Teenagers cycling to school

magicbastarder

i think a lot of parents wouldn't be happy with kids cycling on unlit roads; i used to cycle through the park (on my commute) and you would need lights to see with (rather than the usual 'lights to be seen with') - even the lights running along the path on the main avenue are feeble enough.

Utter Consternation

I think in rural or unlit areas there is a real risk of drivers coming around corners at speed and going through cyclists.

I'd be nervous as hell doing it at home in County Galway.

hans aus dtschl

Utter Consternation wrote: »

I think in rural or unlit areas there is a real risk of drivers coming around corners at speed and going through cyclists.

I'd be nervous as hell doing it at home in County Galway.

Conversely, it's when I'm given most room on the road by drivers: when it's dark and I have bright lights on.
If people are driving around corners at speed, why would it be better by day than by night? That's just bad driving, day or night doesn't come into it. At least at night your lights can give sometimes an indication that you might be at the other side.

I've been through this so many times with people lecturing me on how they think cycling is so dangerous, based on the amount of times they've driven around blind bends at speed and not expected to find a cyclist on the other side. My answer is the same every time: "I presume you'll be a lot more surprised to find a car/tractor/truck/cow/horse/dog/child on the other side?".

Utter Consternation

hans aus dtschl wrote: »

Conversely, it's when I'm given most room on the road by drivers: when it's dark and I have bright lights on.
If people are driving around corners at speed, why would it be better by day than by night? That's just bad driving, day or night doesn't come into it. At least at night your lights can give sometimes an indication that you might be at the other side.

I've been through this so many times with people lecturing me on how they think cycling is so dangerous, based on the amount of times they've driven around blind bends at speed and not expected to find a cyclist on the other side. My answer is the same every time: "I presume you'll be a lot more surprised to find a car/tractor/truck/cow/horse/dog/child on the other side?".

The bright lights are the key issue there. I would not be confident with my bog standard lights if i was on a country road.

LeChienMefiant

plodder wrote: »

I've never cycled in it, but is it really not safe for kids, or is there just no access from the park?

No father would allow a daughter to go through the park at night. I remember as a young fella out on the town with friends that Castleknock girls were notorious for bringing lads home in the taxi (on the premise of a promise) and then dispatching them back in same taxi. They just needed a chaperone to get through the park in the taxi!

ted1

LeChienMefiant wrote: »

No father would allow a daughter to go through the park at night. I remember as a young fella out on the town with friends that Castleknock girls were notorious for bringing lads home in the taxi (on the premise of a promise) and then dispatching them back in same taxi. They just needed a chaperone to get through the park in the taxi!

I didn’t know where that was going

Lumen

LeChienMefiant wrote: »

No father would allow a daughter to go through the park at night

The mothers would be fine with it though, right?

LeChienMefiant

Lumen wrote: »

The mothers would be fine with it though, right?

Didn't say that. I did however anticipate some such responses to my light hearted post. I thought about formulating my light hearted post for complete political correctness but then I decided to burst on. No offence intended.

https://twitter.com/rickygervais/status/1172874651019763712

eeeee

plodder wrote: »

I wouldn't like cycling those roads myself near that school, but ..

"through the Phoenix park" ...

I've never cycled in it, but is it really not safe for kids, or is there just no access from the park?

I cycle through the whole park on my commute.
It's fine.
I cycle on the cycle lanes, put my lights from flashing to steady, and it's perfectly fine.
That said, I have good lights in fairness.

