Beware Wooden Bridge on North Bull

KevRossi

Took a spin out there this morning, front wheel went between the gap in two planks and I went over the bars. Probably rotor cuff damage in the left shoulder and a lot of grazes and sore ribs.

Tyres are 700x25c, but the rim went down through the gap as well. Reported this to DCC

Pic of the spot where it roughly happened.

https://www.google.com/maps/@53.3600668,-6.1809092,3a,75y,121.88h,76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9evINJOKxu67D4ZEVrWGUw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

ted1

Dublin port are responsible for the bridge.

odyssey06

Aren't there signs up saying cyclists should dismount?

It's a very old bridge, not helped by the extra traffic generated by the coffee shop.
I don't know if there's much DCC \ Dublin Port will be able to do short of a new bridge.

PS hope you are back on your feet ok with no lasting damage.

is_that_so

Sorry to hear that OP but it's always been like that. As mentioned dismount!

Sonny noggs

I was sure that the last time I walked it there were signs saying cycling across the bridge was not permitted.

KevRossi

ted1 wrote: »

Dublin port are responsible for the bridge.

Cheers for that, thought it was a possibility.

odyssey06 wrote: »

Aren't there signs up saying cyclists should dismount? It's a very old bridge, not helped by the extra traffic generated by the coffee shop.

Looking at it on Google maps, there's a written sign on the west side and none on the east side.

I must have cycled/walked/ran over that bridge 500 times (no exaggeration) and never noticed it before.:)

Atlantic Dawn

"Cyclists Must Dismount When Using The Walkway And Carriageway"...

https://www.google.com/maps/@53.360364,-6.1815248,3a,75y,104.73h,100.16t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sZt5Vu-WRYAP0i4sGeh8yNQ!2e0!5s20170501T000000!7i13312!8i6656

is_that_so

Sonny noggs wrote: »

I was sure that the last time I walked it there were signs saying cycling across the bridge was not permitted.

I thought so too. Here's a photo.

http://www.picreach.com/gallery/wooden-bridge-at-dollymount/photographer-brendan-lyon-7/

odyssey06

I have a relative who won't drive across that bridge... always uses the causeway.
Says it's only a matter of time before a car falls through it...

Sonny noggs

Sonny noggs wrote: »

Yeah, here you go OP. No cycling allowed.

Picture

KevRossi

odyssey06 wrote: »

I have a relative who won't drive across that bridge... always uses the causeway.
Says it's only a matter of time before a car falls through it...

It's an odd design in that the planks are laid in the direction of travel, it's better for load bearing if they are perpendicular to the direction of travel.

That said I really like the bridge and a run/cycle out to the Star of the Sea in all weathers.

Odyssey 2005

From google maps !

Effects

I always cycle across it but am wary of the gaps in case it pulls the wheel in, similar to Luas tracks.
I'm aware of the dismount sign, but just ignore it and cycle carefully.

It has a speed limit too but I don't think I've ever seen a driver obey it.

Wishbone Ash

KevRossi wrote: »

... front wheel went between the gap in two planks...

Do the planks shrink in warm dry weather and swell in wet weather?

railer201

Back in the sixties or thereabouts, the Dublin Port and Docks Board stationed one of their policemen on the bridge, in that sentry box at the East end, and many's the time we were told to get off our bikes and walk across. However, his vocal chords were worn out as the tendency was, and indeed still is, to cycle across. Incidentally cyclists rarely cycled across on the carriageway - mostly on the footpaths.

It was always a bit dodgy as wheels tended to stick in some of the gaps, so along with the planks being slippy when wet, it does make sense for the time it takes to walk across on the footpaths.

Having said that I always cycle across myself, unless there's a lot of pedestrians, whereupon I dismount.

plodder

They've been doing work replacing some of the planks on the footpath/sides of the bridge recently. Not sure if that has anything to do with it. I've always seen the signs about not cycling though it never occurred to me that might be the reason.

railer201

plodder wrote: »

They've been doing work replacing some of the planks on the footpath/sides of the bridge recently. Not sure if that has anything to do with it. I've always seen the signs about not cycling though it never occurred to me that might be the reason.

The carriageway planks appear to be teak which doesn't rot easily, I'm not sure about the footpaths. I have noticed some wear and tear on those planks ok.

There's also the possibility of someone going over the handlebars into the drink on a high tide. The side rails aren't all that high. There are good reasons for that sign ok.

Lumen

Nothing helps recovery more than twenty people telling you that you were doing it wrong.

