Near misses - mod warning 22/04 - see OP/post 822

BoardsMember

07Lapierre wrote: »

Fair enough...we'll leave everything as it is so. No point even discussing it. Sure it'll cost millions and lets face it, there's always something much more urgent to spend that kinda money on! you know, Hospitals, education etc.

IMO It is relevant in that it shows what's possible if there is a will to do it.

Agreed, hence my other post straight after that (below). What I mean is that we get nowhere saying "look how good it is over there" - there will always be a better health service elsewhere, a better social welfare system elsewhere, a better cycle infrastructure elsewhere. We need to develop strategies with vision for getting there, or somewhere close. There's no point in just saying that we should not allow people to park their cars on public property. You have to have a realistic vision of how to get there, something that works for the greater good. It can't just be a light switch where on some date you have no longer allow parking on public property.

BoardsMember wrote: »

I agree we should be going high rise. Not just for car parks, for apartments. And we should be putting in the required infrastructure so that not having a car is an option for more people. At the moment it really isn't, and not just for people with mobility issues, public transport is a joke and not everyone can cycle.

What we really need is people in power with vision. Instead we have teachers and publicans trying to keep their constituents happy, with no forward thinking or mater plan. It really is pathetic.

looie

A few of these signs scattered around the city centre would be a good starting point IMO. Driver would be issued a ticket immediately and automatically.

07Lapierre

BoardsMember wrote: »

What we really need is people in power with vision. Instead we have teachers and publicans trying to keep their constituents happy, with no forward thinking or mater plan. It really is pathetic.

Well said! ... this is why i couldn't care less when Enda Kenny leaves office...I have no faith in any of the others to do a better job!

BoardsMember

07Lapierre wrote: »

Well said! ... this is why i couldn't care less when Enda Kenny leaves office...I have no faith in any of the others to do a better job!

Here's one for you, I know it is not original....according to Wikipedia, 2/3rds of Irish port traffic goes through Dublin Port, i.e. pretty much into the city centre. There's nearly 200 hectares down there, right in the city centre.

Our Island's main deep water port should not be on the most valuable land in the country, that also happens to be the busiest traffic wise. Why ship stuff into the hardest place to get it out of? That which needs to come into the city centre could come via the tunnel, dont bring everything for the whole country into the middle of the bloody city!

The port should be moved up the coast, where a number of possibilities exist. That land should be all residential, museums, hotels etc built to the highest standard with high rise accommodation, an excellent transport system, local amenities including green areas, creches, youth clubs. It could be absolutely fantastic. It's a massive area on the sea and the river liffey. A bit of foresight and vision and you could have 100,000 people living down there happily, families, singles, couples, all socio-economic background. Cruise ships coming into a lovely modern part of the city, easily accessing other parts.

It could be amazing. Sure, there are loads of obstacles, like ownership of the land for one, but all these can be overcome with the right vision and leadership.

buffalo

BoardsMember wrote: »

It's a massive area on the sea and the river liffey. A bit of foresight and vision and you could have 100,000 people living down there happily, families, singles, couples, all socio-economic background.

And ready to be wiped out by climate change in 20 years! :pac:

magicbastarder

BoardsMember wrote: »

That land should be all residential, museums, hotels etc built to the highest standard with high rise accommodation, an excellent transport system, local amenities including green areas, creches, youth clubs. It could be absolutely fantastic.

if we don't do it already on existing land being developed...
the above idea is great. but the cost would be astronomical, and with all the best will in the world, i think people idealise what we would do with the land partly because we know it's not going to happen. we should be thinking this way on actual upcoming developments - but we're still living in a country where 40% of house builds are one off, and where the minister for the environment is striving to reduce building standards so houses get lashed up more quickly.

Chuchote

tomasrojo wrote: »

Any evidence that quietways or similar schemes push up property prices? It's the only language NIMBYs understand.

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/oct/05/blame-bike-cycling-contribute-city-gentrification

But does cycling really contribute to gentrification? John Stehlin, a geographer at the University of California, Berkeley who has studied San Francisco’s cycling politics, says the relationship is complex. “Cycling feeds into wider urban changes, including gentrification, but it does not cause gentrification. A bicycle lane gets put on a street that is already undergoing change.”
==
When it comes to cycling, our cities are certainly changing. The numbers cycling to work in London more than doubled from 77,000 in 2001 to 155,000 in 2011, according to census data. Brighton, Bristol and Manchester all registered big increases, too. In the US, the number of people cycling in the previous 12 months increased from just over 47 million in 2008 to more than 66 million in 2015.

