So, what happens when you’re a cyclist, who rides their bike into work every day, and suddenly – just because you’re now the city’s Deputy Lord Mayor – the powers that be decide to bestow upon you a somewhat unnecessarily large parking space?
You just park your bike in it, don’t you?
Well, that’s exactly what Colette Finn, a Green Party councillor and the current Deputy Lord Mayor of Cork, has chosen to do, as evidenced by this rather striking image – posted on Twitter by fellow Green councillor Dan Boyle – neatly depicting the vast chasm in space routinely provided for some commuters over others.
While several cyclists praised Finn’s decision to park her bike in her designated Deputy Lord Mayor’s spot, with different variations on “Love it” peppering the replies, the image did however strike up a rather heated debate (it is social media after all) on the use of so-called ‘car’ parking spaces for bikes – and whether designated parking spaces for officials should even still be the norm if we want to encourage active travel.
“Celebrating wasted space. Hilarious,” said Aodhán, while Orchard Man also described Finn’s bike parking as a “symbol of ‘road’ space wasted by cyclists”.
“If the space isn’t needed for cars, put in a bike rack,” he continued.
“Selfish though. Bet that same person will whine about a car taking up space on a cycle path,” added Nick, as if those two examples are directly comparable.
Meanwhile, Colum wrote: “I suppose it’s political humour but it’s wasteful. She could have requested removal of the sign.”
Others, naturally, were baffled by the backlash to a cyclist parking their bike in a reserved space for an elected official in an underground car park…
“People saying it’s a waste of space but no one can park in it but her so who cares if her bike is in it. That’s fine!” said greekman.
Meanwhile, when it comes to the issue of ‘wasted space’, some cyclists noted that another culprit could perhaps be responsible for taking up too much unnecessary room.
“I know, crazy how many bikes you can fit in the space of a car, isn't it?” wrote Tim. “Crazy waste of space, five empty seats and two tonnes of metal just to move somebody around when clearly this is all most of us need.”
“This makes you think how much space a commuter actually needs if we would be more conscious,” said the Cork Cycling Campaign.
Con, however, noted that the very concept of ‘privileged’ car parking was detrimental to the cause of active travel.
“As long as we dole out privileged parking places to an entitled few, we are never gonna see progress on the use of public transport or alternative transportation like cycling,” he said.
“The few isn’t the issue, it's a wider issue with council and civil service staff too,” added Cycling in Kilkenny. “How much will an entire council staff care about public transport if they get free parking?”
Add new comment
83 comments
The rantyhighwayman retweeted
"The driver is 100% at fault here, but this is a clear example of how badly designed infrastructure can significantly increase the risk of dangerous driving occurring. Any competent driver will look at the whole road, poor drivers don't. Infrastructure needs to accommodate that."
https://twitter.com/magnatom/status/1752271168889905660
I'd agree with that, I've been nearly hit by cars so many times entering roundabouts like that I won't ride those outer lines regardless of the infra in place.
The most spectacular bit of victim blaming I saw on the cyclist on a roundabout story was somebody explaining that they didn't help themselves much because they didn't have any lights on in broad daylight and that would've helped the motorist to see them and avoid them. They'll just keep on piling on conditions until they find a way of making it the cyclist's fault, expect in the not too distant future to hear "I am a cyclist myself, but you have to admit that as he wasn't carrying an activated distress flare and playing a trombone he wasn't really doing the best he could to avoid a collision…"
The latter would at least protect from the dreaded Lurgi though.
Ah, my old man used to have the records of those shows when I was a kid, that was one of my favourites!
I've had similar myself. Riding home from work, in broad daylight, on my 2 metre long bright green and yellow cargo bike, wearing a bright red jacket, someone pulled out from a side road right in front of me. I slammed on my brakes to avoid going into the side of them and gave them a "what the...." shout. As she drove away she shouted "where are your lights?"
In my case the driver pulled out of her drive and slammed on the brakes when belatedly spotting me, and then shouted "why aren't you thanking me".
Was your response "where are your eyes?"
Realistically cyclists should behave like cars when they first appeared. We should have at least 1, probably 2 people walking ahead of us waving flags to denote our coming.
That looks like it could be a constant bearing, reducing distance issue. The cyclist could have been hidden behind the A pillar of the car until they were in front of the bonnet. A competent driver avoids this by slowing down as they approach a roundabout and moving their head to make sure they have properly sighted the road they are trying to enter. This driver clearly did neither.
A competent driver wobbles their head to see round their blindspots !
A competent driver is observant of what's on the roundabout as they begin braking to approach it, when the entire junction is visible in their windscreen with no blind spots. If there is any doubt that something might be in their blind spot as they approach the give way line, they come to complete standstill before pulling out onto the roundabout.
It seems to be more and more the default that drivers don't stop at roundabouts or junctions - just keep going and do an emergency stop if there's someone there.
Competent drivers are few and far between.
