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

Cycling getting the squeeze in Dublin city centre

Options
2

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    m5ex9oqjawdg2i
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,221 ✭✭✭✭m5ex9oqjawdg2i


    average_runner wrote: »
    They are not badly designed

    Based on what exactly? That they exist?
    average_runner wrote: »
    Ah give it a rest. The French use the same system...

    So?

    The Germans don't have this system... Your point is irrelevant.
    magicbastarder wrote: »
    we should move to a system where the lights assume no motorists are present until *they* press a button. assume the pedestrians, and then make allowances for motorists, instead of the other way around..

    Ireland is far too motor centric. It's as if you have zero rights if you are travelling with a non motorized mode of transport.

    Yesterday a woman and her passengers got pissy with me because I didn't stop for them as they were pulling out of their drive. I was walking on the footpath. There's a serious "out of my god damn way" attitude on Irish roads I find.


  • Options
    #33
    HivemindXX
    Registered Users Posts: 1,208 ✭✭✭HivemindXX


    Tenzor07 wrote: »
    So does a flashing green bicycle traffic light at a crossing mean you have right of way or does it mean stop and wait for a solid green?

    I can't quote the rules but my understanding is that this means you can proceed with caution, similar to the flashing orange for motorists. I think these are only used on the Grand Canal cycle lane right? In that case they seem to be used to indicate a period in which cyclists can go but only if there are no pedestrians wanting to cross.


  • Options
    #34
    cython
    Registered Users Posts: 4,769 ✭✭✭cython


    mr spuckler wrote: »
    there are bus lanes in the city centre that taxis aren't allowed to use. an example is the side of stephens green by the residence heading towards the NCH or the contra flow in front of custom house.

    not sure about this one, will have a look at the signage this evening.

    edit... this report suggests taxis are good to use it. as i said in an earlier post, it seems like private cars continue to do so too.

    The bolded is also actually a contra-flow bus lane, which is why taxis are not allowed to use it. Doesn't stop several of them and indeed private cars doing so in practice, mind! AFAIK the lane on O'Connell bridge, however, is just a normal with-flow bus lane, meaning taxis are permitted.


  • Options
    #35
    HivemindXX
    Registered Users Posts: 1,208 ✭✭✭HivemindXX


    average_runner wrote: »
    Ah give it a rest. The French use the same system where we go on holidays and they constantly used the cycle lanes.

    Do they? Not in Paris I think. There virtually every junction changes on a timer with no button press required. Same for pedestrians. I never pressed a button on a bicycle and only had to do so a couple of times when a pedestrian.

    I was surprised at how civilised the Paris traffic seemed to me. Not only because pedestrians weren't treated like an impediment to be managed but because motorists didn't seem to have the same sense of entitlement. I guess those two things go hand in hand. I don't know if Paris traffic has improved since I was there 20 year ago or Dublin traffic has gotten worse, but my guess is that it is the latter.

    Even if they did do this everywhere else in France that wouldn't make it any less stupid to try and claim a design where cyclists have to stop and wait at every junction is not a bad design.


  • Options
    #36
    ted1
    Registered Users Posts: 23,538 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    average_runner wrote: »
    Ah give it a rest. The French use the same system where we go on holidays and they constantly used the cycle lanes.

    Walkers have to press a button also.

    Walkers belong in footpaths, cyclists don't.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Tenzor07
    Registered Users Posts: 8,848 ✭✭✭Tenzor07


    HivemindXX wrote: »
    I can't quote the rules but my understanding is that this means you can proceed with caution, similar to the flashing orange for motorists. I think these are only used on the Grand Canal cycle lane right? In that case they seem to be used to indicate a period in which cyclists can go but only if there are no pedestrians wanting to cross.

    Nah this was at the Cycle crossing on the Artane roundabout...


  • Options
    #38
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,940 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    cdaly_ wrote: »
    And in the meantime, it would be good if every traffic light had a pedestrian phase at every change, not just once (for a microsecond or so) every full cycle as at present.
    The grand canal cyclepath is a prime example of this at Northumberland Road. and at the end of the path. The light changes for pedestrians are so slow that they often end up with a large crowd of people, that some can't even make it across in time.
    Tenzor07 wrote: »
    So does a flashing green bicycle traffic light at a crossing mean you have right of way or does it mean stop and wait for a solid green?
    Not sure if there is a technical legal definition but as someone else said, it is the same principle as a flashing Amber. it does not give you any right of way but you may proceed if the path is clear and it is safe to do so.


