Road level cycle lanes with divider - Who has right of way?

dubrov

Car is on road coming up to junction looking to go left.

Bicycle is on cycle lane like the below (at road level but thin divider to road) moving in same direction looking to go straight on.

Bicycle is just ahead of the car and hasn't undertaken coming up to the junction.

Who has right of way?

Wishbone Ash

Is there any 'Yield' signage for cycle track users?

From my experience of segregated tracks. I'd be inclined to think that the motorist has right of way.

Padre_Pio

Show a pic of the junction.

If the cycle lane carries on with no signs to indicate a yield or stop, I'd be inclined to think the cyclist.

Oherwise the car.

Princess Calla

If the cyclist is already ahead of the car , the car turning left shouldn't be an issue.

If the car is Infront and indicating their intention to turn left it would be prudent for the cyclist to reduce speed and let car complete the manouvre.

If both are reaching junction at same time I would see they cyclist as having right of way as they are continuing with the road and the car is changing direction.

That's how I would see it if there's no other signs indicating otherwise.

However there's no point in putting yourself in danger because you think that you're "in the right".

greasepalm

They are putting up signs at some junctions to yield to cyclists on the inside if your [ in car ] turning left so at every junction i will yield to them.

Paddigol

It's why I avoid segregated cycle lanes. I just take the lane. And if drivers moan I point out the exact uncertainty being discussed here.

Segregated cycle lanes have their merits and a place in road infrastructure, but championing them above all else just allows angry drivers to demand that after all the money spent on them you should be forced to use them.

chooseusername

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058280280/road-level-cycle-lanes-with-divider-who-has-right-of-way

Who has right of way?

The cyclist;

rsa.jpg

Macy0161

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120127519#Comment_120127519

That's great progress actually, rather than the cycle lane ceding priority that the cyclist would have on the road.

Padre_Pio

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120128083#Comment_120128083

It's a shame this has to be explicitly stated to some motorists

Mellor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120128082#Comment_120128082

That's doesn't say the cyclist has right of way. It say they have right of way when there is a advanced stop line - which indicates their right of way.

This question is pointless without seeing the junction. As there are signs and/or road markings they can clearly indicate right of way to one or the other. Amazing the amount of people that don;t understand road marking and signs though

Cyrus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058280280/road-level-cycle-lanes-with-divider-who-has-right-of-way

thats carysfort avenue right? i think there is a yield at the junction for cyclists although im not 100% sure.

chooseusername

bike.jpg

This is the junction I believe, the cyclist has right of way.

magicbastarder

i'd say the cyclist has right of way; there's no yield sign and in the scenario the OP describes is ahead of the car.

the cyclist would have to potentially stop for a car turning left, approaching from behind, otherwise.

chooseusername

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120128175#Comment_120128175

Further down it says " Do not overtake a cyclist as you approach a junction if you are turning left"

Couldn't be much clearer.

magicbastarder

are there any circumstances where you have right of way over a vehicle ahead of you, which is travelling in the same direction as you are? unless you are staying in your lane.

Cyrus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120128393#Comment_120128393

i believe, could be wrong, that the junction they are referring to is further down at the lights, thats just an entrance into the smurfit business school.

ted1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120128393#Comment_120128393

using the road markings the cyclists has right of way.

kirving

The marking are a bit of a mess to be honest. In just a few hunderd meters there are a) black wands, b) orange wands and c) yield signs + orange wands at the bus stop.

What does the colour change mean? Are cyclists expected to yield at the orange wand but not the black? Just ahead, yeild + orange are linked together at the bus stop. If they mean exactly the same thing, why the colour change?

Now I know that even asking that will elicit the response "If you need to ask that you shouldn't be driving".

