Journalism and cycling

Hurrache

CramCycle wrote: »

They gave no huge notifications, and one day the gardai turned up at one end of the street directing traffic away. Everyone though there was an accident or a crime was in progress.

I dunno, I live the other end of the country and I knew it was coming because I had seen it in various media outlets.

what_traffic

CramCycle wrote: »

The basic premise I pick up is that whoever on the council team was in charge of organising it, either done no work or deliberately wanted it to fail, there really is no other reason for such a poorly implemented plan.

Ya looks like a box ticking exercise from Council. Real failure from officialdom is to develop conversations on the ground and bring commercial and public transport interests with them before launching such schemes.
What did Roy Keane say: "Fail to prepare, prepare to fail?"
But then again perhaps thats what they wanted in the end. To much hard work at the end of the day.
This is not unique to Cork City. Have seen the same in Galway City around the "Car Free" day when certain streets were closed for 4 hours. Zero engagment in lead up, howls of protest from motordom and local business, headlines in local paper blaming it for x y and "the bad weather on the day".

TheChizler

I think that's pretty unfair, ther was loads of notice in newspapers and street signage. This was planned for two years. Lanes were marked in advance with the times in 4 foot letters, footpaths were modified and bus priority lights put in to facilitate new bus lanes. Hardly a box ticking exercise. More of an example of officials not having the backbone to not cave in to loud protest to change IMO.

what_traffic

TheChizler wrote: »

I think that's pretty unfair, ther was loads of notice in newspapers and street signage. This was planned for two years. Lanes were marked in advance with the times in 4 foot letters, footpaths were modified and bus priority lights put in to facilitate new bus lanes. Hardly a box ticking exercise. More of an example of officials not having the backbone to not cave in to loud protest to change IMO.

That's the problem - that evidently is not enough?
How come the Traders have turned on the idea so quickly?
Need to have more bottom up consultation and locked in time frames agreed.
The real problem is nobody will get fired for this in City Hall, so it does not matter if something is a success or not.

tomasrojo

what_traffic wrote: »

How come the Traders have turned on the idea so quickly?
Need to have more bottom up consultation

Based on what's happened over and over again in Dublin: there is a core of vociferous business owners, who, like many who are wealthier than average, think that people who don't travel by car are the wrong type of people; maybe not actually penniless hippies or shoplifters (though they probably are), but certainly not "high-end" shoppers.

It's largely prejudice.

I'm not saying this scheme was well implemented. I don't know much about it. But I would be very dubious of traders saying that trade has declined by 30% since the restriction was put in place. Just because they're human beings, and human beings in general don't stint on exaggeration when they want to get their way.

If the restriction was only during the afternoon and trade really did decline by that much, there must have been a misperception of the extent of the restriction. For a typical urban centre, about 30% of total business would be down to car travellers.

ford2600

tomasrojo wrote: »

Based on what's happened over and over again in Dublin: there is a core of vociferous business owners, who, like many who are wealthier than average, think that people who don't travel by car are the wrong type of people; maybe not actually penniless hippies or shoplifters (though they probably are), but certainly not "high-end" shoppers.

It's largely prejudice.

I'm not saying this scheme was well implemented. I don't know much about it. But I would be very dubious of traders saying that trade has declined by 30% since the restriction was put in place. Just because they're human beings, and human beings in general don't stint on exaggeration when they want to get their way.

If the restriction was only during the afternoon and trade really did decline by that much, there must have been a misperception of the extent of the restriction. For a typical urban centre, about 30% of total business would be down to car travellers.

I have to get into Cork City centre about 100 times a year; I think I've driven on Patrick Street once over the years. Bar you have ambulatory difficulties between buses, Park & Ride and quite of lot of available street parking around city centre it's a lovely city centre to access one foot.

Patrick Street has light, which are slow, on Grand Parade, Academy Street and Merchant's Quay along with at least one pedestrian crossing; it is slow as fcuk to drive on. People are lazy in adapting to change and want to use the route they always have rather than adapting their mode or route.

Either side of Patrick Street is predominantly pedestrian street; Paul Street to the north and Oliver Plunkett Street to south and all the linking streets. Making Patrick Street more pedestrian friendly could only be good for trade in the long term.