KevRossi

Lumen wrote: »

Nothing helps recovery more than twenty people telling you that you were doing it wrong.

Yeah, lesson learned.

It happened on the footpath incidentally, left side going out, or northern side of the footpath looking at it on a map, early morning so few people about. If anything I could have slid under the railings into the sea.

Have cycled on the 'path' and carraigeway loads of times, without incident, have seen many more do it as well.

I'll get onto the Ports and see if they can put up a more noticeable sign, a pictogram is better than a written sign in most cases.

Effects

KevRossi wrote: »

I'll get onto the Ports and see if they can put up a more noticeable sign, a pictogram is better than a written sign in most cases.

This isn't a dig at you, but is there a case to be had for some cyclists not reading signs? It's a decent size to be fair. But maybe they need something with a diagram/picture.

KevRossi

Effects wrote: »

This isn't a dig at you, but is there a case to be had for some cyclists not reading signs? It's a decent size to be fair. But maybe they need something with a diagram/picture.

Yeah, diagrams are better, like I said I walk/run/cycle out there 2-3 times a week and I never noticed it before, or never bothered to read it somehow.

A mix of these two would be better with some explanation

ted1

plodder wrote: »

They've been doing work replacing some of the planks on the footpath/sides of the bridge recently. Not sure if that has anything to do with it. I've always seen the signs about not cycling though it never occurred to me that might be the reason.

They replaced the height barrier recently. Around May/June

plodder

I was running up there at lunchtime today and had a look out for the signs. The only obvious one when you approach is the "slippery for cyclists" sign below, which is a bit meaningless imo.



I'm not a fan of these picture signs in situations like this. I prefer simple written messages. Maybe they could put a plate underneath that says "Cyclists dismount on bridge" or something.

Sonny noggs

plodder wrote: »

I was running up there at lunchtime today and had a look out for the signs. The only obvious one when you approach is the "slippery for cyclists" sign below, which is a bit meaningless imo.



I'm not a fan of these picture signs in situations like this. I prefer simple written messages. Maybe they could put a plate underneath that says "Cyclists dismount on bridge" or something.

There is at least 2 other signs pointing out that cycling is prohibited.

plodder

Sonny noggs wrote: »

There is at least 2 other signs pointing out that cycling is prohibited.

That's the only one facing you when you approach the bridge from the main road, and are likely to see.

Sonny noggs

plodder wrote: »

That's the only one facing you when you approach the bridge from the main road, and are likely to see.

No, the picture I uploaded is of a sign facing people heading towards the beach.

plodder

Sonny noggs wrote: »

No, the picture I uploaded is of a sign facing people heading towards the beach.

I don't think that sign is still there, but I'll be up there again today, and will check. What I think they have done is replace the plate (with the useful text information on it) with the sign I mentioned above. There's two signs there. The slippery for cars, and slippery for bikes one.

Yep, that is what they did. They replaced a quite useful and informative sign with this generic, not very helpful one. The same sign is on the opposite side. There is also a sign on the side of the bridge saying cyclists should dismount, but I don't think you could depend on anyone seeing it, as it's not facing you.

Mickiemcfist

I think the OP should just chalk this one down to experience. There's already signs to dismount, he wasn't paying enough attention to spot the sign, or to spot the large gap in the boards.

Tombo2001

Unfortunately I dont have a photo of the sign to go along with the 12 other near identical photos that have been posted.

But I can say i have cycled that bridge many times and ignored the sign. With hybrid tyres, not slim tyres but nonetheless.

Thanks for sharing OP - wont be doing it again.

Of course this isnt an excuse - but there are 'Cyclist Dismount' signs in all sorts of daft places, so it becomes normal to ignore them.

cdaly_

Tombo2001 wrote: »

Of course this isnt an excuse - but there are 'Cyclist Dismount' signs in all sorts of daft places, so it becomes normal to ignore them.

But it is a problem. If they were only placed where they were actually necessary they might get taken seriously.

They mostly seem to be placed in a 'Cyclist dismount and get out of the way of real traffic' sort of context (like road works etc).

Effects

cdaly_ wrote: »

They mostly seem to be placed in a 'Cyclist dismount and get out of the way of real traffic' sort of context (like road works etc).

Are they not placed in locations for the most unobservant and non-vigilant cyclists, to help them?
Like for the kind of people that usually get their wheel caught in Luas tracks.

When I cross the wooden bridge I'm aware that my tyre might get caught (25mm), but it's not because of the sign, and I cycle carefully. Some people are just unobservant and unsafe on bikes.