Bicycles, Phoenix Park and traffic

beauf

You said at speed. Someone else said 40kph. Its a park not a race track for cars or cyclists.

hans aus dtschl

beauf wrote: »

You said at speed. Someone else said 40kph. Its a park not a race track for cars or cyclists.

AFAIK speed limit is 50kmh.
I probably wouldn't be racing if I was going 40kmh downhill tbh.

beauf

hans aus dtschl wrote: »

AFAIK speed limit is 50kmh.
I probably wouldn't be racing if I was going 40kmh downhill tbh.

I guess then if it's the actual number that's critical.... if no one breaks that limit and doesn't actually hit anyone its all ok then.... ...since it's the number that's important...

https://youtu.be/Vn29DvMITu4

magicbastarder

beauf wrote: »

You said at speed. Someone else said 40kph. Its a park not a race track for cars or cyclists.

you mean Pinch Flat's comment about doing 40km/h? he was probably cycling 10km/h - or more - slower than the cars. people would regard that as unnaturally slow for cars if the road was clear on the main avenue.

though that does raise the spectre of whether the speed limit in the park should be changed (and whether it would be policed anyway)

beauf

If people are driving like it's "formula 1" as reported it sounds like it's completely out of hand. Though overtaking like formula 1 would seem to contradictory.

But you are right is any of this ever enforced anyway.

Seth Brundle

beauf wrote: »

You said at speed. Someone else said 40kph. Its a park not a race track for cars or cyclists.

Elsewhere on boards, some drivers are complaining because their cars cannot drive at under 50km/h and so Dublin City Council should not impliment the proposed speed limit changes

beauf

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Elsewhere on boards, some drivers are complaining because their cars cannot drive at under 50km/h and so Dublin City Council should not impliment the proposed speed limit changes

Is this the thread to continue that discussion?

It's a park. The thread is about people enjoying the lack of traffic, and not having to dodge fast moving objects. Be that a car or a lycra clad speed skater.

They don't seem to have a problem stopping (enforcement) people if they want to...

https://youtu.be/u-iF57cxqJk

beauf

Maybe they should ban all wheeled vehicles just to be safe. ....

hans aus dtschl

beauf wrote: »

I guess then if it's the actual number that's critical.... if no one breaks that limit and doesn't actually hit anyone its all ok then.... ...since it's the number that's important...

https://youtu.be/Vn29DvMITu4

Your YouTube link seems to be broken.

I'm not sure if you're suggesting that 40kmh is a reckless speed? I wouldn't consider it to be a reckless speed on a road with 50kmh traffic.
On part of my commute, I freewheel at 40kmh in a 50kmh area. Most motorists won't stay behind me at that speed, they even overtake into oncoming traffic to get past me. I don't really consider myself to be going too fast, in that scenario, personally. The motorists overtaking me don't seem to think I'm going too fast either. Certainly wouldn't consider myself to be "racing".

Then, if a car from the opposite direction comes into my lane driving towards me and we have a scary moment, then I also don't consider myself to have been at fault for "driving too fast". Maybe the driver didn't anticipate me because of my relative pace, but I'm not supposed to anticipate somebody suddenly driving towards me in the same lane as me.

AKA, I can't imagine why I should need to hold my brakes, just on the off chance that somebody on the other side wants to overtake.

beauf

hans aus dtschl wrote: »

Your YouTube link seems to be broken.

I'm not sure if you're suggesting that 40kmh is a reckless speed? I wouldn't consider it to be a reckless speed on a road with 50kmh traffic.
On part of my commute, I freewheel at 40kmh in a 50kmh area. Most motorists won't stay behind me at that speed, they even overtake into oncoming traffic to get past me. I don't really consider myself to be going too fast, in that scenario, personally. Certainly wouldn't consider myself to be "racing".

Speed is relative to the location and the conditions. Just because there's a sign up that says 50kmh, or that other people are driving like formula 1. Doesn't imply its safe to do so. Considering its a recreational park, with deer, dogs, children and families roaming all over it. If people think 50kph is too fast on Chesterfield Ave, and are suggesting 30kph, how is 50 or 40 appropriate in the rest of the park.

Does it make sense to keep travelling "at speed" in a location, hilly with poor sight lines, that you know from past experience people aren't expecting to meet you travelling at speed towards them.

Sounds like they need some traffic calming. Speed ramps.

hans aus dtschl

beauf wrote: »

Speed is relative to the location and the conditions. Just because there's a sign up that says 50kmh, or that other people are driving like formula 1. Doesn't imply its safe to do so. Considering its a recreational park, with deer, dogs, children and families roaming all over it. If people think 50kph is too fast on Chesterfield Ave, and are suggesting 30kph, how is 50 or 40 appropriate in the rest of the park.