People who own business, generally are anxious/afraid of change; like any anxious person control is weapon of choice.

I feel sorry for the council; like any bureaucracy it will have dead wood but in my experience councils have lots of staff who take great pride in their city/county and work as hard as any private sector employees.

They should double down on this; take the cars out of the South Mall also, develop a few park/communal areas and make the city centre a destination for activities other than shopping.

buffalo

tomasrojo wrote: »

I would be very dubious of traders saying that trade has declined by 30% since the restriction was put in place. Just because they're human beings, and human beings in general don't stint on exaggeration when they want to get their way.

If the restriction was only during the afternoon and trade really did decline by that much, there must have been a misperception of the extent of the restriction. For a typical urban centre, about 30% of total business would be down to car travellers.

The figure I saw was 40%. It's bizarre that they were doing that much business in the late afternoon by car users. My other major gripe as a scholar of ancient Rome is that they said trade was decimated - was it 10% or 40%?

I spent some time in Ballsbridge 'village' yesterday afternoon. Car central - it's a puzzle to figure out how to best cross the road, and even using the pedestrian crossings I was nearly hit by a car whose driver couldn't work out which set of traffic lights applied to his vehicle. I grabbed a coffee and sat down by the Dodder, and couldn't believe the dark back of the cafe was full - but then, who'd want to sit in the sun on the side of a 6 lane road breathing car fumes?

magicbastarder

so a general road safety meeting was held in kerry, where the increasing levels of DUIs in under 40s was discussed among other topics, and this is the takeaway for the examiner:

Clubs urged to lead use of cycle lanes
https://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/clubs-urged-to-lead-use-of-cycle-lanes-469735.html

AndrewJRenko

magicbastarder wrote: »

so a general road safety meeting was held in kerry, where the increasing levels of DUIs in under 40s was discussed among other topics, and this is the takeaway for the examiner:

Clubs urged to lead use of cycle lanes
https://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/clubs-urged-to-lead-use-of-cycle-lanes-469735.html

Well cycle lanes are undoubtedly the key issue in reducing the death toll on the roads. I mean - there must be cycle lanes for at least 1% of the roads covered on the average club spin.

It would surely have been just confusing and misleading for the headline and most of the story to focus on other issues covered at the meeting, such as "rising numbers of drivers under the age of 40 who are being detected for drink-driving".

Pinch Flat

magicbastarder wrote: »

so a general road safety meeting was held in kerry, where the increasing levels of DUIs in under 40s was discussed among other topics, and this is the takeaway for the examiner:

Clubs urged to lead use of cycle lanes
https://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/clubs-urged-to-lead-use-of-cycle-lanes-469735.html

Must bear this in mind next time we head up the sally gap. I admit It’s a while since I’ve been up, presume there’s nice shiny new bike lanes up there by now, no?

Pinch Flat

buffalo wrote: »

The figure I saw was 40%. It's bizarre that they were doing that much business in the late afternoon by car users. My other major gripe as a scholar of ancient Rome is that they said trade was decimated - was it 10% or 40%?

I spent some time in Ballsbridge 'village' yesterday afternoon. Car central - it's a puzzle to figure out how to best cross the road, and even using the pedestrian crossings I was nearly hit by a car whose driver couldn't work out which set of traffic lights applied to his vehicle. I grabbed a coffee and sat down by the Dodder, and couldn't believe the dark back of the cafe was full - but then, who'd want to sit in the sun on the side of a 6 lane road breathing car fumes?

I’ve lived in Dublin City now almost continuously for 20 years. In that time I’ve managed to get in and about the city on public transport (I’m on a bus as we speak) and can count on one hand the amount of times I’ve used my car for “shopping” in the city - and managed to buy clothes, several fridges and other household appliances without too much drama or the need for a car.

It’s just a case that a lot of people are lazy as fook and would rather drive from the end of their driveway to the front door of whatever store they’re patronising.

I’ve said it before - If they wished to reverse the pedestrian of grafton street and Henry street there’d be uproar among the traders. Even if it was on the premise of encouraging more cars into the city.

tomasrojo

Pinch Flat wrote: »

It’s just a case that a lot of people are lazy as fook and would rather drive from the end of their driveway to the front door of whatever store they’re patronising.