  • Options
    #39
    flatface
    Registered Users Posts: 719 ✭✭✭flatface


    Leroy42 wrote: »
    Lets think about it for a sec. Instead of 5 cyclists at the top of the queue, you may now have Bus, cyclist, taxi, cyclist, bus, cyclist etc. How does that make any sense from a traffic management POV?

    That is a fair point, I avoid filtering as I feel safer but I do add to traffic blocking up the road. Many junctions around Dublin have the advanced cycle box but very little space to get past stopped cars to it.

    If the layout was better it could help traffic management as you say (more cars fit in the queue) but this mainly benefits drivers? Is it better for cyclist safety?


  • Options
    #40
    Weepsie
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 20,511 Mod ✭✭✭✭Weepsie


    flatface wrote: »
    That is a fair point, I avoid filtering as I feel safer but I do add to traffic blocking up the road. Many junctions around Dublin have the advanced cycle box but very little space to get past stopped cars to it.

    I rarely see an advanced cycle box that doesn't have a car in it. Often a car that had been gambling on a light


  • Options
    #41
    flatface
    Registered Users Posts: 719 ✭✭✭flatface


    Weepsie wrote: »
    I rarely see an advanced cycle box that doesn't have a car in it. Often a car that had been gambling on a light

    I think that's a bit of an exaggeration. Sometimes yes, but not most of the time in my experience.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Leroy42
    Registered Users Posts: 15,657 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    flatface wrote: »
    That is a fair point, I avoid filtering as I feel safer but I do add to traffic blocking up the road. Many junctions around Dublin have the advanced cycle box but very little space to get past stopped cars to it.

    If the layout was better it could help traffic management as you say (more cars fit in the queue) but this mainly benefits drivers? Is it better for cyclist safety?

    It would be if they provided space for cyclists to filter on the left. The way they have done it is to force cyclists onto to path of the Luas/traffic of sit in the queue.

    Now, they might say that the cyclists will have to wait in the queue, but in the real world many cyclists are either going to try to squeeze through or go onto the tracks.

    Engineers should build infrastructure based on how it will actually be used not some utopian ideal.

    The result is that they have created a system which is the worse for everyone. Cyclists have nowhere to filter and either are going to put themselves into danger or create extra queue. Just think what will happen when you are the bike at the end and a taxi gets stuck in the yellow box on O'Connell bridge. You will be told to move over to let the traffic in!


  • Options
    #43
    Weepsie
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 20,511 Mod ✭✭✭✭Weepsie


    flatface wrote: »
    I think that's a bit of an exaggeration. Sometimes yes, but not most of the time in my experience.

    I didn't say there are always cars in the advanced stop boxes as I don't see and can't see every single one around the place. I said I rarely see which is not an exaggeration from my own personal experience and on my particular routes


  • Options
    #44
    mcgratheoin
    Registered Users Posts: 1,461 ✭✭✭mcgratheoin


    flatface wrote: »
    I think that's a bit of an exaggeration. Sometimes yes, but not most of the time in my experience.

    No exaggeration at all in my experience. I actively watched for this for a while - and on my morning commute along the north quays I would see less than one junction per day where all cars/trucks/buses were stopped behind the correct line and not in the bike box.


  • Options
    #45
    mr spuckler
    Registered Users Posts: 3,113 ✭✭✭mr spuckler


    Weepsie wrote: »
    I didn't say there are always cars in the advanced stop boxes as I don't see and can't see every single one around the place. I said I rarely see which is not an exaggeration from my own personal experience and on my particular routes

    i'd agree and it's one of those things that probably annoys me more than i should let it do. in my experience they're very rarely left clear.


  • Options
    #46
    buffalo
    Registered Users Posts: 8,081 ✭✭✭buffalo


    flatface wrote: »
    I think that's a bit of an exaggeration. Sometimes yes, but not most of the time in my experience.
    mcgratheoin wrote: »
    No exaggeration at all in my experience. I actively watched for this for a while - and on my morning commute along the north quays I would see less than one junction per day where all cars/trucks/buses were stopped behind the correct line and not in the bike box.

    As a point of information, by the letter of the law any motor traffic can enter the advanced stop box as long as the traffic light is not red. The rules of yellow boxes (do not enter unless you can leave it) do not apply. So it's quite probable for every advanced stop box you encounter in heavy traffic to have a car in it, completely legally.


  • Options
    #47
    Weepsie
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 20,511 Mod ✭✭✭✭Weepsie


    buffalo wrote: »
    As a point of information, by the letter of the law any motor traffic can enter the advanced stop box as long as the traffic light is not red. The rules of yellow boxes (do not enter unless you can leave it) do not apply. So it's quite probable for every advanced stop box you encounter in heavy traffic to have a car in it, completely legally.

