of a light or high viz jacket. Schools should be involved here ensuring their students have reflective strips on their bags.But on the tunnels there should be more of them and along our motorways and canals, just like Holland we should have cycle lanes as part of the build. This would educate people and get them thinking about cyclists when they get back into their cars?
And from Naas to Cork city?0 -
Join Date:Posts: 71301
On the specifics of those tunnels I was at a meeting with FingalCoCo a while ago on a separate matter, but one of the engineers responsible was there. When I explained I did not use them he expressed surprise, particularly when I further explained why did not use them. I don't think there was much consultation at all and the money could certainly have been better spent if it had been dedicated to improving the lot of cyclists in other ways. Of course it was all done as part of the junction upgrade, but the impression I got was it was done more with an intention of being seen to introduce dedicated cycling facilities with little thought to what would be considered useful cycling facilities
One of the problems seems to me there are quite a few people who are motorists and do a bit of cycling who then think they are experts on the subject when they patently are not. Maybe if they volunteered to head down into those tunnels to clear the fallen leaves and other debris, perhaps bring some heaters down to dry them out particularly when it's icy, they may start to better understand some of the problems perhaps more experienced cyclists have a bit of a whinge about.
If anyone wishes to discuss the merits or otherwise of hi viz head over to the Cycling forum where we have a dedicated thread frequented by numerous cyclists who are fully bought into the idea of having proper lights, but highly sceptical over any pressure to get cyclists to wear hi viz.0 -
Carawaystick wrote: »I've only crashed and fallen off my bike, on a road, on my own, 2 times since I got a bike with gears.
One of those was at the tunnels under the M1, due to the bad engineering there.Carawaystick wrote: »There is no legal definition of competent cycling
A incompetent cyclist is one who can't ride a bike; there is a legal definition of a competent motor vehicle driver: somebody who passes their driving test.Carawaystick wrote: »Are these students travelling on the road during lighting up hours? i.e. half an hour before sunrise or after sunset?Carawaystick wrote: »So you agree there should be a high quality grade separated cycling route from Jonesboro to Clough in Wexford?
And from Naas to Cork city?
Im in favour by the way of people cycling.0 -
On the specifics of those tunnels I was at a meeting with FingalCoCo a while ago on a separate matter, but one of the engineers responsible was there. When I explained I did not use them he expressed surprise, particularly when I further explained why did not use them. I don't think there was much consultation at all and the money could certainly have been better spent if it had been dedicated to improving the lot of cyclists in other ways. Of course it was all done as part of the junction upgrade, but the impression I got was it was done more with an intention of being seen to introduce dedicated cycling facilities with little thought to what would be considered useful cycling facilitiesOne of the problems seems to me there are quite a few people who are motorists and do a bit of cycling who then think they are experts on the subject when they patently are not. Maybe if they volunteered to head down into those tunnels to clear the fallen leaves and other debris, perhaps bring some heaters down to dry them out particularly when it's icy, they may start to better understand some of the problems perhaps more experienced cyclists have a bit of a whinge about.
Agree with you on this Beasty. Same with most things be it sport or any hobby. Obviously Fingal need to look at how they maintain the tunnels and if it needed they should be cleaned every day by the sweeper machine they use on footpathsIf anyone wishes to discuss the merits or otherwise of hi viz head over to the Cycling forum where we have a dedicated thread frequented by numerous cyclists who are fully bought into the idea of having proper lights, but highly sceptical over any pressure to get cyclists to wear hi viz.
Most mornings around Rush I pass a lad about 5.30 dressed in black but his lights are like a motorbike. I used to pass a lad cycling between Rush and Skerries, he would be fairly belting along but you could him on Cairn hill as you came to St. Catherines and once or twice I passed him out past Mourne view but his lights were excellent but he was obviously a serious cyclist.0 -
..Maybe there should be a test for cyclists as SOME of the ones, a minority, should not be let out on the roads....
Going back to my previous point - how many of those fatalities were caused by cyclists?0 -
Advertisement
-
Wishbone Ash wrote: »We have had a driving test since 1963 yet 23,000 people have died on our roads since then, the vast vast majority involving a motorised vehicle.
Going back to my previous point - how many of those fatalities were caused by cyclists?
We dont really know how many have been caused by cyclists. Maybe swerving to avoid a cyclist has caused a few but we will never really know. Speed and drink driving have been a major cause.
But also look at the cyclists who have been knocked of their bicycles and sustained serious injuries, you can probably come up with a figure but perhaps if there were proper cycling lanes like Holland we would have less.