And they're quite loud complainers too, so they dominate the discourse after any attempt to retilt the balance in favour of the 60-80% of people in cities who don't arrive by car (which is always framed as a "ban" on cars, which is itself misleading, as it's often just a temporal restriction, or a prohibition on driving all the way through a zone).

Pinch Flat

tomasrojo wrote: »

And they're quite loud complainers too, so they dominate the discourse after any attempt to retilt the balance in favour of the 60-80% of people in cities who don't arrive by car (which is always framed as a "ban" on cars, which is itself misleading, as it's often just a temporal restriction, or a prohibition on driving all the way through a zone).

It's a combination of the overbearing car lobby and the (usually) negative press aimed towards cyclists, the case in point being the media coverage from Kerry noted above. We're really going to struggle if we continually put the car forward as the default travel option.

JMcL

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

It would surely have been just confusing and misleading for the headline and most of the story to focus on other issues covered at the meeting, such as "rising numbers of drivers under the age of 40 who are being detected for drink-driving".

Sure it's Kerry and down there there's no harm in going out, getting tanked up, and getting behind the wheel, in fact it may even make you a better driver. Some talking cap said so in the dail and on TV so it must be true </sarcasm>

Idleater

Pinch Flat wrote: »

We're really going to struggle if we continually put the car forward as the default travel option.

There was an article in the Irish times magazine a couple of weeks ago "Many are steering from the need to learn to drive", my favourite quote

Mario Rosenstock wrote:

One of my pet hates in life is queuing. And driving is basically queuing. Moving and queuing.

Speaking of which, I was in Berlin a few weeks ago and there's a monument to the first ever set of traffic lights at Potsdammer Platz.

Kop Idol

Not specifically about cyclists but discusses what becomes of ordinary people when you put them under time pressure and inside a metal box...

https://www.independent.ie/life/motoring/car-talk/are-you-a-dr-jekyll-or-mr-hyde-driver-36830187.html

Particularly interesting/disturbing about studies on aggressiveness shown towards other road users with a "perceived lower status". Example used was learner drivers but it could equally be applied to cyclists, pedestrians, etc.

Hurrache

Ok, a stretch putting it in the journalism thread, but there's a cyclist on Liveline at the moment recounting what sounds like a pretty horrific accident he was involved in when hit by car.

Oh oh, second caller is a taxi driver, his area of expertise, helmets, or lack thereof, and how they should be compulsory. [nips back to the AH thread to see if a regular there has conveniently gone missing]

Missus Doubtfire

I don't know if any of you saw this yesterday.
It's an article about a cyclist who was killed in Russia. He was overtaken by a bus at a corner and fell under the wheels. All caught on dashcam. "Police have launched an investigation but officers believe he failed to notice the bus because his hood prevented him from seeing it and his headphones from hearing it"

buffalo

Missus Doubtfire wrote: »

I don't know if any of you saw this yesterday.
It's an article about a cyclist who was killed in Russia. He was overtaken by a bus at a corner and fell under the wheels. All caught on dashcam. "Police have launched an investigation but officers believe he failed to notice the bus because his hood prevented him from seeing it and his headphones from hearing it"

Here's a link, with an edited video: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/hooded-cyclist-wearing-earphones-crushed-12412182

Jebus, on the inside of a turning bus. I'm not sure he would've survived without the hood and earphones.

mr spuckler

reading this makes my blood boil. turning around to speak to a child is not careless, it's absolutely reckless. particularly when she turned around for so long that she never saw him before she hit him. I cannot fathom how such a black and white case where no blame whatsoever can be attributed to the cyclist results in such a lenient sentence.

Driver who killed cyclist in Cork gets suspended sentence

Sgt Pat Lyons told how Harkin was driving along the Ballincollig bypass with her two young children after visiting Smyth’s Toys when one of them asked her to remove a tag from one a toy. She turned around to respond and took her eyes off the road.

Sgt Lyons said that Harkin was extremely traumatised by what had happened and made admissions that she had never seen the cyclist and had collided with him.

Mr O’Brien was out for a morning cycle and was wearing all the appropriate safety gear including a high visibility jacket.