I aim to do something similar on my bike as it keeps the momentum, but of course it'd be me suffering if I mis-judge the situation.
That is the killer argument for approach roads orthogonal to roundabouts.
Proper geometries, dependent on the traffic flows and desired speed limit indeed!
Unfortunately that likely puts many UK ones outside the limits considered safe for Dutch "cycle priority" roundabouts. Or even the rural "cycling doesn't have priority" design (considered safest by a certain Mr. Hembrow).
https://www.aviewfromthecyclepath.com/2014/05/the-best-roundabout-design...
In fact the large, busy, often multi-lane UK ones would seem to require transformation into turbo-roundabouts because safer for motorists. That then *requires* grade-separation for walking and cycling.
https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2022/01/05/a-new-cycling-viaduct-over...
The *best* thing of course would be a network-level redesign of our traffic networks instead of applying reactive "fixes"...
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=G24x26s3Hjg&t=298
Actually - that's a country-wide change of transport goals please! Hmm... maybe we should just stick to asking for some potholes filled?
A few roundabouts on dual carriageway arterial roads near me have been fitted with metal fencing along the central reservation on approach which blocks your view of oncoming vehicles. Especially where the structure is not angular, but follows a curve where you could easily maintain all your speed and navigate the infrastructure without lifting or braking if unobstructed. So you have to slow to a crawl at minimum in order to navigate safely because you don't know what's coming until you're almost at the give way line. It's not perfect but navigating the roundabout to come off the main drag does feel a bit safer on both two and four wheels. Shame that kind of infra can't be implemented on all roundabout designs.
EDIT - missed your "dual carriageway" bit.
Where cars only, slightly softer "not the best idea though" but only because likely no cyclists there.
Hmm... I'd say "no" on balance to these, especially where cyclists would be on the road or would interact with motorists at all.
Yes it can be effective as it's leveraging "fear of the unknown" and self-interest. Overall though guiding behaviour on the roads using fear and uncertainty is going in the wrong direction - humans are far more likely to go wrong in that state.
Blocking vision *prevents* an important safety behaviour namely looking at what is coming up - so careful drivers - and myself on a bike - can't do it either.
I sometimes have to navigate similar structures by bike and I dislike them! I don't want to feel "what's round that corner" more than i do. Being slowed on a bike makes things much less convenient than the same in a motor vehicle and if you're in the path of traffic (on the road) can also make you feel more vulnerable. It's much harder to get out of the way quickly if you need - unless you're a track athlete...
Yet again by trial and error the Dutch have the answer. Do not build roundabouts with cycling interaction on roads where people (can) drive quickly or there is a large volume of traffic. Make small, tight roundabouts with single lanes and with roads joining at right angles. The carriageway should have "adverse camber" on the roundabout itself so you get immediate feedback to slow down. For busy roundabouts / high volumes separate vehicles from cycling completely and consider *preventing* motorists changing lanes on the roundabout at all.
It is clear, both from their behaviour and comments, that some people just do not understand that there are vehicles other than cars on the road. IMHO, this makes them incapable of driving safely, and they should have their licences removed until they can demonstrate that they comprehend that others are allowed to ride, walk, drive on our highways.
I hope that driver suffered that fate, and is no longer in charge of a lethal weapon.
Warwickshire cyclist - those cycle lanes around the edge of a roundabout are just dangerous and I'd never use them. Appalling infrastructure.
Roundabouts are not used well by driver on driver either
see dashcam uk best of 2023
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0wadiKMIjM
They have those death strips various places across Rugby too. Specifically, across the mouths of junctions onto busy roads. Perhaps it's a Warwickshire thing.
It's almost as if someone went out with the intention of increasing danger to cyclists.
Sending cyclists round the edge of a roundabout like this puts them at greatest risk of collisions like this. But ESPECIALLY if, as here, the 'lane' vanishes when jt reaches the actual junction onto the roundabout, meaning drivers have no prompt to actually check it there's someone in that lane. So of course they only look at the motor vehicle lane, as the design has encouraged them to do.
Similarly, the 'red death' strips in Rugby typically only run along the mouth of junctions on busy roads that otherwise have no cycle lane, encouraging cyclists into the most dangerous place for them to be - maximum vulnerability to left hooks from drivers turning into the side road and maximum vulnerability to drivers pulling out - in the exact locations where majority of motor vehicle / cyclist collisions occur (i.e. junctions). Not only that, but they guarantee maximum rage from motorists at any cyclist who dares to position themselves more safely when passing those junctions. It's literally hard to imagine a way to get worse outcomes than these 'red death' strips.
I hope that Warwickshire Council reviews and eliminates them all.
https://youtu.be/IGQmdoK_ZfY?si=4CwV0Msu3UAyG8AM
when lloking for cars you see only cars.....
(im relatted 2 Danny)
It's also known as Vine's law - "In any situation involving a cyclist and a driver, someone on the internet will blame it entirely on the cyclist, irrespective of the actual details."
Pages