Cycle lanes should not be mandatory for cyclists - RSA

Tombo2001

Cyclists would be in a pickle if this cycle path was mandatory.

On a related subject; maybe it warrants its own thread......

Why oh why are there so many on street parking spaces in Dublin. Surely, for example in the photo below - it is better to facilitate the hundreds of cyclists that will pass through every hour with a proper cycle path, than the facilitate the 9 or 10 motorists who want to park.

Weepsie

Why is it right for drivers to be frustrated, but seemingly not right for cyclists?

The last 2 times I've used the path I've had to deal with people on rollerblades and skateboards behaving fairly unpredictably. That and waiting to get across the road took longer than it would have taken me to cycle on road and take my turn straight away.

Otherwise, It's a great path. Nice for tipping along on safely.

Tombo2001

Weepsie wrote: »

Why is it right for drivers to be frustrated, but seemingly not right for cyclists?

The last 2 times I've used the path I've had to deal with people on rollerblades and skateboards behaving fairly unpredictably. That and waiting to get across the road took longer than it would have taken me to cycle on road and take my turn straight away.

Otherwise, It's a great path. Nice for tipping along on safely.

Point taken, but there is a difference between having to slow down a bit to pass a roller blader, which is a 5 second inconvenience; and having to drive behind a cyclist for 5 kilometres because there is nowhere to pass out.

As mentioned; its probably the best cycle path in Dublin - the major inconvenience I see with it is cyclists going too fast.

Zulu

Tombo2001 wrote: »

Point taken, but there is a difference between having to slow down a bit to pass a roller blader, which is a 5 second inconvenience; and having to drive behind a cyclist for 5 kilometres because there is nowhere to pass out.

As mentioned; its probably the best cycle path in Dublin - the major inconvenience I see with it is cyclists going too fast.

There is a difference alright - the stretch at St Annes isn't 5km.
And bear in mind, that you only need to move your foot on the accelerator with little risk to yourself. The cyclist is trying not to get tangled in a roller blader at 252kmph.

Tombo2001

Zulu wrote: »

There is a difference alright - the stretch at St Annes isn't 5km.
And bear in mind, that you only need to move your foot on the accelerator with little risk to yourself. The cyclist is trying not to get tangled in a roller blader at 252kmph.

The road is a single lane for 6km from Sutton to Clontarf.

Also - I never said risk, I said inconvenience.

Just as the roller bladers are an inconvenience to cyclists; if the cyclist approaches them with the same caution that a car should show to a cyclist.

Have we had any instances of collisions between rollerbladers and cyclists?

Anyway - it looks like we are just down to difference of opinion here.

eeeee

Tombo2001 wrote: »

<snip>

The issue I suspect that some cyclists have with it is that it is not safe (legal, but not safe) for cyclists on road bikes to pelt along the cycle path at full speed, when there are other cyclists and pedestrians about the place.

So presumably rather than go slower, they go on the road themselves. Rather than inconvenience themselves, the inconvenience others.
<snip>
.

People cycle in a myriad of different ways, for a myriad of different reasons. Some go faster than others, some train on the roads. This is not an inconsiderate activity.

I will never fail to understand why there is such divisiveness around road cyclists. I commute on a heavy old racer, but I also race. When I am on my road bike, I cycle considerably faster than when commuting on the old boat anchor. If I am going fast I go on the road, if I'm middling or slow I use the cycle lane.
I would rather train on the road than play dodge the slower cyclist/walker/buggy/child/dog on the cycle path.
Again, people cycle for a wide variety of reasons, and there is nothing wrong with legally cycling on the road when it is unsafe to use the path for what you are doing.
I also have no problem with faster cyclists passing me out when commuting or on the road bike. I can't say I have ever been endangered by being passed by a faster cyclist on the road or that path yet.

There is a real attitude towards faster cyclists (as evidenced by your above quote) that I just don't understand. We're all cyclists. We are proportionally few. There are dickheads amongst us, as there are amongst any vehicle users. But surely it's better to stand together than apart?

Cycle lanes, even the best ones, are never going to be safe or suitable for all users, and that's ok.

Lumen

Grassey wrote: »

They still aren't safe, I'd a car cut across 2 lanes (with no traffic) this morning, mount the grade separated cycle lane inches in front of me, hit the brakes, then take the left turn (I was going straight). Poor thing was probably late for work or something equally more important than avoiding killing me.

It's quite amazingly coincidental that you composed that post as I was finding the Louis CK video describing exactly the same behaviour.

rubadub

Tombo2001 wrote: »

Just as the roller bladers are an inconvenience to cyclists; if the cyclist approaches them with the same caution that a car should show to a cyclist.

Are rollerbladers legally allowed on cycle tracks? if not then its like cyclists illegally being on a motorway holding people up -totally unacceptable -if both are illegal I expect the lad on the bicycle is far more likely to be stopped by the gardai for doing it.

One law mentioned pedal cyclists & wheelchair users being allowed use a cycle track (or possibly a cycleway). There are numerous laws containing the phrase and I can still not figure it out.

