Turning Left in a left turn lane

the_pen_turner

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118330128#Comment_118330128

Or defensive driving

ELM327

has signalled an intention to turn to the left and there is a reasonable expectation that the vehicle in which the driver has signalled an intention to turn to the left 

Where is there a reference to using an indicator? How does one indicate straight on?

HeidiHeidi

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118330247#Comment_118330247

You signal your intentions by using your indicator (or a hand signal, but that's a bit archaic and not very visible, though legal).

In an ideal world, you would indicate your intention to go straight on by not indicating that you're going to turn right or left.....

But this thread has amply demonstrated that it doesn't always work like that! 🙄

UID0

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118330098#Comment_118330098

You are intending to change direction, but are you intending to alter course? It's the latter that requires indication. As I said, a court would have to decide if turning left while in a left turn only lane is altering course.

In the junction in question, there is an arrow about 25-30m before the junction which says the left lane is left turn only, but the road layout does not suggest that it is a left turn only lane and, afaik this arrow is the only signage indicating that it is a left turn only lane. There has been no point up to this where the motorist was required to indicate in order to enter that lane as the lane split from one lane into two. This creates an ambiguity in the intended course of travel, meaning that a motorist should (although I don't know if they must) indicate that they are turning. Looking at a different junction layout, if you take someone going from Ellis Quay to Blackhall Place, a person has already indicated to move into the left turn lane, and in that instance there isn't any ambiguity in their intended direction of travel. They are not, in my opinion, altering course and an indicator should not be required (although I personally would use one as I feel it makes my intentions clearer). A court would have to decide if my interpretation is correct.

The junction has been recently changed to this traffic flow, and, in my opinion, they have done an awful job. Where there is a cycle lane that goes straight, it should not go to the left of a left turn only lane, and whatever about a shared lane which allows cyclists to take command position and control the lane, putting a segregated cycle lane down the left forces a conflict situation which the cyclist cannot easily mitigate.

Spook_ie

Devils Advocate time and actual interpretation of the wording of SI 332/2012

(i) has signalled an intention to turn to the left and there is a reasonable expectation that the vehicle in which the driver has signalled an intention to turn to the left will execute a movement to the left before the cycle overtakes the vehicle, 

Question:- The word HAS doesn't have the same meaning as IS, Does this mean you need not actually be signalling at the time, only that at some stage you have signalled, perhaps before someone arrives on the scene and overtakes on the left, while you are in a left/right turn lane?

UID0

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118330128#Comment_118330128

The last time I went through that junction it was still a left/straight lane. If I was approaching that junction and the light was red/going red and I was going to be in the first 1/2 cars at the light, I would indicate and pull right over to the left. If there were cyclists coming up that I could see, then I would hang back a little to let them go past me before pulling in behind them.

If traffic was moving, and there were cyclists there, I would assume they were going straight, and depending on exact position and relative speeds, I would either go in front of them if I was well clear, or let them go first if I wasn't going to be well clear. And by well clear, I don't mean barely missing hitting them, I mean plenty of space so that they were not in any danger of being hit by me (or hitting me as I slowed).

km991148

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118330286#Comment_118330286

But all of this is written from the perspective of the person who has driven into (or remained before the split) in the left turn lane.

The road still turns into a different road (a new perpendicular road) and therefore you are turning. There are also many other peopl earound that didnt come up the road travelled by the car.

I know this is the legal forum and the question round the legality of the indicator was asked, but it misses the point entirely. All of this should be focused on the safest thing. To me as a driver in this situation would be to signal and check all around before moving (And I think clearly the checking has been missing) and as a cyclist would be to read the road as far ahead as possible, adjust speed to not be near a blind spot (and yes at times I would signal straight on - with a weird Hitler type hand signal). Leaving everyone around me who can see me in no doubt as to what I am going to do.

XVII

so a left turn lane with a bike lane which goes straight? As in right across it?

jesus christ, well done to whoever designed that.

what's next, how about putting straight bike lane here for instance?

https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.4049389,-6.2653751,3a,75y,348.78h,62.85t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGtTI4gT-zJoWmxuQZkGCGA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Or do people here expect drivers to signal left on the above as well?

