Above from left Cyclist Mark Langtry, Assistant Garda Commissioner David Sheahan, Minister for Tourism Transport and Sport Shane Ross TD, RSA Chief Executive Moyagh Murdock and cyclist Dave Magee
This morning.
Government Buildings, Dublin 2
The Road Safety Authority (RSA) May Bank holiday weekend safety campaign launch urging motorists to give “cyclists the space to ride safe”.
The RSA and transport minister Shane Ross recommend drivers allow a safe distance of at least 1.5 meters when passing at speeds above 50km/hour.
FIGHT!
Previously: Falling Down
Sam Boal/RollingNews.ie
Sponsored Link
So it’s optional and not law?
idiots putting the measuring ruler in the middle for the photo shoot, it’s not 50cm each side for passing width
Yes, and positioning in the middle of the bike is ridiculous and gives completely the wrong impression of the distance required.
Yes. It’s a poorly design sign. It implies the 1.5m distance is from the edge of the road to the driver. The 50km/h & car should be on the extreme right, and it should take into account the rider, the road, the kerb and the car. They should look like this…
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DcM8d0EX0AMl0T5.jpg
Assistant Commissioner Sheahan, I hope?
It’s going to be awkward to carry those signs around when I cycle. Also, trying to gauge how fast the motorist behind me is going, then getting the correct sign isn’t going to be easy either.
Hmm. I don’t think they thought this through.
um, as a cyclist it’s not your responsibility.
The driver that is overtaking you should – check their speed and leave an appropriate distance.
and :-)
#cianfacts
wheres the statutory instrument he promised?
wouldn’t it have been better to include car in the pose
So in order to add confusion, there are two measurements. 1m in under 50kmh and 1.5m over 50kmh. Richardheadery. In the split second a motorist checks his speed and (how does he/she) calculates 1m or 1.5m what could that distraction cost?
Do motorists measure from the inside cyclist or the third one out?
Motorist should already know whether they are in a 50kmh zone, or a 60/80/100kmh zone, and they should not be driving faster than that limit….
So the signs refer to speed limit areas?
Yes
How about if they just remembered to give the cyclist plenty of space irregardless, instead of trying to get away with as little room as possible and making calculations.
Wouldn’t that be a nice solution for all concerned?
exactly
it’s a pity that we have to start drawing up rules because so many are fupping idiots
basic courtesy
most of our laws exist because there are so many fupping idiots.
+1
yeah I was about to say
bit of cop on and respect outa do it
‘Irregardless’ is not a word
OED says it is a word, irregardless of what you say.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/irregardless
“The word dates back to the 19th century, but is regarded as incorrect in standard English”
“The word dates back to the 19th century, but is regarded as incorrect in standard English”
Beloved (May 2, 2018 at 2:35 pm)
‘Irregardless’ is not a word
Beloved (May 2, 2018 at 3:29 pm)
“The word dates back to the 19th century, …”
just go wide Giggidy. Really really mind-bogglingly simple. If you have any doubt whatsoever as a motorist, don’t ‘have a go’, just wait and give cyclist a load of space
Aye. But my comment was basically showing up the way it’s being portrayed above. Very little thought went into the presentation. One cyclist with the sign sticking out one side of his space would have been far more informative.
BTW aren’t the cyclists wonderful how they are able to balance for the photograph with no feet on the ground?
it’s only a recommendation so means nothing. motorists with any level of manners or respect for others do this anyway, and those that don’t obviously won’t heed a “recommendation”
Shane Ross has said he will make it the law, but there is no indication of when that will happen.
Surely Shane Ross should remain on the fence about this? Tell us that his “department is monitoring the dispute between drivers and cyclists but is ‘not going to do anything about it.'” There are the priviliged versions of potholes that need filling with cash, all over his constituency. Perhaps the addition of a sun room, or a tasteful orangery perhaps, for a detached Foxrock residence needs funding from the public purse? Mr Ross? Our doer of great good? Our great and just statesman?
I expect nothing but rational, well considered comments on this topic.
and are you pleased?
Actually, I am quite pleasantly surprised, yeah. It usually descends fairly quickly into all cyclists/motorists are the worst.
Shane Ross is the worst. And we are paying him handsomely for doing nothing. LOL!
Heh
Has Ross clarified whether use of cycle lanes is mandatory or not?
It is not, thanks for your concern.
