State creates a Cycling Office

mr spuckler

I've a mate working in TII, I must ask him how many cycling specific projects cross his desk versus rail / road etc and then whether that changes over the next few months.

zell12

Colm Ryder (Dublin Cycling Campaign) currently on Newstalk discussing this

Peter T

Welcome news. I hope they fill the positions with people that have actual experience rather than someone who thinks they know what the system needs. Id personally like them to role out information and training days for all road users and i think the first few pages of comments proved this. Cork city and surrounding area is crying out for some proper cycling infrastructure to help get some cars off the road during commuter times.

dense

mamax wrote: »

That is the single most anti-cycling comment I've ever read on here, if you are indeed a cyclist then shame on you for that.
You're basically saying if a cyclist gets hit by a car it's their own fault in the first place for engaging in "a risky activity"

Shameful comment, better training for motorists and investment in our cycling infrastructure is what we need not your backward attitude.

I am a cyclist and I acknowledge that there is a risk involved. There is nothing backward about that. Would you acknowledge that there is a risk involved?

How do you personally minimise that risk of you accept that it exists?
It is up to us, both cyclists and motorists to acknowledge the risks and then act accordingly.
My point is that I don't ever recall reading any cyclist saying that they should slow down or campaign to make themselves more visible.

daragh_

dense wrote: »

I am a cyclist and I acknowledge that there is a risk involved. There is nothing backward about that. Would you acknowledge that there is a risk involved?

How do you personally minimise that risk of you accept that it exists?
It is up to us, both cyclists and motorists to acknowledge the risks and then act accordingly.
My point is that I don't ever recall reading any cyclist saying that they should slow down or campaign to make themselves more visible.

Is cyclist's speeding thing now?

dense

Duckjob wrote: »

Nobody is suggesting that and suggesting that they did is a pretty pathetic attempt at straw-manning on your part.

As a cyclist, I could quite happily live with the current speed limit structure if every car that passed me simply made the easy decision to just pass me with care:

- slow down
- wait behind if necessary
- give space
- the less space there is, the more you slow down. If not enough space to pass safely, just waiting a F'ing minute or two. It won't kill you!



As a motorist, i do the above all the time, and you know what? It's easy. You just make a decision to treat the human being in front of you with respect. Road safety really is that simple.

I do this all the time and you know what? It feels good - at worst I may stay behind a cyclist for 30 seconds to 1 minute and then I go happily on my way knowing that at least I've made a safe environment for that person while I passed them.

I do those things as well. I purposely do it in the hope that good example might rub off on other motorists. And as a cyclist, if on a country road if I know there's no where for a car to pass for a mile I'll actually scan for a place to pull over myself and let them pass out of courtesy.

dense

daragh_ wrote: »

Is cyclist's speeding thing now?

Their speed affects their ability to control their machine, their scope for accurate observation, reaction time and braking abilty whilst weaving in and around traffic and pedestrians, so obviously yes.

Have you ever seen a cycling speed safety campaign designed by cycling groups advocating slowing cyclists down? I certainly haven't.

07Lapierre

dense wrote: »

I do those things as well. I purposely do it in the hope that good example might rub off on other motorists. And as a cyclist, if on a country road if I know there's no where for a car to pass for a mile I'll actually scan for a place to pull over myself and let them pass out of courtesy.

Can you post a link to the road that has no place for a car to overtake a single cyclist for a whole mile? What kind of car are we talking about? is it a Hummer stretch limo being driven by Mrs Daisy?

BTW when Cycling i do pull over and allow HGV's to pass me...hate having them behind me on narrow roads.

Thinkingaboutit

cgcsb wrote: »

Ironically the road that the NTA is on, an unnamed road between Adelaide Road and Harrington St., is probably the worst street in Dublin for cycling on. There aren't even any lanes for cars and merging/exiting is only doable in an Indian style. It's also one of the darkest streets at night in Dublin. This street and Nassau st are very dark and anti pedestrian/cyclist.