Chips Lovell

I've used the new coast cycle track. It's good. However, there are some occasions I wouldn't use it, e.g. if training or if on a club spin. In those cases, you're better off on the road.

As it happens, the government's own policy on cycling, which recommended the removal of mandatory use recognised that cycle tracks, even if well constructed, didn't suit all cyclists and specifically mentioned group spins.

Chips Lovell

rubadub wrote: »

Are rollerbladers legally allowed on cycle tracks?

As far as I gather, the only class of road user prohibited from cycle tracks are mechanically propelled vehicles, with the exception of mechanically propelled wheelchairs.

Lumen

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

As far as I gather, the only class of road user prohibited from cycle tracks are mechanically propelled vehicles, with the exception of mechanically propelled wheelchairs.

I think mechanically propelled wheelchairs are known as "pedestrian controlled vehicles" in the law.

Chips Lovell

I'd always wondered what a pedestrian controlled vehicle meant

Tombo2001

nee wrote: »

People cycle in a myriad of different ways, for a myriad of different reasons. Some go faster than others, some train on the roads. This is not an inconsiderate activity.

I will never fail to understand why there is such divisiveness around road cyclists. I commute on a heavy old racer, but I also race. When I am on my road bike, I cycle considerably faster than when commuting on the old boat anchor. If I am going fast I go on the road, if I'm middling or slow I use the cycle lane.
I would rather train on the road than play dodge the slower cyclist/walker/buggy/child/dog on the cycle path.
Again, people cycle for a wide variety of reasons, and there is nothing wrong with legally cycling on the road when it is unsafe to use the path for what you are doing.
I also have no problem with faster cyclists passing me out when commuting or on the road bike. I can't say I have ever been endangered by being passed by a faster cyclist on the road or that path yet.

There is a real attitude towards faster cyclists (as evidenced by your above quote) that I just don't understand. We're all cyclists. We are proportionally few. There are dickheads amongst us, as there are amongst any vehicle users. But surely it's better to stand together than apart?

Cycle lanes, even the best ones, are never going to be safe or suitable for all users, and that's ok.

The original comment was from a driver, who was saying they couldnt understand why cyclists were going on the main coast road when a new bike path had been put in place.

The context I was giving was that the cycle path was not a good environment for people on road bikes as it had too much traffic, and that they might switch to road on that basis.

You say "there is nothing wrong with legally cycling on the road when it is unsafe to use the path for what you are doing". Personally, I can see why drivers would find it frustrating to be stuck behind a cyclist for a long stretch of narrow lane road when there is a cycle path beside them.

Lumen

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

I'd always wondered what a pedestrian controlled vehicle meant

Actually I'm probably wrong about that.

http://www.bradshawev.com/electric-vehicles/pedestrian-controlled-vehicles/

GabbaTheHutt

I dont often cycle in the North side but I was on that new section of cycleway in Clontarf a few weeks ago in a group and as smooth as the tarmac was I still think its not suitable for cyclists doing anything more than slower speeds or cycling alone.

First we had to negotiate the older stretch of cyclepath on the city end with the bus stops recessed into the path, random poles in the way, sharp bends around car parks and poles in the middle of the path when it crosses entrances to car parks etc... We singled out and were not cycling fast but all of these obstructions added to the pedestrians, rollerbladers and bikes going against us made for a not so pleasant cycle.

Onto the new stretch with nice tarmac and every now and again it narrows for bus stops and again mixes with pedestrians.

After the new stretch we found oursleves on another old stretch where the actual marked cycle lanes are a joke - if you are going towards Howth the path occasionally disappears where steps down to the road are cut into the path, there were bikes either side of us and pedestrians walking on the cycle lanes and crossing them.

As I watched a group cycle along the road instead of the path I made a mental note to do the same next time!

eeeee

Tombo2001 wrote: »

The original comment was from a driver, who was saying they couldnt understand why cyclists were going on the main coast road when a new bike path had been put in place.

The context I was giving was that the cycle path was not a good environment for people on road bikes as it had too much traffic, and that they might switch to road on that basis.

You say "there is nothing wrong with legally cycling on the road when it is unsafe to use the path for what you are doing". Personally, I can see why drivers would find it frustrating to be stuck behind a cyclist for a long stretch of narrow lane road when there is a cycle path beside them.

If that lane isn't safe to use then it won't be used, no matter where it is, or how well constructed it appears to be. It's one of the main reasons why cycle lanes should never be mandatory, they are not fit for all purposes.

Personally, as a cyclist, I can empathise with why a cyclist wouldn't use a cycle lane. The real issue is why drivers in general don't understand why all cycle lanes aren't suitable for use. The attendant frustration drivers share is as a result of a lack of understanding, which can be dangerous at times (I have been punishment passed, shouted at, etc.etc. for not using the cycle lane. However, now I don't have to be on the n11 every day incidents of same have reduced by at least 80%!). Think it needs to be made more public why they aren't fit for use, so the frustration can be at least directed at faulty infrastructure and road maintenance rather than taken out on cyclists.