Cycling Infrastructure and Safety

CramCycle

average_runner wrote: »

Oh i understand schools in your area could be full, but that could be because they are great schools and people outside the area are going to them!

Their not. They are not bad schools but they are not the type to have a large draw from far outside. Their might be a few that it is due to convenience on the commute but this would not be huge either.

Lets say you live 60km from work. Your kids are too young to cover the distance to the local school and there are no buses that go that way. Not only this, but your a parent, you want to have a drop off point that you can see them passed over to someone elses care be it a bus driver or a teacher. You now have to pick a school en route, that opens as you pass or before you pass. For Dublin workers, that shifts the pressure onto certain schools.

There should also be a move by school management to have pre and post care if there is clearly a demand for it. I get that in Dublin because many creches will do that, they don't down the country.

Its a very messy situation but it would be good if they tried to at least solve the issues for the majority, rather than ignoring it wholesale.

average_runner

CramCycle wrote: »

Their not. They are not bad schools but they are not the type to have a large draw from far outside. Their might be a few that it is due to convenience on the commute but this would not be huge either.

Lets say you live 60km from work. Your kids are too young to cover the distance to the local school and there are no buses that go that way. Not only this, but your a parent, you want to have a drop off point that you can see them passed over to someone elses care be it a bus driver or a teacher. You now have to pick a school en route, that opens as you pass or before you pass. For Dublin workers, that shifts the pressure onto certain schools.

There should also be a move by school management to have pre and post care if there is clearly a demand for it. I get that in Dublin because many creches will do that, they don't down the country.

Its a very messy situation but it would be good if they tried to at least solve the issues for the majority, rather than ignoring it wholesale.

Totally agree with what your saying, alot of the things in this country are done arse ways

average_runner

buffalo wrote: »

Is that 5mins by foot, bike, car or PT? With suburban sprawl, what is the size of population that would live within this radius, and would they be enough to sustain these businesses without public subsidies?

They manage to do it in Sweden, same tax rate as us, free creche, playgrounds in every area and shops also.

I think it has to be 5 mins public transport because that means everyone can get there

Moflojo

average_runner wrote: »

I didnt say "bus lanes first", i said that public transport needs to drop in price and buses every 5 mins need to happen first. People were saying they wanted unecessary driving to stop, but for that to happen you got to improve the public transport first by more often and alot cheaper.

If I was in charge of public transport, and there wasn't much money in the coffers, and congestion was an issue, and I was under pressure to "loosen the belt" and relieve the congestion, I know where I'd be spending my money first:




Given that the following is true:

average_runner

Moflojo wrote: »

If I was in charge of public transport, and there wasn't much money in the coffers, and congestion was an issue, and I was under pressure to "loosen the belt" and relieve the congestion, I know where I'd be spending my money first:




Given that the following is true:

Coffers aren't tight, now is the time to do these projects, borrowing rates through the floor. We should be pushing for massive infrastructure change, more trams, open the train station in lucan. Once we get the public transport right the other stuff will fall into place, less cars on the road and then the cycling infrastructure can get the upgrade it needs to cater for them.

Leroy42

@Moflojo - wher did you get the cost stats from? They seem crazy. $445,000 to put in a mile of cycle lane? I assume that is the whole segregation thing, rather than our attempts on a painted white line.

And $280k for a traffic light. No way. It can't possibly cost that much.

Moflojo

average_runner wrote: »

Coffers aren't tight, now is the time to do these projects, borrowing rates through the floor. We should be pushing for massive infrastructure change, more trams, open the train station in lucan. Once we get the public transport right the other stuff will fall into place, less cars on the road and then the cycling infrastructure can get the upgrade it needs to cater for them.

Are you Alan Kelly?

Moflojo

Leroy42 wrote: »

@Moflojo - wher did you get the cost stats from? They seem crazy. $445,000 to put in a mile of cycle lane? I assume that is the whole segregation thing, rather than our attempts on a painted white line.

And $280k for a traffic light. No way. It can't possibly cost that much.

It's from a San Francisco study, and I agree that it would probably be cheaper in Ireland, but the relative cost differences between modal investment is probably the same.

average_runner

Moflojo wrote: »

Are you Alan Kelly?