HeidiHeidi

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118330372#Comment_118330372

That's one where I wouldn't necessarily keep signalling, once I'm gone past the point of physically being able to go straight on. But I'd have signalled up to that point.

Where there is any ambiguity at all, indicators should be used. But you'd swear it costs money, or wastes the battery, or something!

km991148

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118330372#Comment_118330372

Correct on the design - this is something a lot of Drivers will not be aware of (and usually results in "use the bike lane our road tax paid for" or other such nonsense - where a lot of the time the design is so poor its safer to not use them... but thats a digression!)

That junction - why wouldn't you be signalling left? On approach I'd signal left to enter the lane and would keep the indicator on - that way any pedestrians waiting to cross and everyone else knows - BUT even if you argue that the junction shows more clearly to peds what is going on - it is more hassle to cancel the signal that do nothing and cancel after you turn.

Unless there is some new tax on using indicators, I don't see what the arguments against are?

the_pen_turner

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118330274#Comment_118330274

What's the diference between rolling the road straight or following it around to the left or right

HeidiHeidi

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118330459#Comment_118330459

I don't even understand that question tbh.

The difference arises when there's a risk of taking out a cyclist (or pedestrian) when you turn to the left.

Using your indicator means they get some advance warning of your intentions.

Honestly, what's so difficult to understand about that?

HeidiHeidi

magicbastarder

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118330247#Comment_118330247

number 23.

https://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1964/si/294

magicbastarder

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118330332#Comment_118330332

if i knew i was at a junction like that and i was stopped, i would deliberately place my car where practical to allow cyclists past so they can get up to the top of the junction; for the same reason advance stop boxes have been placed in many junctions, so hopefully they can clear the junction ahead of the flow of motorised traffic, rather than inside the flow.

Allinall

That junction has two traffic light signals for cars. One for left turn, and one for straight on.

They need to add a third for cyclists, which can be green for straight on when the car light is red for turn left, and Green for turn left in sync with the car light.

magicbastarder

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118330286#Comment_118330286

i wouldn't like to stand in front of a judge and argue 'well, yes, i was northbound on the R123 and intending to turn westbound onto the R321 but that doesn't mean i was altering course because an arrow was painted on the road'.

Spook_ie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118330590#Comment_118330590

Actually, that's only if you are indicating to a pointsman that you wish to proceed straight on.

2) Whenever a driver wishes to indicate to a pointsman the direction he wishes to take, he shall give either a hand signal in accordance with the following Table or a signal by using a direction indicator :

SIGNALS TO POINTSMEN.

Intended course of action

Signal to be given

I want to go straight ahead.

Extend the forearm and hand upwards with the palm to the front.

I want to turn to the left.

In the case of a vehicle other than a cycle, point the right forearm and hand (with the fingers extended) to the left.

In the case of a cycle or an animal-drawn vehicle, extend the left arm and hand fully to the left with the palm to the front, and hold them rigid in a horizontal position straight out from the left side.

I want to turn to the right.

Extend the right arm and hand fully to the right with the palm to the front, and hold them rigid in a horizontal position straight out from the right side.

Seth Brundle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118330610#Comment_118330610

Whilst I agree, the design is such that any cyclist approaching the junction with the intention of travelling straight ahead will be placed in direct conflict with left-turning traffic. It is simply a bad design and there is no way around that other than a physical change.

Allinall

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118330686#Comment_118330686

They won't be in conflict with left turning traffic if they obey the traffic lights.

That's akin to saying cyclists going straight through a set of lights are in direct conflict with crossing traffic.

blackwhite

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118330664#Comment_118330664

No it isn't, and one can think you're being deliberately misleading at this stage as well given you very deliberately quote Part 2, but leave out Part 1.

23.—(1) Whenever a driver intends to slow down, stop or alter course, he shall either give a hand signal in accordance with the following Table or give a signal by using a direction indicator or stop lamp :

SIGNALS TO OTHER ROAD USERS.