The biggest irritation for me are the other cyclists going in the wrong direction in the cycle lanes on Chesterfield Avenue :mad: One I see every morning he cycles on the correct side of the road from Castleknock into the park, then crosses into the cycle lane on the wrong side of the road when he gets in I don't understand.
Anyway, apologies that was an OT rant.

plodder

I don't cycle every day, but my commute is about 50% on rural unlit roads, with not too much traffic. I enjoy cycling in the dark, though you do need a bright front light, on steady setting, as flashing mode in the dark is very hard on the eyes. Clear glasses/goggles are a help too. The biggest hazard is oncoming motorists who "forget" to dip their headlights. A friendly hand-gesture often fixes that though. Sorry, gone way ot now ..

doozerie

My 10yr old daughter has been cycling to and from school (with my wife) for several years now. We did, and sometimes still do, encounter the predictable reactions from some other parents in the school, usually but not always from those who don't cycle themselves and whose kids don't cycle. The reactions ranged from disapproving looks to questioning of our sanity, but arguably most offensive of all is that common to them all is an assumption that we simply don't care about our daughter's welfare.

My reaction to those that declared the roads to be dangerous was to remind them that the roads in themselves are usually not dangerous at all, it's the behaviour of the people using them that is almost always entirely the source of any danger. So long as my daughter behaves responsibly while cycling, which she generally does, then she'll generally be perfectly safe as long as other road users behave responsibly too.

It's not a welcome response usually, since it reminds people that they need to prioritise "the common good" when using the roads ahead of their own convenience. Their own convenience includes prioritising their race to get from A to B as quickly as possible, their unwillingness to park their car a little further away from the school in order to avoid parking on a blind bend while also blocking the footpath, their unwillingness to cede priority to smaller/lesser road users as they force their car past other badly parked cars even if it means driving at oncoming traffic in the wrong lane, etc.

Being a responsible road user is very inconvenient, it's far easier to declare "the roads" as dangerous to shift the focus away from the root cause of what is basically anti-social behaviour (and textbook dangerous driving at times) by themselves and others, the logical conclusion of which is to declare the roads completely unsafe for kids. Which more often than not means putting more kids into cars, and usually feeding the problem by further skewing the balance in favour of car numbers and "de-normalising" that brilliant option of kids cycling not just to school but to everywhere they might want to go.

As far as I am concerned, the challenge boils down to trying to normalise the use of bicycles. And not just for kids, but for adults too. That's a challenge that we can all chip away at, sometimes chipping away at it is about all we can do but I think it's an essential thing to do. For me, that means that as adults we need to behave responsibly when cycling - I consider it pointless to talk up the safety of cycling if I were to, for example, routinely rattle through red lights while cycling and skimming past pedestrians and moving cars alike. And for those of us that are parents we need to encourage our kids to cycle responsibly, another reason to not set a bad example by our own irresponsible behaviour.

And this applies while driving too. When driving I imagine we all know how it can feel frustrating to be stuck behind a cyclist and to be tempted to overtake when it clearly isn't safe, just to avoid what is typically a very short delay. Especially when there is an impatient driver behind who would have us run the cyclist over if it saved them a handful of seconds. If we drive irresponsibly then we feed into normalising bad driving. And ironically cyclists can be amongst the worst drivers - If I had a euro for every time a driver did something reckless towards me while I was cycling, only for them to respond with "Sure, I cycle myself!" as if this gives license to behave as badly as they like when behind the wheel of a car... Our behaviour is a choice, and its impact is our responsibility.

My approach with my daughter is to try to teach her to behave responsibly, explaining why, for example, stopping at a red light is the best option not just for her but for the pedestrians crossing at the lights and for those cyclists/bikers/drivers that would have to take evasive action if she cycled out in front of them (which means also emphasising that looking for dangers and actually seeing them are two different things). It also means modelling that responsible behaviour when I am cycling and when I am driving.

It also means teaching her that awareness is essential because even with the best will in the world people make mistakes, Behaving responsible herself drastically reduces risk for her by reducing the likelihood of her making mistakes that would put her in danger but she still has to be constantly watching for, and prepared for, mistakes that other people might make. That sounds like more effort than it really is - as one example it just means slowing down if you have any concern at all that the car (or cyclist) ahead of you might turn across your path despite a lack of any indicator, better to slow down for a delay of at most a few seconds and have your concerns prove groundless than to plough on regardless and end up being hit.