Cycling that SCR - Harrington St - Adelaide Rd route c. 8.30am and 5.30pm frankly requires body armour and a teleportation ability (or cycling on an often crowded footpath). That was partially my route, which I resolved by an earlier hour and a partial route change. Anyone on that route at peak times has to be brave.

magicbastarder

maybe it'd be perfect so, if that's where the cycling unit is to be based.

Peter T

07Lapierre wrote: »

Can you post a link to the road that has no place for a car to overtake a single cyclist for a whole mile? What kind of car are we talking about? is it a Hummer stretch limo being driven by Mrs Daisy?

BTW when Cycling i do pull over and allow HGV's to pass me...hate having them behind me on narrow roads.

There's plenty of roads out there and i cycle a few of them myself. Like suggested above I sometimes pull over to let someone pass on roads like that

07Lapierre

Peter T wrote: »

There's plenty of roads out there and i cycle a few of them myself. Like suggested above I sometimes pull over to let someone pass on roads like that

Fair enough.. Just one link to google maps please.

Peter T

07Lapierre wrote: »

Fair enough.. Just one link to google maps please.

https://www.google.ie/maps/dir/52.0643845,-8.8877514/52.0765645,-8.9086487/@52.0719095,-8.9041151,1878m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en

07Lapierre

Peter T wrote: »

https://www.google.ie/maps/dir/52.0643845,-8.8877514/52.0765645,-8.9086487/@52.0719095,-8.9041151,1878m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en

Yeah that's narrow alright. Still looks like there are few spots where overtaking is possible.

cgcsb

Thinkingaboutit wrote: »

Cycling that SCR - Harrington St - Adelaide Rd route c. 8.30am and 5.30pm frankly requires body armour and a teleportation ability (or cycling on an often crowded footpath). That was partially my route, which I resolved by an earlier hour and a partial route change. Anyone on that route at peak times has to be brave.

I use it every day on the way home, turning right on Camden st, it's scary in the dark evenings.

Thinkingaboutit

magicbastarder wrote: »

maybe it'd be perfect so, if that's where the cycling unit is to be based.

Yes, if they were to fix that road for cycling in the mornings / evenings, the whole office would have worked a miracle, or least done a lot of good, but that's probably DCC's role.

Peter T

07Lapierre wrote: »

Yeah that's narrow alright. Still looks like there are few spots where overtaking is possible.

You could but it would be cyclists elbow rubbing the passenger window still

07Lapierre

Peter T wrote: »

You could but it would be cyclists elbow rubbing the passenger window still

I hate when drivers do that! Any reasonable driver would stop,(preferably at one of the driveway or field entrances) allow the cyclist to pass, and only then proceed.

Tell me how

dense wrote: »

Hopefully the new quango will follow this new departure by the RSA and address the victim culture that permeates cycling. Cyclists the same as pedestrians need to not be placing themselves in dangerous positioning situations and then blaming everyone else for whatever subsequently happens.

Sitting here on fractured pelvis after a car knocked me off the bike when it drove on to the roundabout as I was riding straight through.

My consultant said cycling injuries are keeping him in business.

mamax

dense wrote: »

I am a cyclist and I acknowledge that there is a risk involved. There is nothing backward about that. Would you acknowledge that there is a risk involved?

How do you personally minimise that risk of you accept that it exists?
It is up to us, both cyclists and motorists to acknowledge the risks and then act accordingly.
My point is that I don't ever recall reading any cyclist saying that they should slow down or campaign to make themselves more visible.

Of course there is a risk, there is a risk getting out of bed and travelling to work by bike, car, bus, or walking, the risk is that through no fault of my own some idiot is not paying attention and will crash into me on my bike, car, bus or while I'm walking regardless of what clothing I'm wearing or what lights I've on my bike or the size and colour of my car etc etc
You can't make people be better drivers unless they want to be, that's why we need to educate them, quite simple really.

And btw my club gear is designed with fluro yellow in it and I've used lights on my bike with 30 years so yes I always have made myself more visible on the road.

Wishbone Ash

07Lapierre wrote: »

I hate when drivers do that! Any reasonable driver would stop,(preferably at one of the driveway or field entrances) allow the cyclist to pass, and only then proceed.