I know they (black/orange) mean the same thing though, I'm just asking why an additional layer of confusion has been layered on top of something which may people are uncertain (as evidenced by this thread) how to approach?

https://goo.gl/maps/hTTUXUuJcZKQvPvh9

Sarn

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120128393#Comment_120128393

In that case I would agree that the cyclist has right of way. It should be noted that that is an entrance into private property rather than a junction.

Does a two way segregated bicycle lane have the same priority as the main road at a junction? Signage would definitely help!

Patrick2010

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120127987#Comment_120127987

Wouldn't you have the same issue with a car turning left?

Paddigol

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120128656#Comment_120128656

It's possible, but in my experience if you are in the vehicle lane cars behind will treat you more akin to traffic. Of course you'll get the odd driver who'll aggressively overtake and cut you off, but even in those circumstances you'll be less likely to be t-boned and also be more alive to the danger by the nature of the overtake.

At lot of it comes down to experience, familiarity of the road you're on and roadcraft - if I'm coming up to a junction where I know cars regularly turn left, I'll just take the lane a bit more for 50 metres or so to discourage all but the biggest w*****s from cutting me off.

There really shouldn't be so much aggro on the roads with cyclists... I rarely have an issue with cars (albeit I've come to accept a certain frequency of bad driving/ bad cycling etiquette from other road users... no point getting stressed about it). The reality is that as much as the media likes to frame it as motorists -v- cyclists, the majority of aggro and rage on the roads is from one motorist to another.

A little bit of courtesy goes a long way, and I always make a point of thanking motorists who show a bit of decency and awareness. There are a lot more good eggs than bad eggs out there.

CramCycle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120128510#Comment_120128510

Not sure what you mean here but I think the answer is no. On the same note, they have no right of way over you unless they indicate in sufficient time.

Of course, experience will ahve taught most of us that position and speed are better indicators than actual lights on a motor vehicle around Dublin. I had a car in front of me yesterday who continually indicated right to go straight through on roundabouts and then didn't indicate at all when turning left later.

Paddigol

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120128867#Comment_120128867

Is straight through on a roundabout not no indication until exiting (left indicator being 1st exit, right indicator being 3rd/ 4th exit?)... in which case they failed on both counts. Although half a point awarded for making any effort... most motorists I come across in the car don't see the need to indicate on approaching a roundabout at all.

ted1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120128609#Comment_120128609

Crossing a broken line means you are changing lanes. So the car or bike in the lane going straight has priority

kirving

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120129279#Comment_120129279

I know that yes. Why do we have different coloured wands which on junctions 250m apart?

It is entirely reasonable that a pedestrian, cyclist or motorist could think that an entirely different colour should bear some significance, especially since only the orange wands are mixed and matched with accompanying yield signs.

ted1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120130090#Comment_120130090

Black are ornate , others are hi-vis…

Wishbone Ash

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120128867#Comment_120128867

.....they have no right of way over you unless they indicate in sufficient time.

One of the most basic road traffic regulations is that an indicator does not convey right of way. Whether a road user indicates or not has nothing to do with right of way.

robinph

Surely it's like on a multi lane road/ dual carriageway/ motorway and whoever is on the left has priority. If the vehicle to the right wants to turn left then they either need to properly complete their overtake first, or slow down and take the turning after the vehicle in the left lane has passed the junction.

The cycle lane is just the far left lane of the road, and so is the footpath actually and pedestrians should in theory have priority if they are continuing straight on just the cars believe they own the road and so pedestrians tend to give way. Think they did clarify that pedestrians have priority a couple of years ago in the UK version of the rules of the road, but never made any difference to how people actually behave.

cletus

Are cycle lanes actually recognised as separate lanes of traffic?

Podge_irl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120128609#Comment_120128609

The colours mean nothing. Wands are not signage - they are a physical impediment to physically stop cars doing what signage (lines on the road and roadsigns) is telling them not to do

It is weird and stupid to have multiple different colours though.

Wishbone Ash

Are the different colours of wands anything to do with approach to junctions (like the way cats eyes change colour at junctions)?