I've always found that it is second-nature to cycle in such a defensive/"safe" way when I am in a calm frame of mind, it's much harder when I allow my focus to shift entirely to my own self-serving priorities e.g. if I'm late it is very easy to justify all sorts of stupid and reckless behaviour to myself and it requires a real effort to stop myself from becoming a complete arsehole on the bike. Which is another reason that I encourage my daughter to see the roads as being fundamentally safe, if every time she climbs on a bike she is consumed by fear for her life, then she clearly won't be relaxed and she won't make those casual "concessions" (such as yielding to a car that looks like it's going to cross regardless) that would help keep her safe.

PhilOssophy

doozerie, kudos for the best post I have read in the cycling v cars v road behaviour debate.
Reasonable behaviour by everybody (including adult cyclists) will encourage more onto the road. That is the best outcome we can hope for, but it needs everybody to behave accordingly. Good behaviour starts with yourself, not tut tutting at the bad behaviour of others and using it to justify your own wrecklessness.

beauf

eeeee wrote: »

I cycle through the whole park on my commute.
It's fine.
I cycle on the cycle lanes, put my lights from flashing to steady, and it's perfectly fine.
That said, I have good lights in fairness.

The biggest irritation for me are the other cyclists going in the wrong direction in the cycle lanes on Chesterfield Avenue :mad: One I see every morning he cycles on the correct side of the road from Castleknock into the park, then crosses into the cycle lane on the wrong side of the road when he gets in I don't understand.
Anyway, apologies that was an OT rant.

If you are on cycle lanes the road you are on is well lit and very busy lots of people. Unless you are on it late. Also you are an adult not a child on their own. Very different.

The road you'd take (in the park) to mountsackville has no cycle lanes and it's poorly lit. There is some traffic and it's not that dangerous. But it's certainly not without its risks especially at night. Especially for a school kid.

I've never considered the cycle lanes on
Chesterfield Avenue directional. I'm surprised someone would. It's a private park normal rules like signage doesn't apply AFAIK. You have to expect people, children and animals to be around and cycle accordingly.

My moan about the park is cyclists going flat out doing road speeds on a narrow cycle path literally inches away from much slower cyclists. Use the road if you are going that fast.

beauf

Personally I find the drivers around D15 and similar suburbs to be far more aggressive to cyclists than city center drivers. It's like they think normal rules don't apply one they are out of the city. They drive faster and more aggressively. Considering the area is full of schools it's a bit ironic. Also lots of schools have very poor cycling access in their catchment areas. Well done the planner's.

beauf

All mine cycle to school but they have an unusually easy and safe route with cycle lanes most of the way. But then that was the plan when I moved there. Not a choice everyone has though.

Utter Consternation

beauf wrote: »

Personally I find the drivers around D15 and similar suburbs to be far more aggressive to cyclists than city center drivers. It's like they think normal rules don't apply one they are out of the city. They drive faster and more aggressively. Considering the area is full of schools it's a bit ironic. Also lots of schools have very poor cycling access in their catchment areas. Well done the planner's.

I live in D24 and i find that in my estate people in SUV's absolutely bomb it around in the morning. It must be in anticipation of getting stuck in the traffic jam when they get out onto the main road.

It makes no difference to them in the end.

magicbastarder

i used to cycle to school over the M50 - when it was under construction - and they closed the road between blanchardstown and castleknock for several months while doing so, which speaks to how much traffic has increased since i was doing that.

plodder

I was in the park for the first time in ages last weekend and was amazed at how primitive the cycling/walking infrastructure is. Even the footpaths are ridiculously narrow. I can understand the reluctance to disturb the historic vibe of the place, but after seeing a lovely park I visited in Dresden about a month ago, where there is a gorgeous wide main avenue, with no cars on it, the solution is obvious. Sooner or later, we will do the same thing.

PhilOssophy

In fairness, its easy to blame planners but don't forget, many of these schools are in places where there was a horse and cart when the school opened.....