Gentrifying districts are often those most suited to cycling. Closer to the inner city, they were often built during the age of slow-moving, horse-drawn carts. In the 10th arrondissement of Paris, for example, where on-street parking is scarce, the bike is often a far more rational choice than the car for newcomers.

But the growth of city cycling is not purely utilitarian. Among what urban theorist Richard Florida calls “the creative class”, the bicycle is a potent symbol of identity and status. And more bikes, it seems, means more well-paid knowledge economy jobs. “Cycling to work is positively associated with the share of creative-class jobs and negatively associated with working-class jobs,” Florida wrote in 2011.
==
“Bike lanes are often introduced in areas that are gentrifying,” says Stein. “The people who produce gentrification – landlords and developers – want this because it makes a neighbourhood more desirable and increases their property prices.” City planners often “use cycling infrastructure as a way to facilitate development. So where gentrification goes cycling infrastructure follows, but that is a problem of planning, not cycling.”

Chuchote

Also:

Cycle lanes boost real estate value - where you build a cycle lane, house prices rise - http://atlanta.curbed.com/2013/8/8/10210634/bike-lanes-property-values-is-there-a-correlation

and http://www.icebike.org/property-prices/ (American)

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest-news/living-near-popular-cycling-routes-add-value-home-280901 http://lcc.org.uk/articles/cycle-lanes-and-parking-rival-tube-stations-in-boosting-property-prices (UK)

Facts and figures from the UK on cycle lanes and local value - https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/509587/value-of-cycling.pdf

Bike Lanes Mean Business - an analysis of what a cycleway can mean to local businesses https://www.sfbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Protected_Bike_Lanes_Mean_Business.pdf

Alanstrainor

Damn this thread got huge. For those that remember from earlier. I have a conclusion to this scenario:

Alanstrainor wrote: »

Most passes I deal with are not to do with people not seeing me. They are to do with people who do see me, and decide to chance their arm in passing where there is no room to do so. I have 2 lights front, and 2 lights rear. I do have some highvis gear, but I don't always wear it, and I definitely don't agree with RSA's fetish for highvis clothing.

This about sums it up:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UE0YZ-y6hKA

Alanstrainor wrote: »

Just an update on this for anyone that remembers. (Close pass by a taxi in Portmarnock, video now private)

I got a call from the local station about a week after contacting Traffic Watch, and for a few different reasons I only managed to go up to the station with the footage this evening. His opinion on the pass was that it was ridiculously dangerous. He asked whether I'd be willing to go to court over it, which I said I would. He took the footage and said he will call to the drivers house and see what he says.

So far, everyone has been incredibly professional and courteous. So a thumbs up on the response so far.

So the Gard did call to his house that evening and confronted him. The gard had the footage on his phone to show whether his story lined up with reality. The driver seemed to remember the incident, although his take was slightly different.

Initially the taxi driver stated that "he was forced to swerve due to the on-coming bus, which caused the close pass". Now the gard didn't take this excuse and said well then you shouldn't have passed. The taxi driver also stated to the gard that he had stopped further up the road to apologise, but saw my banging my fist on the bars and thought the better of it.

The gard then got me to come again to the station and show the extended footage to see if he indeed stopped. The footage shows him slow, and then take off again. It was at this second meeting that the gard said "well, there's nothing really here to convict him on, as dangerous driving wont stand, so there's not much we can do". He suggested I come to the station again and meet the driver and he would caution him.

So this is what happened. I went to the station this evening and met the driver, who was incredibly apologetic about the whole thing and said that he should have just waited for a safe moment to pass. The gard just reiterated that it was very dangerous and if there had been a collision it would have been a completely different situation. We shook hands, I said fair play and that was that.

The whole experience was a bit odd really. At the second meeting with the gard I got the impression that there wasn't much that could be done. He even asked me if there was a 1.5 meter rule, which I explained that there wasn't (but that it is recommended in the RotR). And then they talked about cyclists who take the lane and how that wasn't right. To which I corrected them in saying that there was nothing I was aware of to prevent a cyclist using the entire lane.

In one sense I'm happy with the apology, and I think that was a fair resolution. I suppose the let down here is to do with the current legislation, or lack there of, for this kind of situation.

TLDR: Went to Gards, got a direct apology from the taxi driver. Not much else the gards could do.

