The recent tragic death of a female cyclist following a horrific incident involving a heavy goods vehicle at the junction of O'Connell Bridge and Burgh Quay has generated significant media and public interest. The fact that this was the second fatal accident involving a cyclist and a heavy goods vehicle near O'Connell Bridge this year has added understandably to the sense of public concern.
From my own perspective, I can say that the impact of these two incidents has been especially profound. As a keen cyclist, I have a natural affinity with the concerns of cyclists. At the same time, as Director of Traffic I feel I should respond to the unprecedented criticism of Dublin Corporation's traffic management policies. Given the scale of the road safety problem in the city - there were 26 road fatalities in the corporation area in 2000, including nine pedestrian and two cyclist fatalities - the focusing of public attention on traffic management and cyclist safety issues and the public debate on these issues is very much to be welcomed.
It is right and proper that criticism should be directed at Dublin Corporation where it is merited and that the corporation should be held to account for the manner in which it discharges its traffic management responsibilities. What has been especially striking, however, is the extent to which so many contributions to the debate have been ill-informed and unbalanced. In most cases they have displayed an almost total lack of understanding of the complexity of the issues involved and there has been a general failure to acknowledge the progress that is being made in improving the provision for cyclists in the city.
A prime example in this regard is the article by your correspondent Ms Karlin Lillington (The Irish Times, Tuesday, October 31st). Ms Lillington began by asserting that the corporation's traffic management policy "continues to prioritise vehicle traffic over cyclists and pedestrians". This is simply not the case.
Almost every initiative taken by the corporation in the area of traffic management in recent years has been designed to facilitate buses, cyclists and pedestrians, usually at the expense of general traffic. The most recent examples are the measures which are being implemented to reduce the volume of general traffic in the city-centre together with the proposed restrictions on delivery times for commercial vehicles. These measures will facilitate the provision of a network of city-centre cycle lanes and a greatly-enhanced pedestrian environment.
Ms Lillington correctly identifies the poor state of the city's road network as a serious problem for cyclists and other roadusers. However, it is unfair to assign all the blame for this unsatisfactory state of affairs to Dublin Corporation. While the corporation is responsible for maintaining the road network, there is a major problem with roadworks being carried out on behalf of utilities (including telecoms operators). The simple fact is that the corporation does not have adequate power to control these works and to ensure that standards are maintained. These problems have become especially acute in recent years with the proliferation of telecoms operators laying fibre-optic networks throughout the city following the liberalisation of that sector.
I have previously described the situation that prevails in relation to roadworks on the streets of Dublin as little short of a "state-sponsored free-for-all". The road network enjoys about the same protection as common land over which every utility and telecoms operator enjoys almost unrestricted grazing rights. As long as the needs of utilities and telecoms operators are given priority over the maintenance of the road network and the requests of the corporation for enhanced powers are ignored, the current unsatisfactory situation will prevail.
It is true that the north and south quays, because of the high volumes of heavy goods vehicles they carry, constitute a relatively unsafe environment for cyclists. Even with the planned provision of cycle lanes on certain stretches on the quays and a remodelling of some junctions in early 2002, the problem of heavy goods vehicles on the quays will remain until the completion of the Dublin Port Tunnel.
Ms Lillington is clearly opposed to shared bus/cycle lanes. She ignores the reality that at many locations in the city the space simply does not exist to provide dedicated cycle lanes. I believe that a shared bus/cycle lane is better than no provision at all for cyclists. She is also highly critical of the standard of cycle lanes in the city. While I accept that some of the earlier cycle lanes left a lot to be desired, the standard has improved dramatically and the older sub-standard cycle lanes are being upgraded.
Ms Lillington enters very dangerous territory when appearing to suggest that no blame at all should attach to roadusers even where they engage in inappropriate or dangerous behaviour. She states: ". . . the real problem is not that walkers often cross streets before lights favour them, or that cyclists (legally) move up inside of vehicles at intersections, or that drivers turn without signalling and cut off cyclists. Poorly-designed and neglected streets force all three groups into frequent and unsafe contact."
This ignores the fact that any successful road safety strategy must involve education, enforcement and engineering measures and cannot be based solely on one of these measures. It is precisely because we have a road system that was not designed to cater for the volumes of traffic and pedestrians it carries on a daily basis - and because contact between these groups is unavoidable - that there is an added responsibility on all roadusers to moderate their behaviour in the interests of improved road safety. The onus must be placed on pedestrians not to cross before the lights favour them, on cyclists not to move up inside stationary vehicles when it is unsafe to do so and on motorists not to turn without signalling.
The suggestion that roadusers should not have to accept responsibility for their behaviour and that the corporation can be blamed for everything is irresponsible. While it may meet Ms Lillington's need to scapegoat Dublin Corporation in the aftermath of the recent fatalities, it will not advance the cause of cyclist safety in the city. This cause will be best served in the short term by the corporation implementing the planned traffic management changes in the city-centre and by cyclists and other roadusers changing their behaviour.