Why spend money having cycle lanes then? The poor cyclists of Ireland, the nasty government doesn’t ensure the cycle lanes are in perfect condition at all times so they’d prefer to cycle in the gutter of the road with all the debris and crap. Not using a perfectly good cycle lane and opting to cycle on the side of the road with passing busses etc may not be subject to the law but Jesus it’s stupid.
“Not using a perfectly good cycle lane and opting to cycle on the side of the road with passing busses etc may not be subject to the law but Jesus it’s stupid.”
No it’s not stupid and in some cases can be safer.
Take the cycle lane going into town at Fairview.
Opt for that and you’re dealing with pedestrians who don’t know which part is cycle lane and which part is walk way (which is not helped by the fact that halfway along it switches from the left to the right for some mysterious reason)
You’ll also have a load of leaves in there in Autumn.
Needless to say yes the surface of most cycle lanes is incredibly poor.
I’ll generally avoid them as I’m safer on the road.
One of the (few) cycle lanes on my daily commute ends with a 10cm kerb on one side, a wall on the other and a lamp-post directly in front of me.
“A perfectly good cycle lane”?
Please, please, please give us perfectly good cycle lanes rather than the ones that are just thrown up to satisfy planning and E.U. funding.
“Perfectly good cycle lanes” – how we laugh :)
Shane Ross lol. A monkey throwing faeces would get more done if he was Minister for Tourism Transport and Sport than this clown. The only thing Ross has accomplished in Office is the record for most photos taken while pretending to be a working Minister.
*Rant over – deep breathing commenced
why isn’t Ross wearing hi-viz and a helmet? anything could happen, he could fall over, Mary Mitchell-O’Connor could crash into him. Wreckless!
There should be a car on one side and a bike on the other. Their props are terrible.
This is how you demonstrate it: http://www.stickybottle.com/latest-news/stayin-alive-mat/
That is much better.
So treat a cyclist as if it were as big as a car.
Ehh, that Garda car is basically on the wrong side of the road
Yes. When you overtake a car you cross onto the other side of the road.
When you overtake a bike, you should cross onto the other side of the road.
Fair enough, I read the road as urban, it appears to be more rural
I always err on the side of caution and give Ross and his ilk a far wider berth than 1.5m, even at walking speed.
But surely this is fantastic news!
At last!!! – an end to the constant stream of cyclists weaving across lanes of slow-moving traffic through lanes traffic and squeezing between cars at close quarters.
I’m certainly going to invest in a few of those large signs to hang out the windows of the driver’s and front passenger’s doors!!!
What???
You mean it’s yet *another* ‘rule of the road’ that doesn’t apply to cyclists?
If a car is overtaking a cyclist at speed and hits the cyclists, the cyclist dies.
If a cyclist is filtering through stopped/slow moving cars and hits a car, the car gets a scratch.
Before we decide which scenario is worse I have a question: in the first case – where the car hit the cyclist – is there any damage to the car?
Is there a particular speed at which weaving through moving traffic entails some degree of responsibility on the part of the cyclist? No, thought so, none. And at what speed is it irresponsible for a cyclist to cycle without a helmet? Again, none.
You are aware, aren’t you that in other countries when bikes – pedal and motorised – and traffic mix, that the bikes are obliged to behave like cars and are absolutely BANNED from cycling between lanes of traffic – they must line up in a ‘space’ BEHIND other traffic (What a thought!!!) as if they were cars. In addition to promoting mutual respect for each other’s space, this also prevents the ‘tour de france’ starts we now have at red traffic lights at major junctions in Dublin with a phalanx of cyclists spread across the road, having weaved up between lanes of traffic.
Everyone in a car has had to undergo at least a minimum number of hours tuition; anybody can – and obviously does – jump on a bike and start making a complete nuisance of themselves on a public road, endangering themselves and others. Until there is some attempt to regulate the poor standards of cycling in terms of observance of the rules of the road, cyclists will continue to behave badly. Speeding is increasingly a problem with cyclists in Dublin – a bicycle’s brakes are emphatically NOT built to stop a bike traveling at 30-40km/h and they either lose control or simply scream through inconvenient red lights and pedestrian crossings.
Then you should wholeheartedly support the campaign for better and safer cycling infrastructure!
https://www.irishtimes.com/business/work/pilita-clark-why-i-refuse-to-follow-the-law-while-cycling-1.3478087
a quick question. when you’re not pole-vaulting, do you ever cycle anywhere?