CYCLE PATH on BYPASS "NMU" HELP!

daroadlescycled

I am looking for some help with the following project in my local area.:)

A new Bypass 7km which has 2 carrigeways heading in one direction and 2 carrigeways heading in the other direction (type 2 Dual C) with a steel wire rope along the centre dividing both (to aoid head on's) with a 1 metere margin of roadside on each side. :eek: That is the design so far.

This ByPass would be my shortest commute to work

I have asked the NRA to include a Cycle Path along this road.
There is a 3m verge on each side for barriers grass etc.
This is the intresting bit there is a provision for a 1m wide paved surface to be used by "NMUs"

NON MOTORISED USERS.
After meeting with the Nra a few times this where I'm at.

1. I must prove there is a need for a Cycle Path
2.What would happen if it was'nt included. (CONSEQUENCES)
3. What if cyclists approached this new 2 lane Bypass from the old connecting single lane road, see this fine 2lane down hill with no Cycle path, Q. Do they continue, or detour on older narrow longer route.
4. How many Cyclists would use By Pass with Cycle Path?
5.How many cyclists are cycling in this area on any given day.

I need to produce a one page detailed document based on the 5 points above to have ready for 2 weeks time.

I need your help to write that letter based totally on the information above or any new information that would further the cause.
All ideas and comments are welcome.

If together we can make a really strong argument for a Cycle path, the people in the NRA tell me we will be setting a Precedent for Cycling and Cycle Paths .

Any queries or questions you may have I will try to answer.

Thanking all contributors in advance.

short circuit

Would it not be better to include where you are talking about so feedback is based around that ... or have you included it in earlier post and I am just missing it.

daroadlescycled

short circuit wrote: »

Would it not be better to include where you are talking about so feedback is based around that ... or have you included it in earlier post and I am just missing it.

Yea of course. Castleisland Bypass The N21 Limerick to Killarney/Tralee .

Stark

I assume the 1m NMUs area is a footpath.

You could just tell them that if they don't provide a cycle path, then the cyclists will just use the left lane to cycle on

zzzzzzzz

When you say 1 metre margin at the roadside - do you mean there's a hard shoulder?

I don't know the area in question at all, but can you not just cycle in the hard shoulder? From your description I'd equate the road to the N11 anywhere between Bray and Rathnew (or slightly after where it becomes single lane) which is perfectly safe for cycling.

Or is it a motorway?



EDIT: Sorry - just re-read your post and noticed the "Non Motorised Users" bit.

Stark

There's a PDF on the NRA site with a description of Type 2 dual carriageways although this link explains it better: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_carriageway#Ireland

Type 1 dual carriageway would be motorway or HQDC. Type 2 is steel cable barrier, no hard shoulder.

From the pictures on the NRA website, there does seem to be a 1m area to the left and the right of the main traffic lanes which would provide enough room for cyclists to cycle in.

Bunnyhopper

1.0m doesn't strike me as a sufficient width, particularly when you're talking about a track alongside a dual carriageway where traffic (including HGVs) will be travelling at 80-100kph - and probably more than that, in practice.

Sustrans tend to talk about a minimum width of 1.5m and preferred width of 2.0m, and the DTO Manual on Provision of Cycle Facilities refers to an absolute minimum for on-road tracks of 1.25m and a preferred 1.5-2.0m. It also says: "When the volume of cycle traffic is high, a width of 2.00m is recommended." I'd guess that would apply in this case but because of the volume of high speed traffic rather than of cycle traffic.

Esroh

Slightly off your OP but.
Can I ask you a Question.
If they were to put a proper cycle lane which was well marked and surfaced on the Old Road would you use it even though it is longer.This has been something I have wondered about on all the roads which have been down graded in the last few years.There is a network of roads out there that maybe we should be fighting for and setting a precedent on that might be easier.

Have you asked if they have done a cycle/ped count already?

daroadlescycled

Stark wrote: »

I assume the 1m NMUs area is a footpath.

I'll try to reply to some of threads here.

A.The 1m paved area is intended (for the moment) for road users that might break down and has to walk for help.

When you say 1 metre margin at the roadside - do you mean there's a hard shoulder?

A.There is no hard shoulder as you find on single carrige way roads.

From the pictures on the NRA website, there does seem to be a 1m area to the left and the right of the main traffic lanes which would provide enough room for cyclists to cycle in.

A.What I have looked for is a Cycle Path seperated from the road edge by a grass strip.

1.0m doesn't strike me as a sufficient width, particularly when you're talking about a track alongside a dual carriageway where traffic (including HGVs) will be travelling at 80-100kph - and probably more than that, in practice.
A. Yea I agree, what I hope for is the NMU Lane will be moved in to grass margin and will serve as Cyclepath and for stranded motorists.

I will deal with other queries shortly.

daroadlescycled

Esroh wrote: »

Slightly off your OP but.
Can I ask you a Question.
If they were to put a proper cycle lane which was well marked and surfaced on the Old Road would you use it even though it is longer.This has been something I have wondered about on all the roads which have been down graded in the last few years.There is a network of roads out there that maybe we should be fighting for and setting a precedent on that might be easier.

The longer route would not be a prob for me. I'm using the shorter route argument to make a better case. The old road in this case has very little width for development, I agree with you on the network of old roads could be made cycle friendly. I prefer these older roads for cycling.
If a precedent is set now it will mean all NRA designs in the future will have to consider Cyclepaths and Cyclists needs. There has to be pressure kept on all planners Countrywide to change there mind sets and take the needs of cyclists seriously.