Intended course of action

Signal to be given

I am going to slow down or stop.

Extend the right arm and hand fully with the palm turned downwards, and move the arm slowly upwards and downwards.

I am going to turn to the left.

In the case of a vehicle other than a cycle or animal-drawn vehicle, extend the right arm and hand to the right, and rotate them in an anticlockwise direction.

In the case of a cycle or animal-drawn vehicle, extend the left arm and hand fully to the left with the palm to the front, and hold them rigid in a horizontal position straight out from the left side.

I am going to turn to the right.

Extend the right arm and hand fully to the right with the palm to the front, and hold them rigid in a horizontal position straight out from the right side.

So shocking to see a taxi driver arguing to the death, and lying about it, to try and justify not using their indicators 🙄

magicbastarder

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118330664#Comment_118330664

i was answering the question 'where is the reference to using an indicator'. you've quoted subsection 2, this is subsection 1:

(1) Whenever a driver intends to slow down, stop or alter course, he shall either give a hand signal in accordance with the following Table or give a signal by using a direction indicator or stop lamp :

HeidiHeidi

If you're going to make it so that cyclists are on the left of potentially left- turning cars, you need to make it an entirely separate lane, not this half-assed effort.

The only place I've seen it is at the junction from the Rock Road onto Monkstown Road (not sure I've got those names right, I'll see if I can get a Google maps link), where bikes have their own independent set of traffic lights that prevents vehicles crossing them

ETA I meant Temple Hill i think

6 R113

https://maps.app.goo.gl/iSsLEP7DPJVuog9R9

the_pen_turner

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118330492#Comment_118330492

Sorry supposed to say following the road straight v following it around to the left.

They dont need advance warning. Its bloody obvious where your going. You following the road. That junction screws that up by crossing a cycle lane across the left turning lane

Spook_ie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118330717#Comment_118330717

The question and reply were in relation to how to signal going straight, please ensure you understand the reply before asserting that I'm lying

Spook_ie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118330718#Comment_118330718

Please in future clarify which section of a post you are replying to, then I might respond by replying to the correct intention of your post.

I see we are now at the usual risk of this turning into a bashing exercise rather than a discussion about the salient points of the law

If I was sat at traffic lights in a left turn or a right turn only lane I would not be sitting there with the indicator on

HeidiHeidi

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118330722#Comment_118330722

At the junction that started this thread, it isn't bloody obvious where cars are going to go, unless they indicate. There are two lanes to continue on into if you go straight, or you can go left.

The only indicator of an left turn,apart from the driver indicating, is one arrow painted on the road a distance from the junction, that is covered by cars most of the time.

magicbastarder

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118330768#Comment_118330768

why not?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118330799#Comment_118330799

Would rather not sit there with the ticking sound. Quite loud in my car. And there no point. As it’s a left turn only or right turn only lane

magicbastarder

you are joking, right?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118330898#Comment_118330898

Nope

TheChizler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118330610#Comment_118330610

Some of the junctions in Cork with new cycle lanes have this, its a bit frustrating as the cycle time is lengthened but ultimately a lot safer.

Of course changing the layout would be safer again.

Seth Brundle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118330696#Comment_118330696

oops, I misread your line about cyclists getting a red to allow for left turning traffic:

They need to add a third for cyclists, which can be green for straight on when the car light is red for turn left, and Green for turn left in sync with the car light.

So you are proposing that cyclists should have to wait while cars turn left. What would cars in the right hand lane be doing at this time - travelling straight ahead? So effectively you are de-prioritising people who are on bikes at this junction as they will have a shorter traffic light window to cross the dual carriageway. Why? Because many people in cars aren't observing their surroundings properly and aren't signalling.

How does that fit in with DMURS? What about international best practice? How will it work in reality?

Seth Brundle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118330893#Comment_118330893

Out of curiosity, do you have a radio or music player in use when driving?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118330956#Comment_118330956

Sometimes. Not sure of the relevance

UID0

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118330334#Comment_118330334

I agree with you completely. As I said, I think the motorist should indicate, but I don't know if the law says they must. In general, I think that you should indicate anytime where indicating doesn't create confusion.