Last year cycling between Wassanar, The Hauge and Amsterdam I hardly had to mix with traffic at all. It was fantastic as our kids were in no danger. This is my point.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 71301
The Netherlands had to largely re-build after the war and could accommodate dedicated cycling facilities relatively easily (as indeed could Denmark)
I would have no problem if more was invested over here, but the costs nowadays are pretty astronomical and not something this country could afford for some time (given it cannot repair the roads it has and seems to prefer to spend limited resources on adding extra motorways that are relatively underused (other than the likes of the M50 and M1))
The money spent on that intersection would, in my view, have been much better spent at Blakes Cross and the road to Turvey (which was the scene of a fatality last year)
You mention a cycling forum at FingalCoCo. I've never heard of it and if there is one I would have thought it would be speaking to the largest cycling club in the area, McNally Swords CC (which it has not)
The council is generally supportive of cycling and allowed the national Cyclocross championships to be held at River Valley in January. As an aside there is another event being held there in a couple of weeks, the Leinster Cyclocross championships. I'll put more details in the event thread nearer the time, but again FingalCoCo have been very helpful in allowing the club to promote that event on its land.0 -
I don't expect any specialist cycling facilities as I'm quite happy to cycle on the road. If they were to be created, I'd be quite happy with an on-road cycle track (where there is room) when new roads are being build.
Take the section from the airport roundabout to Dardistown cemetery and vice versa. What a waste of money! Plenty of room for an on-road track but instead they waste money on that stupid segregated track where the cyclist is expected to yield at every entrance they pass. They are also expected to share the footpath with pedestrians (many of whom think the cyclist is illegally cycling on a footpath). As there is no legal obligation to use it, it is rarely used. The northbound section is even worse as one is brought into the airport even if intending to go straight on.
Why couldn't they have done it like the section on Pinnock Hill/Fosterstown North. A simple, inexpensive, no-nonsense on-road track which is used by every cyclist I see on that stretch.0 -
The Netherlands had to largely re-build after the war and could accommodate dedicated cycling facilities relatively easily (as indeed could Denmark)
You mention a cycling forum at FingalCoCo. I've never heard of it and if there is one I would have thought it would be speaking to the largest cycling club in the area, McNally Swords CC (which it has not)
The council is generally supportive of cycling and allowed the national Cyclocross championships to be held at River Valley in January. As an aside there is another event being held there in a couple of weeks, the Leinster Cyclocross championships. I'll put more details in the event thread nearer the time, but again FingalCoCo have been very helpful in allowing the club to promote that event on its land.
I was unclear earlier. Maybe there should be a cycling forum to cater for everyone's needs.
Fingal are fairly supportive of most outdoor activities and a forum like this I think would be helpful and could push cycling way up the agenda through various initiatives promoting it.0 -
-
The money spent on that intersection would, in my view, have been much better spent at Blakes Cross and the road to Turvey (which was the scene of a fatality last year)
One point about the attitude of FCC is that they want to build a cycle/walkway from Malahide to Donabate, but not to Donabate village, only to Newbridge. Which is shut at night, so you'ld be dumped onto the Hearse road, instead of getting into Donabate0 -
You mention a cycling forum at FingalCoCo. I've never heard of it and if there is one I would have thought it would be speaking to the largest cycling club in the area, McNally Swords CC (which it has not)
LeoB might be referring to the Transport SPC*
Ray Ryan from Skerries Cycling Initiative is on that committee.
http://www.fingalcoco.ie/your-council/spc-committees/transportationspc
I use the tunnels but my route is north-south and south-north, I wouldn't use any of the tunnels if I were heading from Swords to Donabate.
I remember the NRA's proposal had a cycle path that would have put cyclists through 13 pedestrian traffic lights heading north-south.0 -
GlennaMaddy wrote: »
I remember the NRA's proposal had a cycle path that would have put cyclists through 13 pedestrian traffic lights heading north-south.0 -
That's NTA planners for ye, build the M1 on the in land route instead of the coastal route, and totally bypass one of the state's largest urban population centres,miniature roundabouts on the side of hills,tis a wonder they never managed a rounabout on its side,I digress , I believe there is a new Lusk cycling club formed and based in the Lusk United club house on the Skerries rd.
There may be a facebook page or check at the club house.0 -
Advertisement
-
... and totally bypass one of the state's largest urban population centresdslamjack wrote:I believe there is a new Lusk cycling club formed and based in the Lusk United club house on the Skerries rd.
There may be a facebook page or check at the club house.0
Advertisement