It's not usually a problem when meeting a vehicle on a narrow road as you can see what's going on. More of a problem when a motorist is behind cyclists on a narrow road and you're unsure what they intend to do.

cletus

I don't think it's so difficult to meld the opposing viewpoints here. Surely it's possible to campaign for better understanding from drivers regarding cyclists, while at the same time taking every precaution to keep yourself safe and seen, knowing that there's always a chance that some asshole will be driving behind you. I don't see why it's viewed as one or the other on this forum (granted I'm very new here, so maybe there's something I'm missing).

In my mind it's kinda like walking down a street at night and up ahead there's a bunch of scumbags. Am I entitled to continue walking down the street? Absolutely. Would it behove me to perhaps take a different route, cross the street, take some action that will prevent me becoming involved in an incident where I could be hurt or injured? Probably. Should I have to do that? No, but I'd prefer that to ending up hurt and blaming the the other guys afterwards

Lumen

I don't take every precaution in anything I do. That would be tedious.

cletus

Lumen wrote: »

I don't take every precaution in anything I do. That would be tedious.

Pedantism much? I thought it was obvious I was using a turn of phrase

07Lapierre

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

It's not usually a problem when meeting a vehicle on a narrow road as you can see what's going on. More of a problem when a motorist is behind cyclists on a narrow road and you're unsure what they intend to do.

That's true too. The last time I pulled over (into a house driveway entrance) to allow a car pass, it turned out that he lived in the house that i had just pulled into!

07Lapierre

cletus wrote: »

I don't think it's so difficult to meld the opposing viewpoints here. Surely it's possible to campaign for better understanding from drivers regarding cyclists, while at the same time taking every precaution to keep yourself safe and seen, knowing that there's always a chance that some asshole will be driving behind you. I don't see why it's viewed as one or the other on this forum (granted I'm very new here, so maybe there's something I'm missing).

In my mind it's kinda like walking down a street at night and up ahead there's a bunch of scumbags. Am I entitled to continue walking down the street? Absolutely. Would it behove me to perhaps take a different route, cross the street, take some action that will prevent me becoming involved in an incident where I could be hurt or injured? Probably. Should I have to do that? No, but I'd prefer that to ending up hurt and blaming the the other guys afterwards

I think a better comparison is to imagine your walking along the street on your own. There are two people walking behind you (side by side) and they are walking faster than you and catching up on you.

There is also two people walking towards you. They to are walking side by side and all five of you are going to meet at some point.

Now imagine that as you all meet, the two people walking behind you simply push you into the ditch and keep walking, thereby not having to obstruct the path of the two people walking towards you.

See all five have a right to walk but only one is treated like a 2nd class citizen.

cletus

Ok, make whatever comparisons you'd like. It doesn't take from my initial point that, as a cyclist, regardless of being in the right about a situation, it surely makes practical sense to take steps to protect yourself, while still advocating for better driver awareness of cyclists in general

07Lapierre

cletus wrote: »

Ok, make whatever comparisons you'd like. It doesn't take from my initial point that, as a cyclist, regardless of being in the right about a situation, it surely makes practical sense to take steps to protect yourself, while still advocating for better driver awareness of cyclists in general

Fair enough...I obey the ROTR,I use lights when cycling in the dark and I wear a helmet ( only because if I don't...in the event of a driver crashing into me, the non wearing of a helmet could be used to limit the drivers responsibility)

What else do you suggest I do???

Grassey

'protect' yourself...

Surely openly carrying a gun for protection, or steel bars with spikes extending 1.5m from the right of the bike might work to protect yourself and the space you occupy. Or taking the lane and defensive cycling, cycling 2 abreast also serve to protect yourself.

Wearing a jacket with limited to no effectiveness in an urban environment outside of daylight hours offers no protection bar the 'high vis forcefield effect'

The Specialist

What a quango this will be. Will it stop the Lycra clad pricks dangerously cycling through red lights or disobeying whatever rules of the road they feel like? Of course not.