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

AndrewJRenko

Stark wrote: »

For reference, because it's probably useful for cyclists to know as well.

The first light governs entering the junction. The lights at the end of the junction are repeater lights, their only function is in case your view of the lights at the entrance are blocked. The repeater light turning red is not an excuse to drop anchor and freeze in the middle of the junction.

If you enter the junction and you can't get out before the repeater light goes red because the road ahead is full of traffic, that's a different offence than RLJing, your offence is blocking the junction. Once the traffic clears, you have an obligation to continue on and not sit there continuing to block the junction.

If you enter the junction on a green light, and the repeater light goes red before you have time to exit, you've committed no offence. This is common enough for a lot of junctions where the duration of the amber light is shorter than the time needed to clear the junction while travelling at a safe speed (or cycling speed for that matter).

If you're looking to turn right and there's continuous oncoming traffic, the correct thing to do is take up a position in the middle of the junction (a few junctions will have a box specifically marked out for this) and wait for the red light then exit the junction. If you don't enter the junction and miss an opportunity to turn right as a result, you would fail a driving test for lack of progress.

The ROTR aren't very comprehensive in this regard, but the relevant bit is on page 72: https://www.garda.ie/en/Crime/Traffic-matters/Rules_of_the_road.pdf .



Note that it says don't proceed into the box through a red light. It says nothing about not exiting the box, or having to wait until oncoming traffic has stopped before entering the box.

Not an official source but it is from an approved driving instructor and consistent with advice I've gotten from every other driving instructor and the same behaviour I followed on my test which I passed without being faulted for doing so http://www.safedriver.ie/learning-to-drive/turning-right-at-traffic-lights

There is no distinction in ROTR and (I'm fairly sure) in law between the first set of lights and 'repeater' lights. The ROTR is absolutely clear on red lights - you have to stop;

A red light means ‘Stop’. If the light is red as you approach it, you must not go beyond the stop line at that light or, if there is no stop line, you must not go beyond the light

Deleted User wrote: »

Thank you "lack of progress" was the phrase I was trying to think of. I'm also reminded of a pal who failed his motor bike test for not taking up a position in the box when given the opportunity

Just to absolutely clear, the practice of driving testers does not make law.

Idleater wrote: »

I read it as that too, but I have passed 6 tests, all first time, car, motorcycle and RoSPA advanced (expires every 3 years).

Anyway, to Andrew, might be worth a refresher on yellow boxes and right turns and advanced stop boxes for right turns.

Yeah, thanks for the refresher. I've gone through the ROTR repeatedly on this. There is no allowance in ROTR for driving through red lights.

hesker wrote: »

You can only stop in the middle of the junction if your way is clear. That means that there isn’t an obstruction (tailback) in the road you are turning into.

Also often the light sequences are messed up. Used to see regular crashes near a place I lived at previously. Traffic turning right would see the straight ahead light go red and presume that it also went red for traffic coming towards them. Only it didn’t. This is more common than you might think.

This is potentially lethal for cyclists so you should always double check traffic is stopped before completing your turn.

Unless you have a green right filter arrow, you can never assume that you have right of way. A green light always means proceed with caution if doing a right turn.

Hurrache wrote: »

Then late one evening on the canal, nobody around, a rat ran infront of me. Similar to the dog, both got a fright and it decided to run slightly ahead of me before diving back into the bushes.

Watch out for those bastards. They'll report you to the authorities at the drop of a hat.

Stark

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

There is no distinction in ROTR and (I'm fairly sure) in law between the first set of lights and 'repeater' lights. The ROTR is absolutely clear on red lights - you have to stop;

Illegal to turn left or right at any traffic light controlled junction in that case as to turn left or right, you have to first go through a green light to enter the junction, and then exit through the red repeater light for the side road.

DaveyDave

So when I'm driving up to a junction that's already green and I'm waiting to turn right, I'm not legally allowed do so because it turned red, despite the sensor skipping my filter entirely just because I wasn't there the moment the light went green?