LeChienMefiant

PhilOssophy wrote: »

In fairness, its easy to blame planners but don't forget, many of these schools are in places where there was a horse and cart when the school opened.....

A bicycle needs a lot less space than a horse and cart. It's all about how the space is allocated. At the moment we have it all wrong and badly need a road diet.

beauf

PhilOssophy wrote: »

In fairness, its easy to blame planners but don't forget, many of these schools are in places where there was a horse and cart when the school opened.....

Most of the ones near my built in the last 10-15 and they've done very little to facilitate cycling. The primary consideration seems to be facilitating developers at the expense of everyone else.

PhilOssophy

LeChienMefiant wrote: »

A bicycle needs a lot less space than a horse and cart. It's all about how the space is allocated. At the moment we have it all wrong and badly need a road diet.

You are missing my point. Some of these schools were built when that was the only other road user.

For the ones built in the last 20-30 years, fair enough they got it wrong.

LeChienMefiant

PhilOssophy wrote: »

You are missing my point. Some of these schools were built when that was the only other road user.

For the ones built in the last 20-30 years, fair enough they got it wrong.

When did mass car ownership start? Car traffic on these roads is a recent phenomenon (since post war maybe). Maybe I am still missing your point. The car traffic (and the space allocated to it) is the problem. What should we have done differently in the 20 - 30 years?

beauf

PhilOssophy wrote: »

You are missing my point. Some of these schools were built when that was the only other road user.

For the ones built in the last 20-30 years, fair enough they got it wrong.

What is your point. That its impossible to change the design of streets in 50yrs? That its still impossible now in 2019?

Cars arrived, after the war, 1950 & 60's.
As long as there has been cars, there have been bicycles.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wYMqb0F5aqo

The dutch really only started in the 70's reclaiming their streets from cars.
https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2011/10/20/how-the-dutch-got-their-cycling-infrastructure/

PhilOssophy

A school like Mount Sackville is (I would guess) there so long that planning for anything other than a horse and cart was not involved. For other schools, that were built in the last 30 years, there is no excuse. I fully agree.
But a bit like Dublin, plenty of older schools and streets would be done differently if being planned now.

Anyway, how is the OP getting on?

beauf

PhilOssophy wrote: »

A school like Mount Sackville is (I would guess) there so long that planning for anything other than a horse and cart was not involved. For other schools, that were built in the last 30 years, there is no excuse. I fully agree.
But a bit like Dublin, plenty of older schools and streets would be done differently if being planned now. ..

They were built before cars. Didn't stop any planning for car truck and bus traffic.

There is nothing about these building or when they were created that stops someone planning cycling access. Nothing.

magicbastarder

just for the record, mount sackville is not on an island in the middle of the atlantic. it's one of the two private schools which serves one of the better off suburbs on the northside, but perhaps that's the problem.

Still waters

Advise them never to go o up the inside of hgvs/buses also, that's never a good place to be for a child on a bike if the driver can't see them

beauf

magicbastarder wrote: »

just for the record, mount sackville is not on an island in the middle of the atlantic. it's one of the two private schools which serves one of the better off suburbs on the northside, but perhaps that's the problem.

...or maybe its the poorly narrow country roads, with no cycle lanes.

... and/or the poorly approved junction changes to allow a Lidl in the middle of a bottleneck making it far worse and traffic jam in every direction. leaving even less space for cyclists.

..or that they allowed over development all over D15 and beyond with no road network capacity to carry it, and thus again no really effort at creating cycling routes.



But you're probably right, its because of all the other stuff.

Cookie_Monster

site_owner wrote: »

they are only kids, tell them to cycle on the path if they need to

they're teenagers not 5 year old kids, should not be on path ever. And at that age they have enough awareness to be cycling on the roads anyway.
Biggest danger to them is having the bikes nicked while in school IMO, decent locks are the only thing you really need to worry about OP