Pedestrians and Cycle lanes

W

witz1234

Registered User
Messages
9
I have a friend who always gets angry about pedestrians using cycle lanes. We had a discussion on this and could not decide if it was legal or not for pedestrians to walk on cycle lanes.
Does anyone know what the law is?
 
The law states pedestrians must use a footway where provided (that's what they called footpaths in 1964). Where there isn't a footpath pedestrians must keep to the right hand side of the road. A cycle lane (cycle track in law) is not a footway.
 
Some footpaths in towns are marked out for both pedestrians and cycles . If two people walk side by side it is very hard to stay on their own lane and usually do not hear the cyclist until they are right behind .
 
joer said:
Some footpaths in towns are marked out for both pedestrians and cycles . If two people walk side by side it is very hard to stay on their own lane and usually do not hear the cyclist until they are right behind .
Click to expand...
Simple; don't walk side by side.

Personally I don't use cycle lanes which are shares with pedestrians; far too dangerous.
 
Here is the relevant bit of the legislation

Article 14 covers Cycle Tracks
Section 7 covers shared tracks.

(7)(a) A shared track shall be indicated by the provision of traffic sign number RUS 058 (shared track for pedal cycles and pedestrians) and the design displayed on the particular traffic sign number RUS 058 that is provided will indicate if the shared track is a non-segregated track where there is no visual or physical segregation of use between pedestrians and persons driving pedal cycles or if the shared track is a segregated track with a continuous white line on the track or a barrier provided along the length of the track signifying a separate area for use by persons driving pedal cycles and an adjoining separate area for use by pedestrians.
(b) At a location where traffic sign number RUS 058 indicates that a shared track is non-segregated, as described in paragraph (a), pedestrians and persons driving pedal cycles may use that track.
(c) At a location where traffic sign number RUS 058 indicates that a shared track is segregated, as described in paragraph (a), persons driving pedal cycles shall only use the area of the track that is designated on the sign for use by them
and pedestrians shall only use the area of the track that is designated on the sign for use by them.

This is RUS 058
4640
 
Last edited:
There is a lot of stupidity on the roads, pathways and cycle-lanes. Particularly when trying to maintain 2 meter distancing.
 
Brendan Burgess said:
That is not what is being asked in this question.

The question is whether or not it is legal for pedestrians to walk in off-road cycle lanes.

Brendan
Click to expand...
There doesn't appear to be any legislation on it. "Shared use" is the term used by the NTA and seems to be their policy. It means that a tin of white paint is the only cost they have to produce miles of cycle paths.
 
Leo said:
The law states pedestrians must use a footway where provided (that's what they called footpaths in 1964). Where there isn't a footpath pedestrians must keep to the right hand side of the road. A cycle lane (cycle track in law) is not a footway.
Click to expand...
Sure but is a cycle lane and a cycle path the same thing?
 
joer said:
In my opinion footpaths should only be for pedestrians and not cyclists full stop.
Click to expand...
Cycle lanes should be for bicycles and not pedestrians full stop.

One of the worst places for this to happen is the Phoenix Park. On Chesterfield Ave the cycle lane is directly beside the road. People park their cars and assume that the cycle lane is a footpath when in fact the footpath is further in. I would love to know what genius decided that it would be a good idea that people alighting from their parked cars would have to cross over a cycle path to get to the footpath.

The footpath in the image below is just behind the white bench. The cycle path is just beside the buggy.

chesterfield.png

Not surprising that accidents have occurred.
 
Hi Páid

That is exactly what I am talking about, except that I thought that the footpath was beside the cycle lane.

But it's even worse there because pedestrians walk on the closest path they see. And there probably is a feeling of safety not walking so far away from the public road.

I did stop a Garda in the Phoenix Park to ask about this. If I recall correctly, he told me that they had no authority in the Phoenix Park and that it was up to the Park Rangers to deal with it.

Brendan
 
In Fairview Park, they got rid of the split lines between pedestrians and cyclists and everything is shared use.
I would have assumed those lines had no legal basis in any case.

In Clontarf promenade, a few months ago they spent a chunk of money re-directing the cycle paths away from the car parks. As noted, it was a dangerous design that car parks were directly adjacent to the cycle path and there were no footpaths provided to the promenade.
 
Purple said:
Sure but is a cycle lane and a cycle path the same thing?
Click to expand...

Path and lane are terms others have applied, the law just talks about tracks and the definition includes both on and off-road varieties:

"cycle track" means part of a road, including part of a footway or part of a roadway, which is reserved for the use of pedal cycles and from which all mechanically propelled vehicles, other than mechanically propelled wheelchairs, are prohibited from entering except for the purpose of access
Click to expand...
 
Páid said:
I would love to know what genius decided that it would be a good idea that people alighting from their parked cars would have to cross over a cycle path to get to the footpath.
Click to expand...

I read somewhere that it used to be the other way round, and the cycle lane was the one inside the railings, can't find where that was now though. The current layout makes no sense, expecting families with buggies to lift them over the railings and cross at times boggy ground to get to the footpath?

The OPW have been 'reviewing' it for years after a number of incidents, including the death of a cyclist who collided with a pedestrian on the cycle track in 2016.
 
Páid said:
Cycle lanes should be for bicycles and not pedestrians full stop.

One of the worst places for this to happen is the Phoenix Park. On Chesterfield Ave the cycle lane is directly beside the road. People park their cars and assume that the cycle lane is a footpath when in fact the footpath is further in. I would love to know what genius decided that it would be a good idea that people alighting from their parked cars would have to cross over a cycle path to get to the footpath.

The footpath in the image below is just behind the white bench. The cycle path is just beside the buggy.

View attachment 4615

Not surprising that accidents have occurred.
Click to expand...

One of the big issues here is that the pedestrians don't realise they are walking on the cycle lane, even though it is marked as such. Because it's such a silly set-up and so counter-intuitive, they assume it's the footpath.
Surely the simple solution here is to swap the cycle lane with the footpath on Chesterfield Ave?
 
Since May 19th the cycle lanes on Chesterfield Ave are now for pedestrians.

Cycle lanes are now on the hard shoulder which is coned off from traffic.

[broken link removed]
 
Olympian said:
Since May 19th the cycle lanes on Chesterfield Ave are now for pedestrians.

Cycle lanes are now on the hard shoulder which is coned off from traffic.
Click to expand...

I wonder will some of that become a more permanent arrangement. A lot of people won't be happy with losing the parking along there.
 
Leo said:
I wonder will some of that become a more permanent arrangement. A lot of people won't be happy with losing the parking along there.
Click to expand...

Let's hope so. The absence of cars in the Park made it a pure joy the past couple of months.
I read a recent proposal suggesting banning all cars driving through the park, only allowing cars driving to the park. It would be an intetesting experiment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top