Idleater

DaveyDave wrote: »

So when I'm driving up to a junction that's already green and I'm waiting to turn right, I'm not legally allowed do so because it turned red, despite the sensor skipping my filter entirely just because I wasn't there the moment the light went green?

No, you may

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2012/si/332/made/en/print
2) Sub-article (1) does not apply where the driver of a vehicle intending to make a right hand turn at a junction enters the cross-hatched area for that purpose.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

There is no distinction in ROTR and (I'm fairly sure) in law between the first set of lights and 'repeater' lights. The ROTR is absolutely clear on red lights - you have to stop;

Seriously, the Rotor are not laws, just have a read of them.

AndrewJRenko

Stark wrote: »

Illegal to turn left or right at any traffic light controlled junction in that case as to turn left or right, you have to first go through a green light to enter the junction, and then exit through the red repeater light for the side road.

DaveyDave wrote: »

So when I'm driving up to a junction that's already green and I'm waiting to turn right, I'm not legally allowed do so because it turned red, despite the sensor skipping my filter entirely just because I wasn't there the moment the light went green?

Here's the exact wording of the law from the link kindly provided by idleeater above;

Traffic lights


30. (1) Where traffic sign number RTS 001, RTS 002, RTS 003, RTS 004 or RTS 013 (referred to in these Regulations as ‘traffic lights’) is provided, a person shall not drive a vehicle past the traffic lights, or past traffic sign number RRM 017 (stop line) where such sign is provided in association with the traffic lights when the red lamp of the traffic light is illuminated.

TheChizler

Don't tell us you're seriously arguing that you think that if you get caught by the secondary lights you should stop in front of them and wait for them to go green again? Even if it means blocking traffic then turning left or right from the perpendicular road?

I guess they should stop anyway since if they're turning left or right the second set of lights for them will be red anyway... :rolleyes: (I actually have seen this happen occasionally)

There are loads of little technical quirks in law and contradictory implementations, if you were to follow them all to the letter of the law society would grind to a halt. A little common sense has to be applied, the intent of the law clearly applies to the first set of lights, near the stop line. That same common sense had to be applied again if so much time has passed that the pedestrian crossing goes green so you probably shouldn't barge through.

AndrewJRenko

TheChizler wrote: »

Don't tell us you're seriously arguing that you think that if you get caught by the secondary lights you should stop in front of them and wait for them to go green again? Even if it means blocking traffic then turning left or right from the perpendicular road?

I guess they should stop anyway since if they're turning left or right the second set of lights for them will be red anyway... :rolleyes: (I actually have seen this happen occasionally)

There are loads of little technical quirks in law and contradictory implementations, if you were to follow them all to the letter of the law society would grind to a halt. A little common sense has to be applied, the intent of the law clearly applies to the first set of lights, near the stop line.

I'm seriously argueing that you basically treat every junction as a yellow box junction - you don't enter the junction unless you know you can clear the junction without breaking the red lights.



There are people who use the excuse of 'sure it was just amber when I passed the light' as an excuse for breaking red lights. This is wrong.

Idleater

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I'm seriously argueing that you basically treat every junction as a yellow box junction - you don't enter the junction unless you know you can clear the junction without breaking the red lights.

I've a sneaking suspicion that is in there somewhere, it's how I was instructed for advanced driving, maybe it was just a "good way" to control the space around you.


I commented recently on the "radioactive symbol" yellow boxes on a (T junction) roundabout near me. The whole roundabout is a yellow box, but because it was completely getting blocked, they painted the boxes. Needless to say it's only slightly improved.

Weepsie

The only way you should be getting caught at secondary lights at a junction is if you've entered one that is basically blocked already, or having gone through an amber.

You see it in Drumcondra all the time coming from the direction of clonliffe to turn right, some numpty blocking cars turning or some numpty turning right and thinking the secondary red applies to them when it's for traffic from their left.

Wishbone Ash

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I'm seriously argueing that you basically treat every junction as a yellow box junction - you don't enter the junction unless you know you can clear the junction without breaking the red lights..

In a yellow box, a driver who wishes to turn right, may enter the box and wait for oncoming traffic to clear (providing the exit they intend to use is clear).