He was useless as is Ross.

We never have a plan for the future here

CramCycle

Leroy42 wrote: »

@Moflojo - wher did you get the cost stats from? They seem crazy. $445,000 to put in a mile of cycle lane? I assume that is the whole segregation thing, rather than our attempts on a painted white line.

And $280k for a traffic light. No way. It can't possibly cost that much.

In Ireland no. In San Francisco, where they actually think ahead and cost in the installation time, integration to the current system, where the light is hooked up to the grid that it can be controlled by their central traffic management system and adapt to changing pace immediately, particularly for large scale emergency response events.

I still think 280k is crazy as the backbone should be there but they have probably factored in other things such as traffic management, strain on other parts of the infrastructure, increased manpower to deal with complaints, maybe statistical increase in minor accidents in the area etc.

magicbastarder

Leroy42 wrote: »

And $280k for a traffic light. No way. It can't possibly cost that much.

is that for one light pole, or to signal an entire junction?
the gantry style of lights - where they're placed over the lanes, rather than at the side - seems to be more common in the states too.

a quick google shows claims that a single three light assembly plus pole costs a couple of grand. haven't found anything to verify that yet.

Moflojo

magicbastarder wrote: »

is that for one light pole, or to signal an entire junction?
the gantry style of lights - where they're placed over the lanes, rather than at the side - seems to be more common in the states too.

a quick google shows claims that a single three light assembly plus pole costs a couple of grand. haven't found anything to verify that yet.

As Cramcycle alluded to, it's probably the cost of installing a complete set of lights at a junction, with a sensor system that's integrated into a centralised grid, including the relative cost of monitoring & maintaining that junction for an entire year.

Ronaldinho

There's a lot of sense being talked in this thread but let's call a spade a spade, there's a significant proportion of commuting cyclists for whom their own safety doesn't seem very important. What I mean is that they take unnecessary risks with their own safety.

Taking the issue of lights as it's an easy one to be totally objective about, I'd say on my route there's a good 30% of people that don't have/use any. Of course it's possible that I am seeing a disproportionately high number in the cross section that I am observing.

So in as much as it would be great to get better cycling infrastructure and I'm all for it, the 'commuter cycling community' could do with having a look at itself too. A bit more cop on from the significant minority that I see on the road would a) lessen the chances of them getting in an accident and b) help build a bit more goodwill amongst other road users.

RayCun

Enforcement would be great.

Pull over bikes without lights, or bikes breaking lights.

Stop the cars without a full set of lights, or breaking lights (there is no such colour as "just turned red"), or without NCT, tax, or insurance.

People break these laws and get away with it, so they do it again, and everyone else does it because "everyone is doing it"

Chuchote

Ronaldinho wrote: »

There's a lot of sense being talked in this thread but let's call a spade a spade, there's a significant proportion of commuting cyclists for whom their own safety doesn't seem very important. What I mean is that they take unnecessary risks with their own safety.

There is a significant proportion of commuting gob****es (on foot, bicycle, motorbike, car, van, lorry, artic and donkey rickshaw, who take no account of their own or others' safety.

Moflojo

Ronaldinho wrote: »

There's a lot of sense being talked in this thread but let's call a spade a spade, there's a significant proportion of commuting cyclists for whom their own safety doesn't seem very important. What I mean is that they take unnecessary risks with their own safety.

Taking the issue of lights as it's an easy one to be totally objective about, I'd say on my route there's a good 30% of people that don't have/use any. Of course it's possible that I am seeing a disproportionately high number in the cross section that I am observing.

So in as much as it would be great to get better cycling infrastructure and I'm all for it, the 'commuter cycling community' could do with having a look at itself too. A bit more cop on from the significant minority that I see on the road would a) lessen the chances of them getting in an accident and b) help build a bit more goodwill amongst other road users.

I see the behavioural vs. infrastructural argument as being 'incremental' vs. 'transformational'. There is room for both and they're not mutually exclusive. Changing behaviours and attitudes can create incremental change over time, whereas building the correct infrastructure can have an immediate and lasting impact. Also, if (when) enforcement levels reduce people tend to return to their previous bad habits - this doesn't happen with infrastructural change.