Chuchote

Or not much the garda could do in the current circumstances. When (if) An Garda Síochána follows the lead of the many UK police forces now taking legal action on close passes (Edinburgh is just the latest), then the ordinary garda on the beat will be able to act.

Tenzor07

That coast road is a nitemare, I've only ever tackled it when there's a strong wind behind me and I can do about 35/40kph along it..

Would be a definite No-Go for your average or casual cyclist!

There's a video on the Green's Facebook page talking about that road: https://www.facebook.com/pg/GreenPartyIreland/videos/

magicbastarder

I've often used that road and wouldn't consider it that bad. Yes, it certainly could be better but it's not one I particularly fear.

Annie get your Run

He even asked me if there was a 1.5 meter rule, which I explained that there wasn't (but that it is recommended in the RotR).

As a matter of interest, why aren't the ROTR law? What's the point in having them if they're not enforceable? I always just assumed that they were.

Chuchote

Dublin (and Galway, and Cork, and Limerick, and Belfast, and Derry) could be like Oslo

https://player.vimeo.com/video/212846367

Tenzor07

magicbastarder wrote: »

I've often used that road and wouldn't consider it that bad. Yes, it certainly could be better but it's not one I particularly fear.

Speaking as a motorist no doubt!

Kaisr Sose

07Lapierre wrote: »

In Switzerland it's illegal to park on the street. If you have a car, it's your responsibility to park it off the road. If you don't have a driveway or private property to park on...thats your problem.

Unless it's changed from when I lived there 10yrs ago, that's not correct. You could get permits for street parking on your street - if spaces were available. Not cheap. They also have a 2hr free rule in suburbs or other specified locations, but you have to self declare your arrival time with a paper dial clock placed on your dash. Try to set it later than you park and you risk a ticket and overstay, you risk a ticket. Everywhere else, no free parking - including parks. Great country for cycling, not so for driving. The more you use your car, the more you are levied (done from their matriculation (nct). While it has a good road network, cars are looked down upon as causes of congestion and pollution. You can easily live there without a car and get to anywhere you want on effecient public transport. If you need a car, you can hire them by the hour (like our city bikes)
I can't recall seeing a crash there - people obey the rules of the road and when they speed or run a light, they are likely to be fined.

ThisRegard

magicbastarder wrote: »

I've often used that road and wouldn't consider it that bad. Yes, it certainly could be better but it's not one I particularly fear.

Yeah, never struck me as too bad when on the bike there. But ironically when driving it I see more issues with vehicle behaviour around other cyclists.

magicbastarder

Annie get your Run wrote: »

As a matter of interest, why aren't the ROTR law? What's the point in having them if they're not enforceable? I always just assumed that they were.

they're meant to be the 'plain english' interpretation of the law. it'd be a bit mad to ask learner drivers to learn the actual law (since our own state bodies have trouble interpreting them).

AndrewJRenko

Roadhawk wrote: »

I wonder how much on-street parking is worth, in Dublin alone, on a daily basis.

In what terms? Are you talking about income from parking fees or what?

Alanstrainor wrote: »

TLDR: Went to Gards, got a direct apology from the taxi driver. Not much else the gards could do.

I suppose the other option could be a prosecution for careless driving, though I've no idea if this would be likely to stick in Court. I've never bothered reporting close passes to the Gardai, as it is hard enough to get them to act of visible, unquestionable offences like red-light-jumps and phone use.

But the informal approach of getting an apology from the driver isn't a bad outcome. If the driver has any kind of humanity about them, the experience of having a Garda land at the front door and having to come to the station to give an explanation and face the accuser would surely have an impact when they find themselves in that situation on the road.

There are a minority of brazen drivers who wouldn't be impacted by this, but it is a positive step to some degree.

robyntmorton

I like the principle of restorative justice for these things, and while we can't put the driver on a bike and run a car/bus/tank past them at close pass distance, being able to put that footage in front of them, showing them just how bad it is can change behaviours without having to go through the legal system.

Some people will never change though, but I'll not go there.

magicbastarder

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

But the informal approach of getting an apology from the driver isn't a bad outcome. If the driver has any kind of humanity about them, the experience of having a Garda land at the front door and having to come to the station to give an explanation and face the accuser would surely have an impact when they find themselves in that situation on the road.

probably a naive question, but would the gardai maintain/refer to records of having visited drivers to have a wee chat?
i.e. would a garda know if he was the third garda to go visit a driver for a 'what were you thinking?' talk?