I have passed the driving tests in all categories and was always taught that, when waiting to turn right, you were permitted and expected to complete the manoeuvre even if the lights had turned red. I can't find it written down in any legislation although I didn't spend much time looking.

A person doing a driving test would be penalised if they waited after the light turned red. It was always said that, once you enter the junction, you are in 'control' of it and the oncoming drivers must wait even if they have a green light as their way is not clear and therefore it is not safe to proceed. (Bear in mind that a heavy articulated truck may take several seconds to clear the junction).

ED E

Can we get back to the actual near misses?

tomasrojo

Effects wrote: »

Taxi driver, just speeding up the cycle lane to avoid the traffic queue on Stephen's Green.
Can you report stuff like this?

I go that way every weekday evening and have for the last year. Just lately -- last few weeks -- motorists seem to have started using it to skip the queue with some frequency.

Effects

tomasrojo wrote: »

I go that way every weekday evening and have for the last year. Just lately -- last few weeks -- motorists seem to have started using it to skip the queue with some frequency.

I've seen it the odd time. Even cut them off once or twice.

AndrewJRenko

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

In a yellow box, a driver who wishes to turn right, may enter the box and wait for oncoming traffic to clear (providing the exit they intend to use is clear).

Provided that you don't block traffic that would otherwise be free to proceed, right?

Idleater

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Provided that you don't block traffic that would otherwise be free to proceed, right?

No. Well yes they should not block traffic that would have right of way (eg straight through traffic), but the person turning right (car/bicycle/vehicle), having proceeded through a green light (providing the exit they intend to use is clear) must wait for traffic approaching with right of way to clear. They may continue to clear the junction even if the light that they went through originally is now red.

They may however block traffic from the left / right that (eg) have a red light showing.

CramCycle

ED E wrote: »

Can we get back to the actual near misses?

MOD VOICE: 100%, so with that in mind I'll move all of the posts into a seperate thread in the morning, where people can debate it some more.

RGS

New law took effect at midnight no change in driver behaviour.

Witnessed the closest pass possible this morning on malahide road just past donnycarney church.

A red VW charging down the bus lane passed within a few centimetres of a cyclist about 10 metres ahead of me.
(Hes a regular bus lane abuser.)

Amazingly 100 metres back the road the gardai were pulling in motorists driving down the bus lane at maypark.

Duckjob

RGS wrote: »

New law took effect at midnight no change in driver behaviour.

Witnessed the closest pass possible this morning on malahide road just past donnycarney church.

A red VW charging down the bus lane passed within a few centimetres of a cyclist about 10 metres ahead of me.
(Hes a regular bus lane abuser.)

Amazingly 100 metres back the road the gardai were pulling in motorists driving down the bus lane at maypark.

Too many people not riding assertively enough to block these sort of idiots and their idiot behavior.

When I'm in a bus lane in town these days I'm squarely in the middle of it. If you desperately need to pass me find your way into the other lane to do it.

work

RGS wrote: »

New law took effect at midnight no change in driver behaviour.

Witnessed the closest pass possible this morning on malahide road just past donnycarney church.

A red VW charging down the bus lane passed within a few centimetres of a cyclist about 10 metres ahead of me.
(Hes a regular bus lane abuser.)

Amazingly 100 metres back the road the gardai were pulling in motorists driving down the bus lane at maypark.

I think 3 points and a small financial fine is no deterrent, its for a dangerous pass.....so does actually just driving over cyclists get 6 points?

As it is now law is there any requirement for the Garda to act? what about video from helmet cams? If yes it's time for submission of this on mass.

I believe the perceived danger of cycling is the largest deterrent to cycling. If people felt safe you could increase cyclist numbers by multiples.

aloooof

work wrote: »

I believe the perceived danger of cycling is the largest deterrent to cycling. If people felt safe you could increase cyclist numbers by multiples.

I'm certainly in that boat. If the infrastructure was better and I feel I could get to work safely by bike, I would. (It'd be a no-brainer, would likely halve my commute).

axer

work wrote: »

As it is now law is there any requirement for the Garda to act? what about video from helmet cams?