    That makes perfect sense, and possibly accounts for a lot of why they are in the box. In it on green, light goes amber so they stay there rather than because they are gambling as I suggested. It rarely bothers me that said, sometimes however you can have an aggressive driver behind you revving long before a light change


  • Options
    #48
    mr spuckler
    Registered Users Posts: 3,113 ✭✭✭mr spuckler


    buffalo wrote: »
    As a point of information, by the letter of the law any motor traffic can enter the advanced stop box as long as the traffic light is not red. The rules of yellow boxes (do not enter unless you can leave it) do not apply. So it's quite probable for every advanced stop box you encounter in heavy traffic to have a car in it, completely legally.

    it's probably a mix, i see plenty of cars pulling up at lights that have been red for several seconds and still stopping well over the line of the advance stop box.


  • Options
    #49
    flatface
    Registered Users Posts: 719 ✭✭✭flatface


    Leroy42 wrote: »
    It would be if they provided space for cyclists to filter on the left. The way they have done it is to force cyclists onto to path of the Luas/traffic of sit in the queue.

    Now, they might say that the cyclists will have to wait in the queue, but in the real world many cyclists are either going to try to squeeze through or go onto the tracks.

    Engineers should build infrastructure based on how it will actually be used not some utopian ideal.

    The result is that they have created a system which is the worse for everyone. Cyclists have nowhere to filter and either are going to put themselves into danger or create extra queue. Just think what will happen when you are the bike at the end and a taxi gets stuck in the yellow box on O'Connell bridge. You will be told to move over to let the traffic in!

    I am not really disagreeing with you, I wonder what the perfect solution is as I would question having cycle lanes for turning lanes.

    Many junctions dissolve the separate lane so that traffic comes together at a junction. This is usually designed to equalise the priority.

    A cycle lane on a turn would make me worry about encouraging filtering up the left of turning vehicles, or putting you in a lesser priority position within the swing of a bus.


  • Options
    #50
    jimmycrackcorm
    Registered Users Posts: 14,339 ✭✭✭✭jimmycrackcorm


    magicbastarder wrote:
    we should move to a system where the lights assume no motorists are present until *they* press a button. assume the pedestrians, and then make allowances for motorists, instead of the other way around..


    I've seen something similar in Holland except instead of buttons the lights use proximity detectors. They all stay red for cars so pedestrians have an automatic right of way. As cars approach an empty junction they go green well in advance to help flow, unless there are pedestrians on the crossing.

    It works well because pedestrian proximity is near but cars are far giving the appropriate time in favour of pedestrians. For the most part it works very well for cars as there are no long delays where at a crossroads here you find all lights red waiting to change one to green.


  • Options
    #51
    mr spuckler
    Registered Users Posts: 3,113 ✭✭✭mr spuckler


    jimmycrackcorm wrote: »
    I've seen something similar in Holland except instead of buttons the lights use proximity detectors. They all stay red for cars so pedestrians have an automatic right of way. As cars approach an empty junction they go green well in advance to help flow, unless there are pedestrians on the crossing.

    It works well because pedestrian proximity is near but cars are far giving the appropriate time in favour of pedestrians. For the most part it works very well for cars as there are no long delays where at a crossroads here you find all lights red waiting to change one to green.

    there are so many relatively simple concepts like this that we never seem to try in Ireland. for example there are several places i've been to in Italy where lights will turn red if you're exceeding the speed limit. you end up being held up for far longer than if you were driving around the limit.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    buffalo
    Registered Users Posts: 8,081 ✭✭✭buffalo


    jimmycrackcorm wrote: »
    I've seen something similar in Holland except instead of buttons the lights use proximity detectors. They all stay red for cars so pedestrians have an automatic right of way. As cars approach an empty junction they go green well in advance to help flow, unless there are pedestrians on the crossing.

    How do the lights know if pedestrians are on the crossing?


  • Options
    #53
    cython
    Registered Users Posts: 4,769 ✭✭✭cython


    buffalo wrote: »
    As a point of information, by the letter of the law any motor traffic can enter the advanced stop box as long as the traffic light is not red. The rules of yellow boxes (do not enter unless you can leave it) do not apply. So it's quite probable for every advanced stop box you encounter in heavy traffic to have a car in it, completely legally.

    Technically amber is also a no-go unless stopping before it is not safe, but stopping at the second one can be done safely. (below lifted from the legislation megathread, which in turn quoted SI 332/2012):
    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.