ED E

magicbastarder wrote: »

probably a naive question, but would the gardai maintain/refer to records of having visited drivers to have a wee chat?
i.e. would a garda know if he was the third garda to go visit a driver for a 'what were you thinking?' talk?

In the UK they have a formal police caution for that, dunno if we have the same here. Paging GM228!

AndrewJRenko

magicbastarder wrote: »

probably a naive question, but would the gardai maintain/refer to records of having visited drivers to have a wee chat?
i.e. would a garda know if he was the third garda to go visit a driver for a 'what were you thinking?' talk?

Good question.

07Lapierre

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

Unless it's changed from when I lived there 10yrs ago, that's not correct. You could get permits for street parking on your street - if spaces were available. Not cheap. They also have a 2hr free rule in suburbs or other specified locations, but you have to self declare your arrival time with a paper dial clock placed on your dash. Try to set it later than you park and you risk a ticket and overstay, you risk a ticket. Everywhere else, no free parking - including parks. Great country for cycling, not so for driving. The more you use your car, the more you are levied (done from their matriculation (nct). While it has a good road network, cars are looked down upon as causes of congestion and pollution. You can easily live there without a car and get to anywhere you want on effecient public transport. If you need a car, you can hire them by the hour (like our city bikes)
I can't recall seeing a crash there - people obey the rules of the road and when they speed or run a light, they are likely to be fined.

Geez! You can't trust anyone! my wife's aunt and uncle live in Zurich and he told me parking on the street was illegal. There coming over to Ireland in a few weeks! I'll give him a thump for you!

Beasty

magicbastarder wrote: »

they're meant to be the 'plain english' interpretation of the law. it'd be a bit mad to ask learner drivers to learn the actual law (since our own state bodies have trouble interpreting them).

They are, but equally you need to bear in mind that some rules, such as dangerous driving, can be quite subjective. Causing an accident or having a near miss when breaking the RoTR is likely to be held against you when determining guilt and any penalties

tomasrojo

ED E wrote: »

In the UK they have a formal police caution for that, dunno if we have the same here. Paging GM228!

They have a "caution register" here. A driver who did some bizarre stuff against me was put on the caution register. He had no previous convictions, so the Gardaí reckoned there was no point going to court. They did try to set up a handshake between me and the driver, which I was amenable to at first, but when they told me his version of what had happened between us, I said he was lying and I wasn't interested in meeting him.

I think if there are subsequent incidents with the driver, the caution register can lead to a harsher sentence, but I might have misunderstood that.

Alanstrainor

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

But the informal approach of getting an apology from the driver isn't a bad outcome. If the driver has any kind of humanity about them, the experience of having a Garda land at the front door and having to come to the station to give an explanation and face the accuser would surely have an impact when they find themselves in that situation on the road.

There are a minority of brazen drivers who wouldn't be impacted by this, but it is a positive step to some degree.

You're right. And maybe it didn't come across well in my post. I am happy with the outcome in the end. The driver fully took responsibility for the dangerous maneuver and apologised numerous times for the whole thing. I would not have wanted things to go any further after the meeting today.

Kaisr Sose

magicbastarder wrote: »

probably a naive question, but would the gardai maintain/refer to records of having visited drivers to have a wee chat?
i.e. would a garda know if he was the third garda to go visit a driver for a 'what were you thinking?' talk?

If it goes up on PULSE, there is a record which could go against them at a later point (another incident) In my opinion all blatantly dangerous incidents should be reported as it helps the Garda build a profile of that drivers overall driving.

Kaisr Sose

07Lapierre wrote: »

Geez! You can't trust anyone! my wife's aunt and uncle live in Zurich and he told me parking on the street was illegal. There coming over to Ireland in a few weeks! I'll give him a thump for you!

That may be their street or area if close to the city centre? There is on street parking in Bern where I lived but also lots of underground parking. Here very little of anything goes underground! Go easy on the visitors...

Wishbone Ash

Tenzor07 wrote: »

That coast road is a nitemare, I've only ever tackled it when there's a strong wind behind me and I can do about 35/40kph along it...

What exactly do you mean be a 'nitemare'? I've ridden than road countless times and can't ever recall any incidents on it. It's very popular with cyclists and I'd say most motorists expect them. (It's also one of the few roads in Co Dublin with very little truck activity).