I don't know if there is ever a duty for a Garda to act on anything. They can take details and file it in the bin.

I had a Garda from store street station tell me there was no law he could act on when I provided footage to him of a close pass. At least now I can point to a specific law in relation to close passes of cyclists. At least that now gives me some leverage to push on them to act and issue fines/penalty points.

I reported another incident to Kevin Street where a van was so close they hit my hand as I put it out to indicate right. I was given the option to report as an accident or just for the driver to be cautioned (and a record against them in pulse). I went for the latter as I didn't have any injuries. Was told id get an update when something was done but never heard anything.

Next time I can demand a fine/penalty points be issued which I will always do from now on unless someone does acknowledge to me there and then that they made a mistake and seem genuinely sorry - not accepting crocodile tears to a Garda when trouble is headed their way. I think that does add something to the interaction with the Gardai when reporting close passes. It's a pity it isn't as strong as the minimum passing distance option (a pass distance totally can be measured from video footage when you can measure lane width and see bike position) but this law is something to work with for now.

RobbieMD

axer wrote: »

Next time I can demand a fine/penalty points be issued which I will always do from now on unless someone does acknowledge to me there and then that they made a mistake and seem genuinely sorry - not accepting crocodile tears to a Garda when trouble is headed their way. I think that does add something to the interaction with the Gardai when reporting close passes. It's a pity it isn't as strong as the minimum passing distance option (a pass distance totally can be measured from video footage when you can measure lane width and see bike position) but this law is something to work with for now.

There’s a great thread in the legal discussion forum about Garda discretion. Definitely worth a read if you’re that way inclined. There’s a great poster there GM226 I think, is the posters name.

Essentially you cannot demand a fine/points or prosecution. Of course you’re always open to commencing a private prosecution yourself.

Garda discretion means it can be recorded on PULSE as the garda simply cautioning the driver with no FCPN/summons/charge issued.

mrcheez

I was fully expecting a ton of punishment passes this morning as a result of the new law but I was getting huge wide berths from taxis. I was astonished. This was coming from Clontarf into town.

I fully imagine this to rectify itself this evening though and back to status quo.

On a different topic, how does one go about notifying gardai of people breaking this new law? Just make sure to have video camera ready, or is recording the reg plate sufficient?

fryup

how in the name of flying fuk are the gaurds suppose to police this???

unless there's clear bike-cam footage, its going to boil down to his word against mine 99% of the time

its ludicrous legislation (imo)

CramCycle

Car tried to undertake me going through a roundabout this morning. Single lane exit, his front bumper was at my rear axle. Had to pull left and let a roar. Elderly lad in a Merc. Never heard me shout, he was typing on his phone, that was on one of those dash mounts. Not sure he even noticed me at all. Thankfully the wind was in my face as it really was a straw breaking a camel's back moment. My Walter Mitty mind was imagining ripping his door open, grabbing his phone and throwing it into the river.

tnegun

New law made f all difference to my commute this am.
https://streamable.com/3zfji


Red Audi didn't get the pointless close pass right the first time
https://streamable.com/30sos


Much better on take 2, definitely no need to pass this close, perfect close pass/cyclist intimidation attempt.
https://streamable.com/4ns70

mrcheez

I might pick up one of those drones that follows you from above on my commutes X)

AndrewJRenko

aloooof wrote: »

I'm certainly in that boat. If the infrastructure was better and I feel I could get to work safely by bike, I would. (It'd be a no-brainer, would likely halve my commute).

If it's any help, Dublin Cycling Campaign have a 'Buddy' programme to let you cycle with an experienced cyclist for a while, if that would help you to gain confidence.

AndrewJRenko

CramCycle wrote: »

My Walter Mitty mind was imagining ripping his door open, grabbing his phone and throwing it into the river.

I've thought about doing this more when on foot than on the bike for some reason - but just grabbing the phone out of their hand and throwing it into the back seat of their own car.

Those streamable links always do crazy stuff to my wifi connection. Clinking one drops my signal to about 30%