The legal minimum requirements are a minimum, not a target. No situation will be made more dangerous by people around you knowing what you intend to do.

Allinall

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118330947#Comment_118330947

You've arrived at your own conclusions, so I'll leave you to it.

UID0

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118330602#Comment_118330602

If there is an advance stop box, then the situation is different. There is a place for a cyclist to go that doesn't end up with them sitting to my left. The road positioning I use is so that I don't end up with a cyclist inside me when I'm turning left.

I spend more time cycling than driving, especially in the city, and the number of times I have seen cyclists cycle up the inside of a bus that is pulling into a bus stop on the quays is ridiculous. While the majority of cyclists are able to avoid placing themselves in harms way, there is a minority that don't seem to pay attention to what is happening around them. Unfortunately, in order to avoid a collision there are times when the car has to be put in a place that inconveniences cyclists who are paying attention.

Looking at it from the cyclists point of view, I like when I can predict what a car is about to do. If they are in the left of the lane with their indicator on, I know that they are turning left. If they're far out and have their indicator on, I don't know if they are actually turning left, or if they've accidentally turned the indicator on and can't hear it over whatever music they have blaring.

What is really needed is properly designed infrastructure which provides a safe and efficient path for cyclists and which minimises the potential for conflict with vehicles. Unfortunately, despite many occasions where our elected officials have said they are going to invest more in cycling infrastructure, it ends up with something that isn't suitable for purpose, and which in some instances, the junction at the start of this thread being an example, increases the danger for cyclists. Our elected officials need to realise that paint is not infrastructure, and when planning improvements that they need to look at all possible paths traffic will take through the junction.

I think that we should also change the rules so that cyclists can turn left on a red light or have a separate set of lights that turn green for cyclists before they turn green for motorised traffic. They have some of these lights already installed on the quays. This is to get cyclists out of the danger area when the lights go green. If you allow cyclists to turn left on red, then it also means that motorists know if the cyclist is sitting there, they are going straight. It reduces the uncertainty on where traffic is intending to move when the lights go green.

magicbastarder

I think Paris introduced the Idaho stop/turn right on red for cyclists a few years ago.

the_pen_turner

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118330791#Comment_118330791

I agree that junction is a disaster . Way better signage needed.

Just because there is 2 lanes in front doesn't mean anything.

HeidiHeidi

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118331417#Comment_118331417

If you haven't/can't see the left arrow on the road, it's a logical assumption that traffic in both lanes might go straight on if there are two equivalent lanes ahead, or turn left from the left-hand lane.

km991148

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118330893#Comment_118330893

Maybe it's better you don't drive then? If you find it difficult to interact with others, since that is what you are doing sitting in traffic.

There are lots of examples where the indicator is useful in a queue of traffic, I doubt you (or anyone) is able to monitor all the scenarios for change.

It's kinda crazy that there are a significant amount of people who are are arguing against not indicating. A chance to communicate while you perform complex operations that can severely cause harm when done incorrectly.

No wonder the state of Irish road use is as it is.

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118330893#Comment_118330893

I find the "headlights on" lamp on my dash to be awfully glaring so I'm going to drive around with no headlights for these winter evenings. Sure you can all see me anyhoo.

the_pen_turner

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118331488#Comment_118331488

You can assume all you like. It wont change the law.

If the car assumed it could go straight and crashed who would be responsible. The car that left its lane and entered another illegally

Spook_ie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118330300#Comment_118330300

Well it's almost answered but we do need to tease out the actual wording used in the SI relating to turning left.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118331589#Comment_118331589

That’s an equivalence that is not even worthy of a response

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118331919#Comment_118331919

It makes just as much sense as your 'I don't like the ticking' approach.

monkeybutter

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118331932#Comment_118331932

you really need to get yourself a hobby

HeidiHeidi

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118331706#Comment_118331706

Oh FFS, I wasn't talking about the cars 🙄

But you knew that, I'm sure.

That's enough of that for me. I'll give my spidey-senses radar an extra polish before I next go out on the bike after this thread!!