Does it make sense to keep travelling "at speed" in a location, hilly with poor sight lines, that you know from past experience people aren't expecting to meet you travelling at speed towards them.

Sounds like they need some traffic calming. Speed ramps.

It's a road? There was no discussion of dogs, children or families roaming?

The earlier poster said that cars were overtaking without expecting cyclists might be coming towards them at speed.
You said that the cyclists were at fault and should slow down. You said "it's no place for racing" etc.
That makes no sense? Nobody said they're cycling too fast or without due care. No speed is slow enough when someone is coming towards you in the same lane!

beauf

Actually what I said was...

beauf wrote: »

...Arguably none should be "at speed". Its not a closed road. If people are driving or cycling with out consideration of others the OPW should be having a word with them.

hans aus dtschl

Mercian Pro wrote: »

The main safety issue was approaching cars pulling out to pass cyclists and forgetting there were other cyclists heading towards them at speed.

This is what you were replying to.

You managed (somewhat impressively) to make it seem like the oncoming traffic could be at fault for a poor overtaking attempt.

beauf

I made a few of points.

People shouldn't driving without consideration of others
People shouldn't cycling without consideration of others
Drivers should anticipate other road users
Cyclists should anticipate other road users
What is a "appropriate" speed for drivers is worthy of debate.
What is a "appropriate" speed for cyclists is worthy of debate.

Incidentally if a 30kph limit could be appropriate for Chesterfield Ave how is not similarly appropriate on worse roads.

I thought that was fairly neutral.

magicbastarder

i think a park-wide 30km/h limit is a no-brainer. except for the caveat again that i don't think it'd ever be enforced.

beauf

I don't think it will start to be enforced either.

In lieu of enforcement, you'd imagine traffic calming should be considered.

Dr_Colossus

beauf wrote: »

In lieu of enforcement, you'd imagine traffic calming should be considered.

Hell no, they have severe speed bumps on the north section of the park and they're terrible for cycling, nearly as bad as the road surface. Generally avoid that section of the park.

Seth Brundle

magicbastarder wrote: »

i think a park-wide 30km/h limit is a no-brainer. except for the caveat again that i don't think it'd ever be enforced.

Agreed.
However, in terms of cyclists who don't have a method for calculating speed, how will they know if they are under or over the limit?

beauf

Dr_Colossus wrote: »

Hell no, they have severe speed bumps on the north section of the park and they're terrible for cycling, nearly as bad as the road surface. Generally avoid that section of the park.

Maybe they should try them any place where traffic is problematic lol.

Pinch Flat

Given that you'll be routinely tail gated or overtaken when driving at 50kph, a lower limit of 30kph will be futile

beauf

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Agreed.
However, in terms of cyclists who don't have a method for calculating speed, how will they know if they are under or over the limit?

When they achieve flight after the speed ramp...?

magicbastarder

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Agreed.
However, in terms of cyclists who don't have a method for calculating speed, how will they know if they are under or over the limit?

speed limits don't apply to bikes!

Seth Brundle

magicbastarder wrote: »

speed limits don't apply to bikes!

Yeah, I was going the long way around to prove that point to those who appear to be suggesting one for all park traffic

polesheep

I don't understand why they can't close all roads to cars bar Chesterfield and allow parking there. It's central to all of the Park's amenities.

irlirishkev

Dr_Colossus wrote: »

Hell no, they have severe speed bumps on the north section of the park and they're terrible for cycling, nearly as bad as the road surface. Generally avoid that section of the park.

Wheel bucklingly bad they are!

beauf

magicbastarder wrote: »

speed limits don't apply to bikes!

Don't need to. Cycling has it own charges..."Riding a bicycle without reasonable consideration"... and there is a similar one for cars. If a cyclist hits someone at 40kph+ it's not going to be pretty. There was a previous tragic collision in the park.

If you want to slow cars down without enforcement put in ramps. If it's worked on the north road. Probably one of the reasons they haven't is the ambulances that use these roads.

Mercian Pro

irlirishkev wrote: »

Wheel bucklingly bad they are!

I'm convinced they are higher than 100mm which is the max allowed in the regs. 75mm is preferred where there are a lot of cyclists. I have asked OPW to include a cycling bypass on both sides when the road is being resurfaced in the next few months. No reply yet!

beauf

They could simply try closing it all except essential traffic and counting the numbers of those using the park.

Nothing to lose trying it....again...

monkeyslayer

The bumps aren't as bad going west, and you can go around a good few of them if there are no joggers in the way. Going east they're really awful. Have gotten a good few punctures on the section by the zoo too, its a bit of a sniper alley.

eeeee

There are no speed limits for bikes.

The fatality mentioned was due to a pedestrian in the cycle lane, they killed the cyclist.

All gates should never have been opened again to motor traffic, even the OPW didn't want to open them again. Makes no sense for how a park should be used.