    (2) A driver of a vehicle approaching traffic lights in which a non-flashing amber light is illuminated, shall not drive the vehicle past the traffic lights, or past traffic sign number RRM 017 (stop line) when such sign is provided in association with the traffic lights, save when the vehicle is so close to the traffic lights that it cannot safely be stopped before passing the traffic lights or traffic sign number RRM 017.

    (3)(a) A driver of a vehicle facing traffic sign number RTS 001, RTS 002, RTS 003 or RTS 013 in which the green lamp is illuminated may proceed beyond the traffic lights, or beyond traffic sign number RRM 017 (stop line) if such traffic sign is provided in association with the traffic lights, provided no other road user is endangered and subject to compliance with the relevant provisions of articles 8 and 29.

    (b) When traffic lights contain green lamps which indicate a directional arrow, a driver of a vehicle wishing to proceed in accordance with paragraph (a) in the direction indicated by the arrow may only do so when such lamp is illuminated.

    Open to correction if there is another SI that is more specific to advance stop lines, but that is the one quoted on the megathread, hence using it.


  • Options
    #54
    mcgratheoin
    Registered Users Posts: 1,461 ✭✭✭mcgratheoin


    buffalo wrote: »
    As a point of information, by the letter of the law any motor traffic can enter the advanced stop box as long as the traffic light is not red. The rules of yellow boxes (do not enter unless you can leave it) do not apply. So it's quite probable for every advanced stop box you encounter in heavy traffic to have a car in it, completely legally.

    Didn't know that. To be honest it's one of those things that doesn't really annoy me - I was just interested in the prevalence as an observation. It was in relation to somebody giving out about cyclists moving ahead of the line to get out in front of traffic and my initial thought (later confirmed) was that it was frequently due to the cycle box being occupied by cars.


  • Options
    #55
    uck51js9zml2yt
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,268 ✭✭✭✭uck51js9zml2yt


    Michelin wrote: »
    There is a new lane for right turning public service vehicles on O'Connell bridge when coming from Westmoreland street and turning right for Custom house direction. The council have built up a kerb on the left of the lane with no provision for bikes at all will only fit a bus. With plans of cycling only paths running along the quay, that seems more like dreamland for bike commuters as I dont really think the council are really too interested in people using bikes its all about the public service vehicle for now it seems to me anyway.

    I came over that way today...There is a big bicyle painted on the ground in the lane. What more do you need?


  • Options
    #56
    Leroy42
    Registered Users Posts: 15,657 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    Adilynn Wrong Statistics wrote: »
    I came over that way today...There is a big bicyle painted on the ground in the lane. What more do you need?

    So its a cycle lane is that your point?


  • Options
    #57
    tomasrojo
    Registered Users Posts: 11,769 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    magicbastarder wrote: »
    we should move to a system where the lights assume no motorists are present until *they* press a button. assume the pedestrians, and then make allowances for motorists, instead of the other way around..

    In particular, this should be true of many city centres on Friday and Saturday nights. Pedestrians often completely outnumber motorists, and they still have to ask permission to cross.


  • Options
    #58
    Wishbone Ash
    Registered Users Posts: 24,995 ✭✭✭✭Wishbone Ash


    CramCycle wrote: »
    ..., it is the same principle as a flashing Amber. it does not give you any right of way but you may proceed if the path is clear and it is safe to do so.
    A steady green light means that one may only proceed if the way is clear and it is safe to do so. So what's the difference?


  • Options
    #59
    vektarman
    Registered Users Posts: 2,923 ✭✭✭vektarman


    It's timewarped back to 1953, The northbound traffic island is back!
    1953-1.jpg


  • Options
    #60
    Wishbone Ash
    Registered Users Posts: 24,995 ✭✭✭✭Wishbone Ash


    vektarman wrote: »
    It's timewarped back to 1953!..
    Except it was two way traffic on the quays then.

    Not sure when it went one way but it used to be the other way around - westbound on north quays and eastbound on south. It changed in the late 1970's/early 1980's IIRC.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Thinkingaboutit
    Registered Users Posts: 2,200 ✭✭✭Thinkingaboutit


    mr spuckler wrote: »
    there are so many relatively simple concepts like this that we never seem to try in Ireland. for example there are several places i've been to in Italy where lights will turn red if you're exceeding the speed limit. you end up being held up for far longer than if you were driving around the limit.

    Different from here. Go a bit over, all the lights favour me, while the speed limit seems to mean red lights at every junction.


Advertisement