Ronaldinho

Chuchote wrote: »

There is a significant proportion of commuting gob****es (on foot, bicycle, motorbike, car, van, lorry, artic and donkey rickshaw, who take no account of their own or others' safety.

Correct - but whataboutery will get us nowhere

eeguy

Ronaldinho wrote: »

Correct - but whataboutery will get us nowhere

It's ALL about enforcement. Law's don's mean sh*t if no one is going to uphold them.
I've seen a cyclist break a light on O'Connell St, hop up onto the pavement and cycle down Henry St., all in front of the garda standing in front of the GPO.

She didn't give him a second glance.

On the spot fine or confiscate the bike, and do it consistently, will solve most of the bad behaviour on roads.

cdaly_

average_runner wrote: »

I didnt say "bus lanes first", i said that public transport needs to drop in price and buses every 5 mins need to happen first. People were saying they wanted unecessary driving to stop, but for that to happen you got to improve the public transport first by more often and alot cheaper.

Part of the current problems with buses is that they are held up by traffic congestion. Take the 46a bus route as an example.

According to Dublin bus timetable, the full distance from Phoenix Park to Dun Laoghaire takes 1 hour (62 min to be precise). In reality, it takes probably 1h30 or more. Assuming 30 46a buses rolling (or in a tailback) at any one time, that gives 10 per hour passing any bus stop or one every 6 minutes.

If the car traffic was not there, the route would take only 60 min and the 30 buses would pass each bus stop at a rate of one every 4 minutes.

There are already enough buses, it's just that so many cars in tailbacks get in the way. Remove the cars and the 5-minute bus magically happens.*



*Yes, I'm aware that certain routes only have a 20-minute frequency but the increased speed would free up capacity and these routes could be more frequent. You also don't need 5-minute buses for convenience. A 10-minute interval for popping down to the shops is grand. You need the 5-minute bus for passenger capacity when a route is busy enough...

Carawaystick

Chuchote wrote: »

What is a parish boundary? Sorry to be ignorant, but I don't know.

/Off Topic
A parish is a collection of townlands, you have caholic church parishes and civil parishes, and I'm not sure if CoI parishes are different from civil parishes

Here's the list of roman catholic parishes in the Dublin diocese
http://www.dublindiocese.ie/parishes/

The boundary is obviously where 2 parishes meet.
As most primary schools are run by the roman catholic church, some of them use their parish boundaries to determine their policy to accept pupils.

Townlands are reasonably similar in size, Parishes are more variable so you've about 10 townlands per parish in Louth, and 40 townlands per parish in Mayo.


Back On Topic
Another issue with the poor infrastructure is that the nra, and local authorities seem to think it's fair game to close or obstruct a cycle track to keep cars moving. This morning at the Dominic street/Bolton/Dorset junction,
the NRA had cones obstructing the southbound cycle track, for no obvious reason.

Again, during the last General Election campaign, the nra parked a van on the cycle track across the M1 to allow the driver take down election posters. Despite the nra building actual parking spaces in the junction specifically for service vehicle parking.

Or you have Dublin city closing the bike lanes on North wall quay to allow festivals get set up, but retaining parking spaces which could be used instead.
Or you have an Post vans driving along and parking in mandatory cycle tracks etc, etc

And then you have the cops complaining about people posting photos of vehicles in cycle tracks, instead of prosecuting the people who are breaking the law.

And then you have the rsa claiming that it is legal for a taxi to drive in a mandatory cycle track

Chuchote

Thanks, Carawaystick; I'm still a bit hazy about the exact size of a parish; let's agree that kids should really go to a school within 10km? If I understand 'parish' rightly as being more or less equivalent to general area names, it wouldn't be possible for every kid to go to school within the parish - for instance, Harold's Cross has no secondary school, though it's near good secondary schools in Rathmines, Ranelagh and Rathfarnham, and less than 7km from one of the best schools in the country in Stillorgan.

The NRA's approach to cycle lanes comes from two assumptions: that cycle lanes are optional and so not really necessary (which is true of the painted-streak style of cycle lane, which is more street art than infrastructure); and that private citizens are entitled to store their private property (their cars) on public roads.

As these assumptions cease to be, so will the use of cycle lanes for storage of vans and trucks.