Judge O Donnabhain said he accepted that there were no aggravating factors such as speed or drink involved but he believed that a simple failure to keep a proper lookout was an aggravating factor and for him that amounted to a high level of carelessness.

However he accepted that Harkin had co-operated with gardaí, pleaded guilty and had no previous convictions which were all to her credit and he sentenced her to 12 months in jail but suspended in its entirety while also banning her from driving for five years.

Corca Baiscinn

[QUOTE. I cannot fathom how such a black and white case where no blame whatsoever can be attributed to the cyclist results in such a lenient sentence.[/QUOTE]

I guess it's because the judge had to deal with the charge that was actually brought which was careless rather than dangerous driving and sentence accordingly including take mitigating circumstances (cooperation/admission of guilt/remorse) into account as per guidelines. Also the fact that there weren't other aggravating circumstances eg speed/drink driving.

I was pleased that the judge made his views very clear re seriousness of the offence and that the cyclist had done everything right. The driver did get a 5 year ban. Jail would have deprived two small chldren of a parent for a time, she'd probably have lost her job (if she has one) and it wouldn't have brought the dead man back.

I'm guessing/hoping that the experience including being prosecuted will mean that not only this woman but her family/friends will forever more realise the seriousness of distracted driving. Later,the RSA could do an ad about it too like the Gillian Tracey one if the family of the dead man were willing

TheChizler

Corca Baiscinn wrote: »

I was pleased that the judge made his views very clear re seriousness of the offence and that the cyclist had done everything right.

My worry there is that if he hadn't been wearing hi-vis would the judge have attributed blame to him? This was in full daylight IIRC.

Fian

buffalo wrote: »

Here's a link, with an edited video: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/hooded-cyclist-wearing-earphones-crushed-12412182

Jebus, on the inside of a turning bus. I'm not sure he would've survived without the hood and earphones.

The comments on that daily mirror article. honestly my mind boggles. worst i have ever seen. Basicly they seem to say serves the cyclist right for being on the road.

hard to fathom given how clear cut it was. he was being overtaken not undertaking it, it turned accross him. How was he meant to intuit that it was going to turn right across him whether he saw it or not? not clear how long the indicators were on before it turned.

mr spuckler

Corca Baiscinn wrote: »

I was pleased that the judge made his views very clear re seriousness of the offence and that the cyclist had done everything right. The driver did get a 5 year ban. Jail would have deprived two small chldren of a parent for a time, she'd probably have lost her job (if she has one) and it wouldn't have brought the dead man back.

in that IT piece the judge said very little tbh. although I'll edit that as I've now read the more detailed comments in the indo.
I find it hard to equate a 5 year ban from driving with taking a life. you get 3 years off the road for a first drink driving offence for example.
no punishment will ever bring someone back or undo any crime, that doesn't stop the system from imposing custodial sentences when the offence is serious enough. what this sentence says is that causing the death of a cyclist is not deemed serious enough to serve jail time.

Cookie_Monster

from that piece:

Mr O’Brien was out for a morning cycle and was wearing all the appropriate safety gear including a high visibility jacket

I didn't realise there is cycle specific appropriate cycle gear, maybe a helmet sure, but "all of" it?? :rolleyes:

magicbastarder

Older men on e-bikes behind rising death toll among Dutch cyclists

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/apr/25/older-men-using-e-bikes-behind-rising-death-toll-among-dutch-cyclists?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Messages

Tenzor07

For the love of God don't look at the comments section!!


http://www.thejournal.ie/lie-down-cyclists-3978398-Apr2018/

Eamonnator

Tenzor07 wrote: »

For the love of God don't look at the comments section!!


http://www.thejournal.ie/lie-down-cyclists-3978398-Apr2018/

Too late

Lumen

Tenzor07 wrote: »

For the love of God don't look at the comments section!!

http://www.thejournal.ie/lie-down-cyclists-3978398-Apr2018/

mr spuckler

Tenzor07 wrote: »

For the love of God don't look at the comments section!!


http://www.thejournal.ie/lie-down-cyclists-3978398-Apr2018/

I already had done yesterday evening, that's the worst I've seen in a while